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

Apple Watch Ultra vs. Ultra 2 Buyer's Guide: 12 Differences Compared

thefredelement said:
Apple are nuts not improving battery life, this doesn't compete with more advanced fitness watches, like Garmin epix or fenix. Apple Watch Ultra doesn't last long enough to track an ultra marathon and seems like an ultra waste of money.
Click to expand...
Seriously??? I did an 8hr 28mile event the other day and my ultra didn't even dip below 50% and that’s without turning half the settings off!
 
  • Like
Reactions: bradincroton
Lakersfan74 said:
I will replace my S6 with an Ultra when there is a more substantial update. I use a hard case on my current watch which has saved me from potential damage. Is the Ultra face harder to damage than the S series?
Click to expand...
I cannot answer harder than questions, but I can say that the Ultra is hella durable. After a year of abuse it certainly gives the perception of being substantially tougher than either of my two previous AWs. The only thing I would think might damage the Ultra's face would be dragging it against granite like when one is rock climbing.
 
MacRumors said:
Most users of the existing Apple Watch Ultra will not be able to justify upgrading to the Ultra 2, but some customers coming from an older Apple Watch or those who do not have one at all could still have good reason to prefer the latest model, namely those who heavily use a HomePod, plan to buy an iPhone 15 model and can take advantage of Precision Finding, need additional storage for downloaded media, or think one-handed use with the Double Tap gesture would be useful.
Click to expand...
Put me in that small group then! I upgrade my Apple products around every 3-5 years.

I bought the Ultra (as an upgrade to an S3), because it was the first Apple Watch with the battery life to track my marathon running and other extended exercises without needing to go into low power mode after.

But I’ve also increased my use of Siri and have found that the Ultra (my first cellular watch), would rarely if ever complete a single thing I’ve asked of it since I purchased it. Apple Support says it’s my fault or it’s T-Mobile’s. :rolleyes:

Either way, if Ultra v2 can fix Siri it’s worth the upgrade for me. If not, I’ll return it. But real Siri improvements promised from on-device processing alone are worth it to me. Better outdoor visibility is even better.
 
thefredelement said:
Apple watch is a contradiction as a health tracker b/c it can't track someone 24/7, it can't respond dynamically to sleep quality and training load, it can't coach you to a higher VO2 max, it can't last long enough to track an ultra marathon. It doesn't last long enough to profile sleep and then for the data is does gather, you need to go find several third party app developers, which may or may not exist in the future, to get insightful data out of it.

At that point the Ultra version is a waste compared to the regular version - its supposed to give you more than the regular watch, of which I've owned several, including series 0, something before the 4 or 5, I have a 7 or 8 on my desk and have had dedicated polar running watches the Garmin fenix 5x and now the Garmin epix pro but doesn't measure up to others, especially at its price point.

The apple watch is great if you're a screen person but if you're serious about your personal health or fitness there are much better options available to consumers.
Click to expand...
edit to: The apple watch is great .... but if you're exclusively focused on your personal health or fitness there are much better option available to consumers.

Seriously though, if it's not for you and doesn't fit your needs, why not just move on instead of telling people who have a clear desire for it (even if it is a purely aesthetic one) that it is an unnecessary waste? For me, the additional battery life alone for my particular training justifies it in comparison to the aging series 6 I have (which I bought, btw when the 7 was launched because that did not make a clear case to me). And do you really think Apple is going to design something for such a small, some may fairly argue overly obsessed/obsessive group of users? They're doing a great job, arguably a better job than anyone, getting a huge base of users more conscious about being active and living a healthier life resultantly. To me, encouraging massive groups of people to take a minimal amount of steps per day to lower their risk of diabetes and other things destroying quality of life for tens of millions of people while putting a huge burden on health care systems and cost is more important than my PR improvement, incremental VO2 growth or sleep patterns. And you should be careful when you make statements about who in your estimation is serious or not about personal health. Could affect your ability to be considered fun at parties and stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jz0309 and tbayrgs
thefredelement said:
Apple watch is a contradiction as a health tracker b/c it can't track someone 24/7, it can't respond dynamically to sleep quality and training load, it can't coach you to a higher VO2 max, it can't last long enough to track an ultra marathon. It doesn't last long enough to profile sleep and then for the data is does gather, you need to go find several third party app developers, which may or may not exist in the future, to get insightful data out of it.

At that point the Ultra version is a waste compared to the regular version - its supposed to give you more than the regular watch, of which I've owned several, including series 0, something before the 4 or 5, I have a 7 or 8 on my desk and have had dedicated polar running watches the Garmin fenix 5x and now the Garmin epix pro but doesn't measure up to others, especially at its price point.

The apple watch is great if you're a screen person but if you're serious about your personal health or fitness there are much better options available to consumers.
Click to expand...
Just listen to you’re own post…it’s not for the extreme ultra athlete. It’s a perfectly acceptable, if not better than acceptable option for the regular person tracking their regular fitness routines.

And it does give more than the typical Apple Watch, just not more of what you’re looking for. It has much longer battery life than the regular watch, a bigger, brighter display made of more scratch resistant material, in a case that’s also a more durable yet lighter material. It has an extra GPS antenna, trail marking and dive functionality not available in the other watches. There’s a lot that’s different and the majority of customers already don’t need more than this.

You just need to come to grips with the fact that it’s not for you specifically.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jz0309 and bradincroton
alexandr said:
Yes, except I still see no reason to. And I like the look and feel of the Ultra, but they didn't even add the thermometer function which I had specifically asked for several times!
Click to expand...
Oh 😮 you asked for it and they didn’t give it to you??😨
 
msackey said:
True!

I still remember the times maybe like a little less than 10 years ago when the next iteration of a device a year later was actually so much better AND resolved many slowdown issues. But as a case in point, my MacBook Pro 13" from 2017 for the way I use it still feels very fast and I don't experience what feels like slowdown issues. So at this point, upgrading to a newer computer is unnecessary unless my computer breaks.
Click to expand...
So are you saying things are so good now you don’t have any jarring complaints to make you want to upgrade again?

I’m trying to remember these just have updates people keep bringing up from the magical past. I never felt like the upgrades were must have but nice to haves. As someone that does it yearly mind you. Because if I had problems I switched.
 
Sad updates for watch where is there innovation lately. Brightness doesn’t matter of ultra is so bright as is double tap seems dumb since it’s been on watches for years in accessibility disappointing
 
Delivered said:
So are you saying things are so good now you don’t have any jarring complaints to make you want to upgrade again?

I’m trying to remember these just have updates people keep bringing up from the magical past. I never felt like the upgrades were must have but nice to haves. As someone that does it yearly mind you. Because if I had problems I switched.
Click to expand...
I'm trying to say that the processing power of recent devices are so good that updated software functions don't test its limits.

Consumer devices from over a decade ago seem to be just at their max for processing power when released and upgraded software functions quickly test their processing limits. That's what I'm trying to say.

This is nothing about a magical past. I've used Macs since 1989 and do recall that after a few years, to keep up with software function demands, the machine had to be upgraded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Delivered
msackey said:
I'm trying to say that the processing power of recent devices are so good that updated software functions don't test its limits.

Consumer devices from over a decade ago seem to be just at their max for processing power when released and upgraded software functions quickly test their processing limits. That's what I'm trying to say.

This is nothing about a magical past. I've used Macs since 1989 and do recall that after a few years, to keep up with software function demands, the machine had to be upgraded.
Click to expand...
Yes this I can absolutely concur with. Software is no longer pushing the hardware as hard and devices as a result last a long time, if you want them to so I appreciate that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: msackey
jz0309 said:
you are entitled to your opinion, but my Ti S7 45mm was actually more expensive than the Ultra, $849.
And the SS 45mm costs $749 vs $799 for the Ultra ...
Click to expand...
Yes this is a problem I have. Is usually do a decent job of not wanting/dwelling on what I can’t afford. But when I can afford something and want it I get in these debates on prices. I never could justify a new Stainless Steel Apple Watch bc it was JUST a material change. Now that it’s so much more and esp the battery life being something I highly value I’m hesitating. Spending $799 for a watch for watch enthusiasts is nothing. But for me I’m a tech enthusiast and I’m just stuck in the thought of I can but should
I or would it be better to get Series 9 and just upgrade it sooner? Since this is close to double the price.
 
Delivered said:
Yes this is a problem I have. Is usually do a decent job of not wanting/dwelling on what I can’t afford. But when I can afford something and want it I get in these debates on prices. I never could justify a new Stainless Steel Apple Watch bc it was JUST a material change. Now that it’s so much more and esp the battery life being something I highly value I’m hesitating. Spending $799 for a watch for watch enthusiasts is nothing. But for me I’m a tech enthusiast and I’m just stuck in the thought of I can but should
I or would it be better to get Series 9 and just upgrade it sooner? Since this is close to double the price.
Click to expand...
I can certainly appreciate the delta pricing from a technology perspective, here is my own perspective/reasoning, it is the sapphire screen that makes it worth it for me:

I smashed my S0 (All) a few months after AC expired, replaced it with a S3 (all) as I was really planning to get the S4. I use my AW while mountain biking and the S3 got scratches on both the body as well as the screen.
I got the S4 SBSS and in over 2.5 years no scratch on the body, screen had a minor scratch that was only visible in sunlight in certain angles. Neither my S7 Ti nor my Ultra have any scratches period, I also don't "baby" my watches, bang them all the time.

That's my reasoning for getting the sapphire screen, and, unfortunately only available on higher end case material
 
  • Like
Reactions: Delivered
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back