Hacker News Reader

Comment by dpandey | Hacker News Reader

It would be extremely unwise for the CEO of a very public company to make such a statement if it weren't true.

The lift in units sold must definitely be affected by the recent price drop.

Anecdotal evidence: we have a fitness app that connects with the Apple Watch, and we have seen a large number of users connect their Apple Watch (about 7% of our total user base). We get data from these watches on a regular basis which means the watches are on and being used.

The battery is still terrible (barely runs a day) compared to Fitbit Blaze (5-7 days).

View on HN

Maybe I do not use mine to its potential, but it is midnight here just before bed, and my series 2 is at 73%. Certainly not 5 to 7 days, but far longer than barely a day.

Same -- my series 1 is at 75%, and it's 9pm...

Also the Fitbit Blaze has 1/100th the functionality and cpu power.

Believe me, I'm a big fan of the Apple Watch.

Everytime I meet someone who uses (used to use) the Watch, it usually turns out they have given up because of short battery life. I have a series 1: looks like it has improved in recent versions. I'm glad to hear that. Mine barely lasts a day.

Battery life is really important. Many of my friends see smartwatches as primarily a fitness device, and when the comparison with Fitbit (or anyone else) happens, it usually comes last.

My hope is that Apple focusses aggressively on making the iWatch battery life longer. That would undoubtedly lead to further lift in sales and happier customers.

Unless you got it in the last two months, you don't have a series 1. You have an "Apple Watch".

* Apple Watch - released last year

* Apple Watch Series 1 - released in September of this year, has new CPU, but otherwise mostly same

* Apple Watch Series 2 - latest edition

Same for me. Series 1. I routinely finish the day with about 70%. Full brightness and an hour of fitness tracking (i.e. all sensors on) in the morning.

Something is defective with the watch or it isn't running watchOS 3 if it isn't lasting a day. I can easily last a weekend.

More anicdata, my original makes it through the day with 60%. It does about 40 hours on a charge. This is with fitness tracking and notifications on.

I put mine on at 7:30am, and its now 4:56pm and I'm sitting at 61%.

I was thinking the same thing, yet I don't have a sense it is super popular or thing to get for holidays. What I think, without any solid evidence, is that sales are probably higher, but nothing major and that Mr. Cook just formulated this as they need a win of some sorts.

BTW, both android and apple watches are not very practical in terms of battery life. You had Blaze, I had Basis Peak which could do 10 days. I think Pebble is probably the most reasonable solution, unfortunately they just got acquired, so not really sure what will happen there.

My Series 2 can do two full days (not wearing while sleeping) even with heavy notifications. My original one definitely couldn't, but the series 2 can.

I've got the Series 2 (first smartwatch I've owned) and it lasts 3 full days.

I'm not wearing it at night and I don't overuse it in the day. I also don't consciously NOT use it, to preserve battery life. Note the double negative. (Maybe I got this wrong; what I meant: I don't make the conscious decision to use my watch very lightly in order to preserve its battery life. If I have to use it, I use it. I don't go out of my way to make the battery last.)

I use Siri a lot, I sometimes take my calls on my Watch (when I am at home or alone), I use it to remote control Apple Music on my iPhone, I receive tons of notifications, I use it to check my work calendar and weather an awful lot, I have lots of apps with background refresh enabled (weather, calendar, emails, etc.), I didn't disable the GPS, it's recording my steps and activity at all time.

Very, very satisfied with the battery life. I thought it would be terrible based on Apple Watch (the old one, not the newer, revised Series 1).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com