RAM for Apple Watch 6 is incorrect[edit]

I don’t know how to edit tables, but the RAM listing for Apple Watch 6 is incorrect. It should be 1GB, not 1.5GB. See the references already provided in the table. 82.35.104.37 (talk) 16:28, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the table accordingly, as there have been no objections, and also updated the rest of them, as 1 twitter source for 1.5GB for the series 7 doesn't seem enough. Caleb Evans (talk) 21:54, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed split[edit]

I propose that this article should be split into different pages for each Apple Watch model, or at the very least the Apple Watch Ultra, which has significant hardware and software differences. The current article, in particular the comparison of models table, is lengthy and hard to read. This split would also bring the Apple Watch in line with the iPhone, iPad, and Mac families which have their own individual articles for each device. TechnicalNewt (talk) 08:25, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, when that was tried previously, to be blunt and plain-spoken, nobody really put in the effort to make the Series articles decent, overall. IIRC, each separate Series article basically just seemed to be a rehash of portions of the mothership article relating to Apple Watch overall, with a few Series-specific tech specs and some miscellanea thrown in (and maybe a review).
So eventually action was taken to bring those articles back into the fold.
During a period of heavy Wikipedia editing, like 2007-2015, it probably would have been simpler to get those individual articles made and filled with details, so that they could stand alone. (Given that iPhone and iPad models were first produced during that time, it's easy to see why the tradition of each model have its own page began.)
I'm not necessarily opposed to each Series having its own article, but really would want to hear that people are pledging to do the work to make those proposed articles stand up on their own. Infoman99 (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I'd rather this article be improved than create stubs that no one but Wikignomes will touch for the next ten years. DFlhb (talk) 18:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do think the Ultra needs its own article. It is significantly different from the other Watch models to date, and will apparently be getting updates going forward similar to the annual updates the regular Watches receive. —Locke Cole • t • c 22:00, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
+1 DFlhb (talk) 15:13, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, if each IPhone has it's own page, each watch model should as well. We must act in the best interests of the consumer, as benevolent Wikipedia gods. RyanLovesWikihow (talk) 03:18, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily about apple watch Ultra but I think there should be different pages for each of the apple watch generations which can be linked to this main page. Moreover, in coming years, there will be more apple watch generations and it will be too much information on a single page. 69.157.98.196 (talk) 18:42, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise?

I propose adding info-boxes for each generation to summarise the specifications and key data, making it a lot easier to parse than the current long-form paragraphs. Mike (talk) 08:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, prose is always more important than infoboxes, especially when references in the latter are often lacking. I'm not averse to this suggestion, just wondering if there's enough accompanying prose at present to prevent there being a lot of blank spaces when the infoboxes are added. Seasider53 (talk) 22:38, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Condensing Page to the Basics

In the spirit of adding separate pages for each model, I propose keeping the basic information about the Apple Watch release but moving the Hardware, Software, and Model Comparison to a separate page at least. Might I also suggest moving the Reception topic closer to the Unveiling and Release topic? It may have even been intended as Perception. The current break between the two with the charts and tables makes the page even more overwhelming to digest.--Supergirl02 (talk) 22:52, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree as it will be hard to navigate if you want every thing in 1 page and change en to simple in the link and everything will be simplified
' 2406:7400:63:AE0A:5D79:CCC5:6C1:3C9A (talk) 12:58, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Split Apple Watch Ultra[edit]

It has been suggested that this page should be split into a new page titled Apple Watch Ultra. (discuss)

Even if each generational model does not get split into their own individual page, I propose splitting the Ultra line into a seperate page. With the announcement of the Apple Watch Ultra 2, it is clear that Apple sees the device as a seperate product line similar to the iPhone Pro series. The Ultra line of watches have a specific target market (hiking, trailing, & diving) and have enough distinct hardware and software features that set them apart from standard Apple Watch models even further than typical generational upgrades. TechnicalNewt (talk) 04:25, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The Apple Watch Ultra is like the Pro iPhone at this point, and for the most part, Pro iPhones are separate products and separate articles than their normal ones. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 17:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support as well. Per my comments above in the other proposed split. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:45, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Changed my mind since the discussion above, to Oppose. They're variants of the same product more than they are distinct product lines. In that sense they're more comparable to the iPhones Pro (no separate article) than to the MacBook Pros (separate article) and iPads Pro (separate article). Both products get refreshed simultaneously rather than at different intervals, and most new features are common to both products (this year: new chips, higher brightness, Siri on-device, double-tap, carbon neutral, increased disk space); splitting them would result in high duplication of content, and would also make it harder to compare and contrast both models. DFlhb (talk) 06:38, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The Apple Watch Page does need a split. Its size is currently at 206,139 bytes. And that as time goes on Apple will release new watch models . CosXZ (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:21, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But if the case is split. I would split the SE not the Ultra CosXZ (talk) 19:36, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i agree on splitting the apple watch ultra into its own page, but i also think is should happen with the SE Ckitty2010 (talk) 19:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Ckitty2010 CosXZ (talk) 23:14, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Ultra is significant enough for its own page. Macpro8921 (talk) 06:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Ultra is a product line separate from the Series line daruda (talk) 12:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of information for the original original model[edit]

Before the Apple Watch Series 1, there was a lineup of a few other watches such as the Apple Watch edition. These models are not documented in this article even though they are just as important as the others.

Thank you, ItsCheck (talk) 04:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Apple Watch health monitoring patent dispute for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Apple Watch health monitoring patent dispute is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apple Watch health monitoring patent dispute until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:37, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Categories