Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

No Refresh for Apple Watch Ultra or Apple Watch SE as Apple Focuses on Series 10

Does anyone know if the new AW 10 will not be able to use the watch faces from the ultra that has data along the sides , I think it’s called modular ultra ?
 
Pre-ordered mine already. It's about time to let my Apple Watch Original rest and retire after almost a decade of solid use 🤣 I still cannot believe it held up with me for so long.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snipr125
aussie-reader said:
The Apple Australia website shows the Apple Watch SE available from 20.9 implying a new model..
Click to expand...
On Apple France site it clearly shows what's new and what's not. The SE is not highlighted as new.
 

Attachments

  • Capture d’écran 2024-09-10 à 12.27.09.png
    Capture d’écran 2024-09-10 à 12.27.09.png
    70.2 KB · Views: 51
AlexJaye said:
I would’ve finally considered my 1st Apple Watch had they introduced the blood pressure monitoring that was rumored this year, it would’ve been helpful.
Click to expand...
As far as I'm aware, there's still no way for any device like this to monitor blood pressure without it being regularly calibrated by a "proper" wrist or (preferably) upper-arm blood pressure monitor.

They could do it in-store I suppose, but the only bpm watch I know requires you to use the included upper arm bpm once a month for calibration.

Once this issue gets sorted out (assuming it can be done) then it will be a very useful addition.
 
Hallouminati said:
It was a very strange update. I have been trying to find a reason to replace my older 6 with the Ultra 3 (or "updated" 2 as it turns out) but the 10 has s10 SiP and a much faster charge time than the Ultra. Surely logic would dictate they at least give the Ultra 2 these features. And it is circa $450 AUD cheaper.
Click to expand...
The charging time isn't really faster. The Ultra 2 has double the capacity, and double the runtime of the 10. So yes, it may take double the time from 0-80%, but in the end you get a much longer runtime. If you would charge the Ultra 2 for 30 minutes like the 10, it will have the same runtime with just 40% charged.

And if you take the AW10 in titanium, the price is just 100$ lower than the Ultra 2. But the Ultra is more robust, has double the runtime, better GPS and better diving capabilities. All my Apple watches had a scratched (or even slightly broken) displays because of the rounded edges of the display. The Ultra with its flat screen and the titanium frame around it will be much better in this regard.
 
Last edited:
hifimacianer said:
The charging time isn't really faster. The Ultra 2 has double the capacity, and double the runtime of the 10. So yes, it may take double the time from 0-80%, but in the end you get a much longer runtime. If you would charge the Ultra 2 for 30 minutes like the 10, it will have the same runtime with just 40% charged.

And if you take the AW10 in titanium, the price is just 100$ lower than the Ultra 2. But the Ultra is more robust, has double the runtime, better GPS and better diving capabilities. All my Apple watches had a scratched (or even slightly broken) displays because of the rounded edges of the display. The Ultra with its flat screen and the titanium frame around it will be much better in this regard.
Click to expand...
You know, even if the Ultra Watch 3 came with just the S10 processor, it would have been a no-brainer upgrade for many people who just want the latest and greatest. Now I feel like I should have just upgraded my Series 5 last year. 😅
 
Entilzha said:
This statement amuses me.

Casio has made a business on “phoning in” different colorways with their watches since time immemorial. Watchmakers do it all the time.

Apple does it and they’re “phoning it in.” :D
Click to expand...
Rolex (although admittedly that’s different since a Rolex isn't disposable like an Apple Watch) hasn’t done much more than colorway changes for like… 100 years. Yes the movements get improvements every decade or so but most years the only real changes are different bezel or dial colours.
 
  • Love
Reactions: jo-1
Abazigal said:
You know, even if the Ultra Watch 3 came with just the S10 processor, it would have been a no-brainer upgrade for many people who just want the latest and greatest. Now I feel like I should have just upgraded my Series 5 last year. 😅
Click to expand...
I am upgrading from my Series 4 now - just right in time - no need to do that more often IMHO
 
Dwalls90 said:
I wonder if this is the start of non-annual watch upgrades. Seems to be the case for the SE and Ultra as of today.
Click to expand...
It really surprised me that after one year of having released the original Ultra that Apple would then release an Ultra 2 that didn't have that much improvement. It seems silly.

Instead, what should have happened is the current Ultra 2 NOT be released last year. Then this year alongside the Series 10, the Ultra 2 is released with all the features it currently has PLUS a bigger display, option of black titanium, and whatever other minor new features the Series 10 has. That makes much more sense, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AppleMango and Dwalls90
Entilzha said:
They also don’t make phones. But they do make watches, and that’s what I’m referring to. Not every year has to be a quantum leap, and I kinda like the Ultra 2 as it is, personally. The 10 really doesn’t have anything over the Ultra 2 except the 1 second refresh rate. That’s it. Wooooow, the ultra got left behind!

Also, I remember last year there was a great wailing and gnashing of teeth that Apple didn’t make the Ultra 2 in black. Well…now they have. :D
Click to expand...
I agree too that not every year has to be a quantum leap.

I'll say that I don't think it was "necessary" to have released the Ultra 2 last year. They could have released Ultra 2 this year and include the upgraded features like larger display. Why release Ultra 2 last year when there wasn't that much difference with the original Ultra? The Ultra was such a big jump, it would have been fine to have 2 years of Ultra.
 
jz0309 said:
Not even upgrade to the S10 chip was really a surprise, and keeping your “top model” in the lineup for likely a total of 2 years is certainly strange, not sure what was driving this.
Click to expand...
It’s the same deal with the AirPods Max, low sales so they don’t care
 
johnnyenv said:
Are we at all going to expect the new watch faces from the S10 to be available on the Ultra 2.
Seems ridiculous to have a category leading product have less features to a newly designed mid range.

This is starting to feel like when they brought app drawer to the iPhone and not iPad just to give them something to push 12 months later.
Click to expand...
Yes. I have the two new watch faces on my Ultra2, I’m running the RC beta.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LlamaLarry
hyperactiv8 said:
It is also VERY difficult to have health advancements annually. Not only do they have to develop the tech, they usually have to get approval from the health regulators of every country it’s sold in. Hell, my country STILL doesn’t have ECG and arrhythmia detection. It’s not as simple as throwing money at it and finding annual success. There is a lot of red tape that goes along with it. Just look at the Blood Oxygen sensor in America right now. At least I have THAT where I live.
Click to expand...
You’re confusing red tape with the consequences of stealing IP.
 
At least Apple had the decency to leave it at “Ultra 2”.

Black Ultra 2 with titanium Milanese band looks good.
 
UW2 still has material differences:
-1000+ nits max bright
-more battery
-expanded GPS capabilities
-expanded depth capabilities
-expanded altimeter capabilities
-dual speaker playback
-three array mic w/ beamforming and wind noise isolation
-action button
-siren
-some extra MIL spec situation stated in tech specs
-matte titanium finishes
 
  • Like
Reactions: fraXis
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back