Just tested on mine, 4 seconds to display the local weather (first check of the day), far too slow
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.
Up to 40% Thinner Apple Watch 2 Predicted to Debut at WWDC in June
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Just tested on mine, 4 seconds to display the local weather (first check of the day), far too slow
speed increase != more power/thermal
recent iPhones are faster than older ones, consume less power and even with their smaller rated batteries, have a (marginally) better battery life.
process size and transistor efficiency is what matters, and given that the S1 SoC is 28nm, Apple can make a much faster and more efficient S2 SoC -if they use a modern 14/16 nm process.
Its a pain, I don't really care about exact accuracy - though I do a work out that tries to get you in the fat burning zone of the majority so its helpful to know - but I don't mind wearing the chest strap for that, it'd just be useful that when I put the workout in my Apple Watch and my heart rate has been over 145bpm for nearly 25mins and Apple Watch says my average heart rate for the work out was 71! I tried pulling it tighter, wearing it so the face is on the inside of my wrist, nothing seems to get ever a reasonable amount of accuracy. Its just most frustrating when you're peaking at 180bpm and you look at Apple Watch and it says 47bpm
[doublepost=1460199592][/doublepost]
Really? I've tried it so tight it cuts my circulation off, i've tried it on the inside of my wrist - its never anywhere near. I don't really do steady treadmill running though so many a constant repetitive motion is easier for it monitor. But my actual heart rate could be 180 and the watch might be reading 51. Its useless for me.
To be fair it could be a little thinner. I have trouble with some of my shirts that I don't have with my mechanical watches, even the fairly thick ones.
I totally agree with the areas that you mention for improvement though. I would also note that battery life is not even on my list of things that I want improved. I can easily get 2 days and 1 night out of the watch. It so easy to charge every night that I do it anyway. A huge 50% increase in battery might get me an extra day. I would still be charging every night, I think.
As a 6+ and Apple Watch owner (both of which can get me 2 days of use, but never do because recharging every night as a routine is more convenient), the battery comments that come up every time He word "thinner" is mentioned really grind my gears.
Yeah right - there aren't even really any massive advances in battery technology on the horizon, let alone that would be at market in 10 years.
[doublepost=1460200086][/doublepost]
They all have e-ink displays to allow this to happen. You're not going to get it with OLED or LCD, probably ever.
The Apple Watch could easily have a basic always on time, it would lower the battery life, and design wise the clock digital time would need to move around the screen to stop burn in - so they probably decided against it for these two reasons.
I've worn my apple watch every day since I got it in April last year. Never had a battery issue and always had 40-50% left when I stick it on the charger at night (except where I ran early betas where the battery suffered).
The watch does exactly what I want, still. Doesn't need to be thinner. Maybe a little faster but that may be a watchOS 3 thing as no-one really knows how constrained the CPU actually is.
The watch does exactly what I want, still. Doesn't need to be thinner. Maybe a little faster but that may be a watchOS 3 thing as no-one really knows how constrained the CPU actually is.
I picked this at random.
Google thin mens watches for more. The WHOLE WORLD is obsessed with thinness!
the whole world? funny but most of the watches i see on men (and women) are usually thick and oversized.
Why do I get the feeling this guy knows nothing and is just trotting out the standard rumor that comes with every Apple product (will be thinner). The #1 problem with the watch is how slow it is (even to launch stock apps). One would assume Apple has a better replacement for the S1 by now but I still don't think we'll see it at WWDC.
I'd agree with you if it worked every time, but all to often I have to make an exaggerated wrist motion to "wake" the screen up.
THANK YOU. I went from mildly amused to rather annoyed at the backlash to one of the weakest rumors I've seen.
My experience is different than yours. I have owned one since May of 2015.
The average is about 10-12mm thick, the same as the Apple Watch, the average male watch is also 42mm, so not sure how you would see it as thick. Lately, women's watches are a lot bigger than they used to be, so 38mm is pretty close to what sells most these days. Apple didn't choose those dimensions on a whim.
If they thin it out a bit, say 9.5mm, that would be at the very low end of male watches and probably the average for female watches. Don't think they'll make the screen smaller than 38mm, cause then you have problems using it for anything else than telling time.
[doublepost=1460207478][/doublepost]
12mm is the average thickness of current male watches; so, what the hell are you saying?
And what about the Macbook pros updates ???
Nobody cares about these stupid watches !!
I care.
Signed, Nobody*
[*recent marketing research has determined that Apple Watch sales rank much higher with individuals named "Nobody" than that of people with more traditional names like, for example, Arthur]
How about both thinner and a better battery? Technology tends to advance so we get our cake and eat it a lot these days.
But electronic watches != mechanical watches, so what the hell are you saying?
Because Apple actually has released new products with less battery life? Because to my knowledge it hasn't, battery life ratings for iPhones have gone up over the years if slowly but never down.
An e-ink display. That right there is innovation against a background of naysayers and burn at the stakes types who said e-readers were blasphemy. The key point is that Apple needs to innovate solutions to these hard problems. Some on here are willing to compromise for a shoddy features which is fine if you are okay with that. I and a few others are not.
My opinion, having had one since October:
* Battery life is fine most of the time, only annoying when I go camping or something and have to bring a battery & charger to last all weekend.
* As mentioned above, some kind of always-on time feature would be a nice-to-have as the instant-on sensing often doesn't work on first try
* Thickness is not an issue to me, but I'd like the case to be more like the iPhone 5/SE instead of round/pill-like. (I guess that's what they call "chamfered edges"?)
* My biggest complaint is speed, apps often are too slow or choppy; I'd rather the watch stay the same size and increase CPU speed or memory (or whatever is making it slow)
* I always have my phone in range, so the need for it to be tethered is not a problem for me but I can see why some would want that.
* Metal link bands should be WAY less expensive, I picked up a Oittm one that is nearly as nice as the one that my prior watch (a medium sized Citizen Eco-Drive) for about $23. There's no way I'm paying Apple $500 for theirs!
* Battery life is fine most of the time, only annoying when I go camping or something and have to bring a battery & charger to last all weekend.
* As mentioned above, some kind of always-on time feature would be a nice-to-have as the instant-on sensing often doesn't work on first try
* Thickness is not an issue to me, but I'd like the case to be more like the iPhone 5/SE instead of round/pill-like. (I guess that's what they call "chamfered edges"?)
* My biggest complaint is speed, apps often are too slow or choppy; I'd rather the watch stay the same size and increase CPU speed or memory (or whatever is making it slow)
* I always have my phone in range, so the need for it to be tethered is not a problem for me but I can see why some would want that.
* Metal link bands should be WAY less expensive, I picked up a Oittm one that is nearly as nice as the one that my prior watch (a medium sized Citizen Eco-Drive) for about $23. There's no way I'm paying Apple $500 for theirs!
I've already supplied a metric for what is acceptable for the iWatch battery life. Which part of that statement do you not understand? As for reputations and naming of products, don't tell me what I can/can't do/say/think.