Apple watch series 2 - not waterproof up to 50m

[frifra]

Hi guys,

just to avoid watergate when aw series 2 comes out: AW series 2 is not waterproof for up to 50m of diving even though it was mentioned in the macrumors video about the top 5 facts about the aw series 2.

Video Macrumors:

0:58

"The apple watch is now waterproof, you can swim with it up to 50m deep and that is quite a bit ..."

"Water Resistant 50 Meters" does mean:

Suitable for swimming, white water rafting, non-snorkeling water related work, and fishing.

Not suitable for diving.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark

During the keynote the following was stated:

Apple keynote

36:00 Min

...but what that means is, the watch needs to withstand the pressure, the water pressure equivalent of being at a depth of 50m and that is pretty deep and ...

So, I assume some people just misinterpreted this statement.


Edit: Tl;Dr

Some more info for people which might find the thread to long to read:

50m water resistant is equal to 5bar. At a depth of 10m a pressure of 2 bar is experienced, thus 5 bar are experienced at 40m. Now you might think you won't dive 40m anyways.

But as a result of movements in the water, such as a forceful swimming motion or a stroke on the water, the resulting dynamic pressure can exceed the specified static pressure many times over, thereby impairing the predetermined watertightness of the watch.

Now think about jumping from a 3/5/10m board into a pool.

 

[NT1440]

Hi guys,

just to avoid watergate when aw series 2 comes out: AW series 2 is not waterproof for up to 50m of diving even though it was mentioned in a similiar way during the key note and in the macrumors video about the top 5 facts about the aw series 2.

"Water Resistant 50 Meters" does mean:

You mean the crystal clear explanation at the Keynote wasn't enough? Swim with it, don't go scuba diving with it.

 

[OllyW]

Hi guys,

just to avoid watergate when aw series 2 comes out: AW series 2 is not waterproof for up to 50m of diving even though it was mentioned in a similiar way during the key note and in the macrumors video about the top 5 facts about the aw series 2.

"Water Resistant 50 Meters" does mean:

The emphasis was definitely focused on 'swimming' during the keynote and I can't recall any claims being made that it was suitable for diving.

Apple Watch Series 2 has a water resistance rating of 50 metres under ISO standard 22810:2010. This means that it may be used for shallow-water activities like swimming in a pool or ocean. However, Apple Watch Series 2 should not be used for scuba diving, waterskiing or other activities involving high-velocity water or submersion below shallow depth. Stainless steel and leather straps are not water resistant.

 

[frifra]

The emphasis was definitely focused on 'swimming' during the keynote and I can't recall any claims being made that it was suitable for diving.

Well, macrumors clearly understood it differently and in some threads here you can read the same expectations. I edited my 1st post and added a quote. I will have a look through the keynote again.

 

[eastwoodandy]

Thanks for the clarification.

How can you swim to a depth of 50m? Surely the 50m classification makes no sense!

 

[matrix07]

Apple doesn't said you can scuba with Watch serie 2, and there's no scuba app presented so no false advertising from them.
I guess the diffrence is the Watch can withstand water at 50 M. just for a short period of time.

 

[eastwoodandy]

Apple doesn't said you can scuba with Watch serie 2, and there's no scuba app presented so no false advertising from them.
I guess the diffrence is the Watch can withstand water at 50 M. just for a short period of time.

I'm not accusing Apple of being misleading, it's the classifications that are wrong IMO.

Essentially, 50m means don't go below 1m. It also says no sudden pressure changes, so it's impossible to be at 50m for a short period of time. It's a useless definition of 50m

 

[NT1440]

I'm not accusing Apple of being misleading, it's the classifications that are wrong IMO.

Essentially, 50m means don't go below 1m. It also says no sudden pressure changes, so it's impossible to be at 50m for a short period of time. It's a useless definition of 50m

....Wurt.

50m does NOT mean don't go below one meter. WTF are you talking about? The 50m is the marker for the IP rating the device has. Frankly, I'd love to see what happens to you with sudden pressure change from 1m to anywhere near 50m. You're the one that's going to have a severe problem with that pressure change, the watch would be the least of your worries.

 

[matrix07]

I'm not accusing Apple of being misleading, it's the classifications that are wrong IMO.

Essentially, 50m means don't go below 1m. It also says no sudden pressure changes, so it's impossible to be at 50m for a short period of time. It's a useless definition of 50m

Where does it say you can't go below 1 meter?

 

[eastwoodandy]

....Wurt.

50m does NOT mean don't go below one meter. WTF are you talking about? The 50m is the marker for the IP rating the device has. Frankly, I'd love to see what happens to you with sudden pressure change from 1m to anywhere near 50m. You're the one that's going to have a severe problem with that pressure change, the watch would be the least of your worries.

Have you read the link, it says NO snorkelling, NO diving. It's a misleading classification.

In what situation is it suitable for 50m? None from what I can see. So it might as well say 1m.

 

[NT1440]

Have you read the link, it says NO snorkelling, NO diving. It's a misleading classification.

In what situation is it suitable for 50m? None from what I can see. So it might as well say 1m.

It's suited for a static pressure load at 50m underwater, which is not the same as the forces applied when motion is involved. Apple doesn't create the IP certifications nor the ISO one, but I thought they did a pretty damn clear job of describing it at the keynote. They even listed the EXACT specification you can look up, but you didn't do that, you just wiki'd a totally different spec for some reason.

 

[oftheheavens]

they say that stuff because when you go to those depths you usually aren't there for 1-5 seconds you are there observing the wildlife, fighting off sharks, or discovering buried treasure which has you down there as long as you can hold your breath or as long as your air tanks allow.

The watch is rated to be exposed to those depths for short periods of time and probably not on a normal reoccurring occasion so lets stop talking silly and just come to the agreement that the AW2 is waterproof within the common sense standards of not going deep sea wreck diving with it. k?

 

[telefono]

It's water resistant to the equivalent pressure of 50mt. Apple isn't misleading anyone, some people are misunderstanding what 50mt means in watch terms.

Do your research, it's very interesting and you will learn something.

 

[oftheheavens]

It's water resistant to the equivalent pressure of 50mt. Apple isn't misleading anyone, some people are misunderstanding what 50mt means in watch terms.

Do your research, it's very interesting and you will learn something.

no need for him to research i left a very scientific explanation in the post just above yours ;-)

 

[mallbritton]

they say that stuff because when you go to those depths you usually aren't there for 1-5 seconds you are there observing the wildlife, fighting off sharks, or discovering buried treasure which has you down there as long as you can hold your breath or as long as your air tanks allow.

Ha! Thanks for a really good laugh at your vivid description this morning. FYI, according to the SSI recreational dive tables, a diver using regular air would get 5 minutes of bottom time at 40m (which is the maximum limit for recreational diving). So you wouldn't be fighting off sharks for very long before you had to, slowly, return to the surface. Heh.

 

[eastwoodandy]

no need for him to research i left a very scientific explanation in the post just above yours ;-)

Why don't you all read my posts. At no point did I say Apple is misleading anyone.

In every post I have explained that the classification is misleading.

It pretty much says don't use at 50m, so why state that in the standards? The 100m rating says suitable for surfing, which implies the 50m isn't. The 50m isn't suitable for diving or snorkelling, I have scuba dived several times and snorkelled a lot. The standard is pretty much saying there is no real world scenario where 50m water usage is valid.

If it says not suitable for snorkelling or diving, does that mean at any depth?

 

[oftheheavens]

Ha! Thanks for a really good laugh at your vivid description this morning. FYI, according to the SSI recreational dive tables, a diver using regular air would get 5 minutes of bottom time at 40m (which is the maximum limit for recreational diving). So you wouldn't be fighting off sharks for very long before you had to, slowly, return to the surface. Heh.

during that ascent and at your decompression level off you can be swinging your underwater clipboard and pencil trying to take out their teeth so you don't get as many holes in you as they start to chow down. Using nitrox or, if you're a billy bad a$$, trimix you could be fighting mermaids and their shark body guards for quite some time at 40m but at this point your AW2 has imploded and you have lost track of your HR spelling certain disaster as the mermaid shaman casts a HR enhanced speed spell. Without your AW2 which due to being at the near max rated depth, but wailing about fighting sharks and mermaids, has obviously rendered it useless and your life comes to an end when the mermaid shaman asks one question

"I will spare you if you can answer this question right now"
you say "blub blub bluuuub"
her response and question "what time is it right now"

"sahdhashfhadsfhghfawhhblublblubblub"....dead.
[doublepost=1473430417][/doublepost]

Why don't you all read my posts. At no point did I say Apple is misleading anyone.

In every post I have explained that the classification is misleading.

It pretty much says don't use at 50m, so why state that in the standards? The 100m rating says suitable for surfing, which implies the 50m isn't. The 50m isn't suitable for diving or snorkelling, I have scuba dived several times and snorkelled a lot. The standard is pretty much saying there is no real world scenario where 50m water usage is valid.

If it says not suitable for snorkelling or diving, does that mean at any depth?

ummm dude i was defending you by obviously pointing him towards a joke....

 

[Julien]

Hi guys,

just to avoid watergate when aw series 2 comes out: AW series 2 is not waterproof for up to 50m of diving even though it was mentioned in the macrumors video about the top 5 facts about the aw series 2.



"Water Resistant 50 Meters" does mean:



During the keynote the following was stated:



So, I assume some people just misinterpreted this statement.

To help you understand the Watch carries an industry standard ISO 22810 ATM5 rating. There is nothing subjective and there is NO such thing as a waterproof rating. It is rated to the ATM5 standard.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark

EDIT: From the Apple site (scroll to bottom).

Apple Watch Series 2 has a water resistance rating of 50 meters under ISO standard 22810:2010...

http://www.apple.com/apple-watch-series-2/

 

[eastwoodandy]

during that ascent and at your decompression level off you can be swinging your underwater clipboard and pencil trying to take out their teeth so you don't get as many holes in you as they start to chow down. Using nitrox or, if you're a billy bad a$$, trimix you could be fighting mermaids and their shark body guards for quite some time at 40m but at this point your AW2 has imploded and you have lost track of your HR spelling certain disaster as the mermaid shaman casts a HR enhanced speed spell. Without your AW2 which due to being at the near max rated depth, but wailing about fighting sharks and mermaids, has obviously rendered it useless and your life comes to an end when the mermaid shaman asks one question

"I will spare you if you can answer this question right now"
you say "blub blub bluuuub"
her response and question "what time is it right now"

"sahdhashfhadsfhghfawhhblublblubblub"....dead.
[doublepost=1473430417][/doublepost]

ummm dude i was defending you by obviously pointing him towards a joke....

Apologies, I quoted the wrong post. Was meant to quote telefono.

I genuinely am interested to know what the rating actually means. It says 50m but no diving or snorkelling, is that at any depth? In which case, shouldn't there be a more reasonable depth to rate against?

 

[Julien]

...I genuinely am interested to know what the rating actually means. It says 50m but no diving or snorkelling, is that at any depth? In which case, shouldn't there be a more reasonable depth to rate against?

Read ATM5
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark

 

[mallbritton]

You need to take your questions up with the International Organization for Standardizations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Organization_for_Standardization). Apple didn't just come up with these standards. They are following strict guidelines.

For practical purposes you could wear the AW 2 while snorkeling. But since the device is not a dive computer, nor is it being marketed as one, there is absolutely no reason someone would be wearing one while scuba diving. Or Free Diving.

 

[oftheheavens]

Apologies, I quoted the wrong post. Was meant to quote telefono.

I genuinely am interested to know what the rating actually means. It says 50m but no diving or snorkelling, is that at any depth? In which case, shouldn't there be a more reasonable depth to rate against?

Ever heard of free diving? I think that is what it is referring to when it states "snorkeling" diving down to 50ft or more then racing back to the top is probably not good for the watch components.

Snorkeling itself is no different that freestyle swimming which is what the watch is now being hyped up as being able to do, pool exercises. Soooooo unless you are a free diver or a scuba diver stop worrying about it. IF you are one of those type of athletes then I am sure you have special diving watches so just switch watches before jumping off the boat. K?

 

[eastwoodandy]

Yes, thank you everyone I understand fully what you are saying. I have read that wiki link many times over.

It just seems illogical to call the rating 50m when you can't use it at 50m.

I'm not intending to use at that depth, but this thread is specifically about the misinterpretation of 50m, which is why I questioned the rating name.

It would make much more sense to leave the depth out of the rating unless you're talking about the dive rated ISO standards.

 

[fischersd]

Read ATM5
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Resistant_mark

Hmm. It makes you wonder - if sailing is covered under ATM10, if you're a regular jetski enthusiast or waterskier, should you maybe opt for an ATM20 instead? (considerable differences in speed).

 

[5105973]

Oh well, I'm not particularly water resistant at that depth myself. Thanks for the warning though.

Anyone plan to wear their Watch into salty ocean water or a salt water pool? I swim in both. Not very deep. It would be a massive convenience to be able to keep my watch on me when I do.