Why?
Apple has already sold $5 Billion (or more) worth of watches. And double the number of 1st generation iPhones sold.
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
Why?
Apple has already sold $5 Billion (or more) worth of watches. And double the number of 1st generation iPhones sold.
You do realize that the Watch has wifi? And the Watch uses wifi whenever Bluetooth isn't available. In fact I use it almost exclusively to connect directly to wifi networks only, without any detrimental effects.
And this GPS uses too much power is an annoying meme, that is getting tiresome. There are GPS watches with lower capacity batteries that will last up to 10 hours or more using continuous GPS. Moreover, Apple includes the ability to make phone calls from the watch which drains the batteries to the tune of 3 hours of continuous use. So there's no reason that even if GPS were a more massive power drain than making phone calls (and it isnt) apps could make limited use of GPS only as needed.
These arguments are just pointless.
It seems to be pretty accurate for me -- low rate while fat-burning on an elliptical machine - 126 bpm - which matches the reading on the elliptical. When going fast for cardio - 146 - 155 bpm - again matched speeds on the elliptical sensors and the apple watch. I don't have a separate heart rate monitor (dedicated device), so I don't know if this would show a very different time. But the apple watch does also give me an accurate heart rate reading when I'm not really moving around much -- 72 - 76bpm.
I suppose the benefit here is on a machine your arms are not moving much and its steady. If you're doing weights, HIIT, high intensity yoga, or boxing (which is ironic as one of the adverts showed shadow boxing) its not nearly as accurate.
I do refer to it (watch) while weight-lifting/training, and the readings seem to correlate with my exertions. For instance, when doing heavy leg presses of 12 reps (340+ pounds), my heart rate hits 160 - 180+. I check in between sets so that I have an idea of what is what in terms of bpm and exertion. One thing that is interesting is that I am coming to be aware of what my bpm rate 'feels' like -- meaning that I can say to myself, 'wow, I am feeling breathless, I can feel my heart pounding, I must be at over 160+ bpm). I have only just started to use the apple watch routinely for this monitoring during exercise, so I'm still becoming comfortable and aware of checking between sets. I've also been using the timer/stopwatch to allow for one minute to one and a half minutes between sets. What really is a pain point for me is that I don't have any way to gauge number of calories expended while weight training! I use the apple watch 'exercise' app (and later on my phone, MyFitnessPal) to monitor and estimate calories burned per activity -- but there are only settings for cardio activities. I have to set "Other" during weight training, which just tracks the bmp and minutes per session. Do you know of an app that one can use for non-cardio activities?
[doublepost=1460228003][/doublepost]
I'm pretty sure that had to do with the FDA determining that a fitness app would be considered a 'medical device' if it were to do something like glucose monitoring, and that would then require the hideously lengthy and expensive FDA review and certification process which all medical devices receive. It was a major setback for Apple - at least that's how I would have seen it if this were my product. So, they had to rollback some of their intended functions -- which were only planned of course, since the current capabilities don't include anything which could monitor glucose.
No one has ever run it for less than one day under normal use. So that extra battery would only make it last for 2 days. That's great for campers and no one else. Everyone simply charges the watch everyday the same way they charge their phones everyday.
[doublepost=1460228490][/doublepost]
Every device needs to be thinner and more importantly, lighter, because we know every device a few years from now will be thinner and lighter. So long as full day battery life isn't compromised for normal users, it's Apple's obligation to push use cases and industry a a whole towards the future of mobile devices.
Want to see a round Apple Watch. Not "roundish." Needs Circular UI. Something fun to engage with.
I reiterate my disagreement. Albeit, only time will tell. If Samsung can have its Super AMOLED display always-on, I'm sure very soon someone will bring it to tiny screens and batteries of smart watches.
(In fact, Samsung's implementation of always-on is quite interesting. It does shift the pixels but very nearby ones, keeping in mind that the same ones aren't reused. This avoids burn-in and is done ever so swiftly that we barely notice.)
Ugh. Battery life is already my biggest gripe. Can we also just get a revised apple watch 2 that the same size as the current one with whatever tech is inside the new one allowing thinner (less battery) have the same longevity? Like maybe a sport watch that's actually a sport watch and not just a term used as a synonym for "entry level"? Take a look at moto 360 sport but then have it be an apple watch! I'd love to replace my fitbit. pie in the sky dreams of this rivaling a Garmin. Please? I'm asking nicely.
[doublepost=1460235189][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1460235189][/doublepost]
The moto 360 sport manages. I don't say this to start some sort of war, but it would be nice for a sport watch to be a sport watch. I'd by Apple's version of the 360 sport in a heartbeat.
No GPS built in or ability to use it without my iphone = no sale.
Something tells me you'll get it anyway...
I would still buy it. I mean I bought mine last April but with the $50 off, why not get it? The Watch 2 won't be here anytime soon.. Maybe September or maybe later on.. I doubt it releases with the new iPhone. And I doubt it'd be this summer.
Maybe, but all you have to do is charge it .. it's actually really easy to do.
Plus if someone doesn't want these features, they can be toggled off and you'll have a watch that just tells time that has a battery life of many days if you would rather not charge it as frequently.
I will say I see no point in an always on display. GPS is a must have, 3G would be an incredible bonus.
Somehow I don't see round to be 'fun to engage with' in the context do an Apple smart phone.
Again, it's a user choice option. Jony Ive said the minute someone wears so wing they have the expectation of choice. Some of the walled-garden restrictions Apple imposes on the iPhone just won't fly on a wearable. And Ive knows that.
The pixel movement is barely noticeable, and that's only if you're looking for it. As for battery life, my always on Android watches go just as long as my almost never-on Apple Watch.
As pointed out, the Apple Watch has WiFi.
The Sony Smartwatch 3 also has GPS, and while it chews up the normally two-day battery like crazy (~ 20% battery drop every 1/2 hour) when being used while tracking yourself while running, it's at least a benefit that's there if you wish to use it.
GPS on and of itself wouldn't. Reasonably speaking it would only be used for fitness tracking and that, for now, is an afterthought.
I didn't read all of the posts, but I have a few questions/comments:
I have another gripe. I got the space grey sport because I wanted the lowest investment in case I didn't like it. I work out with it almost every day. Am I supposed to change bands daily (I have an Amazon version of the black M Loop)? Nah, I'm not going through that every day. So, I am probably going to by the space grey stainless when the updated watch comes out so I can have something with a different band to wear to work. Or, Apple could make the previously mentioned wearable and I would be good.
[doublepost=1460250290][/doublepost]
How will it be helpful for fitness tracking if I'm not a runner? Is the thought to leave my phone at home if I go for a run/walk?
- The Watch may not need more battery life. My phone hits 10% some days, my watch doesn't. But maybe...
- If they add more functionality like many people want, it may need more battery
- I'm not sure what a cellular chip on the watch will bring, but it scares me to think about another $10/month; I already have 3 iPhones and 3 iPads on my phone bill.
I have another gripe. I got the space grey sport because I wanted the lowest investment in case I didn't like it. I work out with it almost every day. Am I supposed to change bands daily (I have an Amazon version of the black M Loop)? Nah, I'm not going through that every day. So, I am probably going to by the space grey stainless when the updated watch comes out so I can have something with a different band to wear to work. Or, Apple could make the previously mentioned wearable and I would be good.
[doublepost=1460250290][/doublepost]
How will it be helpful for fitness tracking if I'm not a runner? Is the thought to leave my phone at home if I go for a run/walk?
I find that the battery life really suffers on days I wear the watch to the gym -- my workouts totaling roughly 1-1/2 hour (cardio + weights) uses a huge chunk of battery - like more than 30% for that period of time. I know that part of the reason is that I have the screen on a lot in order to check time while between sets and to monitor heart rate. So I am intensely using the watch with the screen on for that entire period. That is the only reason why I would say that longer battery life would be useful. Personally, I don't want a separate cellular chip, either. The thought of Verizon charging me an 'add-on' price for another device...! No, thanks. Also - since most of the heavy lifting for most watch apps does seem to be done on the phone, I don't know that I'd ever not carry the phone when wearing the watch out.
Since you mentioned withings and some other fitness trackers -- have you found any kind of app that will work on the iphone/watch to track (accurately, or even close to) weight-training/lifting? I am at a loss as to how to estimate caloric exertion for weight-training.