Early this month I reported that accessory makers were planning on tapping into the Apple Watch’s hidden port for battery straps and faster charging. Not only would that allow companies to avoid having to design a solution with the magnetic, inductive charging system Apple is using, it also meant they wouldn’t have to workaround the sensors on the back of the watch.
Now, the company that first announced plans to use the hidden port, Reserve Strap, has posted a video showing faster charging using the port vs Apple’s charger:
[youtube=https://youtu.be/NOuUroPZE14]
The video shows Apple Watch charging slightly faster with the hidden port, hitting around 95% charged when Apple’s solution hits 90%.
At the time of its original announcement, the company noted that using the port enabled it to “achieve a higher charge capacity and quicker, more efficient charging times while also improving durability and eliminating any interference with Apple Watch functionality including taptic feedback and heartrate sensors.”
Today the company told us it’s much further along in the design process with its prototypes. Here’s what the current design looks like:
Reserve Strap is up for preorder for $249 with first shipments coming sometime this fall, and we’re sure this will inspire a number of other accessory makers even though we argued against it.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
It’s unlikely that apple can stop the charging pins from working. The worst they could do is be outright nasty about it, and make the watch display an “unauthorised accessory” message, which wouldn’t stop it charging but it would make the accessory practically unusable.
I think these guys are right to gamble, or indeed call Apple’s bluff on this — that said, I don’t think anyone should use that port for anything other than charging (assuming they can work out what else it does).
Your previous article was 100% spot on. People should be wary of throwing $250 away… but now that it’s sat with me for a while, I don’t think it’s a bad idea for an accessory maker to take that risk.
Business of any kind is a risk. Accessory makers are all leeching off the greater success of the product their accessories are designed for, and it’s usually a very crowded space. A strong differentiator is not a bad substitute for originality.
I don’t welcome their challenges though. I’m looking forward to seeing how they expect users to get the port cover off.
I should add also, I don’t think anyone needs to add $250 to the cost of their watch, to get additional battery life which as far as I can tell, nobody needs.
This direct charging method though, is the only way these guys are ever going to sell anything. They had one idea. If they don’t do this, they have to go back to not having any ideas.
I think, to be fair, there are a lot of iphone charging cases around that people are obviously buying so this is similar to that.
@pdjhh – But at the end of the day, my phone battery is hitting 5% if I don’t plug it in at my desk at work, while my Watch battery is pretty consistently at 50%+. Maybe with WWDC and apps running on the watch instead of the phone we’ll see that shift a little bit and I’ll end the day at 20% on each. Right now though, I’d absolutely love a battery case for my phone, and see zero use for one for my watch.
Agreed; the battery life of Apple Watch is not only adequate, but it’s a lot better than I expected. I can go 2 days sometimes without needing a charge…that’s pretty damned good IMHO.
I agree with you on the fact that your typical consumer wont be able to take the cover off the port. From the video they even had to lift the display to allow the wiring to access the port connections. Definitely a deal breaker if you’re sacrificing your warranty.
To remove the diagnostic port, you need a really thin needle (smaller then a sim card remover, more like a sewing needle) and insert it into the port, like a sim card, revealing the connections.
now, I don’t think I’m the only person here thinking that it would be a nifty idea if somebody produced a strap that ended in a micro-usb / usb-c port down the other end. This would make charging the Watch a lot more convenient when you’re out and about, than having to carry this mini-stethoscope in your bag, along with your other charging accessories.
But Apple being Apple, I’m sure they will do their BEST to disable such “functionality” in the next iteration of the hardware.
Because you know what happens when ****ty 3rd party accessory makers fry peoples Apple Watches by accessing ports they have no specs for and hoping for the best? Those people come to Apple, angry that their “stupid ****ing watch doesn’t work and is **it and you’d better replace it now or I’ll sue you for not honoring your warranty.”
Source: Worked in support at Apple for 5 years. I never once had a device come in fried from 1st party accessories, but 3rd party stuff? Killed batteries, caused little fires, and shorted out devices on a startlingly regular basis.
So I for one am all in favor of Apple limiting access to this sort of thing. It’s a port that gives them hardline access for diagnostics and repairs. For the same reason you don’t take your car to the bad mechanic in the shady part of town and expect it to work perfectly, you don’t open up access to a port like that to someone who has no idea WTF they’re doing with it.
So what about all the iPods over the years that have exploded and caused severe injuries? No accessory required…just the iPod…explain?
Do you own your Apple watch or not? Apparantly so – so why not let people who have spent their own money DO WHATEVER THE HELL THEY WANT WITH IT.
If people want to break or damage their purchase let them. If they want to install dodgy software which gives them a virus let them. They own the thing, they know the risks – if they break it that is their problem and their problem only.
Just don’t treat them like kids -which is what Apple does and does so so well.
I can 100% verify this to be the case.
While it’s well within someones right to use their products however they like, there are countless people that enter the Apple Store outraged when a 3rd party uncertified accessory damages their product. Often they have the expectation that Apple is gonna cover that under warranty, and are outraged when that isn’t the case.
I have nothing against freedom of use of the things you buy, but I do think it’s horribly unfair when you expect the manufacturer to cover you for damage you’ve cause yourself. Often people don’t know the risks and aren’t fully informed about what’s covered under their warranty.
@AuntyTroll And then they complain that Apple does not warn/protect them from these sneaky accessories. The problem is that they often don’t realize it is their own problem that their gadgets are broken.
Something that exposes all the inner details and thus is easily breakable is never a good consumer product, neither is it what most people want. Just like you separate public and private members in a class when you program. Build one by yourself from scratch if you want a can-do-whatever-you-want one.
@AuntyTroll – Go buy an Android Wear watch? I like the walled garden of Apple. I spend all day dealing with computers, so I like my personal technology to not require a ton of fiddling to keep working. Whether you’re aware of it or not, opening up a port like this to un-planned 3rd party usage DOES create extra work for engineering teams, support teams, and the like.
@srgmac – Was it a problem… yes. Was it a COMMON problem… Nope. I saw one in 5 years, and I often dealt with 50+ a day coming in for problems, so my sample size is vastly larger than 99.99% of the population, and is controlled for only those iPods that have issues. Quite honestly, I’m surprised it wasn’t more frequent given the condition some of those iPods came in with. Bent, soaked in water, thrown in fires, left in the hot sun for too long, fractured in half, run over by cars, I’ve seen them all. The only one that came in having caught fire though? Yeah, she had a cheap knockoff 3rd party charger purchased on a trip thru China. Funny how that works.
Not all 3rd party accessories come from some s**ty factory in China, you know…
The “anything not coming from Cupertino might/will damage your Apple product” line is a VERY LAME EXCUSE from Apple, who wants a tight hold on whatever it releases, hardware and software. Sometimes too tight a hold. Their products aren’t cheap (this is justified by their quality, though) but the accessories for them aren’t any good value for money.
For example, spending $19 on a Lightning cable. Cheap, right? If I want 5 cables to have laying around in different places, that’s about $100 for me. Think about it…
Example 2: the $79 Macbook cable so that you can have a single USB-A port while charging your laptop at the same time. For a machine that costs almost two grand. A complete bargain, right?
In the Watch’s case: Apple will do its best to FORCE you to buy its inductive charging stethoscope, sorry cable. This, however, is not necessarily everybody’s idea of practicality / good value-for-money, so I want to be left with the option of charging it otherwise.
Clear now?
@Τριαντάφυλλος Καραγιάννης – I don’t disagree in the slightest. There’s an entire MFi program to indicate that even Apple agrees that 3rd parties can build accessories for their devices.
But, you’re suggesting that accessing intentionally-hidden ports on a device with zero certification from Apple and a strong suggestion that you shouldn’t be using a port should be smiled upon and encouraged by Apple.
I understand that the port needs to be there for diagnostic and repair purposes, and I’m suggesting that having 3rd parties without the spec for the port building accessories is a terrible idea that will end in a bad user experience, and ultimately Apple getting bad PR for a watch that catches fire on someone’s wrist. If they build it so that 3rd parties CAN connect, it’s extra work on their part for very little additional reward and it makes no business sense at this point.
OoO you mean inductive charging is slower? No wai dewD!
Exactly. I’m actually surprised it’s only ~5% difference.
I think people are stupid to spend money on something like this without Apple’s explicit endorsement. That port is covered for a reason. Even the IFixit teardown had a difficult time getting it open. Perhaps Apple has plans for its use in the future. Until then I would be wary of any 3rd party attempting to use it. If it corrupts the Watch Apple’s not going to replace it.
I feel pity for the people that don’t have the Apple Watch yet, but are going to buy this and use this crap from day one.
You don’t need this, enjoy simplicity, save your bucks.
I’m certainly not going to spend $1000 for an Watch and then promptly void the warranty by using a kludged, unsupported charging system that may or may not damage the device at some point. I’m simply not that stupid. But I can see here that some are.
I thought apple filed a patent for batteries in a watch band?
I would much prefer to see a luxury travel case with a built in battery so i can charge my watch anywhere, but also have the option to connect the case via usb to charge directly etc — just like with some travel electric tooth brushes…
It also means that i could keep it in the case charging, and if im in a rush in the morning i can just put the case in my bag and dash – whilst on the train, or when i get to work i can then get it out knowing that it was protected in my bag and charged…
this would me more useful than wearing a battery strap around my wrist connect to a hacked port — which is used by demo models for keeping it charge, but is also a way for apple to do a diagnostic on the watch without having to open it — not really something that should be messed with
To me it’s not worth it. 250$ for a strap that gets u 5% more battery. If it was a huge difference like 20-30% now that is what I would buy. Personal opinion.
It doesn’t actually appear to be much faster at the end… they also only showed it up to 95%, but the apple charger almost caught up with the strap… the speed is not much slower.
how do I edit comments on here? I used to be able to when logged in to WP…
For all the people saying “nobody needs this”: Not everyone works eight or nine hours a day and not everyone works in an office environment. Not everyone has access to, or wants to carry, a charger around when they’re away from home, especially for a weekend. My Watch battery is better than what I expected, but I’m not content until Apple is able to squeeze 36-48 hours out of version two or three.
If this is being marketed as a lifestyle device, which I believe it to be, then this device needs to be able to go where I go, for how long I go (reasonably speaking), and maintain it’s functionality. If I want to go on a weekend climb, camping trip, or mountain biking starting on a Friday evening or Saturday morning it would be nice to not have to worry about how to charge my Watch until I get back home Sunday afternoon. I have a few associates who feel the same.
Same thing with working double shifts in law enforcement or being in the military. You don’t always have access to charging in the field. Let’s not assume there’s no market for accessories that provide extra Watch battery life. That’s foolish.
That’s quite obvious, Just like Wireless charging is slower than USB…
anyone else notice that the watch that supposedly charged faster was on power reserve mode?