Apple Watch Series 4 in 40mm and 44mm sizes confirmed in sitemap leak

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 38
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
    That's a new one. Have never heard anyone complain that the AW was too small...
    There are human beings with large wrists and fingers. I really want to see this 44mm in person.
    Sure, but considering that the most common complaint size-wize is the AW is too big (on presumably small & average wrists), I'd expect it to be "just right" on above-average wrists. But small?
    edited September 2018 svanstrom
  • Reply 22 of 38
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
    That's a new one. Have never heard anyone complain that the AW was too small...
    There are human beings with large wrists and fingers. I really want to see this 44mm in person.
    As true as that is, I think the watches would fit a fewer number of total people if they made the "normal" sized watch bigger.

    Right now my male-level dainty wrists absolutely couldn't go with the smaller watch, but a bigger "normal" one might make me hesitate to get one; at least if they don't make the bands a bit more flexible as far as the angle protruding from the watch.
  • Reply 23 of 38
    I have the apple watch 3  ;)
  • Reply 24 of 38
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
    That's a new one. Have never heard anyone complain that the AW was too small...
    If you’re under 230 lbs, have biceps under 18 inches, wear less than a 36 waist, and shirts medium and under, you probably wldnt understand…
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 25 of 38
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,449member
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
     Not likely. It’s only a mm taller on each side of the current watch, which is insignificant. The current watch is actually 42.5mm which means less than 1.5mm if it’s exactly 44mm or slightly less.

    The leaked digitizer seems pretty symmetrical, but they could easily increase it a mm on each side without increasing the width, which would also compensate for the extra height in the purported enlarged display, and those two extra mm may give them some important room inside the case to add more stuff, and larger battery.
  • Reply 26 of 38
    My hunch is the old bands won't fit. This is consistent with Apple's philosophy of planned obsolescence to drive new sales. 
  • Reply 27 of 38
    it sounds awfully too big for a wrest. :( 
  • Reply 28 of 38
    lbarry74 said:
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
    That's a new one. Have never heard anyone complain that the AW was too small...
    If you’re under 230 lbs, have biceps under 18 inches, wear less than a 36 waist, and shirts medium and under, you probably wldnt understand…
    There's your problem… you're trying to wear the watch around your waist and your biceps.

    Sorry, it's actually NOT an accessory for your waist and biceps as you are flexing in front of the mirrors at the gym. 
    bonobob
  • Reply 29 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,801member
    There’s no reason why the 42mm model bands won’t fit. When these pics first came out, in a slightly smaller size, I couldn’t easily tell if the corners had been rounded more, as a couple of people here said,  it now, I can see that indeed, it does look that way. Considering that, I see that the ends could have been designed so that the older bands do fit.

    i certainly hope so. I had bought the series 2 with bracket, in black carbon coat. I sold the 2 for the 3 with LTE, in black carbon, last year, but kept the $550 bracket. I’m expecting to upgrade again, if this model has what I’m expecting, and this time, my wife who was going to buy a watch last year, but didn’t, wants mine. I expect to use my bracelet with this model 4. I would be disappointed if I couldn’t.

    but I have to remind people that conventional watches with spring roll band attachments come in over a dozen widths. So if Apple came out with a third, it wouldn’t be unusual. But I hope it hasn’t, because this is only a tiny amount larger, and about 1.4mm wider. The rounded ends makes them shorter, so it should remain the same.
  • Reply 30 of 38
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,449member
    eightzero said:
    My hunch is the old bands won't fit. This is consistent with Apple's philosophy of planned obsolescence to drive new sales. 
    I disagree. If you’ve been following this, the rumored display measurements were slightly taller than the case had room for. Adding 2mm to the height of the watch does not have to change the width for the bands. There would be more to worry about if they made it thinner which doesn’t not yet seem to be the case from what we’ve seen.

    In the graphic below, you’ll see the rumored new display fits within the current case design, albeit asymmetrically relative to the bezel. Adding an extra mm on top and bottom fix this without changing anything else about the design, while presumably giving Apple extra space inside for new features and/or larger battery. 



    netrox said:
    it sounds awfully too big for a wrest. :( 
    Not at all, I doubt most people will even notice the increase of 1mm on the top and bottom.

    Of course, this does take away some of the bragging rights Apple had by releasing a 38mm sized digital watch for smaller wrists.
    edited September 2018
  • Reply 31 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,801member
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
    That's a new one. Have never heard anyone complain that the AW was too small...
    Yeah. I know guys who think it’s tiny, and would never buy it unless Apple made a “full size” model. There are people with very large wrists. A friend of mine is like that. He wants to buy one, particularly after my medical situation, but his wrist is really large. Arnold Schwarzenegger came out with his own line of watches several years ago because he’s a big guy, with big wrists. Those watches are 52mm in diameter, and watch sizes in general, for the larger sizes, have moved to 46mm. This is for round watches, which are far bigger than this.
  • Reply 32 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,801member
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
    That's a new one. Have never heard anyone complain that the AW was too small...
    There are human beings with large wrists and fingers. I really want to see this 44mm in person.
    Sure, but considering that the most common complaint size-wize is the AW is too big (on presumably small & average wrists), I'd expect it to be "just right" on above-average wrists. But small?
    Apple does have the slightly smaller size for that purpose, which you really don’t see for round smartwatches because of the inefficient shape for graphics, and particularly, text.

    way too small, even in the larger size for some people. Go to the Amazon page large watches, or oversized watches. I tried, it keeps jumping to the Amazon app instead so I can’t give the link..
  • Reply 33 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,801member
    eightzero said:
    My hunch is the old bands won't fit. This is consistent with Apple's philosophy of planned obsolescence to drive new sales. 
    That’s wrong on so many levels. Sometimes a company needs to have something that’s slightly different in order to enable new features, but that doesn’t mean they’re doing it specifically to obsolete something current. If that were the situation, they would have done this last year. For better battery life, and a usefully larger screen, the case had to change somewhat. I doubt the 42mm watch bands can’t be used, but if true, it wasn’t to drive band sales, as that would be stupid.
  • Reply 34 of 38
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
    That's a new one. Have never heard anyone complain that the AW was too small...
    They used to say the same about the iPhones. Today, Apple will introduce one the size of a toilet seat cover-:)
  • Reply 35 of 38
    dewmedewme Posts: 2,125member
    svanstrom said:
    dewme said:
    Spoilers gotta spoil. Geez, hang on for just 4 more hours and tell the spoilers to go pound sand. It's like when you were a kid and one of your siblings determined where "Santa" was hiding all the unwrapped presents. Do you really want to spoil the surprise? Why not just let it be fun and enjoy the moment as it unwraps.
    Damn all these rumour websites that are forcing me to look at them.
    There’s a difference between speculation and last minute tapping into artifacts that are a normal part of the announcement and release process.
  • Reply 36 of 38
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,801member
    And as we now know, the old bands WILL fit. Yea for Apple obsolescence policies.
    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 37 of 38
    melgross said:
    And as we now know, the old bands WILL fit. Yea for Apple obsolescence policies.
    People like Rene Ritchie (from iMore) will appreciate this. He has virtually every band Apple has ever made.
  • Reply 38 of 38
    svanstrom said:
    lbarry74 said:
    lbarry74 said:
    Hopefully the rumored 44 will have a bigger case; as is, my 42 looks tiny on my wrist. 
    That's a new one. Have never heard anyone complain that the AW was too small...
    If you’re under 230 lbs, have biceps under 18 inches, wear less than a 36 waist, and shirts medium and under, you probably wldnt understand…
    There's your problem… you're trying to wear the watch around your waist and your biceps.

    Sorry, it's actually NOT an accessory for your waist and biceps as you are flexing in front of the mirrors at the gym. 
    Ummmmmm… isn’t it intended for fitness tracking??? Lol. Too funny
Sign In or Register to comment.