Rumor: Apple Watch 2 will add bigger battery, look exactly the same [u]

12346»

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 109
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    No its not.  You are dumping a large piece of crap on the Watch for no reason.

     

    Again no one cares you didn't buy it.  No one.

     

    I did not buy one either but I'm not here dumping a large piece of crap.




    You are the biggest hypocrite of all. In the frenzy leading up to the Watch release you were claiming you were going to buy multiple gold editions just for investments. You were cheering on the Watch like a madman and still have some projected sales goals in your signature. Now you are saying you haven't even purchased one yet. What?

     

    I have always been a bit critical of the Watch, but, last Thursday I decided to see what all the fuss was about so I went to the Apple store and purchased it. A 42mm stainless with Milanese loop. $800+ and 5 days later, I'm sticking with 'completely unnecessary' and I can add that that it has a few issues as well, at least in my opinion. First, unless you wear it very snug on your wrist it constantly asks for your passcode, Second, it doesn't always light up when you turn your wrist, for example when you are prone. I have had to tap the screen on a number of occasions to get it to light up. Third, the small grey font on a black background is difficult to read, impossible in direct sunlight. I do not like the annoying messages that it keeps popping up. "You did it!." Also, the pulse tracking is way the hell off.

     

    I will admit, the bulkiness is not as much of an issue as I thought it would be. Bottom line, it is just ok, but I don't think I like it enough to wear it everyday. Maybe I'll get used to it, who knows, but I'm certainly not excited about it the way some people on this forum are. Some people who don't even own a Watch.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 102 of 109
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DogCowabunga View Post



    It has to show the time 100 percent of the time I look at it, period, otherwise it's a design defect. A friend who has one says it's @surprisingly good@ at knowing when you turn your wrist. Not good enough for me.



    And yet do you accept that your current watch is telling you the wrong time 100% of the time? "design defect" or reality? YMMV

     

    FWIW, mine shows the time etc. 100% of time I look at it (having to turn my wrist to view just as with any other of my watches, of course). But in any case far more convenient that my iPhone for that and other routine daily tasks (weather and email being the primary pair for me).

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 103 of 109
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

     



    And yet do you accept that your current watch is telling you the wrong time 100% of the time? "design defect" or reality? YMMV




    How do you figure? Many high end watches and even some midrange watches synchronize with the Bureau of Standards atomic clock in Colorado by radio signal which is as accurate as you can get. Much more so than the cell carrier internet time servers which is what the iPhone and Apple Watch use.

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 104 of 109



    Sure, I have a couple of twenty-dollar wall clocks that get the time signal from Denver.  The wristwatch matches that exactly.  BTW the time signal radio is not station YMMV, FYI.

     

    My grandfather used to wear his watch on the inside of his wrist, so that when he was onstage he could unobtrusively glance down and read the time without moving his hand at all.  

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 105 of 109
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     



    How do you figure? Many high end watches and even some midrange watches synchronize with the Bureau of Standards atomic clock in Colorado by radio signal which is as accurate as you can get. Much more so than the cell carrier internet time servers which is what the iPhone and Apple Watch use.




    "accurate as you can get" is STILL inaccurate (even presuming the atomic clock signal is "100%" accurate, which it is not, moments after the calibrating signal is received those wristwatch start their drift all over again until the next signal, be that an hour later or a day., everything drifts including the atomic clocks used by the bureau (their disappointing truth: "The best cesium oscillators (such as NIST-F1) can produce frequency with an uncertainty of about 3 x 10-16, which translates to a time error of about 0.03 nanoseconds per day, or about one second in 100 million years.

    "). The latest designs, as the ones before them, reduced the drift but none ever eliminate it. So in the world of demanded "100%", they all fail. And in the choice between design "failure" and physical reality, I choose physical reality, others may surely choose differently, hence: Your Mileage May Vary. Of course the longer interval between successfully receiving a signal, the larger the error: "These clocks and watches typically synchronize overnight and keep time between synchronizations using an internal quartz crystal oscillator." Mine are successful most evenings, though in some seasons less so as radio interference varies.

    Fun stuff.

    http://www.nist.gov/pml/div688/

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 106 of 109
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post
     


    These clocks and watches typically synchronize overnight and keep time between synchronizations using an internal quartz crystal oscillator." Mine are successful most evenings, though in some seasons less so as radio interference varies.

    I'm not sure how often iPhones update their time but I remember a few years ago mine had completely the wrong time, like four hours off, and it persisted off and on for a couple days. Then it corrected but a week later it was wrong again. I called AT&T and asked them what was going on. The support tech immediately said you are using an iPhone right? I said why do you ask? She said that a number of iPhone users were experiencing the same issue in Southern California only. I think it was a bug in their network or something, but it was only that particular instance. It has been fine since.

     

    Anyway I read that Windows by default updates their time about every 7 days so it is possible that devices which get their time from the cell networks or other internet time servers could have even larger time drift than a high end watch which probably has a much higher quality crystal than a cell phone or especially computers which usually have extremely cheap crystals. Bottom line, I would trust the nightly atomic clock sync way more than a once in awhile cell network sync if for no other reason than the cell network is probably getting their time information at least third hand. Not to put too fine a point on it, but it is sometimes fun to split hairs.

    I found time.gov which is the Navy's atomic clock and my Apple Watch is dead on the money.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 107 of 109

    A bigger battery is never a bad thing I think. I am wondering when will  Apple update their iPhone's battery? 

     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 108 of 109
    tenlytenly Posts: 710member
    mstone wrote: »

    How do you figure? Many high end watches and even some midrange watches synchronize with the Bureau of Standards atomic clock in Colorado by radio signal which is as accurate as you can get. Much more so than the cell carrier internet time servers which is what the iPhone and Apple Watch use.

    What makes you think that the cell carriers don't synchronize with the same atomic clock?

    If we're splitting hairs and talking about accuracy differences in terms of fractions of a nano-second, then, unless your timepiece had a GPS in it and knew your exact location as well as the exact location of the radio tower or satellite sending the signal out - and then used those exact locations to calculate an offset for the time It took the signal to get from the tower to you - then all watches synchronized from the radio signal would be different from each other base on how far they are away from the source of the radio signal.... No?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.