Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses IOS Operating Systems Software The Almighty Buck Apple Hardware Technology

Apple Announces Apple Watch Series 2 With GPS, Water-Resistance and Faster Performance (theverge.com) 88

Posted by BeauHD from the sun-dial dept.
In addition to two shiny new iPhones, Apple has announced its second generation Apple Watch today, calling it the Apple Watch Series 2. The appearance is nearly identical to the original Apple Watch, with the exception of the new (optional) ceramic build material. The biggest changes can be found under the hood. The Verge reports: "The built-in GPS allows the device to perform mapping on its own, no phone required. The company also upgraded the processor in the device, now called the S2, and the display. The Series 2 has a dual-core processor Apple says is 50 percent faster than its predecessor, with double the graphics performance thanks to a new GPU. The display is now 50 percent brighter as well. The company also renewed its longstanding partnership with Nike with a special Nike+ version of the Apple Watch. It resembles a fusion of an Apple product with Nike's discontinued FuelBand fitness tracker, and it's designed for runners and workout junkies. The aluminum sport version of the Apple Watch Series 2 will start at $369, as will the Nike+ edition. The original Apple Watch is being rebranded as Series 1 and will start at $269, though it will come with the upgraded S2 dual-core processor. Preorders start on September 9th, while the watchOS 3 update will go live on September 13th."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Announces Apple Watch Series 2 With GPS, Water-Resistance and Faster Performance More

Apple Announces Apple Watch Series 2 With GPS, Water-Resistance and Faster Performance

Comments Filter:

  • Much faster (Score:2, Funny)

    by elrous0 ( 869638 )

    This new model is so fast, it'll only take it half as long to be forgotten about.

  • Missing feature (Score:3)

    by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @04:22PM (#52843515)

    Can it last a weekend without charging?
    It's bad enough I have to charge my watch once a week.

    • Fall is coming up, you can hide your charging cables in your new iJacket for the low, low price of $999. Also, nothing will keep your iJacket that trademark Apple white like iBleach. Pickup a bottle or two with your purchase only $30 a quart.

  • Still waiting (Score:4, Informative)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @04:24PM (#52843529)

    I tend to like Apple products, but the Watch - all smart watches, really - just isn't where it needs to be for me to want one. They're too big, too clunky, way too expensive and way too limited. Plus having just one-day battery life (or worse... they haven't really said what "Series 2" owners can expect, which is a bad sign) for something you only look at sporadically is ridiculous.

    This isn't an Apple problem, though - it's because the underlying technology is just not there yet.

    I think I'll be sticking to a fitness tracker for the next few years - I currently have a Garmin Vivosmart, but I might get the new FitBit Charge 2. I get 90% of the utility (notifications, alarms, reminders, texts), week-long battery life, and pay less than half what a smart watch costs. Additionally, having a gentle vibration on my wrist to wake me up in the AM is superior to something blaring on my night stand - and is something current smart watches basically can't do, since they'll be charging and not on my wrist.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It is an Apple problem. They require a shiny, glossy high brightness display and apps. Other manufacturers use lower power displays that are daylight readable and carefully limit functionality to get days of battery life, e.g. Pebble.

    • This isn't an Apple problem, though - it's because the underlying technology is just not there yet.

      It's ironic that the company that is touted for its patience in waiting for technology to catch up to compelling use cases for the iPhone is not willing to give the Apple Watch the same consideration. Is this a sign of desperation to find the next big thing by leveraging marketing prowess and brand appeal even in the face of lackluster use cases.

    • all smart watches, really

      I think you contradict yourself. It seems you found a smartwatch that has the right set of features for your wants/needs.

  • ....and NO headphone jack.

  • Call me when I can change the battery in this thing every three years like a real watch. Otherwise it's a bit fucking pointless.

    • its a 'show off' item for rich motherfuckers.

      for them, they can afford to throw it out each year or two. they could care less how much it costs; its a hipster show-off item and apple full well knows it.

      there is no need for this; its pure luxury and fashion statement. the fact that it sells at all means that buyers who fall for this are the 'perfect gullible market' that apple makes its money from.

      • Re:All out of fucks to give (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Moridineas ( 213502 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @06:36PM (#52844245) Journal

        its a 'show off' item for rich motherfuckers.

        Is a ~$300 high-tech item really a show off item? I mean, we're at the point now where pretty much anywhere in the country (and excepting fast food), a dinner for a family of 4 costs a minimum of $50, and probably a good bit higher. I'm not calling $300 pocket change, but I'm not sure it gets you into "rich asshole" territory either! (Hypocrisy alert, if I knew someone dropped $300 on a namebrand purse or some shit like that, I would call it a show off item!)

        for them, they can afford to throw it out each year or two. they could care less how much it costs; its a hipster show-off item and apple full well knows it.

        Most of the people I have met with Apple watches actually were road warriors---people who travel constantly for work. One guy liked it because he always stays at Starwoods and he can unlock his room via the watch. Another liked hers because she got so many text messages for work that she filtered the Watch to only get family messages, so she didn't have to constantly be pulling her phone out of her purse whenever it dinged. etc. Most of the other users I've met just seem to use it like a glorified FitBit. I actually have not seen or met a single hipster-type wearing one!

        Full disclosure, I don't have one and don't particularly want on, but I don't think your characterizations are remotely accurate--they seem more driven by your own imagination of what a gross characterization of an Apple user is!

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          its a 'show off' item for rich motherfuckers.

          Is a ~$300 high-tech item really a show off item? I mean, we're at the point now where pretty much anywhere in the country (and excepting fast food), a dinner for a family of 4 costs a minimum of $50, and probably a good bit higher. I'm not calling $300 pocket change, but I'm not sure it gets you into "rich asshole" territory either! (Hypocrisy alert, if I knew someone dropped $300 on a namebrand purse or some shit like that, I would call it a show off item!)

          The notion that the Apple watch is some kind of status symbol for "high net worth individuals" is ludicrous. Especially as a watch. Watches aren't expensive status symbols until they cost in the 5 or even 6 figure range.

          At best (or worst), they symbolize one's status as a "true" Apple fan.

        • One guy liked it because he always stays at Starwoods and he can unlock his room via the watch.

          I think Starwoods need to improve their security if an Apple watch can open any of their rooms!

      • I keep seeing this statement - that the Apple Watch is for "rich people" - but strangely I see far more people that make less than I do wearing them.

        Rich people buy actual luxury watches - not these things that will be unsupported and collecting dust in 3 years.

  • Seems like a good upgrade (Score:3)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Wednesday September 07, 2016 @04:41PM (#52843629)

    I'll be sticking with my existing AppleWatch for a while I think, the GPS is a nice addition but I prefer to run with my phone anyway so I don't really need that. Apple really understands who the watch is most useful for though, between the waterproofing and the GPS they have really improved things for fitness uses (which is also my primary use).

    I think it was also a nice touch to include the faster processor in the older model non-GPS watch they continue to sell.

    The more important announcement is really WatchOS 3.0 which also works on the older watches - it really improves usability, ditching the old "circle of friends" use of the side button in favor of your five top watch apps, and keeping them constantly refreshed with data so there's no launch delay. That will make a number of watch apps much more useful, along with the ease of switching watch faces and sets of complications for different tasks. So you'll see a large increase this year in really useful Watch applications, which will ramp up sales even further...

    • I'll be sticking with my existing AppleWatch for a while I think, the GPS is a nice addition but I prefer to run with my phone anyway so I don't really need that. Apple really understands who the watch is most useful for though, between the waterproofing and the GPS they have really improved things for fitness uses (which is also my primary use).

      Do you use the Watch for any home automation functionality?

      • At the moment I don't have any home automation gear, but I plan to get a number of items later this year... HomeKit stuff does look like a useful way to use the watch.

        • I have a wifi thermostat and about a dozen Philips Hue bulbs. They've been really handy. I've been thinking about getting a Homekit enabled lock for a basement...maybe a ceiling fan...etc. Seemed like watch controls would be nice for those things!

        • At the moment I don't have any home automation gear, but I plan to get a number of items later this year... HomeKit stuff does look like a useful way to use the watch.

          Right now I have a houseful of Insteon sensors that send me iPhone notifications if there's a lean under the sink or the cat needs kibbles. How much instanter would they be on a Watch?

          • Well they would be a lot more instant if you wander around the house without a phone as I do - I thought for instance I would never use the watch for making calls, (which is true) but I use it often for receiving them while I leisurely stroll to where my phone is (or sometimes just ignore when I can tell its a marketing/political call).

            Leak detectors are a really great idea though, I didn't even think about that so thanks for mentioning them - so you are happy with the Insteon sensors? I assume the sensor

            • Insteon devices are one of the unheralded wonders of the IoT world. You connect their proprietary hub to your router, and then buy whatever sensors and actuators you need for the house, any number of each. They are cheap and mesh-linked, so if you have multiple devices they relay status messages through each other to fill in any dead spots ij the house. I have one leak sensor under a radiator behind a metal grating. The hub connects over the Internet with your mobile device.

              There isn't actually a cat dish s

      • I do-- hue, sonos, insteon. Marginally useful when laying on floor without phone handy. Not a great UX yet though.

  • Smart watches will become as popular as Smart phones only when they become functional enough to completely replace Smart phones.

    Until then, most people aren't going to bother carrying around (and recharge) two devices when carrying around one will do.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Kjella ( 173770 )

      Smart watches will become as popular as Smart phones only when they become functional enough to completely replace Smart phones. Until then, most people aren't going to bother carrying around (and recharge) two devices when carrying around one will do.

      I already put my smartphone on the charger and take off my "dumbwatch" every night, plugging in my watch would only take a few seconds. It's the intersection between things that are more complicated than checking the time and things that'd take less time than whipping out my smartphone I'm struggling to find. Then again I have a small iPhone SE, maybe if have one of those plus size phones you feel the need for a smaller device but then I think you got the wrong phone not the right watch.

  • Serious question: does this "watch" keep good time? It has GPS, so it should never display the wrong time but what if it loses power and can't get a solid GPS signal? Will it just blink "12:00" like a neglected VCR? Does it have an actual RTC in it or is it just updated by GPS often enough to not notice a time drift?

    • I don't have an Apple Watch, but I have friends that do. They've never complained of a time problem, and they absolutely would if it had one.

      It's got a RTC in the processor, it's essentially an ARMv7 - which has that baked in.

      The v1 watch doesn't have its own GPS, it syncs to the iPhone.

    • The AppleWatch sets time via the iPhone it's paired with, then beyond that has some absurdly accurate internal timekeeping mechanism (described in the original AppleWatch presentation I think). Wonky GPS satellites will not mess with your time; wonky cell tower times might.

  • Is the iWatch still using a 24 hour day or has Apple improved on it?

  • How useful is a watch that you have to charge on a daily basis? I just find that to be a pretty high barrier to entry in terms of investing my dollars in a "hey look at me" gadget.

    • Very. I didn't wear a watch when I went to bed before, and the Apple Watch isn't changing that habit*. I have a cheap little charging stand that lets me use the watch as a bedside alarm clock while it's charging, so it's still useful even when I don't have it on. Charging overnight, like I do with my phone and laptop, is a non-issue of an inconvenience.

      *David "Underscore" Smith made the Sleep++ app and detailed [david-smith.org] how to "time" your charging to let you wear the watch nearly 24/7. I gave it a try for a few

    • I had the same concern and wouldn't throw my money down. But my wife surprised me for my bday with one.

      What use is a phone that needs to be charged everyday?!

      As for battery life. Most of the time it only consumes 30% in a typical day - and I wear it ALL day. I've pared down the apps that make notifications (what's that condition called when everything Beeps you ignore it more?) - and I have worn it 24 hours on one occasion but had to make a few more tweaks to save the battery (ultimately it did go into

  • No word from Apple about whats going to happen with the Apple Watch Edition. Seriously if you are going to sell a $17,000 luxury item that will be obsolete 16 months after it is released you better have a good upgrade plan in place.

    • The new ceramic Watch is listed as "edition", but the gold and rose gold edition watches haven't made the Series 2 cut, at least per Apple's website [apple.com]. Presumably they didn't sell well enough to be worth upgrading, since the new ceramic model is, despite being "edition", only costing a couple hundred more than the priciest stainless watches.

      As for upgrade plans Apple offers, if you're buying the solid gold Watches, either 1. you can afford to take the hit or 2. you're a wealthy and significant-enough tastema

  • Meh. (Score:2)

    by antdude ( 79039 )

    I will stick with my old school Casio Data Bank watch!

  • Great, so it still does less than my phone and still looks like an 80's calculator watch. Some one please tell me, why does anyone buy these?

  • Why does a watch device need to be high performance? It's a freaking *watch*.

    Heaven forbid Apple actually did something useful and, say, increase the battery life so that the bloody thing lasts for more than a day between charges.

    A conventional watch can go months, if not years, on a single battery. There's no excuse to put out a watch-like device that can't go less than a couple weeks between charges.

  • I have a Garmin Forerunner 920XT watch - and I love it. I use it for triathalons. It can track my workouts because it has internal GPS (that doesn't need a smartphone), it is waterproof so I can use it swiming (count strokes, and use GPS positioning for open water). I've always said the Apple watches were "cute" and flashy - but were completely ill-equipped for my purposes. Of all the people I train with - almost *everyone* has these newer high-end Garmin watches. *PLUS* you can do things like Bluetooth a
  • There is something inherently wrong with a watch that is guaranteed to run faster, isn't there? /s

    I'll just keep my old slow watch, thankyouverymuch. There already isn't enough time in the day to get everything done that I need to do.

Slashdot Top Deals

Never test for an error condition you don't know how to handle. -- Steinbach

Close