Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I wasn’t aware of the fact that the SE 2 didn’t even have the ECG system. That completely discards the SE from my list of potential purchases, as well as the Ultra for being so big.

If I ever get an CD Apple Watch, I definitely want it to have the ECG stuff, blood oxygen sensor and sleep apnea detection.
 
Still love my Ultra Watch 1. I’m a marathoner and couldn’t be happier. Skipped U2, if U3 has even longer battery life and a brighter screen I might bite. Best product Apple has made in recent memory. Could never go back to a standard AW.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howard2k
If the AW3 has better battery life, it might be a real world challenger for the overpriced Fenix 8, but if you’re at all outdoorsy I’d say think about how you want to use a smartwatch and consider grabbing a Garmin instead, especially if you can find a comparable price deal on the brilliant Fenix 8. I’m an Apple guy going back 30 or so years but looked at an AW Ultra 2 in the shop and bought a Garmin Epix Pro 2 on sale for 50% less than the AWU2. Epix is an amazing watch that does everything I need - 51mm oled, practically indestructible titanium and sapphire case, 1 month battery life. Software has been faultless so far and built in support for sports is brilliant (golf in particular is best in class). I don’t really want intrusive txts or phone calls from an iOS mini me watch when I’m working out or at work on the tools. Garmin’s health, sleep tracking, etc are right on the money. Importantly it’s comfortable and I don’t notice it on the wrist. The only potential downside on the Epix line and older Fenix’ models was the button waterproofing design - I surf a lot and decided not to use my smartwatch in the ocean for this reason, though a ton of people have used Garmin’s in saltwater for years with no issues - but I realise both AWU and Fenix 8 have nailed it with waterproofing.
I recently tried to go back to Garmin. Pre-AW, I had a few in a row. I have always felt they were superior to AW for what I used them for. Once I had to download three different apps just to get it set up, I returned it and put my AW back on. I was really bummed but apparently my life has different priorities now and reduced capability is acceptable if it's plug and play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Downundermac
I went from the Series 3 to the Ultra 2 purely for the battery life. Even when my S3 was brand new it could maybe last a day and a half on a charge. My Ultra 2 can go 5 days.
This is much better than I expected. Do you use it for GPS/fitness tracking? I would buy one if I could get two solid days of battery with one hour a day GPS/fitness use.
 
if Apple can allow the Apple Watch(cellular data) to be used by Google Fi customers.... it's already 2025.... still nothing. :( or at least a standalone cell data plan for the Apple Watch on any other carrier in the US.
 
if Apple can allow the Apple Watch(cellular data) to be used by Google Fi customers.... it's already 2025.... still nothing. :( or at least a standalone cell data plan for the Apple Watch on any other carrier in the US.
They do (standalone plans)


 
They do (standalone plans)


"Perfect for kids and seniors."

That's what they say about the standalone Apple Watch plan on the US Mobile website. Guess I'm still a kid! (unfortunately, I'm the other one... senior... :( well, almost a senior)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Howard2k
This is much better than I expected. Do you use it for GPS/fitness tracking? I would buy one if I could get two solid days of battery with one hour a day GPS/fitness use.
I’m never without my phone so it’s likely just using my phones GPS, I do use it for fitness but it’s strictly indoors at the gym, so I can’t give you an accurate measure of using it on outdoor runs I’m afraid.
 
Longer battery life is always good. Satellite/more band connectivity is good. More health sensing, more storage for offline maps and audio (and movies? jk)—all would be good.

One thing I’d like though is a new product line—an Apple Smartband. I’m not a big watch person—I’d prefer something a little more low key. It could potentially have better battery life than the Watch too with a smaller display and if the battery is built into the band like the Nike Fuelband. And maybe it could have better health sensing with sensors on the underside of the wrist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: satchmo
They need to resolve the patent dispute. Not having O2 is putting them behind the competition - event the Oura Ring has O2 capability.
 
Longer battery life is always good. Satellite/more band connectivity is good. More health sensing, more storage for offline maps and audio (and movies? jk)—all would be good.

One thing I’d like though is a new product line—an Apple Smartband. I’m not a big watch person—I’d prefer something a little more low key. It could potentially have better battery life than the Watch too with a smaller display and if the battery is built into the band like the Nike Fuelband. And maybe it could have better health sensing with sensors on the underside of the wrist.

Yes. I've wondered why Apple has never gone down this route (other than killing AW sales).
It's sort of an AW Lite.
 
Yes. I've wondered why Apple has never gone down this route (other than killing AW sales).
It's sort of an AW Lite.
I think Apple is very careful/slow/steady. Watches are a more established market than bands, so that’s the market they entered first, and they want to make sure they mature in it and have a good hold before they branch out product lines. I think Apple only gains to offer more products (I doubt the smartband would be much cheaper than a Watch SE if not more expensive), but only after existing lines are well-established and there is more room in the market. Is the Apple Watch established enough? Maybe. If so then maybe Apple just doesn’t see a big enough market for a smartband compared to other things they could be focusing on. But I still have hope that it’s coming.
 
I don't care about it being faster. I want battery life to reach a level where the damned device is usable. I've got the 1st gen SE and it struggles to make it through the day - and I can't even dream of sleep tracking or haptic alarms as I have to stick it into the charger for the night. I considered Ultra just for better battery life but as the original one seemed to have only ~2 days battery life I didn't feel it was worth the huge price. Someone in some comment mentioned getting 5 days out of ultra2 - could live with something like that, but preferably in the more sane price bracket.

I might still buy ultra 3, but only if I get at least a week's use out of it. Real use, not just glancing at the time twice a day. And even then I'd buy one of the cheaper ones if they managed that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eduardodfj
Yes. I want (and need days - 5-10 days sometimes without another charger to pack along. I do not want to charge every 1-2 days.
 
Excellent point - You may be right!
Ultra 3 would need for blood oxygen test to be operational like on my early ultra 2. No interest if that function is still missing. Apple Care can keep U2 working for many years.

My backups are my several Rolex watches. One from 1967 works just fine. Does the primary function of showing date and two time zones.
 
  • Love
Reactions: turbineseaplane
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.