The Apple Watch SE is set to start shipping on Friday, September 18, but the first hands-on reviews of Apple’s low-cost wearable are now appearing online. Review units were provided to several journalists and media outlets, and so far from Chris Velazco Engadget And from Victoria Song Gizmodo After 24-hours with the wearable shared their opinion.
Given that the Apple Watch SE is a low-cost option that doesn’t introduce any new features, reviews have focused on the balance of features that Apple has chosen to include in the device. Still, the Apple Watch SE is considered a welcome, good-value-for-money option. The song outlines the features the Apple Watch SE lacks:
For starters, you’re not getting an electrocardiogram app or a new blood oxygen-monitoring sensor for atrial fibrillation detection. You also don’t get the always-on screen introduced with the Series 5, the Series 6’s faster S6 chip, or the U1 ultra wideband chip. From a charging perspective, the Series 6 is slightly faster from zero to 100% in 1.5 hours vs. 2.5 hours on the Watch SE. As for WiFi, the Series 6 supports 2.4GHz and 5GHz, while the SE only supports the former.
Despite these flaws, he was positive about the Apple Watch SE’s performance, saying it “doesn’t give up as much as you think.”
The S5 chip, so far, is slick. I have no complaints about downloading or launching the app. I’m sure the S6 chip is faster, but the S5 is simply better than “fast enough”. So far, tilt-to-wake responsiveness for the Watch SE’s display is also pretty great. I’m not sure if it’s just my memory failing me, but being in series 2, 3 and 4 makes it feel faster than I remember. Maybe it’s the S5 chip?
The Velazco was similarly positive in terms of performance and battery life:
In other words, you can expect performance that was — until recently — Apple’s flagship wearable. I didn’t have enough time to fully test the SE’s battery life, but I easily got through a full day of use with the Series 5 when it was on, and the SE could have lasted a bit longer because it doesn’t have an always-on display to worry about.
Song commented on the lack of an always-on display found on the Apple Watch Series 5 and Series 6, but said “I don’t feel cheated by not having an always-on display.”
Unsurprisingly, reviews tended to express some disappointment about the Apple Watch SE’s lack of advanced health features like ECG and blood oxygen monitoring, but ultimately resolved that they weren’t critical. Song says:
ECG and atrial fibrillation notifications are great innovations. But unless you have a heart condition or are in the age range at risk for Afib, it’s not the most necessary feature. The lack of an ECG doesn’t mean you won’t receive a potentially life-saving warning if your heart rate suddenly spikes or exceeds your normal range. It’s something that comes with watchOS—even the Series 3 has that capability. As for blood oxygen-monitoring… this is also a great innovation that, generally speaking, wearable companies have yet to figure out how to implement in a truly meaningful way… you’re not missing out on a huge thing if you don’t have blood oxygen-monitoring most of the time. That’s what makes the Apple Watch great.
Vellazo echoed the sentiment, saying that the Apple Watch SE “still has most of the health-focused features that Apple has rolled out over the past few years, such as fall detection, alerts for excessive ambient noise, and non-ECG-based heart rate monitoring.”
Overall, Velazco describes the SE as “a mixed bag of features and best parts from the last few years of Apple Watch history” and notes that it’s “surprisingly similar” to the high-end Apple Watch Series 6. Gunn said the Apple Watch SE “looks like an extremely good deal… Apple may have a real affordable winner on its hands.”
A more detailed, long-form review of the Apple Watch SE is coming soon.
