Compared: Rumored 47mm Apple Watch Series 8 size versus Series 7

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in Apple Watch edited July 2022
The Apple Watch Series 8 could have a new larger model coming in at 47mm when it is announced this fall. Here's how that compares to the existing Apple Watch lineup.

The 'Apple Watch Series 8' could have a new larger model
The 'Apple Watch Series 8' could have a new larger model


There are numerous case materials, bands, and sizes available across Apple Watch's history, but Apple has kept the device lineup within two size classes. That may change with the "Apple Watch Series 8."

The first three generations of Apple Watch had 38mm and 42mm case sizes, then the fourth through sixth generations had 40mm and 44mm case sizes. Apple expanded those again slightly for the Apple Watch Series 7 to 41mm and 45mm, thanks to a display that wrapped over the edge of the case.






Despite these size changes, all Apple Watches fall into large or small sizes. So, if a customer purchased bands for the 42mm Apple Watch Series 2, it would still work on a 45mm Apple Watch Series 7 since they both fall into the large category.



"Apple Watch Series 8" may change this two-size system with a new larger third size. Details are slim at the moment since the only leaked detail is the display size at 1.99 inches.

Apple Watch sizes through each generation based on Apple's millimeter height measurement
Apple Watch sizes through each generation based on Apple's millimeter height measurement


This is a significant number because display manufacturers measure displays by a diagonal using inches, versus watch cases being measured using the distance from the top of the watch screen to the bottom. So, the Apple Watch Series 7 with a 45mm case has a display size of about 1.9 inches.

The leak didn't specify how that increase of 0.09 inches would be applied. It could mean a larger display in a slimmer case or a proportional increase in case size to display size.

Assuming Apple goes with the same Apple Watch Series 7 design and display bezels, the case would be around 47mm. Some rumors suggest the "Apple Watch Series 8" might get a redesign with flat sides, which would provide more space for the display in the same case size.

Using proportions with flat sides and slimmer bezels yields an even larger end result
Using proportions with flat sides and slimmer bezels yields an even larger end result


From what we could measure, the 1.99-inch display would fit in a 45mm equivalent case with flat sides, making the case size slimmer and display size larger all at once. However, that doesn't quite fit with the rumors.

The long-rumored flat-sided Apple Watch would have a large 2.2-inch display in a 47mm case. The leaker, display supply chain analyst Ross Young, appears to be leaning towards a 47mm case with a 1.99-inch display. Or at the least, he isn't discounting it.

Apple is expected to announce the "Apple Watch Series 8" alongside the iPhone 14 during an event in September. There could be three sizes of Apple Watch with a rugged model option, new health metrics, and better performance.

Read on AppleInsider
FjordCruiser
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 24
    dk49dk49 Posts: 267member
    Man that's too big. The 45 version already looks like a calculator on wrist for most people. I wish they introduced a middle version - 43mm. That will be nice sweet spot for most.
    edited July 2022 twokatmewAnilu_777Beats
  • Reply 2 of 24
    BTknightBTknight Posts: 1member
    Not big enough. Should be in the area of 49mm. Min. To really take advantage of all the info avail. to users. Keep growing 👍🏻
    MrBunside
  • Reply 3 of 24
    thttht Posts: 5,447member
    I'm definitely a 47mm Apple Watch buyer. Bring it on.

    My Series 4 has a problem with counting stairs taken when I haven't. It's ready to be replaced, unless I can find a way for it to stop counting stairs.
    FjordCruisernewisneverenoughMrBunsideurahara
  • Reply 4 of 24
    discountopiniondiscountopinion Posts: 80member
    Personally I would welcome a larger screen of 2.2 inch. The larger form factor would also enable a slightly larger battery to offset the increased screen size.

    I have an Apple Watch 6 and I am getting ready for an upgrade. The Watch gets more and more useful every year.
    FjordCruisernewisneverenough
  • Reply 5 of 24
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,960member
    As long as my older 45 mm bands fit, no problem. 
    FjordCruiseriOS_Guy80Anilu_777
  • Reply 6 of 24
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,168member
    BTknight said:
    Not big enough. Should be in the area of 49mm. Min. To really take advantage of all the info avail. to users. Keep growing ߑ�ﻦlt;/div>
    Agree. Won’t be happy until this:


    TBH though, think of what the price a 47mm watch would be!  I suspect it will be limited to female pop stars. 
    .
    edited July 2022 dk49fred1apple4thewinBeats
  • Reply 7 of 24
    entropysentropys Posts: 4,168member
    The restriction on size will,always be the size of most peoples’ wrists, at least for everyday use rather than an outfit accessory for clubbing.

    Here is a thought, what if… the rectangular screen was rotated ninety degrees to landscape? You could go quite a bit bigger then. And change the possibilities of screen layout and the ways different types of data are displayed
    anyway, I reckon there is unlikely to be a design change for another couple of iterations, so maybe this change is around series 10.
    edited July 2022 robin huber
  • Reply 8 of 24
    bluefire1bluefire1 Posts: 1,302member
    If the AW gets much larger, we can rename it the iPhoneTiny.
    Anilu_777dk49Beats
  • Reply 9 of 24
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 2,322member
    bluefire1 said:
    If the AW gets much larger, we can rename it the iPhoneTiny.
    They'd have to decouple it from the iPhone before they could do that. 
  • Reply 10 of 24
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,842moderator
    dk49 said:
    Man that's too big. The 45 version already looks like a calculator on wrist for most people. I wish they introduced a middle version - 43mm. That will be nice sweet spot for most.

    dk49 said:
    Man that's too big. The 45 version already looks like a calculator on wrist for most people. I wish they introduced a middle version - 43mm. That will be nice sweet spot for most.
    I started with the series zero, ordered the night they went on sale back in April 2015.  I’d been ito an Apple store to the try-on tables they setup after the introduction back in Sept 2014, and I felt that larger 42mm version looked giant on my wrist.  So it was the 38mm version for me.  I stayed with the 38mm when I upgrade to the series 2.  But today I wear a series 7, still the small size, but it’s 41mm, just 1mm short of the original large size.  But the overall case is still smaller than that original 42mm watch.  I suspect a 45mm is in my future and it’ll still feel right-sized.  I hadn’t worn a watch for decades prior to the Apple Watch release, and it took some time to get accustomed to having something strapped on my wrist.  It’s the same as with the iPhone; the original 3.5” was considered a big phone.  Many of us think nothing of carrying an nn Pro Max.  We adjust as the tech offers more desired features and capabilities.   
    edited July 2022
  • Reply 11 of 24
    longfanglongfang Posts: 456member
    discountopinion said:
    Personally I would welcome a larger screen of 2.2 inch. The larger form factor would also enable a slightly larger battery to offset the increased screen size.

    I have an Apple Watch 6 and I am getting ready for an upgrade. The Watch gets more and more useful every year.
    Not all of us have gorilla wrists though. Think of the little guy sometimes. 
    Beats
  • Reply 12 of 24
    AI_liasAI_lias Posts: 434member
    Bigger and nerdier. I think Apple should offer two form factors, a round one and a rectangular one (like the current one). Round watches are much more elegant, for both men and women. They could make one that doesn't look so sporty to also be fit for dress up occasions.
  • Reply 13 of 24
    apple4thewinapple4thewin Posts: 67member
    entropys said:
    BTknight said:
    Not big enough. Should be in the area of 49mm. Min. To really take advantage of all the info avail. to users. Keep growing ߑ�ﻦlt;/div>
    Agree. Won’t be happy until this:


    TBH though, think of what the price a 47mm watch would be!  I suspect it will be limited to female pop stars. 
    .
    That’s exactly what I envisioned for the future. Ironically I just watched that episode of Chuck with my family last night.
    Beats
  • Reply 14 of 24
    oberpongooberpongo Posts: 182member
    I am looking forward to the new smallest size. Hope it’s case is smaller than the original small. Would be great for kids or teens wir small wrists. 
    Beats
  • Reply 15 of 24
    hopestillflieshopestillflies Posts: 33member
    mattinoz said:
    bluefire1 said:
    If the AW gets much larger, we can rename it the iPhoneTiny.
    They'd have to decouple it from the iPhone before they could do that. 
    This is exactly what I dream of. It doesn't seem they're going to go any smaller with the iPhones and I pessimistically think they're not going to keep the mini going (so I'll hold on to my 12 mini, which really isn't mini enough, but it's the best I can get). So I'm just hoping for the day the watch grows even more capable and is offered completely independent of an iPhone plan. I want just my iPad for work and watch for my personal device. Probably will never happen, but a guy can dream.
    Beats
  • Reply 16 of 24
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 839member
    Apart from a couple of special watch faces, Apple has yet to make much practical use of the larger 45mm screen size--mostly, things are just a little bigger, which isn't a bad thing, but where's the creative functionality? So while the 47mm will satisfy those who just like a big watch, I don't see much appeal beyond that. What I really, really hope is that Apple doesn't go with flat sides on the Watch 8--which, especially in the new jumbo size, would go all in on that Casio Calculator Watch look. I can get THAT for $20, thank you very much--I don't want it in a $600 Apple Watch. 
  • Reply 17 of 24
    jcs2305jcs2305 Posts: 1,337member
    mattinoz said:
    bluefire1 said:
    If the AW gets much larger, we can rename it the iPhoneTiny.
    They'd have to decouple it from the iPhone before they could do that. 
    This is exactly what I dream of. It doesn't seem they're going to go any smaller with the iPhones and I pessimistically think they're not going to keep the mini going (so I'll hold on to my 12 mini, which really isn't mini enough, but it's the best I can get). So I'm just hoping for the day the watch grows even more capable and is offered completely independent of an iPhone plan. I want just my iPad for work and watch for my personal device. Probably will never happen, but a guy can dream.
    All you younger folks wanting smaller screen phones and smaller watch faces B)   Eventually your eyes will not agree no matter what you say or like about a smaller size. Personally I am not as huge person ( 6ft 1in 215lbs ) but the iPhone mini feels like a toy in my hands I could never go back to a phone that small whether I could see or not.

    edited July 2022 StrangeDays
  • Reply 18 of 24
    uraharaurahara Posts: 733member
    entropys said:
    The restriction on size will,always be the size of most peoples’ wrists, at least for everyday use rather than an outfit accessory for clubbing.

    Here is a thought, what if… the rectangular screen was rotated ninety degrees to landscape? You could go quite a bit bigger then. And change the possibilities of screen layout and the ways different types of data are displayed
    anyway, I reckon there is unlikely to be a design change for another couple of iterations, so maybe this change is around series 10.
    Landscape positioning would prevent the wrist to bend backwards freely. 
    edited July 2022
  • Reply 19 of 24
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    As long as the case size doesn’t increase. I don’t want the 50mm version to be the “mini” 10 years from now.

    jcs2305 said:
    mattinoz said:
    bluefire1 said:
    If the AW gets much larger, we can rename it the iPhoneTiny.
    They'd have to decouple it from the iPhone before they could do that. 
    This is exactly what I dream of. It doesn't seem they're going to go any smaller with the iPhones and I pessimistically think they're not going to keep the mini going (so I'll hold on to my 12 mini, which really isn't mini enough, but it's the best I can get). So I'm just hoping for the day the watch grows even more capable and is offered completely independent of an iPhone plan. I want just my iPad for work and watch for my personal device. Probably will never happen, but a guy can dream.
    All you younger folks wanting smaller screen phones and smaller watch faces B)   Eventually your eyes will not agree no matter what you say or like about a smaller size. Personally I am not as huge person ( 6ft 1in 215lbs ) but the iPhone mini feels like a toy in my hands I could never go back to a phone that small whether I could see or not.

    You’re not a “huge” person at 6’1 215lbs?!

    one of my girl friends is 5’1 and 95lbs.
  • Reply 20 of 24
    ApplePoorApplePoor Posts: 286member
    I have several round pilot watches from the 60s and 70s that are larger in diameter than my S7 45 is tall. Because they were self winding, they were thicker and much heaver than the S7. While they did all the flying things, they were not also a phone, and mini computer showing weather in real time.
Sign In or Register to comment.