Excellent thought!
Maybe they will offer a discount to existing owner to offset the cost of the including sport band.
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.
Upgraded Apple Watch 1 Models Said to Launch Alongside Apple Watch 2 Later This Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe they will offer a discount to existing owner to offset the cost of the including sport band.
Me now: "Dumb. I'll keep my Watch until it dies."
Me during keynote: "Looks nice, but mine is fine for my purposes."
Me in October: "OMG what can I sell ASAP so I can have this without being out $500?!"
It's a vicious, predictable cycle. Apple, I wish I knew how to quit you.
Me during keynote: "Looks nice, but mine is fine for my purposes."
Me in October: "OMG what can I sell ASAP so I can have this without being out $500?!"
It's a vicious, predictable cycle. Apple, I wish I knew how to quit you.
Al things considered, probably not best to advertise that buying the Watch will require you to modify your lifestyle, but you'll get used to it.
That's a third party application. So using it as your prime example to establish that the Apple Watch itself is useless is illogical.
However, even the Sleep++ application has some use; and that's true even if it creates a conflict with charging. Some people need sleep monitoring for just a few a nights, which typically takes specialized equipment. If that's the case, you can use the Apple Watch for that, even if it means you use it less during the day for a couple of days. As many have said, the Apple Watch supplements other gadgets-- it's a convenience not a necessity.
In any case, the introduction of the new watch is going to expand the availability of versions of the watch at lower price levels; possibly by the Watch 1 being sold at lower price levels, and certainly through the used market. Plenty of people will have more than one of these things.
[doublepost=1470661608][/doublepost]
Goodness, it is unfamilar to see a post by an adult woman in these forums. I had gotten too used to puerile negativity lacking in perspective. Thanks!
Yes. There was a lot of ridicule on this forum for those of us who wanted to be able to easily pair multiple watches, then Apple focused on adding that capability in the first major update. And now we see why -- as I predicted all along (and yes it seems obvious, but again a lot of ridicule), multiple pairing, and a lower priced first generation watch sold along a more feature rich 2nd gen watch, hereby encouraging customers who already have a watch to buy more keeping the original, and providing a lower entry point for new customers, and as a backup for customers with more disposable income.
The net result is that people will always have a freshly charged watch waiting for them, and allows them to use more features of the watch trough out the day and night. Sleep tracking can provide ongoing information for a person, and not just a temporary study. And some people rarely remove their watches, even when they sleep, whether they're interested in the overnight data or not.
I will be most curious to see if GPS proves to be the power suck many on these forums claimed it would be in ridiculing those of us who wanted to see it from the beginning.
It's amazing how some on this forum think many of the features debated on these forums are ridiculously unnecessary until Apple adds them.
Go hunt down some companies with crappy performance and pressure them to oust their CEO's. There are plenty.
Apple is up close to 100% since Tim's installment. That's even with the recent poor performance of the stock.
I, for one, am very confident in Apple's mid to long term future. If you are expecting more than double your money in 5 years you're pretty greedy.
And please don't pull out stats on comparing Apple to Amazon or Facebook or other performances in the same period. We're all smart enough to know that there are stocks that have done better.
My point is asking for the ouster of a CEO of a company that's not sh*ting the bed is pretty silly.
I'm not an apologist, just a realist.
Ok, now if you complain about Jonny Ive, I'll be right behind you...
Complain about the slow upgrade cycles on the Macbook Pro and the Pro, right behind you...
still dont care. I want new socks for the ipod. C´mon apple, come up with a revolutionary new improved sock. (and bring on a new mac pro too, if its not too much trouble.)
The problem is that Apple is falling back into the patterns of the early-mid 1990s which contributed to it's eventual downfall. Too many products to choose from and crafty repackaging to disguise for lack of innovation (Performa anyone).
I hate to disappoint a lot of you including myself. But based on the lineup of current Apple products it's been consistent for quite sometime now, and would be applied to iPhone this year. Old products will stay in the market as long as possible, as long people still buy them. Therefore, Apple Watch 1 will stay along with Apple Watch 2. This is where the disappointing part, we are not getting an upgrade version of the watch. That means the iWatch 1 will keep the same price. The iWatch 2 is an upgrade but it comes with the price, around $50-$100 more. The third option in the lineup will be released in 2017, and that would be the Apple Watch Pro. It will be a round watch and a little bit bigger than current offerings. That will also include a cellular chip and bigger battery, to justify the Pro name on it. In 2017 will complete all the Apple product lineup, from (old) last year edition product, to (mid) current Apple technology that they can offer, then the Pro for premium pricing but has a little advantage to other Apple products other than the looks. It's going to be an exciting year next year but also disappointing for others. And one more thing! Pro bands will be release as well to compliment the Apple Watch Pro.
Any new gadget you buy invariably requires you to make some change to your routine if you hope to be able to get maximum benefit from it.
With the Apple Watch, you could do most most people do and simply charge it overnight while you sleep. This has the least disruption to your daily routine (since most people likely don't wear their watches to bed anyways). The caveat is that then you won't be able to wear it to bed and track your sleep. If you want to sleep with your Apple Watch on, then common sense dictates that you will just have to find some other opportunity to charge it. It's no different from sleep trackers because however long their battery life may be, you still need to (eventually) take it off to charge anyways.
I agree with you. The people complaining that the battery would only last a day so how were they going to track their sleep if it had to charge overnight, were missing the forest for the trees. It's still a bad PR move.
That said, as long as the battery reliably lasts 24 hours with a slightly above average use, then that's all that's needed for any device requiring charging used for sleep tracking. Then again there's something to be said for a watch that only needs to be charged once a week, that someone can charge reliably every Ednesday at 2pm with a 24 hour window in case they miss that target period for some reason.
And you are correct, Apple is likely addressing the needs of most people, who don't likely wear their watches to bed, unless they are sleep tracking, as they do with all of their products. But they've solved the problem by allowing multiple pairings, and therefore multiple watches. Yes, a customer has to buy two watches now, but it takes all the thought out of it.
The better augments for greater run time were those of the customers who routinely found themselves staying away from home overnight, or going away for a spontaneous weekend, and being without a charging puck, or able to find one easily in world where less than 10 million units had shipped worldwide.
The problem is all of the sources, included the "oft-correct" Ming-chi is that they ALL throw a hundred guesses at the wall and one of them is bound to be correct and all of a sudden they're right every year and their wrong guesses are ignored.
Ming-Chi is especially good at contradicting himself in the same speculation.
I have a feeling the Apple Watch 1 is gonna get iPad 1'd due to low-end first-gen hardware (mainly RAM) and not get much in the way of updates beyond Watch OS 3. I'll probably upgrade for the third generation Watch and keep this original from the preorder batch forever. It will be really tempting, however, if the performance on the next model is significantly improved because this thing can be pretty slow to load, although software updates have helped over time.
Of course, he only lasted 3 years before they brought Gil in.
I don't know how long Tim will last. They continue to be profitable and if you look at the makeup of the BOD, they're not going to rock the boat, I believe, at this time.
However, Tim is definately slanted towards different causes and with wanting to give away his money at some point in time, might go the Bill Gates route. There is just no one that will ever fill Steve's shoes, and maybe at this point where the company stands, just might not work out as before. I do believe that at some point there will be some major changes in the Executive Team. Angela seems to riding very low under the radar, so I think there are some issues there. Craig, as charming as he is, is having challenges with software. Pages, Numbers are now a shadow of what they used to be and I think there are too many 'point' releases of software.
Computer updates are at a standstill.. I won't go into that as there has many different threads on that issue.
Will I still buy Apple? More than likely. Very entrenched in the Ecosystem, but are more reluctant to upgrade every other year. My 5s is still good and with the improvements in Watch iOS, my
Watch will be fine for a few more years.To keep on point, I think that an upgrade to the 1st gen watch will make sense.I believe we could see a $199 starting price that will bring more people into the system. They will keep the watch tied to the phone as for new entrants to Apple will have to have the phone to have the watch.
New model same price as the current.I'm all for options, but I'm not sure offering different models at the same time when the first one hasn't been as huge a success as it might have been is a great idea yet.
"Upgraded" V1 @$100 cheaper.
Instant explosion of the smartwatch market.
If the new version is $100 cheaper I will buy it. Not to crazy about GPS since I know it will drain battery though but for runners I am sure they will love it.
Why release an updated 1? Why? Just kill the thing and get it over with. Unless you want it to be the new entry level Apple Watch, but good luck with that one...
[doublepost=1470671555][/doublepost]
Or Apple Watch 1 S?
[doublepost=1470671555][/doublepost]
Or Apple Watch 1 S?
I can only assume if they're releasing and "upgraded" watch 1 that the current bands won't fit watch 2? That would be the only reason I could think of why they'd release 2 models.
Only the upgraded v1, if an actual product, will be the cheaper one. I think Apple's current watch pricing strategy is missing a lower end (which the V1 will fill) but otherwise makes a ton of sense for the company.
GPS is likely a substantially lower battery drain than the ability to take and make phone calls already offered in the watch. Just like that feature, if you abuse it, you can expect to have less than 3 hours battery life too, which is not the fault of the watch or engineering, much less the inclusion of useful tech.
Why release an updated 1? Why? Just kill the thing and get it over with. Unless you want it to be the new entry level Apple Watch, but good luck with that one...
[doublepost=1470671555][/doublepost]
Or Apple Watch 1 S?
Just because the technology is better inside the watch does not negate the appearance of the previous watch, especially if that watch does everything a customer may want. The chief problem with the old watch was speed. A new processor solves that, along with software improvements, making the first gen watch a much more palatable entry level device they can charge less for since they aren't doing a wholesale hardware redesign. Many watch companies sell the same designs they have been making for decades; they're classics. At some point, because they're selling so many of them, and the volume of parts they can order to make them will reduce the price, especially if they are offering newer models. As technology improves in some area, or an older part is discontinued they will update the internals without necessarily updating the price.
Not likely given the rumors we've heard about the second model having few external changes. They will continue selling the first model, because it has fewer features and allows them to sell it for less, thereby expanding the market for the watch, and finding a good average selling point for the entire product line going forward.
That said, I've never understood why anyone would be so upset if their old bands don't work on the next model. Most people who wear watches, especially those who invest themselves in bands, usually own more than one watch, since traditionally change bands on a watch to match an outfit for instance wasn't very easy to do. Having already invested in the watch, why not keep it? In which case all the bands continue to be useful with it. Unless someone specifically needs the technology added to the new watch model, rotating the old watch into and out of a customer's weekly schedule should be a plus -- for years to come. While it might be a nice option to be able to use the old watch bands with the new watch, it might also be nice to buy new watch bands for the new watch too. Add to that, maintaining complete compatibility with all of the old bands will restrict Apple in their ability to even subtly alter the design of the case, as any new contours round the band connection point will require band alternations. Also keep in mind, the more expensive bands can easily have their lugs replaced so that they will fit the new watch. The only bands that would be left behind would be the cheap $50 bands that don't have lugs.
Apple is definitely bringing in new stock this fall. I think we will see more nylon bands if Apple Watch 2 launches.
Well maybe. How about just new model, @$100 cheaper though? Bigger instant explosion!
What about the analysists and supply chain sources which say there won't be a separate Pro model?
No. I can say almost to certainty All Apple Watch bands will fit the First Generation and second generation Watch. This would not be a likely move on Apple's behalf yet to have the bands not compatible on Watch 2, but by Watch version 3 or 4, it could change.
Last edited: