Apple Watch 'Series 6' could use smaller batteries than Series 5

AppleInsider

The Apple Watch Series 6 may have a comparable or shorter battery life compared to previous models, with regulatory filings indicating there could be three different sizes of battery used, with two out of the three smaller than the last generation and one larger.

Apple Watch collection

Apple's refinements with the Apple Watch series have led to wearable devices that are more power-efficient, extending their battery life as much as possible to get users though the day. Initial regulatory filings relating to the next model suggest Apple may be leaning on its power efficiency improvements.

Filings with 3D, Safety Korea, and UL Demco seen by MySmartPrice reveal a trio of batteries submitted by Apple for use in the Apple Watch Series 6. The filings, which includes photographs of the components, reveal three model numbers for the batteries: A2306, A2345, and A2327.

The three batteries have differing capacities, with the A2327 having the largest capacity at 303.8mAh. The A2345 and A2306 have lower capacities of 265.9mAh and 262.9mAh respectively.

The differing capacities could be for a few reasons, such as for different sizes of models, or for versions with LTE over models without cellular connectivity.

The capacities may have an impact on the battery life of the Series 6, as two out of the three are smaller than the battery used in the Apple Watch Series 5, which had 296mAh, and the Apple Watch Series 4 at 291.8mAh.

Depending on Apple's power-saving gains for the next generation, there is a good chance that it may offer the same battery life as the Series 5 at least, though the larger capacity model stands a chance of offering more time between charges.

Other rumors circulating about the Apple Watch Series 6 has the device including a new plastic option, the possible use of microLED, and increased wireless performance.

jintech

Just what we need, an Apple Watch with an even shorter wear time. 

lkrupp

JinTech said:

Just what we need, an Apple Watch with an even shorter wear time. 

What leads you (and the author of this piece) to think a smaller battery will reduce battery life? Is it possible that the Series 6 will feature more power efficient components or possibly newer battery technology that will keep the wearing time the same or even better? Why does the hater sect always assume the worst, always prefer the negative narrative?

jintech

lkrupp said:

JinTech said:

Just what we need, an Apple Watch with an even shorter wear time. 

What leads you (and the author of this piece) to think a smaller battery will reduce battery life? Is it possible that the Series 6 will feature more power efficient components or possibly newer battery technology that will keep the wearing time the same or even better? Why does the hater sect always assume the worst, always prefer the negative narrative?

Just going based on the article. I absolutely hope that we will see more power efficient components or possibly newer battery technology.

saarek

I was really hoping for a bigger battery coupled with more energy efficient components.

I’d love my Apple Watch to last longer, but that does not seem a priority to Apple for some reason.

bageljoey

saarek said:

I was really hoping for a bigger battery coupled with more energy efficient components.

I’d love my Apple Watch to last longer, but that does not seem a priority to Apple for some reason.

I can only speak for myself, but I am on a schedule where I charge mine at the same time 7 days a week. I never run out. If I didn’t do any workouts, I might make 2 days, but why?  I’m used to charging every day. 

If they offered 3 day battery charge, it wouldn’t go me a lick of good and might even hurt—if I get in the habit of only charging when it’s low, I can guarantee I will forget once or twice a month and I would end up occasionally being without charge and therefore with less functionality than I have now. 

Again, I know this might not be true for everyone, but maybe it’s true enough for enough people to make a difference...

entropys

Does this mean three sizes of Apple Watch?

sellerington

From the article: "or for versions with LTE over models without cellular connectivity." I would have expected 4 different battery sizes for 2 different sized watches, with and without LTE?

beats

JinTech said:

Just what we need, an Apple Watch with an even shorter wear time. 

Why do Apple haters always think like 1980?

rayz2016

Seems unlikely they’ll go for shorter battery life when they’re also looking at sleep tracking. 

edited August 2020

jintech

Beats said:

JinTech said:

Just what we need, an Apple Watch with an even shorter wear time. 

Why do Apple haters always think like 1980?

I am far far from an Apple hater If you read my second comment, I am just going based on the article.

georgebmac

Rayz2016 said:

Seems unlikely they’ll go for shorter battery life when they’re also looking at sleep tracking. 

Yes, I totally agree.

I wear my Series 4 while I sleep and, by the time I'm up the battery is close to drained.  It takes 2-3 hours to fully charge.  

Right now most people charge their Apple Watches overnight.   But once Apple adds sleep tracking, the battery complaints, which had pretty much died off, will begin once again.

But, that said, I find the current battery life pretty amazing:   most days of the week I'll run for an hour with the heart rate monitor buzzing and LTE streaming music and sending it via Bluetooth to my Airpods -- then I'll often do more streaming / Airpods for an hour or two during the day -- plus all the usual messages, emails, etc., etc.,....    But still, the battery almost always lasts till I get up out of bed the next morning.   I find that amazing for such a tiny little battery!

edited August 2020

matteblack13

lkrupp said:

JinTech said:

Just what we need, an Apple Watch with an even shorter wear time. 

What leads you (and the author of this piece) to think a smaller battery will reduce battery life? Is it possible that the Series 6 will feature more power efficient components or possibly newer battery technology that will keep the wearing time the same or even better? Why does the hater sect always assume the worst, always prefer the negative narrative?

Maybe provide an example when a piece of tech got a smaller battery and BETTER (at least 30 min to an hour), battery life? I certainly can’t think of a single situation and I read articles about obscure tech. 

For example: The 11 series iPhones have a much more efficient everything supposedly, at least according to the marketing hype, are the same size as the Xs, yet the biggest change leading industry leading instead of basically Pixel-level battery life is the significantly larger battery across the board.

edited August 2020

jagnut

GeorgeBMac said:

Rayz2016 said:

Seems unlikely they’ll go for shorter battery life when they’re also looking at sleep tracking. 

Yes, I totally agree.

I wear my Series 4 while I sleep and, by the time I'm up the battery is close to drained.  It takes 2-3 hours to fully charge.  

Right now most people charge their Apple Watches overnight.   But once Apple adds sleep tracking, the battery complaints, which had pretty much died off, will begin once again.

But, that said, I find the current battery life pretty amazing:   most days of the week I'll run for an hour with the heart rate monitor buzzing and LTE streaming music and sending it via Bluetooth to my Airpods -- then I'll often do more streaming / Airpods for an hour or two during the day -- plus all the usual messages, emails, etc., etc.,....    But still, the battery almost always lasts till I get up out of bed the next morning.   I find that amazing for such a tiny little battery!

Maybe the one with the larger battery has sleep tracking and the smaller ones do not?  None the less the watch will still need charging every day.  Maybe faster charging.  Seems to me like years ago with mechanical watches you had to wind them up every day (except for automatic and battery watches, which can last around five years).

macgui

Generally Apple goes for the same or longer battery life in a device, not shorter. I'd guess that if there are difference size/capacity batteries in the Series 6 Watches, there will be attempts via software and or hardware to maintain or improve battery life.

The rumored oximeter in the Series 6 could be a different tier Watch and require a bigger battery. It's not that it monitors O2 all day long, but it's one more feature some people will be using, possibly throughout the day.

Apple might be doing different tiers within the basic Series 6, or they might be relegating some additional functionality to different Editions.

joer293

I am called an Apple fanboy by my friends and family, but if I had one gripe it’s the unethical misleading “industry leading battery life” marketing claims.  

I would pay more for greater energy density in the battery. We should not have to, but I would. Why does Apple set the target so low?  Why do all the customers set their expectations so low?  Everyone with smart watches today may have grown accustomed to “all day battery life”,  because it’s their first smart watch experience. Considering Apples investment in battery R&D, and efficient custom silicon and efficient software, vs all those no name brands that came years before apple makes me really confused. My $50 2008 gsm smart watch with j2me apps, lasted 4 days. That was considered terrible in 2008. Everyone laughed, after being slightly amazed I could make a phone call from my wrist.   The no name Chinese brand spent nothing on efficiency, generic batteries, bloated inefficient j2me software.  Today that battery life would be considered impossible engineering by Apple.  It just doesn’t make sense why Apple with all their resources aims so low and convinced  everyone that they can’t expect any better.  

I suppose I have the same complaint with my AirPods “amazing” battery life claim. AirPods battery life during a phone call is significantly shorter than all the Bluetooth earpieces I’ve ever owned. The batteries in the AirPods are just not efficient. My jawbone era with a “dead” battery still lasts over 5 hours, (7 hours when new). Apple also touts their industry leading phone battery life, which until about the iPhone 6s, could not beat the talk time of my 2006 Sanyo, which had a smaller battery. 

mike1

sellerington said:

From the article: "or for versions with LTE over models without cellular connectivity." I would have expected 4 different battery sizes for 2 different sized watches, with and without LTE?

That makes the most sense. Or maybe the larger battery for the small watch is the non-LTE battery in the bigger watch.

Either way, I'm hoping the Series 6 gets a little thinner. Personally, I get about 2 days out of a charge on my S4. I'd be happy to charge every day rather than every other if the watch were thinner. I'd also be less likely to forget if I just charged with my phone every night.

neilm

I'd be astonished if any future Apple watch had reduced battery runtime. If they can decrease the device's power demand and thus reduce battery size and case thickness, then great.

With the always on screen active, my own Series 5/LTE runs into the red zone on the evening of the second day. In effect, assuming overnight charging, this means needing to charge it every day.

But with the screen set to turn on/off automatically — which from an appearance point of view I actually prefer — there's still 30-35% left in the battery at the end of day 2. So now it's only on the charger every second night, and that's with some considerable margin for extra usage. Even the heaviest user should easily get through a full 16+ hour waking day.

I think that's pretty good.

beowulfschmidt

bageljoey said:

saarek said:

I was really hoping for a bigger battery coupled with more energy efficient components.

I’d love my Apple Watch to last longer, but that does not seem a priority to Apple for some reason.

I can only speak for myself, but I am on a schedule where I charge mine at the same time 7 days a week. I never run out. If I didn’t do any workouts, I might make 2 days, but why?  I’m used to charging every day. 

If they offered 3 day battery charge, it wouldn’t go me a lick of good and might even hurt—if I get in the habit of only charging when it’s low, I can guarantee I will forget once or twice a month and I would end up occasionally being without charge and therefore with less functionality than I have now. 

Again, I know this might not be true for everyone, but maybe it’s true enough for enough people to make a difference...

I'm much the same.  It goes on the charger when my alarm goes off, and goes back on my wrist when I'm done with the morning ablutions.  Depending on what I've done the previous day, it might or might not be completely charged when it comes off, but it's seldom less than about 90%.

georgebmac

beowulfschmidt said:

bageljoey said:

saarek said:

I was really hoping for a bigger battery coupled with more energy efficient components.

I’d love my Apple Watch to last longer, but that does not seem a priority to Apple for some reason.

I can only speak for myself, but I am on a schedule where I charge mine at the same time 7 days a week. I never run out. If I didn’t do any workouts, I might make 2 days, but why?  I’m used to charging every day. 

If they offered 3 day battery charge, it wouldn’t go me a lick of good and might even hurt—if I get in the habit of only charging when it’s low, I can guarantee I will forget once or twice a month and I would end up occasionally being without charge and therefore with less functionality than I have now. 

Again, I know this might not be true for everyone, but maybe it’s true enough for enough people to make a difference...

I'm much the same.  It goes on the charger when my alarm goes off, and goes back on my wrist when I'm done with the morning ablutions.  Depending on what I've done the previous day, it might or might not be completely charged when it comes off, but it's seldom less than about 90%.

Huh?  Your watch burns only 10% of its full charge during a day's use?

Mine burns more like 75% and takes about two hours to fully charge.   It's a pain.   But, like I said earlier -- the things that watch does on that tiny little battery are simply incredible!   

It was lot easier before I started wearing it to bed and I could charge it over night.

spheric

GeorgeBMac said:

beowulfschmidt said:

bageljoey said:

saarek said:

I was really hoping for a bigger battery coupled with more energy efficient components.

I’d love my Apple Watch to last longer, but that does not seem a priority to Apple for some reason.

I can only speak for myself, but I am on a schedule where I charge mine at the same time 7 days a week. I never run out. If I didn’t do any workouts, I might make 2 days, but why?  I’m used to charging every day. 

If they offered 3 day battery charge, it wouldn’t go me a lick of good and might even hurt—if I get in the habit of only charging when it’s low, I can guarantee I will forget once or twice a month and I would end up occasionally being without charge and therefore with less functionality than I have now. 

Again, I know this might not be true for everyone, but maybe it’s true enough for enough people to make a difference...

I'm much the same.  It goes on the charger when my alarm goes off, and goes back on my wrist when I'm done with the morning ablutions.  Depending on what I've done the previous day, it might or might not be completely charged when it comes off, but it's seldom less than about 90%.

Huh?  Your watch burns only 10% of its full charge during a day's use?

No, he charges it as soon as he gets out of bed, and by the time he's done with morning routine, it's usually at 90% or above.