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

Would you pay $10 a month for data plan on future versions of Apple Watch?

  • Yes

    Votes: 28 23.5%
  • No

    Votes: 91 76.5%

  • Total voters
    119
Nope I really hate the idea of having a cell phone with all that bad stuff attached to my wrist. I know Wifi and Blue tooth are not great but cell chips seem way worse.
 
Depends how they implemented it. When I first read this question, I thought it meant something different from what I realized it meant when I read everyone's responses. If it means having to have an additional data plan for the AppleWatch on top of what you already got for the iPhone, then that's a definite no from me too.

However, if they had meant that Apple was somehow getting into the data plan business and I could get a few GB of cellular data for my iPhone through Apple (instead of my carrier) for only 10 bucks a month, then I'd be well up for that! (not that I care too much about it being for the AppleWatch, but if your iPhone did that, then anyone who has an AppleWatch would be running their internet off that anyway!) But if I could use my iPhone anywhere and it was all connected to the internet for just 10 bucks a month through Apple, then that's an idea I really could support! So Apple, if you're wondering what to do as your next awesome business venture, just thought I'd put this out there as a positive suggestion, as you might find more people interested! All those in favor, say "i"!!
 
Same reason I don't care for a standalone GPS. If I'm going somewhere I would want a GPS, I'm not going without my phone.

Stand alone gps would be very helpful when running. One could run without the phone and get accurate readings.
 
Stand alone gps would be very helpful when running. One could run without the phone and get accurate readings.
I've said this in other threads, the power requirements for the GPS is such that it would drain the battery in no time flat.

I have a Fitbit surge whose battery lasts a week, but it will drain in 7 hours if the GPS is left on. So if a product that has a stated battery life of 7 days, will last mere hours, how much less will the apple watch will last when it can only last under 24 hours.
[doublepost=1464867867][/doublepost]As for the topic, I'd not want to pay just to make calls on my watch. Its a nice little feature that I've used on a few occasions but its not a feature that I use all the time, so paying monthly isn't something I'm open too.
 
I've said this in other threads, the power requirements for the GPS is such that it would drain the battery in no time flat.

I have a Fitbit surge whose battery lasts a week, but it will drain in 7 hours if the GPS is left on. So if a product that has a stated battery life of 7 days, will last mere hours, how much less will the apple watch will last when it can only last under 24 hours.
[doublepost=1464867867][/doublepost]As for the topic, I'd not want to pay just to make calls on my watch. Its a nice little feature that I've used on a few occasions but its not a feature that I use all the time, so paying monthly isn't something I'm open too.
It wouldn't be just for making calls, it would also include data and sms/mms, which means you could continue using your apps, receive notifications, and send/receive messages without your phone.
 
Not a chance. I'm almost always connected to WiFi except when I'm doing workouts outside. There isn't enough you can do on the Apple Watch to justify a monthly cellular charge. Big deal, I can receive messages, phone calls and emails without having my phone present. 95% of the time I have my phone, and as I said earlier, at least connected to WiFi.
 
Are you counting the currently crippled functionality in the watch (dictating the message/email rather than compose them discretely, etc.)?

I'm not likely to leave my iPhone behind as it's not always appropriate to dictate messages and you can't surf the web anyway on the AW.
I mean from the iPhone. I want to be able to use apps, make/receive phone calls/FaceTime, send/receive sms/iMessage, send/receive emails, surf the web, stream/download music/podcasts, gps maps, and even stream video. I want to be able to leave my phone behind and not feel like I'm losing any functionality, just the experience might be worse on certain things because of the smaller screen.
 
I mean from the iPhone. I want to be able to use apps, make/receive phone calls/FaceTime, send/receive sms/iMessage, send/receive emails, surf the web, stream/download music/podcasts, gps maps, and even stream video. I want to be able to leave my phone behind and not feel like I'm losing any functionality, just the experience might be worse on certain things because of the smaller screen.

Not to mention not being able to make the calls/compose messages discretely (unless you're using canned responses). You'd be stuck with having everyone listen in your calls/texts/email in public.
 
Last edited:
I could probably justify the $10 extra per month on my phone bill if the watch was capable of functioning independently of my phone. I could use it for fitness/exercise, hiking, phone calls and text, Apple Music, and short errands around town without having to drag along my bulky 6s Plus. It would also be great to be able to leave my house in a hurry, forgetting to grab my phone as I am prone to do, and not fear missing vital communication because I'd be wearing my watch. I would never use it for web surfing though. This is the main reason why I decided to skip the first generation Apple Watch. I am very interested in having one but don't need it if it can't function independently from the phone when need arises.
 
Apple Watch 2 with LTE? Seems awfully like

Motorola%20T720%20Pic.jpg


Small screen, check
can make and receive phone calls, check
limited input method, check
limited access to Internet, check

There's a reason I have a 5.5" computer in my pocket and not one of those.
 
If the watch was water proof and I could swim, shower etc and keep in touch with emails, texts and calls, then maybe, but only if it was about 2.50 a month.
 
If the watch was water proof and I could swim, shower etc and keep in touch with emails, texts and calls, then maybe, but only if it was about 2.50 a month.

Not sure what you mean because the AW is rated waterproof to 1 meter for 30 minutes and many here shower, swim, etc. with it with no ill effects even outside the scope of the IPX7 rating.
 
I pay AT&T enough (even with a FAN discount). I have no interest in giving them any more money than I already give them each month.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHNXX
I really want to know what people expect "web surfing" to be like on a watch.
Think of something like wap on old smartphones, or look at flipboard on the Apple Watch. I don't think anyone expects to be surfing for hours or even minutes on the watch, but more like looking up something real quick, or having the option to check something out if they don't have their phone.
 
No... don't want them adding a cellular radio to the watch. It will add significant battery drain and potentially heat to the watch. I won't ever be without my phone and the whole use case with the watch is to extend the iPhone... so don't think it will ever happen.
 
Nope - won't pay for cellular on a watch. Just independent Wi-Fi is fine. Just like my iPad.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.