WatchOS 2 without new Apple watch ?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by lympero, Aug 17, 2015.

  1. lympero macrumors 6502a

    lympero

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Location:
    Arta, Greece
    #1
    Is it possible for apple to introduce the new watchOS 2 without revealing a new Apple watch? Imagine introducing IOS 9 without new iPhone. It doesn't seem right to me.

    What do you think?
     
  2. dhlizard macrumors G4

    dhlizard

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Location:
    The Jailbreak Community
    #3
    I think WatchOS 2 will roll out in September alongside iOS9.
    I am quite certain you will not see a generation 2 Apple Watch until 2016
     
  3. lionsy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Location:
    England, UK
    #4
    Yes, OS2 seems more about fulfilling Apple's plans for what they wanted at launch rather than the sort of thing you can expect from a second gen product.
     
  4. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #5
    They can simply introduce new band colors. In fact, there were rumors pointing to this.
     
  5. BSG75 macrumors regular

    BSG75

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2015
    Location:
    Tennessee
    #6
    I would have to agree with this as well. IMO, there is probably much more functionality on the current watch than Apple released at launch.
     
  6. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #7
    ...and maybe Yellow and Rose gold anodized Sport's.
     
  7. Aluminum213 macrumors 68040

    Aluminum213

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    #8
    Apple isn't going to reveal apple watch 2 less then 6 months after apple watch 1 was released
     
  8. BaggieBoy macrumors 6502

    BaggieBoy

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #9
    I expect people thought that too when the iPad4 was announced 6 months after the iPad 3...
     
  9. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #10
    That was more like 9 months.
     
  10. Enygmatic macrumors 6502a

    Enygmatic

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2015
    Location:
    Various
    #11
    Wow...
     
  11. OrangeWhip macrumors newbie

    OrangeWhip

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2008
    #12
    Not quite:

    iPad 3: March 16, 2012
    iPad 4: November 2, 2012

    221 days between releases.
     
  12. lagwagon Suspended

    lagwagon

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2014
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    #13
    It will only have been 5 months since watch launch and watchOS 2 (if watchOS 2 does release along side iOS 9.) So I wouldn't think of it as number two. It's more like 1.1. WatchOS 1 to WatchOS 2 has to be the shortest cycle Apple has ever done on any OS. It was surprising Apple went with 2 so soon instead of doing a 1.1, 1.2 and so on before moving to version 2.
     
  13. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #14
    So that's what... 7 months? :D

    Eh, it wasn't a big deal. I skipped the 4 and got a mini instead. :p

    As far as Watch OS 1 -> 2 goes, it reminds me of the original iPad. Which I think was released in the spring with iOS 3.3 but was updated to iOS 4 in the fall. I forget the exact version number, but you get the idea.

    I suspect part of the reason Apple held back some features from watch OS 1 is that they needed iOS 9 on the iPhones to make them work. So no, I don't expect new watch hardware to go with watch OS 2.
     
  14. Rogifan macrumors P6

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #15
    IMO that was the exception not the norm.
     
  15. Mlrollin91 macrumors G4

    Mlrollin91

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    Location:
    Ventura County
    #16
    Completely agree. The only reason for the quick release of the iPad 4 was the lighting cable introduction.
     
  16. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #17
    Plus adjusting the product cycle to align with the gift giving season.
     
  17. silverblack macrumors 68030

    silverblack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #18
    In my opinion, iOS 2 should really be iOS 1.1. Nothing revolutionary. All the "new" features should have been there at device launch.
     
  18. Rogifan macrumors P6

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #19
    Disagree. I think it was because the A5X couldn't handle the retina display.
     
  19. Rogifan macrumors P6

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #20
    Why does it matter what it's called? Obviously those features weren't ready at launch. And I think it made sense for Apple to release the watch when they did so by the time the holiday season comes the manufacturing process is a well oiled machine and there are no delays in shipping watches.
     
  20. silverblack macrumors 68030

    silverblack

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    #21
    I wasn't implying that Apple shouldn't have released the watch when they did. I just thought OS 2 was really catching up what OS 1 should have been, rather than a major "upgrade" that should be accompanied by a hardware upgrade.
     
  21. Aluminum213 macrumors 68040

    Aluminum213

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    #22
    My thoughts exactly, native apps should have been there from the beginning and the other OS2 updates are really minor
     
  22. Rogifan macrumors P6

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #23
    Sure but whether they call it 1.1 or 2.0 does it really matter?
     
  23. Rogifan macrumors P6

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #24
    What if the software wasn't ready? Should Apple have delayed the launch? I've been happily using my watch for 3 weeks, knowing it's going to be even better this fall.
     
  24. Aluminum213 macrumors 68040

    Aluminum213

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    #25
    It obviously wasn't ready, all I'm saying is OS 2 is really just version OS 1 software fully realized

    And like you said, it doesn't matter if they called it 1.1 or 2.0, it's all just semantics
     

Share This Page