Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Just transplant that lovely new GPS chip into the 41 mm regular for those of us with twiggy wrists and no athletic pursuits longer than an hour, please and thank you
 
I was shocked at the $799 sticker price, so that was an automatic yes for me. I went from S2 > S4 > Ultra. If I had AppleCare+ I would definitely keep it for 4 years before upgrading again.
Yeah @StaceyMJ86 I remember your problem with apple care. I got mine for $749 at Best Buy sale my membership at Best Buy includes automatic ”free” apple care plus on my AW Ultra, new gen 6 12.9 iPad Pro and my new 16 inch M2Pro macbook I would be uncomfortable not having apple care on my Ultra for sure
 
I don’t understand the photography terms but a great camera is an added bonus for me. With a 2 year upgrade I’m more amazed with the updated camera. I don’t think I would see any difference if I went year to year. I personally think the 16 Pro Max will be a great upgrade from the 14 Pro Max.
I agree @StaceyMJ86 the 16 ProMax is gonna be a awesome upgrade for us 14 ProMax users.
 
Because most importantly Apple loves to gate features behind new models not because of functionality but because they need more reasons for a "upgrade". So if they are on a two year cycle then they focus on the current device that year and not a new model.


I'm not sure I understand.

"focus on the current device"? How would Apple focus on the existing Ultra? They can't add new sensors (for instance) via software. They can add new software features via software, and they do that already.

I'm not following your logic at all, sorry.

I do agree, yes, Apple offers different watches with different features at different price points. For sure. Compare the SE vs the Ultra. Far different, nothing to do with a two year cycle.
 
The bezels protect the screen, though. Reduce them much and it'll reduce it.

I've absolutely trashed (scratched) the screen on my 6 from rock climbing and bouldering. The ultra should take care of that, when I finally buy one.
Thew raised lip protects the screen, not the bezels. There is room to push the screen size closer to the edge and still have a bit of bezel.

My hope is if they decide to make a smaller one, they don't make the current model bigger.
 
they can cut a pound off the weight... its still like strapping an iPad to my wrist (and many others I see wearing them at work etc.) compared to my Apple Watch Normal ;)

just another mans opinion... now make it a lot slimmer and a tad smaller and I would dump my 22 Apple Brand watch bands and 45mm 7 Ti in black...
 
Remember folks, Apple is selling a lifestyle and not a product. The AWU is for city folk who want to think of themselves as adventurous and might go on the odd hike into the hills every month. This isn’t a criticism: I am one of these exact people and it’s why I bought one 🤭

Serious adventurers and hikers will have a Garmin that last for 3 weeks between charges and has a transparent solar panel for a glass front. It’s not meant to be a computer but it sure can track your stats.

I wonder if we will see the transparent solar panel on the AWU at any point? 🤔
 
The bezels protect the screen, though. Reduce them much and it'll reduce it.

I've absolutely trashed (scratched) the screen on my 6 from rock climbing and bouldering. The ultra should take care of that, when I finally buy one

I wonder if there actually is a difference between the screen and the bezels in terms of durability. Because both the bezels and the screen are covered by one continuous top glass material. The top glass seems like the part that typically breaks.
 
Apple Watch Ultra mini… Sounds like a page out of Tim’s playbook. I see no reason they wouldn’t offer this at some point.
Or just do like they do with all of the other watch names. Apple Watch Ultra (49mm) and Apple Watch Ultra (45mm) or whatever size it is. Don't have to make it more complicated than it is, they leave that to the iphone and mac naming schemes.
 
Are they really going to make a new model every year? I don’t get why this is necessary, other than those with extra income to help Apple bring in extra cash.

And I don’t mind them making a buck. But I kind of wish they had a 2 year cycle.
Because believe it or not, not everyone upgrades at the same time. This isn't meant to be bought every year by the same watch users as an upgrade. The same goes for iPhones.
 
I'm not sure I understand.

"focus on the current device"? How would Apple focus on the existing Ultra? They can't add new sensors (for instance) via software. They can add new software features via software, and they do that already.

I'm not following your logic at all, sorry.

I do agree, yes, Apple offers different watches with different features at different price points. For sure. Compare the SE vs the Ultra. Far different, nothing to do with a two year cycle.
Apple updates WatchOS/iOS every year. Time and time again they will have a cool new software feature and say but it only works on for example Apple Watch Ultra Series 2. People argue and defend Apple every time and people through jailbreaking or whatever else turn said feature on and it works just fine on an older device.

So yes if there is a new device yearly new software features are exclusive to the new model as a way to encourage upgrades. If there is no new device there is no reason for Apple to hold features back.
 
Apple updates WatchOS/iOS every year. Time and time again they will have a cool new software feature and say but it only works on for example Apple Watch Ultra Series 2. People argue and defend Apple every time and people through jailbreaking or whatever else turn said feature on and it works just fine on an older device.

So yes if there is a new device yearly new software features are exclusive to the new model as a way to encourage upgrades. If there is no new device there is no reason for Apple to hold features back.
And sometimes the new phone or AW or Mac contains new HW, and SW features might require that new HW. So there’s that
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howard2k
Apple updates WatchOS/iOS every year. Time and time again they will have a cool new software feature and say but it only works on for example Apple Watch Ultra Series 2. People argue and defend Apple every time and people through jailbreaking or whatever else turn said feature on and it works just fine on an older device.

So yes if there is a new device yearly new software features are exclusive to the new model as a way to encourage upgrades. If there is no new device there is no reason for Apple to hold features back.

Time and time again? Do you have any examples of this? Off hand I can only think of one feature that might fit this bill, but not being an AW software developer it's an assumption on my part that Apple withheld the feature from older watches, I can't say for sure that there was not some limitation that prevented the feature from being delivered to the older watches. I'm not uber familiar with the AW lifecycles though, only been using it a few years.

But let's say that's true, it almost means that Apple might be artificially then holding back things like new sensors in order to appease the anti-one-year crowd. I'd rather Apple throw in new sensors as they're ready. Not just as a Watch user, but also as a shareholder. If I'm buying a new watch tomorrow I don't want to get old tech because Apple has new stuff ready to go but is waiting for a 2 year cycle. And if Apple has blood glucose ready to go tomorrow but has to wait until September 2024 to put that in to fit a 2 year cycle, that seems like it would not be a smart move.
 
Remember folks, Apple is selling a lifestyle and not a product. The AWU is for city folk who want to think of themselves as adventurous and might go on the odd hike into the hills every month. This isn’t a criticism: I am one of these exact people and it’s why I bought one 🤭

Serious adventurers and hikers will have a Garmin that last for 3 weeks between charges and has a transparent solar panel for a glass front. It’s not meant to be a computer but it sure can track your stats.

I wonder if we will see the transparent solar panel on the AWU at any point? 🤔

I see several Apple Watch Ultras on the trails. I'm not city folk (live on several acres in the middle of nowhere), but I'm looking into one. My buddy is an ultramarathoner and he sports an Ultra.

I have a Fenix, in addition to my series 6.
 
Time and time again? Do you have any examples of this? Off hand I can only think of one feature that might fit this bill, but not being an AW software developer it's an assumption on my part that Apple withheld the feature from older watches, I can't say for sure that there was not some limitation that prevented the feature from being delivered to the older watches. I'm not uber familiar with the AW lifecycles though, only been using it a few years.

But let's say that's true, it almost means that Apple might be artificially then holding back things like new sensors in order to appease the anti-one-year crowd. I'd rather Apple throw in new sensors as they're ready. Not just as a Watch user, but also as a shareholder. If I'm buying a new watch tomorrow I don't want to get old tech because Apple has new stuff ready to go but is waiting for a 2 year cycle. And if Apple has blood glucose ready to go tomorrow but has to wait until September 2024 to put that in to fit a 2 year cycle, that seems like it would not be a smart move.
This is why they get away with it. Apple said it requires the new watch so it has to be true. If Apple wants to do a watch every year I wouldn't complain but Apple goes well not everyone needs glucose monitoring so what else can we offer to get people to upgrade? Oh to use this new sleep tracking feature you have to get the new watch. People get angry and complain and maybe even prove its a software decision and Apple just says it doesn't perform as well as we want it to and everyone just goes okay Apple guess I need a new watch.

As for examples look at last years iPadOS that basically said any device without a M1 processor isn't getting a majority of the new software features. They accidentally released a beta with some of the features enabled on old devices and people tried to call them out and they just said it doesn't work as well on old devices. That was the end of the discussion.

Every major update excludes more devices and every year there is a debate why software features are exclusive to new models. This is pretty much a known Apple strategy.
 
I am wondering how they can achieve that.
I’m not an expert, but it’s hard to reduce weight without making some big/heavy parts smaller (or removing them).

Unless they are shaving off just 2 or 3 grams, which of course wouldn’t be noticeable...
 
This is why they get away with it. Apple said it requires the new watch so it has to be true. If Apple wants to do a watch every year I wouldn't complain but Apple goes well not everyone needs glucose monitoring so what else can we offer to get people to upgrade? Oh to use this new sleep tracking feature you have to get the new watch. People get angry and complain and maybe even prove its a software decision and Apple just says it doesn't perform as well as we want it to and everyone just goes okay Apple guess I need a new watch.

As for examples look at last years iPadOS that basically said any device without a M1 processor isn't getting a majority of the new software features. They accidentally released a beta with some of the features enabled on old devices and people tried to call them out and they just said it doesn't work as well on old devices. That was the end of the discussion.

Every major update excludes more devices and every year there is a debate why software features are exclusive to new models. This is pretty much a known Apple strategy.

Sleep tracking required a new watch? I wasn't aware of that.

I'm sure there's always debate but if it's not informed debate then it's not that relevant. The example I was thinking of was power saving. The S8 has more granular power saving than the S7, but I don't know for sure that there is no hardware limitation there. It seems unlikely to me and I think it probably is what you suggest in the case of power saving, but I don't know for sure.

The M1 iPad issue was the screen sharing thing IIRC and from what I remember Apple said that they weren't confident it would work well enough on older devices. Apple release it working poorly on older device and people will complain too. You might be right that it was just a selling strategy (and let's face it, selling iPads it not surprisingly on strategy for Apple) but again I don't know for sure.

I'm not sure I'm seeing this happening "time and time again" though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StyxMaker
I had an Ultra for one day. My aging eyes loved the screen size, but the bulk of it while using a computer was just a bit too annoying. I returned it and got an 8 instead. A lightweight version with the larger screen would be perfect for me.
This. I would love an Ultra for the brighter and bigger screen, along with better battery life. But I am in no shape or form, a person who is into hiking, swimming, diving, running, marathons, etc. I don't want the bulkiness that I feel is part of the ruggedness needed for the highly active/sport crowd. And if Apple could make one in (PRODUCT)RED, it would be an instant day one purchase for me!
 
  • Like
Reactions: George Bailey
A bit thinner case, edge to edge screen (like in the original ad), drop the daft crown guard, drop the daft orange accents (like the red dot on the original AW cellular) and give me a Black Ti option and I'll get involved.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.