It's interesting to see confirmation that it will use an eSIM. It's a no brainer, really, since, as pointed out in the article, there's nowhere to put a slot for a SIM tray. I will be interested to see what happens with eSIM adoption as a result.
For instance, Australia is a market where the eSIM is yet to be adopted. If you buy a modern iPad with LTE, you can't use the eSIM to connect to any of the local Telcos, only to roaming services for international travel. The AppleWatch could be the product that gets Australian telcos to support the eSIM, although it wouldn't surprise me if they only support it as a limited service: only on the watch, only connected to a mobile phone plan, and so on.
One thing I'd like to see, but I suspect it won't be in the initial implementation from Apple, is tethering to the watch. It might just be because I've left my LTE modem in one too many coffee shops, though.
For me, eSIMs as standard can't come soon enough.
I quite agree. That's why I hope the LTE watch, and the potential to make an extra $5 a month out of people like me, might get Telstra and/or Optus to adopt it. Even if it does start out as restricted as I suggested above, it's a step forward, and will (hopefully) eventually lead to them allowing it across the board.
There is nothing worse than having to fiddle with little nano-SIMs and an ejector tool on the tray table of a plane when flying overseas. Hit one air pocket, and you spend the next half hour trying to reach them on the floor right by your feet... If we can't have eSIMs, then go back to the full size SIM card we had back in the early 90s.
As I noted in a previous most with a link to an article, AT&T and Verizon are offering LTE-M data plans for $1.50–$2.00/month, respectively. Melgross keeps saying $5 but I haven't seen a single article to back up that claim and discredit the article I posted.
As for Telstra and Optus, are those there official plan rates for LTE-M? It seems like the US is the one that typically has higher charges over Australia.
A$5 is what I'm currently paying to share the data allowance on my phone account with my iPad. Taking into account exchange rates, taxes, etc, it's not [I]much[/I] more than US$2. I expect, should Telstra support an LTE Apple Watch, they will charge me the same again.to add another device.
The A$5 is basically a minimum data plan with 100MB per month, it's just added to the data sharing plan for my phone. (Telstra changed all their smartphone plans to data sharing by default.)
Well it is either LTE-M which doesn't support VoLTE and wasn't designed for continuous data connection for VoIP, or it simply doesn't have call function ever.
The industry was also expecting to test Half Duplex FDD LTE with LTE-M, making the design much cheaper.
My guess is that this is why Apple went to court with Qualcomm, no more CDMA patents required for LTE Data only services, and if they won, we could expect LTE across Mac and iPad as standard.
Data is the key...
Who really finds it conveniant to make call on the watch?
With both GPS and LTE I would be happy to leave my phone at home. So, ME! ... And yes, I've used it for phone calls. It felt strange talking to my wrist, but it works surprisingly well.
...a new LTE-connected model expected to arrive later this year will reportedly focus on delivering data to users faster, meaning FaceTime and apps may serve as a stand-in for cell phone calls.
Back to topic. This sucks. I love my iPhone 7 plus. It has largely replaced my iPad for work purposes. I don't want to run or ride my bike with it. I would be very appreciative if Apple Watch took calls (have to be accessible).
I have an iPhone 6+ and run and bike with it. For running I make sure I wear shorts with pockets -- and it works well. For biking I stick it in my trunk in back -- then use the Apple Watch for calls & texts.
But, an Apple Watch with both GPS and LTE makes it possible to run & bike and still maintain communications (even if its only FaceTime audio) without lugging the iPhone around. For me, that makes it very worthwhile to upgrade from my original series. (Right now, adding GPS to the watch doesn't do much for me because I carry my phone anyway. But LTE on the watch could change that).
I'm on board with this because those are trademarks and brand names used by Apple so I'd never expect them to use that in their official marketing. I'm not going to hunt down colloquial dialogue by Apple execs to prove it, but I'm willing to bet you they've all referred to "iPhones" instead of always saying "iPhone devices."
It's interesting to see confirmation that it will use an eSIM. It's a no brainer, really, since, as pointed out in the article, there's nowhere to put a slot for a SIM tray. I will be interested to see what happens with eSIM adoption as a result.
For instance, Australia is a market where the eSIM is yet to be adopted. If you buy a modern iPad with LTE, you can't use the eSIM to connect to any of the local Telcos, only to roaming services for international travel. The AppleWatch could be the product that gets Australian telcos to support the eSIM, although it wouldn't surprise me if they only support it as a limited service: only on the watch, only connected to a mobile phone plan, and so on.
One thing I'd like to see, but I suspect it won't be in the initial implementation from Apple, is tethering to the watch. It might just be because I've left my LTE modem in one too many coffee shops, though.
For me, eSIMs as standard can't come soon enough.
I quite agree. That's why I hope the LTE watch, and the potential to make an extra $5 a month out of people like me, might get Telstra and/or Optus to adopt it. Even if it does start out as restricted as I suggested above, it's a step forward, and will (hopefully) eventually lead to them allowing it across the board.
There is nothing worse than having to fiddle with little nano-SIMs and an ejector tool on the tray table of a plane when flying overseas. Hit one air pocket, and you spend the next half hour trying to reach them on the floor right by your feet... If we can't have eSIMs, then go back to the full size SIM card we had back in the early 90s.
As I noted in a previous most with a link to an article, AT&T and Verizon are offering LTE-M data plans for $1.50–$2.00/month, respectively. Melgross keeps saying $5 but I haven't seen a single article to back up that claim and discredit the article I posted.
As for Telstra and Optus, are those there official plan rates for LTE-M? It seems like the US is the one that typically has higher charges over Australia.
A$5 is what I'm currently paying to share the data allowance on my phone account with my iPad. Taking into account exchange rates, taxes, etc, it's not [I]much[/I] more than US$2. I expect, should Telstra support an LTE Apple Watch, they will charge me the same again.to add another device.
The A$5 is basically a minimum data plan with 100MB per month, it's just added to the data sharing plan for my phone. (Telstra changed all their smartphone plans to data sharing by default.)
An extra $2 USD to connect an iPad to a cellular network sounds great. Hell, $5 USD sounds great.
Data is the key...
Who really finds it conveniant to make call on the watch?
With both GPS and LTE I would be happy to leave my phone at home. So, ME! ... And yes, I've used it for phone calls. It felt strange talking to my wrist, but it works surprisingly well.
How would you do that with LTE-M? Are you then expecting to use FaceTime audio or Skype for calls? Will that even be possible?
Consider this. I happen to like the form factor based on the Cartier Santos watch. I had one for many years. Given how the data is displayed, I can't see how a round form would make a great deal of sense from an efficiency standpoint. I read with great interest the concern than an LTE version would eat up battery life. To those people I would refer them to several earlier articles speculating on a battery boosting watch band. If the data plan were $5/month or less unlimited, I'd be in. I have never liked having to have my phone on me at all times. Several times I have been doing something around the house when the doorman rang up or a client called and I didn't want to go rummaging for my phone yet i wanted to acknowledge the call.
I read with great interest the concern than an LTE version would eat up battery life. To those people I would refer them to several earlier articles speculating on a battery boosting watch band.
I don't see the battery bands coming, but if they do use LTE-M and switch to microLED (as well as other more efficient components) the battery life could be as good or better with normal usage while connecting to a cellular network.
It's interesting to see confirmation that it will use an eSIM. It's a no brainer, really, since, as pointed out in the article, there's nowhere to put a slot for a SIM tray. I will be interested to see what happens with eSIM adoption as a result.
For instance, Australia is a market where the eSIM is yet to be adopted. If you buy a modern iPad with LTE, you can't use the eSIM to connect to any of the local Telcos, only to roaming services for international travel. The AppleWatch could be the product that gets Australian telcos to support the eSIM, although it wouldn't surprise me if they only support it as a limited service: only on the watch, only connected to a mobile phone plan, and so on.
One thing I'd like to see, but I suspect it won't be in the initial implementation from Apple, is tethering to the watch. It might just be because I've left my LTE modem in one too many coffee shops, though.
For me, eSIMs as standard can't come soon enough.
I quite agree. That's why I hope the LTE watch, and the potential to make an extra $5 a month out of people like me, might get Telstra and/or Optus to adopt it. Even if it does start out as restricted as I suggested above, it's a step forward, and will (hopefully) eventually lead to them allowing it across the board.
There is nothing worse than having to fiddle with little nano-SIMs and an ejector tool on the tray table of a plane when flying overseas. Hit one air pocket, and you spend the next half hour trying to reach them on the floor right by your feet... If we can't have eSIMs, then go back to the full size SIM card we had back in the early 90s.
As I noted in a previous most with a link to an article, AT&T and Verizon are offering LTE-M data plans for $1.50–$2.00/month, respectively. Melgross keeps saying $5 but I haven't seen a single article to back up that claim and discredit the article I posted.
As for Telstra and Optus, are those there official plan rates for LTE-M? It seems like the US is the one that typically has higher charges over Australia.
I use Verizon, and they told me that they have the offer in place, and it costs $5 a month. AT&T also has a similar plan, also for $5.
while I know that AT&Ts plan is now down to $5 a month, it’s hard to find it. It used to be $15 for a smart watch with LTE!
T-Mobile is very expensive. They charge $20 a month for an LTE tablet, instead of $10 I pay at Verizon. And they want $10 a month for an LTE smartwatch. Scroll down a bit to see it.
Which people that exclusively use an Android phone are likely to purchase an Apple Watch, at least at this point?
Apple has an installed base of ~700+ million iPhone users. There is no need to go out hunting Android phone users when the user experience would not be as good - better to focus the resources on making the AW more useful to iPhone owners.
Maybe by Apple Watch Series 8 it might make sense...
I disagree. You’re way too dismissive. You shouldn’t be.
It's interesting to see confirmation that it will use an eSIM. It's a no brainer, really, since, as pointed out in the article, there's nowhere to put a slot for a SIM tray. I will be interested to see what happens with eSIM adoption as a result.
For instance, Australia is a market where the eSIM is yet to be adopted. If you buy a modern iPad with LTE, you can't use the eSIM to connect to any of the local Telcos, only to roaming services for international travel. The AppleWatch could be the product that gets Australian telcos to support the eSIM, although it wouldn't surprise me if they only support it as a limited service: only on the watch, only connected to a mobile phone plan, and so on.
One thing I'd like to see, but I suspect it won't be in the initial implementation from Apple, is tethering to the watch. It might just be because I've left my LTE modem in one too many coffee shops, though.
For me, eSIMs as standard can't come soon enough.
I quite agree. That's why I hope the LTE watch, and the potential to make an extra $5 a month out of people like me, might get Telstra and/or Optus to adopt it. Even if it does start out as restricted as I suggested above, it's a step forward, and will (hopefully) eventually lead to them allowing it across the board.
There is nothing worse than having to fiddle with little nano-SIMs and an ejector tool on the tray table of a plane when flying overseas. Hit one air pocket, and you spend the next half hour trying to reach them on the floor right by your feet... If we can't have eSIMs, then go back to the full size SIM card we had back in the early 90s.
As I noted in a previous most with a link to an article, AT&T and Verizon are offering LTE-M data plans for $1.50–$2.00/month, respectively. Melgross keeps saying $5 but I haven't seen a single article to back up that claim and discredit the article I posted.
As for Telstra and Optus, are those there official plan rates for LTE-M? It seems like the US is the one that typically has higher charges over Australia.
I use Verizon, and they told me that they have the offer in place, and it costs $5 a month. AT&T also has a similar plan, also for $5.
whi,e I know that AT&Ts plan is now down to $5 a month, it’s hard to find it. It used to be $15 for a smart watch with LTE!
T-Mobile is very expensive. They charge $20 a month for an LTE tablet, instead of $10 like I Pay at Verizon. And they want $10 a month for an LTE smartwatch. Scroll down a bit to see it.
im not bothering to look up Sprint, but I’m pretty sure it’s somewhere around these three.
1) I'm not making any statement about what is or isn't, except for what I referenced in the article. If you think that article from 2(?) months is incorrect about iOT pricing for LTE-M then I'm curious as to how they got it so wrong.
2) "$20 for an LTE tablet" means we're likely not talking about the same technology. Which tablets are using LTE-M?
people will want to make/receive regular calls if they pay monthly bills to a carrier for their iwatch.
It’s $5 a month from most carriers for an LTE smartwatch now. If it can make, and receive regular calls, what do you think the carriers will do? Likely, they’ll raise the price to at least $10 a month, which is what I pay for our iPads. And they can’t originate a regular call. They may want to charge the same as a smartphone.
It’s not iwatch. It’s Apple Watch.
1) LTE-M rates look to be between $1.50–$2.00 per month.
2) There's not wrong with calling it iWatch instead of just saying Watch or writing out Apple Watch. I refer to iOS-based devices like the iPhone and iPad as iDevices despite that not being any official branding term from Apple. We have all sorts of shorthand on this forum, like MBP for MacBook Pro. iWatch is no different.
Yeah, but it’s not the iwatch. It’s just the wrong name. I don’t see anything wrong in pointing out that it’s the wrong name, because it is. You don’t have to write it out if you’re using an Apple product because using text replacement allows you to write awatch, and have it come out as Apple Watch. I imagine other OSs allow the same thing. MBP is the correct abbreviation for Macbook Pro, which again, I have in text replacement as mbp. You wouldn’t call it the PowerBook Pro, or the pbp, would you?
thats ioT. Verizon, and others, charge $5 a month for LTE smartwatches.
I just call the Watch (cap W), which is technically correct?
If you’re saying “Apple’s watch”, it doesn’t matter, though lower case would be the correct way. It depends. If you’re saying “the watch”, that isn’t necessarily referring to it by name, so that’s ok too.but if you’re intending to use the name then it should be either Apple Watch, which is the official name, or, to abbreviate it, aWatch, or AWatch, which just looks odd.
normally, the full name or the accepted abbreviation (when easily recognizable) of a product name is acceptable. But changing it isn’t correct. I was in advertising for a number of years, and my company, after that, dealt with brand names on a regular basis. Companies can get very feisty about improper spelling and abbreviations. And Apple had a brief fight over iWatch. Whether that was a reason they didn’t use it, I don’t know. But they’re apparently through with using “i” in front of names, and I think we should honor their branding choices by using them appropriately.
Actually, on Apple's main web page, the top banner (which says "Mac", "iPad" and "iPhone") simply says "Watch".
Yes, because on their own website headline page, it would be redundant. But if you go to the actual pages, you’ll see the actual name that they use with the Apple graphic. Headline items are often pared down. But not when they talk about the actual product. And you see above that, that they are all described by Apple as the - Apple Watch.
Yes, because on their own website headline page, it would be redundant. But if you go to the actual pages, you’ll see the actual name that they use with the Apple graphic. Headline items are often pared down. But not when they talk about the actual product. And you see above that, that they are all described by Apple as the - Apple Watch.
Redundant, like repeatedly referring to it as Apple Watch in a discussion about the Apple Watch on a forum dedicated to Apple news. Thank you for finally seeing that Watch is perfectly acceptable in context and even used by Apple.
It's interesting to see confirmation that it will use an eSIM. It's a no brainer, really, since, as pointed out in the article, there's nowhere to put a slot for a SIM tray. I will be interested to see what happens with eSIM adoption as a result.
For instance, Australia is a market where the eSIM is yet to be adopted. If you buy a modern iPad with LTE, you can't use the eSIM to connect to any of the local Telcos, only to roaming services for international travel. The AppleWatch could be the product that gets Australian telcos to support the eSIM, although it wouldn't surprise me if they only support it as a limited service: only on the watch, only connected to a mobile phone plan, and so on.
One thing I'd like to see, but I suspect it won't be in the initial implementation from Apple, is tethering to the watch. It might just be because I've left my LTE modem in one too many coffee shops, though.
For me, eSIMs as standard can't come soon enough.
I quite agree. That's why I hope the LTE watch, and the potential to make an extra $5 a month out of people like me, might get Telstra and/or Optus to adopt it. Even if it does start out as restricted as I suggested above, it's a step forward, and will (hopefully) eventually lead to them allowing it across the board.
There is nothing worse than having to fiddle with little nano-SIMs and an ejector tool on the tray table of a plane when flying overseas. Hit one air pocket, and you spend the next half hour trying to reach them on the floor right by your feet... If we can't have eSIMs, then go back to the full size SIM card we had back in the early 90s.
As I noted in a previous most with a link to an article, AT&T and Verizon are offering LTE-M data plans for $1.50–$2.00/month, respectively. Melgross keeps saying $5 but I haven't seen a single article to back up that claim and discredit the article I posted.
As for Telstra and Optus, are those there official plan rates for LTE-M? It seems like the US is the one that typically has higher charges over Australia.
I use Verizon, and they told me that they have the offer in place, and it costs $5 a month. AT&T also has a similar plan, also for $5.
whi,e I know that AT&Ts plan is now down to $5 a month, it’s hard to find it. It used to be $15 for a smart watch with LTE!
T-Mobile is very expensive. They charge $20 a month for an LTE tablet, instead of $10 like I Pay at Verizon. And they want $10 a month for an LTE smartwatch. Scroll down a bit to see it.
im not bothering to look up Sprint, but I’m pretty sure it’s somewhere around these three.
1) I'm not making any statement about what is or isn't, except for what I referenced in the article. If you think that article from 2(?) months is incorrect about iOT pricing for LTE-M then I'm curious as to how they got it so wrong.
2) "$20 for an LTE tablet" means we're likely not talking about the same technology. Which tablets are using LTE-M?
Because this isn’t IoT. That’s for devices like lights, or locks, or other home connected devices. You’re confusing the two. This isn’t LTE-M. It’s LTE as used in tablets as a regular data plan. I can use FaceTime, and have, with my iPads. That’s not IoT.
I showed you you what the actual smartwatch data plans cost. I don’t care about what that article was talking about, because it doesn’t matter. The plans are out, and they cost between $5 and $10 a month, and that’s the end of the story.
Consider this. I happen to like the form factor based on the Cartier Santos watch. I had one for many years. Given how the data is displayed, I can't see how a round form would make a great deal of sense from an efficiency standpoint. I read with great interest the concern than an LTE version would eat up battery life. To those people I would refer them to several earlier articles speculating on a battery boosting watch band. If the data plan were $5/month or less unlimited, I'd be in. I have never liked having to have my phone on me at all times. Several times I have been doing something around the house when the doorman rang up or a client called and I didn't want to go rummaging for my phone yet i wanted to acknowledge the call.
Actually, inside your house (unless it is quite large) you should be able to take that call on your watch already -- even though your phone is in another room.
Consider this. I happen to like the form factor based on the Cartier Santos watch. I had one for many years. Given how the data is displayed, I can't see how a round form would make a great deal of sense from an efficiency standpoint. I read with great interest the concern than an LTE version would eat up battery life. To those people I would refer them to several earlier articles speculating on a battery boosting watch band. If the data plan were $5/month or less unlimited, I'd be in. I have never liked having to have my phone on me at all times. Several times I have been doing something around the house when the doorman rang up or a client called and I didn't want to go rummaging for my phone yet i wanted to acknowledge the call.
Actually, inside your house (unless it is quite large) you should be able to take that call on your watch already -- even though your phone is in another room.
Is WiFi on the Watch and its auto connection to your home WiFi by being given the WiFI credentials from your iPhone not well known? I suppose if you're still using MAC address-based access to your home network the Watch could get ignored, but that would be some very, very, very slow watchOS updates (I'm not even sure that those updates will work solely over BT).
Consider this. I happen to like the form factor based on the Cartier Santos watch. I had one for many years. Given how the data is displayed, I can't see how a round form would make a great deal of sense from an efficiency standpoint. I read with great interest the concern than an LTE version would eat up battery life. To those people I would refer them to several earlier articles speculating on a battery boosting watch band. If the data plan were $5/month or less unlimited, I'd be in. I have never liked having to have my phone on me at all times. Several times I have been doing something around the house when the doorman rang up or a client called and I didn't want to go rummaging for my phone yet i wanted to acknowledge the call.
Actually, inside your house (unless it is quite large) you should be able to take that call on your watch already -- even though your phone is in another room.
Is WiFi on the Watch and its auto connection to your home WiFi by being given the WiFI credentials from your iPhone not well known? I suppose if you're still using MAC address-based access to your home network the Watch could get ignored, but that would be some very, very, very slow watchOS updates (I'm not even sure that those updates will work solely over BT).
I use Mac based security on my router - where I have to approve each individual Mac address before it can connect to my WiFi. I have not had to add the Apple Watch and it appears to be working properly without direct access to my router. Could it be that the iPhone is being used as a both a BT and a WiFi transmitter to the Apple Watch?
Most cellular calls sound like crap on all handsets in any case. So, perhaps LTE based FaceTime or Skype calls makes more sense from the watch. The sound quality of a phone call on an Applewatch is also horrible - so yes, I'm all for it if it makes the conversation more intelligible.
Comments
A$5 is what I'm currently paying to share the data allowance on my phone account with my iPad. Taking into account exchange rates, taxes, etc, it's not [I]much[/I] more than US$2. I expect, should Telstra support an LTE Apple Watch, they will charge me the same again.to add another device.
The A$5 is basically a minimum data plan with 100MB per month, it's just added to the data sharing plan for my phone. (Telstra changed all their smartphone plans to data sharing by default.)
The industry was also expecting to test Half Duplex FDD LTE with LTE-M, making the design much cheaper.
My guess is that this is why Apple went to court with Qualcomm, no more CDMA patents required for LTE Data only services, and if they won, we could expect LTE across Mac and iPad as standard.
With both GPS and LTE I would be happy to leave my phone at home. So, ME!
... And yes, I've used it for phone calls. It felt strange talking to my wrist, but it works surprisingly well.
I'm good with that.
For running I make sure I wear shorts with pockets -- and it works well.
For biking I stick it in my trunk in back -- then use the Apple Watch for calls & texts.
But, an Apple Watch with both GPS and LTE makes it possible to run & bike and still maintain communications (even if its only FaceTime audio) without lugging the iPhone around. For me, that makes it very worthwhile to upgrade from my original series. (Right now, adding GPS to the watch doesn't do much for me because I carry my phone anyway. But LTE on the watch could change that).
How would you do that with LTE-M? Are you then expecting to use FaceTime audio or Skype for calls? Will that even be possible?
https://community.verizonwireless.com/thread/927119
while I know that AT&Ts plan is now down to $5 a month, it’s hard to find it. It used to be $15 for a smart watch with LTE!
T-Mobile is very expensive. They charge $20 a month for an LTE tablet, instead of $10 I pay at Verizon. And they want $10 a month for an LTE smartwatch. Scroll down a bit to see it.
https://www.t-mobile.com/cell-phone-plans?icid=WMM_TM_Q117TMO1PL_2SADAX76BBT7513
im not bothering to look up Sprint, but I’m pretty sure it’s somewhere around these three.
2) "$20 for an LTE tablet" means we're likely not talking about the same technology. Which tablets are using LTE-M?
https://www.apple.com/watch/
I showed you you what the actual smartwatch data plans cost. I don’t care about what that article was talking about, because it doesn’t matter. The plans are out, and they cost between $5 and $10 a month, and that’s the end of the story.