Rumor: Second-gen Apple Watch to feature new, thinner 'One Glass Solution' touchscreen

Posted:
in Apple Watch
Apple suppliers are said to be gearing up for the upcoming launch of the second-generation Apple Watch, which will allegedly conserve space with new, thinner technology behind its touchscreen OLED display.




In comments apparently made by Apple supplier TPK Holding, it was revealed that the new Apple Watch will adopt "One Glass Solution" technology, according to DigiTimes. Rather than citing its usual unnamed supply chain sources, the Taiwanese publication credited the information to TPK itself.

TPK indicated that production of the new "OGS" touch panels led to unexpected technical issues. As a result, yield rates for the new Apple Watch's touchscreen were lower than anticipated.

Touchscreens typically feature a capacitive stack of materials, including two pieces of glass, which can also be known as a "glass on glass" solution. Glass on glass is used in the OLED touchcsreen on the first-generation Apple Watch.

Little is known about Apple's upcoming wearable update, though one rumor from over a year ago suggested the second-generation model will look exactly the same on the exterior. If that's the case, the new "OGS" touchscreen would allow for more space inside of the device, potentially accommodating a larger battery.




Partners in Apple's supply chain are said to be gearing up for a fall launch for the so-called "Apple Watch 2." The original model became available in April of 2015.

Other rumored features for the next Apple Watch include a better screen for outdoor visibility, as well as the possibility of integrated GPS and LTE cellular data.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 30
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,358member
    I'm used to the size, but a little slimming couldn't hurt, as long as they don't cut back on the battery. I don't care if they come up with superior battery tech, I don't want to lose any run time by making the battery thinner.  

    It gets a day and then some, most days. Sometimes it gets a little close, so any increase in battery capacity is always welcome. Making the Watch thinner but keeping run time the same isn't progress.
    Deelrondrewys808
  • Reply 2 of 30
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member

    Other rumored features for the next Apple Watch include a better screen for outdoor visibility, as well as the possibility of integrated GPS and LTE cellular data.
    You're just not going to let go of this, are you? It's not happening, nor does it need to.

    The only thing that could possibly get me to upgrade the watch would be a larger model. 42mm is still rather small for a men's watch.
    Deelronration aldoozydozen
  • Reply 3 of 30
    mtbnutmtbnut Posts: 199member
    I'm stuck because the new Suunto OLED touchscreen watches come out next month. As a cyclist, this watch really appeals to me, and the battery life on the Apple Watch sucks ass big time (and if I start Strava from the Watch, which launches heart rate measurement during the ride, then I get about eight turns of the cranks before the Watch dies).
    edited July 2016 longpath
  • Reply 4 of 30
    nhughesnhughes Posts: 770editor
    TurboPGT said:

    Other rumored features for the next Apple Watch include a better screen for outdoor visibility, as well as the possibility of integrated GPS and LTE cellular data.
    You're just not going to let go of this, are you? It's not happening, nor does it need to.

    The only thing that could possibly get me to upgrade the watch would be a larger model. 42mm is still rather small for a men's watch.
    Let go of what? A logical rumor that we've reported on a few times before?

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/04/25/apple-watch-2-expected-to-feature-cellular-connectivity-faster-s2-chip
    netmage
  • Reply 5 of 30
    sockrolidsockrolid Posts: 2,789member
    Other rumored features for the next Apple Watch include a better screen for outdoor visibility, as well as the possibility of integrated GPS and LTE cellular data.
    Cellular radio (voice and/or data) would be very interesting.
    cali
  • Reply 6 of 30
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    nhughes said:
    TurboPGT said:
    You're just not going to let go of this, are you? It's not happening, nor does it need to.

    The only thing that could possibly get me to upgrade the watch would be a larger model. 42mm is still rather small for a men's watch.
    Let go of what? A logical rumor that we've reported on a few times before?

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/04/25/apple-watch-2-expected-to-feature-cellular-connectivity-faster-s2-chip
    It's not logical, nor a rumor. You picked up on a musing by the WSJ, who wouldn't know otherwise, and turned it into more than it is because...again...It's just something that you keep repeating that you would like to see, despite how illogical it is for an Apple Watch. This is not a standalone product. It is from top to bottom designed as an iPhone accessory, and that is not changing. It is fundamental to the product. Apple has gone to great length to leverage the mandatory connection to iPhone and avoid redundant features (things like GPS, LTE) crippling the Apple Watch.
    radarthekatration aldoozydozenbestkeptsecret
  • Reply 7 of 30
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,064member
    Logic. You keep using that word. I do not think I means what you think it means.
    sirlance99TurboPGTdoozydozennetmage
  • Reply 8 of 30
    TurboPGT said:
    nhughes said:
    Let go of what? A logical rumor that we've reported on a few times before?

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/04/25/apple-watch-2-expected-to-feature-cellular-connectivity-faster-s2-chip
    It's not logical, nor a rumor. You picked up on a musing by the WSJ, who wouldn't know otherwise, and turned it into more than it is because...again...It's just something that you keep repeating that you would like to see, despite how illogical it is for an Apple Watch. This is not a standalone product. It is from top to bottom designed as an iPhone accessory, and that is not changing. It is fundamental to the product. Apple has gone to great length to leverage the mandatory connection to iPhone and avoid redundant features (things like GPS, LTE) crippling the Apple Watch.
    I'm glad we have Turbo who can speak for the entire world and tell us what's logical or not and knows Apple's future product plans of what they will or won't do. Who needs an explanation when all you have to do is just say "illogical" and people should believe you?

    Yes the current product is designed as an iPhone accessory. However future Apple Watch models that can be standalone with GPS and cell connectivity is a very logical step. Lots of runners or people at the gym don't want to carry their phone when exercising. It's called forward thinking and miniaturization of technology. It's been going on for the past 30+ years.
    nhugheswilliamlondondoozydozen
  • Reply 9 of 30
    nhughesnhughes Posts: 770editor
    TurboPGT said:
    nhughes said:
    Let go of what? A logical rumor that we've reported on a few times before?

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/04/25/apple-watch-2-expected-to-feature-cellular-connectivity-faster-s2-chip
    It's not logical, nor a rumor. You picked up on a musing by the WSJ, who wouldn't know otherwise, and turned it into more than it is because...again...It's just something that you keep repeating that you would like to see, despite how illogical it is for an Apple Watch. This is not a standalone product. It is from top to bottom designed as an iPhone accessory, and that is not changing. It is fundamental to the product. Apple has gone to great length to leverage the mandatory connection to iPhone and avoid redundant features (things like GPS, LTE) crippling the Apple Watch.
    You seem to think that I have a dog in this fight and that's why I included it in the story. I can assure you I did not include that tidbit out of some personal hopes. Just reporting what we know to the best of our ability.
  • Reply 10 of 30
    homiehomie Posts: 44member
    GPS in the watch?  I guess it would be fine if it made GPS apps faster.  But really, I have absolutely no need or want for another LTE device to add to my data plan for another $10 per month.  Let's eat up battery and spend more money on a couple of redundant features.  Great idea!

    Make it faster.  Make it communicate faster with the iPhone.  Battery  is fine for a day right now but if I could get a couple of days that would be better.

    The watch needs speed, and maybe some other sensors - like blood pressure, blood sugar, etc.  What if it could identify a heart attack in progress?  This is where advancements can come.  Some, like blood sugar, would be fine as an add-on in a smart band and only needed by those that have elevated sugar issues.  

    Better software for exercise measurement and recording would be good too.
    fotoformatration alnolamacguymac fan
  • Reply 11 of 30
    JinTechJinTech Posts: 1,022member
    mtbnut said:
    I'm stuck because the new Suunto OLED touchscreen watches come out next month. As a cyclist, this watch really appeals to me, and the battery life on the Apple Watch sucks ass big time (and if I start Strava from the Watch, which launches heart rate measurement during the ride, then I get about eight turns of the cranks before the Watch dies).
    Really? I use Strava daily for about a 7 mile round trip ride plus eight hours of on time at work, and by the time I get home I still have about 40% battery left. 
    nolamacguynetmage
  • Reply 12 of 30
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    TurboPGT said:
    It's not logical, nor a rumor. You picked up on a musing by the WSJ, who wouldn't know otherwise, and turned it into more than it is because...again...It's just something that you keep repeating that you would like to see, despite how illogical it is for an Apple Watch. This is not a standalone product. It is from top to bottom designed as an iPhone accessory, and that is not changing. It is fundamental to the product. Apple has gone to great length to leverage the mandatory connection to iPhone and avoid redundant features (things like GPS, LTE) crippling the Apple Watch.
    I'm glad we have Turbo who can speak for the entire world and tell us what's logical or not and knows Apple's future product plans of what they will or won't do. Who needs an explanation when all you have to do is just say "illogical" and people should believe you?

    Yes the current product is designed as an iPhone accessory. However future Apple Watch models that can be standalone with GPS and cell connectivity is a very logical step. Lots of runners or people at the gym don't want to carry their phone when exercising. It's called forward thinking and miniaturization of technology. It's been going on for the past 30+ years.
    It's not that simple. When you really look at Apple Watch, the entire product that they took years to develop, is 100% an iPhone accessory, and a complete non-starter without the iPhone.
    I understand what you're saying. It's not like it isn't of course a hypothetical goal for the product in general. But it doesn't take much to understand that it is not a short term goal. Apple is committed to leveraging iPhone for Apple Watch features. LTE on Apple Watch is so far in the future you couldn't see it with a crystal ball.

    ration al
  • Reply 13 of 30
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    homie said:
    Battery  is fine for a day right now but if I could get a couple of days that would be better.
    I've yet to hear a compelling argument for why a product like iPhone or Apple Watch need to last longer than 1 day on their battery. You sleep at night. You don't use these products when you're sleeping. Be responsible, and put them on the charger. Ready to go when you wake up.

    It's not that more better battery isn't always better, its just not necessary. It doesn't warrant expending development and engineering resources that could be better spent elsewhere.
    ration aldoozydozenpscooter63nolamacguy
  • Reply 14 of 30
    Who would NOT WANT a watch that was fully independent of a phone, that you can make and receive phone calls on, that was thinner and with battery life that lasted more than one day between charges?
    sphericcali
  • Reply 15 of 30
    eightzero said:
    Logic. You keep using that word. I do not think I means what you think it means.
    Who is “I” — and if so, how many? ;-)
  • Reply 16 of 30
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    A watch half as thin with the same battery life or possibly better would be a WINNER. I would expect to see it sell twice as fast.

    TurboPGT said:
    homie said:
    Battery  is fine for a day right now but if I could get a couple of days that would be better.
    I've yet to hear a compelling argument for why a product like iPhone or Apple Watch need to last longer than 1 day on their battery. You sleep at night. You don't use these products when you're sleeping. Be responsible, and put them on the charger. Ready to go when you wake up.

    It's not that more better battery isn't always better, its just not necessary. It doesn't warrant expending development and engineering resources that could be better spent elsewhere.

    Sleep monitors.

    macgui said:
    It gets a day and then some, most days. Sometimes it gets a little close, so any increase in battery capacity is always welcome. Making the Watch thinner but keeping run time the same isn't progress.

    Are you kidding? Any device half the size with the SAME battery life is a huge leap in modern technology.  Not even iPhone has advanced this fast each generation. It took iPhone almost a decade to cut size in half with slightly better battery life.
    edited July 2016 doozydozennolamacguywilliamlondonnetmagehomie
  • Reply 17 of 30
    macgui said:
    I'm used to the size, but a little slimming couldn't hurt, as long as they don't cut back on the battery. I don't care if they come up with superior battery tech, I don't want to lose any run time by making the battery thinner.  

    It gets a day and then some, most days. Sometimes it gets a little close, so any increase in battery capacity is always welcome. Making the Watch thinner but keeping run time the same isn't progress.
    Good points...I am also getting used to the size...but thinner is nicer. 
  • Reply 18 of 30
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 2,316member
    Who would NOT WANT a watch that was fully independent of a phone, that you can make and receive phone calls on, that was thinner and with battery life that lasted more than one day between charges?
    If there is any truth to the rumour of LTE than I'd think we are talking LTE Cat0. Low power, low bandwidth so I don't think it's going to deliver on the expectations people have when they hear cellular modem in the watch. 

    I would think even with the tech it's still going to limited to expanding the distance you can get away from your phone while still working, Similar to how being in trusted wifi coverage gives you greater range. It's still going the phone as trusted store. 
  • Reply 19 of 30
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    mtbnut said:
    I'm stuck because the new Suunto OLED touchscreen watches come out next month. As a cyclist, this watch really appeals to me, and the battery life on the Apple Watch sucks ass big time (and if I start Strava from the Watch, which launches heart rate measurement during the ride, then I get about eight turns of the cranks before the Watch dies).
    how odd -- I routinely do a two-hour workout using the Apple workout app so it tracks my HR, and I still get all day battery life. sounds like your app is broken. 
    netmage
  • Reply 20 of 30
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Who would NOT WANT a watch that was fully independent of a phone, that you can make and receive phone calls on, that was thinner and with battery life that lasted more than one day between charges?
    who wouldn't want a jet pack too? those things are great but the core technology isn't there yet. 
    netmage
Sign In or Register to comment.