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

Appl3FTW

macrumors 603
Original poster
Nov 15, 2012
5,552
1,252
I mean I get it, apple will profit blah blah... But cmon wouldn't it be simpler if we use the same lightning cable? Maybe by using the magport for the watch Apple was able to use the space more instead of integrating it with the motherboard. that one too okay I get it .
 

foxkoneko

macrumors 6502
Sep 5, 2011
378
141
arent they already doing this just with an extra piece at the end for the watch belly piece :p
 

ericgtr12

macrumors 68000
Mar 19, 2015
1,774
12,174
I mean I get it, apple will profit blah blah... But cmon wouldn't it be simpler if we use the same lightning cable? Maybe by using the magport for the watch Apple was able to use the space more instead of integrating it with the motherboard. that one too okay I get it .

^ I second this.
 

Julien

macrumors G4
Jun 30, 2007
11,835
5,432
Atlanta
I mean I get it, apple will profit blah blah... But cmon wouldn't it be simpler if we use the same lightning cable? Maybe by using the magport for the watch Apple was able to use the space more instead of integrating it with the motherboard. that one too okay I get it .

:apple:Watch Lightning port = water entrance.
 

bunnicula

macrumors 68040
Jul 23, 2008
3,816
817
I mean I get it, apple will profit blah blah... But cmon wouldn't it be simpler if we use the same lightning cable? Maybe by using the magport for the watch Apple was able to use the space more set of integrating it with the motherboard that one too okay I get it .

If you buy an Edition, it charges in its box and you just plug a lightning cable into the back of the box. ;)

I mean, if you wanted simple.

They didn't put a lightning cable port into the watch because... water damage from an open port.
 

Quahog

macrumors member
Jan 26, 2010
89
8
I agree, I think the biggest reason is water resistance.

Plus it would probably require more space to have the lightning port.
 

Appl3FTW

macrumors 603
Original poster
Nov 15, 2012
5,552
1,252
If you buy an Edition, it charges in its box and you just plug a lightning cable into the back of the box. ;)

I mean, if you wanted simple.

They didn't put a lightning cable port into the watch because... water damage from an open port.

Not lightning, usb type c
 

MrLoL

macrumors 6502
Jan 20, 2014
425
502
Lyon, France
Because it's so much easier to charge than putting the lightning cable right in the hole. (Even if it's reversible)
 

shenfrey

macrumors 68020
May 23, 2010
2,424
657
I asked about the water resistance in the Apple Store and the employee said that you should still be careful, it's not completely resistant.
 

Appl3FTW

macrumors 603
Original poster
Nov 15, 2012
5,552
1,252
Those rubber port covers are ugly. Never seen one on an Apple device, besides those plastic nubs old iPods used to include.

I was merely suggesting it. I'm sure apple could develop a better cover than plastic.
 

Julien

macrumors G4
Jun 30, 2007
11,835
5,432
Atlanta
I asked about the water resistance in the Apple Store and the employee said that you should still be careful, it's not completely resistant.

Doesn't matter what you were told by an employee. It only matters what Apple put in writing and it is advertised as being IPx7.;)
 

dilap

macrumors 6502a
Apr 18, 2014
813
60
London, UK

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    57.6 KB · Views: 111

Appl3FTW

macrumors 603
Original poster
Nov 15, 2012
5,552
1,252
So that means I have to carry my lightning cable and my magport or the watch plus my 30 pin if I'm using the old iPad. I thought the 30 pin and the lightning cable days were over. now I have to deal with lightning plus the magport. I thought dual cables are over since everything is using lightning cable now but I guess not
 

shenfrey

macrumors 68020
May 23, 2010
2,424
657
Doesn't matter what you were told by an employee. It only matters what Apple put in writing and it is advertised as being IPx7.;)


So not completely water resistant then. Sounds to me the employee got it spot on.
 

Appl3FTW

macrumors 603
Original poster
Nov 15, 2012
5,552
1,252
Doesn't matter what you were told by an employee. It only matters what Apple put in writing and it is advertised as being IPx7.;)

The watch is water resistant not waterproof

----------

Just asking, why would they include a lightening cable? But not a USB Type-C?

Well if it's lightning cable I'm glad. Maybe the reviewer was wrong he said it was type c.
 

Julien

macrumors G4
Jun 30, 2007
11,835
5,432
Atlanta
So not completely water resistant then. Sounds to me the employee got it spot on.

What is completely water resistant????? There is no such thing as a completely water resistant watch. Given enough depth/pressure EVRERY watch will fail.
 

shenfrey

macrumors 68020
May 23, 2010
2,424
657
What is completely water resistant????? There is no such thing as a completely water resistant watch. Given enough depth/pressure EVR+ERY watch will fail.


Yes but with ipx7 there's no such thing as depth. Washing your hands with it is about as good as it gets.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.