Ultra broke after 1. fall

[OriginalAppleGuy]

No it doesn't. If they had designed it to withstand accidental damage don't you think the marketing team would a big song and dance about it? It would be shouted out, "Look, its even strong enough to withstand accidental damage"... or, "Can be dropped from 5ft and still not break". Marketing teams from any business are famous for promoting special features. They certainly wouldn't remain quiet about it it that's for sure!

Rugged design is for while it's in use and that means on your wrist as before it is placed on your wrist, it can't record any data or work as intended either. Dropping it on the floor before it was in use is user error. Unless you're suggesting they deliberately dropped it?!?

Funnily enough, the times I've had something break when I've caused it, I've also felt really annoyed, upset and disappointed. Might even lash out at the company but really, deep down, I know I'm feeling those things about my own actions. Which is also silly, it's an accident and they happen and we just have to take ownership of it and move on.

One time Dell reps came in to convince us to give Dell laptops a try. We were an HP shop at the time and believed their products to be more durable and manageable. Only Panasonic tough books, though, could be put through abuse so we used them for those use cases. Dell touted you could drop the laptop something like 5' and it would survive. It was better than the competition they said. Our R&D guy looked at the guy, looked at his desk and pushed the laptop off to test the sales guy's statement. It broke all over the place. Didn't survive a 3' drop. Sales rep was upset to say the least. But - nothing he could do as his statement was proven false.

Why are you so desperate to apologize for Apples crap job at making an implied rugged device? You don't need to dig deep and say sorry to Tim. It's not your fault that you had unreal expectations. If someone buys this and it breaks being dropped...that Apples marketing being deceptive. It's constructed of fragile materials then touted as something that you can go adventuring with. Apple didn't make this watch for any of the people it claims it did. This is for the Porsche driving, crossfit shirt wearing, Starbucks drinking douche most of us work for. They want to advertise to the world they can afford better things than you and that they are living the action adventure lifestyle while you work for crap pay. That's who this is for. The rest of the target is the wanna bes that work for him and bought a car they can't afford to fit in. The last target is iPhone users that will buy anything Apple to be cool or nerdy.

There have been plenty of videos from people buying the watch and testing it beyond reason. As one mentioned already, a guy took a sledgehammer to it. I saw another video where a guy was hitting the watch against various objects and EVEN dragged it from a car going down the road. It survived. At no time do I recall Apple stating you can drop this thing from any height and it will survive. Did I miss that? Apple claims it can dive to 100M. A guy tested to 50M as that's as low as his test chamber could go. Survived without issue.

i bought the Ultra for a couple reasons - came out in my 2 year upgrade window. Better battery life - MUCH better battery life. Improved speaker phone capability for those times I don't have my phone on me. Bigger screen (eyes getting older and smaller things are harder to see). improved GPS for hiking in dense woods and mountainous terrain. Durability while wearing it. It's fit in the Apple eco system which - just works (more often than not). Not for any of the moronic issues this individual stated.

 

[AsherN]

Apple claims it can dive to 100M. A guy tested to 50M as that's as low as his test chamber could go. Survived without issue.

And it's marketed to rec divers. Not "not serious", but rec. Rec dives don't usually go beyond 30-40 m. Too little bottom time. The watch is waterproof to 40m and water resistant to 100m. It stops showing you info below 40m. When it's time to replace my current AW, I'll het an Ultra. Dive with it and my Cressi for a few dives. I intend to then switch to the AWU. Why? Because I never dive alone. I usually dive in a group. if my computer fails, I'll buddy up with the DM to finish the dive.

 

[OriginalAppleGuy]

And it's marketed to rec divers. Not "not serious", but rec. Rec dives don't usually go beyond 30-40 m. Too little bottom time. The watch is waterproof to 40m and water resistant to 100m. It stops showing you info below 40m. When it's time to replace my current AW, I'll het an Ultra. Dive with it and my Cressi for a few dives. I intend to then switch to the AWU. Why? Because I never dive alone. I usually dive in a group. if my computer fails, I'll buddy up with the DM to finish the dive.

Was curious about your comment and my understanding of the Ultra's capabilities. I do understand the difference between "water resistance" and "waterproof" as atmospheric pressure vs. water depth. But for some reason I still was under the impression the watch could dive down to 100m. Maybe I heard someone misspeak? So - went to find the Oceanic World Wide write up on their Oceanic+ dive computer app. Found it here:

Oceanic+ In Depth - Oceanic Worldwide

www.oceanicworldwide.com

And what did I find?

• Depth – This is your actual depth during the dive displayed in feet or meters in a large, easy-to-read format. The maximum operational depth of the hardware is 130 feet (40 meters). However, the depth could be even less with enriched gas mixtures."

With that said - the chamber the guy used was a water chamber designed to test watch manufacturer waterproof claims. The Ultra did handle 50m rather well. Perhaps "certified" equipment needs to be capable of going deeper to increase ability to handle margins of error?

On diving - I'm not certified so can't speak with authority here but even if you do have a dive computer, don't you still take manual gauges as backup? Part of the certification is knowing how - or the theory - of diving to depths requiring decompression stages, right? So even if you do go with many people, you still have a way out - er up - yourself.

 

[AsherN]

Was curious about your comment and my understanding of the Ultra's capabilities. I do understand the difference between "water resistance" and "waterproof" as atmospheric pressure vs. water depth. But for some reason I still was under the impression the watch could dive down to 100m. Maybe I heard someone misspeak? So - went to find the Oceanic World Wide write up on their Oceanic+ dive computer app. Found it here:

Oceanic+ In Depth - Oceanic Worldwide

www.oceanicworldwide.com

And what did I find?

• Depth – This is your actual depth during the dive displayed in feet or meters in a large, easy-to-read format. The maximum operational depth of the hardware is 130 feet (40 meters). However, the depth could be even less with enriched gas mixtures."

With that said - the chamber the guy used was a water chamber designed to test watch manufacturer waterproof claims. The Ultra did handle 50m rather well. Perhaps "certified" equipment needs to be capable of going deeper to increase ability to handle margins of error?

On diving - I'm not certified so can't speak with authority here but even if you do have a dive computer, don't you still take manual gauges as backup? Part of the certification is knowing how - or the theory - of diving to depths requiring decompression stages, right? So even if you do go with many people, you still have a way out - er up - yourself.

The watch is certified waterproof and operational to 40m. Going deeper for a bit is covered under the water resistant, it won't pop a gasket at 41m, but don't wear it long at 50-60m.

As for gauges, people with five computers with integrated air readers only have the computer. I like to dive with an analogue gauge package that has PSI and depth. Then again, I started diving over 40 years ago. The computer is simply a way to avoid Navy diving charts prior to going in, and to be able to enjoy going at any depth instead of having to carefully follow the plan. The computer will tell you your NoDeco time at any given depth.

 

[Howard2k]

Was curious about your comment and my understanding of the Ultra's capabilities. I do understand the difference between "water resistance" and "waterproof" as atmospheric pressure vs. water depth. But for some reason I still was under the impression the watch could dive down to 100m. Maybe I heard someone misspeak? So - went to find the Oceanic World Wide write up on their Oceanic+ dive computer app. Found it here:

Oceanic+ In Depth - Oceanic Worldwide

www.oceanicworldwide.com

And what did I find?

• Depth – This is your actual depth during the dive displayed in feet or meters in a large, easy-to-read format. The maximum operational depth of the hardware is 130 feet (40 meters). However, the depth could be even less with enriched gas mixtures."

With that said - the chamber the guy used was a water chamber designed to test watch manufacturer waterproof claims. The Ultra did handle 50m rather well. Perhaps "certified" equipment needs to be capable of going deeper to increase ability to handle margins of error?

On diving - I'm not certified so can't speak with authority here but even if you do have a dive computer, don't you still take manual gauges as backup? Part of the certification is knowing how - or the theory - of diving to depths requiring decompression stages, right? So even if you do go with many people, you still have a way out - er up - yourself.

I haven’t dived for ages but we had a plastic sheet with the dive tables on it as a primary. Then once dive computers become more popular we still all carried our plastic dive tables as a backup. I don’t dive any more but I feel like I’d still carry my plastic.

 

[alongdingdong]

The new AW ultra reminds me of that turtle with the open heart.
Rugged but also very fragile at the same time.

 

[MajorFubar]

How do you know that? I'm also wondering if the reason they don't has something to do with the functioning of the sensors. But pretty much any company will cut costs where it's reasonable to, and I believe this would be reasonable (if that's indeed why they designed it that way). So it's not "so Apple" any more than it's "so Garmin" or "so [fill in the company]".

Sensors maybe, and I admit I hadn't considered that when I first made the post, but as for 'how do I know that'...nothing other than lining it with gold is going to add anything significant to the manufacturing cost of a electronic watch already costing the best part of a grand. The markup on this, as with all premium-priced electronics, is going to be eye-watering, because the actual electronics that make it work don't become more expensive just because they're inside a premium watch rather than a watch costing 3/4's less. It's expensive because Apple believes its price is the sweetspot where it will return the highest ROI, not because it's expensive to make.

 

[Howard2k]

Sensors maybe, and I admit I hadn't considered that when I first made the post, but as for 'how do I know that'...nothing other than lining it with gold is going to add anything significant to the manufacturing cost of a electronic watch already costing the best part of a grand. The markup on this, as with all premium-priced electronics, is going to be eye-watering, because the actual electronics that make it work don't become more expensive just because they're inside a premium watch rather than a watch costing 3/4's less. It's expensive because Apple believes its price is the sweetspot where it will return the highest ROI, not because it's expensive to make.

No. That’s not “Apple”. It’s basic economics.

 

[newellj]

I know. They said it is the rugged Apple Watch ever. Didn‘t know that it is not true! My fault…I dropped the watch wrong..

You didn't drop it "wrong," but you certainly banged part of the watch that isn't expected to be exposed while it's being worn.

 

[lostPod]

After 2 weeks my watch felt on a stone ground in my bathroom. See the result. I am a little bit dissapointed. Good for me that I have Appe Care

THe back sensor glass broke? Does it still work though?

 

[lostPod]

One time Dell reps came in to convince us to give Dell laptops a try. We were an HP shop at the time and believed their products to be more durable and manageable. Only Panasonic tough books, though, could be put through abuse so we used them for those use cases. Dell touted you could drop the laptop something like 5' and it would survive. It was better than the competition they said. Our R&D guy looked at the guy, looked at his desk and pushed the laptop off to test the sales guy's statement. It broke all over the place. Didn't survive a 3' drop. Sales rep was upset to say the least. But - nothing he could do as his statement was proven false.


i bought the Ultra for a couple reasons - came out in my 2 year upgrade window. Better battery life - MUCH better battery life. Improved speaker phone capability for those times I don't have my phone on me. Bigger screen (eyes getting older and smaller things are harder to see). improved GPS for hiking in dense woods and mountainous terrain. Durability while wearing it. It's fit in the Apple eco system which - just works (more often than not). Not for any of the moronic issues this individual stated.

LOLOL that is great!

How long of battery life are you getting? I really want to know if it can last 3 days if you turn off all the fancy features and just leave notifications on.

 

[newellj]

If the back of the watch broke during extreme use…it’d be the least of your worries because you’d be busy dealing with the extreme crush injury that just happened to your wrist/arm.

Cut the nonsense, the back of the watch’s protection is your arm itself.

Exactly. The watch is build for extreme use on the wrist, not for extremely bad luck or extremely clumsy handling.

 

[usagora]

Sensors maybe, and I admit I hadn't considered that when I first made the post, but as for 'how do I know that'...nothing other than lining it with gold is going to add anything significant to the manufacturing cost of a electronic watch already costing the best part of a grand. The markup on this, as with all premium-priced electronics, is going to be eye-watering, because the actual electronics that make it work don't become more expensive just because they're inside a premium watch rather than a watch costing 3/4's less. It's expensive because Apple believes its price is the sweetspot where it will return the highest ROI, not because it's expensive to make.

Oh, believe me, I understand that Apple isn't going to be hurting for money even if they added a lot more than a strengthened back and kept the price the same. But at the same time, a little extra cost spread over millions of units adds up and eats into their profits. Will that cause them to collapse? Of course not, but why would they voluntarily give up that extra profit when the rationale for "improving" the area in question is based on such a statistically insignificant event (dropping the watch directly on its back from sufficient height onto a hard surface so as to cause damage). At least, I assume it's statistically insignificant, given there's no major public outcry or news stories about it. I know I personally have never dropped a watch like that in my entire life.

 

[wgaller]

This whole thread is ridiculous, BMW is marketed as the Ultimate Driving Machine, but not too ultimate if you drive it into a wall. If Apple had put some unbreakable plastic on the back of the watch, people would complain that they are cheapening their products.

 

[dukebound85]

Blaming Apple for something you caused is down right wrong.

the watch is marketed towards rugged applications

It is implied it is durable. It is disappointing that it seems fragile with a simple drop

 

[usagora]

This whole thread is ridiculous, BMW is marketed as the Ultimate Driving Machine, but not too ultimate if you drive it into a wall. If Apple had put some unbreakable plastic on the back of the watch, people would complain that they are cheapening their products.

A wall, I can understand, but a tree should not have caused this damage to my Beemer. Totaled after only ONE tree strike. I'm very disappointed in BMW.

 

[OriginalAppleGuy]

LOLOL that is great!

How long of battery life are you getting? I really want to know if it can last 3 days if you turn off all the fancy features and just leave notifications on.

I haven't turned off the fancy features but can say it probably lasts longer then the 36 hours they claim. In a software update coming up, you'll be able to use a low battery mode that turns the sensors off and allows the device to go 60 hours. I suspect it will be longer than that.

Until the Ultra, I rarely wore the watch to bed. Now I do it nightly and charge it in the morning. To give you an idea of my personal experience - when I wake up in the AM, I have around 60% charge (so about 24 hours use). It takes about 20 or so minutes to charge to 100% from there. I tend to do that between 8 AM and 9 AM.

Last Sunday I didn't charge the watch when I woke up. We went for a 5 mile hike in the woods that afternoon. Unlike with previous versions (last was a 6) wasn't concerned with running out of battery. Came home to around 37% charge. Took maybe 40 - 50 minutes to get to 100% charge afterwards. So - if I charged it first thing Saturday - around 8 AM, hit got to 37% in about 33/34 hours. Not too shabby in my book.

 

[OriginalAppleGuy]

A wall, I can understand, but a tree should not have caused this damage to my Beemer. Totaled after only ONE tree strike. I'm very disappointed in BMW.

THAT's your BMW? Dang - hope you are okay!

 

[wgaller]

A wall, I can understand, but a tree should not have caused this damage to my Beemer. Totaled after only ONE tree strike. I'm very disappointed in BMW.

Flimsy German cars.

 

[ZipZap]

The title of this thread is wrong. It broke and 1 drop by the owner on a stone floor. You did not fall.

 

[usagora]

THAT's your BMW? Dang - hope you are okay!

No, just a random picture off the internet - my post was 100% facetious!

 

[azhava]

Just a suggestion, but never take 2 compasses. Take 3. Otherwise if the two with you don't match you won't know which one is wrong.

"Man with one watch knows what time it is. Man with two watches is never sure."

 

[Farrellcollie]

I appreciate the op posting - sorry he is getting abuse by people. Watches are meant to be taken on and off -so it is not a stretch for it to fall when taking it on or off. I would have expected the watch to be a little hardier as well

 

[papbot]

I appreciate the op posting - sorry he is getting abuse by people. Watches are meant to be taken on and off -so it is not a stretch for it to fall when taking it on or off. I would have expected the watch to be a little hardier as well

Because I was always concerned with possibly dropping and damaging my Rolexes, which I did on one occasion, live and learn, I developed the habit of never taking them off unless I were standing on carpet. Like I said live and learn.

 

[AsherN]

I haven’t dived for ages but we had a plastic sheet with the dive tables on it as a primary. Then once dive computers become more popular we still all carried our plastic dive tables as a backup. I don’t dive any more but I feel like I’d still carry my plastic.

I've been diving 40 years. I can still calculate multiple dives from tables. It's been a long time since I've seen dive tables on a boat. Computers are reliable enough.