LTE on Series 3?

[squirrrl]

So many people have mentioned this but one thing I don't see discussed is this:

If Apple does put LTE on it (and presumably you'd have to pay someone a monthly bill for coverage) Apple would likely sell 2 version of the watch like they do with iPads, one cellular, and one non-cellular. Like the iPad, I'm guessing +LTE would add a price premium, maybe $50 extra.

I'm wondering instead of a Series 3, if they will have a Series 2 with or without LTE. I have a feeling that not many people would want to pay more for LTE on a watch. Do you think cell providers would add LTE on a watch for free? I mean, how much data could you possibly use on it? You're not going to be watching movies on the thing... streaming music and maps most likely.

And for all the people waiting for Series 3, if it happens just to be Series 2 + LTE, which would you buy? with or without LTE?

 

[44267547]

I personally don't have any interest in LTE for my Apple Watch. But I imagine if they release an LTE version for a Series 3 in September, it would likely be two versions, one with LTE and the another model without it.

 

[Mlrollin91]

I also have zero interest in LTE watch. It would probably be the same cost as an iPad upgrade. $129. So $129 more for the watch, plus $10 a month for service and you can't even browse the web if needed. No thanks.

 

[harlenmm77]

I had a watch with LTE in it for a week. Had a sim and had to pay a monthly fee for it. Only advantage it had was ability to receive or make calls without needing a phone.

 

[Hayseed]

I'm never really in a place where I'm wearing my watch without my iPhone. Even at the gym, the phone is in my pocket or in front of the me on the machine. At work, I can't even wear my AW or have my phone with me. Yeah, I can't see paying an extra ten bucks a month or so for LTE functionality that I likely won't use. I have a AWS0 and I'm waiting to see what the AWS3 will bring with it before making an upgrade decision. LTE won't even factor into it though.

 

[squirrrl]

It's funny who's written in this thread so far... from the threads that ask what people would want in a Series 3, The number one thing is LTE, but so far, not a single supporter of LTE.

I guess started this thread to see if anyone who wanted LTE would pipe up and say they would pay the premium for it (as it is on iPads) since the assumption has been that Apple would throw in LTE for "free" as the next gen upgrade. I thought this was a big assumption because I doubt most people who own an Apple watch would 1) need LTE or 2) want to pay a premium upfront cost + potential monthly costs.

 

[DMVillain]

I am really hoping for cellular. It could be LTE, 3G, idc. I want a basic device (like a dumbphone) that allows me to be untethered from my iPhone. That's a cellular Apple Watch.

I'd like to think that there'd be two models of the 3.

 

[Luba]

AW with LTE would be good, but the downside of having LTE is too much to bear. I would think it would make the watch thicker. I like the thickness of AW0 and I'm okay with the thickness of AW2, but anymore I wouldn't like that. How much battery power would be used if the LTE part was used, 5% per call, 10%? Finally, unless it was an extra $5 per month to access your voice minutes/data, I think it would feel like a burden. I'm guessing the wireless companies will charge $10 per month, the same if you added another phone to your account.

 

[DMVillain]

$129 more for the watch, plus $10 a month for service and you can't even browse the web if needed. No thanks.

I'm guessing the wireless companies will charge $10 per month, the same if you added another phone to your account.

Small difference, but Verizon currently charges $5/mo for the Samsung Gear and LG Sport.

 

[QCassidy352]

It's funny who's written in this thread so far... from the threads that ask what people would want in a Series 3, The number one thing is LTE, but so far, not a single supporter of LTE.

I'd pay for it. Worth it to have for emergencies when running without my phone.

 

[bruinsrme]

I had a watch with LTE in it for a week. Had a sim and had to pay a monthly fee for it. Only advantage it had was ability to receive or make calls without needing a phone.

We’re you a ble to receive texts, update emails, text, use weather apps, or use other apps that are in apples world dependent on the phone?

 

[harlenmm77]

We’re you a ble to receive texts, update emails, text, use weather apps, or use other apps that are in apples world dependent on the phone?

Yes, you could do everything on the watch without needing a phone.

 

[44267547]

We’re you a ble to receive texts, update emails, text, use weather apps, or use other apps that are in apples world dependent on the phone?

LTE allows the Watch to not be tethered to the iPhone for connectivity, and it allows for all notifications and incoming/outgoing calls to be direct to the Watch.

 

[bruinsrme]

LTE allows the Watch to not be tethered to the iPhone for connectivity, and it allows for all notifications and incoming/outgoing calls to be direct to the Watch.

I understand what it does. It allows for interdependent use and functions.
My partner in crime has the Samsung set up. Personally I would like to have such a seamless duo.

 

[jhfenton]

In an ideal scenario, LTE would be nice, but I suspect the technology is quite there yet.

An ideal scenario would be (1) minimal impact on battery life and (2) a low cost ($5-10/month) add-on option through your iPhone's existing wireless plan.

If both of those were true, I'd pay $50-100 more for an AW3 (or AW4) with LTE. But I'm not going to pay $20 or more per month to my wireless provider, and I'm not going to sacrifice battery life.

 

[44267547]

In an ideal scenario, LTE would be nice, but I suspect the technology is quite there yet.

An ideal scenario would be (1) minimal impact on battery life and (2) a low cost ($5-10/month) add-on option through your iPhone's existing wireless plan.

If both of those were true, I'd pay $50-100 more for an AW3 (or AW4) with LTE. But I'm not going to pay $20 or more per month to my wireless provider, and I'm not going to sacrifice battery life.

Besides the technology, I don't think LTE is mainstream enough in a smart Watch for more widespread adaptation. Samsung is the other major contributor to LTE in a smart Watch, but I'm curious how much of a demographic utilizes LTE over Bluetooth. I have said it before, I don't think think LTE will happen in September for the Apple Watch, that is if we even see a 'Series 3' Watch. I think there are those who would really
Apppreciate it, but I don't think it will be the primary choice for most due to the increase in a monthly carrier invoice.

 

[BarracksSi]

Nah. Don't need a watch with LTE. And my reasoning has nothing to do with thickness, battery life, or anything else.

I'd prefer to have my phone available as a backup. Like, if text dictation is more miss than hit, I can grab the phone and type instead.

If I didn't have that choice, I'd get more aggravated, and I'd end up choosing to bring my phone with me more often -- which negates having a cellular radio inside the watch.

 

[jhfenton]

Besides the technology, I don't think LTE is mainstream enough in a smart Watch for more widespread adaptation. Samsung is the other major contributor to LTE in a smart Watch, but I'm curious how much of a demographic utilizes LTE over Bluetooth. I have said it before, I don't think think LTE will happen in September for the Apple Watch, that is if we even see a 'Series 3' Watch. I think there are those who would really
Apppreciate it, but I don't think it will be the primary choice for most due to the increase in a monthly carrier invoice.

Agreed. A monthly wireless fee would be the primary negative.

The best-case scenario is that Apple negotiates a friendly deal (a flat-rate add-on to an existing wireless data plan) with carriers on behalf of users, and that the carriers go along because an LTE Apple Watch would be a relatively low-data device (especially if it did not support live music streaming). That's not the most likely scenario, but it's the best-case.

I would only care about LTE because I'm a runner, and it's nice to run sans iPhone. As it is, though, my AW2 already struggles with battery on long runs without my phone. The combination of GPS plus HR monitoring plus BT to AirPods drains close to 40% per hour, and LTE would be another major power drain. I have a Polar HR10 strap arriving today, and I'll see how much offloading the HR sensor improves battery performance--in addition to the obvious improvement in HR tracking.)

 

[recoil80]

I don't need LTE on my Apple Watch, at least not at the moment, but those are my 2 cents.

First of all, no SIM card. They don't have room for that and it would be a waste of space. It should be in some ways bound to the sim card you have on your iPhone, so you can use the same data plan.

Battery life: I think with watchOS 3 we have a good battery life, and it should remain the same even when using LTE. With series 2 they introduced GPS and you can get to the end of the day if you use GPS for a certain amount of time, it would be great to have LTE behave the same way. If you have your iPhone nearby you don't use GPS and LTE, so as long as you use the Watch alone for 2/3 hours a day you're ok.

Price: I think it is ok to ask a premium price for it. Let me put it another way, it would be good to have a cheaper Watch for the folks not interested in LTE. We have cellular iPads, it would be ok to have cellular Watches

 

[SoN1NjA]

Yes you will have to pay, that's how all LTE watch models work now, about $10 a month (or more / less depending on carrier) and no Series 2 wouldn't get LTE, that would be a major selling point for S3 so wouldn't come to S2

 

[Newtons Apple]

Yes you will have to pay, that's how all LTE watch models work now, about $10 a month (or more / less depending on carrier) and no Series 2 wouldn't get LTE, that would be a major selling point for S3 so wouldn't come to S2

I can not see how they could get LTE even on a Series 3. Even improving the screen to use less power, LTE would take too much power. Do not what the watch to be bigger or even thicker for LTE.

 

[SoN1NjA]

I can not see how they could get LTE even on a Series 3. Even improving the screen to use less power, LTE would take too much power. Do not what the watch to be bigger or even thicker for LTE.

Erm, what do you think that new crossfit Workout app stuff is for? Nothing?

Take a hint, smh... They're prepping us for Series 3 since it's gonna be so big and heavy!

 

[Newtons Apple]

Erm, what do you think that new crossfit Workout app stuff is for? Nothing?

Take a hint, smh... They're prepping us for Series 3 since it's gonna be so big and heavy!

According the the "Front Page" the cellular AW will be here this fall. Betting it will have a different form factor so who know how big it will have to be.