If for whatever reason you’re unhappy with the image quality, screen size, and square display of the current Apple Watch display, don’t expect any of your quibbles to be fixed with next year’s Apple Watch 2.
According to a new report, the display of the next-gen Apple wearable will remain identical in size, shape and resolution to its predecessor — although the display will be marginally thinner to allow for a larger battery.
Today’s report notes that LG — which produces the displays for the current Apple Watches — will be joined by Samsung, which will provide P-OLED panels for the Apple Watch 2.
Previous reports have claimed that the next-gen Apple Watch will also boast an added FaceTime camera, greater levels of iPhone independence, and additional high-end models costing $1,000+.
While some users may be disappointed to hear that Apple won’t be massively changing the form factor of its next Apple Watch (perhaps embracing the round display of the Moto 360, for instance) I think the majority will be just fine with it. As it is, the Apple Watch display is far superior to Android Wear smartwatches — with pixels visible but only upon very, very close inspection.
Battery life for the first-gen Apple Watch is largely better than expected, too, although I sincerely doubt there will be anyone complaining if Apple does improve it for its second crack at the device — provided it doesn’t make the device any thicker, that is.
Source: GforGames
Luke Dormehl is a U.K.-based journalist and author, with a background working in documentary film for Channel 4 and the BBC. He is the author of The Apple Revolution and The Formula: How Algorithms Solve All Our Problems … and Create More, both published by Penguin/Random House. His tech writing has also appeared in Wired, Fast Company, Techmeme and other publications.
8 responses to “Apple Watch 2 will keep same resolution, screen size, get bigger battery”
I’m not too worried about the same form factor so much as the price. If they’re going to keep the high cost of entry and focus more on the $1,000+ price point, they’re going to have an issue after the initial wave of adopters.
All i truly really really want from version 2.0 is GPS inside the watch for workouts.. man, can I please run without my phone already!
You can already… just go for several runs with the iPhone and the Watch and then it’ll work pretty well without it. The Watch uses the iPhone to gauge your stride and a person’s average stride over a run doesn’t change much. Once the system calibrates, you’ll get your number of steps and distance without the GPS in the iPhone because the Watch will track your steps as you run and simply multiply them by the average stride it calibrated back from when it had your phone. It divides the distance ran over the steps. It works. I’ve gone for walks with the Watch and it’s told me when I hit 1 mile, without my iPhone. I checked it and found it to be pretty accurate (not perfect, but good enough). GPS will eat the battery meaning the Watch would have to be bigger/thicker.
GPS would still be real cool feature, especially if they are going to put a larger battery in it anyway. Some people like to use the GPS for the actual tracking not just the distance.
No Jim, that is not what I want. I am glad the accelerometer and iPhone GPS calibration method works for you, but go on any running forums and you will find it is accurate for some and very inaccurate for others. I want a real GPS map of my run, real GPS data on pace, distance, and all the good jazz. I also want to look at all of my run info in the Activity app as a list of runs, best times, best distances, most calories…. I love Apple products, but this is so Beta-ish, I am going back to Runkeeper for actual running data. The watch is awesome as a fitness tracker, and I love the SMS notifications, but the Workout aspect has such a long way to go.. GPS is essential for accurate running, if Garmin can make it work, then I am sure Apple can. And yes you would drain battery more, but that is an easy software switch asking the user if they want GPS or not. I would gladly recharge my watch while I shower after my run if having GPS means less daily battery life!
I’m with Allewsive. I, too, want built in GPS (& add Wifi, while you’re at it). iPhone calibrated (watch only) runs are accurate enough if you run the same pace over the same terrain every time. As it stands currently, the workout app is pretty useless for me, as a serious athlete. It’s fine for Joe average who does 30 minutes “exercise” every day. That isn’t how real athletes train. They have hard / long days followed by easy/short (recovery) days. The motivational features currently do not cater to that kind of “exercise”
No reason to change the screen, it’s great. They might need to go brighter on the Sapphire models, but the resolution is the best in the industry and square is the proper form factor for a smartwatch. Circle makes no sense for smart watches for the same reason it makes no sense for computer and smartphone screens.
I won’t even consider buying one of these until they take a couple of millimetres off the thickness.