4 ms·
The aforementioned article about the Apple Watch talks of "heavy application use" and suggests it might only last 2.5 hours. If you read, for example, http://w
by bshimmin 12y ago
The aforementioned article about the Apple Watch talks of "heavy application use" and suggests it might only last 2.5 hours. If you read, for example, http://www.trustedreviews.com/iphone-6-review-battery-life-and-verdict-page-6 http://www.trustedreviews.com/iphone-6-review-battery-life-a..., it suggests "heavy use" of the iPhone 6 (at 50% screen brightness) yields about 14 hours of battery life. That's a pretty significant difference.
While it's easy to say "it's more compelling to do stuff on a phone than it is to do it on a watch, so you'll naturally use the phone more", that rather makes me wonder why I would bother buying the watch, especially when you actually need the phone as well.
Time will tell how people use these devices and whether the battery really holds up to a reasonable person's usage. And, of course, it seems likely (though not certain) that later generations will have improved battery life.
- freehunter 12y agoBecause of the big screen, it's easier to browse the web on a tablet than on a phone. Easier than that is a laptop. A PC has an even bigger screen than that! But people still use phones, mostly for the minor convenience of having it in your pocket instead of in a bag, but also for the unique interactions it provides. I use my PC for eight hours a day straight. I use my phone for maybe 10 minutes here, 10 minutes there, maybe an hour long call once or twice a day. Is there anything wrong with that? Should I be using my phone more? I mean, why would I spend all the money on having a powerful phone when I'm only using it occasionally? That's the logic you seem to be putting towards this watch. I'm not going to defend the battery life, it's totally crap. I'm just arguing against the logic. You seem to be saying if you're not using the device constantly, it's not worth having. I don't use my car constantly. I don't use my phone constantly. I don't use my Pebble constantly. But they're nice to have for their own reasons. The point of the watch is not to use it 100%, all the time. It's to use it when it makes sense to use it. Heavy application use isn't what it's designed for. Still, I agree the battery makes it useless even for the intended functionality.
- bshimmin 12y agoI agree with a lot of what you're saying. It just seems to me that it's a lot of money to spend on something that you aren't intending to use all that much (regardless of the battery life problem). You have a phone in your pocket that works quite well for many tasks; do you really need to spend a bunch more money on a fancy watch that does some of the same things as your phone, via your phone, in possibly a less useful way? I really don't know, perhaps Joe Public will see it very differently to me; certainly those of my friends who don't work in tech, but overwhelmingly do own iPhones, I have spoken to about the Apple Watch seem fairly uncertain as to its general usefulness.
- elektronjunge 12y ago>While it's easy to say "it's more compelling to do stuff on a phone than it is to do it on a watch, so you'll naturally use the phone more", that rather makes me wonder why I would bother buying the watch, especially when you actually need the phone as well. While this is true, no body is browsing the web or watching a video on their watch. People are doing quick checks of stocks, the weather, firing off a text message on their watches. The use cases overlap significantly but smart watches fill the niche of "I don't want to pull my phone out to check the time/if I have texts."