I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
Give me a break. Apple has no reason to hold back - they're moving as fast as the technology (and regulation) will allow them. Also even if we are to believe these are the only changes (which I'm skeptical of) I suspect that many current and prospective Apple Watch owners would be happy to buy a Watch with improved battery and processing performance.
Oh please unless the watch gets a week battery life who cares if you have to charge it every day or every two days? And for what people do with the watch how much improved processing power do they need? It's not like there's a gold rush of all these amazing apps developers are building for the watch. Outside of health what's the narrative for the Watch? Being a notification devices shouldn't take that much processing power.
I think Apple has more important things to worry about with the Watch. Breakthroughs in the health arena will take time and some will be difficult if they require government approval. I'd rather than not have Apple launch a new Watch every year and instead maybe just introduce new bands and tweak the software to keep the device fresh.
Aren't they on a two-year cycle so far? The Series 2 was two years after the original was announced, wasn't it?
Just under 1.5 years.
Series 0 – 24 April 2015
Series 2 – 16 September 2016
Now, Series 0 was first announced on 09 September 2014, but we need to go by release dates, not the product category introduction date.
As always, incremental improvement is the name of the game. Compare the incremental iphone improvements from 2007 to 2016 and its dramatic over time. This is how apple rolls. How apple has always rolled.
It's funny that when talking about Macs the narrative is the complete opposite for Apple fanboys. "Why would you want incremental changes every year!?"
I think it still applies because incremental updates doesn't imply how often, only how. The recent MBP w/ TouchBar is an incremental update to the rMBP, which itself was an incremental update to non-retina MBPs. Etc. Likewise w/ iMac models. But over a span of time, the most-recent model is vastly better than one from 10 years ago. Evolutionary, not revolutionary. Processor speed bumps aren't really what is meant. New feature evolution is.
As always, incremental improvement is the name of the game. Compare the incremental iphone improvements from 2007 to 2016 and its dramatic over time. This is how apple rolls. How apple has always rolled.
It's funny that when talking about Macs the narrative is the complete opposite for Apple fanboys. "Why would you want incremental changes every year!?"
I think it still applies because incremental updates doesn't imply how often, only how. The recent MBP w/ TouchBar is an incremental update to the rMBP, which itself was an incremental update to non-retina MBPs. Etc. Likewise w/ iMac models. But over a span of time, the most-recent model is vastly better than one from 10 years ago. Evolutionary, not revolutionary. Processor speed bumps aren't really what is meant. New feature evolution is.
And even when Apple makes bold moves that are a synergy of HW and SW that took years to develop those without vision say it's all a pointless effort. Like they did with the original iPhone that didn't have a physical keyboard, or the Touch Bar in the new MBPs. Then you have other features, like the growing size and functionality of the already great trackpad to which they say, "big whoop, all they did was make it bigger." Apple can't win with these people.
I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
Give me a break. Apple has no reason to hold back - they're moving as fast as the technology (and regulation) will allow them. Also even if we are to believe these are the only changes (which I'm skeptical of) I suspect that many current and prospective Apple Watch owners would be happy to buy a Watch with improved battery and processing performance.
Oh please unless the watch gets a week battery life who cares if you have to charge it every day or every two days? And for what people do with the watch how much improved processing power do they need? It's not like there's a gold rush of all these amazing apps developers are building for the watch. Outside of health what's the narrative for the Watch? Being a notification devices shouldn't take that much processing power.
I think Apple has more important things to worry about with the Watch. Breakthroughs in the health arena will take time and some will be difficult if they require government approval. I'd rather than not have Apple launch a new Watch every year and instead maybe just introduce new bands and tweak the software to keep the device fresh.
Aren't they on a two-year cycle so far? The Series 2 was two years after the original was announced, wasn't it?
Just under 1.5 years.
Series 0 – 24 April 2015
Series 2 – 16 September 2016
Now, Series 0 was first announced on 09 September 2014, but we need to go by release dates, not the product category introduction date.
I'm not so sure. They announced 0 in fall 2014, and the new one almost came out almost exactly two years after that. I don't think it's coincidence -- I don't think they're on an annual cycle at all, and expect them to be two years. But we'll need to wait and see.
I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
Give me a break. Apple has no reason to hold back - they're moving as fast as the technology (and regulation) will allow them. Also even if we are to believe these are the only changes (which I'm skeptical of) I suspect that many current and prospective Apple Watch owners would be happy to buy a Watch with improved battery and processing performance.
Oh please unless the watch gets a week battery life who cares if you have to charge it every day or every two days? And for what people do with the watch how much improved processing power do they need? It's not like there's a gold rush of all these amazing apps developers are building for the watch. Outside of health what's the narrative for the Watch? Being a notification devices shouldn't take that much processing power.
I think Apple has more important things to worry about with the Watch. Breakthroughs in the health arena will take time and some will be difficult if they require government approval. I'd rather than not have Apple launch a new Watch every year and instead maybe just introduce new bands and tweak the software to keep the device fresh.
Aren't they on a two-year cycle so far? The Series 2 was two years after the original was announced, wasn't it?
Just under 1.5 years.
Series 0 – 24 April 2015
Series 2 – 16 September 2016
Now, Series 0 was first announced on 09 September 2014, but we need to go by release dates, not the product category introduction date.
I'm not so sure. They announced 0 in fall 2014, and the new one almost came out almost exactly two years after that. I don't think it's coincidence -- I don't think they're on an annual cycle at all, and expect them to be two years. But we'll need to wait and see.
I'm not saying they aren't going to use a biennial cycle, I'm saying that we shouldn't gauge release dates by looking at announcement dates, especially when we're talking about a new product category for the world's highest valued company. To wit, they need to get in front of any new product before they ramp up production and leaks become virtually impossible to plug.
Consider the iPad was first announced in January and has never been released in that month. It also no longer follows an annual cycle for a variety of reasons. The Watch could easily follow a similar path.
I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
Give me a break. Apple has no reason to hold back - they're moving as fast as the technology (and regulation) will allow them. Also even if we are to believe these are the only changes (which I'm skeptical of) I suspect that many current and prospective Apple Watch owners would be happy to buy a Watch with improved battery and processing performance.
Oh please unless the watch gets a week battery life who cares if you have to charge it every day or every two days? And for what people do with the watch how much improved processing power do they need? It's not like there's a gold rush of all these amazing apps developers are building for the watch. Outside of health what's the narrative for the Watch? Being a notification devices shouldn't take that much processing power.
I think Apple has more important things to worry about with the Watch. Breakthroughs in the health arena will take time and some will be difficult if they require government approval. I'd rather than not have Apple launch a new Watch every year and instead maybe just introduce new bands and tweak the software to keep the device fresh.
Aren't they on a two-year cycle so far? The Series 2 was two years after the original was announced, wasn't it?
Just under 1.5 years.
Series 0 – 24 April 2015
Series 2 – 16 September 2016
Now, Series 0 was first announced on 09 September 2014, but we need to go by release dates, not the product category introduction date.
I'm not so sure. They announced 0 in fall 2014, and the new one almost came out almost exactly two years after that. I don't think it's coincidence -- I don't think they're on an annual cycle at all, and expect them to be two years. But we'll need to wait and see.
Don't forget that on the first generation, they were working out the manufacturing. That obviously took a while. The original SiP S1 chip was very old process technology by the time it was released showing that Apple had problems with development of the core system. The S1 was a 28 nm part that was first shipped in April 2015. The A8 in the iPhone 6/6+ was already out for the introduction of the original Apple Watch in September 2014 and it was a 20 nm part. Just 6 months after the S1 shipped Apple shipped the A9 which was a 14/16 nm part. I think it is pretty clear that Apple had planned to release the Apple Watch much sooner than they did. The Watch benefits from a new node process as much or more than the iPhone does.
I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
Of course it will be incremental. You (and a lot of other people) need to stop expecting revolution when its always been an evolution.
Could not agree more - the 'revolution' (if the word absolutely must be used, misleading marketing term as it is), was the original device. Everything after that is incremental updates.
I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
Give me a break. Apple has no reason to hold back - they're moving as fast as the technology (and regulation) will allow them. Also even if we are to believe these are the only changes (which I'm skeptical of) I suspect that many current and prospective Apple Watch owners would be happy to buy a Watch with improved battery and processing performance.
Oh please unless the watch gets a week battery life who cares if you have to charge it every day or every two days? And for what people do with the watch how much improved processing power do they need? It's not like there's a gold rush of all these amazing apps developers are building for the watch. Outside of health what's the narrative for the Watch? Being a notification devices shouldn't take that much processing power.
I think Apple has more important things to worry about with the Watch. Breakthroughs in the health arena will take time and some will be difficult if they require government approval. I'd rather than not have Apple launch a new Watch every year and instead maybe just introduce new bands and tweak the software to keep the device fresh.
Aren't they on a two-year cycle so far? The Series 2 was two years after the original was announced, wasn't it?
Just under 1.5 years.
Series 0 – 24 April 2015
Series 2 – 16 September 2016
Now, Series 0 was first announced on 09 September 2014, but we need to go by release dates, not the product category introduction date.
I'm not so sure. They announced 0 in fall 2014, and the new one almost came out almost exactly two years after that. I don't think it's coincidence -- I don't think they're on an annual cycle at all, and expect them to be two years. But we'll need to wait and see.
Don't forget that on the first generation, they were working out the manufacturing. That obviously took a while. The original SiP S1 chip was very old process technology by the time it was released showing that Apple had problems with development of the core system. The S1 was a 28 nm part that was first shipped in April 2015. The A8 in the iPhone 6/6+ was already out for the introduction of the original Apple Watch in September 2014 and it was a 20 nm part. Just 6 months after the S1 shipped Apple shipped the A9 which was a 14/16 nm part. I think it is pretty clear that Apple had planned to release the Apple Watch much sooner than they did. The Watch benefits from a new node process as much or more than the iPhone does.
What size is the chip in Series 2? Unless they make the chip smaller, i would rather Apple work on the Mac and macOS. Give us refreshes to MacPro and MacMini.
The Mac line still is much bigger than the Apple Watch, but has received development than the watch over the last 3 years.
I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
Give me a break. Apple has no reason to hold back - they're moving as fast as the technology (and regulation) will allow them. Also even if we are to believe these are the only changes (which I'm skeptical of) I suspect that many current and prospective Apple Watch owners would be happy to buy a Watch with improved battery and processing performance.
Oh please unless the watch gets a week battery life who cares if you have to charge it every day or every two days? And for what people do with the watch how much improved processing power do they need? It's not like there's a gold rush of all these amazing apps developers are building for the watch. Outside of health what's the narrative for the Watch? Being a notification devices shouldn't take that much processing power.
I think Apple has more important things to worry about with the Watch. Breakthroughs in the health arena will take time and some will be difficult if they require government approval. I'd rather than not have Apple launch a new Watch every year and instead maybe just introduce new bands and tweak the software to keep the device fresh.
Aren't they on a two-year cycle so far? The Series 2 was two years after the original was announced, wasn't it?
Just under 1.5 years.
Series 0 – 24 April 2015
Series 2 – 16 September 2016
Now, Series 0 was first announced on 09 September 2014, but we need to go by release dates, not the product category introduction date.
I'm not so sure. They announced 0 in fall 2014, and the new one almost came out almost exactly two years after that. I don't think it's coincidence -- I don't think they're on an annual cycle at all, and expect them to be two years. But we'll need to wait and see.
Don't forget that on the first generation, they were working out the manufacturing. That obviously took a while. The original SiP S1 chip was very old process technology by the time it was released showing that Apple had problems with development of the core system. The S1 was a 28 nm part that was first shipped in April 2015. The A8 in the iPhone 6/6+ was already out for the introduction of the original Apple Watch in September 2014 and it was a 20 nm part. Just 6 months after the S1 shipped Apple shipped the A9 which was a 14/16 nm part. I think it is pretty clear that Apple had planned to release the Apple Watch much sooner than they did. The Watch benefits from a new node process as much or more than the iPhone does.
What size is the chip in Series 2? Unless they make the chip smaller, i would rather Apple work on the Mac and macOS. Give us refreshes to MacPro and MacMini.
The Mac line still is much bigger than the Apple Watch, but has received [less] development than the watch over the last 3 years.
1) I assume the S1 and S2 SIP boards will be the same size, even if they use a smaller process node. Even the S1 in the Series 1 over the Series 0 watch could use a smaller process node and still have the same size board.
2) Not every transistor needs to be on the same process node.
3) Developing a smaller process node doesn't mean the Mac isn't getting designed or that macOS isn't being debugged or updated. These are not mutually exclusive operations for a company with over 100k employees.
4) The Mac hasn't received less development over the Watch in the last 3 years. The T1-chip in the new MacBook Pros controlling the Touch Bar, Touch ID, and Apple Pay, and creating a new version of OS X based on stripping down watchOS and then adding in features from the iPhone and then syncing with macOS is not an easy feat. Then you have all the much improved or completely redesigned components in the Macs from the display to the keyboard.
As always, incremental improvement is the name of the game. Compare the incremental iphone improvements from 2007 to 2016 and its dramatic over time. This is how apple rolls. How apple has always rolled.
It's funny that when talking about Macs the narrative is the complete opposite for Apple fanboys. "Why would you want incremental changes every year!?"
I think it still applies because incremental updates doesn't imply how often, only how. The recent MBP w/ TouchBar is an incremental update to the rMBP, which itself was an incremental update to non-retina MBPs. Etc. Likewise w/ iMac models. But over a span of time, the most-recent model is vastly better than one from 10 years ago. Evolutionary, not revolutionary. Processor speed bumps aren't really what is meant. New feature evolution is.
My observation was about the incremental argument. Look at a few mac posts and you'll see Apple apologists defending the long wait times between updates and explaining that small yearly incremental updates would be pointless and the reason Apple doesn't do it yet a slightly faster Apple Watch alone is fine and the "Apple way"? What?
keep in mind my post was not intended to be anti Apple. I'm not even in either camp. I feel incremental updates are pointless and at the same time feel features like Waterproofing and stereo speakers are NOT "incremental". Waterproof a MacBook and tell me that's "incremental".
Apple will be fine and I highly doubt the next Watch will only have improved speed/battery with no other new features.
Better battery sounds good if it enables an always on mode of the watch face.
I feel this would be a pretty significant feature to increase attraction to the Apple Watch for new users. A legitimate criticism of a smart watch is that most of the time the screen is blank - just a black piece of glass. Many people wear a watch as jewelry, and regardless of the wide variety of watch bands, some don't find the Apple Watch attractive for this reason. Expose all of the watch faces to the public (perhaps in a lower power mode) and it becomes much more attention getting as a piece of fashion.
I know for those only interested in function, they consider this of no value, but as a current AW owner I know I would enjoy it, and think it would be a great move to increase the products sales. A very good use of increased battery.
A cellular data connection would be the next big h/w item to add. Perhaps it doing it within the battery or space constraints is not possible this year, but I hope so. To minimize the impact to battery, it should be possible to only activate it when the BT connection to the paired iPhone goes away, and/or not on WiFi. Otherwise, no need to use it. Being able to maintain data connection without iPhone would expand again the uses and attractiveness to broaden sales.
A new model could have interface for new smart bands. Similar to the smart connector on iPad Pro. Older fashion watch bands work fine, but new smart bands would only work with this model & higher moving forward.
Minor h/w features: - BT5 - barometer to count steps without iPhone
The third model is often the one which can drive the breakout from the early adopters, so certainly hoping for more than just improved battery and updated SIP.
My Series 2 is plenty fast and unless you can get 4-5 days of battery, the current battery life is adequate for me. I would love to have LTE as long as it doesn't kill the battery. If that isn't possible, then an always on display would also be appreciated.
I wear my Series 2 Apple Watch all day, every day and night. I usually charge when it gets around 50%--usually after about 24-36 hours depending on usage. This takes less than an hour. I could easily get 2 days of use before a battery warning if necessary.
One trick is to save battery while sleeping so I can use a sleep tracking app. I turn off Raise to Wake and set the brightness to minimum. This is a quick and painless way to keep the watch going for more than 24 hours and easy enough to set back to normal when I get up. But I would love it if Apple gave me a quick way to set this in Watch OS 4.
I'm very happy with Series 2 as well. Battery life for me is usually 65-75% by the end of the day unless I've done a workout. I really really want to see LTE but I'm not convinced Apple has figured out how to do it and save battery life. Samsung has pulled off LTE and 3 day battery life, apparently. I don't know what the catch is or why they can do it when Apple's engineers can't.
I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
It is a watch - what do you expect?
By the way that battery life increase might be more significant than the article allows for. New battery combined with a 10 nm chip could mean run time into a week or more.
in any event I think Apple will get there eventually. What is there? Well you all remember Dick Tracy and his watch right!
I hope this is BS. Another year of mostly incremental changes to Apple Watch is no good. If all we're getting is a new SiP and watchOS 4 Apple might as well not release a new watch this year.
Give me a break. Apple has no reason to hold back - they're moving as fast as the technology (and regulation) will allow them. Also even if we are to believe these are the only changes (which I'm skeptical of) I suspect that many current and prospective Apple Watch owners would be happy to buy a Watch with improved battery and processing performance.
Oh please unless the watch gets a week battery life who cares if you have to charge it every day or every two days? And for what people do with the watch how much improved processing power do they need? It's not like there's a gold rush of all these amazing apps developers are building for the watch. Outside of health what's the narrative for the Watch? Being a notification devices shouldn't take that much processing power.
I think Apple has more important things to worry about with the Watch. Breakthroughs in the health arena will take time and some will be difficult if they require government approval. I'd rather than not have Apple launch a new Watch every year and instead maybe just introduce new bands and tweak the software to keep the device fresh.
You won't get a gold rush app without an increase in processing power. Just like the first iPad was more or less useless advances in technology has turned the iPad into an amazing platform (hobbled by iOS). I saw Apples Watch as being a similar junction as iPad was with iPad 1 & 2, nice concepts that simply where under specced to really move the platform forward. The only problem is that moving forward with the Watch requires technology that simply isn't there yet.
Well if you believe what I read above the number one thing Apple can do with the Watch is to increase computational power to open up the platform for more advanced apps. Unfortunately what they need isn't really there yet. What is that, low power high performance machine learning hardware optimized for voice processing. Once you can get the watch to take voice commands (without a network connection) the platform will have moved beyond its current human interface limitations. Most likely this will require moving beyond silicon technology so probably 5 -10 years out.
I think every iteration of the Watch is going to be more and more challenging. When I got the first one, the one thought I had was that the next revolution would be when the Watch becomes water-resistant enough for swimming.
To my surprise, they did it with the second generation, which was very unexpected. That's the reason I ended up buying a Nike+ edition.
In the end, the iPhone remains the only Apple product I buy every iteration of. I don't think I'll buy every iteration of the Watch.
I'm sorry what is revolutionary about the Watch compared to other wearable devices? It might be more popular/better selling because it's Apple but revolutionary? In what way? And I say that in comparison to Android Wear, Pebble etc. What about Apple Watch is revolutionary compared to those other devices?
Like most Apple products, looking at it in isolation, it doesn't seem that innovative. But if you use it in conjunction with the rest of the Apple ecosystem, you get a multiplier effect.
I use my Apple Watch to unlock my Mac. I use this a dozen times a day.
I use my Apple Watch to turn on and off my home lights with HomeKit. I use this several times a day.
I use my Apple Watch/iPhone to turn off my home lights when I leave the house.
I use my Apple Watch to limit the number of notifications I get during working hours. VIP only email notifications. Only work related calendar events. etc. My iPhone is set to silent during work hours.
I use my Apple Watch to control my iPhone tracks and volume when playing music and Podcasts, this is especially useful when playing through my new AirPods because the Siri controls are not useful during working hours since I don't want to disturb others.
Siri integration across all my devices has too many uses to describe. Siri could be better but when it works, it is a big timesaver.
Tight integration with iOS and macOS ecosystem is the innovative feature of watchOS 3 that no other smart watch can duplicate on any platform.
I'd say the Taptic Engine and Force/3D touch were innovative.
I love 3D Touch on my iPhone and am a fan of haptic feedback but is it revolutionary? To be honest I find the Apple Pencil more interesting from an innovation standpoint than Apple Watch (as it is right now). I think one could make the argument that the Pencil is better than any other stylus on the market. I don't know that the same can be said about Apple Watch.
I'm sorry what is revolutionary about the Watch compared to other wearable devices? It might be more popular/better selling because it's Apple but revolutionary? In what way? And I say that in comparison to Android Wear, Pebble etc. What about Apple Watch is revolutionary compared to those other devices?
Like most Apple products, looking at it in isolation, it doesn't seem that innovative. But if you use it in conjunction with the rest of the Apple ecosystem, you get a multiplier effect.
I use my Apple Watch to unlock my Mac. I use this a dozen times a day.
I use my Apple Watch to turn on and off my home lights with HomeKit. I use this several times a day.
I use my Apple Watch/iPhone to turn off my home lights when I leave the house.
I use my Apple Watch to limit the number of notifications I get during working hours. VIP only email notifications. Only work related calendar events. etc. My iPhone is set to silent during work hours.
I use my Apple Watch to control my iPhone tracks and volume when playing music and Podcasts, this is especially useful when playing through my new AirPods because the Siri controls are not useful during working hours since I don't want to disturb others.
Siri integration across all my devices has too many uses to describe. Siri could be better but when it works, it is a big timesaver.
Tight integration with iOS and macOS ecosystem is the innovative feature of watchOS 3 that no other smart watch can duplicate on any platform.
I'd say the Taptic Engine and Force/3D touch were innovative.
I love 3D Touch on my iPhone and am a fan of haptic feedback but is it revolutionary? To be honest I find the Apple Pencil more interesting from an innovation standpoint than Apple Watch (as it is right now). I think one could make the argument that the Pencil is better than any other stylus on the market. I don't know that the same can be said about Apple Watch.
Define revolutionary. It's not exactly a typical evolution since the technologies involved aren't just making a current technology better, but adding something entirely new. A new HW layer that also required the OS to be updated to properly use the new HW layer. Then you had other vendors who use SW—and only SW—to try to mimic Force Touch on the cheap without investing the time, energy, and money into the proper R&D to make it happen.
Force Touch isn't one of those features I think about often, but it's one I use all the time—mostly on the keyboard to quickly and accurately move the cursor to a new location. That alone is why I'd never want to get rid of it.
Comments
Now, Series 0 was first announced on 09 September 2014, but we need to go by release dates, not the product category introduction date.
I think it still applies because incremental updates doesn't imply how often, only how. The recent MBP w/ TouchBar is an incremental update to the rMBP, which itself was an incremental update to non-retina MBPs. Etc. Likewise w/ iMac models. But over a span of time, the most-recent model is vastly better than one from 10 years ago. Evolutionary, not revolutionary. Processor speed bumps aren't really what is meant. New feature evolution is.
Consider the iPad was first announced in January and has never been released in that month. It also no longer follows an annual cycle for a variety of reasons. The Watch could easily follow a similar path.
Unless they make the chip smaller,
i would rather Apple work on the Mac and macOS.
Give us refreshes to MacPro and MacMini.
The Mac line still is much bigger than the Apple Watch, but has received development than the watch over the last 3 years.
2) Not every transistor needs to be on the same process node.
3) Developing a smaller process node doesn't mean the Mac isn't getting designed or that macOS isn't being debugged or updated. These are not mutually exclusive operations for a company with over 100k employees.
4) The Mac hasn't received less development over the Watch in the last 3 years. The T1-chip in the new MacBook Pros controlling the Touch Bar, Touch ID, and Apple Pay, and creating a new version of OS X based on stripping down watchOS and then adding in features from the iPhone and then syncing with macOS is not an easy feat. Then you have all the much improved or completely redesigned components in the Macs from the display to the keyboard.
keep in mind my post was not intended to be anti Apple. I'm not even in either camp. I feel incremental updates are pointless and at the same time feel features like Waterproofing and stereo speakers are NOT "incremental". Waterproof a MacBook and tell me that's "incremental".
Apple will be fine and I highly doubt the next Watch will only have improved speed/battery with no other new features.
I know for those only interested in function, they consider this of no value, but as a current AW owner I know I would enjoy it, and think it would be a great move to increase the products sales. A very good use of increased battery.
A cellular data connection would be the next big h/w item to add. Perhaps it doing it within the battery or space constraints is not possible this year, but I hope so. To minimize the impact to battery, it should be possible to only activate it when the BT connection to the paired iPhone goes away, and/or not on WiFi. Otherwise, no need to use it. Being able to maintain data connection without iPhone would expand again the uses and attractiveness to broaden sales.
Minor h/w features:
- BT5
- barometer to count steps without iPhone
The third model is often the one which can drive the breakout from the early adopters, so certainly hoping for more than just improved battery and updated SIP.
I think every iteration of the Watch is going to be more and more challenging. When I got the first one, the one thought I had was that the next revolution would be when the Watch becomes water-resistant enough for swimming.
To my surprise, they did it with the second generation, which was very unexpected. That's the reason I ended up buying a Nike+ edition.
In the end, the iPhone remains the only Apple product I buy every iteration of. I don't think I'll buy every iteration of the Watch.
Force Touch isn't one of those features I think about often, but it's one I use all the time—mostly on the keyboard to quickly and accurately move the cursor to a new location. That alone is why I'd never want to get rid of it.