Apple announces $399 Apple Watch Series 3 with cellular, letting you ditch your iPhone for...

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 98
    entropys said:
    I wonder if this is a stealth way to get carriers to start accepting esims more broadly?
    it would seem the LTE watch will be an add on to your iPhone contract and thus the same number. 
    I wonder if stand alone is possible, and also data only?
    Wonder how much that add-on plan costs.
  • Reply 42 of 98
    I wonder if you have to have an iPhone in order to set up an LTE Watch 3. The demo pointed out that it would share your phone number but said nothing about just buying the watch, getting a cellular number and account. I can imagine that if it really is completely independent that it would cut into iPhone sales. It would be the lowest priced iPhone and Watch in one.
  • Reply 43 of 98
    diruocco said:
    you would still need an iPhone to make this all work right?
    Nope. You can use it without a phone, but you would of course need to have a cellular plan. I don't believe they mentioned how much such plans would run for the new Watch.


    edited September 2017 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 44 of 98
    Jeff did specifically say AW3 and watchOS4 incorporated find my friends functions. I'm thinking parents will want to get AW3's for their kids. Someone might want to design an app that places parental controls into the AW3, allowing tracking and notifications if the watch becomes disabled (like being taken off.) Yes, a few security challenges here, but manageable. What parent wouldn't want a lojack on their kid?

    I'm also thinking an app for 24/7/365 safety monitoring would be popular. Like the intro video featured, a "I've fallen and can't get up" kind of thing, but one that does so while reporting GPS coordinates, and activates independently or requiring voice interaction. There are cycle helmets that do this now. Sensors in the watch might detect a fall or impact. Lots of possibilities. Cool tech.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 45 of 98
    mwhite said:
    diruocco said:
    you would still need an iPhone to make this all work right?
    Nope. You can use it without a phone, but you would of course need to have a cellular plan. I don't believe they mentioned how much such plans would run for the new Watch.


    Nope.
    StrangeDays
  • Reply 46 of 98
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,362member
    MisterKit said:
    I can imagine that if it really is completely independent that it would cut into iPhone sales. It would be the lowest priced iPhone and Watch in one.
    It's not much of an iPhone, though, so I don't think it would have hardly any impact.
    StrangeDaysjony0
  • Reply 47 of 98
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 30,368member
    netrox said:
    I am actually bummed that it offers no rapid recharge nor allow me to sleep with the watch on to monitor my sleep. I rely on that as sleep health is very important to me. 

    I wear Samsung which offers sleep monitor and it lasts two days. It provides me decent info about my sleep habits. 

    I hope Apple will provide some kind of bracelet that can monitor my sleep while I leave Apple Watch overnight on a recharge and then record it back to Watch after waking up and I just leave the sleep bracelet on powerAir to recharge again. That would be convenient. 


    It doesn’t take long to charge, and if you have an old 10 watt iPad charger around, then it does charge faster. And I wear my watch every bight. I get two days of charge. And since it charges quickly, I can wake up with 10% charge, and by the time I’m ready to go down to breakfast, it’s up to over 80%. If I leave it until I’m done with breakfast, it’s at 100%.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 48 of 98
    cgWerks said:
    dkimak said:
    Was anything said about battery life?
    But, I'll admit that while I'm not sure I'll get one anytime soon, this *finally* makes the Watch a bit useful. While I'm sure it will be quite limited (in comparison to what people are imagining), this is the killer feature for the Watch.
    I'm of the opinion that different people have different primary use cases. I've had immense usefulness out of my AW from day 1. Workout tracking, wireless ipod, notifications, payments, home lighting control. Here LTE isn't a killer feature or even a requirement. But what do I know, I only have one and use it daily.
  • Reply 49 of 98

    Cripple Watch is the namn of this watch. At least outside US. No LTE and still paying a huge premium. No thanks!
    While "huge premium" is arguable, what you're getting in return with an Apple Watch is something that isn't an instantly-forgettable piece of techno-junk. I couldn't even name one of the knockoffs. I'm sure they aren't getting the awesome support that Apple is putting into watchOS, the new features are amazing.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 98
    anome said:
    Cripple Watch is the namn of this watch. At least outside US. No LTE and still paying a huge premium. No thanks!
    Not true. They listed the countries that would have data enabled (see here ), and I was quite surprised that Telstra and Optus are going to support it at launch. If you're not in one of those countries, then I recommend not buying the Cellular version. (Although it does seem a bit rough they're not offering the Stainless Steel in GPS only.)
    I'm not in one of those countries. So currently they limit it to 10 countries. To bad, I really would go for that watch if it had LTE in my country. Now I will let it be and change my Garmin Fenix 3 for the new Garmin Fenix 5, its more robust, and are more pro sports than the Apple Watch.
    No Apple Music tho. Nor does it control my HomeKit devices.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 51 of 98
    eightzero said:
    mwhite said:
    diruocco said:
    you would still need an iPhone to make this all work right?
    Nope. You can use it without a phone, but you would of course need to have a cellular plan. I don't believe they mentioned how much such plans would run for the new Watch.


    Nope.
    Yeah, what a scam. 10 bucks a month just to have the device on the cellular network seems absurd. These are the same clowns that scammed us on SMS costs for years and years.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 98
    SoliSoli Posts: 7,310member
    eightzero said:
    Nope.
    Yeah, what a scam. 10 bucks a month just to have the device on the cellular network seems absurd. These are the same clowns that scammed us on SMS costs for years and years.
    I don't want to give Verizon another $10+tax per month, but that price sounds reasonable to have a device always connected to their cellular network.
    mwhite
  • Reply 53 of 98
    diruocco said:
    you would still need an iPhone to make this all work right?
    Absolutely. You have to have an iPhone to set this up, but you can leave your phone at home or even power it down once this is set up. 
    mobird
  • Reply 54 of 98
    Cripple Watch is the namn of this watch. At least outside US. No LTE and still paying a huge premium. No thanks!
    No one is asking you or telling you to buy it. Blame your advanced wireless carriers.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 55 of 98
    entropys said:
    I wonder if this is a stealth way to get carriers to start accepting esims more broadly?
    it would seem the LTE watch will be an add on to your iPhone contract and thus the same number. 
    I wonder if stand alone is possible, and also data only?
    Stand alone is not possible. 
  • Reply 56 of 98
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,022member
    sirozha said:
    entropys said:
    I wonder if this is a stealth way to get carriers to start accepting esims more broadly?
    it would seem the LTE watch will be an add on to your iPhone contract and thus the same number. 
    I wonder if stand alone is possible, and also data only?
    Stand alone is not possible. 
    yet.
  • Reply 57 of 98
    ZRyser said:
    The one product I really looked forward to at this event, and in fact had been waiting for for years, is the LTE Apple Watch. It's totally deflating to learn it won't be available here in Denmark. So disappointed and sick of this. This is something, that would have made an actual difference in my daily life.
    Blame your advanced wireless carriers. 
  • Reply 58 of 98
    dkimak said:
    Was anything said about battery life?
    18 hours like Apple Watch 2. However, my Apple Warch 2 normally lasts 48 hours. 
  • Reply 59 of 98
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,022member
    tylersdad said:
    I don't understand why they'd keep the Series 1 and get rid of the Series 2. Why not lower the price of the Series 2 to Series 1 levels? 
    I agree. The Series 1 is not waterproof. While it's sufficiently water resistant for most, doesn't it make sense to eliminate that problem completely from such a device? Did they maybe upgrade the water proofing on the Series 1 to that of the Series 2?
  • Reply 60 of 98
    eightzero said:
    This was a highlight today. I will upgrade to one at some point, but I suspect it will be when carriers start tossing in the cellular connection for free. Sure, an "intro rate" is all fine and good (and I see they didn't discuss those) but I'm wary of these add ons. It adds up quickly.

    The price will drop, and carriers will use that add-in as a promo. Then I'll bite. For now, I really like my original.
    Your best bet is with T-Mobile. 
Sign In or Register to comment.