All I ask is that Apple not destroy the investment I made in the Apple Watch. Release a new one, make sure the bands from the prior fit the new. keep supporting and selling the old.
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.
Quanta May Begin Trial Production of Apple Watch 2 This Month
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unless the watch is very large, that quickly starts to be a very cluttered. And you introduce overlapping elements. All for the sake of wanting your smartwatch to look like a mechanical watch.If you make the round face the same diameter as the height of the current Apple Watch face you can make the dial bigger and bring the complications inside. Just like they do on traditional watches.
As I said, these compromises are the very definition of form over function.
A round watch adds nothing to the function of the watch and only serves to have the shape conform to preconceived notions of what a 'watch' should look like.
I do agree that there is a demand for round smartwatches, I just feel that it is objectively misguided.
Why do you all want GPS in a watch that only works with an iPhone (with its own GPS)?
I don't want them to stop making the rectangular watch, just give another option for those who don't like the current design.
A few people keep bringing this up as if it mattered on a smartwatch meant for glances.
If reading text was most important, then everyone should follow Samsung's lead and make a huge wrist-wrapping screen like this:
However, in real life, round is just fine for reading text:
Most pertinent of all, losing some text doesn't seem to bother the millions of people who chose the 38mm Apple Watch over the 42mm:
As for round UIs, not a problem. Heck, some of Apple's core watch apps look like they started that way:
Last edited:
My feelings when I read the comment was to have the ability to go two-days then charge as a routine versus doing it daily. I charge daily all of my devices.
Your point though is understood. There are times when we just can't make it back to a charger in the evening. You used the words forget and unscheduled in your reasons. We all have those but they are the exception so still say the space would be better used for a GPS receiver that activates during workouts and/or another sensor to expand the medical monitoring or something. If they can do that and add battery life I would gladly accept that and I would be happy if they used the same case size they do today. I have no argument against your point, its good. Its just that for me its rare that I would need a second 24 hours of battery compared to my need for the additions I mention which would be used daily.
I am more interested in what watch os3 may bring. Also developers need to get on the ball as they have not put anything out worth mentioning. The only non local app i have used is shazam.
How much battery do you have at the end of one day? On regular time checks and slight fitness use I've /just/ edged out 2 days from mine. But, yeah, more reliable full 48 hours would be great.
Because I would prefer not to run with my iPhone 6 or even my old iPod Touch 5th gen. If the watch could give me GPS and a bit of music, I could leave both behind.
I get that you are ok with the compromises of using a round display. But, the compromises are still there.
You just seem to be saying that round watches are good enough for your needs.
Also your giant watch strawman is silly. Square watches actually propose the exact opposite; the more efficient use of available screen space allowing for smaller watches.
I can never understand people asking for this, nonsensical! Battery life is one of the few issues I don't have with mine. Gets me through a day with plenty to spare, why need more?
The Apple Watch isn't square though.
A circular screen with a 390px diameter would only have 2% less available screen space than the 390px x 312px 42mm Apple Watch. The watch body would only need to have the same height as the current watch and would be a little wider but like you said earlier...
For the apple watch to TRULY be a health and fitness device, which seems to be the direction that Apple is trying to go, and a iPhone "companion", they need to look at getting up to 48 hours battery life (minimum) and GPS antenna. This device would be the best on the market if it had GPS for outdoor activities (running, biking, etc) since it is already capable of holding some form of music on it. Combine that with it's bluetooth capabilities (bluetooth headphones) and 70% of the running community would buy one....most just-above-novice runners spend $100-300 on running watches (JUST GPS capable). It was terrible watching the "apple watch" marathon training video last year because she was still running with a GIANT phone on her arm. Once the watch can do those two things, Garmin, TomTom, and Fitbit will be struggling. Until then, the watch will be a bust....and my bet will be one of those companies will beat apple to the punch and get music onto their devices first.
You mean "real" chunky watches?
Watches used to be lovely and thin, and some classy one still are before the MACHO BIG WATCH craze took hold and the bigger your watch the more impressive you as a REAL MAN must be.
I love the thin and elegant mens classy dress watches.
If you are infallible and never forget to put your watch on charge, never forget to pack the charger/cable/international adapter on a trip, never find yourself in a hotel with a single socket where you have to decide between charging your phone, never make an unplanned overnight stay anywhere then fine. Spare a thought for us less perfect people!
...but the exceptions also tend to happen when you are travelling or your routine is otherwise disrupted. At such times (a) you're likely to be making more use of your mobile devices and (b) your back-up dumbwatch is likely to be a in a drawer a few thousand miles away.
I periodically make transatlantic trips... not uncommon to be the thick end of 24 hours from bed to bed, with lots of prime playing-with-gadget opportunities (sorry: I meant 'prime smartwatch use cases') along the way to use up the battery.
Ultimately, though, you're right because although a 24 hour battery on a smartphone is as much use as a chocolate teapot, this is a smartwatch and utterly optional.
Honestly, don't bother.
You cannot explain to some people this.
They can only see things in a negative way.
You give them a 4:3 tablet, then you add extra to the left and right sides of the tablet to make it, 16:10 lets say, and they cannot grasp that you have added more. They can only see it in a negative way, that it's now a shorter screen than 4:3
Depends on the bands people are buying. $50 Sport bands, which I would wager are the most popular are effectively no more expensive than iPhone cases which may have to be replaced every upgrade anyway. If that's the reality, then Apple has no reason not to change the band lugs. And even if they did, it likely wouldn't stop them.
The solution is simple. Don't introduce so many elements as to make it cluttered. People can make that choice now with traditional watches, square or round. Jony Ive is on record as saying the watch is best used for quick glances ... the more information on a display, no matter how organized, is going to turn into much more than a glance. For people who don't want a computer terminal on their wrist, the shape of the watch does not matter.
The word "Objective" is misused here, because while most would not argue that text is best displayed in a rectangle, whether or not a watch is the best designed to display text is hardly objective. OI'd say the deciding factor is subjective totally based on how any individual uses the "watch".
I don't use my Watch with an iPhone now. I only use it for activities during which I need to know the time, and it would otherwise be inconvenient to carry my wallet, or phone. And it works out just fine. I surf in it, and wearing nothing more than board shorts or a wetsuit, I can stop by my local coffee shop, pay for food, check my messages, and eventually when ATT turns it on, make and receive phone calls -- all without my iPhone. Adding GPS would make it far more useful to me in terms of using maps to navigate my way around in such situations, like when I'm in surfing at breaks I don't know.
[doublepost=1452709779][/doublepost]
Perhaps this will help:
Last edited:
To be fair the 7-9 day battery life on the 235 is just for using it as activity tracker and for notifications. When you fire up the GPS and optical heart rate monitor for training (running for example) you only get a max of 11 hours usage. Of course those numbers are still substantially better than the Apple Watch so the 235 is still a compelling product.
I see a few advantages to a round watch.
1) It would give Apple Watch variety: Two styles to choose from (keep the original rectangular design in the mix); Apple offered larger iPhone screens to match competitors, why not a round watch so competitors don't have an exclusive on that design, for people who prefer it? iPads and Mac laptops come in a wide array of choices...
2) A circle with the same diameter as the long dimension on the current watch would have greater volume, thus could include a larger battery. Battery life's never been a problem for me--charging overnite--so I'd rather see the increased volume used to accommodate a same-capacity battery as current but with a thinner design, which i wouldn't mind) EDIT: Or to accommodate chips for extra features such as GPS, an am-fm chip, whatever...
Last edited:
It's not black and white. Square watches also have compromises.
Sure, they're slightly better for lists (although round has no problem with those), but there are also apps that make more sense in a round screen. Analog watchfaces. Maps of what's around you within an equal distance. Ditto for weather radar screens. Circular graphs like Apple uses for fitness. A circular menu of friends like Apple uses.
Not to mention that only round watches can have rotating bezels for input and/or other purposes.
More importantly, in real life, there's little difference in what can be seen. And as I pointed out, the smaller Apple Watch already SHOWS LESS text than its big brother, and millions of people DO NOT CARE. So all you're doing is dissing 38mm watch owners.
As for style, I can tell you from experience in public that no one cares one whit about my daughter's Apple Watch, not when they see my round always-on Android Wear watch.
So let's be frank here. The reason why a few people here want to diss round watches (besides obviously not having experience with both styles), is because Apple doesn't have one (yet). The moment they do, I'll bet that it'll be the most popular model... just as round watches are far and away the most popular mechanical style.
TL;DR - This is a repeat of the "no one wants a phablet sized phone" or "no one can use a smaller tablet" claims, that were also proven wrong.
Most people I see running are carrying their smartphones with them regardless of their seriousness with the sport. I do quite a bit of running and use only my phone and Apple Watch (I use Strava to log runs). However I carry my phone in a waist belt or in a pocket on my hydration vest and never on my arm.
In the end it just come down to user preference and I think the fitness and running market is large enough for both Apple Watch like devices and full blown GPS Garmin like devices to be very successful.
Hmmm, a combination of bad maths and my wife lying about how much my Xmas present cost! You can get the watch for £230 if you shop around.