Name an Apple product that HASN'T followed this plan. All have been successful including iPod and iPhone.
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.
Will there be a thinner and lighter Apple Watch 2 next year?
- Thread starter saintforlife
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Name an Apple product that HASN'T followed this plan. All have been successful including iPod and iPhone.
Where did you see this? I read elsewhere that Samsung is going to discontinue wearables as they are not doing well.
Where did you read that? Doesn't make any sense at all.
Ah wait. You know what, I think you must've read something about how they plan to cut back on the number of new smartwatch models that they introduce.
Otherwise, not only are they doing things like investing $100 million into smartphone-automobile interfacing, but...
They're also rumored to shortly introduce a round smartwatch with a rotating bezel input. This would be their answer to Apple's tiny Digital Crown. It's supposedly called the Orbis project. Here's their patent:
ANSWER: Nope. Just like the iPad, iPhone, and iPod, the first design released will continue to be sold in perpetuity, for years on end.
Ah, yeah that was it. No new smart watch models. Thanks, sometimes my memory has a page fault.
I thought about this since the event. At first I was thinking it would be updated yearly. But now I'm thinking it won't be. The reason, it's called Apple Watch not iWatch. Like the AppleTV it's not on an annual release. It also has a replaceable battery, which is very unlike Apple. If it was going to have an annual release it wouldn't have a replaceable battery.
Based on the price and the amount of time they put into designing this, I would say at least 5 years (if not indefinitely for the form factor).
----------
Just no. I am pretty sure Jony Ive have thought about this, but turning the whole bezel is "crude". I prefer a tiny crown, out of the way, simple and minimalist.
----------
Just no. I am pretty sure Jony Ive have thought about this, but turning the whole bezel is "crude". I prefer a tiny crown, out of the way, simple and minimalist.
I put this in another thread but it belongs more here -
I don't think thinness is as important with the watch as it is with devices you hold.
I don't expect the Watch 2, 3 or onwards to be significantly thinner. Sure over time miniaturisation will ensure the Watch can get a little thinner, but battery life will be crucial for a watch.
With the iPhone, Apple have a mandate to ensure 4-5hrs of battery life. If they can do this and also increase the speed and make the device thinner they will. Same with the iPad, it has 10hrs of battery life and they will keep making the device thinner as long as it retains 10 hours battery. Both of these meet their expectation for battery life. Something that you have to hold keeps getting better the lighter and thinner it is.
With the Watch, the current battery life is not ideal. Apple will want to keep improving this over time. So this means that making the device thinner will be less of a priority, as they will rather keep expanding battery life instead until they reach a point where current battery technology can meet their expectation for battery life. When that happens they will begin to make the device thinner.
And we know they are not completely satisfied with battery life by needing to introduce features like 'Power Reserve' where they are putting battery management in the hands of the users. This is quite un-Apple like.
I don't think thinness is as important with the watch as it is with devices you hold.
I don't expect the Watch 2, 3 or onwards to be significantly thinner. Sure over time miniaturisation will ensure the Watch can get a little thinner, but battery life will be crucial for a watch.
With the iPhone, Apple have a mandate to ensure 4-5hrs of battery life. If they can do this and also increase the speed and make the device thinner they will. Same with the iPad, it has 10hrs of battery life and they will keep making the device thinner as long as it retains 10 hours battery. Both of these meet their expectation for battery life. Something that you have to hold keeps getting better the lighter and thinner it is.
With the Watch, the current battery life is not ideal. Apple will want to keep improving this over time. So this means that making the device thinner will be less of a priority, as they will rather keep expanding battery life instead until they reach a point where current battery technology can meet their expectation for battery life. When that happens they will begin to make the device thinner.
And we know they are not completely satisfied with battery life by needing to introduce features like 'Power Reserve' where they are putting battery management in the hands of the users. This is quite un-Apple like.
Thinner and lighter would probably mean less gold so they might make new straps for the edition with extra gold bits to not have to force a price drop on the watch.
i don't think it needs to be thinner though. I generally think they get the design right at every iPhone release and then I'm even more impressed with the next release. So, they might wow me with the design of the next watch. I did say wow at their prices too but not in a good way.
i don't think it needs to be thinner though. I generally think they get the design right at every iPhone release and then I'm even more impressed with the next release. So, they might wow me with the design of the next watch. I did say wow at their prices too but not in a good way.
It could be like Apple TV, or Macs where the design just doesn't change for many years. Only this time next year are we able to tell.
I think the edition will be one of their biggest flops. Wouldn't be surprised to see it greatly reduced in cost or even dropped. I don't about you guys but it's been the laugh of every radio station/tv news stuff around me for the last day.
I think they will probably keep a similar form factor, maybe thinner and upgrade the internals. Probably won't be a reinvention unless consumers give them hell and they go back to the drawing board
You can't really make a watch all that much thinner and still be able to spin that crown; it would start rubbing up against your skin and impede operation of the watch, as well as not feeling very classy...
I could also imagine Ive's hair falling out (all over again
) at the thought of mounting the crown asymmetrically so that it sticks up above the front face of a slimmed-down watch, where it would catch on your shirt sleeves and whatnot.Premium watches traditionally aren't very thin. It's not a thinness competition, like with laptops for example. You could argue in favor of just making the crown smaller for a thinner watch, but smaller wheels are also less precise; they spin at a higher gearing ratio when moved with your finger. Scrolling and zooming and whatnot could end up feeling fiddlier with a smaller crown, and that's something Apple would really hate.
Rather, I think they'd want to keep roughly the same internal volume (for the next couple updates anyway) and bump up battery life instead. At some point, maybe we will see a horizontally mounted crown instead, enabling a thinner watch profile, but if I was to guess I wouldn't expect any height slimming for the foreseeable future...
From what I've read, I believe, and would expect power reserve to engage automatically when battery capacity drops to a critical level. Yes, I hear you can put the watch into reserve mode manually if you want to, but there needs to be automation involved in the process as well to ensure the battery doesn't drain if you don't remember to enable power reserve mode or if the watch isn't even on your wrist at the time.
You can't really make a watch all that much thinner and still be able to spin that crown; it would start rubbing up against your skin and impede operation of the watch, as well as not feeling very classy...
I could also imagine Ive's hair falling out (all over again
Premium watches traditionally aren't very thin. It's not a thinness competition, like with laptops for example. You could argue in favor of just making the crown smaller for a thinner watch, but smaller wheels are also less precise; they spin at a higher gearing ratio when moved with your finger. Scrolling and zooming and whatnot could end up feeling fiddlier with a smaller crown, and that's something Apple would really hate.
Rather, I think they'd want to keep roughly the same internal volume (for the next couple updates anyway) and bump up battery life instead. At some point, maybe we will see a horizontally mounted crown instead, enabling a thinner watch profile, but if I was to guess I wouldn't expect any height slimming for the foreseeable future...
From what I've read, I believe, and would expect power reserve to engage automatically when battery capacity drops to a critical level. Yes, I hear you can put the watch into reserve mode manually if you want to, but there needs to be automation involved in the process as well to ensure the battery doesn't drain if you don't remember to enable power reserve mode or if the watch isn't even on your wrist at the time.
I wonder if the crown is there more as a way to lend some physical resemblance to a mechanical watch? Based on what I've seen in videos, it's not the best tool for the job. Ironically, a round watch face with a modern touch implementation of the old click-wheel around the edge would be more useful. I wonder if in a few years, when the mechanical watch ice age is firmly entrenched, and Apple is making most of the time-piece industry profits, if they will depart from the crown for a sleeker, narrower, body, with a touch-wheel like interface instead?
That's a subjective opinion; personally I prefer screens with corners, because that makes it easier to read text and array information efficiently. Just because analog watches are round doesn't mean we should chain ourselves to that format forever.
True. Maybe they just need to add a new circular touch gesture to zoom in (move your finger clockwise) and zoom out (counter-clockwise) on the screen... It would work fine even on a rectangular screen.
I still think the Crown is an unnecessary throwback to mechanical watches that needed winding. It allows Apple to more clearly position this up against traditional watches, rather than just compete with Google and Samsung in the nerdy gadget segment. It's hardware skumorphism.
Longer term, once the Apple Watch has established itself as a better watch, it has no reason to be maintained and the crown can be ditched in favor of something more user friendly.
Lol, how true!It's hardware skumorphism.
Anyway, I haven't had the opportunity to try the Watch myself, but from the demonstrations we've been shown the crown looks plenty user friendly to me at least. Of course, not everybody will like it - as with everything else - that's human and only to be expected.
The problem I'm having right now is that the Watch doesn't have an announced release date for my country yet. Usually we get new iPhones in the second release wave a month or two later after the first batch, so I'm hoping it won't take too long, but damn, is all this waiting infuriating or what!
Apple's obsession with thinness is always laid on the foundation of a certain battery life goal they set themselves. Like with the ipad, they make it thinner every year but only with keeping a certain battery life of at least 10 hours.
I dont think they have met their battery life goal of apple watch yet. I think it will only get thinner once they achieve 2 days of battery life.
I will buy one when the battery lasts for days and the CPU is stand alone and does not need a phone in your purse.
One way to do this is to use Liquid Metal. Apple invested in the leading company in thie area. Appropriately named Liquid Metal. They have a joint holding company for patents and exclusive rights to use in the consumer products area. This alloy is harder than the steel model. Other benefits too. That would be a killer product.
Don't think they can pull this – they would have to release Gen 2 in already 6 months or so for X-mas sales and IMO even Apple with their famous chutzpa knows that the anger of Gen 1 buyers would outweight the extra profit in the short term. But on the other side, who knows... Everything is possible.
Apple Watch S next year, Apple Watch 2 year after.
Are you serious? This is not an iPhone. Can you imagine Apple Watch Sport 5S or Apple Watch Edition 5S, how silly they sound. I how they keep the original names with each new model.
Who knows they might not even get updated every year like iPhones hence the removable battery. Updates might get new faces and UI update plus accessories plus bands and stands.
The Swatch Group has an exclusive license for Liquid Metal in timepieces, just as Apple has one for its use in consumer electronics.
So it depends on how the licenses are worded, but it's assumed that Apple would have to sublicense from Swatch, if that's even possible and if Swatch would be willing.
I'd guess they'd have a refresh cycle closer to Macbooks. Update internals every 18 months or so, but not the design. Maybe 3-4 years for design update? By then, they could have one with a much better battery in a thinner design, basically making it still have a one day battery. To get two full days in the same form factor would take a drastic change in battery tech I'd think.