Battery Life

The Apple Watch, more than any other wearable, presents some enormous barriers for battery life testing. On the smartphone side, testing has traditionally been pretty simple in the sense that you can usually design an app, script, or some other form of automatic test that will run a specified workload. The display is set to not timeout by either an application that adjusts the timeout to an extremely large value or by adjusting the timeout in the settings menu.

Meanwhile for wearables, on Android Wear, testing battery life is generally quite simple, because you still have some control over the timeout settings, you can set manual brightness, and the display automatically turns on when you receive a notification. On Watch OS, exactly none of those things are true. As a result, objective battery life testing of the watch has a number of significant challenges and thus far I haven’t seen any real solution to this problem. We hope to have a standardized battery life test across all wearable OSes in the near future, but for now this section will be purely subjective in nature.

38mm Apple Watch Battery (Image Courtesy iFixit)

To really sum up battery life on the Apple Watch, it’s definitely more than sufficient. I never recall having battery life drop below 30% in a single day of use. If a day was particularly slow in terms of notifications, I often would end the day with more than 50% battery life, so going two days wasn’t completely impossible. However, in practice I found myself charging the watch every night.

Just by virtue of the glance-based nature of the watch, battery life continues to be far better than the iPhone 6 over the course of the day. I did notice that idle battery life isn’t particularly strong on Apple Watch when wearing it on my wrist, presumably because things like the haptic feedback, fitness tracking, and background sync activities have to be running quite often. Something like reading email doesn’t seem to drain the battery all that quickly, which is also helped by the consistently low average picture level (APL) throughout the UI. However, I would notice throughout the day that the battery percentage seemed to decrease even though I’d go the whole day just checking the time. Given that the workout mode also seems to have a pretty significant workload, I suspect fitness tracking is a significant component of this idle drain.

For a first-generation product on 28nm, this level of battery life is actually rather remarkable as I expected wearables to go through a few generations of somewhat poor battery life before reaching an acceptable point. Although performance isn’t amazingly fluid on WatchOS, it’s definitely more than made up for due to the improved battery life that comes from such a low-power SoC. Roughly speaking, Apple has definitely met their promise of 18 hours of battery life, and arguably exceeded it. Of course, given that there’s no real data here yet opinions may vary widely on whether the battery life of Apple Watch is acceptable.

Charge Time

Although battery life is usually the primary way in which people determine how good a device is at staying mobile, charge time often enters the equation. I’m sure a lot of people have experienced situations in which charge time becomes critical. Traveling will often affect this, as power outlets are fairly rare in airplanes and airports, which means that the time spent at a power outlet needs to be as productive as possible in terms of increasing battery charge. In the case of the Apple Watch, the only option for the average user to charge the watch is with a wireless charger that uses magnets to hold the charger in the correct position on the watch. This wireless charger is fed by Apple’s standard 5V, 1A charger. In order to test this, we monitor the time it takes for the wearable to go from a completely drained state to a fully charged state.

It’s probably no surprise that our test results track relatively closely with listed Apple spec at 2.68 hours. What isn’t listed in the spec is that like every other wireless charger I’ve tested thus far, trickle charging with wireless charging isn’t really trickle charging to the AC adapter. I thought something might have just been off with the Moto 360, but after my experiences with the Apple Watch it’s clear to me that wireless charging behaves differently from wired charging. As a result, it wasn’t unusual for me to wake up 9 hours after putting the watch on the charger and still feel that the watch was quite warm from charging. At any rate, given the need for wireless charging on wearables I suspect that we’re already at the limits for charge rate on wearables for the near future given the increased heat output of wireless charging.

Taptic Engine

As I’ve mentioned earlier in the review, one of the biggest points of differentiation with the Apple Watch is the use of a brand new haptic feedback system that Apple calls the Taptic Engine. At a low level, this is just a linear actuator, but the system is very different from a traditional linear actuator.

For those that are unfamiliar with traditional linear actuator haptic feedback systems used in smartphones, a voice coil has voltage applied across it, which allows current to flow and generates a magnetic field because the voice coil is an electromagnet. This voice coil acts on a mass, which vibrates in a small cell at a certain frequency. However, in the traditional y-axis configuration of most linearly-actuated feedback systems, the limited length means that there isn’t a lot of room for low frequency vibrations.

Source: Precision Microdrives

In the case of the Apple Watch, it seems that Apple is using a z-axis vibration motor combined with the speaker. Relative to the PCB on the watch, the weight and the length of travel for the mass is enormous. This inherently allows for much better haptic feedback at lower frequency vibrations. This haptic feedback motor design, combined with the speaker, is what makes up the Taptic Engine.

Source: Precision Microdrives

The question now is whether Apple has actually accomplished significant here for the end user experience, and the answer to that is definitely a strong yes. When this feature was first announced, I wasn’t particularly interested in it because I’ve never really been one to pick nits over haptic feedback which is why I never point out a phone’s haptic feedback system as a key point of differentiation unless it’s egregiously poor. However, in the case of the Apple Watch it’s an enormous step up from what one might be used to from a phone because of just how distinct it is. It really feels like someone is tapping me on my wrist when notifications come through, and it’s sufficiently distinct from conventional vibrations that I’ve never failed to miss a notification that comes in, which happens every so often with my phone or even other wearables.


Apple S1 Taptic Engine (Image Courtesy iFixit)

There might be some missed potential here though, as it would be great to have more variation to the vibration patterns to indicate various types of notifications as I usually can’t reliably guess what application a notification came from by the haptic feedback alone. The system is also remarkably quiet compared to vibrations from phones, presumably because the frequency of the noise is relatively low and the watch is strapped to the wrist, which muffles noise. As said before, I normally don’t care enough about vibration feedback to write anything about it, but in the case of the Apple Watch the difference is big enough to be notable in terms of user experience.

Misc. Thoughts

As far as I can tell, the speaker is decently loud for relatively quiet environments but it’s easily drowned out by background noise. I also found that I almost never took the watch out of silent mode, as the haptic feedback is enough and audible ringtones definitely lack the relative subtlety that comes just vibrations.

On the receiving side, I was pleasantly surprised by just how effective the microphones are at rejecting noise, as it rejects anything reasonably far away and seems to amplify nearby voices based upon some casual testing of iMessage audio messages. However, Siri seems to struggle a bit with noise rejection and I’m pretty sure that Google Voice Search continues to be faster and less error-prone than Siri when it comes to dictation.

As best as I can tell, Apple Watch currently doesn’t detect sleep states or much of anything around sleep, which is definitely an area of potential improvement as it would be amazing to have an alarm clock that would go off at the end of a sleep cycle to reduce sleep inertia. Sleep tracking in general would be a significant feature if executed well, although this would likely require significant increases in battery life so that an average workload would only use around 40% of the battery in a day.

Meanwhile as far as inputs go, the side button is roughly analogous to the power button on a smartphone, but with a friends list and Apple Pay mapped to the button as well. The Digital Crown is roughly analogous to a home button, but with a scroll wheel attached. In my experience, the Digital Crown isn’t manipulated with a twisting motion, but a sliding motion with a single finger similar to a scroll wheel.

Handoff works well with the iPhone, although it’s often difficult for me to remember to swipe up to activate Handoff when TouchID makes phone unlock almost instant. You are still able to use handoff via the multitasking drawer on your iPhone, but that requires a number of extra steps that can be slower than simply opening an app and navigating to where you need to be. I also find it a bit odd that Apple Watch doesn’t have a multitasking interface like iOS does, but given how rare it is that I attempt to switch to another app with the use of the double press interface I suspect that this is more of a fast app return switch than a multitasking switch.

Finally, "Hey Siri" works well in terms of activation, but it's really kind of disappointing that the hotword detection doesn't work with the display off. I suspect this is due to power requirements as I haven't seen any other wearable have screen-off hotword detection, but it would definitely be great to see such a feature in the future.

Display Final Words
Comments Locked

270 Comments

View All Comments

  • JoshHo - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link

    It would be great to get specific instances of overly wordy areas, and information that you have learned elsewhere that is redundant in the review to improve our wearable reviews going forward.
  • Blairh - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    As an iPhone user I think the notifications aspect of the AW would be very appealing, but Apple is asking for too much money for such a luxury. And I'm talking about the Sport models. The SS models are ridiculously expensive. It's no surprise that roughly 3/4 of all AW sales have been the Sport models. Seriously you are nuts IMO to buy the SS model unless you have money to burn. Plus I think the Sport models are just nicer looking in general. And lighter to boot.

    Anyways, this review highlights a current glaring weakness which is the inability to respond to IM 3rd party apps directly on the AW. If you use WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger often as I do you are SOL if you want to respond with your AW right now. Perhaps this will change with the 2.0 update come fall, but still, right now this is really only ideal if you main communication is the messages app. Email is another story as there are several 3rd party email clients that offer voice dictation.

    I'm waffling between an AW and the Vivosmart. The Vivosmart won't let me reply to any notifications from my wrist however it's a third of the price of the 38mm AW and feels awesome on your wrist.

    I do believe in the future of the AW, but right now its got a lot of glaring holes to fill.
  • nrencoret - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    The worst article I've ever read on this site by miles. Too many words for nothing insightful. What I find here is a desperate struggle to justify what cannot be justified. As a person who loves the site's content I'm stumped by the horrible mess I have just read just a few points:

    - Apple has "solved" how a watch has to fit like no other company, traditional (ie. Rolex) or tech focused. That is a simply mindboggling statement.

    - The UI/UX is great. The Apple mouse and the iPhone have just one primary button for interacting. The crown, side button and force touch trilogy are the work of a comitee which couldn't settle for a simple means of interacting with a piece of technology. What Apple is best known for is how great they are at removing complexity -"just works" and "boom" come to mind- the reviewers were far to forgiving to all the usabily issues (ie. force touch discoverability). These would have been major issues on any other piece of technology.

    - Understanding what it is you get for your money: If you own a jewel like a watch or ring its timeless and has an intangible value. The watch can cost a pretty penny for something that has no better hardware than whats out there. There is no inherent intangible value in the watch because as has been stated in the review there will be future iterations of it, killing the timeles argument. As such, this watch is a piece of technology not jewelery and thus, its way overpriced. Lets just see how many dads give their sons Apple Watches and how those sons give them to theirr own.

    - Battery life of a single day for a timepiece is not even remotely acceptable. The Basis Peak, Fitbits and Pebbles may not be as smart but they nail the basic concept of a a time keeping device must do.

    - Nowhere was there a real argument of how the current incarnation of the watch is mostly useless without being tethered. Basis Peak comes to mind as how useful a device can be with our without tether.

    I could go on, given the amount of sheer nonsense of this review. I'm really dissapointed that this came from Anandtech.
  • alanpgh1 - Monday, July 20, 2015 - link

    Awesome Review... and right on target.
    I've had an Apple Watch for 2 months, and it continues to be an important and non-intrusive assistant in my life. I seem to learn something new that is helpful all the time.

    The only thing I ask the author to consider are these words from your review:
    "Finally, "Hey Siri" works well in terms of activation, but it's really kind of disappointing that the hotword detection doesn't work with the display off. I suspect this is due to power requirements as I haven't seen any other wearable have screen-off hotword detection, but it would definitely be great to see such a feature in the future."

    It is actually a feature to have the watch only listen for the "Hey Siri" hotword when the arm is lifted.
    Otherwise, if listening all the time, the system would have false triggers. Think about it; this way of operation is by design.

    Thanks for an excellent and thorough review!
  • TheRealArdrid - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link

    Gotta admit: I didn't get past the second page of this review. This is dripping with the feel of an Apple shill piece. Am I really to believe that no other watch in history, including recent smartwatches, properly fit the author's wrist but the Apple Watch, with its amazing Milanese band, magically did? Statements like that completely destroy legitimacy and credibility. Come on man...
  • zodiacfml - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link

    Their failure is sticking to the old, physical idea of a watch.
  • FunBunny2 - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link

    -- Their failure is sticking to the old, physical idea of a watch.

    Yeah, and what would GUIs be without radio buttons, menus, and all of the other analog clones they're built on? Face it: it's just pixels made to look "physical".
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link

    Honestly, I love that Apple is successful. The sound of PC-worshiping heads exploding all over the Internet is amusing. It lifts my spirits on a regular basis.

    Seriously, people... Apple didn't run over your mother, kill your dog, or beat your sister.

    The level of nerd rage over Apple's success really is misplaced. There are far worse things to cry over than yet another big tech firm that dodges taxes and overprices stuff. It's not like Apple is the only one and it's not like society in general doesn't reward that behavior.

    I've seen the anti-Apple zealotry for decades. It never changes. It always comes down to whinging about how much Apple charges, along with accusations that only gays, girls, and social-climbing superficial people use the products. In reality, despite their flaws, Apple products have been dependable workhorses for people for a long time, and some of them have been pretty innovative.

    The Lisa was a thousand times more innovative than the IBM PC. Apple didn't execute because of some poor management and the sudden spike in DRAM cost (caused by Japanese firms pushing US firms out of the market with price dumping and then colluding to raise prices, as far as I have read). Yes, it was expensive but the platform was a very solid foundation for line of machines. Apple had an office suite, multitasking, protected memory, tool-less design, a bootloader that made it easy to boot from multiple operating systems, and a plethora of other modern features back in '83.

    Unfortunately, the Mac was botched because it was turned from what was envisioned to be a $500 computer into a $1000 computer and then into a $2400 computer -- without making the underlying OS robust enough to justify that price or the hardware expandable enough. But, despite that, it had a very efficient GUI and people were willing to put up with bombs and freezes because that GUI was miles nicer to work with than Windows (up until 95 when things almost became as good on Windows, but not quite).

    If you think Apple is so fraudulent then start your own company or get a job running one already out there and out-compete them. Then let us know about your success. Until then, find something more productive to do with your time than rant ineffectually on Internet forums.
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link

    As for this product specifically, my advice is to wait for the next iteration that comes with a shrunken process. Apple's first iPad had a relatively short lifespan, rapidly orphaned. I wouldn't want to be stuck with this device if the same thing were to happen. It has generally been the same advice for quite some time: when Apple comes out with a new form factor, wait until version 2.
  • Oxford Guy - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link

    This even applied to the Mac, come to think of it. Jobs demoed (without telling the audience or the press, of course) a 512k prototype in order to run speech synthesis when he was unveiling the first Mac (128K, not expandable) to the press.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now