Two months after the initial launch of the Apple Watch, and only a day following the device’s debut at Apple Stores, sources have revealed Apple’s considerations for the 2016 release of a second-generation model. According to multiple sources familiar with Apple’s plans, the Apple Watch 2 is planned to gain a video camera, a new wireless system for greater iPhone independence, and new premium-priced models. Interestingly, it will also feature similar battery life to its predecessor…
FaceTime Video Camera
Apple’s current considerations call for a video camera to be integrated into the top bezel of the Apple Watch 2, enabling users to make and receive FaceTime calls on the move via their wrists. The company telegraphed its interest in increasing Apple Watch FaceTime functionality during the rollout of watchOS 2.0 at the Worldwide Developers Conference earlier this month. For the first time, the new software allows users to answer FaceTime Audio calls from the Apple Watch, as well as route FaceTime video calls to either be answered on an iPhone or rejected. Of course, plans can change and it is possible that the camera could be pushed back to a later model.
More iPhone Independence
Under an initiative internally called “tether-less,” Apple plans for the second-generation Watch to have more functionality when used independently from an iPhone. Currently, the Apple Watch’s activity tracking, mobile payment, and music playback functionality work substantially without a connected iPhone, but many other features that could normally function solely under a Wi-Fi connection do not function completely, including text messaging, emailing, and receiving updated weather data.
In order to make the next-generation Apple Watch more capable without a connected iPhone, Apple intends to integrate a new and more dynamic wireless chipset into the wearable. Although the Apple Watch 2 will likely continue to require an iPhone for heavy data transfers, including software upgrades and the synchronization of media files, basic communication tasks could be handled without iPhone assistance. The new Wi-Fi chip will also enable the Find my Watch feature we reported on earlier this year, as Apple will be able to track Apple Watches using Wi-Fi router triangulation technology instead of GPS.
Battery Life
While Apple and consumers were both concerned about the Apple Watch’s real-world battery life prior to the product’s April release, Apple has conducted market research since then, and has concluded that the majority of current customers are satisfied with charging their Apple Watches nightly. According to a source, Apple’s research indicates that average consumers finish each day with between 30% and 40% charge remaining on their Apple Watches, enabling the company’s engineers to change their hardware priorities for future Apple Watch models.
While Apple might otherwise have considered focusing on major battery life improvements for the next Apple Watch, it now believes that it can satisfy customers by keeping, or slightly improving, the existing battery life while adding more advanced hardware features. Indeed, Apple’s addition of a Nightstand charging mode to the Apple Watch (rather than, say, sleep tracking) implies that the nightly charging requirement will not be going away in the near term. This strategy would follow Apple’s annual iPad hardware strategy, which has brought new features to the product annually without shifting away from the 2010 promise of 10 hour battery life.
Additional Variations
Apple is currently exploring a wider portfolio of Apple Watch models beyond today’s Sport, Steel, and Edition tiers. Interestingly, the company is said to be focusing on introducing new models that will sit between the highest-end stainless steel Apple Watch and the entry-level 18-karat gold Apple Watch Edition. The company is looking at ways to attract customers at price points between $1,000 and $10,000, but it is unclear if this will result in lower-priced gold Apple Watch variations, higher-priced steel models with more advanced bands, or versions with new materials. It is possible that Apple could introduce Apple Watch 2 variations made with titanium, tungsten, palladium, or as has been previously suggested, platinum.
Launch
While minor hardware upgrades for this holiday season have been hinted at in analyst reports over the past several months, it is most likely that Apple will wait until 2016 to release a full next-generation Apple Watch device. Sources did warn that Apple prototypes several variations of future hardware products before release, so the plans for a camera-equipped model could ultimately be saved for another generation either due to roadmap changes or component availability. To hold off Apple Watch customers until a new model, Apple will release watchOS 2.0 this fall with new Nightstand functionality, a trio of new watch faces, improved email functionality, and new “Digital Touch” messaging features.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
zzzzzzzzzzzz
No GPS?! I’m waiting for this to go running with my Apple Watch and leave my iPhone at home! By the way, if you preload maps on your Watch, will it remember them when you’re not connected to the internet?
You are looking at the wrong device then. I wouldn’t hold your breath that Apple will over take Garmin in this respect any time soon. In fact Google hasn’t really come close to Garmins stand alone offerings.
@DaanZijlstra is absolutely right to question this.
Apple Watch is a health/fitness device and Apple is very much marketing as such. In fact,fitness is one of the top use cases for Apple Watch’s existence. There is a reason the most prominent sensor is a heart rate monitor.
Excluding GPS on the second gen Apple Watch would be a major fail. GPS is way more important than a Face Time camera. From a business perspective, it makes not sense. There is a huge segment of the market that would buy Apple Watch with GPS. In fact, I’d argue a very big part of the iPod’s success was due to runners and people going to the gym being able to bring their own music with them for a workout. Apple Watch is even more health and fitness focused, and the ability to go for a run, with GPS and music sans iPhone, is huge.
@Michael Loughan,
If this watch will have no GPS and they indeed decide not to focus on improving battery life then i’ll assume those two decisions are connected. A GPS would probably be a significant drain and would force them to do something about the battery. Like Daan said, as someone who runs with my dog, the lack of such a feature would suck and lowers the potential value of this device to me.
Apple distortion field in full effect.
@Michael Loughan,You can already use the watch like runners used the iPod. The iPod relied on a gyroscope for running not GPS, which you can use on the watch w/o the iPhone, and you can play music on the watch w/bluetooth headphones.
GPS is a total battery killer. For Garmin watches (which last 14 days not using GPS, but 10 hours with), and MSFT band which barely lasts a day if you workout for any amount of time with GPS.
While GPS is a battery killer, the Garmin Forerunner 920XT is rated at 24 hours of battery life. Granted the 920XT does not do all the things that the Apple Watch does, but it does show that decent battery life is possible in a GPS watch that also provides live tracking and some notification. Plus it seems Apple could do what Garmin does and extend the battery life by pinging the satellites less frequently. While everyone’s use case is different, I personally can’t justify an Apple Watch without GPS given the types of activities I need tracked.
The screen resolution on the forerunner is fine for its stats based interface. But would be horrible on the apple watch. Also the cpu in it is abysmal compared to the apple watch. It would be hard to keep apple watch as small as it is and include battery draining gps. not sure it can be done with out better GPS chips and better battery chemistry
the truth is that they will iterate this like the iPhone …… and the fact is that the 42 inch is too small….. if you follow fashionable watches you know that 42 inch watches were hot in the early 2000’s …. now they’re 46…. apple will surely iterate THAT size too…..
Or maybe Apple sees a return to the more classic watch sizes. The 38mm is a classic men’s watch size.
if you look at the current trend in watches, they are coming back down in size. The apple watch isn’t even truly a 42mm watch, since that is measured top to bottom. When a traditional watch is 46mm, they mean from one side of the case to the other, not counting the crown. I would never buy a 46mm watch, that’s why I passed on the moto 360.
A 42 INCH watch???
I would like to see the wrist that could accommodate that!
;)
A 46 inch watch you say? Welcome to Lilliput mr. Gulliver…
I hate huge watches. 42mm is perfect.
I recently ran in a half marathon utilizing both my phone’s GPS (mapmyrun, runkeeper) and my watch.
I live in a dense city and within 1.5 miles the GPS was WAY WAY offf. It alwys is.
Between miles 0 and 6 my watch was spot on with the mile markes for the race. There was times where my watch ticked way later than the mile marker but utimately ended .19 miles MORE than the race was designated for.
I feel that’s accurate enough for recreational use.
Agreed, and same here – did a HM on a treadmill the other day and the difference was exactly 1km. Must me algorithms i guess, as i added an incline that the watch doesn’t register. That said, an advanced menu on these workout settings would be great.
GPS isn’t necessary to track a run on the Watch. The iPod didn’t have GPS either. I took my iPhone with my on my first run with the Watch and with that, it figured out my pace length. I’ve never had to bring the iPhone on a run and from my estimates, it’s getting pretty much exactly the correct distance and number of steps as I’ve compared it to previous runs with the same route.
There will be maps, and a GPS. I think it will remember them considering it is in the watch. You should go down to you’re local Apple Store and get all the info you need👍
Yes
As much as I wanted the Stainless in Space Gray – and even per-ordered it – and then canceled the order with non-buyers remorse – I’m glad I listened to that little voice that said “Wait for the 2nd Generation, it’s always better.”
I can only hope that they release a Titanium version that doesn’t beak the retirement fund!
Every new generation is always BETTER than the previous one. So when are you gonna buy?
I’ll buy one when they come out with a thinner model.
Honestly you lazy Apple Watch sloths will torture people with awful FaceTime Video calls from your wrist because you refuse to pull your phone out of your pocket any more.
Always a pleasure, Chris
Jealous much? lol
I dunno about lazy, as I like to workout and be outdoors as much as possible. And sloth? Not sure it means what you think it means lol. But, as long as history has been recorded, there has always been, the troll. I tip my hat sir :)
Having a different opinion to you doesn’t make anyone a troll. What he said isn’t particularly offensive is it.
Well, actually Aunty, statements like “…you lazy Apple Watch sloths” fits the criteria for being offensive. It’s intent and meaning were crafted specifically to be offensive and could not be reasoned for any other intent. Though, with a handle like “Aunty Troll”, you can understand if I’m a bit skeptical of your defensive position for Chris’s choice of wording. An unfortunate, but still justly, consequence of the First Amendment. :)
Ah right – yet oddly enough my comment was less offensive and less inflammatory than the two comments you have made. Odd that isn’t it. Just shows you that names don’t count for anything, because just as I’m not a troll, I assume that you aren’t a berk.
Wow. They would be so incredibly stupid to add a FaceTime camera in that bezel. NO ONE should even want to use FaceTime on the watch. I honestly cannot believe they would add a camera to it, ever. It simply doesn’t make any sense, at all. It goes completely against their entire idea that the watch should be used for only seconds at a time. No one will want to FaceTime on the watch, very few even do it on the phone. To think that people will want to hold their arm up for extended periods of time, tilting it perfectly to make their face be seen is just completely absurd. Now I know Apple is clueless and shouldn’t have released the watch until 2020, when they could actually make it useful with good biometric sensors. Currently, it isn’t a product that is worth existing, and I own one mind you. Most IMPORTANTLY, everyone would want the top, bottom, left, and right bezels to get MUCH smaller to accommodate much more screen real-estate, and that will never happen for the top and bottom if they add a useless FaceTime camera. It honestly couldn’t be a more horrible decision.
Biometric sensors
Notifications
Home automation
Key
These are the only reasons for the watch to exist, and it only does one of them really.
You do realize this is just a rumor and may never become reality?
Gurman is legit, this is indeed Apples roadmap for the Apple Watch. Whether they can implement it or not in a year is not known but you can trust this is Apples idea of improvement.
A bit disappointed that NFC can’t be used on Apple Watch or iPhone 6/6+ as a key, seems like a logical use case. Maybe next year.
Tim Cook also mentioned using Apple Watch as a key to your car eventually. So it’s certainly on the roadmap. But I’m guessing the current watchOS 2.0 features (running apps on the watch itself) was far higher priority.
Agreed — NFC has limitless applications…when implemented right with a strong backbone, Apple can use NFC to integrate their products into things most people would have never thought of…completely new markets await Apple because of this — I hate that they took so long to adopt it though, and of course Phil Schiller’s famous line, “NFC isn’t a good solution to any problem” back when the iPhone 5 came out and people were like “WTFBBQ NO NFC!?”
Funny how the entire Apple Pay retail / brick and mortar system is based on NFC :P Guess no one told Phil Schiller…
Umm but it can be used as a key http://9to5mac.com/2015/04/24/apple-watch-hotel-room-key/
Very well said, o0smoothies0o.
If Apple walks that path, it’ll be doing more fashion or lifestyle-oriented stuff (“this thing sells”) rather than Steve Jobs-era kind of innovation. Much like Nokia was doing back in the early 00s.
I’m super excited about FaceTime from my wrist. I’ll use it all the time.
I hope this is sarcasm. Hold your arm up and tilt your wrist so it’s perfectly aimed straight toward your face. Now hold it in that position without moving a muscle, lest the hypothetical person on the other end will be seeing you shaking and your face going in and out of view. Continue holding it perfectly steady in this position for over a minute and tell us again how much you can’t wait to do this, but more importantly, be seen doing this (even by family). Then, remember that your iPhone with its large display will almost always be on your person, or close by. Lastly, remember that due to the addition of that FaceTime camera in the front bezel of the watch, that tiny display you’ll be viewing that horrific FaceTime call experience on, will remain just as small due to that awful FaceTime camera, when it could have gotten significantly larger, if that camera weren’t there.
iPads and iPhones are held for Facetime and they’re heavier and not simply strapped on to a wrist..
It’s so funny how people can get their knickers in such a knot over someone getting excited about something.
@dipaguco It’s fun when you can totally ignore facets of an argument, isn’t it? Like, for example, how I specifically went over the fact that holding your arm up, and rotating your wrist to perfectly align with your face would become insanely uncomfortable, and any slight movement of the wrist or arm would leave your face out of the picture. Holding an iPhone or iPad uses far less muscular activation, not to mention pulling in much stronger muscles, like the biceps. Moreover, the tension is far less as opposed to holding your arm up, fully, which puts maximal tension on the anterior deltoid. Also, the very fact that it’s strapped to your wrist is one of the reasons it would be so difficult to position and maintain your face in the camera, whereas an iPhone or iPad is held in your hands, and can be adjusted greatly with slight hand/finger movement, and controlled much easier, I mean you can easily run with an iPhone and be able to keep your face in the camera, good luck doing that with a camera on your wrist.
I guess it’s a good thing there are omnidirectional cameras and Apple’s Primesense technology can track your face.
I get the idea of a new watch, but I REALLY do not think it will be next year. I think the product cycle will be more like the mac mini. This is far too expensive to have a new model each year. The only way this will happen is if they offer another tier. Watch premium vs watch.
Apple doesnt refresh based on price points…..hello dirt cheap Apple TV who hasnt gotten love since I think 1947 or so
I’m trying to figure out your logic, its too expensive for what?
For you to buy a new one every year? Then don’t.
The macbook pro is an expensive product, I don’t buy one every year. My macbook pro is from 2012.
I thought the Tetherless stuff was coming with watchOS 2? I know it’ll bring the ability to connect to known wifi hotspots so not sure how this new stuff will be different?
As I understand it yes, you will be able to connect to known Wi-Fi networks with WatchOS 2.
Needs a dedicated GPS chip on the watch itself…that will be the best feature IMHO. Most people, I think, do not want to take their phone with them biking or running; that’s supposed to be private time, time away from interwebz.
I literally just bought an Apple Watch yesterday. But also do you think Apple Watch 2 will be it’s own keynote or tagged on to the usual fall launch of iPhone?
I think they’re going to keep it on a spring release schedule. iPhones for Christmas, Watches for graduations.
No true health tracking sensors makes the Apple Watch still a. I sale for me.
Apple almost has to have iPhone independence as feature for the next model. I would rather them improve the battery instead of putting a Facetime camera in the damn thing.
I think Apple has a problem with all the sku.s it has with its products. Look how many iPads,iPhones and Apple Watxhes sky’s they are. Hearing of even more Watch models coming shows Apple won’t streamline the number of models soon.
FaceTime camera is absolutely idiotic. It means no reduction of bezel, which customers want, not a FaceTime camera that no one will use that isn’t a complete tool.
As I look at my Apple Watch, I begin to realize this day was going to come. Just did not think I’d hear a rumor so quickly :-/
Okay, let’s see… Dick Tracy’s 2-way watch in 2016. 70 years after Dick Tracy. So… 2001 by 2071?
Residual income. 1k plus models that will be replaced yearly. I’m sure there’s a market, just won’t be me.
A more traditional looking round variant would be great…I like my apple watch, but I look at my traditional watches and think they are way better in terms of looks…
Never happen
For a traditional watch I agree that round works better, but I honestly don’t want to see a round watch I have to interface data with. Remember that you’d have to read text on this thing.
At first the low battery life was killer to me, because I have bad battery charging habits.
This is a real basic tip, but what can I say, sometimes a reminder about the basics is helpful. Get plenty of charging capacity and think about the ergonomics. I finally did, and it make the world of difference.
My Apple Watch, my Wii Gamepad, and my iPad were always uncharged when I needed them, but now they are always charged.
What I did is I bought 3 USB hubs, (1 for the car, 1 for bedroom, 1 for the kitchen), a stand, an extension cord, one extended battery, and a bunch of cheap $1 cables off ebay.
OK, the problems this solved were – 1, I used to swap devices, unplug one, plug in another. No more, I have plenty of ports and cables and keep everything plugged in at once. That’s why my iPad is charged now, instead of being dead – its plugged in! I said it was simple, but this really made the difference.
For the watch, I got the stand. I only occasionally use the watch for running, by leaving it on its stand, its charged when I go to get it.
For the Wii U Gamepad, which has a notoriously bad battery, I went ahead and got the extended battery from Nintendo US. But more than that, I got a simple extension cord. Now my Gamepad can be plugged in, even when playing.
Little attention to ergonomics, turned by charging situation upside down. All my devices are charged all the time now :)
With a FaceTime camera; we’ll now have morons driving down the road, looking at their watch for video chats, rather than paying attention to the road. (To be followed by municipal regulations that somehow attempt to outlaw the use of the watch while driving). I see a regulatory train wreck coming down the road.
I held off on purchasing the 1st generation Apple Watch; because I wanted to see more biometrics and better battery life. I see a lot of potential for a unit that can be worn in your sleep & record motion, O2 levels, Heart rate, etc. Unfortunately, that isn’t feasible if you have to take it off your wrist every night. Also, what about users who frequently travel internationally on lengthy flights? Do they need to remove the watch & charge it in-flight? While I would ultimately like to see the 3-5 day battery life of the Pebble (I was an original Kickstarter backer) I’d be satisfied short-term with a device that would make it at least two days without needing to recharge.
The Apple Watch recharges really fast. With conservation, it can last 2 days, but as a routine, I charge it nightly, or after I first wake up (while I eat breakfast, shower, etc…). I had a Pebble too, and frankly the battery life on it was a bit of a hassle because it wasn’t a routine to charge it. Also, the Do Not Disturb mode sucked, so I never recharged it next to my bed.
Despite being able to wear the Apple Watch while you sleep, there’s unfortunately not much tracking (currently) for it anyway… it won’t (currently) monitor your sleep, there is no O2 sensor (at least not enabled) and no sleep monitoring app. It would be nice though to see all of these things.
RE: “Despite being able to wear the Apple Watch while you sleep, there’s unfortunately not much tracking (currently) for it anyway…”
Thus the portion of my comment where I referenced my hopes that the 2nd generation would have better (read as additional) biometrics built in. Other than that missed point, the feedback is appreciated.
If you travel on a plane with it you will need to have it on airplane mode which should lengthen the battery life significantly. On airplane mode, it will easily last more than 24 hrs. One day I didn’t charge it for about 28hrs and had 15% battery when I did charge it.
For most flight routes Wi-Fi & Bluetooth are no longer restricted in-flight; just cellular. Thus, airplane mode would not be required. For Trans-Atlantic travel; you typically depart USA mid-day to late evening & arrive in UK / Europe early-mid morning. You need enough of a charge to get you through the day in the US, then again through your destination. Even with on-board power ports; I’d be hesitant to remove my expensive watch in-flight. (especially since I try to get a few hours of sleep en-route.) I see somewhat of a parallel between battery life on the Apple Watch & Battery Life on iPhone / iPad. Instead of giving users great battery life; Apple seems bent (no pun intended with reference to 6 plus) on making every device as thin as possible. I’d much rather see an extra mm thickness dedicated to batteries.
Should be Waterproof
If that was the only feature with version 2 plus new material choices it’d be a great update.
I used to think that too, but until I see the Apple Watch actually fail a water torture test, I’m not the slightest bit worried about it.
I sure hope they don’t put a camera on it — it will be google glass all over again (people getting creeped out, studios getting the device banned from movie theaters, etc).
I hope they do put a GPS chip in it, but I suspect if it was that easy it would already be there. I have a nike running watch with GPS and it’s not reliable, and that is all plastic… apple watch is mostly metal, leaving a very small plane for GPS signals to reach the watch through the glass. The Garmin watches work well, but they have made huge design sacrifices to get there and I don’t think Apple will do the same.
Platinum is more expensive than gold so wouldn’t sit between gold and stainless. But silver or titanium would.
I’m interested to see if Apple will be able to ever appeal to those who never worn watches or never cared for wearing watches. I’m one of those people. I think it’s a beautiful watch and it looks like a watch but at the same time it’s still looks like a watch. I was hoping it wouldn’t look like a watch kind of like the iPhone didn’t look like a phone. It seems to me if they can really make a feature that sets it apart or maybe design a model that appeals to those who don’t want a traditional looking watch that would be cool. It needs a feature that makes non watch people say “I need that” before we will spend 400 on something we don’t care for to begin with. I don’t know what they will do but I find it interesting. I really want to want one but I just don’t at this point.
So I guess I should just go ahead and buy Gen 1 since Gen 2 is not adding anything I find valuable. I don’t want a camera and I don’t care about other metals as they will still be too expensive. It wont be independent enough of the iphone to upgrade. Maybe for Christmas!
I would be all over a titanium version, preferably polished titanium and not in space grey or DLC. Plus titanium is a great choice for people with metal allergies. GPS would be even better.
Given the disgreement of which features the watch should have, I think it’d be wise for Apple to do like the Macbook with USB C bands that function as different things. They could offer Facetime bands, GPS bands, etc… A moto maker type band store would make it even more personal
Considerations? Meaningless drivel. Anybody could have written this collection of speculations which seems to be unaware of current technological limitations.
Who cares
I Found an helpful article on apple watch oS2.0 What’s New in Apple WatchOS 2.0 and Should You Update?
http://www.springbox.com/news/whats-new-in-apple-watchos-2-0-and-should-you-update/
I will wait for the apple watch air hehehe
Here’s the Apple Watch 2 wish list: thinner (say 2-3mm less); better WiFi; less bezel (not more); read and answer more email types (not always handing back to Phone); separate GPS enabled version for those who like to charge more often; ability to replace my car fob (Toyota in this case). Please uncle Tim, make it happen.
What’s the point of this product?
I’m sure if I care that the watch has a FaceTime camera. You definitely wouldn’t want to hold up your wrist for a long call. Would it be worth any trade-offs to make a short call? Am I missing something? I like the other features mentioned in the article, but I don’t think they would stop me from getting a 1st-gen Apple Watch.
I meant to say “I’m not sure.”
A FaceTime camera guarantees no reduction of bezel, if Apple adds it, or anyone wishes for that trade-off they are a complete moron.
I am a diehard Apple fan but with cell phone companies now forcing us to pay full price for phone upgrades, still locking us into contracts, attempting to force us to trade in old phones to get a discount, I do not want to pay full price for a new iPhone AND a continuously updating Apple Watch. As a mother of five, I would prefer to keep my iPhone and have the possibility of buying my older teenagers a watch with voice and GPS functionality and not have to purchase a phone for each one also which is always getting broken, stolen, or lost!
My opinion is that Apple could & should consider placing a GPS chip into the watch and have it as a toggle-able setting for certain fitness applications. I understand that the GPS would drain the battery faster, but on my Suunto Ambit2 R watch, I can set when to use the GPS and set the intensity of the single pull while on my runs, hikes and bike routes. Hence my batt life lasts becasue the GPS is only on for an average of 2 hours a week, when I run outside. If the GPS was active ALL THE TIME – for sure my watch would run out of power. I think since Apple is using the “health” marketing pitch, a GPS for runners and adventurers, would be a wise investment of resources.
It is so hard to read this, especially on the so-called touch optimized version. The ads are so big and the page turn gives you a full page takeover ad after just a few paragraphs. (This is why I don’t use Flipboard.) At least those ads are not moving around while I try to read, though, like the main site. The font is small, the text takes up a very small portion of the screen, but you can’t expand the text!
I don’t mind ads when they are smaller and stationary and FOR something I’m interested in, but I’m trying to read here.
Several thoughts.
– camera
I think this is a real privacy problem, kind of like google glass. I don’t think face time adds enough value to do this. I think about walking into a restroom where somebody has a watch recording everything. Changing rooms, etc., and I don’t want people thinking I might be doing this.
– sleep tracking
Possible right now. I find I can just charge the watch while I’m in the shower and getting ready in the morning and that will pretty much do it. I sleep with it right now, as the alarm is really nice for getting up without bothering my wife, and I can turn it off so much quicker than a typical alarm.
– GPS This would be nice. It could be done as an option that comes with a wristband that adds extra power. There are several after market bands like this already. Yes, it could really shorten battery life, but already the pulse feature really drains the battery when you’re using the workout app, and I don’t have a problem with recharging afterwards when I take a long bike ride.
– more biometrics This would also be nice. As I understand it, some of those functions fall under “medical devices” and require FDA approval, which is why the watch COULD measure O2 saturation right now, but doesn’t.
– Key Already possible. There are some hotels where you can use the watch as a room key. The problem here is that whoever makes the locks has to come on board to allow the watch to be used. Its totally possible to use the watch for the Prius, if Toyota was willing to work with Apple.
– Home automation. This is a really exciting realm for the watch, and I can hardly wait for manufacturers to make locks, AC, lights (Philips Vue already works with the watch) etc. I want my front door to unlock like my Prius does, is that too much to ask?
It’s not /actually/ serious privacy problem, or at least, not any more of a serious privacy problem than the increasing ubiquity of inexpensive cameras is.
Any video taken on a watch surreptitiously is going to be terrible, unless the watch is being held in a fairly obvious manner.
And if some creep wants to record people in a bathroom, there are many other vendors of small hidden cameras that are a /lot/ less expensive than an Apple Watch, and don’t require the creep to hang out in the bathroom or changing room holding his arm in front of his face like a capeless cartoon vampire.
I just returned mine – It would not let phone calls come to my blue tooth headset. Makes you talk into the watch – very hard to do in a noisy space.
Good choise, if that’s all you wanted to do with the watch. There is no point of that feature if you are going to use Bluetooth headphones. With or without the watch your phone will be in your pocket, and you can connect your Bluetooth speakers to your phone.
Apple will look at ALL of these points: GPS, Battery, FaceTime, NFC, style, cost and others options considered including ones not considered, and Path or no Path will roll out any and all as technology gets smaller, more powerful/advanced and battery life improvements necessary. And like the iPhone will release in successive generations & price points between now and 2020 and after. iPhone model has been successful, working out technology as you build your base, then get repeat (upgrading) customers as new “can’t be without” features are offered. The Path is very fluid depending on acceptance in this Watch market: focus on most likely early adopters (health/sport) and adjunct to already established iPhone users. People who buy watches for style or as a wealth statement is still nascent beyond a fad. Because even a $20,000 Rolex still just gives Time Day/Date like a Timex– ;). I agree that the Google Glass basically got in it’s own way, like the Segway — geeky fun, but off putting to the average user. It’s still an awesome concept but more integrated into “normal” everyday activity. If it was designed earlier to look or integrate into a normal pair of eyeglasses, it might not have been as geek chic but wider acceptance might have been possible. Maybe as more wearable tech becomes the norm Google can take another run at it. (Apple Newton wasn’t as popular as the iPhone was). As early adopter I will wait until 2nd or 3rd iteration of A. Watch just to see what their Path REALLY becomes.
I wish it had the ability to send a text without iPhone. That would be awesome.
I would really love to own of of these but without a GPS it’s a waste of money!
There will still be a GPS, maps and all the tracking stuff.
I would want Apple to make the Apple Watch 2 to be able to use WiFi without the iPhone, making it more independent. But I don’t think Apple would do that considering that the Apple Watch is an accessory to the IPhone, and making it more independent people won’t even use their phones.