No New Apple Watch For 5 Years?

[Careful]

The platform is designed for it.

An upgrade would be a single chip that would be replaced after paying a few hundred. The entire system is designed to allow for that. That would explain the single chip. They open the back pull out the old chip put in the new one. Upgraded software and hardware with in minutes.

 

[vigilant]

I don't necessarily think Apple will be updating the Apple Watch every year, but I also doubt it will be 5 years.

To me Apple Watch seems more like the Apple TV, and are very similar in what they actually do. They are both consumption first devices that are reliant on external items to be useful.

I expect Apple to release a revised Apple Watch in 18 months to a year probably around Christmas of 2017. The bands for the Apple Watch will probably be like the Smart Covers or even like the lightning cables where it will just work for a while.

Apple will probably have annual "Collections" of bands ranging in price from $50-$500 for the foreseeable future using this model.

The big constraint from everything we've seen and heard on the Apple Watch appears to be battery life, and reliance on the iPhone. Native Apps should give the Apple Watch a bit more performance breathing room but it's still mostly a consumable platform. I don't think anyone has any aspirations to write a novel using siri on their watch.

----------

A mechanical watch that can be passed down from generation to generation is an investment. An expensive gadget that is guaranteed to lose support sometime in the next ten years is a status symbol.

While I personally wouldn't spend $10-17k on a watch, I don't necessarily think it's a status symbol any more then anyone who is willing to buy a Mac Pro, or a Porsche to be a status symbol.

It CAN be a status symbol if your sole objective is just to be scene with it.

Some people can be just an odd enthusiast despite "status".

I'd think Apple customers of over a decade can understand that

 

[ZombiePete]

While I personally wouldn't spend $10-17k on a watch, I don't necessarily think it's a status symbol any more then anyone who is willing to buy a Mac Pro, or a Porsche to be a status symbol.

It CAN be a status symbol if your sole objective is just to be scene with it.

Some people can be just an odd enthusiast despite "status".

I'd think Apple customers of over a decade can understand that

There's a major difference between your examples and the Edition Watch; a Porsche and a Mac Pro can be objectively said to perform better than their less-expensive counterparts. The Edition model is no different from a performance standpoint than the Sport, so the only reason to buy it is because it stands apart from a price/looks perspective. To me, that screams status symbol.

 

[vigilant]

There's a major difference between your examples and the Edition Watch; a Porsche and a Mac Pro can be objectively said to perform better than their less-expensive counterparts. The Edition model is no different from a performance standpoint than the Sport, so the only reason to buy it is because it stands apart from a price/looks perspective. To me, that screams status symbol.

To be clear I agree with you in many regards.

The same thing can probably be said between Honda, and Acura or GM and Cadillac to a certain degree.

 

[Cashmonee]

I expect Apple to release a revised Apple Watch in 18 months to a year probably around Christmas of 2017.

While I don't think you are wrong, especially since the watch is being reported in a lump with the Apple TV and other stuff, I think this would be a horrible move. The Apple TV is light years behind most everything else on the market. The hardware is dog slow compared to a Roku 3, and the software isn't much better. If Android Wear comes to iOS, Apple will have to update yearly, or Google will destroy them on their own platform.

 

[Poochi]

While I don't think you are wrong, especially since the watch is being reported in a lump with the Apple TV and other stuff, I think this would be a horrible move. The Apple TV is light years behind most everything else on the market. The hardware is dog slow compared to a Roku 3, and the software isn't much better. If Android Wear comes to iOS, Apple will have to update yearly, or Google will destroy them on their own platform.

Not sure what else they can add (even for android) given the battery constraint. Apple could easily add more feature on the software side without changing the hardware for a while.

 

[vigilant]

Not sure what else they can add (even for android) given the battery constraint. Apple could easily add more feature on the software side without changing the hardware for a while.

Thats kinda my thought as well.

Any upgrades they do seem like it would be more focused on updated radios to better communicate with the iPhone.

If the Apple S1 truly is a really small version of the A5 then thats a lot of power for a device 400x400 display that even beyond technological constraints you can't usefully do multitasking or any other of things on such a small screen.

Yes, the Apple will obviously get faster, and smaller. Thats a given.

Outside of resolution can most people see the difference in performance between any of the black puck Apple TV's? Do any of us think an updated Apple TV will be different then a black puck?

----------

While I don't think you are wrong, especially since the watch is being reported in a lump with the Apple TV and other stuff, I think this would be a horrible move. The Apple TV is light years behind most everything else on the market. The hardware is dog slow compared to a Roku 3, and the software isn't much better. If Android Wear comes to iOS, Apple will have to update yearly, or Google will destroy them on their own platform.

I haven't used a Roku, but I've used all the iterations of the Fire TV, Fire TV Stick, the Xbox 360, Xbox One, PS3 and PS4 for internet TV. Sure going from one menu item to the next may be slightly faster but in terms of usefulness, and features for strictly the purposes of watching video the Apple TV seems faster to use in general.

Intellectually I know that the hardware is behind. Thats a given. But the Fire TV, Xbox One, and PS4 really don't have much room to be as close to usable performance day to day then the 3 year old Apple TV.

I tried using the Xbox One to be the one TV box to use in my home, and pulled the HDMI-IN after two weeks. I've tried it again several times to see if it's gotten any better whether it be as a pass-through for the TV (I know the Apple TV doesn't do it, but more on point to discuss overall performance for Video), as well as for Sling, Netflix, and Hulu. The performance can occasionally be better, but considering it's got an 8-core CPU, and 8GB of memory it seems pretty bad.

One thing that I do think is worth pointing out though. Just about every single application outside of the Apple TV looks about the same on all of the competitors platforms that I've used. I wonder if these providers are using some not well optimized middleware to target everything, and thats whats causing it or what.

Apple TV in general is very simplistic in applications. The visual layouts, and error messages I've seen lead me to believe that Apple is providing (for most at least) a template UI to content providers and Apple polls the content providers for an XML feed to populate the UI. This would explain why so many of the Apple TV applications look the same but are fairly responsive compared to their competitors with better hardware.

 

[placidity44]

Not a chance. I absolutely love apple they're my favorite company on earth by a wide margin but their goal is to make the best products they can and of course as other companies make a ton of profit. I see it being updated anywhere from every year to year and a half to two years. Absolutely no way to predict this sort of thing.

 

[Gjwilly]

FWIW I was told the same thing during my try-on appointment.

 

[conifer]

From the tech republic tear down:

"Packed with cool tech: Apple used a lot of unique hardware inside the Watch. For example, the processor, much of the system board, and most of the other ICs are completely covered in a molding compound. I've never seen so many separate components encapsulated like this. And thanks to the analysis of companies such as Chipworks, we know that the Apple Watch has a new STMicroelectronics 6-axis gyroscope in it, as well as at least 30 components mounted to the S1 SiP (which measures a mere 26mm x 28mm).
Not practical to upgrade: Unfortunately, there's no way to upgrade the 2015 Apple Watch, without completely replacing all the Watch's internal hardware--a very impractical process. If Apple does release a new Watch next year, I'm doubtful that it will have the same body as this year's Watch. So, it's unlikely the hardware from a 2016 Watch would fit in the body of the 2015 model. When the new models come out next year (if they do), the old one will just be outdated."

http://www.techrepublic.com/article...eveals-unique-hardware-and-replaceable-parts/

 

[sallenthornton]

Seems very unlikely. And very much out of character for Apple

 

[AZhappyjack]

In the store this week I was told Apple is planning on working with this current version for several years and won't be treating this device as others in the past with frequent new models. I asked if that was from his training updates and he said it was part of a recent training update to reassure potential buyers of the Edition models that Apple won't ask them to spend $10K+ and re-issue another in a year or two. I take it with a grain of salt, but does make sense that Apple would get that this would be a serious issue. The bad press alone...

I find this incredibly doubtful. Apple doesn't divulge this kind of information to just some customer in one of their stores. It's inconceivable that the information is even known by a lowly Apple store employee. I'm calling BS.

 

[MaulRx]

Keeping the watch as a constant and selling bands by the truckload is the safer bet for Apple. Especially given the small owner pool compared to their other products. They will never see iPhone numbers out of the watch so it would only alienate users to push a new model every year or two.

 

[audirs5]

My big screen tv cost £1,350. I've had it for seven years. So it's cost me around £200 per year, i.e. less than £1 a day. When it finally dies, I won't be asking Sony to replace the internals so I can reuse the outside.

People who can afford £10,000 Apple Watches are, I strongly suspect, the kind of people who are really not that cost conscious. I don't think they'll be furious if, in two years time, a newer, better, different-looking one comes out. They'll just buy that one.

The Edition is aimed at people who don't look at money like the rest of us do. They might think to themselves "it'll last two years, so that's five grand a year". Or, more likely, they'll spend the money and barely notice the cost. They will have forgotten about it in two years time.

People who worry about the Apple Watch 2 being better and wondering if there'll be a special deal to just replace the internals of an Apple Watch 1 are almost certainly not the kind of people who'll be buying an Edition. If your budget is that tight, you really shouldn't be buying ten thousand dollar wristwatches.

Edition buyers are the kinds of people who go to clubs and ostentatiously order £500 bottles of champagne. They don't ask for refills. The money's gone and they don't care.

People who want an expensive watch and want it to last for 20 years wouldn't even consider an Apple Watch. It's a wholly different product. It's disposable jewellery, not an heirloom.

Yea, I don't think too many people here understand money and its value to some...

Someone, just purchases a 10-17k APPLE WATCH..... Think about that. DO YOU THINK, that someone , who can EVEN consider a 10k watch, made by apple, KNOWING that its filled with a battery, worries about money.. If they wanted an investment, they would purchase a Rolex, Which even then runs for 6k on the low end, new, and will last 20 years..

This is rich people who want something that they know a ton of people won't have. Rolex, you'll see that almost anywhere. But a gold plated Apple watch, no thats gonna be more rare.


MY prediction for this watch:

1- Apple will not change the form of the watch until gen 3, in the least. I think they still want to add more sensors and having room to add it is a plus.
2- Apple will offer internal upgrade packages for edition buyers only. considering the 17k watch has the same internals as the 350 dollar one, I'm not sure how pricing will work..
3- All bands will be compatible for many generations. Apple is stubborn and idiotic at times. But I don't think they want a huge public backlash.

 

[audirs5]

I can't see them updating millions of devices being feasible. They'll probably do what that've always done, they'll come out with a version 2 and keep supporting version 1 until they stop supporting it. The edition is probably the only one that will have some kind of exchange program due to the value of the gold.

How is it not? charge depending on the model of the watch and have them drop it off at an apple store and it gets shipped to a warehouse or done in store. and even then, the internals will probably come in a easy to insert package so the person behind the counter could prob do several an hour..

The biggest bottle neck here is going to be O.S.. I don't think people understand how little the outside and sensors even matter. Apple has such tight control on everything that the watch is being used for 10% of its potential. Depending on what they say tomorrow then we will see how fast they want to expedite the maturity of this item.. But they need to let devs have full access to everything on the watch IMO.. But lets be honest.

It took them how long to add copy/paste.. Some of the things apple does makes no sense. Then we cheer like animals when they let us get basic functions.

 

[Shirasaki]

While I'm completely guessing, I do think the upgrade cycle will be less frequent than others, but 5 years seems a bit ridiculous.

Can you imagine using a 5 year old iPhone? I know people do, but I'd rather not. LOL, what would that be? The iPhone 3GS or the iPhone 4?

Well, I use iPhone 4. Despite the hardware, this phone is great, in its own. It deserves me decent power to do basic things, and it can upgrade to iOS 7.
Although I use iPhone 6 Plus to reply due to the serious performance issues on 4, I still keeps it as my backup phone, although SIM card tray size could be a problem because I cannot easily use nano SIM card on it, without a tray.
For watch, I think they will upgrade internals next year, or even this fall (unlikely). But the exterior will remain the same for perhaps half a decade. Apple watch has become a fashion symbol in some cases, therefore upgrading exterior every year would be not possible.
I am still waiting for the next generation of apple watch, because first generation apple watch has really bad performance. And I hate using any app must stream from iPhone, rather than storing a local copy on it.

 

[AZhappyjack]

While I'm completely guessing, I do think the upgrade cycle will be less frequent than others, but 5 years seems a bit ridiculous.

It has nothing to do with the upgrade cycle being (or even approaching) 5 years. My amazement is that some low-level store wonk employee claims (1) to have this "inside" information and (2) that they are freely sharing it with the public. That alone makes the whole discussion implausible, IMO.

 

[bunnicula]

From the tech republic tear down:

"Packed with cool tech: Apple used a lot of unique hardware inside the Watch. For example, the processor, much of the system board, and most of the other ICs are completely covered in a molding compound. I've never seen so many separate components encapsulated like this. And thanks to the analysis of companies such as Chipworks, we know that the Apple Watch has a new STMicroelectronics 6-axis gyroscope in it, as well as at least 30 components mounted to the S1 SiP (which measures a mere 26mm x 28mm).
Not practical to upgrade: Unfortunately, there's no way to upgrade the 2015 Apple Watch, without completely replacing all the Watch's internal hardware--a very impractical process. If Apple does release a new Watch next year, I'm doubtful that it will have the same body as this year's Watch. So, it's unlikely the hardware from a 2016 Watch would fit in the body of the 2015 model. When the new models come out next year (if they do), the old one will just be outdated."

http://www.techrepublic.com/article...eveals-unique-hardware-and-replaceable-parts/

I'm not sure why they think Apple won't use the same body. They do it with most everything else. I cannot see them reworking the band connector system that quickly, even if they do make any other body changes.

 

[mcdj]

I think what the guy was actually saying was that Apple would fulfill the first wave of preorders within five years.

 

[andrewstirling]

Not sure what else they can add (even for android) given the battery constraint. Apple could easily add more feature on the software side without changing the hardware for a while.

Have a look at the garmin 620 to see what they could add in relation to fitness. For me, the lack of GPS is a glaring omission which I'd like to see fixed in future updates

 

[The Doctor11]

Kinda like how the dumb ass Apple Store employee tried to tell me the sport watches can't use any band other than the sport bands?

 

[ianrip]

I heard the battery life is about 1,000 charges , roughly 2.73972602739726 (I haven't calculated leap years ) years to keep getting the same 19hours life per day etc, so that is a good indicator about how long Apple sees this lasting
Apple website
http://www.apple.com/batteries/service-and-recycling/

Your battery is designed to retain up to 80% of its original capacity at 1000 complete charge cycles. The one-year warranty (for Apple Watch and Apple Watch Sport) and two-year warranty (for Apple Watch Edition) include service coverage for a defective battery. If it is out of warranty, Apple offers a battery service. Prices and terms may vary.

 

[Michael CM1]

I would wager the updates would follow the MacBook products more than anything else. They get random internal upgrades like processor, RAM, storage, sometimes better battery life or ports change. But it's about every five years when they get a total redesign.

Someone explain to me what needs to change on the outside of this stainless steel watch version in the next two or three years even. Maybe you add a camera, although that would be difficult unless you somehow tuck it underneath the display in some magical feat of engineering. An LED the size of a pinhole on top might be good for a few times when I have needed a flashlight. Building Touch ID into the display would be awesome yet also difficult. But none of that aside from the camera, and even then it wouldn't take a major redesign, would require scrapping this design.

Smartphones change so much because so many people buy them every two years. A lot changes in phones every two years. But if those end up being the hub of the watches, which they are for most of the top-end ones from Apple and Android builders, then it's a case of relying on a faster phone connection with more efficient processing instead of needing to jam more power into the Apple Watch.

I spent $600 on my watch because I wanted to get one that would last for a good number of years. I was worried about the Sport getting scuffed more or scratched because of the glass and aluminum compared to SS and sapphire. I already whack the thing on my seat belt buckle about every day, so consider me glad for getting the stronger materials.

 

[Newtons Apple]

I learned long ago that the Geeks know less than we do in the forums. No way they will let their watch alone for 5 years. I am betting a year maybe.

 

[danmart]

I think a 5 year support life is realistic, but not 5 years of staying the same.

My money would be on small increments to hardware annually, but for these not to be trumpeted as reasons to force an upgrade. New bands will be produced each year to drive sales within the user base. I'd expect a significant capability upgrade in 2-3 years which might prompt us early adopters to feel the need to purchase the latest version.