Analyst claims Apple Watch 2 coming in fall 2015; will not require iPhone for full connectivity

Tiernan Ray reports for Barron’s that Cowen & Co. semiconductor analyst Timothy Arcuri in a note to clients wrote, in part:

Regarding Apple Watch, the Taiwan supply chain remains generally skeptical and Quanta/ASE yield issues persist. Our work indicates overall unit supply of ~6MM units by June for Apple Watch with Apple now working with Foxconn to try to improve supply and also trying to develop a parallel supply chain in Japan. We got more confirmation of the likelihood of a 2.0 version of the Watch to be launched later this year that will not require iPhone tethering for full connectivity and, we think will also be the first Apple device w/OLED screen, supplied by Samsung. — Cowen & Co. semiconductor analyst Timothy Arcuri

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Seriously, does it make sense for Apple to alienate the first, most enthusiastic wave of buyers by releasing the next-gen Watch a mere 5 or so months after the initial Apple Watch release?

Not to us, it doesn’t.

Frankly, if this isn’t just bad information wafting out of China, this smacks of a rather laughable effort to suppress initial Apple Watch sales or, at least delay them until fall when those who’ve been hoodwinked realize that there is no Apple Watch 2 launching in fall 2015 while the actual Apple Watch is still in the midst of its worldwide rollout.

In January 2014, Arcuri claimed the iPhone 6 display was “locked down” with a 4.8-inch display. It wasn’t.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Dan K.” for the heads up.]

37 Comments

    1. “Seriously, does it make sense for Apple to alienate the first, most enthusiastic wave of buyers by releasing it 5-6 months after the initial Apple Watch launch?”

      “Not to us, it doesn’t.”

      Let me see if I get this one right…. Are you MDN guys saying “Seriously, it makes sense for Apple to alienate the first, most enthusiastic wave of buyers by releasing it after 12-13 months.” ?

      I think, no, that doesn’t make sense either; but that 12-13 months release is what Apple has done with iPhone and will likely do with the watch.

      1. Yes it does make sense. Apple has history of that with the iPhone.

        Original iPhone 4GB ended within weeks of release.

        The iPhone 3G was released a few months after the original iPhone was launched. Fortunately, I was given a free upgrade to the 3G, since I bought the original iPhone on launch day.

        So, MDN might want to rethink your take on this.

        1. The iPad 4 was released about six months after the iPad 3, the first retina version. The iPad 3 (which I happily own and use frequently) was a stopgap to introduce the retina display (much like the recently released 5k iMac). The iPad 3 was thicker than Apple desired and still included the 30-pin dock connector.

          But the examples that have been provided are the exception, not the rule. In my opinion, it is highly unlikely that Apple will release a second-generation Apple Watch in 2015. The first generation Apple Watch appears to be a meticulously designed and highly refined product.

          Apple’s upgrade cycle for the Apple Watch has not been publicly established. It might be around the the 12 months or so that is common for iOS products, or it could be longer – perhaps even 24 months. Unless there are significant near-term advances in technologies critical to reducing thickness/weight or enhancing functionality (new sensors), the Apple Watch upgrade cycle might be longer than for other iOS products. After all, the Apple Watch is programmable using apps and leverages the iPhone to provide or augment many of its functions. As a result, many of the functional upgrades for the Apple Watch will be provided via the iPhone.

    1. Not really “stupid.” More like desperate. 🙂 It just means the competition, from Google and Samsung, to the traditional watchmakers, are scared. Really scared. They’ll pay “analysts” to put nonsense out there, to delay Apple’s takeover of “all things people wear on the wrist” in any way possible. Expect more in the coming weeks…

      It really won’t matter. There is nothing remotely close to Apple Watch in Android world. And Android, if you can even call Android a single “platform,” is hopelessly fragmented. Only Apple has a wildly popular mobile platform that is completely controlled by the maker of the phone and watch. The greatest advantage of Apple Watch over the completion is its deep, complex, and open-ended integration with iPhone. “Open-ended” means WHAT Apple Watch can do is only limited by the power of iPhone and the imagination of developers.

      This particular attempt tries to make it sound like separation of watch from phone is the desirable goal. That’s because the competition must keep them mostly separate, by necessity. Apple’s goal is nearly continuous interaction between iPhone and Apple Watch. Apple wants customers to first own an iPhone, and then enhance their iPhone experience with an Apple Watch (or buy an iPhone and Apple Watch together). Any rumor that suggests “the next Apple Watch will not require an iPhone” is pure nonsense, because that would be a particularly dumb move. Apple is NOT dumb.

  1. It may be a piece of misinformation, but if you just stop to think for a minute, there is a vast market for the iWatch that doesn’t need an iPhone. And frankly, if they already know how to make one without tethering, then they are blithering idiots not to have done that in the first place. To do it six months down the line…well, they’ll just head the way of Microsoft, which would be disastrous. They have done enough to bug some of us who are Mac lovers lately, particularly with half-assed software.

      1. So how many Macs do you have? Playing? You’re the player, with words. iPhone, iCloud, iPad, iCloud Drive–I call em all i because it’s easy for me. I’ve been a Mac person since 1989, when I left other systems behind forever. I changed my whole publishing company over to Mac. I use Apple TV. Don’t jump to conclusions based on a word. My comment still stands.

        1. What is your stance on the iTouch? If you’re so imprecise that you don’t even pay attention to proper names, what in the hell do you publish? Davids Approximate Maps? The new novel from Davids Little Publishing Hat is your stance on the iTouch?

          1. I use iTouch most of the working day, since I touch my three–what are those thingamijigs called that replaced the mouse? Oh, plus the ones on my laptops. And I also iTouch my two iPhones and iPod. Now, not forgetting the iPad. But I especially loved your idea for Davids (it actually has a ‘ in it, since you are a stickler for detail in words: David’s–misused twice in your post) Approximate Maps, but I believe Apple already grabbed the approximate maps slot, at least it appears that way when I use Apple maps (or is it Imaps? Geesh, it do get complicated!) here on the Big Island (I should send Apple the bill for my many miles of driving into the middle of nowhere).

    1. I’m sure that Apple would love to have a version that would do all that it will do without tethering. I’m also sure they would love for the Watch to be able to run without charging every day.

      There have to be tradeoffs with the current technology, and to think that Apple would intentionally withhold an advanced version just shows who the “blithering idiot” really is.

    2. Of course there’s a big market for an Apple watch that doesn’t require an iPhone. No need to “stop and think” to realize that.
      And one day there will be one. But that day sure won’t be in six months.

  2. First off, the  Watch being released next month uses an OLED screen. Secondly, they don’t say what they mean by independent operation. We know that Apple developers will be permitted to actually offer apps that will run independently on the  Watch in an upcoming release. But, that option will not require a change to future hardware, just a software update.

    If they’re suggesting the next version of the  Watch will not require an iPhone for connectivity, I’d say that’s unlikely. Battery technology has a long way to go for that, and adding a SIM card to the watch for a separate carrier contract would certainly force a redesign of the watch. So, if that’s what they’re suggesting, I’m calling it FUD.

  3. I see no problem with this. People are going to collect multiple watches. This is not a laptop that people will upgrade when needed. The customers buying the Edition watch, will also by the sport for casual wear.

    1. Some are, but many of us aren’t. We don’t use watches anymore. It’s only the fact it’s Apple that tempts us to get one. Our iPhones replaced our watches. I think there’s a huge market if they can actually pull off not needing tethering. But the technology is likely not there.

  4. Have these people already confirmed that there are princes in Nigeria looking for someone to deposit millions into a US bank account? Because it would make more sense than his apple watch rumor.

  5. Why do we keep referring Watch as a watch? There is no comparison!

    Why do we keep bastardizing the trademark. It’s Watch (Option-Shift”Watch”) or Apple Watch. Not AWatch or a watch.

    And for those that don’t wear a watch or refuse to buy an Watch because they use their iPhone to tell time, finding/taking time with an iPhone is a just waste of time.

    Finally, the Watch does something that most wrist watches can’t, i.e., present the time in analog or digital displays. And for those that don’t think that is important, ask a bunch of school kids (even in college) to read an analog clock. Amazing how many can’t. Hmm. Wonder how many here are afraid to admit that.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.