So, does this require a separate cellular subscription? If so it's going to be much more expensive to own. I wish they had provided more detail on that.
There could be some behind the scenes trickery on apples end. If not, hopefully carriers release a very very reduced price for adding your watch to your existing mobile share plan. Like $20-40 a year cheap
They said there'd be "special deals" at the beginning. I read that as it's reasonable for a few months, before the carriers start screwing you over until your contract ends.
If it works with T-Mobile, you could likely activate it with an MVNO like Ting for $6/month. It would share the data with your existing plan. Unfortunately, Ting is not very competitive on data (it's about $10/GB) but the initial costs are VERY low. I have four lines with Ting, but combined all of them only use around 4GB of data (one is simply for my car to receive realtime traffic, weather, google maps, remote start, etc, at about 100MB/month) and my monthly total for all four lines with 1000 minutes 3000 texts is $77 after taxes.
If you use a lot of data, this isn't a good solution. Perhaps it will work with Sprint where unlimited data from MVNOs is dirt cheap (like Virgin Wireless' $1/month for a year plan)
They must have had a lot of Series 1 just sticking around so they are trying to empty out inventory. Also because only the internals of the Series 2 changed for Series 3 it was easy to recycle the Series 2 that didn't sell and discontinue it entirely.
I still rock an OG pre-series 1, I've broken it 3 times and they replaced it the third time for free outside of warranty. Apple Support has been really good about tracking my behavior with it and was genuinely curious why it kept breaking. My kids are old enough to bath themselves now but when I got the watch over two years ago my son was an infant and just splashing the watch was causing the haptic engine to fail. I suspect all of my input during the first two I ruined with water was used to help engineer the series 2 water ejection system.
I've had the 3rd replacement over a year and no real problems...wear it daily. It is certainly showing its use; the case is scuffed up, the band is stretching and the face has hundreds of abrasions. But it does its job. It just isn't bling anymore. It's a functional watch.
It is also showing its age performance wise. Loading Shazam and submitting a song is incredibly lagy, to the point I'm often worried if its in the middle of the song, it might not even register the song in time.
One thing they said on stage was that the non-cellular version had every feature of the cellular version except for the the cellular radio, which made me wonder if GPS was still available on the non-cellular version. That would be handy for run tracking.
On iPhone and iPad this is not the case, you only get GPS with the cellular version, so it would be a largish change.
It occurred to me to check Apple's website for the tech specs before hitting submit and it's true. This is the first iOS device to offer GPS without springing for the cellular version.
Not a fan of the extreme market segmentation, where the lower priced model is significantly inferior to the higher priced one. But I guess it helps Apple's margins,
The difference in pricing is pretty significant. $249, $329 and $399. I would expect the Series 1 to have lower performance. But as a Series 2 owner, I can say that the SoC is just fine, and the GPS is the only difference between the Series 1 and Series 2. So moving to Series 3, with even higher performance, gives Series 1 buyers a great bargain.
I'm surprised, too. If Apple is going to continue to push the Series 1 with its (in my opinion, having owned one for over two years) pretty low app performance, it should be <$200. You'd be crazy not to just spend the extra $80 for GPS, more performance, IP68 water resistance, etc...
As someone who doesn't own one but is considering purchasing one, I can't agree with you more. The extra $80 seems worth it. The starting price of the Series 1 really should be dropped by $50-$100.
This is a no go for me. I would love a watch and happily pay the 399 but I am happy on a cheapish Android phone and don't want to spend top dollar for a fruit phone to go with it. Sigh. Guess I will wait a couple months until Samsung or someone else make a phone with standalone cellular.
I find the Apple watch to be pretty ugly, and it suffers from the same problem most smartwatches have - really short battery life.
The Garmin Fenix watches are on the large side, but they look like watches, and the battery will last weeks if you aren't using the GPS. I mainly use mine to get notifications about incoming calls, texts, emails, meetings with the volume turned off on my phone.
You like the way the Garmin looks, and you think the Apple Watch is ugly? Sheesh!
What I’m finding is that invariably, Android users think the Apple Watch is ugly. That’s not surprising for a group that was salivating (though not enough to save the smartwatch line for Motorola, which failed) over the really cheap and ugly Motorola Watch, which looked like a $20 Chinese copy of a $50 Watch.
The chunky bulbous iwatch is an iphone on the wrist. It looks good only in the sense that it is a polished and well made gadget. The moto is indeed an ugly watch, I'll give you that, but if you dislike the flat tire then you surely must hate the equivalent iphone x notch.
This would be interesting if it didn't require an iPhone. I could see a real use case to have a watch that covers the main phone use cases. Something you can take with you when you know you wont need to mobile browsing or play a game.
Maybe even not have a phone at all, but the watch and a tablet you take with you if you know you want to sit around and browse.
Apple is saying the efficiency cores in the new A11 chip have improved 70% with the cores in the watch also said to have improved 70%. Anyone else think that they are probably the same core?
If they shifted process, they likely shifted to 16nmFF. Series 0 and Series 1/2 SoC were both on 28nm. Also aWatch Series 0 and 1/2 CPUs are 32-bit. Since Apple did not make a big deal about it, the Series 3 CPU is probably also 32-bit.
All meaning the the watch and phone designs currently remain on separate tracks. (Which is not to say they are utterly isolated. I'm sure the watch guys borrow whatever they can from the phone guys, anything from FPU design to branch predictor algorithms. But right now the tradeoffs are different with the watch guys willing to give up a LOT more in performance for the sake of low energy.
It's certainly possible however that, say next year or the year after, we'll reach a point where it makes sense for the watch guys to adopt as a starting point the low power core from the phone --- especially if they use say the low power core as a watch performance core, and add a REALLY LOW POWER core to do all the ongoing background stuff... Since this has been validated on the phone, and all the necessary machinery added to the OS, I'm sure it's just a matter of time before the watch gets it. Hopefully next year S4 Fusion --- with 64 bit CPU and Apple GPU!)
I agree that a circular watch would be nice, but that's a big change from a UI perspective. Gesture changes, visual differences, resolution changes for apps (a big one). Its probably a ways off until they enhance Watch OS to be more flexible.
yea and this is the THIRD watch , there is no excuse they had enough time.
Samsung Gear moved from Rectangular to circular using Tizen System long time ago ... the first two gear watch were rectangular , now the S2 and th S3 are circular
Guess what? Apple is not in the WATCH business, Apple is in the WRIST COMPUTER business. Your argument is as backward looking as the people who judged the iPhone on its talk time.
Marketing the watch as a watch is a means of introducing people to a new concept. Already last year marketing switched from "watch" to "health tracker". This year I expect more marketing of "glanceable computing" --- the value of the Siri face, the value of notifications, that sort of thing.
You enjoy complaining about the world of watches, but Apple is looking to a future where the WRIST COMPUTER is as fully fledged (and multi-dimensional) a device as your phone is today. I expect Apple is already mocking up and testing new screen form factors (like 2x1 wide screen) that will look "even more awful" to people like you lost in the 19th C, but will make perfect sense for people pushing their wrist computers hard.
I think this is awesome. I am an avid runner but get a little nervous running without a phone so I think having this for emergencies would be well worth the 10$ a month extra.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
44 Comments
Back to Article
Justwow - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
So, does this require a separate cellular subscription? If so it's going to be much more expensive to own. I wish they had provided more detail on that.DanNeely - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
I think you and I both know that your carrier won't let you add another device to your plan without paying them more...Morawka - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
There could be some behind the scenes trickery on apples end. If not, hopefully carriers release a very very reduced price for adding your watch to your existing mobile share plan. Like $20-40 a year cheapBillBear - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
Ten bucks a month in addition to your normal plan, according to Ars.sonicmerlin - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
T-mobile had a deal several months back that let you add a tablet line for free. Was kind of cool.Tams80 - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
They said there'd be "special deals" at the beginning. I read that as it's reasonable for a few months, before the carriers start screwing you over until your contract ends.melgross - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
3 months for free.Samus - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
If it works with T-Mobile, you could likely activate it with an MVNO like Ting for $6/month. It would share the data with your existing plan. Unfortunately, Ting is not very competitive on data (it's about $10/GB) but the initial costs are VERY low. I have four lines with Ting, but combined all of them only use around 4GB of data (one is simply for my car to receive realtime traffic, weather, google maps, remote start, etc, at about 100MB/month) and my monthly total for all four lines with 1000 minutes 3000 texts is $77 after taxes.If you use a lot of data, this isn't a good solution. Perhaps it will work with Sprint where unlimited data from MVNOs is dirt cheap (like Virgin Wireless' $1/month for a year plan)
quiksilvr - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
They must have had a lot of Series 1 just sticking around so they are trying to empty out inventory. Also because only the internals of the Series 2 changed for Series 3 it was easy to recycle the Series 2 that didn't sell and discontinue it entirely.name99 - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
Just determined to maintain the "Apple Watch is failing" narrative, aren't you?ebilg - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
They are not moving up to a dual core chip as Series 2 was already dual-core.Morawka - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
all apple watch's are dual core except the Pre-order Apple Watch 1's..Samus - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
Exactly, ie, before the 'series' moniker.I still rock an OG pre-series 1, I've broken it 3 times and they replaced it the third time for free outside of warranty. Apple Support has been really good about tracking my behavior with it and was genuinely curious why it kept breaking. My kids are old enough to bath themselves now but when I got the watch over two years ago my son was an infant and just splashing the watch was causing the haptic engine to fail. I suspect all of my input during the first two I ruined with water was used to help engineer the series 2 water ejection system.
I've had the 3rd replacement over a year and no real problems...wear it daily. It is certainly showing its use; the case is scuffed up, the band is stretching and the face has hundreds of abrasions. But it does its job. It just isn't bling anymore. It's a functional watch.
It is also showing its age performance wise. Loading Shazam and submitting a song is incredibly lagy, to the point I'm often worried if its in the middle of the song, it might not even register the song in time.
BillBear - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
One thing they said on stage was that the non-cellular version had every feature of the cellular version except for the the cellular radio, which made me wonder if GPS was still available on the non-cellular version. That would be handy for run tracking.On iPhone and iPad this is not the case, you only get GPS with the cellular version, so it would be a largish change.
It occurred to me to check Apple's website for the tech specs before hitting submit and it's true. This is the first iOS device to offer GPS without springing for the cellular version.
solipsism - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
The Series 2 Watch also offered GPS last year.BillBear - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
I must have missed it, thanks.0iron - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
Got iPhone without cellular version? It's called an iPodpeevee - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
Still boring and overpriced.jordanclock - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
The price is fine. The value, though, may be too low for you.Samus - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
Some people just aren't watch people. If you are a watch person and value utilitarian functions over aesthetics, smart watches make a lot of sense.jameskatt - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
Watch people collect watches. A $10,000 Rolex is nothing to them.The Apple Watch at $399 is cheap.
sonicmerlin - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
Not a fan of the extreme market segmentation, where the lower priced model is significantly inferior to the higher priced one. But I guess it helps Apple's margins,melgross - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
The difference in pricing is pretty significant. $249, $329 and $399. I would expect the Series 1 to have lower performance. But as a Series 2 owner, I can say that the SoC is just fine, and the GPS is the only difference between the Series 1 and Series 2. So moving to Series 3, with even higher performance, gives Series 1 buyers a great bargain.Samus - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
I'm surprised, too. If Apple is going to continue to push the Series 1 with its (in my opinion, having owned one for over two years) pretty low app performance, it should be <$200. You'd be crazy not to just spend the extra $80 for GPS, more performance, IP68 water resistance, etc...ingwe - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
As someone who doesn't own one but is considering purchasing one, I can't agree with you more. The extra $80 seems worth it. The starting price of the Series 1 really should be dropped by $50-$100.lefty2 - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
Anyone know if works totally independent without even owning an iPhone, or do you need an iPhone to activate it?solipsism - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
You still need an iPhone to pair with and the phone number of the Watch is the same as your iPhone.Amandtec - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
This is a no go for me. I would love a watch and happily pay the 399 but I am happy on a cheapish Android phone and don't want to spend top dollar for a fruit phone to go with it. Sigh. Guess I will wait a couple months until Samsung or someone else make a phone with standalone cellular.twtech - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
I find the Apple watch to be pretty ugly, and it suffers from the same problem most smartwatches have - really short battery life.The Garmin Fenix watches are on the large side, but they look like watches, and the battery will last weeks if you aren't using the GPS. I mainly use mine to get notifications about incoming calls, texts, emails, meetings with the volume turned off on my phone.
melgross - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
You like the way the Garmin looks, and you think the Apple Watch is ugly? Sheesh!What I’m finding is that invariably, Android users think the Apple Watch is ugly. That’s not surprising for a group that was salivating (though not enough to save the smartwatch line for Motorola, which failed) over the really cheap and ugly Motorola Watch, which looked like a $20 Chinese copy of a $50 Watch.
Ro_Ja - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
You generalized Android users into hating the apple watch?What a disgusting creep.
Amandtec - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
I am an android user and like the look of the Apple Watch more. Maybe you want to share you carefully collect data?id4andrei - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
The chunky bulbous iwatch is an iphone on the wrist. It looks good only in the sense that it is a polished and well made gadget. The moto is indeed an ugly watch, I'll give you that, but if you dislike the flat tire then you surely must hate the equivalent iphone x notch.Elstar - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
The Garmin Fenix is ugly as F. It might as well be all bezel.Sttm - Tuesday, September 12, 2017 - link
This would be interesting if it didn't require an iPhone. I could see a real use case to have a watch that covers the main phone use cases. Something you can take with you when you know you wont need to mobile browsing or play a game.Maybe even not have a phone at all, but the watch and a tablet you take with you if you know you want to sit around and browse.
SunnyNW - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
Apple is saying the efficiency cores in the new A11 chip have improved 70% with the cores in the watch also said to have improved 70%. Anyone else think that they are probably the same core?Amandtec - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
Or the same node shift to 10nm.name99 - Sunday, September 17, 2017 - link
If they shifted process, they likely shifted to 16nmFF. Series 0 and Series 1/2 SoC were both on 28nm.Also aWatch Series 0 and 1/2 CPUs are 32-bit. Since Apple did not make a big deal about it, the Series 3 CPU is probably also 32-bit.
All meaning the the watch and phone designs currently remain on separate tracks. (Which is not to say they are utterly isolated. I'm sure the watch guys borrow whatever they can from the phone guys, anything from FPU design to branch predictor algorithms. But right now the tradeoffs are different with the watch guys willing to give up a LOT more in performance for the sake of low energy.
It's certainly possible however that, say next year or the year after, we'll reach a point where it makes sense for the watch guys to adopt as a starting point the low power core from the phone --- especially if they use say the low power core as a watch performance core, and add a REALLY LOW POWER core to do all the ongoing background stuff...
Since this has been validated on the phone, and all the necessary machinery added to the OS, I'm sure it's just a matter of time before the watch gets it. Hopefully next year S4 Fusion --- with 64 bit CPU and Apple GPU!)
samer1970 - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
Third watch and yet no circular watch option...does not Apple know that the Majority of people hate the rectangular watches ?
this is not rockt science , look at the Majority of watches in the market from Rolex to OMEGA to w/e what is the major shape of the watch ?
ExarKun333 - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
I agree that a circular watch would be nice, but that's a big change from a UI perspective. Gesture changes, visual differences, resolution changes for apps (a big one). Its probably a ways off until they enhance Watch OS to be more flexible.samer1970 - Wednesday, September 13, 2017 - link
yea and this is the THIRD watch , there is no excuse they had enough time.Samsung Gear moved from Rectangular to circular using Tizen System long time ago ... the first two gear watch were rectangular , now the S2 and th S3 are circular
there is no excuse for Apple at all.
name99 - Sunday, September 17, 2017 - link
Guess what? Apple is not in the WATCH business, Apple is in the WRIST COMPUTER business.Your argument is as backward looking as the people who judged the iPhone on its talk time.
Marketing the watch as a watch is a means of introducing people to a new concept. Already last year marketing switched from "watch" to "health tracker". This year I expect more marketing of "glanceable computing" --- the value of the Siri face, the value of notifications, that sort of thing.
You enjoy complaining about the world of watches, but Apple is looking to a future where the WRIST COMPUTER is as fully fledged (and multi-dimensional) a device as your phone is today. I expect Apple is already mocking up and testing new screen form factors (like 2x1 wide screen) that will look "even more awful" to people like you lost in the 19th C, but will make perfect sense for people pushing their wrist computers hard.
akhilakki - Saturday, October 28, 2017 - link
Buy Apple Watch Best Price At AppWorld with low price in india.with AppWorld Cash points Amazing And best discounted on apple watch series 3https://www.appworldin.com/product-category/watch/...
alexmckay - Tuesday, December 19, 2017 - link
I think this is awesome. I am an avid runner but get a little nervous running without a phone so I think having this for emergencies would be well worth the 10$ a month extra.