Apple Watch Series 2 fully deserves the Wearable of the Year crown

It was a tough decision, but here's why we gave the big one to Series 2

Some might see our decision to pick the Apple Watch Series 2 as Wearable of the Year at the first Wareable Tech Awards as a predictable one, I can tell you it most definitely wasn't. Of all the categories, this was the most hotly contested and debated category within the team and with our panel of judges.

And rightly so. It's been a huge year for wearable tech. From standout fitness trackers that weren't all from Fitbit to Oculus Rift rivals, we weren't just talking about the usual suspects here. That tells us that the industry is in a really great place right now and we're expecting even bigger things for 2017.

Essential reading: Wareable Tech Awards 2016 winners revealed

So why did the Series 2 get our vote? It's not simply because it righted so many of the wrongs with the first Apple Watch (And there was definitely a few of those). It wasn't just about Apple understanding what people want from a smartwatch, which we spoke about in our extensive review. The consensus was that this is now a smartwatch that people will want to own.

At a time when some are questioning whether the smartwatch even has a future, the Series 2 arrived and proved that like the iPhone, the iPod and the iPad, Apple does get it right, eventually. The bigger emphasis on fitness, the vastly improved notification support, all wrapped up in a rectangular design that continues to divide, but we think looks great on the wrist. This is what we wanted from the first one.

The Apple Watch Series 2 is not perfect and we openly admit that, but unlike the original, we've all been happy to spend more time with the Series 2 because it feels a more complete package than what we've seen from Google and its Android Wear watches or even Pebble. It's starting to live up to those lofty expectations that we place on any new Apple product.

Apple will have to raise its game next year for the 2017 Wareable Tech Awards that's for sure. With more Android Wear 2.0 packing smartwatches on the way, Google and Levi's Project Jacquard just to name a couple, we're already thinking about the debating that will happen when we have to pick out the next Wearable of the Year winner.

BLACK FRIDAY SAVINGS: Hot smartwatch deals

Apple Watch Series 1
Apple Watch Series 1
Michael Kors Access Sofie - save $70
Michael Kors Access Sofie - save $70
Fitbit Versa - save $50
Fitbit Versa - save $50
Samsung Galaxy Watch - save $70
Samsung Galaxy Watch - save $70

Wareable may get a commission

What do you think?

Reply to
Your comment


  • Extraneus·

    Ugly, expensive, useless... What a joke.

    • Sgodsell·

      This Wearable site has hardly tested any devices. That includes Android Wear, Tizen, Garmin, Fitbit, Polar, and many others. I am beginning to think this is a site specifically here as a front to pump up Apples watch.

      There is still so many glaring things wrong with Apples watch. Like the watch face is still off for most of its life. Whereas others that you have tested will have the watch face on all the time. But then you will give them a bad battery life rating. However they will give you an option to have the watch face off just like the Apple watch. Did you do that kind of testing, of course not. Once this is done you will get superior battery life in comparison to Apples watch. Also you cannot add or change watch faces. Apple released a Nike Apple watch and a Hermes Apple watch. Both of which offer you some unique watch faces that you cannot get on any other Apple watch. Other platforms all their users to add, change, or customize watch faces. A big glaring omission is when the vast majority of the world use Android, then the Apple watch is not even an option, because you need an iPhone. Apples watch doesn't even support their own iPod touches, or iPads. As far as looks are concerned, I personally prefer a smart watch to look like a regular watch. Apples lower tier smart watch is made of more fragile materials in comparison to other smart watches that start with stainless steel. Yet you have to pay an additional $200 for the steel cased Apple watch.

      As far as apps are concerned, developers still have to create an iPhone app, even if they want a native watch app. The native watch app has to use the iPhone app for all external communication and information to the outside web, or world in general. Other smart watch platforms with 3rd party apps can communicate with external devices directly without using the phone to do it. There is still so much wrong with Apples watch. Especially when other platforms have standalone apps for the watches. They can function with out a phone. Some can even install apps without using a phone to upload the apps.

      Out of all this. If you have an iPhone then right now, then it's the best smart watch for an iPhone user right now.

  • Rumor·

    This is seriously a joke. Apple fan boys are at it again. Not to say it's not a decent watch, but an award for best watch of the yr? Hahaha! Someone's delusional.