Up to 40% Thinner Apple Watch 2 Predicted to Debut at WWDC in June

[F1Fan]

The main thing id like in a new Apple Watch is accurate heart rate tracking during workout - its currently garbage. A real heart rate monitor says i'm doing 155bpm (which I bloody well feel) and the Apple Watch things i'm doing 55bpm...which lower than most peoples resting heart rate ffs!

I have had the same experience, but inconsistently. Its odd. Recently working out to near puke level with my trainer and my Apple Watch thinks I'm beating at 55 bpm.

Then, a week or two later I got a new treadmill which comes with a Bluetooth chest strap heart rate monitor and while wearing the watch during runs, the chest strap, watch, and railing hand grip monitor all gave the same read, within 1-2 bpm.

I'm wondering if maybe above a certain heart rate, the Apple Watch monitor can't keep up and just misreads at 55 bpm?

 

[jonnysods]

I'm with you. I don't care about the tethering, but I do ride my bike a lot and so I'd love it if I could use Runtastic with a sort of offline mode that would sync up when I got back to my phone. A GPS in the watch would be decent.

Doubt it. If you want to do FaceTime you're focused on the device, that's NOT what the apple watch is for. It's for glancing at and alerting you to things while you're busy with other things. If you're going to be staring at it, you're not busy doing something else, and that's where you pull out your phone.

I don't mind that it needs a nearby iPhone to work. I have my phone with me all the time anyway. But i can't always use it, e.g., if i'm riding the bike, in a meeting, driving or whatever.

Those are the situations the watch makes sense, not staring at it on public transport or trying to browse the internet or video conference with it...

 

[ColdShadow]

Until it can operate without need of a phone I have zero interest.
They really need to improve the design and battery life too.because frankly it's one of the uglier designs of any smart watch out there.

 

[Fynd]

I'm a Watch owner. The Watch doesn't need to be any thinner. It needs to be faster with more HealthKit tie-ins other than movement and heartbeat.

It needs to be a LOT of things, but the LAST thing it needs to be is thinner.

Agree and disagree. I'm fine with the current thickness, however making it thinner will make it appeal even more to those interested in the fashion side of things. The more appealing the device is to the average user, the more of them are out there, the better developer and accessory support ends up being and so on.

Speed, UX fluidity, and more health features are definitely on top of my list as well.

 

[manu chao]

I've already supplied a metric for what is acceptable for the iWatch battery life.

What you want is one thing, what is physically possible is another thing. You want the same watch with five times the battery life, that is simply not possible. You have to say what you are willing to compromise to get that battery life, eg, an e-ink display, a massive size and weight increase, etc..

 

[lordofthereef]

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?

Are you a biker? If none of the above, it wouldn't. It also won't hurt you because it will never be on. Conversely those who would use it, would absolutely benefit.

Yes, the idea is leaving your phone at home. If they allow us to store some music on the device (as the moto 360 sport allows) you even have a portable music player. Quite a few runners already do this and simply use a garmin paired with a small player, like an old iPod shuffle; it's probably the most popular player in the runner's world.

I personally use a flipbelt with my 6s plus if I am going farther from home, but when I run near my house I take my fitbit surge (there are better options than this, however I got it free so I am not complaining lol) and use its gps to track a run. It's a little cumbersome (6s plus and flip belt) but I am also not ultra serious in running. I don't really compete or race, I just do it to get outside, unwind, and of course to stay fit. I have considered just taking a cheap flip phone in the flip belt, as it is very small, lightweight, and would barely notice it's there) just for emergency purposes. On a run my iphone is two things; a music player, and a backup means of communication should I need it.

 

[Mainsail]

I was not crazy about the idea of owning an Apple Watch. After all, it basically requires an iPhone to perform most of its functionality. But, I got one for xmas and thought what the heck...give it a try. I must say that I rather enjoy using it.

I have the iPhone 6s plus, which is pretty big. So, it is nice to leave the phone in my pocket and just check notifications, weather, stocks, scores, workout progress, etc. from the watch. Also, at the gym and around the house, I can leave the phone in a locker or at my desk and still pickup notifications....which means I don't tote the phone around quite as much as long as it is connected to wifi. As a result, I really only use my phone for more significant tasks, since the watch handles notifications and quick responses well. The impact of this is that I don't take out the phone and get distracted as easily by opening apps, browsing the web and social media. I know this sounds counterintuitive because you would think the watch would be a distraction, but I have it set up so it only vibrates with incoming emails, calendar, messages, reminders.....business stuff. No social media or news notifications.. Anyway the net effect is that I feel less distracted.

That said; I am really not looking for more functionality from my Apple Watch, since there are just practical limits as to what can be done on such a small screen. I would however like to see improved performance (in this order); speed and battery life. Frankly, battery has yet to be an issue for me, since I usually plug-in at night with like 65% charge remaining.....Nevertheless, it would be nice to get a few days from a charge so you don't need to bring a charger with you for a weekend trip....not a huge deal. I find the thickness and weight of the watch to be just fine. It is probably smaller and lighter than my old discount store watch. Also, I am not really into the watch as a fashion accessory. So, an uber thin watch doesn't do much for me.

 

[augustobt]

I think it's a big mistake to treat the watch as a device that should be refreshed every year - or even two.

 

[Mac 128]

Doubt it. If you want to do FaceTime you're focused on the device, that's NOT what the apple watch is for. It's for glancing at and alerting you to things while you're busy with other things. If you're going to be staring at it, you're not busy doing something else, and that's where you pull out your phone.

I don't mind that it needs a nearby iPhone to work. I have my phone with me all the time anyway. But i can't always use it, e.g., if i'm riding the bike, in a meeting, driving or whatever.

Those are the situations the watch makes sense, not staring at it on public transport or trying to browse the internet or video conference with it...

The watch is first and foremost about convenience. Apple already allows phone calls on the watch. The experience is far from optimal, and it drains the battery at incredible rates. So why do it? Well Tim Cook already gave us one reason -- because it's cool. But the main reason is because it's convenient. The watch notifies you silently of a call, and you decide to take it. But the whole point of the watch is so you don't have to pull out your phone, or make sure it's always within easy reach. And that's where a FaceTime camera comes in to play. A user receives a FaceTime call, that they can take immediately if need be, while they then look for their phone and eventually hand it off. The convenience this provides is unquestionable.

Now, add to that what else he camera can do ... It can detect whether your eyes are still looking at it and leave the back light on as long as you need it, and it can assist with turning on the backlight. It can take impromptu selfies when digging out the phone is impractical, something Apple has shown a growing commitment to, from front camera burst mode to the retina flash. It can be used for facial recognition security software. And that's just immediate practical applications. Just like the original iPhones that lacked front facing cameras, people will learn to use them for general photography when their phone isn't handy. They can be used to capture bar codes, etc. for various applications. And, there's likely a lot of potential for health applications.

So, there's every reason to add a FaceTime camera, whether an individual customer sees it as important or not.

 

[kdarling]

1) Well there is such a thing as infrared which would probably yield better accuracy anyway. It doesn't have to be pointed at your face, it has to recognize that the face is looking at it -- it sees the eyes and registers where they are pointed.

This reminds me of the Apple patent a couple of years ago, where a device would have a super low power mode checking to see if a human was in front of it.

Turns out that our skin colors are not black, pink, white, yellow... but simply variations of orange. So the device would only low power peep every second for an instant to see if there was any relevant orange in view. If so, then it would wake up a bit more and do a better analysis to see if it was really a human looking at the screen. If so, then really wake up.

Round would destroy space for complications, and introduce a bunch of issues like the 360 or whatever those round android wear things have. Text cutoff, pixels around the edge unless they invent circular pixels ;-)

Oh good grief. This ridiculous idea has been knocked down a million times already by those of us who use both round and square watches. Both work just as well in real life.

First off, where the heck do you think complications originally were placed? Yep, the interior of round watch faces.

Secondly, did you never notice that many of Apple's own apps are circular based already, because of the Digital Crown?

As for text, you can see just as much if not more in this case, because of the way that the Apple Watch uses less than one half of its face area for display. Yes, its bezels are mathematically that big.

If not, then you scroll a tiny bit. Big whoop. Smartwatches are meant for tiny bits of info, not reading books. If someone wanted to read a lot, they' be wearing that huge Samsung wrist wrap watch.

Not to mention that millions of Apple Watch users already have to scroll more when they choose the smaller Apple Watch with its smaller display. Yet that hasn't stopped anyone from getting one or finding it useful!

Indeed, I bet you that if/when Apple offers a round version, it'll outsell the dull rectangular version, in the same way that real round watches hugely outsell real rectangular ones.

Heck, if Apple had been the one to put out a round always-on watch, while everyone else had stuck with 1980s technology flick-on rectangular screens, we'd be singing Apple's praises right now as an innovator

 

[cocky jeremy]

Sure. Why not. 20 hours of battery life is plenty. lol.

 

[gkarris]

I want a slightly thinner one - small wrists.

So much for the salesman at Bestbuy saying that Apple CAN'T make it any thinner...

 

[Dopestar]

Yes, thinner is good. No space left for a GPS and sim card tray I guess. Battery life is good as it is.
Anyway I won't be buying a new one. The price for this thing is not worth the benefit it returns.
Also thinner.. sounds like the bands won't fit anymore. If they do that I think a lot of customers (like me) will be mad and never buy bands again.

well said

 

[dannys1]

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.

To be honest if there was an option to have it always on, I wouldn't enable it. Its not something I want.
[doublepost=1460321502][/doublepost]

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.)

Yes and as pointed out, there are some watches that can do that - its not quite interesting its a basic anti burn in technique Plasma Screens have used for years. I wouldn't want my watch on all the time anyway emitting light, it'd be extremely annoying.

 

[jamesrick80]

Everyone I know who has the Apple Watch rarely use it. They are usually on their iPhones while the watch sits there with that black screen just waiting to be woke up. This device is a waste of time in my honest opinion.

 

[kdarling]

I wouldn't want my watch on all the time anyway emitting light, it'd be extremely annoying.

Then you can disable it. Choice. It's a wonderful thing

As for me, I've worn a watch for over a half decade. We used to wish that our little radioactive glowing hands would last longer. Ha! So a little light is no bother, especially since you can simply choose a watch face that has a very dim ambient mode (ambient mode is what always-on shows unless you do a flick or tap just like the Apple Watch).

One thing I'm very used to, of course, is the ability to see the time without flicking. There's a lot of times that happens. When someone is my arms asleep. When I'm carrying something in my arm or hand. When I'm trying to be subtle with the face turned toward me and my hands folded in front of me at a meeting. When I'm holding a tool. If I'm hanging from a wall or cliff. And so forth.

Ditto for being able to see the seconds without having to do anything special.

 

[dannys1]

Then you can disable it. Choice. It's a wonderful thing

As for me, I've worn a watch for over a half decade. We used to wish that our little radioactive glowing hands would last longer. Ha! So a little light is no bother, especially since you can simply choose a watch face that has a very dim ambient mode (ambient mode is what always-on shows unless you do a flick or tap just like the Apple Watch).

One thing I'm very used to, of course, is the ability to see the time without flicking. There's a lot of times that happens. When someone is my arms asleep. When I'm carrying something in my arm or hand. When I'm trying to be subtle with the face turned toward me and my hands folded in front of me at a meeting. When I'm holding a tool. If I'm hanging from a wall or cliff. And so forth.

Ditto for being able to see the seconds without having to do anything special.

What is this 'flicking' you refer to...

 

[KidAKidB]

Of all products, especially first generations, the Apple Watch is one where I truly don't mind the size and don't think it needs to get thinner. I was so hoping for some extra sensors or GPS and keeping the same battery life.

And most importantly, SPEED!

Funny because I'm of the opposite view where I don't want the iPhone to get thinner but the current Apple Watch is far too thick.

 

[kdarling]

What is this 'flicking' you refer to...

You know, turning your wrist so a watch's display comes on, whether it's a small subtle movement or a frustrated larger twist that we see people make

Turning on that way is never perfect. There will always be positions from which any watch will ignore the movement. Likewise, there will be movements that turn it on when you didn't want it to.

Always-on watches mostly just change the brightness level (*), so it still has some of that frustration at times, but far, far fewer times than a sometimes-on watch.

(*) With thousands of watch faces to choose from, each often with many options, there are of course also Android faces that stay on the same brightness all the time. For example, the stock LG-R face is like that. It's one of my favorites for my daytime watch, but of course not the face I use at night. That one is much dimmer.

 

[applezulu]

Everyone I know who has the Apple Watch rarely use it. They are usually on their iPhones while the watch sits there with that black screen just waiting to be woke up. This device is a waste of time in my honest opinion.

I use mine every day, quite often in ways that let me leave the phone in my pocket.

 

[Keirasplace]

Everyone I know who has the Apple Watch rarely use it. They are usually on their iPhones while the watch sits there with that black screen just waiting to be woke up. This device is a waste of time in my honest opinion.

Satisfaction with the device is over 95%, you must live in the Twilight zone, don't adjust your TV...

 

[i0Nic]

What I wanted from the original Watch, and most definitely from the next Watch, is more sensors and a better health tracking platform.

The Apple Watch promises to be a great health app, Apple promises health at every keynote these days. But the platform is half-baked. The Watch is half-baked as a fitness/health tracking device.

While I like the notifications of the Apple Watch, it wasn't enough to keep me using it. I've since replaced it with a Microsoft Band 2, which it's health platform far surpasses what Apple provides. The Band also provides basic notifications and music controls, which is really all I ever cared about with the Apple Watch, plus it has an abundance of health features and sensors.

To switch back to Apple Watch, this is what I want the Apple Watch to do:
- Sleep tracking built in
- Heart health, provide this in Activity app or Health app in a better way. Look at Heartwatch third party app for guidance. The watch collects the data but doesn't present it in a way that is useful.
- Compare workouts, I want to see detailed info about my runs and other workouts including maps, graphs, etc. The watch is collecting the info again, but not showing it.
- Guided workouts, and the ability to create my own work out plans for the gym.
- More sensors, how about blood glucose monitoring, UV, V02.. come on Apple, you say you are a leader in health why not bring some innovative sensors to the market.
- Coaching and Analysis - provide some sort of analysis on my data, give me some guidance and coaching rather than just data. Jawbone is doing this but it's quite rudimentary, again Apple could be a leader.

I don't care about apps, thinness, battery life, etc. If you don't have the above, the Apple watch is just a smaller iPhone strapped to my wrist that I don't need. If they can't improve the health functions on the watch, I don't care if they make it thinner.

For those that have ignored the MS Band and are interested in health tracking, I really suggest giving it another look. It's really not that ugly.

 

[jujufreeze]

Just because it's Apple doesn't mean they can't make design faux pas. I don't care how thin it is it's not a good look, especially for men imho.

 

[Stirlo]

Are you a biker? If none of the above, it wouldn't. It also won't hurt you because it will never be on. Conversely those who would use it, would absolutely benefit.

Yes, the idea is leaving your phone at home. If they allow us to store some music on the device (as the moto 360 sport allows) you even have a portable music player. Quite a few runners already do this and simply use a garmin paired with a small player, like an old iPod shuffle; it's probably the most popular player in the runner's world.

I personally use a flipbelt with my 6s plus if I am going farther from home, but when I run near my house I take my fitbit surge (there are better options than this, however I got it free so I am not complaining lol) and use its gps to track a run. It's a little cumbersome (6s plus and flip belt) but I am also not ultra serious in running. I don't really compete or race, I just do it to get outside, unwind, and of course to stay fit. I have considered just taking a cheap flip phone in the flip belt, as it is very small, lightweight, and would barely notice it's there) just for emergency purposes. On a run my iphone is two things; a music player, and a backup means of communication should I need it.

Watch stores at least a few hours of music. You need to read more..

For cycling accuracy there's a few devices you can hook up to your bike wheel, track speed and distance far better for any fitness tracker afaik,,,


I wish the watch did work for other phones though, apples expedition into google play store might be a hint that they may be about to bridge android wear or similar into the watch, as why not make more profit if you could!

Saw a dude recently with "the Darth Vader" model, black link steel and a Samsung - maybe he was running a hotspot but apart from 1st party apps not sure how useful the watch would be without an iPhone. Speaking of why not iPad and iPod touch, but I guess it needs data connection so that would have similar annoyances..




If any of you are on Fon have you tried taking the watch with you and no phone? My friend "freaked out a bit" when his watch happily kept working and notifications too, we were at a mall while he got his 6S swapped. Every phone box here is a Fon hotspot which is pretty handy when you're in the city or a mall.

 

[kyleh22]

40% thinning plus a more intuitive OS would be enough for me pick a sport model. I've never been a fan of endless scrolling thing that's getting popular in so many apps.