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.
Why Apple won’t allow 3rd party watch faces
- Thread starter Rogifan
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
People are acting like Apple is opposed to having other faces even though Apple's never said that.
It could very well be the case that they see the value in having third party faces but just haven't got around to implementing all of the necessary APIs for it.
There are also going to have to be policies around what's allowed, how they're reviewed, how complications are integrated, how power is managed, etc. The last one is a big one: if you've done any app development work for watchOS you know how stringent Apple is when it comes to how much CPU time an app can use when doing things like background refreshes. And the watch face is the thing that's going to get polled and displayed the most, and it has to be always ready and run at full FPS, so energy use is going to have to be very carefully policed to make sure developers don't inefficiently implement faces that result in battery life being halved, etc. Look at how carefully implemented the existing faces and notifications are in this regard (any complicated 3D graphics like awards or Solar or Astronomy are the most minimal of SceneKit scenes, and full motion effects and faces are pre-rendered video like goal completions and the Fire/Water/Liquid Metal/Vapor/Timelapse/Motion faces).
When Apple is silent on something and there seems to be no progress, half the time it's because they've been busily working away in secret to get everything ready to release a complicated new feature.
It could very well be the case that they see the value in having third party faces but just haven't got around to implementing all of the necessary APIs for it.
There are also going to have to be policies around what's allowed, how they're reviewed, how complications are integrated, how power is managed, etc. The last one is a big one: if you've done any app development work for watchOS you know how stringent Apple is when it comes to how much CPU time an app can use when doing things like background refreshes. And the watch face is the thing that's going to get polled and displayed the most, and it has to be always ready and run at full FPS, so energy use is going to have to be very carefully policed to make sure developers don't inefficiently implement faces that result in battery life being halved, etc. Look at how carefully implemented the existing faces and notifications are in this regard (any complicated 3D graphics like awards or Solar or Astronomy are the most minimal of SceneKit scenes, and full motion effects and faces are pre-rendered video like goal completions and the Fire/Water/Liquid Metal/Vapor/Timelapse/Motion faces).
When Apple is silent on something and there seems to be no progress, half the time it's because they've been busily working away in secret to get everything ready to release a complicated new feature.
Good post. Marco Arment is comparing Watch faces to iPhone wallpaper but I don’t think they’re the same thing at all. To me iPhone wallpaper is most comparable to the photos Watch face. It’s a static image. That’s all. To me Watch faces could be comparable to iOS themes or Springboard skins which Apple doesn’t allow. But you might be right that Apple is working on something it’s just not ready yet.
I keep thinking about the Hermes version and to some extent the Nike version when we talk about watch faces.
People are paying a pretty substantial premium for the Hermes watch. The benefit being a high quality band and significantly the Hermes watch face.
With a wide open watch face ecosystem it seems to me that the special Hermes version will lose that extra appeal because consumers will now have access to pretty much any face they’d like.
Also new unique faces in each new version of the watch is another feature that inspires people to upgrade. I’m not saying they upgrade because of the new faces, but in combination with the other new features, it’s part of the package.
Because Apple considers the face as part of the features package, I don’t think they’ll ever give that up.
People are paying a pretty substantial premium for the Hermes watch. The benefit being a high quality band and significantly the Hermes watch face.
With a wide open watch face ecosystem it seems to me that the special Hermes version will lose that extra appeal because consumers will now have access to pretty much any face they’d like.
Also new unique faces in each new version of the watch is another feature that inspires people to upgrade. I’m not saying they upgrade because of the new faces, but in combination with the other new features, it’s part of the package.
Because Apple considers the face as part of the features package, I don’t think they’ll ever give that up.
All good points. Aesthetics are obviously something Apple cares a lot about and they are a selling point and part of the overall experience of the Hermes and Nike watches. The fact that Apple decided to take the approach of brand partnerships says a lot.
By the way, I wasn't suggesting Apple's just going to give developers free reign to make entire faces in any way they want - I still think they'll limit it somehow. But I feel the technical hurdles of performance, energy, reliability, etc are why we haven't seen anything yet. They won't even hint at this until it's complete, and they've been busy on other priorities, with every release including large internal changes, and the most recent was perhaps the biggest in this regard (lots of new features for developers, lots of new APIs, new apps, big changes to support the new screen sizes and shapes and associated APIs for safe area insets, reworking all their existing apps for it, etc).
Much like how Apple forces developers to use WatchKit to build their app UIs and layouts, I think we'd see something similar if they give more access to faces. Prebuilt UI controls/elements that developers use to build the faces so that things like time display and logic don't have to be reimplemented by every developer (in potentially buggy ways), but where they can do things like define the graphics that get used for hands if its an analog face, define the overall structure of where complications sit and which types they are, define backgrounds, etc. Or maybe it will be much more limited so they can retain more control of the look. The new Infograph Modular large rectangular complication is an example of where they've done that: developers can draw whatever they want and pass it over as an image that gets displayed in that area, something that wasn't previously possible.
By the way, I wasn't suggesting Apple's just going to give developers free reign to make entire faces in any way they want - I still think they'll limit it somehow. But I feel the technical hurdles of performance, energy, reliability, etc are why we haven't seen anything yet. They won't even hint at this until it's complete, and they've been busy on other priorities, with every release including large internal changes, and the most recent was perhaps the biggest in this regard (lots of new features for developers, lots of new APIs, new apps, big changes to support the new screen sizes and shapes and associated APIs for safe area insets, reworking all their existing apps for it, etc).
Much like how Apple forces developers to use WatchKit to build their app UIs and layouts, I think we'd see something similar if they give more access to faces. Prebuilt UI controls/elements that developers use to build the faces so that things like time display and logic don't have to be reimplemented by every developer (in potentially buggy ways), but where they can do things like define the graphics that get used for hands if its an analog face, define the overall structure of where complications sit and which types they are, define backgrounds, etc. Or maybe it will be much more limited so they can retain more control of the look. The new Infograph Modular large rectangular complication is an example of where they've done that: developers can draw whatever they want and pass it over as an image that gets displayed in that area, something that wasn't previously possible.
If you look at the 3rd-party watch faces that have been created for Garmin watches (e.g., Forerunner 230/235), you'll immediately understand why Apple is cautious about opening the floodgates to this. Page after page of abominations, with a few truly useful ones here and there. That said, I would gladly pay for a properly designed analog face for a rectangular case. The Hermes face is one example, but I would like one with the ability to add more than one complication.
Sort of related:
But Garmin has a really poor reputation with their software implementation and stability, which is also indicative that their watch faces Have been garbage for those who have had issues in the past with lag and freezing. It’s probably more poor decision making in terms of what they’re allowing versus actually permitting quality standards.
I still am convinced it will happen. It's just a matter of time. Eventually they will run out of new features, and this will be their big play.
There are 2 main non-health sensor based features left (the way I see it), an integrated camera for FT, and a battery that can last long enough to support it's use.
They will keep adding health features as the technology supports it (Glucose level, Blood Pressure, Body Temperature,...)
But mark my words, it will be added, and as other have stated, Apple can put strict regulations on developers, it will not be the wild west of deployments.
Regarding the Hermes editions, I have to be honest. I live in Nassau County NY (basically a suburb of NYC where property taxes are very high), and spend a lot of time in NYC, of all the apple watches I have seen, I have yet to see a Hermes edition out in the wild. Nike, I see all the time, and how much more money could Nike/Apple make if they made the face available to a watch face store? (disclaimer: I may have seen a Hermes edition, without a Hermes band on, but I always look at the screens if I can to see what face people use, and I never have seen the Hermes screen in public)
The Nike watch face is a perfect example of a watch face that could be in a watch store for $0.99 that would sell, to almost every non-Nike edition apple watch... Right now, there is no additional cost for the Nike face, you just have to select a model at the same price.
Also, if they were so worried about taking away from these Editions, you wouldn't be able to buy these bands as accessories... And the Hermes editions, the price difference is basically the cost of the band.
There are 2 main non-health sensor based features left (the way I see it), an integrated camera for FT, and a battery that can last long enough to support it's use.
They will keep adding health features as the technology supports it (Glucose level, Blood Pressure, Body Temperature,...)
But mark my words, it will be added, and as other have stated, Apple can put strict regulations on developers, it will not be the wild west of deployments.
Regarding the Hermes editions, I have to be honest. I live in Nassau County NY (basically a suburb of NYC where property taxes are very high), and spend a lot of time in NYC, of all the apple watches I have seen, I have yet to see a Hermes edition out in the wild. Nike, I see all the time, and how much more money could Nike/Apple make if they made the face available to a watch face store? (disclaimer: I may have seen a Hermes edition, without a Hermes band on, but I always look at the screens if I can to see what face people use, and I never have seen the Hermes screen in public)
The Nike watch face is a perfect example of a watch face that could be in a watch store for $0.99 that would sell, to almost every non-Nike edition apple watch... Right now, there is no additional cost for the Nike face, you just have to select a model at the same price.
Also, if they were so worried about taking away from these Editions, you wouldn't be able to buy these bands as accessories... And the Hermes editions, the price difference is basically the cost of the band.