Ondrej Holzman One of the biggest obstacles Apple had to overcome when developing the Watch was, or still is, battery life. That's why during itself performance he didn't talk about the durability of his watch at all and later just stated without much detail that expects daily charging. Not even Apple itself really knew how far the Apple Watch would go in terms of battery capacity.
Mark Gurman of 9to5Mac now from its sources directly from Apple acquired detailed information about the Californian company's goals for how long the Watch should last. The following data may differ from the actual values, which we hope to know already in March, but one thing is clear: one day without a charger will be the real maximum that the Apple Watch can last.
The problem with battery life is partly in the small body of the watch and the fact that the development of batteries is nowhere near keeping up with the development of processors and other components that require an ever-increasing amount of energy, and partly in the fact that Apple has invested in very demanding components for the Watch.
The S1 chip should match the performance of the A5 processor that had the iPhone 4S, iPad 2 and the current generation iPod touch, and the Retina-compliant color display is capable of displaying 60 frames per second. Both of these components suck a lot of energy from the battery, so Apple has aimed at least from the beginning for the Apple Watch to last about a day with less active use and the rest of the time "resting".
Speaking of numbers, the Apple Watch's endurance should be as follows: 2,5 to 4 hours of active use including apps, against 19 hours of combined active and passive use, which is not a major problem for the watch, since most of the time we don't really use it, but just have it strapped to our hands .
In terms of durability, Apple will not come up with anything revolutionary, which was not even expected after the introduction of the Apple Watch - its watches last roughly the same as current solutions from competing brands. In low-energy mode, the Apple Watch could last two to three days, but in the most extreme case, i.e. with the display always on, it will die within three hours. They should last at least an hour more if they are used as a tracker during sports.
Each user will probably use the Apple Watch a little differently, but apparently no one can function with it without connecting to a charger for more than a day. In normal mode, however, the watch display will be turned off and will only be activated when you look at the watch (to check the time) or receive a notification, for example. Apple could not achieve higher battery life even when the vast majority of computing operations will be performed by an iPhone connected to the watch.
But this is definitely not a satisfactory situation for Apple. According to 9to5Mac he gave away almost three thousand test units just to test endurance in real conditions. According to the latest information, they have come Apple Watch at the end of March, when we will also know their real durability.
So let's sum it up, we'll give +-10000 for something we'll be afraid to use so it doesn't run out during the day. Oh yeah, this segment just doesn't make sense until the flashlight is fixed somehow, I don't want to be a slave to another device that won't last a weekend without outlets. :( Perhaps some next generation…
This is called CAGED CAGE. Those watches will be small and large. Not all will use sensors. So speculating about durability is complete nonsense at this point
Apple Watch uses a powerful processor that sucks a lot of energy... great, and I thought that in a year with the second generation I will also have GPS in it, like some other smartwatches, but probably barely..
I was struck by the phrase "they should last an hour more if they are used as a tracker during sports". The "watches" are supposed to perform this function constantly, after all, they are supposed to count steps, distance, elevation gain and, last but not least, measure heart rate. Sure, the heart rate measurement probably won't take place all the time, but the other functions of the tracker have to support the Watch all day long, otherwise these functions wouldn't make much sense there. Or am I mistaken? So how to interpret your mention of 4 (!) hours when tracking activities?
To be honest, I don't think charging the watch in the evening is a data-limiting thing (after all, who prefers a watch). The only thing I will miss is a silent alarm clock.
and don't hide behind a pencil :P
apple is lucky to be a strong brand, otherwise I don't know, I don't know. at first it will be a hit, but the market will be saturated even faster than with tablets. The iPhone delivered a wow effect, this is a sigh of relief, everyone expected too much from Apple this time. smart watches are certainly not a delusion, but in their current form they do not make life significantly easier. a lot of brands still don't have a really good smart watch, and it won't be Apple, even if I say the opposite and talk about the ecosystem again.
Since I am already of the "older generation", I remember my grandfather winding his watch regularly every day somewhere in the 70s. Over time, self-winding watches came, then "digital watches" and we were all convinced that no one would ever "wind" a watch again. And we have it back here :) Well, at least one day my grandchildren will have something to remember :)
It is a first generation overpriced. And certainly many functions will be classically prohibited. Until Apple is satisfied, it won't release another feature. Generation 2-3 will be better.
You know, these "visions" are starting to scare me lately. I somehow lose the honesty of the product. Instead of the product, the product, the project being good already in the first generation and not having major flaws, where I consider the 24-hour endurance of the watch to be a flaw, it is allowed to be a work in progress under the motto "first generation". The first version of the SW, well, it may not work properly, after all, it is the first and an update or the next version will solve it - see this year's OSX. I know a bunch of programmers from international giant companies, and there, under the pressure of a business deadline, they easily produce "blind pages" - such black boxes with the fact that simply an update will solve it, but most importantly that the customer will pay for it.
I don't know how anyone would feel about coming to a new baker, getting unbaked, unleavened bread from him and being satisfied with the answers - well, it's the first generation, it will be better in 2-3 years. so don't get too upset and dig. Would anyone else buy such bread there? Or would someone buy a pair of shoes that you couldn't lace up and the cobbler would tell you that you should come back in a year, that the holes will be there in the next version?
And let's not blame it on technological progress, in Apple and not only in Apple, they know very well that the Watch simply has a billion flies, but they will sell it to you with peace of mind, because we will all say to ourselves ... well, it's the first generation, in 2- 3 will definitely be better…
You are absolutely right. And they are not embarrassed to then pay themselves salaries like Ahrendts, the new vice president of brick-and-mortar and online stores, over $73 million. I consider it a normal thieving and fraud, when I sell for expensive money something that does not work as it should. Unfortunately, human stupidity and the effort to be IN is sky high. Unfortunately, we want to be cheated and are happy to pay for it. And this is far from just Apple.
Quality is not examined today. Brand and prestige are important. And smart people make billions from our stupidity.
I think that human envy is sky high. Those watches will have some parameters that will be known and will be enough for some people and they will buy them, and for some people they won't and won't buy them. That someone buys something they know won't suit them is their business and not Apple's fault.
Even if any of what you write was true, you still bury it with the condescension of "the poor people don't know, they just buy", which is literally useless.
If this strategy had been implemented by Apple from the beginning, I would never have heard of Apple again.
Don't whine here. If every single manufacturer in the world put the best possible currently researched technology into their devices, things would be better, but there would be longer gaps between the new version of the product (which is not bad, but there would be a lot of stagnant water and that's not good is) and above all, the most important point = the economy ;) Money must move, otherwise the world economy would decline even more than it is declining.