Cowen and Company analyst Timothy Arcuri claims the second-generation Apple Watch will arrive in mid- to late-2016, reports AppleInsider. The report also claims that the second Apple Watch would be thinner than its predecessor.
/article-new/2015/09/applewatch1.png?lossy)
Arcuri's research memo, based on a recent trip of Asian suppliers, also says Apple will ship 18 million Apple Watches by the end of 2015, with at least 45 million shipped in 2016. Although he also notes the figures for 2016 may be pessimistic based on the current data.
Thus far, very few rumors have emerged about Apple's next Apple Watch. In June, it was reported that the second Apple Watch would feature a FaceTime camera, expanded Wi-Fi and new materials. The new Wi-Fi chip would allow the Watch to do more without an iPhone.
Top Rated Comments
Should I return the one I have now?
The apple watch does have WiFi.Either it was going to have Wi-Fi or it wasn't. They should've put it on there the first time. How do they expect people to keep buying if they leave out obvious stuff? It's like they're releasing prototypes and selling them as the real thing
Hopefully the battery is better. But who am i kidding, it's apple...
The battery is great. It usually lasts for upto two days, and comfortably lasts for one day with moderate-heavy use. I'm actually worried battery will get worse with future versions.But i'll most likely buy one next year.
So I should return it.....
Definitely.If Apple discontinues the Watch at some point, then you can buy with confidence, knowing there won't be a better one in the future. Otherwise never buy electronics again. You're never going to own the final version so you'll always hate yourself for being duped.
I think it'd be much more likely to have a second gen Watch announced next year, and then released Spring 2017.
I have to believe that Apple would have put better wifi and better battery life and FaceTime cameras, etc. into the first gen watch if their engineers could have figured it out in time to ship this product. I read all of the posts on this forum, and I see peoples' comments about how the watch is a flop because Apple made it more expensive than it should have been for what it does. Doesn't anyone think that Apple would have loved to release a first gen watch that was Buck Rogers ahead of their competition, and take away people's hesitation to throw down the money?
At some point we just have to accept the fact that Apple's engineers are human, and that it's hard to put all of that tech into a product that fits on your wrist. And that they have a team of people who are working their a**es off to push the tech forward as fast as they can while keeping competitive products in the market and in the pipeline.
Frankly, this goes for all of their products.
Thinner?
Who are you? Andre the Giant?Who needs that?
No, what they need to do is make it bigger. 47-55mm would suit me perfectly.
The two sizes available now is for women and pygmees..