Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I don't think Apple Watch can handle "thousands" of applications in a day, hell, that's even stretching it for the iphone, but let me stick with just one app and piece of mind in my traditional watch for years to come.

Right, I also stick to a horse and cart because the
horseless carriage is pointless.

:rolleyes:

----------

Man that taptic engine takes up a lot of space from the battery. they could have easily doubled battery life without it.

It doubles up as an ohmibod !
 
It's not a "S1" Chip

It's a circuit board, just like other smart watches, covered in 30+ items.
 
I hope they pop open a 42 so we can see the capacity of that battery.

The most interesting discovery is that the hardware may be capable of measuring blood oxygen levels!
 
Did they really need to print instructions on how to fasten the Sport band? As if people can't figure it out.

Actually, from looking at it I assumed it was like all buckles, where one first tucks the tail in the slot before pushing the button in the hole.

I'll have to ask my mom and sister if this is how the ban was demonstrated at the Apple Store on the first demo day.

----------

Whys the packaging diff from other unboxing videos?

I'm wondering this too.
 
iFixit and Reuters offended because the S1 is completely sealed. Boo hoo.

Yeah, good luck with getting that response, Reuters.

Maybe Reuters can explain to us how you make a watch that is waterproof and not completely sealed.

It's rare that you read something as stupid as this Reuters article. They seem to really think that the Apple Watch should be designed for iFixit (who clearly managed to open the watch even though it was sealed) and for investors who want to open it to find out what companies made the components so they can bet on their shares getting up, instead of being designed for people who want to wear it on their wrist. This is total idiocy of the first order.
 
A ridiculous analogy. The apple watch and your citizen are only similar in the way that they are worn on the wrist and tell time.

Its like saying a concert piano is superior to a synthesizer because you don't need to plug it in, ignoring all the additional possibilities of the synthesizer.

Agreed, as if there is only one legitimate way to do things, and this is frozen in time. ("Harrumph! I think spring driven time pieces are illegitimate because they have moving parts not driven by the sun!")

----------

Maybe Reuters can explain to us how you make a watch that is waterproof and not completely sealed.

Even though the S1 is sealed, the Watch is neither completely sealed nor waterproof.
 
Even though the S1 is sealed, the Watch is neither completely sealed nor waterproof.

So you agree with Reuters, that Apple shouldn't have the watch sealed at all, so that investors can look inside, and customers wearing it in the rain have to buy a new watch? Is that what you are saying? Seriously?
 
Maybe Reuters can explain to us how you make a watch that is waterproof and not completely sealed.

It's rare that you read something as stupid as this Reuters article. They seem to really think that the Apple Watch should be designed for iFixit (who clearly managed to open the watch even though it was sealed) and for investors who want to open it to find out what companies made the components so they can bet on their shares getting up, instead of being designed for people who want to wear it on their wrist. This is total idiocy of the first order.

And the suggestion that Apple completely sealed the S1 so they could pass it off as something more innovative than it really is...yeah I'm sure that was the #1 priority with its design.
 
Also inside is the tiny 3.8V 205 mAh battery...

I would trade the large Taptic Engine space for more battery in a heartbeat.

(See what I did there? ;))

Larger batteries make a lot of difference.

Up to 18 hours or more

205 mAh - Apple

Up to 24 hours or more

300 mAh - Samsung Gear Live
300 mAh - Huawei (?)
320 mAh - Moto 360

Up to 48 hours or more

370 mAh - Asus Zen
400 mAh - LG G
410 mAh - LG R, LG Urbane
420 mAh - Sony SW3

Btw, I've had an "aha" moment about charging in spurts vs. all at once. I like wearing watches at night, partly for the time display. Some even gather sleep info. So the idea of charging overnight away from my wrist is not ideal.

What I've discovered is that, for me at least, a quick charge can work as well. I.e. I wear my LGR watch from 7am - 645am (23.75 hours), then throw it on the charger for 15 minutes or so while I take a shower, which pops it back up to 35-40%... enough to go another full 24 hour cycle with the screen set to always on.
 
I would trade the large Taptic Engine space for more battery in a heartbeat.

(See what I did there? ;))

Larger batteries make a lot of difference.

18 hours

205 mAh - Apple

Up to 24 hours and more

300 mAh - Samsung Gear Live
300 mAh - Huawei (?)
320 mAh - Moto 360

Up to 48 hours and more

370 mAh - Asus Zen
400 mAh - LG G
410 mAh - LG R, LG Urbane
420 mAh - Sony SW3

Btw, I've had an "aha" moment about charging in spurts vs. all at once. I like wearing watches at night, partly for the time display. Some even gather sleep info. So the idea of charging overnight away from my wrist is not ideal.

What I've discovered is that, for me at least, a quick charge can work as well. I.e. I wear my LGR watch from 7am - 645am (23.75 hours), then throw it on the charger for 15 minutes or so while I take a shower, which pops it back up to 35-40%... enough to go another full 24 hour cycle with the screen set to always on.

Unless you actually qualify how those times were determined, I'm going to call it pulling it how of the air. Considering how different the use model of those watches are (and the settings' impact). I'm not even sure how they could compared their use times.

BTW, Actual use of all those other watches has gotten way way way worse times than that.

Many reviewers finished the day with 35-40% left, that means they easily could have gotten to 24h despite the microscopic battery. Considering the haptic device is one of the key differentiator of the Apple watch, removing it would be DUMB.
 
Pretty much confirms there won't be an option to upgrade the internals when they release the next generation watch next year..

I realize why people would be saying that, but this is a watch. There's really nothing that would have told me that it would be a user-upgradable device. The only thing I would have wanted was a way to replace the battery. I don't intend to get one right away, but if or when I do, I would like to know I am not saddled with a replacement just because the battery stops performing.

I love the tear down. Having been pretty absent in the whole iWatch event, it's a very interesting device inside.
 
So you agree with Reuters, that Apple shouldn't have the watch sealed at all, so that investors can look inside, and customers wearing it in the rain have to buy a new watch? Is that what you are saying? Seriously?

How did you read the quote from Robert.Walter and come to the conclusion that you did? All he said was 1. the S1 is sealed. 2. Th watch is not completely sealed and is not waterproof. Both things are 100% true.

Where's the leap in logic that implies agreement with Reuters?:confused:

OT: Like others have said, I too would prefer less taptic engine and more battery. KDarling quoted a nice battery comparison chart. Another 100 mAh would have been fantastic.
 
I realize why people would be saying that, but this is a watch. There's really nothing that would have told me that it would be a user-upgradable device. The only thing I would have wanted was a way to replace the battery. I don't intend to get one right away, but if or when I do, I would like to know I am not saddled with a replacement just because the battery stops performing.

I love the tear down. Having been pretty absent in the whole iWatch event, it's a very interesting device inside.

Considering it costs $30 bucks to get someone to replace a battery in an Iphone, you think it will be a replacement in this case! The batter looks more accessible than in any Iphone. I may even do it myself. I'd expect the battery to cost mo more than $10.

----------

How did you read the quote from Robert.Walter and come to the conclusion that you did? All he said was 1. the S1 is sealed. 2. Th watch is not completely sealed and is not waterproof. Both things are 100% true.

Where's the leap in logic that implies agreement with Reuters?:confused:

OT: Like others have said, I too would prefer less taptic engine and more battery. KDarling quoted a nice battery comparison chart. Another 100 mAh would have been fantastic.

Except his battery chart is UTTER NONSENSE. Other that that.. hey!
 
Unless you actually qualify how those times were determined, I'm going to call it pulling it how of the air. Considering how different the use model of those watches are (and the settings' impact). I'm not even sure how they could compared their use times.

BTW, Actual use of all those other watches has gotten way way way worse times than that.

Many reviewers finished the day with 35-40% left, that means they easily could have gotten to 24h despite the microscopic battery. Considering the haptic device is one of the key differentiator of the Apple watch, removing it would be DUMB.

Like I mentioned earlier, John Gruber said the Watch wouldn't be compelling if it didn't have the taptic engine. He also said most days he finished with 40-50% battery life left.
 
Unless you actually qualify how those times were determined, I'm going to call it pulling it how of the air.

The times come not only from multiple recent online comparisons, but more importantly, from my own experience. I've bought and tried out all the watches (except the Asus and Apple, which haven't arrived yet) to see for myself. I didn't trust old reviews or second hand reports.

Considering how different the use model of those watches are (and the settings' impact). I'm not even sure how they could compared their use times.

Oh sure. For example, some of those watches keep their display on all the time, and still get 48 hours.

The point was not a direct comparison, btw. It was to demonstrate that even among other watches, more battery can make a startling difference.

Many reviewers finished the day with 35-40% left, that means they easily could have gotten to 24h despite the microscopic battery.

I'm sure they did. Doesn't change the fact that more battery = more run time, for ANY situation or device.

I suspect that many people would love for their Apple Watch to have a larger battery than the current quite small capacity one.
 
I'm impressed.... These guys will tear down just about anything huh.

one thing at least Apple made it "clear-as-crystal" which chip is the feedback engine....

Unless you don't know how to read.... you would think Apple would have put more thought than just saying the name........ We KNOW a large chip must be the CPU, for example... so i dunno why they chose to go back to basis here..

what about just a model number ? make 'us" work instead.... Its too easy..

Would this then indicate, due to limited size, the 42,, would be a bit easier to deal with with space, cables etc.?
 
Watching this should put to rest all the crazy notions that the watch will be highly upgradable or even fully modular. Batteries will certainly be replaceable but that's it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.