Induction Charger spare

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by camtechman56, Feb 27, 2015.

  1. camtechman56 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Location:
    Warren, pa.
    #1
    Ok people, I have seen about every thing else covered. So how about the new induction charger? If the battery is going to be the weak point then we might want to have a spare. what do you think, Price and availability. this is new technology and I think at this point it will be a necessity for those who actively use their watch.

    I'm thinking $100
    and a special order
     
  2. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #2
    I'd struggle to see a charger priced at $100 if a whole watch and strap and charger is $350

    $49 would be plenty
     
  3. Trhodezy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2010
    #3
    I second that, £39/$39.
     
  4. cleirac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 7, 2014
    #4
    I do not understand and missed something (because it might be more magical than what I have been thinking) as to why we would need a spare induction charger. Is that the new glorified adapter and lightning connector that duals as stand-alone battery spare? :eek: I thought it will be just the slickest iDevice charger ever!
     
  5. amirite macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #5
    $39/£29 IMO :cool:
     
  6. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #6
    Given this device will have the shortest battery life of any Apple product.
    I would of thought a spare charger would be needed with this device more than any other.
    One for home and one for work at least.

    Given that, upon heavy use, which you might do, reports are it may only last a few hours, you may well wish a charger at both locations you spend most of your day at.

    Unless you wish to carry a charger around with you all the time also.
     
  7. Sharkey311 Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2013
    #7
    Don't care what the price is, I'll be buying a 2nd one for the car.
     
  8. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #8
    People are just pulling out of their butts the unsubstantiated idea that the battery life will be so short, requiring multiple charges a day.
     
  9. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #9
    To be fair, I feel most are in agreement that, from what we currently think we know from comments and stories.
    If you were bored and sat at work in the morning playing with your watch for a few hours it would be dead before you got home that evening.

    Apple saying that current apps should only come on very briefly kinda gives you a strong hint in that also.

    So, not sure people are totally pulling it out there butts as you put it.
    No one here in this thread is complaining about battery life.

    However as I said, we can probably all accept this device will have the worst battery life of any current apple product if it's used heavily, so given that, if you are away from home, say from 6am to 6pm for example, it may not be a bad idea to have a charger at home and at work.

    It will of course depend on his you use the watch and your lifestyle.
    This may also be more of an issue later in the year when apple are supposed to be allowing more full/complete apps to be created, which may well cause the watch and it's screen to be on for longer than these 1st early apps do.
     
  10. cleirac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 7, 2014
    #10
    I am a heavy user, the iPhone 6+ battery lasts for a whole day. With the addition of Apple Watch, I plan to use both devices pretty heavily, and at the end of the day, I think, both will still have more than 50% charge to last for the entirety of the next day.

    I am not going to be like many or most Android users who love hoarding ton of gadget batteries. :D Or I am not going to add more weight in my travel luggage / lightweight travel backpack. Apple might as well put a slot for a micro SD in the Apple Watch. lol It is all about being a minimalist and simplicity with Apple. Piggie's ton of conspiracy theories, stirring the pot, conditioning the minds of newbies to the Apple world or undermining Apple are very entertaining though.

    ----------

    So f'n what if both of them run out of battery charge and that I have to recharge both or any of them again wherever I am somewhere in the same day.
     
  11. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #11
    All this is based on the comment that "you will need to charge it nightly," which makes no sense because the vast majority of us charge our iPhones nightly whether or not it's depleted.

    The Watch will be more of an accessory to the iPhone so nobody is going to be "playing" on their Watch for hours at a time like on the iPhone, iPad, etc.
     
  12. camtechman56 thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2015
    Location:
    Warren, pa.
    #12
    I for one will be getting a spare charger! I carry a spare charger for my iphone 5s because I listen to music I have on it and have to sometimes charge it twice a day. the watch is a small device with a small battery, and I read many comments about how people will be using the watch for music. So maybe Piggie isn't about conspiracy and more about caution, and being prepared
     
  13. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #13
    It'll require a Bluetooth headset though. Maybe you'll benefit from a upgrade to the iPhone 6+ if you're using the iPhone that much?
     
  14. cleirac macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 7, 2014
    #14
    And use that extra money for upgrades instead of buying ton of extra batteries. Be like Piggie. jk :D

    Let us wait how this develops. Stay calm and relax. I am mostly messing around with Piggie.

    ----------

    Wait, it will be too much to pay more than $10 for that piece of junk. Okay, I'll stop. :p
     
  15. Tycho24 macrumors 68020

    Tycho24

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2014
    Location:
    Florida
    #15
    I agree!
    I look at the magsafe... which is, I suppose, currently Apple's most similar accessory. It is $79, I believe... but much bigger & 85w. I think $49 falls in line with what they would charge, including "Cupertino premium".
     
  16. iamMacPerson macrumors 68030

    iamMacPerson

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Location:
    AZ/10.0.1.1
    #16
    I think the charger will be US$39 from Apple which makes sense to me. It's 1/2 the price of a MagSafe adapter but 2x the price of the 3ft Lightning Cable. I also think it's just going to be a USB cable with no attached DC brick. The Watch will probably ship with the same old 5w USB brick and they will expect you to use that.
     
  17. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #17
    I would not (and will not) buy an extra charger on launch day. Why not wait and get some real world usage time (a week or 2) before 'waisting' money on an accessory you may not need.

    ----------

    Just to add. The :apple:Watch may be as much or more because it is also Inductive (wireless). MagSafe is just the magnets that hold it next to the device. The MacBook is still wired (direct metal contacts).
     
  18. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #18
    Indeed, and that's what I would do.
    No point in buying anything until you know if you need it or not, unless it was a one off special offer type of thing which you bought just in case.

    Until you own the watch, use the watch, depending on your lifestyle and usage patterns you won't know.
    Some many get 2+ days and almost never us it.
    Some may be playing and fiddling with it constantly and perhaps get a morning out of it.

    Just wait and see.

    I stand by what I said earlier in that we will see this change as time goes on.
    Right now Apple don't want any negative publicity in the press re battery life so they are heavily restricting what they are allowing devs to do with the device to protect the battery and avoid initial negative press.

    Later on, this year perhaps? When they allow devs to do a bit more, then users will be able to do more with the device, and naturally this will then impact battery more.

    If they opened it right up and allowed devs free and open rights to write whatever they wanted. Games, Media Players, etc etc, then of course this will then majorly hit the battery really hard.

    Of course, I'm guessing, but how long might the watch last with playing like a Candy Crush for Watch game on it?
    A few hours?
    I don't think we would be expecting all day would we?

    So obviously this is why they are locking it down for now.
    Apple would not want a headline such as "Candy Crush wore my Apple watch battery down to zero in 2 hours" in the press in the 1st couple of weeks.

    It will be interesting if, As Apple does, I'm sure we all hope, open up what they will let devs create, they will, at the same time, in future revisions of the hardware be able to increase the battery life to keep pace with more complete apps.

    Certainly a challenge for all smartwatch makers, not just Apple.
     
  19. MisterMankind macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    #19
    Why would anyone want to play candy crush on the watch?! You seem to be mistaken what it's intended for.
     
  20. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #20
    Is this going to end up going into a "You are using it wrong" issue again :)

    Let's simply put is this way.

    People, especially these days love entertainment.
    Attention spans are short, people enjoy something to do.

    The watch is sort of an iPhone accessory right now, but most think that will change in time.

    Even now, you will be able to go out with just the watch, listen to some music and do a few other bits without the phone.

    Imagine this scenario with millions of owners, sitting somewhere, not much going on. Oh I have my amazing smart watch with me.

    Let's have a little fun, and play some game/games that been specially designed to work well with a small screen.
    Perhaps some games we know and love that have been adapted for a small screen or other game/entertainment apps that are yet to be thought up.

    Is anyone really going to be saying "you should NOT be using your smartwatch for that. you BAD person"

    Why not? If someone has written something entertaining that works well, and is fun for a small screen why should not an app be there if you wanted it.

    A small screen is better than no screen.

    Some large icons, and some swiping across the screen could be quite fun I'm sure.
    Or are we going to be going around telling people off for using a device not how we think they should be.

    It would be like me going up to someone at Apple and telling them off for using the iPad for taking a photo or shooting a video because in "my opinion" it should not be used for that.

    What they hell has it got to do with me, what they use their device for, or how they enjoy the device they bought.

    Sorry, but I don't see why it should be artificially restricted.
    If someone wanted to sit at a desk playing Candy Crush Watch, then that's up to them, and I hope such apps are written in the future.
     
  21. nebo1ss macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2010
    #21
    The idea of taking a watch off in the office and putting it on a charger just defeats the whole purpose of having a watch.
     
  22. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #22
    I don't disagree for a moment.

    However, let's just say, for whatever reason you wish to come up with, your Apple watch is running low at mid-day.

    Would it be better to take it off during your lunch hour, and charge it back up so your watch is all great and working again for the rest of the day.

    Or would you simply prefer to keep the dead watch on your wrist for the rest of the day until you got back home?

    Many people have a secondary phone charger at work just in case for this very reason. It's there in case you need it.
     
  23. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #23
    $100? No. Even Apple can't sell a charger that costs 30% of the entry level product. It won't need more than a 5w charger similar to the iPhone. The iPhone charger + cable is $40. Add in $5 for "inductive magic" and let's call it $45. Or Maybe Apple will sell just the cable for $25.

    But I don't think the watch is going to power out mid-day. That would be a functional fail big time, something Apple would not release. Tim Cook has already said we can expect all-day battery life. Since he's been beta-testing it I'm going to go on a limb here and suggest by "all-day" he means his typical work day which is probably from 5am to 11pm and includes a 30-45min work out somewhere in there.

    Also a watch is not like a phone. I might put top off my phone while driving or working but my watch is meant for my wrist from the time I put it on in the AM to the time I take it off in the PM. That's the point of a watch. It lives on the wrist, not a pocket, table, or desk.
     
  24. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #24
    Please understand I am not in any way suggesting under, what many would call normal/typical watch usage the Apple watch will die mid-day.

    I am simply saying, it MIGHT be a good idea to have a secondary charger at the other place you spend the majority of time at when you are away from home. That's all.

    Also, in the future, IF there are apps that people wish to use that means they may be using their watch (fiddling with it, running some apps) a lot more, then of course, this will shorten the battery life more than what may be possible/practical with the apps that are on offer on day one.

    I am fully expecting a day or even 2 days is you hardly use the device for much other than some time checks and some notifications.

    The more you use it, and the more you play/fiddle (which will increase as Apps become fuller - Whenever Apple allows that) the more the battery will take a hit.

    This is all obvious to us all I'm sure :)
     
  25. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #25
    You seem to be forgetting about the iPhone, which the Watch pretty much requires most of the time. This is really no different from choosing the iPad over the iPhone for certain tasks when we have access to both. Nobody is going to be playing Candy Crush for hours at a time on the Watch when they can do it on the iPhone.
     

Share This Page