I hope this is the case.
I wonder if we'll hear more concrete details about the watch in January.
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.
Apple Watch, how often will it get refreshed?
- Thread starter sap12690
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I hope this is the case.
I wonder if we'll hear more concrete details about the watch in January.
So you feel you would see millions (tens of millions?) of people all wanting their watch upgraded NOW!
Paying apple a few $100 and getting the same watch back, with all the past year or two's marks, dinks, scratches, but with new internals, and being happy about that?
Think about how people LOVE their new immaculate iPhone, iPad's etc etc, and they are not worn, can you imagine a "used/worn" watch with new internals making a typical Apple user happy ?
And, as I say, millions wanting their device upgraded all at the same time
Seems plausible to me and would be a win/win situation for Apple and potential Edition buyers. Apple would make a higher profit margin on an Edition upgrade than selling a new Sport watch and customers 'on the fence' would be more likely to invest a HUGE amount in the Edition knowing it would not be so quickly obsolete.
Of course what and why Apple will do is hard to predict with any accuracy. While not likely I thought there was a small chance Apple might release more 'teaser' info before Xmas to encourage people to wait on the aWatch. However we may end up waiting until a week or so before launch before much more info is released from Apple.
This would be fantastic!
I'd love for more than just the straps to be reusable on each iteration.
As an aside: am I the only one who HATES use of aWatch to mean Apple Watch?? I literally cringe every time I read it... I would have never thought a worse misappropriation of an Apple product name would show up after iTouch. Sadly, looks like I was wrong. =/
Too much to type Apple Watch every time when aWatch will do. Apple even shortens to
Watch on the Apple site so I don't see how it's a misappropriation in the way iTouch is just wrong.Also do you have a problem with aTV
apple:TV)? That has been used a while.
I kinda wish they had of got the guts not to call it a watch, when really, we all know, in reality it's not a watch. Not in the way we really think of as a watch.
It would of been nice if they had felt confident enough about it as a product to of called it some unique name, like iPad or iPod, something short and snappy and iconic as a new name.
Apple Watch is just a mouthful
It would of been nice if they had felt confident enough about it as a product to of called it some unique name, like iPad or iPod, something short and snappy and iconic as a new name.
Apple Watch is just a mouthful
Too much to type Apple Watch every time when aWatch will do. Apple even shortens to
Also do you have a problem with aTV
Image
Hmmm....
Lol, I dunno. Just my own eccentricity I suppose.
I love it when people type it:
Watch; that's exactly perfect... or writing out Apple Watch.For some reason aTV doesn't annoy me... probably because that's an acronym & not a smash up of letters that you pronounce, and letters that you don't pronounce.
And to be fair, aWatch is PRECISELY as accurate as iTouch... In one, the single letter in front is a lazy shortcut for writing "iPod", in the other, the single letter in front is a lazy shortcut for the word "Apple". No difference.
Hahaha... 1st world problem, for sure! =P
& I liked your comment btw, so please don't take my pointless word snobbery as any type of slight, sir!
I just was sooooo over the stupid "iTouch" nicknaming fad, but never mentioned this pet peeve to anyone & this now occupies the same headspace... Just thought I'd casually bring it up to see if I was alone .
The problem with calling it a watch is that it implies the
Watch should conform to the general notions and schema of what a watch is.When you remove the small things that differentiate one watch brand from another, you'll find that most watches are pretty much the same. They are small, generally round pieced of technology which exist to perform one function. That function being telling time.
Aside from getting smaller, timepieces haven't really changed all that much in the past few hundred years. When we talk about next generation wearable technology, the sky is the limit with what can be done. It's a completely new category of product, one which shouldn't be forced to conform to the schema of any pre-existing category of product that came before it; in this cast the wristwatch.
In trying to force the
Watch to conform to the notions of what a watch should be Apple is completely missing the point, and essentially limiting the potential of what next-gen wearable technology can or should be. /rant
The problem with calling it a watch is that it implies the
When you remove the small things that differentiate one watch brand from another, you'll find that most watches are pretty much the same. They are small, generally round pieced of technology which exist to perform one function. That function being telling time.
Aside from getting smaller, timepieces haven't really changed all that much in the past few hundred years. When we talk about next generation wearable technology, the sky is the limit with what can be done. It's a completely new category of product, one which shouldn't be forced to conform to the schema of any pre-existing category of product that came before it; in this cast the wristwatch.
In trying to force the
/rant
iPhone has phone in its name yet the phone part of the device is probably the least used feature this day. I don't think using watch in the name limits the potential of the device anymore than using phone in iPhone limits that device. Honestly I think something like the Almost 360 is moreso conforming to "what the notions of a watch should be". Their #1 priority was that the face had to be round because most traditional watch faces are round.
You mean like Microsoft did with Microsoft Band?
iPod and iPad are iconic now but they weren't when first announced. Lots of people made fun of the iPad name, comparing it to feminine hygiene products.
I'm not sure how calling it Watch means they're not confident about the product. Most people expected it to be called iWatch. Had Apple done that though people would probably be calling it creepy.
I don't know what you call a device that sits on your wrist and performs all kinds of different functions, including telling time. Do you have any suggestions for some short, snappy iconic name?
Hmmm....
Lol, I dunno. Just my own eccentricity I suppose.
I love it when people type it:
No doubt we all have our own little eccentricities that bug us.
Trust me when I say I dislike it when anonymous people type you can believe me or trust me on this.
Also I literally become ill when I see literally used 95% of the time.
Just a little difficulty with using
Watch though. You can't see it on Windows PC and it's limited to the MacRumors forum. About as close as you can come is ��Watch or ��Watch unless there is another unicode I'm not aware of.EDIT: Looks like MacRumors' forum doesn't properly show emojis.
The original iPhone was more of a glorified smartphone with an impressive touchscreen than it was a next gen future device. From a functionality standpoint, my Nokia communicator could do more than the iPhone initially. In that sense, it was still very much a phone.
It didn't even have sms messaging or apps for quite a while.
Apple has certainly tried their hardest to make it look like a boring traditional wristwatch. If it's so different than a watch and has so many different features and attributes, why bother calling it a watch at all?
Last edited:
Semantics in names. Remember a watch is a clock and was called a (portable) clock for a long time. It got the name watch from a slang usage and at the time one could easily say it's NOT a watch.
I would think the only version that would have upgradeable parts is the edition. The other version will probably be updated yearly.
People spent $650+ every year to upgrade their phones, they will do it with this. I'm sure the carriers will start to sell it on EIP at some point.
People spent $650+ every year to upgrade their phones, they will do it with this. I'm sure the carriers will start to sell it on EIP at some point.
Jony Ive said they called it a watch but could have called it just about anything. My guess is because it's wrist worn they chose watch.
Personally I'm not convinced by the upgrade YOUR watch concept.
Even with the edition.
Swap it over for a new one for a fee yes, but taking it apart and placing new insides into possibly an edition body with 1 or 2 years of wear/tear/dinks/knocks......
I struggle with that concept, that people would want it, and the time/issues to do it.
It's far easier for everyone to just take a free, hand your old edition in, and get the latest edition back and fitted to your current strap.
You get a new "Looking" watch with latest internals, you keep the strap you like, and it's quick and easy at the store.
No arguments about OMG you scratched my gold case when you upgraded it, that was perfect when I gave it to you etc etc.
well considering its not even out yet, i doubt it will be refreshed as quickly as any other product...
I reckon it will go the way of Apple TV.
But that's just my view..
But it's easy to say that since its not even an official product yet.
On the other hand, it could be the fastest free fall we'll ever see.
I reckon it will go the way of Apple TV.
But that's just my view..
But it's easy to say that since its not even an official product yet.
On the other hand, it could be the fastest free fall we'll ever see.
Or it may just depend on how fast the competition advances. We all know that apple releasing a watch will cause a massive surge in the smartwatch market. If 8-10 months later android wear has evolved into something really great w/ watches lasting 5-7 days on a single charge, they will have to keep pace. Not to mention the fact it is not waterproof is a huge downside. I think the applewatch would be great to use in the shower, where my phone cannot go. They need it to be waterproof!
At the end of the day, the market will likely decide this........
If people are willing to go through an annual upgrade cycle for their Apple Watch then Apple will undoubtedly capture that demand. But no-one forces a user to upgrade, and so if the demand isn't there (as is the case with Apple TV) then there is no reason for an annual refresh cycle. Apple could continue to sell and market the same version for a few years, and make lots of money through incremental sales to new iPhone/Mac users, just like with ATV. This is also no different to the situation with Macs. They release updated hardware each year (usually minor changes) but don't expect every Mac user to rush out and upgrade.
i am a self confessed Apple fanboy and love to have their latest products. Yet that is my decision. If I can't afford the products then I don't buy it. I think it is crazy that people on here would criticise Apple for daring to consider releasing a better version of something in the future!!! Unfortunately, with any electronic purchase - the day after you purchase there is likely an improved product in the pipeline. That doesn't mean the product you have is suddenly bad.
My own opinion on the watch is that there will be incremental updates (better processor etc.) made each year, but they won't market these like they do with iPhone upgrades. They will likely go somewhat unnoticed by the average consumer. At the same time, new straps or maybe even colours will be released (perhaps special edition models) building up to a major refresh every 2 or 3 years.
If people are willing to go through an annual upgrade cycle for their Apple Watch then Apple will undoubtedly capture that demand. But no-one forces a user to upgrade, and so if the demand isn't there (as is the case with Apple TV) then there is no reason for an annual refresh cycle. Apple could continue to sell and market the same version for a few years, and make lots of money through incremental sales to new iPhone/Mac users, just like with ATV. This is also no different to the situation with Macs. They release updated hardware each year (usually minor changes) but don't expect every Mac user to rush out and upgrade.
i am a self confessed Apple fanboy and love to have their latest products. Yet that is my decision. If I can't afford the products then I don't buy it. I think it is crazy that people on here would criticise Apple for daring to consider releasing a better version of something in the future!!! Unfortunately, with any electronic purchase - the day after you purchase there is likely an improved product in the pipeline. That doesn't mean the product you have is suddenly bad.
My own opinion on the watch is that there will be incremental updates (better processor etc.) made each year, but they won't market these like they do with iPhone upgrades. They will likely go somewhat unnoticed by the average consumer. At the same time, new straps or maybe even colours will be released (perhaps special edition models) building up to a major refresh every 2 or 3 years.
Hardware updates like the mac or iPod product cycles hopefully....maybe introduce refreshed bands every 6 months (or seasonal)?
People here are putting their money on a yearly update and claiming they wouldn't be surprised to see a 2nd gen Apple watch late 2015 but, IMHO Apple tried really hard and struggled to get the Apple Watch ready for holiday season of 2014.(remember the rumours?) Yet they failed to do so and as much as we can see they're still not finished with many areas including software and hardware, so much that even at the introduction they didn't give too much detail on a lot of things. (no information on some features like battery life even)
So I'm guessing they're putting their 100% in this first gen watch. After the first Apple watch comes out around March 2015, then they could start working on the second one. With a minor update yes they could technically get something out there by the holiday season of 2015 but it wouldn't be a major improvement right? At least that's what I lead to with common logic.
So I'm guessing they're putting their 100% in this first gen watch. After the first Apple watch comes out around March 2015, then they could start working on the second one. With a minor update yes they could technically get something out there by the holiday season of 2015 but it wouldn't be a major improvement right? At least that's what I lead to with common logic.
I really don't think this is how it works.
Things like chips they don't just finish off a few days before mass consumer production starts.
I would think they chip was set in stone some time ago, and they already have people busy now, today, working on the chip for the next model.
Like if you recall the news that Samsung is NOW gearing up for Apple A9 chip production for next years products, and that must mean the A9 is already designed, I'm sure some areas of Apple are perhaps even prototyping the second watch now, you have to work this way in reality.
So what do you think kept them from making the watch ready for holiday season? Surely there are many other important components that go into a product besides the chip. Just because supposedly Apple Watch 2's chip design being ready doesn't mean it'll refresh very quickly.
In the end it'll probably turn out to be that way (yearly cycle) because that's what consumer tech is all about(capitalism) anyways but I'm just contemplating.
The software.
All of the early previews of the Apple Watch have said the software was unfinished and the watches have limited functionality.