Is the Apple Watch Waterproof? Splash, Shower, Swimming Tests [Video]

POST

MAIL

Posted April 24, 2015 at 1:58pm by Shalom Levytam

Check out this video that puts the waterproofness of the Apple Watch to the test.

FoneFox in Australia was one of the first to get an Apple Watch and they tested it by splashing the smartwatch, taking a shower with it, submerging it in a bucket of water and then finally going swimming.

Surprisingly, despite not being rated as waterproof, the watch had no trouble going for a 15 minute swim!

Take a look at the video below and please follow iClarified on Twitter, Facebook, or RSS for more!

[via Alex]

Follow iClarified

Add Comment

Would you like to be notified when someone replies or adds a new comment?

Yes (All Threads)

Yes (This Thread Only)

Notifications

Would you like to be notified when we post a new Apple news article or tutorial?

Yes

Comments (18)

You must login or register to add a comment...

Add Comment

yas9in - April 25, 2015 at 2:42am

It might actually interest you all to know that "waterproof" is really a term that can have several meanings. in case of the Apple Watch, it is rated at IPX7 (see IEC standard 60529) which means that while it hasn't been certified for any kind of dust protection, it is actually certified to be submerged up to one metre (1000 mm) under water without any damage. most other digital watches (e.g: Suunto, G-Shock, etc. ) are usually rated at IPX8 or higher. taking it any further than one metre would be a risk and in the case of swimming, there's also the risk of Chlorine ruining the watch and it's bands; or if you have a leather band, water, even from washing your hands will ruin it after some time. Liquipel is always a good way to go though. Of course one does wonder how this compares against the sometimes seemingly completely waterproof casings (up to 300-400 m) of luxury Swiss watches Apple is trying to compete with here. but personally I think IPX7 is a good rating for a day-to-day watch.

Reply · Like

PaladinLV - April 25, 2015 at 7:58am

It's water resistant up to 1 meter NOT water proof. All the semantics in the world won't change it.

Reply · Like

gamerscul9870 - April 25, 2015 at 1:05pm

So basically waterproof phone cases or even putting a phone in a bag to protect from water won't help! Good thought on that.

Reply · Like

yas9in - April 25, 2015 at 3:42pm

in these cases, waterproof=water resistant because it means how much resistance the watch shows to water entering it and ruining the electronics. but in the case of mechanical watches you're right as resistance just means how much water pressure it can take before the casing breaks. the IEC does not rate mechanical watches on the same standards as electronic ones.

Reply · Like

gamerscul9870 - April 25, 2015 at 12:29am

Who asked you? Of course it has been done before, but claiming that is like saying "oh we've seen touch screens on different devices other than phones". What are you trying to prove?

Reply · Like

PaladinLV - April 24, 2015 at 11:42pm

NOTHING repeat NOTHING is waterproof! Water resistant yes and that resistance is measured in ATMs. If Apple does NOT inscribe on the back or front of the watch ??? ATM, it is NOT water resistant. Get it wet at your own risk.

Reply · Like

gamerscul9870 - April 25, 2015 at 12:31am

That's why liquipel was made. It waterproofs your watch, headphones, almost any phone to choose from, and tablets. Believe me, my iPhone 6, EarPods, and recently bought Apple watch are invincible in pools now.

Reply · Like

PaladinLV - April 25, 2015 at 8:03am

It makes them water resistant not PROOF. Eventually the makers of the product will realize that IF they are advertising water proof and they get sued like so many of the watch companies before them. Look at any luxury Swiss watch whether they are 10 ATMs or 1000 ATMs. They are all labeled Water Resistant.

Reply · Like

yas9in - April 25, 2015 at 3:47pm

You're right. there isn't anything that can be said to be completely waterproof but there are thresholds that anything is capable of withstanding. in the case of the apple watch, although it won't be crushed by the water until probably several hundred metres under water, the amount of water that enters the casing when submerged to one metre is low enough to be considered safe. I recommend once again that you see IEC standard 60529.

Reply · Like

PaladinLV - April 26, 2015 at 4:24am

I'm not disagree with the rating nor what the rating means. You stated the meaning very clearly and accurately. Now my question again is WHERE in the IEC does it use the words WATERPROOF. Where does Apple use the words WATERPROOF. Where does ANY known maker of "luxury watches use the word WATERPROOF. They do not and for good reason. My argument is not with you but with the article. They are making unjustified statements and claims. That's why Cook makes millions and the writers of these mislabeled and misguided articles make bupkis. ;)

Reply · Like

Mas22 - April 24, 2015 at 5:38pm

Hmm, interesting? But does anyone wear this device on their right wrist?

Reply · Like

PaladinLV - April 24, 2015 at 11:40pm

Most south paws wear it on the right!

Reply · Like

Bleh - April 24, 2015 at 4:25pm

Where's TechRax's test?

Reply · Like

Rawl - April 24, 2015 at 4:05pm

Great. Expect the same to come with the next iphone too.

Reply · Like

gamerscul9870 - April 24, 2015 at 4:13pm

There was a patent some time after the 6 and 6 plus, so it may happen!

Reply · Like

PaladinLV - April 24, 2015 at 2:40pm

"Surprisingly, despite not being rated as waterproof" You writers really need to learn about an industry and terms you are talking about. NO WATCH proclaims to be "waterproof". They only claim, if applicable, water resistance down to a tested and certified ATM. By not claiming water resistance, the responsibility falls on the owner if watch is damaged by water and not the manufacturer.

Reply · Like

gamerscul9870 - April 24, 2015 at 2:21pm

That begs the question, can liquipel make it any better?

Reply · Like