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

What are instances where you will personally will use AW3 cellular without your phone?

I'm enjoying reading all the ways people will be using the cellular connection on the Watch. It's almost got me tempted to change my non-LTE order for the one that does, but I just don't think I'll ever not have my phone with me when I leave the house. As it is now, I almost have a heart attack when I feel my pants pocket and it's not there. I rarely resist advancements in tech, but I think in this case, I'd be forcing myself to ever make use of it. Maybe when the watch is totally independent from the phone and a true replacement, I will make the change. I also considered just getting it to have on the rare chance I might use it, but I'm on a grandfathered data plan, so adding it would be $20, not $10 like everyone else. It should realistically be only $5!
 
eagleglen said:
As it is now, I almost have a heart attack when I feel my pants pocket and it's not there. ... Maybe when the watch is totally independent from the phone and a true replacement, I will make the change.
Click to expand...
First question: When you worry about not having the phone, are you worried about missing a phone call? Or about not being able to pass another level in Angry Birds? (genuine question; sometimes I wonder why people have phones)

Second question: What do you mean by "totally independent"?
 
  • Like
Reactions: nicho
BarracksSi said:
First question: When you worry about not having the phone, are you worried about missing a phone call? Or about not being able to pass another level in Angry Birds? (genuine question; sometimes I wonder why people have phones)

Second question: What do you mean by "totally independent"?
Click to expand...
First question: I'm afraid I've lost the phone. I've been so conditioned to make sure I never loose it, that not feeling its presence is startling. I'm honestly not worried about missing a call (they'll call back) and definitely not worried about any game.

Second question: the S3 Watch still needs to be paired with an iPhone to function and chance certain settings. By 'independent' I mean being able to buy one and use it with no iPhone at all.
 
eagleglen said:
First question: I'm afraid I've lost the phone. I've been so conditioned to make sure I never loose it, that not feeling its presence is startling. I'm honestly not worried about missing a call (they'll call back) and definitely not worried about any game.

Second question: the S3 Watch still needs to be paired with an iPhone to function and chance certain settings. By 'independent' I mean being able to buy one and use it with no iPhone at all.
Click to expand...
First -- Ok, makes sense.

Second -- I think it would be an awful experience trying to configure the AW without the benefit of a phone app and the correspondingly larger screen.
 
BarracksSi said:
First -- Ok, makes sense.

Second -- I think it would be an awful experience trying to configure the AW without the benefit of a phone app and the correspondingly larger screen.
Click to expand...

not relying on something doesn't mean it can't still make use of something.

like how you can buy an iphone and download apps on the device itself or you can use a mac and download apps in itunes and transf... oh wait...
 
batristain said:
The main reason is when I wonder out of wifi range playing with my dogs. I'm Oncall 24/7 and I'm always paranoid I will miss a page out. Also when I visit my office they have crappy wifi so it would be nice to not have to carry 2 phones with me. I can leave them at my desk and know even if the wifi fails (it often does) I can still be reached if I've wondered into a different part of the building.

Cheers,
Bobbie
Click to expand...

Also on call 24/7 and it sounds so nice to be able to run down to the store etc and not have to constantly be glued to two phones.

And the huge selling point for me is peace of mind. As a lone female, if someone carjacks me or steals my purse, I can call for help
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5105973, AlliFlowers, OriginalAppleGuy and 2 others
I will have wait and see.
About 2 years ago I didn’t see the need to answer a phone or text from my wrist.
 
nicho said:
like how you can buy an iphone and download apps on the device itself or you can use a mac and download apps in itunes and transf... oh wait...
Click to expand...
Like how it's a pain in the ass to type on a watch face and how the AW doesn't have TouchID for secure transactions and how scrolling through a list of apps in the App Store on a postage stamp screen sucks...
 
I am getting it for:
bike rides, walks/runs, gym, and swimming pools and emergency for when phone dies
 
Switching to the AW3 LTE from a Samsung Gear S3 LTE. Use it on the golf course as a GPS plus staying in touch via phone and text. Works great for me and the AW3 will sync up with my iPhone much better!
 
eagleglen said:
I'm enjoying reading all the ways people will be using the cellular connection on the Watch. It's almost got me tempted to change my non-LTE order for the one that does, but I just don't think I'll ever not have my phone with me when I leave the house. As it is now, I almost have a heart attack when I feel my pants pocket and it's not there. I rarely resist advancements in tech, but I think in this case, I'd be forcing myself to ever make use of it. Maybe when the watch is totally independent from the phone and a true replacement, I will make the change. I also considered just getting it to have on the rare chance I might use it, but I'm on a grandfathered data plan, so adding it would be $20, not $10 like everyone else. It should realistically be only $5!
Click to expand...

People have been getting it for $10 a month on the grandfathered plan. I have it too and will guarantee you I will only pay $10 month or will threaten to cancel.
 
There's definitely cases where the cellular would be handy. Physical activities, especially ones that last all day, would be the ones that stick out. It's a pain when you're doing something and you need to worry about your phone. We usually end up piling all the phones into one persons bag, and spend the whole day worrying about them.

It's a strange one for me. I would never buy an AW without the cellular because I would be gutted at how useless it would be in cases like the above.

With that being said, is it worth having the AW for the handful of days per year where it might be useful? Probably not if it's adding an extra £5-£10 per month to the bill. I'd be annoyed paying that if I wasn't using it. If it was on my line rental for free that would seal the deal.
 
Beach, swimming, dog walking, gym, grocery store, cruise ship for starters!
 
FoxD said:
People have been getting it for $10 a month on the grandfathered plan. I have it too and will guarantee you I will only pay $10 month or will threaten to cancel.
Click to expand...
I've seen some others on line say that. I called them twice so far and have been told I definitely need to switch to one of the new unlimited data plans to add the watch for only $10 more. Guess I could call again. Maybe once it's actually released, there will be some consistent information on what's allowed. It's very frustrating.
 
It will be nice not to have to remember to take my phone when I walk the dogs, or when I go swimming or going for a run.
 
Many workplaces ban mobile phones. I know hospital care and nurses who can not carry them. Some use the Watch to get texts from kids etc. I work where electronics are sold online, in my work area and the warehouse nearby phones are not allowed. Not that I'd be on my phone a lot, but not being totally cut off all day will be great. Since we don't have wifi my previous A watches were offline.
 
Here is a scenario that some people will be able to relate to. My daughter has Type 1 Diabetes. She uses a continuous glucose monitor (Dexcom g5) that connects to her iPhone so we can monitor her sugar levels from afar. Dexcom will soon be releasing an update to their apps that allows her watch to be a receiver instead of or in addition to her phone. With cellular access on her watch we will still be able to monitor her sugar levels when she is in places without her phone - out playing with friends, gym class in school, water parks like Six Flags or at Disney. This feature alone makes the cellular update for the watch worth the $10/month.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5105973 and Tdadlani
SHirsch999 said:
Here is a scenario that some people will be able to relate to. My daughter has Type 1 Diabetes. She uses a continuous glucose monitor (Dexcom g5) that connects to her iPhone so we can monitor her sugar levels from afar. Dexcom will soon be releasing an update to their apps that allows her watch to be a receiver instead of or in addition to her phone.
Click to expand...
Sounds more like Dexcom will make their app native to the AW instead of phone-dependent. Have they said it'll need LTE to work without the phone?
 
BarracksSi said:
Sounds more like Dexcom will make their app native to the AW instead of phone-dependent. Have they said it'll need LTE to work without the phone?
Click to expand...

The thing parents like about Dexcom is that it uploads the BG readings constantly to the cloud so we can keep tabs on our childs blood sugars. If they are doing an activity or swimming, where they cannot take their phone with, then we lose that data - sometimes for hours. You are left guessing if they are high (or hypo and needing sugar to prevent them passing out). With LTE and an updated app, the updates would continue whilst they leave the phone behind. So absolutely, LTE would be required.
 
BarracksSi said:
Like how it's a pain in the ass to type on a watch face and how the AW doesn't have TouchID for secure transactions and how scrolling through a list of apps in the App Store on a postage stamp screen sucks...
Click to expand...
The Watch doesn't need TouchID for secure transactions - you've already authenticated when you unlocked it (via either unlock code or TouchID on your iPhone) - as long as you still have it on your wrist, why should you need to authenticate again?

Far more convenient for payments than pulling your iPhone out of your pocket.

Oh...and, on topic - when I forget my iPhone (which I do almost weekly) :)
 
nicho said:
as long as you're cruising close to the shore in your home country. it doesn't support roaming, and that would include ship-based roaming networks.
Click to expand...
(as I was reminded of recently) - if your carrier supports wifi calling, your watch would still connect back to your home carrier over the ship's wifi network.
And the VoLTE non-roaming issue is a temporary one. By implementing this in the Watch, Apple's lighting a fire under the GSMA to finalize the rules around VoLTE roaming (which the carriers really SHOULD have done before implementing LTE networks in the first place!!!)
 
fischersd said:
(as I was reminded of recently) - if your carrier supports wifi calling, your watch would still connect back to your home carrier over the ship's wifi network.
Click to expand...

that's also possible on any other apple watch.

fischersd said:
And the VoLTE non-roaming issue is a temporary one. By implementing this in the Watch, Apple's lighting a fire under the GSMA to finalize the rules around VoLTE roaming (which the carriers really SHOULD have done before implementing LTE networks in the first place!!!)
Click to expand...

i enjoy your optimism, but series 3 watches will be long dead before this is implemented around the world.
 
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