Blood oxygen sensor, Touch ID rumored for 'watchOS 7,' Apple Watch 'Series 6'

Posted:
in General Discussion edited August 2020
Apple may introduce sleep monitoring, a blood oxygen sensor, and Touch ID with the "Series 6" Apple Watch and "watchOS 7" update, a new rumor suggests.

Upcoming versions of watchOS and the Apple Watch could feature highly requested features like sleep monitoring.
Upcoming versions of watchOS and the Apple Watch could feature highly requested features like sleep monitoring.


The Cupertino tech giant is largely expected to debut its watchOS 7 update at a virtual WWDC in June, and new Apple Watch models will likely debut later in the year.

In 2020, watchOS may finally add support for both sleep monitoring and blood oxygen level detection to the Apple Watch operating system, according to Hebrew-language site The Verifier and YouTube channel iUpdate.

The new update may also drop support for the Apple Watch Series 2 and include "improvements to Siri's intelligence that will allow it to do more extension operations," the site added.

Apple may also include support for LTE and Wi-Fi 6 on the "Apple Watch Series 6," as well as Touch ID in the Digital Crown and a larger battery. The latter feature will be especially important since current Apple Watch models require charging at least every couple of days, making sleep tracking inconvenient.

While no significant design changes are expected for that model, The Verifier claims that the so-called "Apple Watch Series 7" in 2021 will feature a fingerprint sensor embedded underneath the display.

The Verifier and iUpdate have a questionable track record of accurate Apple information. On Monday, the duo forecast an upcoming Apple TV model with a larger capacity and new tvOS 14 "kids mode."

Blood oxygen detection has been previously hinted at by snippets of code within a leaked version of iOS 14, however. watchOS 7 may also include new a new workout demonstration app, shareable watch faces and a "kids mode."

Apple is also working on other new developments for future Apple Watches, include an updated Digital Crown with touch and light sensors and a new type of housing made from plastic and ceramic fibers.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    bageljoeybageljoey Posts: 1,985member
    This would be a very appealing update!
    1983
  • Reply 2 of 29
    Someone explain to me the use case for touch id in the crown? I only unlock my watch once a day, and that sometimes even happens as a side effect of unlocking my phone.

    I absolutely think we are still in the era where every bit of extra battery capacity makes it better. My new 5 watch gets through the day pretty well (including sleep tracking), but finding 10 minutes here or there during a day is a mild inconvenience.

    A dedicated "sleep mode" that really locks down the device from inputs and display would be better than our current best efficiency option of theater+swimming at night.
    GeorgeBMacrussw
  • Reply 3 of 29
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,135member
    I just want the watch with LTE to be able to pair with a car's Bluetooth so I can occasionally leave my phone home.
    seanismorrisBeatsJapheyGeorgeBMaccaladanian
  • Reply 4 of 29
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    mike1 said:
    I just want the watch with LTE to be able to pair with a car's Bluetooth so I can occasionally leave my phone home.
    That is annoying. I wonder what's up with the BT stack that makes it so they can see each other but then fail to pair.
    GeorgeBMacrussw
  • Reply 5 of 29
    danvdrdanvdr Posts: 25member
    Seems to me that blood oxygen will largely be a cool party trick. A) Unless you are quite sick, your O2 is normal. B) If you are quite sick and aren't getting enough O2 your body detects it and you feel short of breath and start breathing faster/harder. The O2 sensor gives you a number; whether you head to the doctor or not will depend on how you feel.

    Now, if they could get an accurate blood glucose (i.e. blood sugar) monitor, I think that will be a game changer. (But that one is likely a ways off.)
    chasmbeowulfschmidt
  • Reply 6 of 29
    mike1mike1 Posts: 3,135member
    Soli said:
    mike1 said:
    I just want the watch with LTE to be able to pair with a car's Bluetooth so I can occasionally leave my phone home.
    That is annoying. I wonder what's up with the BT stack that makes it so they can see each other but then fail to pair.

    I know. According to Apple support, they don't treat it like a phone. Don't know why. It'll pair with any other BT accessory.
  • Reply 7 of 29
    jimdreamworxjimdreamworx Posts: 1,091member
    danvdr said:
    Seems to me that blood oxygen will largely be a cool party trick. A) Unless you are quite sick, your O2 is normal. B) If you are quite sick and aren't getting enough O2 your body detects it and you feel short of breath and start breathing faster/harder. The O2 sensor gives you a number; whether you head to the doctor or not will depend on how you feel...
    I would guess it would be related to sleep tracking, since sleep apnea deprives a person of oxygen.
    edited March 2020 mld53agodofbiscuitssphericrusswfastasleeprazorpit
  • Reply 8 of 29
    seanismorrisseanismorris Posts: 1,624member
    I read in a review on the Samsung watch the battery life is up to 48 hours.  But, using LTE it lasted 3 hours...

    This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls, but it’s something to consider...

    I was looking for a watch that didn’t require a phone when I came across this info.  Needing a phone also was a dealbreaker, and defeated the purpose of getting a smart watch.

    Obviously both the Samsung and Apple were a fail for my intended purpose.  But it was interesting in that a true Apple Watch/phone will probably not happen anytime soon.
  • Reply 9 of 29
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    I read in a review on the Samsung watch the battery life is up to 48 hours.  But, using LTE it lasted 3 hours...

    This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls, but it’s something to consider...

    I was looking for a watch that didn’t require a phone when I came across this info.  Needing a phone also was a dealbreaker, and defeated the purpose of getting a smart watch.

    Obviously both the Samsung and Apple were a fail for my intended purpose.  But it was interesting in that a true Apple Watch/phone will probably not happen anytime soon.
    What do you mean by "This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls…"?

    The cellular Apple Watch makes calls without going thought the iPhone. You don need an iPhone to initially setup the Watch, but even now SW updates can be done from the Watch (someone not possible until last year), but that's it.

    I have been without my iPhone countless times and have used the watch to send and receive messages, ask Siri for various info, and made and received calls from my Watch. it's aw wonderful utility and convenience.

    Where are you seeing 3 hours of battery life on LTE? I'm guessing that it's 3 hours of life on LTE when on a phone call, but just being a connected and doing normal stuff should get you about a day. Tom Guide's says, "Samsung says the LTE version lasts about 24 to 36 hours on a charge, depending on which size watch you buy, but I didn’t get a chance to test an LTE model." That's what you expect from your always on iPhone compared to actual phone call time with your iPhone.
    edited March 2020 BeatsGeorgeBMaccaladaniansphericfastasleep
  • Reply 10 of 29
    mike1 said:
    I just want the watch with LTE to be able to pair with a car's Bluetooth so I can occasionally leave my phone home.
    ...the exact reason I cancelled my watch cellular.  I was able to do this in a Sportage, but not in my newer vehicle.
  • Reply 11 of 29
    seanismorrisseanismorris Posts: 1,624member
    Soli said:
    I read in a review on the Samsung watch the battery life is up to 48 hours.  But, using LTE it lasted 3 hours...

    This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls, but it’s something to consider...

    I was looking for a watch that didn’t require a phone when I came across this info.  Needing a phone also was a dealbreaker, and defeated the purpose of getting a smart watch.
    J
    Obviously both the Samsung and Apple were a fail for my intended purpose.  But it was interesting in that a true Apple Watch/phone will probably not happen anytime soon.
    What do you mean by "This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls…"?

    The cellular Apple Watch makes calls without going thought the iPhone. You don need an iPhone to initially setup the Watch, but even now SW updates can be done from the Watch (someone not possible until last year), but that's it.

    I have been without my iPhone countless times and have used the watch to send and receive messages, ask Siri for various info, and made and received calls from my Watch. it's aw wonderful utility and convenience.
    I mean the batteries in both devices are likely equal, but they are using different methods.  For example, how much is the Apple Watch pulling from the iPhone when it’s available vs. the Samsung who’s doing everything through cellular?  It means while the Samsung LTE battery life is poor, that might not be true for the Apple Watch.  Apple has the ability to stop certain functions when the internet connection is slow.  When the iPhone is out of range, what happens to battery life in different situations?  It might have little or no impact, or a significant one.  Unless someone does extensive testing it’s unknown.

    I’m not interested in a smart watch that requires a phone in any shape or form.  The Samsung is closer to what I want, but battery life needs to be all day.
  • Reply 12 of 29
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    Soli said:
    I read in a review on the Samsung watch the battery life is up to 48 hours.  But, using LTE it lasted 3 hours...

    This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls, but it’s something to consider...

    I was looking for a watch that didn’t require a phone when I came across this info.  Needing a phone also was a dealbreaker, and defeated the purpose of getting a smart watch.
    J
    Obviously both the Samsung and Apple were a fail for my intended purpose.  But it was interesting in that a true Apple Watch/phone will probably not happen anytime soon.
    What do you mean by "This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls…"?

    The cellular Apple Watch makes calls without going thought the iPhone. You don need an iPhone to initially setup the Watch, but even now SW updates can be done from the Watch (someone not possible until last year), but that's it.

    I have been without my iPhone countless times and have used the watch to send and receive messages, ask Siri for various info, and made and received calls from my Watch. it's aw wonderful utility and convenience.
    I mean the batteries in both devices are likely equal, but they are using different methods.  For example, how much is the Apple Watch pulling from the iPhone when it’s available vs. the Samsung who’s doing everything through cellular?  It means while the Samsung LTE battery life is poor, that might not be true for the Apple Watch.  Apple has the ability to stop certain functions when the internet connection is slow.  When the iPhone is out of range, what happens to battery life in different situations?  It might have little or no impact, or a significant one.  Unless someone does extensive testing it’s unknown.

    I’m not interested in a smart watch that requires a phone in any shape or form.  The Samsung is closer to what I want, but battery life needs to be all day.
    1) I don't want to watch videos (or even look at pics) on any smartwatch. And can you imagine having to type in a hidden SSID and then a passcode to access WiFi on a watch (not to mention a splash screen with a login for public WiFi) that isn't connected to a smartphone to get that data? There are countless reasons how a smartwatch isn't a great solution for many tasks and it never will be, which is why Apple went the route they did. It was the only reasonable path for a consumer electronic with such a small display.

    2) If battery life is your only concern with the Galaxy Watch Active 2 with LTE then you should go out and buy it today as it will last you a full day without being tethered to a smartphone—just like the Apple Watch—just don't expect that it also means you can talk on the phone for 10 hours per day. Now, if streaming music was your concern then that's still a limitation with that much data and high-powered connection to the cellular network and on-device processing for any smartwatch (not to mention the transport to BT headphones) and I doubt that will change anytime soon.

    3) I hope that the smartwatch will grow in size and which from being portrait to landscape on the wrist as there's a lot of real estate to be had. At that point, we could see a device whose screen, battery, and other components are good enough to last as long on a charge and function similar to what the iPhone does now.
    edited March 2020
  • Reply 13 of 29
    MgwlMgwl Posts: 11member
    I read in a review on the Samsung watch the battery life is up to 48 hours.  But, using LTE it lasted 3 hours...
    Soli said:
    Where are you seeing 3 hours of battery life on LTE? I'm guessing that it's 3 hours of life on LTE when on a phone call, but just being a connected and doing normal stuff should get you about a day. Tom Guide's says, "Samsung says the LTE version lasts about 24 to 36 hours on a charge, depending on which size watch you buy, but I didn’t get a chance to test an LTE model." That's what you expect from your always on iPhone compared to actual phone call time with your iPhone.
    I’d say about a day’s battery life is quite right. I regularly go to the office (well, not in these days of the coronavirus, I’m not) with only an Apple Watch on my wrist and the iPhone shelved back home. Including my commute, that’s about 12 hours on LTE with 5-10 minutes of phone calls, a handful of messages, some notifications and checking emails a couple of times during the day. If I don’t overuse it, the watch may hold up until bedtime. I keep a charging cable in my commuter bag, just in case, but have seldom used it.
    GeorgeBMacspheric
  • Reply 14 of 29
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    Mgwl said:
    I read in a review on the Samsung watch the battery life is up to 48 hours.  But, using LTE it lasted 3 hours...
    Soli said:
    Where are you seeing 3 hours of battery life on LTE? I'm guessing that it's 3 hours of life on LTE when on a phone call, but just being a connected and doing normal stuff should get you about a day. Tom Guide's says, "Samsung says the LTE version lasts about 24 to 36 hours on a charge, depending on which size watch you buy, but I didn’t get a chance to test an LTE model." That's what you expect from your always on iPhone compared to actual phone call time with your iPhone.
    I’d say about a day’s battery life is quite right. I regularly go to the office (well, not in these days of the coronavirus, I’m not) with only an Apple Watch on my wrist and the iPhone shelved back home. Including my commute, that’s about 12 hours on LTE with 5-10 minutes of phone calls, a handful of messages, some notifications and checking emails a couple of times during the day. If I don’t overuse it, the watch may hold up until bedtime. I keep a charging cable in my commuter bag, just in case, but have seldom used it.
    Do you have Hey Siri or raise to wake enabled? I have those off which greatly increases my battery life. 
    Beats
  • Reply 15 of 29
    22july201322july2013 Posts: 3,219member
    Soli said:

    Do you have Hey Siri or raise to wake enabled? I have those off which greatly increases my battery life. 
    Interesting tip. Do you mean the options called "Listen for Hey Siri" and "Raise to Speak" when you say "hey Siri" and "raise to wake"? I don't see any option called "raise to wake".
  • Reply 16 of 29
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    Soli said:
    Do you have Hey Siri or raise to wake enabled? I have those off which greatly increases my battery life. 
    Interesting tip. Do you mean the options called "Listen for Hey Siri" and "Raise to Speak" when you say "hey Siri" and "raise to wake"? I don't see any option called "raise to wake".
    Regarding Siri, I only have Press Digital Crown enabled, with Listen for "Hey Siri" and Raise to Speak disabled, under Siri in Watch Settings.

    The other thing I have disabled is Wake Screen on Wrist Raise, under General in Watch Settings. I also have Wake for 15 Seconds instead of Wake for 70 Seconds to keep the screen off as much as possible whilst not looking at it.
    edited March 2020
  • Reply 17 of 29
    JapheyJaphey Posts: 1,469member
    Cool. Now can we drop the proprietary charger and make them true qi compatible? I don’t understand why more people don’t bitch about this. I can’t really be the only one who would love to just drop my watch on a wireless mat on the way to the shower or while at work.   
    caladanian
  • Reply 18 of 29
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    danvdr said:
    Seems to me that blood oxygen will largely be a cool party trick. A) Unless you are quite sick, your O2 is normal. B) If you are quite sick and aren't getting enough O2 your body detects it and you feel short of breath and start breathing faster/harder. The O2 sensor gives you a number; whether you head to the doctor or not will depend on how you feel.

    Now, if they could get an accurate blood glucose (i.e. blood sugar) monitor, I think that will be a game changer. (But that one is likely a ways off.)

    An SpO2 sensor could, I suspect, be useful for endurance athletes.   It is a well accepted fact that high end endurance athletes (runners, cyclists, etc.) are rated on their VO2Max (the body's ability to take in and use Oxygen).  So, providing real time blood levels of oxygen during an event could provide additional useful data to those athletes over and above heart rate.

    For myself, when I race, I look at heart rate most of all in order to pace myself by allowing it to climb from 80% of max up to 95-100% in a controlled manner.   I suspect that blood oxygen levels might be very useful to know in order to better pace myself during an event -- telling me how well my heart and lungs are supplying oxygen to my muscles.
    razorpit
  • Reply 19 of 29
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    Soli said:
    I read in a review on the Samsung watch the battery life is up to 48 hours.  But, using LTE it lasted 3 hours...

    This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls, but it’s something to consider...

    I was looking for a watch that didn’t require a phone when I came across this info.  Needing a phone also was a dealbreaker, and defeated the purpose of getting a smart watch.
    J
    Obviously both the Samsung and Apple were a fail for my intended purpose.  But it was interesting in that a true Apple Watch/phone will probably not happen anytime soon.
    What do you mean by "This might not be comparable to the Apple Watch because the Samsung LTE doesn’t require a phone to make calls…"?

    The cellular Apple Watch makes calls without going thought the iPhone. You don need an iPhone to initially setup the Watch, but even now SW updates can be done from the Watch (someone not possible until last year), but that's it.

    I have been without my iPhone countless times and have used the watch to send and receive messages, ask Siri for various info, and made and received calls from my Watch. it's aw wonderful utility and convenience.
    I mean the batteries in both devices are likely equal, but they are using different methods.  For example, how much is the Apple Watch pulling from the iPhone when it’s available vs. the Samsung who’s doing everything through cellular?  It means while the Samsung LTE battery life is poor, that might not be true for the Apple Watch.  Apple has the ability to stop certain functions when the internet connection is slow.  When the iPhone is out of range, what happens to battery life in different situations?  It might have little or no impact, or a significant one.  Unless someone does extensive testing it’s unknown.

    I’m not interested in a smart watch that requires a phone in any shape or form.  The Samsung is closer to what I want, but battery life needs to be all day.

    My LTE Apple Watch lasts all day -- including sleep overnight as well as exercise tracking, phone calls, messages, etc....
    It gets charged for a few minutes each morning and then back on my wrist.

    My iPhone is used a few times a year in order to update it's OS.   That's it.

    Unless you do not have an iPhone I fail to understand the basis for your complaints.
  • Reply 20 of 29
    International roaming without iPhone nearby still not working. 
Sign In or Register to comment.