Not to mention, does anyone think it’s even remotely possible that Apple would implement a band attachment mechanism that breaks its own Compass app? I mean, this isn’t just Leather Link/Loop anymore. This is EVERY band.
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.
Every Apple Watch band Apple released. Ever.
- Thread starter choreographics
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
True.
As far as rumours go, this one is spectacularly irresponsible. For one, it creates massive FUD in a particularly loyal segment of Apple's customer base -- something I'm sure Apple does not want. Unlike you, I'm relatively new to the AW ecosystem, but I'm already second-guessing my roughly 30-band collection. I can't imagine how you or the creators of the Bandbreite app feel!
Two, someone's probably getting fired for leaking the bit about magnets to Gurman. Apple does have a habit of seeding the rumour mill every now and then with misleading bits of (mis)information to smoke out the tattletales. The source of this exceptionally specific leak will be all too easy to nail down.
On another note, there has been a relative paucity of bands released this year. Just 18 styles since the beginning of the year, according to Bandbreite -- for comparison, we had a whopping 105 styles in 2021, and more than 80 styles in most of the other years. With the FUD that Gurman has created I'm almost tempted to believe that Apple's winding down production of bands using the current connection mechanism to make way for the new contraption he claimed will debut with the X.
Like I said, irresponsible.
Another possibility mentioned by someone on the Discord is a magnetic system which replaces the hardware that locks the band into place. you’ll still have the same channel, but the pin will be pulled and locked into place by a magnet instead of a spring. I’m Not sure how exactly it’d work, but it’s an interesting idea.
I like to think (or so I hope) this is just due to the reallocation of R&D budgets going towards Vision & accessories. The fact that we’re rumored a new band style (weirdly also with magnets…) gives me hope.
We’ll see what the rest of the year brings. It’s possible we’ll have an explosion of bands in a month. I think last year there were over 50 in September alone.
Imagine they’re selling a $300-$800 Hermes band one day and the Series X Hermes the next day and it doesn’t fit…
I'm totally on board with your points, but I wouldn't totally brush off that rumor. It might sound a bit out there, but let's not forget we're talking about Apple - the same folks who sometimes pull surprises out of the blue. Remember how they continued selling the Series 3 through September 2022 despite announching it would not get watchOS 9 support three months earlier at WWDC? And that move to introduce a new iPad that only worked with the ancient 7-year-old Apple Pencil (despite the presence of its newer sibling), and even needed an extra adapter to charge – who saw that coming?
Here's what I'm thinking: Apple might just throw us a curveball for the Apple Watch's 10th anniversary (a huge milestone!) and launch this funky new magnetic band thing. Meanwhile, they could stick to the classic band mechanism for the new SE 3. Maybe this SE 3 would finally come with the standard stuff like ECG support and AOD. It'll be a repeat of 2017 – you could either go with what's familiar, the SE 3 (think iPhone 8), or embrace the future with the Series X and its snazzy design and new band mechanism (like the iPhone X). Apple could argue that they're still keeping existing bands alive with the SE 3. At least, that's my theory.
Now, talking about magnets messing with the watch's compass – here's a head-scratcher. How come magnets in the band mess the compass up, but not the big magnet in the center of the watch that helps align the charger? In fact, that magnet is the reason why Apple warns that the Apple Watch might affect nearby external compasses. Same goes for the MagSafe magnetic array on iPhones – the compass app doesn't seem to be affected by all those magnets. I am no physicist, so I'm all ears if someone's got an explanation for this.
I also don't think Apple's gonna just rely on magnets to hold those bands together. My bet is they'll introduce a mechanism that relies on some combination of magnetic force and quick-release secure clip mechanism. Check out that video below with the Osmo Action 3 camera – kinda what I'm picturing. Apple seems to be all in on magnets these days - the Vision Pro's light seal, straps, charging connector seem to attach by magnets as well. But considering they're cradling a $3,500 device on your face, you bet Apple's gonna make those magnets extra secure. I guess we'll could see get a better sense of how probable the watch rumor is when the Vision Pro hits the scene and gets a teardown.
Osmo Action 3 magnets
Last edited:
Unsupported OS is still usable OS. Annoying, sure, but usable.
Compatibility with old tech is a good thing.
Apple knows we collect bands. They know there are people out there with hundreds of them. They specifically made the bands for collecting. I have an extremely hard time believing Apple would just suddenly say "nah, bored of that, screw your collections" and force us to use only old tech. Especially after just releasing multiple $99 styles that they know people will buy.
I think a solution that uses magnets to align bands but still uses the current channel and pin divot is most probable.
The Ultra is the wild card. It is too new and too expensive a class of AW to have its bands and connection mechanism rendered obsolete in just two years -- or one year if you're counting this year's 2nd-generation Ultra. I find it downright impossible to believe that Apple would let the 2nd-gen Ultra have its day in the sun for a year then nuke its functionality right afterwards. I find it harder still to believe that a 3rd-gen Ultra would not be compatible with the Ocean Band and the Alpine and Trail Loops from the 1st and 2nd generations.
Then, as another commenter pointed out, the rumoured nylon modern buckle that should be launching in a month's time muddies Gurman's analysis. Why drop an entirely new class of product only to nerf its connection mechanism a year later? Launching it and keeping it going just for the SE 3 makes little sense.
Apple may have a history of reinventing the wheel with its non-wearables, but the type of connector used in the iPhone and iPad is incidental to the experience. With wearables, it's a different matter -- the accessories and the connectors that make them work are the experience. You nix Lightning, big deal, people will warm up to USB-C with the passage of time. But you nerf every band you've ever released, you wreck a critical part of your product's USP and overall experience, not to mention you walk back every assurance you've made in the years prior that suggests the opposite. The optics of that are terrible.
So I don't think the analogy is applicable. Wearables don't work that way. It's not like Apple ever claimed Lightning would last forever, but they trotted out reps at the launch of the Ultra that made grand assurances about backwards compatibility and the importance of that to their customers.
So, here's my take: I'm thinking the whole new case and band setup could be the tentpole feature for the Series X, not so much for the Ultra. I mean, like you pointed out, the Ultra is pretty fresh on the scene, and we're celebrating a decade of the regular watch, not the Ultra. So my guess is they'll stick with the original mechanism for the Ultra, not to steal any of the Series X's thunder. Before you say it doesn't make sense, it doesn't make sense either to have the 10th gen iPad work only work with the 1st gen Apple Pencil and still sell the M2 13" MacBook Pro as the only one with a Touch Bar. Just like how 2022 was all about the Ultra, I think they would frame 2024 as the year of the Series X.
And you know what? I don't think it's gonna look bad from a PR angle. Apple could spin it by saying something like, "We've kept the old band mechanism unchanged a solid 10 years and we're proud of it. For those with an existing collection, it lives on with the brand new SE 3. But for the forward-looking folks ready for the next 10 years, step into the Series X and its fancy new mechanism." Think about it, the iPhone X ditched that classic (iconic!) home button that folks had gotten used to over a decade. Tim Cook famously said the iPhone X would "set the path for technology for the next decade" when annoucing the change, so I wouldn't be shocked if they go for a similarly radical change for the 10th anniversary Apple Watch.
"But you nerf every band you've ever released, you wreck a critical part of your product's USP and overall experience, not to mention you walk back every assurance you've made in the years prior that suggests the opposite. The optics of that are terrible."
I personally think this is overblown - in their latest Aug 3 earnings report, Apple reported that 2/3 of Watch revenue come from people being new to the product and emerging markets (who likely do not already have a huge collection of expensive first-party watch bands), so I don't think the group of people affected by the band mechanism change is going to hurt their bottom-line. If anything, they could taut the 10-year shelf life of the old band mechanism to reassure new buyers that the new magnetic mechanism is likely going to stay that long as well.
Last edited:
I like your analysis of how and why Apple just might do this. That being said, relegating the Ultra, just two years after being introduced as the new non-plus-ultra, to play second fiddle to an even newer "futuristic" Series Watch is the weakest link IMO. I can't see how that positioning would make any sense.
Absolutely, I hear you. In the grand scheme of things, this is all just my own wild theory, and hey, I could be way off track when September 2024 rolls around. But I'm fine with that.
I've got a huge band collection myself, so it's not like I'm here, waving the "Change it all up!" flag. What I'm getting at is, maybe we should keep an open mind and acknowledge the possibility (however slim) that they might do something as radical as changing the band mechanism for the watch's big 10th anniversary rather than slamming the rumor door shut. I think having a little flexibility in our thinking can go a long way in adjusting to changes. If they stick with the same old mechanism, great! If they throw a curveball and switch it up, well, no big deal. At least my band collection had a good run, and they'll still work with my existing watch just fine!
However, at the end of the day, I don't think it matters whether they change the mechanism for the Series X or not. If nabbing a fresh band right now puts a smile on your face, then my vote is to go for it! I believe what really counts is soaking up the here and now, rather than sweating about what might or might not go down in the future.
I hear you, too! 😊
I‘m not ruling this rumour out, at all. I‘m sure Apple will want to make a splash with the big re-design and a new band mechanism may or may not be a part of that. It‘s just that in my – perhaps too limited – imagination they have less to gain with this (slightly more interior space) than they could lose (goodwill of the biggest Watch fans, i.e. collectors).
We‘ll see, then. I certainly know I trust Apple enough to do something like this only if it really makes sense and actually makes the product better, like the transition from 30-pin to lightning certainly did. So in a way I start to look at this as a win-win situation: either I get to continue using all my bands with the newest Watches or we‘ll get a much better Watch.
Hear, hear.
Also, worth pointing out that a lightning cable is $20 and they've only ever really made one. We're talking about bands as expensive as $449, with over 600 different ones released. It's a totally different subject.
It is a big deal, actually. We should all be vocal about our disdain for such a change. Shrugging it off as "oh well, no biggie, was fun while it lasted" gives them permission to do this.
I don't know about you, but I don't want my multi-thousand dollar band collection to be rendered obsolete in a year, locking me into old technology. It works with my current watch, yes, but what happens when my battery degrades, or the OS no longer gets support?
I've spent countless hours and, yes, way too much money on my collection. It's a hobby. I wouldn't collect them if they didn't work with the current watches. If Apple seriously changes the connector, I'm selling off every Apple thing I own and not looking back.
I see no probability that Apple completely axes the bands and retains no backwards compatibility with whatever new system they're designing. They know that would be a huge mistake.
Enjoying the moment is a nice sentiment, sure. But say you buy a car, then a year later you find out that they don't make the right kind of fuel for it anymore. Are you going to just go "Oh well, it was fun while it lasted. No big deal!" then buy another? Or would you be justifiably livid?
If they change the design, there'd be no more band sales. Nobody will want to buy $49-$449 bands if they're just going to be incompatible with the next watch. I can't see how apple would be ready to lose out on all those accessory sales.
Again. $20 cable, cheap accessory market. Here we have over 600 bands ranging from $49 to $449 each. It's not a fair comparison. There's a lot more on the line here.
Apple also released adapters for those, so the old accessories could work with lightning. Doesn't sound like an adapter from the current lug to a magnetic lug would be very possible while also fitting into Apple's design aesthetic. (A cable adapter doesn't have to look good, but a band adapter that'll sit on your wrist all day attached to the watch certainly will.)
Until Apple officially announces the Series X in the fall of 2024, I think everything we're tossing around is mere speculation. You've got your theory, and I've got mine. To save us from going in circles arguing about this, how about we agree to disagree and call it a day?
I agree with midekdop here, that would be a very unlikely move.
Furthermore, with the Ultra we just saw the introduction of a new watch where they could have introduced a new connector and no one would’ve been bothered (well, of course we hadn‘t liked it) because it’s a new watch and there is no reason it needs to be compatible. The size difference alone would’ve been a good reason (see 41 vs. 45mm).
But they went out of their way to make it compatible with existing 42/44/45mm bands and talked in interviews about how compatibility was one of their most important design principles. I can’t imagine them throwing all of that out of the window and alienating their fan base with such a move. They certainly make enough money with us buying new bands every season.
I also own so many bands that this would be a reason to be really really disappointed. The transition to a new phone connector or form factor (case compatibility) is nothing in comparison.
Furthermore, with the Ultra we just saw the introduction of a new watch where they could have introduced a new connector and no one would’ve been bothered (well, of course we hadn‘t liked it) because it’s a new watch and there is no reason it needs to be compatible. The size difference alone would’ve been a good reason (see 41 vs. 45mm).
But they went out of their way to make it compatible with existing 42/44/45mm bands and talked in interviews about how compatibility was one of their most important design principles. I can’t imagine them throwing all of that out of the window and alienating their fan base with such a move. They certainly make enough money with us buying new bands every season.
I also own so many bands that this would be a reason to be really really disappointed. The transition to a new phone connector or form factor (case compatibility) is nothing in comparison.
It wasn‘t meant as a comparison, just as an example that if Apple makes a switch, they do it for a very good reason. „Slightly more interior space for a slightly bigger battery“ would certainly not be a very good reason to switch the Watch band connector. So the reasoning Gurman gave for this sounds quite wrong to me. Until someone comes up with a better reason, I remain sceptical there‘s anything to this beyond the usual internal experimentation.
Occam’s Razor is “I am Mark’s extrapolation error from headphone jack-gate.” This is a Lakers fan we’re talking about here…
Well, it seems there's probably no better time to brighten your day a bit. 😬
Our collections have had yet little opportunity to grow this year, as only 18 bands have been released thus far. When was the last time Apple released a Summer collection? How many bands can we statistically expect in the Fall? Say hello to our latest chart which summarizes all the official release dates and bands. It's a beautifully designed one-size-fits-all PDF that gives you all the stats you’re looking for at a glance.
https://url.bandbreite.watch/releasedates (direct download) or
https://www.bandbreite.watch/facts/
Our website offers a free download of the PDF. If you appreciate our work, please consider supporting us by leaving a tip in the Bandbreite app. Thank you! ☺️
Our collections have had yet little opportunity to grow this year, as only 18 bands have been released thus far. When was the last time Apple released a Summer collection? How many bands can we statistically expect in the Fall? Say hello to our latest chart which summarizes all the official release dates and bands. It's a beautifully designed one-size-fits-all PDF that gives you all the stats you’re looking for at a glance.
https://url.bandbreite.watch/releasedates (direct download) or
https://www.bandbreite.watch/facts/
Our website offers a free download of the PDF. If you appreciate our work, please consider supporting us by leaving a tip in the Bandbreite app. Thank you! ☺️
Last edited:
Rather fortuitous timing to follow up with this post. Here is a composite of every unique silicone/fluoroelastomer color band Apple has released so far.
Thanks to @choreographics and @mikedop and Matt Evans for help. For entertainment purposes only.
3K version:
12k version, link should just open in a browser not discord:
Thanks to @choreographics and @mikedop and Matt Evans for help. For entertainment purposes only.
3K version:
12k version, link should just open in a browser not discord:
Masterful blending and photo editing skills here to make the ultimate comparison pics. Definitely belongs in bandfancy.
I honestly thing Bright Crimson has the potential to rival Flash for brightest band.
Okay... probably not. But it's up there! Glows like Capri, too.
Okay... probably not. But it's up there! Glows like Capri, too.
Flash is one I haven't seen in a long time, especially new. I basically bought & sold mine for $40 then never saw it again.
My best advice is to try to buy it off another forum/discord member or collector. If not, look for Lemonade instead. It's close enough if you can't find it imo.