Rumor claims next-gen Apple Watch going into mass production in Q2

Posted:
in Apple Watch
A questionable rumor on Tuesday indicated that the second-generation Apple Watch will go into mass production in the second quarter of 2016, with Quanta Computer remaining as the sole manufacturer.




Apple had considered placing some orders with Foxconn, its main manufacturing partner, but volumes aren't expected to be that high, supply chain sources claimed to DigiTimes. Both Quanta and Foxconn refused to comment on the matter.

The site suggested in fact that Apple has scaled down its 2016 shipment forecast for the Watch, owing to weaker-than-expected performance in 2015, even though the device may control over 50 percent of the smartwatch market. Apple has not released official sales figures, and research estimates have sometimes varied wildly.

DigiTimes has a mixed track record when dealing with Apple products, and indeed the idea of second-quarter Watch production might conflict with more recent rumors that Apple is planning to launch updated hardware in the fall.

The company is expected to host a press event in March at which the Watch will play a part, but only in terms of new bands, and partnerships with firms beyond Hermes.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 23
    I always thought a cool concept would be similar to how they did the Hermes band/watch face. Take it a step further and have a more barebones watch that a watchmaker can match up a band and "watch case". Essentially allowing other major watch makers to have their own version of the Apple watch. This would be a great way to address the different tastes...
    JanNLargonaut
  • Reply 2 of 23
    kpomkpom Posts: 660member
    sog35 said:
    Right on time.

    For supply chain bullshit that says Apple products have weak demand. This time Apple Watch.

    Yet Tim Cook does nothing. What will it take for Cook to defend the company, the reputation of Apple, and shareholders?

    Well, today is the earnings release. Apple couldn't say anything between quarter-end and today because of securities laws. We'll get a forecast for the current quarter along with results for the last quarter half an hour after the market closes.
    ibilllatifbpcornchip
  • Reply 3 of 23
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,557member
    An intentional rumor placed to dampen sales? How many times have users posted the question, “When is the next model coming out?” How many times do we see outraged posts when a new model does come out and users who bought the old one a week ago want a free exchange?
  • Reply 4 of 23
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    sog35 said:
    Right on time.

    For supply chain bullshit that says Apple products have weak demand. This time Apple Watch.

    Yet Tim Cook does nothing. What will it take for Cook to defend the company, the reputation of Apple, and shareholders?

    Yeah let's get back to the good old days when Jobs would come out and state the expectations for the coming quarter were so low the company was crashing... Every Single. Time.
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 5 of 23
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
  • Reply 6 of 23
    mj web said:
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
    I doubt they will do that. They want these devices very much dependent on the iPhone. Plus, the electronics vs battery aren't there for them to do that even if they wanted to. The chunkiness needs to go away, looks like a mini iPod on the wrist of most people. Personally, I like the round watches better so I hope they figure out a way to make a round watch.
    canukstormargonaut
  • Reply 7 of 23
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,689member
    steviet02 said:
    mj web said:
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
    I doubt they will do that. They want these devices very much dependent on the iPhone. Plus, the electronics vs battery aren't there for them to do that even if they wanted to. The chunkiness needs to go away, looks like a mini iPod on the wrist of most people. Personally, I like the round watches better so I hope they figure out a way to make a round watch.
    from a physical hardware standpoint, making the watch round is no issue. It's making an elegant UI that goes along with it. Not everyone is attracted to square watches, so I assume sooner or later, Apple will have to add a round Apple Watch to the collection.
    steviet02argonautcornchip
  • Reply 8 of 23
    roakeroake Posts: 809member
    steviet02 said:
    mj web said:
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
    I doubt they will do that. They want these devices very much dependent on the iPhone. Plus, the electronics vs battery aren't there for them to do that even if they wanted to. The chunkiness needs to go away, looks like a mini iPod on the wrist of most people. Personally, I like the round watches better so I hope they figure out a way to make a round watch.
    I wonder if they will someday create an android app to make them compatible with that platform.  
  • Reply 9 of 23
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    mj web said:
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
    Cramming all the extra radios into the watch isn't going to happen anytime soon so all the features I like that depend on communication with the 'net require the iPhone. And I'm okay with that as I NEVER leave my iPhone behind. Just never.

    I just about never get below about 60% on watch battery power by midnight when I'm done for the day so I'm happy with the battery. Plus I like the looks. If all I wanted was a bauble I'd wear some Swatch toy. Or my just tells the date and time Rolex. (Now THERE'S "clunky looking", far thicker than my Apple Watch for one).
    edited January 2016 nolamacguycornchip
  • Reply 10 of 23
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    steviet02 said:
    mj web said:
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
    I doubt they will do that. They want these devices very much dependent on the iPhone.
    Apple always skates to where the puck is going, and not to where it used to be.

    The smartphone is where it used to be.  I expect that devices will increasingly connect to and use the network independently.  Apple is not going to tether its fortunes to ever-increasing cellphone penetration.  That would be living in the past.
    edited January 2016 nolamacguycornchip
  • Reply 11 of 23
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,689member
    stevie said:
    steviet02 said:
    I doubt they will do that. They want these devices very much dependent on the iPhone.
    Apple always skates to where the puck is going, and not to where it used to be.

    The smartphone is where it used to be.  I expect that devices will increasingly connect to and use the network independently.  Apple is not going to tether its fortunes to ever-increasing cellphone penetration.  That would be living in the past.
    "Apple is not going to tether its fortunes to ever-increasing cellphone penetration."

    You're right, it won't and shouldn't. But that doesn't mean Apple Watch has to work independent of iPhone. Here's another perspective:

    http://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/1/19/apple-is-moving-beyond-the-iphone
  • Reply 12 of 23
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    jfc1138 said: Cramming all the extra radios into the watch isn't going to happen anytime soon so all the features I like that depend on communication with the 'net require the iPhone. And I'm okay with that as I NEVER leave my iPhone behind. Just never.
    No. All those features that depend on the net where wifi isn't an option require an iPhone. I use the Watch essentially independent of the iPhone now. Good wifi coverage allows it to connect to the net in many places. Driving is about the only place it won't work, and many new cars are changing that.

    I believe apple is absolutely looking to move the watch away from the iPhone as quickly as possible, though LTE is going to be a ways away. But around the office and home, or working out, or at a coffee house, traveling, or shopping wifi has more or less got you covered.

    in fact, I expect Apple to eventually allow the watch to pair to the iPod Touch, iPad, and even the Mac, for all those customers who don't have iPhones but own other Apple devices. 
    jfc1138
  • Reply 13 of 23
    jfc1138 said:
    mj web said:
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
    Or my just tells the date and time Rolex. (Now THERE'S "clunky looking", far thicker than my Apple Watch for one).
    But it's round, for some reason round watches get away with that much more than square. As far as the battery goes, you must not be getting a lot of notifications or doing any fitness stuff with it to have 60% left. Thats not the norm, for sure.
  • Reply 14 of 23
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    steviet02 said:
    jfc1138 said:
    Or my just tells the date and time Rolex. (Now THERE'S "clunky looking", far thicker than my Apple Watch for one).
    But it's round, for some reason round watches get away with that much more than square. As far as the battery goes, you must not be getting a lot of notifications or doing any fitness stuff with it to have 60% left. Thats not the norm, for sure.
    Are there linkable statistics from surveys on what remains of the battery under users everyday usage? That's one of those, like iPhone battery that I bet is all over the map in anecdoteville.

    Granted today at work has been light so far: 3:59 of standby, 14 minutes of usage. Most days usage is a couple of hours... which parallels with 40% consumed given the stated battery life.... True: no fitness activity per se: just activity tracking as it does standard. I do bet that like the iPhone navigation would push power consumption.


    edited January 2016 cornchip
  • Reply 15 of 23
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member

    mac_128 said:
    jfc1138 said: Cramming all the extra radios into the watch isn't going to happen anytime soon so all the features I like that depend on communication with the 'net require the iPhone. And I'm okay with that as I NEVER leave my iPhone behind. Just never.
    No. All those features that depend on the net where wifi isn't an option require an iPhone. I use the Watch essentially independent of the iPhone now. Good wifi coverage allows it to connect to the net in many places. Driving is about the only place it won't work, and many new cars are changing that.

    I believe apple is absolutely looking to move the watch away from the iPhone as quickly as possible, though LTE is going to be a ways away. But around the office and home, or working out, or at a coffee house, traveling, or shopping wifi has more or less got you covered.

    in fact, I expect Apple to eventually allow the watch to pair to the iPod Touch, iPad, and even the Mac, for all those customers who don't have iPhones but own other Apple devices. 
    Hadn't considered WiFi and yes that's different: especially with places such as NYC deploying those high speed, encrypted,  wifi kiosks. Frankly I'm a little too paranoid to use generic wandering WiFi, I got spooked once at NYC Penn station when what I thought was AMTRAK at second look was some spoof site trying to redirect me to the Caribbean somewhere! Thank you AT&T unlimited data LTE!

    So yes, independence is an obvious goal: but not for the next iteration as for complete independence it will need LTE (or the follow on version) as I expect cellular to always be more ubiquitous than WiFi if for no other reason that the greater range of cellular signals....
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 16 of 23
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    mj web said:
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
    do you own one? battery life has never been a concern. when i charge it alongside my phone at night, it has close to half a full charge.
    jfc1138
  • Reply 17 of 23
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member

    steviet02 said:
    jfc1138 said:
    Or my just tells the date and time Rolex. (Now THERE'S "clunky looking", far thicker than my Apple Watch for one).
    But it's round, for some reason round watches get away with that much more than square. As far as the battery goes, you must not be getting a lot of notifications or doing any fitness stuff with it to have 60% left. Thats not the norm, for sure.
    i do a couple hours of fitness activity and am routinely at 45% at bedtime.
    jfc1138
  • Reply 18 of 23

    steviet02 said:
    But it's round, for some reason round watches get away with that much more than square. As far as the battery goes, you must not be getting a lot of notifications or doing any fitness stuff with it to have 60% left. Thats not the norm, for sure.
    i do a couple hours of fitness activity and am routinely at 45% at bedtime.
    Same here.  I usually wear mine while playing basketball every afternoon for 90 min or so, and I have a 60ish% charge at bedtime.  I only charge it every other day, and could probably stretch to a 3rd day if I wanted.
  • Reply 19 of 23
    jfc1138 said:
    mj web said:
    Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
    Cramming all the extra radios into the watch isn't going to happen anytime soon ...
    I tend to think it will take a few versions to get to that point as well, but you're also kind of exaggerating here.  To be independent of iPhone, it only needs two more "radios" to add to the two it already has.  

    Knowing Apple, the second version of the watch is likely to be thinner and have a smaller battery before it tackles such things as actual function.  /s
    cornchip
  • Reply 20 of 23
    steviet02 said:


    But it's round, for some reason round watches get away with that much more than square. As far as the battery goes, you must not be getting a lot of notifications or doing any fitness stuff with it to have 60% left. Thats not the norm, for sure.
    I think round watches "get away with that" because the round face is the most ubiquitous, an Every Man watch, and more round watches are utilitarian, such as dive watches, than square watches.

    Bigger, chunkier round watches are just an extension on a popular recognized form. More square watches occupy the elegant, high-fashion watch category, than round watches.

    Not that there aren't either shape in either category. Apple chose a rectangular watch because it is a more popular shape in the fashion world, and Apple wants that cachet. Few of them are as thick as the Apple Watch though. I wear my Apple Watches daily and the thickness doesn't bother me, and that's all I care about.




Sign In or Register to comment.