Worth getting cellular for Apple Watch?

[net777]

Sorry for my english, I am from Sweden.

I was thinking that if you have cellular you doesn´t need the phone.

But if someone sends an sms it would still go to your phone because the sim in your watch would have a different number.

How far from you phone can you be from the phone if it is going to send messages to you phone?

Why would you buy a cellular?

 

[oeagleo]

The phone and watch are totally independent from each other, but the numbers are linked. If anything goes to the phone, it's automatically forwarded to the watch, so any SMS messages would be showing up on your watch, no matter how far you are from your phone. Essentially it's like the message is being sent to both numbers.

 

[BigMcGuire]

I initially thought cellular would be great but when I saw that the AW 4 cellular was $500+ I said no thanks. That and Verizon Wireless charges $13 (after taxes estimated) for the AW to be on my cellular plan. So not only am I paying more for the cellular watch, over the course of several years I'll pay the cost of another Apple Watch. For that price, I can continue to use my waist band for my phone when I go jogging.

It is nice, but it is costly.

In regards to your question - I've seen people with just Apple Watches (cellular - red dot on their turn wheel) - it works fine without the phone being near by. Most people I've seen use Siri more than anything to ask questions and receive text messages from loved ones. My professor did this a lot - even asking Siri math questions during class - it was pretty cool.

 

[AlliFlowers]

I turned off my cell service to my AW3 for a few months. It was such a relief to turn it back on. I dislike being tied to my phone all the time. I can run to the store and leave the phone at home; all the while receiving and replying to texts, AND paying for my groceries.

 

[net777]

Great! thanks for your replies!

Seems worth it but is costly.

 

[bambooshots]

In my experience, no.

But of course, YMMV.

 

[net777]

In my experience, no.

But of course, YMMV.

So why not for you?

 

[RichardMZhlubb]

I think that the upfront and monthly expense of cellular on the watch is only justifiable if there are going to be times that you absolutely need online connectivity and won’t have your phone with you. I am never in that situation because I never go anywhere without my phone, so I get along fine with my non-cellular watch.

 

[myapple2019]

Great! thanks for your replies!

Seems worth it but is costly.

It is totally worth it. I love to be freed from iPhone during workout or any occasions when carrying iPhone causing inconvenience but can still call, receive phone call, text messages and emails. I can turn off my iPhone and still can call, receive phone call, text and email. Overall, the extra cost is for convenience. If you can afford it, your budget allows it and/or you like to have conveniences I mentioned, why not get it?

 

[44267547]

I think that the upfront and monthly expense of cellular on the watch is only justifiable if there are going to be times that you absolutely need online connectivity and won’t have your phone with you.

What you listed is one tangent why someone would want LTE for the Apple Watch, but the secondary reason you and others seem to miss, is that the LTE Apple Watch will now freely allow you to stream your music from your Apple Watch directly to your AirPods as example. Huge advantage when you don’t want to have your phone with you in the gym/walks/runs, ect.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

I got cellular with my new Series 4 (purchased at the beginning of the year - had a Series 0 before that), mostly for the sake of experimentation. I've yet to enable the feature. The only time I leave home without my phone is by accident, and that particular accident is very infrequent - I've had a cell phone in my pocket since the late '90s, so it's a very ingrained habit. I'm as likely to leave home without a phone as I am to leave home without my wallet or keys.

I'm a hiker, not a runner. While carrying one less bit of gear might make sense, I also take a lot of photos, use Car Play and Maps on the way to my hiking destinations, and want a larger screen for hiking maps. I'd certainly feel better having my iPhone with me than leaving it in a car that may be subject to break-in. About the only factor I can think of that fits into my hiking habits is to have a backup phone in case of emergency. As I nearly always hike with others (who also carry smartphones), even that's an unlikely scenario.

I might try leaving my phone behind when I take my daily exercise walk around town, but since the phone isn't really a burden or bother to begin with...

I appreciate that some people would like a symbolic vacation from their smartphones without being totally untethered. It's just not me. My iPhone is a delight, not a burden (It ain't heavy, it's my iPhone...). I really enjoy my Watch, too - it enhances and extends the benefits of the phone. I'm just not ready to fly solo.

My original thought was for my aging dad, who is at risk for falls and is less likely to remember to carry his iPhone with him. I'm not convinced, based on the way he uses his iPhone (and due to certain dexterity and memory issues), that he'd use it effectively. But one of these days I'll pair it to his iPhone and see how it works for him. If he takes to it, he'll keep this one (cellular-enabled), and I'll likely get a non-cellular for myself.

 

[GomerBoy]

I have my phone with me wherever I go, except for when I run (twice a week, each for a hour). So for me, it doesn’t make much sense to pay the monthly fee for LTE on the watch. For my needs, I am perfectly content with just the WiFi version.

 

[keeper]

I got cellular for going out on my bike, but found it was better to take an old iPhone 4s

 

[RichardMZhlubb]

What you listed is one tangent why someone would want LTE for the Apple Watch, but the secondary reason you and others seem to miss, is that the LTE Apple Watch will now freely allow you to stream your music from your Apple Watch directly to your AirPods as example. Huge advantage when you don’t want to have your phone with you in the gym/walks/runs, ect.

If that’s the primary reason to get a cellular watch (being able to stream audio content to your cellular watch when you don’t have your phone), you’re paying $100 in hardware costs and $120/year for cellular access just for that convenience. I’d rather just save the money and download content to my watch before hitting the gym.

 

[MisterSavage]

If I was a runner I would get it but I really don't have a need for cellular on my watch. I've actually been quite shocked at how far I can get away from my phone and still have my watch communicate with it. At work my phone isn't connected to Wifi and when I leave it on my desk I'm always surprised when I get a text alert when I'm a good deal away from it.

 

[LizKat]

I think that the upfront and monthly expense of cellular on the watch is only justifiable if there are going to be times that you absolutely need online connectivity and won’t have your phone with you. I am never in that situation because I never go anywhere without my phone, so I get along fine with my non-cellular watch.

I agree. And on that basis it couldn't possibly be worth it to me. I spend most of my time in areas without a reliable cell signal.

 

[44267547]

If that’s the primary reason to get a cellular watch (being able to stream audio content to your cellular watch when you don’t have your phone), you’re paying $100 in hardware costs and $120/year for cellular access just for that convenience. I’d rather just save the money and download content to my watch before hitting the gym.

Well no, that wouldn’t be a primary reason (I assume for most), I would say that would probably be mainly secondary. My point was, there are a lot of consumers who have no idea that’s actually a capability for the Apple Watch where they can stream music directly from the watch to their AirPods, while leaving their iPhone behind. To me and some others, that’s a huge advantage if you’re someone that’s into running/walking or even in the gym where you don’t have to have your iPhone with you, especially being how large they are today.

I mean, nothing vexes me more than carrying a large phone around with me in the gym when I can just stream my music directly from my Apple Watch to my AirPods, massive advantage to anyone in the fitness aspect of that.

 

[RichardMZhlubb]

Well no, that wouldn’t be a primary reason (I assume for most), I would say that would probably be mainly secondary. My point was, there are a lot of consumers who have no idea that’s actually a capability for the Apple Watch where they can stream music directly from the watch to their AirPods, while leaving their iPhone behind. To me and some others, that’s a huge advantage if you’re someone that’s into running/walking or even in the gym where you don’t have to have your iPhone with you, especially being how large they are today.

I mean, nothing vexes me more than carrying a large phone around with me in the gym when I can just stream my music directly from my Apple Watch to my AirPods, massive advantage to anyone in the fitness aspect of that.

Thanks. I see the benefits, but you can also listen to music from the watch on AirPods even when you don't have your phone, as long as you previously downloaded it to the watch.

 

[Itinj24]

I will never be without an LTE version. One reason only. Emergency backup. And it did save my ass a few times. Once when my iPhone died on me. Literally shut itself off in the middle of a YouTube video and went DOA. Couldn’t get to an Apple Store till later the next day and needed my phone for work. All the other things that go along with the LTE version are perks. I will gladly pay the ~ 0.33c to 0.40c a day for this.

 

[nikkisharif]

For me, it’s worth it! I like being able to walk/run & do yoga without my phone & wallet, but still have a device with me in case of emergency or if I needed to buy something. I discovered early on that I wouldn’t remember to download music to my watch, so I turned on cellular and haven’t looked back. I also like the fact that I can listen to podcasts or random radio stations. I’m not one that likes to workout to the same thing all the time.

FYI...Watch pairs with any Bluetooth device. I don’t own AirPods

 

[TheSkywalker77]

Depends on what you use it for. If you're always going to have your phone with you in your pocket, then no. If you're intending on keeping your phone at home while you ruin quick errands or go for a jog, etc, then you should probably get the cellular model.

I was thinking that if you have cellular you doesn´t need the phone.

You still need a phone to setup and use your watch, but with the cellular model you don't need the phone with you constantly.

But if someone sends an sms it would still go to your phone because the sim in your watch would have a different number.

They're individual sims with individual cell plans, but the number is shared. So texts and calls you get will still go to your phone and watch.

How far from you phone can you be from the phone if it is going to send messages to you phone?

If you have the cellular watch you don't need your phone with you to send messages. (from my knowledge)

Why would you buy a cellular?

I covered that above.

 

[rugmankc]

It is totally worth it. I love to be freed from iPhone during workout or any occasions when carrying iPhone causing inconvenience but can still call, receive phone call, text messages and emails. I can turn off my iPhone and still can call, receive phone call, text and email. Overall, the extra cost is for convenience. If you can afford it, your budget allows it and/or you like to have conveniences I mentioned, why not get it?

^^
THIS

 

[212rikanmofo]

Would also be useful for people who work in warehouse, where they don't allow phones.

 

[tgara]

I think that the upfront and monthly expense of cellular on the watch is only justifiable if there are going to be times that you absolutely need online connectivity and won’t have your phone with you. I am never in that situation because I never go anywhere without my phone, so I get along fine with my non-cellular watch.

The stainless steel and Hermès versions of the watch that me and my wife have, respectively, come with LTE as a standard feature, but we’ve never activated it because we always have our phones nearby. For us, the LTE simply isn’t needed. In addition, I’ve given 3-4 watches as gifts to friends and family, but they have all been aluminum models without LTE for the same reason.

 

[44267547]

Would also be useful for people who work in warehouse, where they don't allow phones.

You would think so, but the problem is, a lot of employers have even banned smart watches from work places. Because of reasons like this, where they know that watches can be used now as a way of communication device similarly to the iPhone, etc. When I was a Loss Prevention investigator [Prior to my L.E. Career], One of my side responsibilities was to CCTV monitor a fairly large warehouse (For OSHA Regulations) with hundreds of forklifts being operated with inside of it. And of course, you would have employees who would look at their smart watch or even accept a call on their smart watch when operating a forklift, which is why they were banned, because of safety concerns and they still treat it like it’s a phone in the workplace, because essentially, it is.