One month late will change for battery life? Don't think so. It may be more on manufacturing issue imo.
That's assuming they were planning March. Some rumors suggest they really wanted it out in the holiday quarter. 9to5Mac's reporting says battery life has been an issue.
To me the Apple Watch feels like a 'wait till the next revision'. I'm not normally someone who does that, I love early adopting products. I just have a bad feeling this product would be a lousy one to early adopt as they'll fix the battery in the next iteration I suspect. I'd also want something with it's own LTE/CDMA chip and not tethered via bluetooth.
and also to prevent it from leaking from FCC disclosure... Control the message... As others pointed out I'd rather have an elegant finished product rather that it being rushed out... Standing by :0
My buddy's Jeep "Sport" model isn't immersible either. And it's not a prototype....
Ha ha!
My Breitling is waterproof to 10 atmospheres (God knows why), but I still take it off in the shower. Or if I'm going swimming. Or if I'm going to sleep.
If Apple has not definitely stipulated that the Sport Model can be immersed by the time orders are being taken, then I will be ordering a Garmin and I will be advising a friend who asked me to find out if the Apple Watch Sport can be immersed to do likewise. I imagine that a number of triathletes will be in the same boat.
If Apple has not definitely stipulated that the Sport Model can be immersed by the time orders are being taken, then I will be ordering a Garmin and I will be advising a friend who asked me to find out if the Apple Watch Sport can be immersed to do likewise. I imagine that a number of triathletes will be in the same boat.
I don't understand.
I thought that triathletes swam. Why would you be in a boat?
I want to see if the market for the Apple Watch is what pundits have been predicting. I'm not so sure that after the early adopter surge that it will be the smash hit that people are forecasting. I'm much more excited about the next generation Apple TV and 12" MacBook Air with Retina Display then I am about the watch.
Yeah plug the thing in when you take shower and have your dinner, then put it back on when you go to bed in case you need to wear it over night.
Based on your complaint, you can never charge the damn watch because you have to sleep every night anyway.
See, that is just an inconvenience to me. I rarely take off my current watch (it's a 13-year old Pulsar Solar) and I've never had to change the battery or wind it because... well, it's solar powered. Call me a creature of habit, but a watch with a 8-month battery life (sorry, I said one-year in the previous post) that still gives me fitness/sleep tracking capabilities is a more suitable replacement for me than a smartwatch that needs my iPhone to do anything but tell time (please correct me if I'm wrong on this part). Heck, I wouldn't even be able to swim with an Apple Watch, which makes it worthless.
Maybe when battery life is measured in weeks instead of hours, I'll consider taking the plunge... and when the thing is actually waterproof and not water resistant.
...than a smartwatch that needs my iPhone to do anything but tell time (please correct me if I'm wrong on this part).
You are wrong.
Apple has already said that it will play music without the iPhone. It will also do fitness tracking (sans GPS). Most people expect ApplePay to work independently as well. Other features are still up in the air.
That being said, how can it be aimed at fitness buffs and not be waterproof?
It's aimed at those that work out and never loose weight because they stuff their faces with bacon, bread and sugar- and will buy anything they think will make it work.
I don't believe this Tim Cook character. He is not a well-connected, well-regarded, well-loved, well-noted, well-mentioned, well-accurate analyst. He's just some CEO who thinks he knows what Apple is going to do.
That being said, how can it be aimed at fitness buffs and not be waterproof?
Why bother making it waterproof when it requires an iPhone for full functionality? I'd say waterproof may come later. They have to start somewhere. It'd be silly to delay release for the sake of waterproof when no one knows what the demand for that feature would be.
"Why bother making it waterproof when it requires an iPhone for full functionality? I'd say waterproof may come later. They have to start somewhere. It'd be silly to delay release for the sake of waterproof when no one knows what the demand for that feature would be."
Rain. (Every day use and definitely fitness use) Sweat. (Especially fitness use-see problems apple has had in the past with this issue.) Swimming. (Fitness use)
Of course it needs to be waterproof, or at least splash proof against rain.
I'm sure the video of the Watch showed it getting wet.
So we have the Watch Edition, the Sport Edition and the Edition Edition!
I am pretty excited about this and hope to get one in April. The 42mm Apple Watch Stainless Steel with Link Bracelet is what I am looking forward to...
A waterproof Apple Watch makes little sense since it's got to be tethered to an iPhone to work. You're not going to take your iPhone scuba driving, are you?
A waterproof Apple Watch makes little sense since it's got to be tethered to an iPhone to work. You're not going to take your iPhone scuba driving, are you?
Obtuse much?
Of course the watch works on its own, but not for everything like calls, emails etc when you leave the phone at home. The watch still plays music and tracks your fitness data.
Comments
That's assuming they were planning March. Some rumors suggest they really wanted it out in the holiday quarter. 9to5Mac's reporting says battery life has been an issue.
A sport watch that can't tolerate immersion isn't finished; but just a prototype.
Buy something else then.
My buddy's Jeep "Sport" model isn't immersible either. And it's not a prototype....
Ha ha!
My Breitling is waterproof to 10 atmospheres (God knows why), but I still take it off in the shower. Or if I'm going swimming. Or if I'm going to sleep.
Buy something else then.
If Apple has not definitely stipulated that the Sport Model can be immersed by the time orders are being taken, then I will be ordering a Garmin and I will be advising a friend who asked me to find out if the Apple Watch Sport can be immersed to do likewise. I imagine that a number of triathletes will be in the same boat.
I don't understand.
I thought that triathletes swam. Why would you be in a boat?
I'm much more excited about the next generation Apple TV and 12" MacBook Air with Retina Display then I am about the watch.
Yeah plug the thing in when you take shower and have your dinner, then put it back on when you go to bed in case you need to wear it over night.
Based on your complaint, you can never charge the damn watch because you have to sleep every night anyway.
See, that is just an inconvenience to me. I rarely take off my current watch (it's a 13-year old Pulsar Solar) and I've never had to change the battery or wind it because... well, it's solar powered. Call me a creature of habit, but a watch with a 8-month battery life (sorry, I said one-year in the previous post) that still gives me fitness/sleep tracking capabilities is a more suitable replacement for me than a smartwatch that needs my iPhone to do anything but tell time (please correct me if I'm wrong on this part). Heck, I wouldn't even be able to swim with an Apple Watch, which makes it worthless.
Maybe when battery life is measured in weeks instead of hours, I'll consider taking the plunge... and when the thing is actually waterproof and not water resistant.
That being said, how can it be aimed at fitness buffs and not be waterproof?
So f'ugly. Good luck Apple.
My 6 gen Nano and a wrist band looks better than that.
You are wrong.
Apple has already said that it will play music without the iPhone. It will also do fitness tracking (sans GPS). Most people expect ApplePay to work independently as well. Other features are still up in the air.
That being said, how can it be aimed at fitness buffs and not be waterproof?
It's aimed at those that work out and never loose weight because they stuff their faces with bacon, bread and sugar- and will buy anything they think will make it work.
That being said, how can it be aimed at fitness buffs and not be waterproof?
Why bother making it waterproof when it requires an iPhone for full functionality? I'd say waterproof may come later. They have to start somewhere. It'd be silly to delay release for the sake of waterproof when no one knows what the demand for that feature would be.
Rain. (Every day use and definitely fitness use)
Sweat. (Especially fitness use-see problems apple has had in the past with this issue.)
Swimming. (Fitness use)
Of course it needs to be waterproof, or at least splash proof against rain.
I'm sure the video of the Watch showed it getting wet.
So we have the Watch Edition, the Sport Edition and the Edition Edition!
I am pretty excited about this and hope to get one in April. The 42mm Apple Watch Stainless Steel with Link Bracelet is what I am looking forward to...
A waterproof Apple Watch makes little sense since it's got to be tethered to an iPhone to work. You're not going to take your iPhone scuba driving, are you?
Of course the watch works on its own, but not for everything like calls, emails etc when you leave the phone at home. The watch still plays music and tracks your fitness data.