What do you guys think is the likelihood the apple watch 2 (or later) will be able to use the same bands as Apple watch 1? This is purely speculative of course, but I would feel better, and might be able to justify, spending $600 on the link bracelet if I knew it would last a couple generations.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Likelihood watch 2+ uses same bands
- Thread starter Bigboiiiii
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Almost guaranteed until they make the case thinner than the connectors, at which time they'll drop it like a hot potato and be more than happy to sell you an adaptor a la USB-C.
I don't see them changing the connector type any time soon so unless they change the width of the case or something I would imagine they will work for several generations.
Not the same thing. A more correct analogy would be the switch from 30-pin to Lightning port.
Exactly. I sometimes wonder how much historical reference people have to Apple iterations.
Two obvious reason the connector would change. One is case redesign. Two is that the connector turns out to have problems. I wouldn't want to predict whether one of those two things happens in the next two years or not, but I think one of those two would be the cause if the connectors change. If I had to make a bet though, I wouldn't hold my breath hoping your current bands will work on more than possibly the next gen.
So here's my slightly crackpot theory (but, not a far fetched one):
The reason it's "Apple Watch" and not "iWatch" or just "Watch" or something is that it's a product line much like the Apple TV.
It's not a product you're supposed to think about upgrading, if you have the best, or whatever. It's just a connection, an accessory, a tool. Notice that there is nearly zero technological differentiation in the *ENTIRE* Apple Watch product lineup. It's Apple's largest layout ever. Despite being just material/design combinations, it's being set out as a huge list of products and nothing about it significantly differs in tech.
Well, Apple TV is the same way, sort of, after the first gen. Every box identical, basically. The feature set pretty much the same. The upgrades relate more to what is cheap for Apple to produce at the moment than anything else. They don't want you to think about the tech. Just, get the accessory and let it do its job.
Okay, so that is the comparison, these are two similarly named, similarly non-technical products despite being filled with technology.
So then, what's the most practical concerns in both cases? That they continue to integrate with your other stuff. Same connections, same shapes, same remotes, etc.
In the watch world, consistency with band connection types is valued. More than the actual tech inside for practical purposes, anyway. So I think Apple is going to stick with this exactly connector in these two exact sizes. I think, even if they change the design a bit, it will continue to be compatible with existing bands using the same connection.
In fact, I don't expect the design to change, at least, not the shape, for maybe 5-6 years. I realize that seems "crazy" for Apple, but, this is not a tech product. IT's a fashion product, and it's a different set of concerns. People who buy that gold Edition watch may very well continue to wear it even if it's no longer technologically competent, because, it remains a status symbol. But, it would be even better if it continued to operate, and be compatible with new band colors, and so on.
Technologically speaking, the watch design is heavily skewed towards a light weight client design. Sure, some stuff will run natively on the watch, but, the focus in API and functionality design is on preset capabilities configured by heavier software on the phone. And all of the advertised value can be accomplished in this manner. What will likely be upgraded over time are interaction models, but, not performance. If we get a v.2 next year, it will probably come with some S2 chip that uses less power to do the same things. Focusing on the practical improvements, using the same cases, maybe one new metal, and being as "fast" as before.
Anyway, I probably could explain this better if I took more time, but, the idea here is that Apple actually wants you to keep this for a long time, spend money on a few more bands, and maybe upgrade the case once every 2-3 years. The device is an iPhone accessory and will drive commitment to the platform. It doesn't, itself, need to be a high churn product line. Apple can approach that form the style angle and that does not require pushing forward on the mechanical interface. They can even make it thinner someday and keep the band connectors as is.
The reason it's "Apple Watch" and not "iWatch" or just "Watch" or something is that it's a product line much like the Apple TV.
It's not a product you're supposed to think about upgrading, if you have the best, or whatever. It's just a connection, an accessory, a tool. Notice that there is nearly zero technological differentiation in the *ENTIRE* Apple Watch product lineup. It's Apple's largest layout ever. Despite being just material/design combinations, it's being set out as a huge list of products and nothing about it significantly differs in tech.
Well, Apple TV is the same way, sort of, after the first gen. Every box identical, basically. The feature set pretty much the same. The upgrades relate more to what is cheap for Apple to produce at the moment than anything else. They don't want you to think about the tech. Just, get the accessory and let it do its job.
Okay, so that is the comparison, these are two similarly named, similarly non-technical products despite being filled with technology.
So then, what's the most practical concerns in both cases? That they continue to integrate with your other stuff. Same connections, same shapes, same remotes, etc.
In the watch world, consistency with band connection types is valued. More than the actual tech inside for practical purposes, anyway. So I think Apple is going to stick with this exactly connector in these two exact sizes. I think, even if they change the design a bit, it will continue to be compatible with existing bands using the same connection.
In fact, I don't expect the design to change, at least, not the shape, for maybe 5-6 years. I realize that seems "crazy" for Apple, but, this is not a tech product. IT's a fashion product, and it's a different set of concerns. People who buy that gold Edition watch may very well continue to wear it even if it's no longer technologically competent, because, it remains a status symbol. But, it would be even better if it continued to operate, and be compatible with new band colors, and so on.
Technologically speaking, the watch design is heavily skewed towards a light weight client design. Sure, some stuff will run natively on the watch, but, the focus in API and functionality design is on preset capabilities configured by heavier software on the phone. And all of the advertised value can be accomplished in this manner. What will likely be upgraded over time are interaction models, but, not performance. If we get a v.2 next year, it will probably come with some S2 chip that uses less power to do the same things. Focusing on the practical improvements, using the same cases, maybe one new metal, and being as "fast" as before.
Anyway, I probably could explain this better if I took more time, but, the idea here is that Apple actually wants you to keep this for a long time, spend money on a few more bands, and maybe upgrade the case once every 2-3 years. The device is an iPhone accessory and will drive commitment to the platform. It doesn't, itself, need to be a high churn product line. Apple can approach that form the style angle and that does not require pushing forward on the mechanical interface. They can even make it thinner someday and keep the band connectors as is.
Not exactly a great comparison. I don't recall apple selling 500 dollar magsafe 2 connectors. A lot of people don't buy any extra laptop chargers (I personally never have) but apple wants people to buy multiple bands so it wouldn't make sense for them to then make those bands completely obsolete.
Interesting perspective, especially considering that the watch will be reported in the same group as Apple TV. It also continues to solidify my thoughts that Apple are planning for the
Watch to sell far less than many people believe. If they do not have a regular (read approximately 1 year) upgrade cycle, the watch will not sell in gigantic numbers after the initial rush. It also will not be the top dog in the category. However, with the margin on some of these, it really doesn't have to in order for it to be a cash cow.
Apple obviously spent a lot of time on the bands. Why would they do that if they knew the bands would be obsolete in one year? 30-pin connector was around for what, a decade or so? We've gone 3 generations of iPhone and iPad with Lightening connector. But Watch bands will be obsolete after one year?
----------
Not really. I see the new MacBook taking some cues from iPad. In Apple's mind you should be able to go all day without having to charge it. No one complains about not having MagSafe on an iPad.
If the bands aren't forwards compatible I would expect a big backlash against Apple and towards investing in smartwatches in general. I don't think Apple would do that.
I wouldn't want to spend £900 to find out that in less than a year there is a new model (when was Apple watch announced, sometime is September last year?, could be a new model announced even sooner than a year from now).
This is pretty much what happened when I bought the ipad 3, so there is history of Apple making quick replacements. I was going to go for the ss model, but now I think I'll play it safe and get the sport and see what happens in terms of product updates, band compatibility etc.
Having said that, I have plenty of old ipods I still regularly use and have no interest in the newer models, similarly with my ipad, so perhaps I should just get the watch I really want....
This is pretty much what happened when I bought the ipad 3, so there is history of Apple making quick replacements. I was going to go for the ss model, but now I think I'll play it safe and get the sport and see what happens in terms of product updates, band compatibility etc.
Having said that, I have plenty of old ipods I still regularly use and have no interest in the newer models, similarly with my ipad, so perhaps I should just get the watch I really want....
I wouldn't let the iPad 3 to 4 thing throw you off, they pretty much had to do that to get lightning connectors across the product range.
There is no chance of that happening to the first generation
watch
I doubt the case will change that quickly. I'd expect a new watch to come out in a year (the tech is going to change too quickly) but they will use improvements in the internals to increase battery life. I'm not talking about getting to two days off one charge, that seems unreachable based on reports. But getting to a full day, every day, no matter what. Or at least a full day and then time to get to the office the next morning where you plug it in there for an hour, would be nice.
Also, I think the bands look like they could be made to work with a slightly thinner face. So that might get these bands through a decade of modifications. Remember there is really few reasons to leave the 38mm and 42mm sizes or the square face. I could see Apple Adding a round face or another face size. But the only way they would stop making the 38mm and 42mm square is if the whole line is a complete flop.
Maybe some new colors will come out. A product RED is an obvious choice for the holidays this year.
Also, I think the bands look like they could be made to work with a slightly thinner face. So that might get these bands through a decade of modifications. Remember there is really few reasons to leave the 38mm and 42mm sizes or the square face. I could see Apple Adding a round face or another face size. But the only way they would stop making the 38mm and 42mm square is if the whole line is a complete flop.
Maybe some new colors will come out. A product RED is an obvious choice for the holidays this year.
You are looking at Apple as though they care about anything other than profit. If they can figure out a way to get you to buy bands all over again, they will. It is clear the way they priced the different collections of watches, that the Apple Tax has gone to a whole new level.
Now, I am not saying it will happen. However, it would not surprise me in the least if gen 2 or 3 breaks compatibility with current bands because they find that the mechanism doesn't work as planned or because they want the cash.
Betting on at least a 2 year hardware form factor cycle with the internals being upgraded every year (similar to iPhone/iphone S). It costs a lot of money to tool for all the different watch bands so they may want to maximize their investment on the hardware side.
In my opinion like the TV the Watch is an extension of the user experience and not something that needs to be or should be upgraded annually. I suspect there may be a new model every two or three years possibly even less frequently.
Also the iPad 4 was the exception rather then the rule as far windows between release dates go. Apple typically sticks to an annual release schedule for their iOS devices and less frequently for their other products. I also think there is little chance if any of the watch bands becoming obsolete any time soon.
TV the Watch is an extension of the user experience and not something that needs to be or should be upgraded annually. I suspect there may be a new model every two or three years possibly even less frequently. Also the iPad 4 was the exception rather then the rule as far windows between release dates go. Apple typically sticks to an annual release schedule for their iOS devices and less frequently for their other products. I also think there is little chance if any of the watch bands becoming obsolete any time soon.