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.
Making it thinner
- Thread starter bchreng
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly, I don't see a lot of 3rd party bands if we start getting electronics in them.
Why does it need to be thinner? My Tissot is thicker, I don't think it's a big deal.
Don't worry, they'll keep it where it is and find a way to make it thinner over time.
Those of you asking why does it need to be thinner, remember this is Apple we're talking about. You know they're obsessed with thinness whether or not we like it.
Those of you asking why does it need to be thinner, remember this is Apple we're talking about. You know they're obsessed with thinness whether or not we like it.
A thinner phone is for easier to handle, store in Jean pocket, and could add case without too thick, why anyone need a thinner watch when it is always strapped on the wrist?
That's like saying why make the iMac thinner when the footprint is unchanged and doesn't take up any more space on the desk. That's Apple for you.
Last edited:
I usually have 40-50% remaining at the end of a 16-17 hour day. Not enough for a second day, but plenty for 1 day. Given that, Apple really has battery over capacity now. Plus, I'm guessing the new version of the Watch will feature much less communication with the phone, hopefully significantly reducing battery draw from the radios.
I know that's Apple's vision for everything, thinner is better, but why are we talking about it, if there is no need for us?
Other than gossip about rumor, what does a thinner AW help fulfill our need?
Last edited:
While I agree that I can easily make it through 1 day with the current watch, the power management is extremely aggressive to make that happen. The CPU is underclocked, the screen is off most of the time, there is no GPS chip, and the sampling rate of the HR monitor is extremely low compared to the competition. When you are using a 3rd party app the watch can't be updated in the background, so you have to raise your wrist to wake the screen, then wait for the data to update.
Apple has nothing to spare with the current battery life, and make no mistake, the AW will be a lot better when they can cut back on those power saving techniques, add more sensors, and provide 3-5 days of battery life like many other devices are already doing.
While big watches are the trend this days and more of a matter of style than anything else, one might argue that making it thinner has its advantages like being less likely to bang it/getting it caught in something and making it easier to fit under a tight shirt cuff.
So 1-2mm will prevent tuck under shirt?
With thinness less than below?
| |
That is a good thinking, but a little stretch.
Added: I would prefer Apple keep the same thickness but put in a bigger battery could last 2.5+ days. There is a different between a device need to be charged nightly vs every other day, so one won't get into low battery situation of forgot to charge for one night.
Last edited:
I am the same way, but they apparently still believe they need more battery power if they want to have an "always on" mode for the watch face.
I would also like to see it thinner, but I want an always on face and GPS more than I need it to be thinner, so I can wait for the tech to evolve to make it a thinner design. I should also mention that I wouldn't be opposed to having the option of a larger face to get GPS/always on features.