Apple Watch users will need to recharge nightly, company still working to improve uptime before laun

Posted:
in General Discussion edited September 2014
Though Apple was mum about battery life for its forthcoming wrist-worn accessory when it was announced on Tuesday, the company has since said that it expects people to charge it nightly, suggesting the battery life will offer about one day of operation.




"There's a lot of new technology packed into Apple Watch and we think people will love using it throughout the day," Apple spokeswoman Nat Kerris said in a statement to Re/code. "We anticipate that people will charge nightly, which is why we designed an innovative charging solution that combines our MagSafe technology and inductive charging."

But sources who spoke with John Paczkowski went further, and indicated that the company isn't happy with the current uptime of the Apple Watch. One person said the watch's battery life is currently "about a day," and that the company is working on modifications ahead of its launch to improve it.

A one-day battery life is about on par with other touchscreen smart watches currently available on the market, including devices running the competing Android Wear platform.

The uptime stands in contrast to less powerful smart watches, like the Pebble, which utilizes a monochrome black-and-white display and lacks a touchscreen. Pebble's low-power screen is always on and provides up to a week of use before the wrist-borne device needs to be recharged.

Apple Watch Sport


Battery life for the Apple Watch remains somewhat up in the air because the product isn't yet finalized and ready for launch. Apple revealed on Tuesday that the wearable device will launch at some time in early 2015, but declined to offer a more specific window.

The company was also vague on other aspects of the hardware, including pricing. While the Apple Watch will start at $349, a breakdown of how much various models will cost was not given.

While the Apple Watch will start at $349, it's possible that the high-end models could reach into a five-figure price point. The luxury Apple Watch Edition is made of hardened 18-karat gold, and existing 18-karat gold watches typically sell for more than $10,000.
«13456713

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 242
    I don't think this is a deal breaker for anyone. It is kind of the standard today that devices charge over night... when we don't use them anyhow...
  • Reply 2 of 242
    Apple still needs to solve this energy dilemma. A one day battery life for all these devices is just pathetic considering the technological advancements of the past 20 years.
  • Reply 3 of 242
    I've just decided I'll get two. One for work, then when I get home just throw it on the charger and put a sport one on for the rest of the day and for the gym and runs. Considering a decent watch costs about the same as two of the base models of the Apple watch it's not really a big deal.
  • Reply 4 of 242
    Actually, if this device is meant to track sleeping (similar to my FitBit?), then overnight charging makes it so you can't track sleeping, right? Seems to defeat (a small) part of its intended purpose.

    As for the high end models (19K gold or rose gold), I think it'd be hard to justify that expense given that this is a 1.0 product. I'm sure the $349 starting point is for the sport band, and once you get to the leather and stainless steel bands, it's going to jump considerably from there. Good leather bands can cost a pretty penny, and these are specially made, so that's going to add to the cost.

    I'm interested, but cautious until Apple gets into much greater detail on battery life and pricing.
  • Reply 5 of 242
    I doubt the gold watch will be 10K. I bought my wife an 18K watch that has a lot more gold in it than the Apple watch and it was only 1.5K.
  • Reply 6 of 242
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,397member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post





    While the Apple Watch will start at $349, it's possible that the high-end models could reach into a five-figure price point. The luxury Apple Watch Edition is made of hardened 18-karat gold, and existing 18-karat gold watches typically sell for more than $10,000.

     

    While critics will go ballistic over the high-end versions with expensive prices, I think Apple has to do this because the watch (IMO) is a "nice to have", not a "must have" and it's not going to sell in the kinds of numbers that the iPhone does, but what would (other than possibly "electronic Viagra")?

     

    I also think that having the high-end versions helps Apple's brand image as a luxury brand.   I think that image has been hurt in recent years as their devices have become mass market and sold in Target, Wal-Mart and other big box stores and as cost-of-entry has been lowered by having subsidized devices.      In fact, I think Apple should let high-end jewelry and watch stores sell the expensive versions.    It's no longer special to own the latest iPhone or iPad because everyone else on the subway does also.    But being able to distinguish one's self by buying the version with the really expensive case or band is going to appeal to many egos.   (Not mine though).  

     

    As for battery life, if it truly lasts a full day I think that's okay, but if it's less, that's going to be a royal pain.   And it really has to be more than a day for road warriors who travel to different time zones.      

  • Reply 7 of 242
    Even if the battery lasts a day and a half it still needs to be charged nightly unless you have the charger always with you. I would think a minimum useful charge to not charge nightly is at least 2.5 days to guarantee that on the second day it does not run dry.
  • Reply 8 of 242
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by johnnybleiss View Post



    I don't think this is a deal breaker for anyone. It is kind of the standard today that devices charge over night... when we don't use them anyhow...

    Thanks for speaking for all of us./s

    I find my pebble steel very useful, its very good at what i use it for. It lasts 3 or 4 days, and its just about acceptable. I keep a charge cable at work, & one at home.

    I want to replace my pebble steel with a ?watch, but having to charge nightly is a deal breaker for me. Thats too much of a pain in the ass. I don't have to do that with my iPad(s) - not even with my Phone, since I often out it on a desk charger when working, and plug it in the car when traveling. I wouldn't do that with a watch - so I hope they figure a way of it lasting several days on a single charge (providing of course your not playing with it all day)

  • Reply 9 of 242

    The Moto 360 was torn down, and found to have an outdated TI OMAP processor in it. We know Apple has made a custom SoC for the Apple Watch (called the S1), so you've gotta think that with Apples tight control over the hardware and software that they will have an advantage in this area compared to everyone else using off-the-shelf processors.

  • Reply 10 of 242
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Now we know why Apple gave no specifics on release date. Not ready for prime time.
  • Reply 11 of 242
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,001member
    The Moto 360 was torn down, and found to have an outdated TI OMAP processor in it. We know Apple has made a custom SoC for the Apple Watch (called the S1), so you've gotta think that with Apples tight control over the hardware and software that they will have an advantage in this area compared to everyone else using off-the-shelf processors.

    Yup, poor choice of hardware IMO tho the overall 360 appearance is very nice IMHO. As usual followup versions should be a big improvement over the original.
  • Reply 12 of 242

    No kidding. I charge my iPhone, iPad, Cordless toothbrush every night.

     

    Charge or die.

     

    They call them batteries for a reason.

     

    Think about your car. If it didn't charge as you drove, you would be calling AAA every day.

     

    Charge or die.

  • Reply 13 of 242
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by johnnybleiss View Post



    I don't think this is a deal breaker for anyone. It is kind of the standard today that devices charge over night... when we don't use them anyhow...

     

    'Anyone' that truly wants one that is fine for them.

    IMO-While the build material and the 'tech' is truly wow! it is its great, but battery... oh boy, that's the real Achilles heal for all these 'wearable's'

    For me,  I have not identified in these wearables (apple included) a (and do not believe many main stream users have) a use case/ compelling feature that warrants duplication of essentially iphone items that would require plugging in every night etc along with iphone, ipad, work phone... ugggg, I have cords galore! 

    Hope I'm wrong!  Perhaps version 2 or 3.

     

    BTW how is the battery replaced in this watch?

     

    An aside -  my present watch is titanium alloy case/band (tough and light), solar charged (no battery worries, no self winding worries etc), sapphire crystal, tunes to the atomic clock signal once a day, day/date, good to 100meters water resistant. No muss, no fuss.

  • Reply 14 of 242

    As long as it lasts a full day, then this is not an issue. Those people who are impressed by the ?Watch will not be deterred by charging once a day.

     

    What kind of a bum is going to sleep with their ?Watch on?

     

    You take the watch off at night and you charge it. When you wake up, you're ready to go again. We're talking about a full color, touch display here on your wrist.

     

    The gold models come with a charging stand I read, and ?'s charging solution seems to be well done.

     

    How long will this charging routine take every night? Ten seconds?

  • Reply 15 of 242
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Yup, poor choice of hardware IMO tho the overall 360 appearance is very nice IMHO. As usual followup versions should be a big improvement over the original.

    Appearance is irrelevant, when it fails at function.

     

    As I wrote in a previous post, I hadn't really given this much thought before, but a round smart watch is a pretty dumb idea when you think about it.

  • Reply 16 of 242
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by johnnybleiss View Post



    I don't think this is a deal breaker for anyone. It is kind of the standard today that devices charge over night... when we don't use them anyhow...

     

    Again, this is a deal breaker for a lot of people. If it lasts just one day when brand new, when battery degradation kicks in (conservatively 10-20% less capacity after about a year), you'll be walking around with a dead watch at dinner or on a night out. I, for one, don't intend to do a yearly or biannual upgrade to an apple watch, so I may very well have to charge my phone at my desk during lunch in order to make it til bedtime. For the price, and if apple intends to sell this as a WATCH, it's not something watch consumers are accustomed to replacing that frequently (most expensive watches are lifetime-level purchases), especially if the reason is the battery can't hold enough charge anymore. 

     

    Speaking of, man would this ever be the perfect opportunity for a replaceable battery at least via an Apple Store "repair"

  • Reply 17 of 242
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    When the first iPhone was released it didn't have 3G, copy and paste, or an app. store.

    And how did that turn out for Apple?

    ;)
  • Reply 18 of 242
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    Coming from a huge Apple fan, I was disappointed.

    When the iPod was revealed, did it look like an mp3 player? NO.

    When the iPhone was revealed did it look like a cell phone? NO.

    When iPad was revealed did it look like those ugly useless tablets of the day?.....

    This thing, it looks like a watch. It looks like something I've already seen over a decade ago. Heck it looks like a Galaxy Gear!!

    Revolutionary crown? Is Apple f****ing kidding me!??! The first thing I thought of is this:
    http://jim-goldstein.photoshelter.com/image/I0000_RaLPnb0QW0
    I INSTANTLY thought of a revolutionary alternative. Less fidgety, less confusing, nicer watch profile. A smooth band on the side of the watch, slide finger forward to Zoom in and slide backward to zoom out. DONE. Need a home button? Touch ID. The digital crown reminds me of something Jobs would have made fun of.

    Needs an iPhone to work.....
    I don't even know where to start. If iPhone had %90 marketshare this would make PERFECT sense. But it doesn't. So in the US iPhone has about %40 marketshare. Now let's assume %30 are AppleWatch compatible. From there how many people are gonna run out and buy an AppleWatch? even assuming a third of them will, only %10 of people who own a smartphone will own AppleWatch and that's best case scenario. This leaves open a HUGE market for Android and others to take smartwatch share. Even though Apple could sell millions more they're just saying "no thanks". If an Android owners think Apple Watch is the greatest thing ever, they need to invest an additional $200 to own one, had the iPhone not been a requirement, AppleWatch would have been a nice bridge into other Apple products. Now it's more like a ladder on top of a building. Maybe we can have a repeat of the iPod and they'll change their minds later because this sounds as ridiculous as having to own a Mac to use an iPod.

    ApplePay is a revolutionary new way to make purchases secured with Touch ID! GREAT!
    AppleWatch works with ApplePay! but lacks Touch ID... So it's either less secure or you have to pull out your phone anyway to scan your fingerprint and then lean your wrist to NFC capable machines. INTUITIVE!!!

    Don't you people DARE tell me about doubters during the iPod/iPhone/"it's just a giant iPod touch" days!! Because back then I saw Apples innovation and defend those products to this day. This watch has so much wrong with it I'm literally for the FIRST TIME wondering if Apple is lost without Steve Jobs and that's a heartbreaking thought.
  • Reply 19 of 242
    rwesrwes Posts: 158member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

     

    Appearance is irrelevant, when it fails at function.

     

    As I wrote in a previous post, I hadn't really given this much thought before, but a round smart watch is a pretty dumb idea when you think about it.


    I think it looks good (the Moto 360) and with Apples original Watch UI, I think round would work close to as well as square. Yes, you'd loose the corners a bit, but it would work.

     

    I skipped the first generation iPhone, purchased the first generation iPad; think this first generation, ?Watch I'll be skipping though. I personally could see a lot of benefit to it, and if I were in the market for a Jawbone/fitbit, I'd be tempted to go straight for the ?Watch, but having to charge it daily seems like a hassle. My opinion may change (though)!

  • Reply 20 of 242
    Originally Posted by cali View Post

    This thing, it looks like a watch.

     

    Watch.

     

    ? Watch.

     

    This just in: Squares are circles!

Sign In or Register to comment.