How is it a weird take? These devices serve different purposes, and their designs optimize for different things.
I like that my watch serves as a mini-iPhone, and I don’t mind charging it while I sleep. I like that I can install some of the same apps on my phone and watch.
You wrote above that preferring a week-long battery life for a watch over an ability to make calls and install apps is a "weird take". For me it's exactly the opposite, I take the week-long battery any time. So if anything at all is weird here I'd vote for your viewpoint.
Congrats you completely misunderstood. Preferring a week long battery life isn’t weird.
What is weird is saying an Apple Watch is inferior to a 10 year old watch because of the battery life, when these are different devices with different purposes.
Think about this for a second, would Apple purposefully gimp their watch’s battery life or maybe, just maybe, there’s more going on.
> Preferring a week long battery life isn’t weird. What is weird is saying an Apple Watch is inferior to a 10 year old watch because of the battery life, when these are different devices with different purposes.
It's the same thing. I'm not going to wear two watches, a choice has to be made. Based on criteria important to me (and to the original commenter you jumped on) Apple Watch is clearly inferior.
> Think about this for a second, would Apple purposefully gimp their watch’s battery life
Yes?
Design a device with just enough to get through the day, forces getting replaced in a few years when battery degrades. Apple is a hardware company with the capability to optimize battery life but they don't since 80% health on a batt that lasts a week won't force a replacement for most customers.
Yet apple device batteries last longer than any other brand. My Apple Watch is 5 years old and lasts at least a day and a half. It feels as fast as the day I bought it and still gets major upgrades.
My other apple devices are the same way. I switched to iPhone 10 years ago they’ve held up very well.
> Yet apple device batteries last longer than any other brand
Citation? In my experience this isn't the case. 2-3 years heavy use and the batt needs replacement (less than 80% design capacity). Can sometimes get as high as 5 years on a lightly used device. It may work longer but its not going to hold anywhere near design capacity. The dual-cell low voltage charging standards other manufacturers use seem to hold up longer since the heat is reduced.
> I switched to iPhone 10 years ago they’ve held up very well.
Cool, stuff like my original SE's hold up fine (and got a security update like a week ago). I've just replaced the batteries 2 or 3 times because they age and performance declines. This is expected but I'm not going to cope on a battery with 60% of its design capacity and act like its just as good as new.
> Your statement is ignorant.
I forgot how hard some people will try to rationalize their behavior. I still think the statement holds true knowing how many people I've met clinging to devices with dying batteries and saying 'well I have an upgrade coming soon' rather than just replacing the fucking battery.
I replaced my first Garmin (640M) at roughly 5 years old due to physical damage (it got mangled badly enough that the part of the case that holds the band on broke off), and it was still getting roughly the same battery life as it did when it was new.
Keep in mind you're doing far less charge cycles than a device with shorter battery life, it's going to last longer than a device that gets a full cycle per day. Not unreasonable for it to have under 500 cycles in a 5 year period (where this would be unheard of in a primary cellphone).
I like that my watch serves as a mini-iPhone, and I don’t mind charging it while I sleep. I like that I can install some of the same apps on my phone and watch.