Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Poor battery life keeps me uninterested. I was hoping for a new ultra, but as that one didn't materialize I'll just keep waiting with my series 5 watch. Faster charging is nice, having to charge twice a day is not. I'll buy a new one when I can rely on the watch to comfortably hold a charge for a full day and night EVEN IF I ACTUALLY USE IT.

I thought I'd be ok with the battery life and charging speeds of my current one, but in reality it's a nightmare. Half the time the watch is out of power when I need it. So these lukewarm updates can be bought by those who want a marginal update. I'll wait for something more concrete.
Just get the ultra. I go on 6 mile run on Saturday morning listening to music and dont need to charge until Monday morning. It's been pretty great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mech986
Too bad since the Series 10 is quite superior to the Ultra in several ways that matter to people who aren't rugged outdoorsmen.
In several ways????
My Ultra 2 has 2 GPS frequencies, is more water resistant, has an action button, a brighter screen just to name a few - turn it over to you to name the superiorities of the 10
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Cirillo Gherardo
All I want to see is someone to put the new 42mm next to an old 44mm.
Seriously, so do I, this year both iphone and watches have new sizes and so far no one's comparing them. The closest thing is the AR feature on the app but even then it's not accurate
 
There’s a titanium link band for the polished series 10 titanium. I’m saying that would match great with the ultra models

Link to that link band please? All the link bracelets I see are stainless steel, even though the colors are updated to match the new titanium S10's.
 
In several ways????
My Ultra 2 has 2 GPS frequencies, is more water resistant, has an action button, a brighter screen just to name a few - turn it over to you to name the superiorities of the 10

Sure. :)

S10 models are smaller, thinner, lighter, and less expensive than the Ultra 2. The 46mm S10 display is also larger - more pixels and more display area - than the Ultra 2.

Choose which fits your individual preferences. I've yet to find any issues with the basic L1 GPS, water resistance, or 2000 nit screen brightness on prior models, so the differences you cite don't seem to have any value in my use cases. Your may well be different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mech986 and mvdrl
Sure. :)

S10 models are smaller, thinner, lighter, and less expensive than the Ultra 2. The 46mm S10 display is also larger - more pixels and more display area - than the Ultra 2.

Choose which fits your individual preferences. I've yet to find any issues with the basic L1 GPS, water resistance, or 2000 nit screen brightness on prior models, so the differences you cite don't seem to have any value in my use cases. Your may well be different.
Form factor isn't really a "superiority" it's just a preference. Nor is cost — that's like saying the MBA is superior to the Mac Pro because it's cheaper and portable, even though it would conk out doing tasks that the Pro wouldn't break a sweat over.

The regular watches and the Ultras serve separate audiences with different needs, just like the Mac Pro has a very specific user base with specific needs. Even though I don't own an Ultra and have no plans to get one, I think it's very hard to say that it is inferior to the regular Watches outside of personal preference over aesthetics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mech986 and jz0309
Sure. :)

S10 models are smaller, thinner, lighter, and less expensive than the Ultra 2. The 46mm S10 display is also larger - more pixels and more display area - than the Ultra 2.

Choose which fits your individual preferences. I've yet to find any issues with the basic L1 GPS, water resistance, or 2000 nit screen brightness on prior models, so the differences you cite don't seem to have any value in my use cases. Your may well be different.
The post I was responding to called the 10 “superior in several ways” without giving any details, so I challenged that post but other than a “laughing” reaction I did t get a response…

And sure, everyone has different needs and 10 and Ultra meet different peoples requirements, or not
 
i am currently on an SE 2nd gen that i got temporarily in Jan 2024 while waiting for S10, and cant wait to set it up on friday.

Before that i had an S6 that randomly got hardware issues, no applecare, and they told me i can either "fix" it for 399 or trade it in for 115, so I put it towards that SE, and i really miss not having an AOD lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: mech986
Form factor isn't really a "superiority" it's just a preference. Nor is cost — that's like saying the MBA is superior to the Mac Pro because it's cheaper and portable, even though it would conk out doing tasks that the Pro wouldn't break a sweat over.

The regular watches and the Ultras serve separate audiences with different needs, just like the Mac Pro has a very specific user base with specific needs. Even though I don't own an Ultra and have no plans to get one, I think it's very hard to say that it is inferior to the regular Watches outside of personal preference over aesthetics.

My post was semi tongue in cheek, but you're echoing the point I was intending -- superior isn't really an objective measure in this sort stuff, but rather is subjective to the individuals needs/preferences/budget. What is the best option for one person may be different for another.



The post I was responding to called the 10 “superior in several ways” without giving any details, so I challenged that post but other than a “laughing” reaction I did t get a response…

And sure, everyone has different needs and 10 and Ultra meet different peoples requirements, or not

Fair enough, hadn't focused on every single post, but replied to make the point described above.

The two models each aim to fit different sets of needs, and thus neither can really be objectively superior over the other.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Webcat86
The S10 seems like a good response to the folks that were put off from the size of the Ultra. It’s basically an Ultra that trades nits, depth rating, and runtime for size reduction and weight reduction. I consider the 516 pixel difference a wash. Offering lower price for glass vs sapphire seems reasonable too. Like-to-like $100 price difference seems mostly a wash too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mvdrl and james2538
I'm receiving mine hopefully on Friday.
I'll keep it if two conditions are met :
  1. I want it to resist some scratch tests on the new Jet Black color... YouTubers, I'm calling for you
  2. I want to confidently know Canada will have Sleep Apnea detection at some point. It's absent from https://www.apple.com/ca/apple-watch-series-10/
 
Sure. :)

S10 models are smaller, thinner, lighter, and less expensive than the Ultra 2. The 46mm S10 display is also larger - more pixels and more display area - than the Ultra 2.

Choose which fits your individual preferences. I've yet to find any issues with the basic L1 GPS, water resistance, or 2000 nit screen brightness on prior models, so the differences you cite don't seem to have any value in my use cases. Your may well be different.
they all run the same outdated Watch OS from 5,6,7,8,9, and now 10. There's very little difference in day-to-day use.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: jblank and jz0309
I went from the 6 to 9 and it was a big difference, so to anyone saying they're not inclined to upgrade from 6/7 because it's not worth it, I will say that you'll be surprised.
I’m still on the 6, what felt like the biggest difference to you upgrading to the 9?
 
  • Like
Reactions: michaelant
they all run the same outdated Watch OS from 5,6,7,8,9, and now 10. There's very little difference in day-to-day use.

you keep saying this (or similar) yet never suggest exactly what should be changed.

What do you think should be made different in watchOS to make it "better"? What suggestions have you made to Apple's product feedback page?

... and yes, a mature product tends to see incremental changes - especially with an annual release cycle. And online content producers tend towards hyperbole to induce clicks and thus revenue.
 
how exactly is it NOT dated? It's literally same Watch OS last 8+ years. Every year we get 1 or 2 new complications. That's it. What else did it add that's really considered newsworthy? At the end of the day, it's still mostly used for getting notifications. Kind of sad.
I couldn't agree more. I do think some sort of design change, both with the case AND with the appearance of the OS, is in order. I love Apple but they seem to be resting on their laurels quite a bit lately. I'm showing my age with the use of that saying, aren't I?
 
you keep saying this (or similar) yet never suggest exactly what should be changed.

What do you think should be made different in watchOS to make it "better"? What suggestions have you made to Apple's product feedback page?

... and yes, a mature product tends to see incremental changes - especially with an annual release cycle. And online content producers tend towards hyperbole to induce clicks and thus revenue.
I mean, is it my job to add new features? Apple employees hundreds of thousands of engineers and it's obvious their focus is not on the Apple Watch. They got moved to build flopped Vision Pro and then had to be moved back to work on Apple Intelligence. Apple got caught with their pants down so to speak.

I'm just pointing out the obvious. Mature or not, entire Apple Watch lineup and Watch OS have been stagnant for a long time. It's funny reading people think it's a staggering upgrade to go to 10. They are literally the same thing.You are happy the first day you get the 10, then after 3 days you are wondering how come it's exactly the same as last 5 generation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1Peace
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.