Apple Watch Series 7 Delivers Larger Screens and More Durability

Earlier today at Apple's iPhone 13 launch event, Apple introduced the Apple Watch Series 7 with a new, more seamless design with larger 41mm and 45mm cases that include larger, brighter and more durable screens. There's also a variety of new colors to choose from. Engadget reports: The update takes advantage of the bigger displays, with more information and new watch faces like Contour, Modular Duo and World Timer. As for durability? Series 7 is the first Apple Watch with a dust resistance rating (IP6X), making it better-suited to mountain climbing or the beach. The screen itself is more crack-resistant thanks to a thicker new geometry, and you'll still get swim-friendly WR50 (that is, 50-meter) water resistance. You won't confuse this with a rugged watch, but you might not panic quite so much after a fall.

The updates aren't quite so aggressive under the hood. You can anticipate 33 percent faster charging and fall detection during workouts. Most of the updates come through watchOS 8, which now includes detection of cycling workouts, better tracking for e-bikes and help if you fall off. You'll also get a full swipe-based keyboard, support for more workouts (Pilates and Tai Chi) and respiratory rate tracking while you sleep. Apple Watch Series 7 will arrive sometime this fall starting at $399. The Apple Watch SE and Watch Series 3 will hang around at respective prices of $299 and $199, and you can expect refreshed Nike and Hermes variants for the Series 7.

WR50 not good enough for swimming

[Anonymous Coward]

100M (10ATM) water resistance is usually considered the minimum for swimming due to the forces exerted while swimming.

Re:

[hey!]

There's nothing that keeps a manufacturer from making a watch that is enough *better* than the iso 22810 "50m" standard to swim laps with, but not quite up to the "100m" standard which you'd need for snorkeling and water skiing. If the manufacturer says it's OK to swim laps with watch, then it's OK even if the watch is only marked "50m". Otherwise "50m" watches are OK for brief swims (e.g. dipping in the water to cool off) but not for swimming laps.

The lap-swimming use-case is so important for fitness tra

Re:

[saloomy]

This. If you take it for a swim that isnt that deep, and it fails, expect warranty to step in and fix or replace it. It operated out of spec.

Re:

[jencinas]

My problem with using an Apple watch to swim laps doesn't have to do with its waterproof rating but with the rules at public swimming pools in my area that prohibit wearing watches while swimming. The rationale for the rule is that if you hit the watch against the side of the pool and break the crystal, glass shards can end up in the pool and cut someone's foot. Broken glass is also very difficult to clean up from the bottom of a large pool. I wonder if the new "crack resistance" of the series 7 will be eno

Re:

[hey!]

Actually you missed the point; since the 50m standard is not enough and the 100m is overkill, watches built to for lap swimming but not to the 100m standard are labeled "50m". They really ought to be labelled something like "60m" but they can't be because there's no such standard.

"50m" is a terrible name for the standard, because it has nothing to do with how you use the watch; it's just one parameter of one test in the compliance suite. There should be meaningful names like "splash-resistant", "brief imm

Re:

[Malc]

Interesting topic, which is new to me. I see that Garmin actually rates my watch as "5 ATM" rather than "50m", and when you follow the link on this part of the device spec to find out what it means, the first think you read is:

We rigorously test our devices to make sure theyâ(TM)ll survive the activities for which they were designed. You should note that even if a device is above a depth it is rated for, it might still suffer water ingression if it is subjected to an activity that creates pressure on

Re: WR50 not good enough for swimming

[Camembert]

That is indeed true for traditional watches. However the Apple watch was designed for swimming with even swimming workout modes to track your calories etc. Many people use it for swimming, and it seems to hold up just fine.

Re:WR50 not good enough for swimming

[shadowrat]

100M (10ATM) water resistance is usually considered the minimum for swimming due to the forces exerted while swimming.

I too was disappointed by this. However, i have, and continue to use my apple watch for swimming (miles in both pools and open water) and surfing. No problems yet after years of doing this.

I suspect the watches are capable of more than the minimum to meet the WR50 standard, but apple only goes after the minimum standard to cut down on warranty claims from people who would take it scuba diving and stuff.

Re:

[Falco54]

Then why are you commenting on a story about an Apple product? Please don't comment unless you have something useful, thoughtful, or witty to add to the conversation.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[arglebargle_xiv]

Possibly because this site slashvertising every single new Apple product ever gets a bit boring over time. Yeah, you've made the corners slightly more rounded and moved the title bar up by two pixels but does that really justify yet another article? Maybe there could be a weekly roundup "This week's Apple product releases" to keep everything in one place?

Re:

[SvnLyrBrto]

Other way around for me. Don't get me wrong here... I'm very far from being one of slashdot's resident Apple haters. I own many of their products (Including a watch.), like them, and get a lot of use out of them.

But this round? Today's release was seriously underwhelming; leaving me no compelling reason to upgrade. A refreshed form factor and faster charging is a great big nothingburger versus the Series 6. Where is the glucose monitoring that was oh so hyped? Or ANY new or improved biometrics? The p

Re:I own no Apple products and like it.

[Yaztromo]

But this round? Today's release was seriously underwhelming; leaving me no compelling reason to upgrade. A refreshed form factor and faster charging is a great big nothingburger versus the Series 6. Where is the glucose monitoring that was oh so hyped? Or ANY new or improved biometrics? The phone's camera improvements look nice. But not even the best, top-of-the-line, DSLR made will turn me into a good photographer. I just don't have the eye for it. And that means the new CPU, whose improvements look to be mostly aimed at the camera and photographers, is equally "meh". So I'll be keeping my iPhone 12 this round as well.

"People who bought last years model" are not Apple's target market for these devices. Their targets are those people who need to replace their ageing iPhone 7 and 8's, and Apple Watch Series 1 through 4s.

The lifespan of these products is supposed to be greater than 1 year. Incremental improvements are targeted at the people using 3 - 4 year old gear that is about to become vintage, and not people who have what yesterday was their latest-and-greatest products.

Yaz

Dumbwatches!

[antdude]

I still wear my rad(ical) Casio Data Bank 150 watch. ;)

Harley Riders need not apply!

[ArhcAngel]

If you ride a Hog, do yourself a favor and select a device that doesn't die if you ride! [nbcnewyork.com]

Re:

[DontBeAMoran]

So basically any modern smartphones with such an image stabilizer mechanism, which is not limited to iPhones.

Re:

[omnichad]

Just make sure you have no optical image stabilization or any mechanical parts. Or an early gen iPod with a hard drive. It's all common sense and can be avoided if you don't want the best possible camera.

I miss /.

[ArhcAngel]

SoyBoy milk toast activist have invaded /.
Too bad. I've been a reader since they went online.
Enjoy your short lived "rebellion" against smart people @ss holes!