Series 10/Ultra 2 owners: What would make you upgrade this year?

[nonns]

Here’s an honest question. Not only direct ed to you, but everyone.

Do you think Apple actually cares to compete with the likes of Garmin for battery times?

Surely by now they can, but choose not to. I think Apple believes that watches are meant to be charged every day at night. So 18 hours should suffice.

Any hope that an Apple Watch will ever have a seven day battery life perhaps is a pipe dream.

I think apple cares to compete only to maintain a marginal lead, flagship status and maintain ebitda and the share price. Garmin has battery advantages but their sensors aren’t great. They’re expensive. Many garmin measures can be replicated through apps. The ultra has proven to be good enough for most people and that god enough to keep apples sales up there.

My problem is I’m tired of the endless upgrade cycle throwing away a lot of money for barely any improvements. There are new players coming in. They’re not quite as good overall but close enough and they’re certainly nearly as good as garmin. Their price is much cheaper. Their battery life stellar. Their sensors close to apples and they’re innovating at a much faster rate. I can get a 90% solution with a 10 day battery life better watch faces prob 90% of the accuracy which is good enough for about 35% of the price. Satellite emergency calls ok fine nice idea but 10 day battery life better yet and better watch faces better too.

They don’t try to grab me with “awe dropping events” and other marketing rubbish whilst offering nothing new. I mean come on if your awe had dropped then presumably you’re not awed. If that’s what they intended then one has to give apple kudos for being honest. I’m not awed at all. Haven’t been for a while. I prefer the pixel watch faces and Samsung galaxy watch faces. They’re clearer. The apple ring fencing is beginning to get me down. The kindle app is just one restriction. The Samsung z fold 7 was very cool and quite impressive but it wasn’t awe inspiring so why does apple think making no changes to speak of will have an effect.

 

[mous94410]

I have a ultra 2 and if the S11 have the same battery life, I’m going to upgrade

 

[Abazigal]

Here’s an honest question. Not only direct ed to you, but everyone.

Do you think Apple actually cares to compete with the likes of Garmin for battery times?

Surely by now they can, but choose not to. I think Apple believes that watches are meant to be charged every day at night. So 18 hours should suffice.

Any hope that an Apple Watch will ever have a seven day battery life perhaps is a pipe dream.

At the heart of the argument is the unspoken understanding that engineering is about making hard decisions about which features to prioritise and which features to not focus on. Let me flip this question around - how many consumers would be willing to accept the drawbacks that came with an Apple Watch sporting a longer, 1-week battery life?

The typical apple sport watch has 18-day battery life. While I have been able to get around 1.5 days out of my S10, this is admittedly with the original OS and a fresh battery with 100% capacity. Either way, I am charging my S10 watch every morning while I wash up for work, so charging is largely still a daily affair.

The Ultra Apple Watch gets 2 days, but it's also way heavier and bulkier. You can imagine how much bigger an Apple Watch would have to be to get 7 full days.

I don't think Apple executives are losing any sleep over the small number of customers who opt for a Garmin watch for the longer battery life. It's a niche of a market, and for all we know, maybe these users own both an Apple Watch and a Garmin watch (which they use accordingly), and Apple hasn't really lost out on any sales here.

It's probably more accurate to say that all factors considered, Apple has decided that 18-hour battery life is an acceptable tradeoff to make, when you consider all the other aspects of the Apple Watch that needs to be prioritised as well (eg: complexity of the OS, form factor, thickness). It's not that battery life isn't important, but that other features matter just as much as well.

 

[eduardodfj]

Here’s an honest question. Not only direct ed to you, but everyone.

Do you think Apple actually cares to compete with the likes of Garmin for battery times?

Surely by now they can, but choose not to. I think Apple believes that watches are meant to be charged every day at night. So 18 hours should suffice.

Any hope that an Apple Watch will ever have a seven day battery life perhaps is a pipe dream.

Both things are true. When making choices, Apple is opting for a "good enough" battery life and the hardware and software needed to run the current features. If Apple could double battery life (or having a seven day battery life) and maintain watchOS as it is, they would obviously make the effort and investment necessary, and that device would obliterate both Garmin and the WearOS crowd. But they can't have both.

So it's not whether they care, but whether they can. At this moment, engineering limits is where the bottleneck is. Having said that, they definitely care a lot, since it is their users' number one complain, and it's a number that they always work on and mention.

 

[4sallypat]

Will be ordering the UW3 for 2 weeks and see how it does on my wrist.
If it's too large, then I'll return it.
That's my biggest concern....

 

[Applewatch42]

I think apple cares to compete only to maintain a marginal lead, flagship status and maintain ebitda and the share price. Garmin has battery advantages but their sensors aren’t great. They’re expensive. Many garmin measures can be replicated through apps. The ultra has proven to be good enough for most people and that god enough to keep apples sales up there.

My problem is I’m tired of the endless upgrade cycle throwing away a lot of money for barely any improvements. There are new players coming in. They’re not quite as good overall but close enough and they’re certainly nearly as good as garmin. Their price is much cheaper. Their battery life stellar. Their sensors close to apples and they’re innovating at a much faster rate. I can get a 90% solution with a 10 day battery life better watch faces prob 90% of the accuracy which is good enough for about 35% of the price. Satellite emergency calls ok fine nice idea but 10 day battery life better yet and better watch faces better too.

They don’t try to grab me with “awe dropping events” and other marketing rubbish whilst offering nothing new. I mean come on if your awe had dropped then presumably you’re not awed. If that’s what they intended then one has to give apple kudos for being honest. I’m not awed at all. Haven’t been for a while. I prefer the pixel watch faces and Samsung galaxy watch faces. They’re clearer. The apple ring fencing is beginning to get me down. The kindle app is just one restriction. The Samsung z fold 7 was very cool and quite impressive but it wasn’t awe inspiring so why does apple think making no changes to speak of will have an effect.

Yes, 3rd party watch sensors are good with neat watch faces, however they cannot maintain other features as well, and the activity rings are really useful and versatile, and have nowhere as good customization and formality, trust me, I have been there.