Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Upgrade to series 2 from 1... Only want waterproofing

M

MrMister111

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Jan 28, 2009
3,900
382
UK
I have s series 1 and it's fine for what I use it for. However it is missing the waterproofing and I've now started swimming.

I believe the series 1 and 2 performance wise are exactly the same? I believe the screen is brighter, and the waterproofing. Anything else?

I'm wondering wether to get a used series 2 for about £200 or get a new series 3 for £359, which is probably overkill for what I need I think unless it's a massive upgrade over the series 2?

Any help and comments please
Thanks
 
The S2 has a ceramic back whereas the S1 has the composite back. Performance wise, they're equivalent.

The S3-GPS has a faster processor and will likely be supported with wOS updates for a longer time. On the downside, the S3-GPS has the composite back.

Now, whether the differences between the ceramic and composite backs make a difference, who can really say? In your situation, I think saving the 160 pounds and going with an S2 (as long as it's in good shape) is probably the way to go. But then again, there's likely no warranty and the battery is already used a bit (maybe a year or more).
 
Thanks. I will only buy with at least warranty if a series 2.

As you say I'm a little worried on battery, but if have some warranty I can claim can't I? I did with my current watch, as felt was going and they replaced the watch.

What's the difference between the cremaric and composite backs? With did they go back to composite on the 3 then? Makes me think it was better?

Thanks
 
The ceramic is better: the LTE version is ceramic.

That said, I suspect Apple uses ceramic mostly for marketing purposes, when they want to show an added benefit to sell the watch --ie they weren't sure if they could sell the LTE based on LTE service alone so they added ceramic and also more storage space for music. They have a vested interest in selling the LTE, not just for the increased price but also as they want to sell Apple music subscription streaming on the watch.

That said, here is a macrumors thread that said the earlier composite watches held up in terms of functionality but at least one got more scratches.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/ceramic-back-versus-composite-back.1868874/
 
About ceramic vs composite --

The ceramic on mine has been darned near scratchproof. It looks as good as the day I unwrapped it.

Composite should be able to take a knock better, though; and if it gets too scratched-up, you can polish it back to virtually-new condition.

Regular watches are pretty much in the same boat. A few luxury-priced wristwatches still use polycarbonate crystals, most famously Omega's Speedmaster Pro. Owners say that while it can be prone to scuffs, more so than sapphire, a few minutes with a rag and Polywatch buffing compound every couple years or so can keep it looking fresh.
 
MrMister111 said:
I have s series 1 and it's fine for what I use it for. However it is missing the waterproofing and I've now started swimming.

I believe the series 1 and 2 performance wise are exactly the same? I believe the screen is brighter, and the waterproofing. Anything else?

I'm wondering wether to get a used series 2 for about £200 or get a new series 3 for £359, which is probably overkill for what I need I think unless it's a massive upgrade over the series 2?

Any help and comments please
Thanks
Click to expand...

Performance wise, the Series 1 and Series 2 share the same processor. Series 2 has a brighter display, 50 M water resistance, and GPS are the significant differences.

Series 3 Apple Watch is not a massive upgrade over the Series 2, it's more of a lateral grade. The Series 3 does have audible Siri and the Improved processor. But In your situation, the Series 2 would likely be more than enough power. My suggestion would find a gently used Series 2 and it offer likely everything you need and the 50 M water resistance is attached.
 
Thanks everyone.

Think for price will get a 2 then. My 1 is still mint and battery great though.

I wish I could find (in UK) a new series 2 but can't anywhere now.

How are Apple on warranty on battery life? Just thinking if get a 2 still in warranty, see how battery life is compared to my 1 and if less could I get Apple to change, or so they do what they do on iPhone, which I've had experience in daughter's.

The iPhone kept shutting down with it still having 15% on, and random jumps when charging, they ran their super test and said nothing wrong. Wouldn't budge.
 
MrMister111 said:
Thanks everyone.

Think for price will get a 2 then. My 1 is still mint and battery great though.

I wish I could find (in UK) a new series 2 but can't anywhere now.

How are Apple on warranty on battery life? Just thinking if get a 2 still in warranty, see how battery life is compared to my 1 and if less could I get Apple to change, or so they do what they do on iPhone, which I've had experience in daughter's.

The iPhone kept shutting down with it still having 15% on, and random jumps when charging, they ran their super test and said nothing wrong. Wouldn't budge.
Click to expand...

If you purchase a used Series 2, the only way to conduct if you need a battery replacement is for Apple to test the battery either in store or over the phone for a diagnostic, which there threshold is 80%.
 
Relentless Power said:
If you purchase a used Series 2, the only way to conduct if you need a battery replacement is for Apple to test the battery either in store or over the phone for a diagnostic, which there threshold is 80%.
Click to expand...
Is there anyway for me gauge that first or not? Any apps? eg for an iPhone you can use coconut battery to see.

How does it work over the phone to check? Just phone Apple support and they can somehow remotely test your watch?!?

Also would they be suspicious say adding it to my AppleID and then 2 weeks later complaining about battery life? They must know then I would have bought 2nd hand etc and which other AppleID it had been on?

Thanks
 
MrMister111 said:
Is there anyway for me gauge that first or not? Any apps? eg for an iPhone you can use coconut battery to see.

How does it work over the phone to check? Just phone Apple support and they can somehow remotely test your watch?!?

Also would they be suspicious say adding it to my AppleID and then 2 weeks later complaining about battery life? They must know then I would have bought 2nd hand etc and which other AppleID it had been on?

Thanks
Click to expand...

They can test your watch in store or over the phone to their own diagnostic testing. It's fairly accurate and I have used it before, and they can at least advise you specifically where your battery is currently at. I'm not too sure if they would be suspicious about the Apple ID, assuming that you set it up to your own account. I'm Not aware of any other applications that you can test your Apple Watch battery.
 
jav6454 said:
Get a Series 2. It'll be cheaper and have almost the same features and speed as a Series 3.
Click to expand...

Same speed? Thought the series 3 was 70% faster?

Now thinking of series 3 brand new for £329, can get a 2 year warranty...
 
jav6454 said:
Faster doing what? Opening an app? Same as Series2. The watch is not a phone, so it doesn't need to have faster speeds everytime.
Click to expand...
I am sorry but this is absurd, unless you only use an Apple Watch to glance at the time. Having owned a series 0, 1, 2, and 3 Apple Watch, I can state unequivocally that the series 3 is appreciably faster than the series 2, which in turn was appreciably faster than the series 0.

Now based on the OP, the AW 2 should be fine, since the desired feature was water resistence. But to assert that the speed of the series 2 is the same as the series 3 is disingenuous.



Mike
 
Tinmania said:
I am sorry but this is absurd, unless you only use an Apple Watch to glance at the time. Having owned a series 0, 1, 2, and 3 Apple Watch, I can state unequivocally that the series 3 is appreciably faster than the series 2, which in turn was appreciably faster than the series 0.

Now based on the OP, the AW 2 should be fine, since the desired feature was water resistence. But to assert that the speed of the series 2 is the same as the series 3 is disingenuous.



Mike
Click to expand...

I will call you out. I have an S2 and my brother had the S3. I don't see any difference. We both use them for workouts (family competition) and have yet to see an instance (even when used it a whole day to compare them) in which the S2 and S3 are apart. The only difference is LTE.
 
jav6454 said:
I will call you out. I have an S2 and my brother had the S3. I don't see any difference. We both use them for workouts (family competition) and have yet to see an instance (even when used it a whole day to compare them) in which the S2 and S3 are apart. The only difference is LTE.
Click to expand...
Repeating the same nonsense doesn't make it true. The S3 is in fact 70% faster. Plenty of evidence to back it up. Here's one:




Mike
 
  • Like
Reactions: Javabird
Tinmania said:
Repeating the same nonsense doesn't make it true. The S3 is in fact 70% faster. Plenty of evidence to back it up. Here's one:




Mike
Click to expand...

Are you sure that's an S2? I just tried the entire presentation on my S2 and it definetly isn't as slow as what the video shows.

I literally shut down my S2 and did evertyhing the video did and even still my watch was on par to that S3.
 
I've watched a few speed tests and it shows a 3 much much faster, but not sure on the scientifics of it all, real world use to me is better.

The 3 on those videos is now at a comfortable speed to use I think. My series 1 is slow on opening apps, not a massive thing, bit when you do its annoying isn't it!!

I do just want waterproofing, and was leaning to a 2 but thinking of the speed now and warranty and battery that I'm thinking of a 3 now, although it's going to be around £170 more..... mmmmm....
 
MrMister111 said:
I've watched a few speed tests and it shows a 3 much much faster, but not sure on the scientifics of it all, real world use to me is better.

The 3 on those videos is now at a comfortable speed to use I think. My series 1 is slow on opening apps, not a massive thing, bit when you do its annoying isn't it!!

I do just want waterproofing, and was leaning to a 2 but thinking of the speed now and warranty and battery that I'm thinking of a 3 now, although it's going to be around £170 more..... mmmmm....
Click to expand...

It's not. Like I stated earlier. I used my S2 to recreate the video sequence above and it just didn't do what the video showed. My S2 did it as fast as the S3 in that video.

Now, since you stated the warranty is an attractive option, then yes, it makes sense to get an S3 from that perspective.
 
jav6454 said:
It's not. Like I stated earlier. I used my S2 to recreate the video sequence above and it just didn't do what the video showed. My S2 did it as fast as the S3 in that video.

Now, since you stated the warranty is an attractive option, then yes, it makes sense to get an S3 from that perspective.
Click to expand...
I'm not doubting your findings at all bit can't believe that the 3 isn't faster. It's a new CPU so would think it will be faster. Great for you though if it's not.

I'm just thinking that the warranty if bought from certain retainers I get a 2 year one so that's attractive as I know my old series 0 after a year or so of moderate use the battery life went down, not massively, then got a series 1 and the battery life compared was brilliant.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back