Ondrej Holzman In two days, Tim Cook should unveil the last one unknown details regarding the expected Apple Watch. The main thing to talk about is battery life or price. At least the first issue is almost clear - the Apple watch will last all day in normal operation, but it will be necessary to charge it every night.
The information comes from people who came into contact with the Apple Watch and were able to test it over a longer period of time. Matthew Panzarino of TechCrunch is convinced after discussions about the Apple Watch that it will significantly reduce the use of the iPhone during the day.
"There are a lot of interesting details, but by far the most recurring experience was how much iPhone usage has decreased with the Apple Watch," he wrote Panzarino. According to him, the Watch has the potential to become the main tool through which you will also access the iPhone during the day.
Some users have even almost stopped using their iPhone during the day after deploying the Watch. This may not be the case for all users, but looking at the watch, simply tapping the display for a reaction or dictating a response is indeed much easier than pulling out an iPhone, unlocking it, and then taking action.
At the same time, however, the Watch won't bother you if you don't have it on your hand. The watch will require skin contact to receive and display notifications. You won't get any notifications even when the battery drops below ten percent.
At the same time, you should not reach the very bottom of the battery during a normal day with the Watch on your hand. Apple should have succeeded in development with an increase in the originally speculated endurance and now its watch according to sources 9to5Mac will last up to five hours of demanding application use. During the whole day, when active and passive use alternates, the Apple Watch should not discharge.
However, it will still be necessary to charge the watch every night, as it would not last a full day. He was also confirmed special "Power Reserve Mode", which cuts Watch functions to a minimum to increase battery life. It will be possible to activate the function directly in the watch or from the application on the iPhone.
The positive thing is the charging speed - according to the latest information, the Apple Watch should be charged from zero to full in about two hours. And it's also good news that using the Watch and connecting it to the iPhone doesn't significantly decrease the phone's battery life.
There is also very interesting news from practice regarding the overall use of the Watch. It won't just be a small screen showing the time or a new incoming message, but people who have used the watch for a long time say that they have been getting more and more intense interactions with it.
The display of the watch is very sharp and easy to read, as well as the smaller buttons are very easy to press, which will result in you wanting to do more on your wrist than just reading the time. Some even talk about the consumption of content, short texts, etc. The experience that the Apple Watch can significantly reduce the need to take the iPhone out of the pocket is at least interesting.
There is nothing worse than pulling your iPhone out of your pocket and looking at a notification. I still take it as if I had exchanged 9990 CZK for the option not to pull out the iPhone with every notification. On top of that, I would buy time spent solving new bugs (why doesn't it sync, why does it drain so quickly, why does it keep beeping when I'm on my laptop and can see everything straight away, etc.) and charging it every day.
I wish everyone to enjoy their new worries on their hands. And let others use their free time for something better.
and exactly like this, if the company looked at technology, we would send letters instead of emails and call at most from landlines... maybe not even that.
Everything has its bugs at first, but if the device is of benefit to the individual, why not buy it…
Tell me the truth. Why would I need a notification display for my iPhone?
When it is debugged and measures blood pressure and body fat and blood sugar and has applications for iOS and OS X, then it will be interesting for me. And of course waterproof for swimming is a must.
I don't know how much you know about the physiology of blood pressure and the like, but how on earth do you want it to measure these things? Do you think the devices at the doctor's are useless? After all, you will never measure your heart rate with a watch alone. Heart rate only. I'm not saying it's not related, but it's not the same. Even for that frequency you need a chest strap..
I want it for sports. There are much more advanced methods of training than cardio, for example HIIT. Depending on how your heart rate, blood pressure and sugar rise and fall, you can improve your training and your performance. All this can now be put into sensors, and the Apple Watch should even have some kind of health certificate that it can measure it. I want something that moves me forward.
Could I ask for a link to some products that can do this? I would love to watch it :)
It doesn't prove anything yet. The Apple Watch was supposed to be the first to prove it, but Apple failed.
But you're telling me that things like pressure can be put into sensors. I'm asking how on earth do you imagine it? Half of the surgery's equipment could be canceled right away, and patients would measure such things themselves, and suddenly there would be money in the healthcare industry
Technology is developing, and even the iPhone itself was able to measure some functions more accurately than more specialized wristbands (from Nik, etc.) and who knows what will happen in a few years - in the case of Apple, perhaps in the next generation...
And otherwise, professional medical technology (for example, specialized devices in pharmacies where you can have various tests done and monitor various levels and functions in the body) can already replace your home appliances (scales, belts, chips, etc.). Measurements, for example, in pharmacies that people often use, take place based on your weight and "holding sensors" in your hand, why shouldn't wearable devices also be able to do something like that over time (but some of it already at the moment)? Technology knows no bounds and as I said, it is evolving…
That you are arguing with her at all.. After all, just share links with evidence… :))
Pressure measurement: http://www.ihealthlabs.com/blood-pressure-monitors/
Non-invasive blood sugar measurement: http://tech.ihned.cz/c1-24111380-diabetikum-svitla-nadeje
Fat measurement: http://www.ihealthlabs.com/wireless-scales/
Blood oxygenation: http://www.ihealthlabs.com/fitness-devices/wireless-pulse-oximeter/
The heart rate and pulse are the same as a result.. So there is nothing to solve there.
I really don't see why people can't measure it at home so that the information is synced and shared with the doctor who then sees everything in one place and can react immediately. You don't need to see a doctor, and a lot of things are revealed much faster than there are physically noticeable symptoms.
Basically prevention..
And I can easily imagine that it will happen automatically without any intervention on my part, and the moment something goes wrong, the doctor simply "beeps" and I come to do the examination.
You just confirmed what I and dfx wrote.
That's what I meant.. :)
Why can't patients measure it themselves? Why couldn't it be linked to an app in iOS or OS X?
The program can measure heart rate thanks to one light diode and a camera. Pressure is measured by any sphygmomanometer, not by the wrist. Leave it to the watch. Any scale measures fat. And there is also a kind of non-invasive method for sugar. I think he measures it by skin resistance.
Does any wrist sphygmomanometer measure pressure? Žejm did not meet anyone like that. To measure the pressure, you need a tourniquet, which inflates to a higher pressure than is in your blood vessels and only measures from there. How the hell are you going to get this into your watch? With that, today the technology seems to be an option only for the heart rate, yes, they could probably somehow add a temperature sensor and if they put in a lot of work, maybe also the glycemia. But that's where it ends. No blood pressure and no heart rate. For that, they would need a chest belt, which I think lookassakool mentions. But that would be a lot of reactions anyway, why should people wear a chest belt (well, because you'll never measure your heart rate without it..)
Wrist sphygmomanometer
http://tlakomery.heureka.sk/sencor-sbd-1470/
I don't care if it will be on the strap of the watch or if I will collect it separately and it will communicate with the Apple Watch via BT, for example.
I don't care how they solve it. If they fix it, I'll buy it. If not, I won't buy it.
And I'll add that the pressure has to be measured at the level of the heart, so even if anyone succeeds, you'll get a different value on your wrist that will be useless to you ;) I understand why you want these things in that watch, it would be awesome, but you can't swear when it's just not possible at the moment
This is what my Apple Watch (Band) would look like:
– Nike+ FuelBand design
– measuring as many things as possible in the body (I understand there is no technology now)
– the option of turning on GPS without an iPhone and subsequent automatic synchronization when you are nearby (just for an hourly run)
– waterproof
– universal unlocking of the car, house, etc.
– payment
– endurance without a display for perhaps a few days thanks to an extremely economical chip, which will not have to focus on rendering unnecessary animations, 2-4 hours on GPS
That's a quick shot, it could do more useful things and be extremely economical.
Boy, you probably wouldn't make a living as an engineer. Hey, you remind me of a DJ. Aren't you a DJ? Didn't you ever say Flame by any chance?
I would also like to know if an updated macbook will be presented at the keynote, if the new Air 12″ will come, etc... It is nice that the watch is getting all the attention, but somehow there is not much written about the others...
It seems to me that I read about the 12″ Air quite often...
Well, I rather wrote it towards the editors of Jablíčkář ;)
Yes, because Jablickar.cz has an insider directly at Apple. Look, nothing is known yet. At one point it was written on MacRumors that it would be announced there, then again that it wasn't. Nothing is certain, but it is likely.
I would be quite pleased with the Airport Extreme with 801.11AC :), but we can only dream :)
Express ;-)
The Apple Watch is certainly a nice piece on the hand, and Apple has succeeded in designing not only the hw but also the software, however, several things must be taken into account that will have a very unpleasant effect on the owner:
1. Endurance for one day - this will discourage 50% of interested parties, charging an iPad, iPhone, Macbook and Apple Watch every day is a superhuman feat, just one day is not enough. I use a Fitbit charge HR myself and its 5 day battery life is the bare minimum so it doesn't bother me or startle me.
2. Real use - people will have to get used to the cooperation between the iPhone and the watch and change habits, this will be a problem at the beginning and the question will be how effective it will be. What will it bring to the user in terms of speeding up or making work easier? As a notification display, it is too expensive and if Siri is not in Czech, sorry...then the functions will be degraded to pedometer, heart rate and time.
3. Use for sports - here the possibility would be offered, and this was my idea, so that a person could easily go for a run without a phone, swim in the pool, go to the sauna, have the location displayed on the map in the field, simply wear the Apple watch as a normal waterproof watch that I hardly took off my hand. Can't! In most cases, athletes get away with it.
4. Charging time - "Charging speed is positive" only 2 hours????? iPhone 6 recharges in 1,45 hours, so what is this, is this a joke? that is of course a negative news….
5. Price – this is still being speculated about, like most things, and we will see in real life, anyway, my estimate will be 9.900 to start, but then it will definitely be more expensive, around 12.000,- for a higher version with better straps, etc...
1. According to the latest reports, they should last 5 hours of active use, which I think is too much. Passively lasts a day +-. But they recommend charging every night, because the next day they wouldn't get the 5 hours of active use. This means they will definitely last two days if you don't play with them. And you don't even have to play with them. It is a device that monitors your daily activity. It's mostly a personal device, however you want to interpret it.
2. I did not understand the second point. But if you want the facts, the testers indicated that the control is very intuitive, simple, and above all, they noticed that after some time they were very happy to return to the device.
3. Wrong again:) You can take your Apple Watch for a run and leave your iPhone at home. It is also in the official materials. Tim Cook himself stated (between four eyes) that he even showers with them and everything is fine. Sorry, but your comment about the sauna was very funny. No waterproof watches should be taken into the sauna. Have you ever been to a sauna? The seal on the watch opens up and that doesn't do much good;)
4. No comment.
5. The price is debatable. In general, there is not such a thing as a price/performance ratio, as most people imagine it to be. I think they want a little more for it, and I'm only talking about iOS devices, since I'm just getting ready for Mac.
1. if one day is enough for you, that's fine, not me!
2. What the testers say is irrelevant, the important thing is that the UI will be new and it will be necessary to learn how to handle it in order to benefit from it. respectively if it's not better to just pull out the iPhone and tap it there!
3. If I take the AW for a run, sir, I can no longer see where I ran, or it can't even guide me if I'm on a bike, it doesn't have GPS! AW will only be waterproof, shower OK, swimming KO! Otherwise, Mr. Krajíček, you will probably be really surprised, but I have a Festina watch and I've been taking it to the sauna for about 5 years now and it still works!
5. price is relative, I agree, but it will play a role here. I'll wait for the Apple Watch 2 :-)
I've never seen anyone in a sauna with a watch in my life. This is really bullshit. :-)))
Well, that's a subjective impression, I just go to the sauna with a watch and what, you can't always rely on an hourglass, that's all....
I get this. I was also worried that there were too many of us and not enough sleepers. So buy small presipacks. And I personally recommend it to you, because I did a small survey on WatchFreeks and although there are a few individuals like you, it is generally not recommended there.
1. Well, I don't know about you, but I don't sleep with the watch on my hand, so instead of throwing it on the table when I get home, I put it on the charger.
1. It's enough for me. But against my taste. And that's why you should rather leave your claim that it will discourage 50% of the applicants in a pile with other numbers that have been picked up.
2. Exactly. I'll give up on the testers. You're right. What to test for? Make up the feedback anyway. It's just that we don't see anything at all about that UI. We don't know what it's like to use it. That's why commenting on the fact that it will be a problem and some other crap should be kept somewhere else. Apple Watch should make your day and work easier with the latest device.
3. Honestly, you should take your watch to the sauna, I take my phone on my bike. I do not recommend wearing a watch to the sauna. I'm not saying you shouldn't, but it's not recommended.
As for the water resistance and how they are all of a sudden so often in Podoli, only one thing can be said. Alas, it's just technology. It has all limits. He can't cook for me either, but I'm not complaining. If I absolutely need to wear a watch while swimming, which seems quite strange to me, as it is quite inconvenient (I even leave the stupid chip on the bench), then buy a special bracelet for that. But I think it's a different story. Whoever wants to beat a dog will always find a stick.
You can see a bit of bias because:
1. Too much? Can you say too much about endurance? Too much for a 5-hour staying power? You don't have to play with them, are they supposed to monitor? Will you buy a pedometer for NOK 9990? You already have it in your pocket.
3. They are officially waterproof (rinse) but not waterproof - diving and swimming. You can't take them for a run, because all you get from them is the number of steps (apparently a little inaccurate) but you don't get GPS information → you have to have an iPhone.
But boy, you are way off. 5 hours of active use. Do you know what it is? What pedometer? What are you talking about? What kind of argument is this? Why can't I take them running? For God's sake, what do you need GPS in Apple Watch for?
"2 hour charging speed is positive"?
Why did I expect a full charge in 20 minutes with such a tiny battery. I always charge the IP6P in two hours...
That's the tax for inductive charging... It would take half an hour with a cable.
Your complaining about charging every day is a shock. You really have serious problems :D
This is mainly because the battery is crucial for watches, even more so than for smartphones. In addition, there is already competition to compare with.
I see the problem here in the perception of the Apple Watch. As a measure of time, it is the last device. I'm not sure about the battery yet, but it says five hours of active use, after which it passively lasts for the whole day. I expect it will last two days. I have the same thing with my iPhone.
Exactly. It is too early to draw conclusions, min. until tomorrow. Mostly it's just misleading speculation.
but I ask another question, will I have to have BT on all day? see you tomorrow though. If yes, my phone will answer in a moment