Report: The Apple Watch Will Only Last 2.5 Hours With 'Heavy' Use

Report: The Apple Watch Will Only Last 2.5 Hours With

We've heard rumours for some time that Apple's been less than pleased with the purported battery life of its upcoming Apple Watch. And now it looks as though it has plenty of reason to be worried. According to a new report from 9 to 5 Mac, the Apple Watch the battery is looking at just 2.5 to 4 hours of "active application use" before it dies. Yeesh.

According to 9 to 5 Mac's report, while Apple (along with everyone else who's had their eyes on one) was hoping its Watch would last for at least a full day on a single charge, it's had to significantly change its tune thanks to the power-sucking Retina screen and A5 processor:

As of 2014, Apple wanted the Watch to provide roughly 2.5 to 4 hours of active application use versus 19 hours of combined active/passive use, 3 days of pure standby time, or 4 days if left in a sleeping mode. Sources, however, say that Apple will only likely achieve approximately 2-3 days in either the standby or low-power modes…

But if you're hoping to use the Apple Watch for fitness tracking, there is (sort of?) better news: "Apple expects to see better battery life when using the Watch's fitness tracking software, which is targeted for nearly four hours of straight exercise tracking on a single charge." That's better than the 2.5 hours you'd get under normal heavy use, but there's no way this is going to be tracking more than the lone workout.

As a point of comparison, the Moto 360 easily lasts a full day of mixed-use. Our own Eric Limer's watch still had a little under half of its battery left after about 16-hours of wear. Even the Samsung Gear S, which is essentially a full-fledged phone for your wrist, can go a full day easy. And of course, the Pebble Smartwatch, which is admittedly a very different beast, can last close to a full week on a single charge.

Still, while these numbers certainly seem awful, most people probably aren't going to be browsing Facebook and playing games on their wrist four hours. Apple expects most people to be wearing the Watch passively for the majority of the day, but while they were originally shooting for about 19 hours of "mixed usage", 9 to 5 Mac's sources say that Apple no longer thinks it can even hit that — at least not in this first generation.

We've reached out to Apple for comment, and will update as soon as we hear back. [9 to 5 Mac]


Comments

    Laughable numbers to be perfectly honest. If they release as is it'll be hilarious!

    LG G Watch R got me through 3 days and some change with always on screen. Minimal fitness tracking and a lot of usage with inbound calls, tests, emails and other notifications.

      ankaz I call bs my friend, i have the same watch and always on gives my 5-6 hours. Just because you hate apple don't make up crap.

      People don't stair at their watch for 3 hours per day, notifications last seconds. I know this site is all about hating on Apple these days but in all honesty average use should be tested.

      the 4 hour fitness only applies to the pulse reader, the motion controller is always on.

      Read the full article not just what anti apple giz nit picked.

      If you stair into your watch for 3 hours a day you have issues. Let be a little realistic. If switch always on screen and sit on apps for my R I doubt ill get 4 hours.

      If I need to labour in App thats a good time to pull out the GS5 or the iPad... or the laptop. No one is going to do work on the watch.

        You can call BS all you want my friend but I use my watch for notifications only and maybe to check heart rate once or twice a day. Each night when I put it down to charge its never below 60%. Its used from 0800 - 2300 every day.

        For example its been on since 0800 today and I have had many notifications this morning and its on 96%.

        And just by the way I'm not "anti-apple". I just wouldn't use their gear personally and I am entitled to an opinion on the matter just like anyone else is.

        Last edited 23/01/15 11:05 am

          I guess if you only used the Apple watch a few times a day you'd probably find similar results which is what zzz is stating. If you used it heavily for 3-4 hours which is what this article is suggesting you wouldn't get your 3 days out of it. The fact you wouldn't use their "gear" based on the fact that it is apple does suggest you are in fact anti-apple.

          Hypothetically if they brought out a product in a category that you were looking for that was a generation ahead of the competition and met all your criteria and was a reasonable price would you still not use it based on it being Apple?

            Actually what zzz was stating was that I am a liar and that I make up real world figures to prove that "Apple is EVIL!!". Which is simply not the case. I am posting my exact experience with the LG G Watch R based on my usage of the product.

            Also I never mentioned that I don't use Apple gear because it's Apple. I don't use Apple gear because I believe Android is better based on my experience and personal preference.

            If Apple released a product that was 1-2 years ahead of Android and I saw a requirement for it in my life then I would definitely consider purchasing it. However, if I had to completely change platform from Google to Apple just for one product I probably wouldn't. That's mostly because I have quite a bit of investment into the Google platform i.e. Google Inbox, Drive, Android etc..
            If, however, I could use that Apple product with my existing Google environment then I would probably buy it but only if I actually felt a need for it.

            Last edited 23/01/15 11:37 am

              Fair enough just posing a question, I notice most Aussies are really brand biased with electronics, cars, all sorts of stuff. I don't understand, I buy what I think is best at the time regardless who's making it. In 2010 when I bought a laptop it was a macbook as they were miles ahead as far as touchpad usability and build quality was concerned, when I upgrade this year I maybe tempted to go a win 10 machine as they've gained a lot of ground. I just don't understand fanboy mentality.

                I'm not a fanboy by any means but I do really really really like my Nexus 5 and I personally prefer the Android OS and Google products. I've owned iPhones, MacBooks and iPad's and I don't dispute that they are great products. However, for my life they just don't quite "fit" if that makes sense...

                  Yeah makes total sense, I agree with you I have a nexus 7 and an S4. I know a lot of people who simply boycot any product thats made by a particular company. It's a lot like the holden/ford mentality, I never understood that since I was a kid how you were meant to completely love one and hate the other even though the main products were virtually the same fucking thing.

                  Stop all this talk, please! You guys are starting to sound sensible! Long live the rabid fanbois/gurlz!

                  Sent from my iSurface Nexus 10.

            "zzz" is a "guest" (i.e: you can't see his profile) that simply calls people anti-Apple. He called me anti apple just a day ago for... gosh, I don't even know what.

        I did what you said and read the article ZZZ. You do have a point.

    Well thats pretty useless. But also, how much are you really going to be doing for heavy use on a watch, Could think of nothing worse.

    19 hours combined is still not great but what do i care, i wont buy one.

    Shouldn't the article read "In a post-Jobs world Apple struggles to play catch-up".

    And I like how Apple thinks that the battery lasting for days if you *don't* use the device is something worth marketing.

    If you look at the time which takes a second a 120 times a day its only 2 minutes.

    Let say you get 100 notification including some replies 10 seconds on average its 16 minutes.

    Some news reading maybe 10 times a day (too lazy to pull the phone headline grabbing stuff) 30 seconds each time = 5 minutes

    App use… very limited using apps 5 times a day for a minute each 5 minutes.

    Change songs a 120 times in a day at a second each 2 minutes.

    That’s a 30 minutes of watch use a day lets double it and you are still only on an hour of the allocated 2.5 hours. Its a watch for F*ck sake.

    Jogging round the Tan a few times one hour of fitness… who spends 4 hours a day in the gym?

    In real life practical use with realistic active/passive you will get 24 hours easily.

    This is on 28nm CPU, the next version S2 will run Samsung on 14nm which will double battery life. This was the one mistake Apple made.

    What the full article states is that Apple will not go below 60 frames a second, which means they won’t sacrifice performance and fluidity for battery.

    I don’t think there is another watch on the market that gives you 60fps

      I had no idea that 60fps was what we all needed from a watch, thank you Apple for revealing this truth to us!

        60FPS... the screen will change once every second in watch mode...

      Has anyone noticed on an iPhone, even the 6/6+ when you scroll the writing is all fuzzy, I compared it to my 2 yr old s3 and it was much easier to read while scrolling, sounds stupid but it means you have to stop reading when you scroll...

        You what?! I'm reading this right now on an iPhone 6. And scrolling. The writing does not go fuzzy and I can read while I scroll. Stop writing nonsense.

    HAHAHHAAHHAHAAHAHAAAAHAHAAHH
    aHHAAHAH
    AHAHHHAAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHHHHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
    hahahah
    ahh
    ..heh..
    funny

    Dumb shits will still buy them buy the crap load.

      and believe that if their apple watch lasts this long then those stupid android smart watches must last 1 hour!

    "2.5 hours? That means it'll die by... *checks apple watch* *finds apple watch dead* shit..."

    Overpriced and underspec'd. Classic Apple as always.

    So the solution is to change the parameters, right? Make "Heavy Use" checking the watch once an hour so that when people say "Hey, you promised X battery life but got Y instead", Apple can say "Oh, you're using it wrong"

    Random: "Excuse me, do you have the time?".
    iWatch owner: "No sorry, my battery died at 10am".

    Was hoping for done incredible battery life. Not because I would buy one but to push Google to improve wear.

    Keep in mind that there are two size variants for this device. This may simply be battery life for the entry-level 32mm device, so it's easy to suspect the larger 42mm device will feature improved battery performance.

    This'll hurt them if it really is this bad...

    as a long time apple user (final cut editor) I have used iPhones because they integrate the best (usually, didn't have a syncing calendar for about 12 months - pretty bad when your a freelancer)
    However, I have also witnessed apples move from professional users (editors, graphic artists, etc) towards a bland consumer market which just makes 'pretty' products rather than useful ones.
    I haven't worn a watch since smartphones (actually since the Palm pilot) and the only reason I would wear one would be to EXTEND the life of my iPhone by using it instead. Who cares about a retina screen on a watch??? Battery life would be one of main features I would be after as an iPhone user

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now