Can you use a cellular watch with a prepaid carrier? Here's what I found out
Smartwatches have been around in some form for a little over a decade, and while Wi-Fi-only models remain the most common, there is growing interest in cellular watches as well. Typically, cellular smartwatches target postpaid customers of Verizon, T-Mobile, or AT&T. But can you use a cellular smartwatch with your prepaid plan? The answer isn't simply yes or no.
While more than a dozen carriers technically support cellular watches, compatibility varies greatly by provider. Although Samsung, Apple, and Google dominate the cellular watch market, smartwatch compatibility often depends on specific brands and even models. Some prepaid carriers only support Apple Watch, while others exclusively cater to certain Google Pixel Watch or Samsung Galaxy Watch models.
Below, we explore all prepaid providers currently offering smartwatch support. If you don't see a particular carrier listed, it's likely because they don't offer formal support — I meticulously checked through dozens of companies to ensure accuracy, but as I'm human, there's always a chance some smaller providers were missed.
Do you use a cellular smartwatch in the US, if so, via what carrier?
0 votes
Yes, I have service through Verizon
NaN %
Yes, I have service through T-Mobile
NaN %
Yes, I have service through AT&T
NaN %
Yes, I use a prepaid service
NaN %
Verizon Prepaid
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority
As it turns out, Verizon is the only one of the big three carriers that offers smartwatch service to its prepaid customers as well.
Verizon provides a standalone prepaid smartwatch plan for $10 per month, offering unlimited 5G and 4G LTE with 15GB of high-speed data. Supported devices include: Apple Watch Series 9 or newer
Apple Watch Ultra 2 or newer
Apple Watch SE 2 or newer
Google Pixel Watch or newer
Samsung Galaxy Watch 5 or newer
Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 and 6 Classic
Samsung Galaxy Watch 5 Pro
Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra
Bottom line, Verizon Prepaid has the broadest smartwatch compatibility but tends to be pricier.
US Mobile
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority
US Mobile provides cellular watch support as a $6.50 monthly add-on or as a free perk with its Unlimited Premium plan. However, this support requires the Warp (Verizon) network; neither Light Speed (T-Mobile) nor Dark Star (AT&T) packages offer smartwatch connectivity. Supported watches include: Apple Watch Series 4 or later
Pixel Watch
Although US Mobile doesn't officially list Apple Watch Ultra or SE models, several user comments on Reddit confirm that these models should play nicely as well.
Google Fi
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority
Google Fi Wireless includes smartwatch support as a free perk on all unlimited plans. It offers robust Samsung Galaxy Watch support, rivaling Verizon prepaid, though Galaxy Watch Classic models aren't supported. Compatible watches include: Original Pixel Watch or newer
Samsung Galaxy Watch Ultra or newer
Galaxy Watch 5 or newer (excluding Classic models)
As you might have noticed, Google Fi doesn't officially support Apple Watches. This isn't surprising since it doesn't directly sell Apple products at all. Of course, there are workarounds for the iPhone, so what about the Apple Watch? While it might be possible to do this by side-loading an eSIM profile, you're much more likely to run into issues when you try to run a device that's not officially supported like this.
Visible
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority
Visible gives you the same great network as Verizon and is even owned by Big Red. Although you won't find as wide of device support, Visible is a great alternative to Verizon and even offers the feature for free on its $40 Visible Plus Pro. Basic and Visible Plus users can also get support for an additional $10 per month.
The list of compatible watches are: Google Pixel Watch 2 or newer
Apple Watch Series 4 or later
Visible initially supported only Apple Watches, but introduced compatibility with Pixel Watches earlier this month. Currently, Samsung watches aren't officially supported, though this might change given Verizon's gradual expansion of watch support to several MVNO partners, including US Mobile, Spectrum Mobile, and Xfinity Mobile.
Metro by T-Mobile
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority
Just like Cricket Wireless, Metro by T-Mobile doesn't offer smartwatch connectivity for free, but does give you the ability to connect the Apple Watch or the Galaxy Watch FE for $10 a month. Although Metro only sells and officially supports the Galaxy Watch FE, it is worth noting that some people have had success bringing other unlocked Galaxy Watch models over to the network, but there's no guarantee it will work, and I'd recommend contacting Metro customer service before adding the plan.
Officially, the following models should work: Apple Watch Series 3 and later
Samsung Galaxy Watch FE
While Metro isn't for everyone, in-store support and brand-new plans make it much more compelling than it once was.
Boost Mobile
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority
Boost Mobile is technically a postpaid carrier, but it offers limited smartwatch support via a $10 monthly plan that is eligible for both postpaid and prepaid accounts. The following devices are officially supported: Apple Watch Series 10 or newer
Apple Watch SE 2 or newer
Apple Watch Ultra 2 or newer
Although it may be possible to get older models to work if you bring them yourself, from what I could dig up, Boost Mobile only officially supports the latest Apple Watch products.
Spectrum Mobile
Spectrum Mobile is an extra service offered to Spectrum subscribers, and while there are a variety of plans, none of them directly include watch support. Thankfully, you can add on support for just $10 a month. You'll be able to pick up the following devices: Samsung Galaxy Watch 6 or newer, Ultra or newer
Apple Watch SE, Watch Series 9 or newer
Xfinity Mobile
Xfinity subscribers have the option of Xfinity Mobile, which, just like Spectrum, runs on Verizon's network. Just like nearly everyone else who charges to add on cellular watch support, you'll pay $10 per month for the privilege. Here are the models supported: Google Pixel Watch 3 or newer
Samsung Watch 7 and Watch Ultra
Apple Watch SE, Watch Series 9, Watch Ultra 2 or newer
Cricket Wireless
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority
Cricket offers smartwatch connectivity for an additional $10 monthly but only supports Apple Watch Series 4 or later. If you are a Google or Samsung fan, you'll have to stick to a Wi-Fi watch if Cricket is your network of choice. Honestly, this is pretty disappointing when you consider that there are no other AT&T-based MVNOs that offer watch support. If you live in an area with AT&T is the strongest choice and you want a wider array of models and brand support, you really have no choice but to stick with postpaid here.
Should you bring your own smartwatch or buy from the carrier?
Jimmy Westenberg / Android Authority
Left to right: Samsung Galaxy Watch 4, Apple Watch Series 6
If you don't already own a cellular smartwatch, buying directly from your prepaid carrier is often advisable. Here's why: Cellular watches typically aren't carrier-locked, ensuring flexibility as long as your network supports your model.
Buying directly reduces compatibility risks and technical headaches.
Prepaid carriers sometimes offer cellular watches below retail prices without requiring long-term commitments.
If you do want to bring your own cellular smartwatch, I highly recommend contacting the carrier, as it should be able to do an IMEI lookup to determine if your exact watch will work or not.
Which prepaid carrier has the best smartwatch support?
Edgar Cervantes / Android Authority
The best is sort of subjective here and depends on a variety of factors, including brand and model preference, network preference, and the list goes on. Still, if I could only recommend three, it would be Verizon Prepaid, Google Fi, or Visible.
If you care about having the widest possible device compatibility? You can't go wrong with Verizon Prepaid. While Verizon Prepaid's phone plans might be more expensive than most of the competition, the good news is Verizon's watch support is stand-alone and priced similarly to most of its competitors.
If you care about value but also want a wide range of support, I'd recommend Google Fi Wireless for Galaxy Watch fans looking for great service and solid pricing, and Visible is perfect for Apple Watch fans. You'll find that either carrier also offers Google Pixel Watch support as well, and Galaxy fans just have to decide whether they prefer the T-Mobile or Verizon network for service.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL): 'This Stock Should Be Up Much More,' Says Jim Cramer
We recently published . Alphabet Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOGL) is one of the stocks Jim Cramer recently discussed. Cramer regularly discussed tech mega-cap Alphabet Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOGL) ahead of its earnings. The firm's shares have reversed course in July and are up by 1.9% year-to-date, primarily due to July's 9.9% gain. Before the report, Cramer was explicit in sharing that he regretted selling Alphabet Inc. (NASDAQ:GOOGL)'s stock. This time, he discussed the firm's businesses and shared that the stock should be higher after the earnings: [GOOGL]'[On earnings report] Yeah, look cloud was important. I think the big focus is frankly, uh, that paid clicks picked up 4%. I mean I was thinking paid clips might be down, I was worried that I felt that this was the beginning of the erosion and the cannibalization versus Gemini. That was completely wrong. YouTube up 200 million. Really, really fantastic. . . .Look the story here is this that the more chips that they get, better they're doing. They have so much demand I was quite surprised. 20 New Technology Trends for 2024 'This stock should be up much more than that. While we acknowledge the potential of GOOGL as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the . READ NEXT: 30 Stocks That Should Double in 3 Years and 11 Hidden AI Stocks to Buy Right Now. Disclosure: None. This article is originally published at Insider Monkey.
Forbes
41 minutes ago
- Forbes
OpenAI: ChatGPT Wants Legal Rights. You Need The Right To Be Forgotten.
As systems like ChatGPT move toward achieving legal privilege, the boundaries between identity, ... More memory, and control are being redefined, often without consent. When OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently stated that conversations with ChatGPT should one day enjoy legal privilege, similar to those between a patient and a doctor or a client and a lawyer, he wasn't just referring to privacy. He was pointing toward a redefinition of the relationship between people and machines. Legal privilege protects the confidentiality of certain relationships. What's said between a patient and physician, or a client and attorney, is shielded from subpoenas, court disclosures, and adversarial scrutiny. Extending that same protection to AI interactions means treating the machine not as a tool, but as a participant in a privileged exchange. This is more than a policy suggestion. It's a legal and philosophical shift with consequences no one has fully reckoned with. It also comes at a time when the legal system is already being tested. In The New York Times' lawsuit against OpenAI, the paper has asked courts to compel the company to preserve all user prompts, including those the company says are deleted after 30 days. That request is under appeal. Meanwhile, Altman's suggestion that AI chats deserve legal shielding raises the question: if they're protected like therapy sessions, what does that make the system listening on the other side? People are already treating AI like a confidant. According to Common Sense Media, three in four teens have used an AI chatbot, and over half say they trust the advice they receive at least somewhat. Many describe a growing reliance on these systems to process everything from school to relationships. Altman himself has called this emotional over-reliance 'really bad and dangerous.' But it's not just teens. AI is being integrated into therapeutic apps, career coaching tools, HR systems, and even spiritual guidance platforms. In some healthcare environments, AI is being used to draft communications and interpret lab data before a doctor even sees it. These systems are present in decision-making loops, and their presence is being normalized. This is how it begins. First, protect the conversation. Then, protect the system. What starts as a conversation about privacy quickly evolves into a framework centered on rights, autonomy, and standing. We've seen this play out before. In U.S. law, corporations were gradually granted legal personhood, not because they were considered people, but because they acted as consistent legal entities that required protection and responsibility under the law. Over time, personhood became a useful legal fiction. Something similar may now be unfolding with AI—not because it is sentient, but because it interacts with humans in ways that mimic protected relationships. The law adapts to behavior, not just biology. The Legal System Isn't Ready For What ChatGPT Is Proposing There is no global consensus on how to regulate AI memory, consent, or interaction logs. The EU's AI Act introduces transparency mandates, but memory rights are still undefined. In the U.S., state-level data laws conflict, and no federal policy yet addresses what it means to interact with a memory‑enabled AI. (See my recent Forbes piece on why AI regulation is effectively dead—and what businesses need to do instead.) The physical location of a server is not just a technical detail. It's a legal trigger. A conversation stored on a server in California is subject to U.S. law. If it's routed through Frankfurt, it becomes subject to GDPR. When AI systems retain memory, context, and inferred consent, the server location effectively defines sovereignty over the interaction. That has implications for litigation, subpoenas, discovery, and privacy. 'I almost wish they'd go ahead and grant these AI systems legal personhood, as if they were therapists or clergy,' says technology attorney John Kheit. 'Because if they are, then all this passive data collection starts to look a lot like an illegal wiretap, which would thereby give humans privacy rights/protections when interacting with AI. It would also, then, require AI providers to disclose 'other parties to the conversation', i.e., that the provider is a mining party reading the data, and if advertisers are getting at the private conversations.' Infrastructure choices are now geopolitical. They determine how AI systems behave under pressure and what recourse a user has when something goes wrong. And yet, underneath all of this is a deeper motive: monetization. But they won't be the only ones asking questions. Every conversation becomes a four-party exchange: the user, the model, the platform's internal optimization engine, and the advertiser paying for access. It's entirely plausible for a prompt about the Pittsburgh Steelers to return a response that subtly inserts 'Buy Coke' mid-paragraph. Not because it's relevant—but because it's profitable. Recent research shows users are significantly worse at detecting unlabeled advertising when it's embedded inside AI-generated content. Worse, these ads are initially rated as more trustworthy until users discover they are, in fact, ads. At that point, they're also rated as more manipulative. 'In experiential marketing, trust is everything,' says Jeff Boedges, Founder of Soho Experiential. 'You can't fake a relationship, and you can't exploit it without consequence. If AI systems are going to remember us, recommend things to us, or even influence us, we'd better know exactly what they remember and why. Otherwise, it's not personalization. It's manipulation.' Now consider what happens when advertisers gain access to psychographic modeling: 'Which users are most emotionally vulnerable to this type of message?' becomes a viable, queryable prompt. And AI systems don't need to hand over spreadsheets to be valuable. With retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) and reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), the model can shape language in real time based on prior sentiment, clickstream data, and fine-tuned advertiser objectives. This isn't hypothetical—it's how modern adtech already works. At that point, the chatbot isn't a chatbot. It's a simulation environment for influence. It is trained to build trust, then designed to monetize it. Your behavioral patterns become the product. Your emotional response becomes the target for optimization. The business model is clear: black-boxed behavioral insight at scale, delivered through helpful design, hidden from oversight, and nearly impossible to detect. We are entering a phase where machines will be granted protections without personhood, and influence without responsibility. If a user confesses to a crime during a legally privileged AI session, is the platform compelled to report it or remain silent? And who makes that decision? These are not edge cases. They are coming quickly. And they are coming at scale. Why ChatGPT Must Remain A Model—and Why Humans Must Regain Consent As generative AI systems evolve into persistent, adaptive participants in daily life, it becomes more important than ever to reassert a boundary: models must remain models. They cannot assume the legal, ethical, or sovereign status of a person quietly. And the humans generating the data that train these systems must retain explicit rights over their contributions. What we need is a standardized, enforceable system of data contracting, one that allows individuals to knowingly, transparently, and voluntarily contribute data for a limited, mutually agreed-upon window of use. This contract must be clear on scope, duration, value exchange, and termination. And it must treat data ownership as immutable, even during active use. That means: When a contract ends, or if a company violates its terms, the individual's data must, by law, be erased from the model, its training set, and any derivative products. 'Right to be forgotten' must mean what it says. But to be credible, this system must work both ways: This isn't just about ethics. It's about enforceable, mutual accountability. The user experience must be seamless and scalable. The legal backend must be secure. And the result should be a new economic compact—where humans know when they're participating in AI development, and models are kept in their place. ChatGPT Is Changing the Risk Surface. Here's How to Respond. The shift toward AI systems as quasi-participants—not just tools—will reshape legal exposure, data governance, product liability, and customer trust. Whether you're building AI, integrating it into your workflows, or using it to interface with customers, here are five things you should be doing immediately: ChatGPT May Get Privilege. You Should Get the Right to Be Forgotten. This moment isn't just about what AI can do. It's about what your business is letting it do, what it remembers, and who gets access to that memory. Ignore that, and you're not just risking privacy violations, you're risking long-term brand trust and regulatory blowback. At the very least, we need a legal framework that defines how AI memory is governed. Not as a priest, not as a doctor, and not as a partner, but perhaps as a witness. Something that stores information and can be examined when context demands it, with clear boundaries on access, deletion, and use. The public conversation remains focused on privacy. But the fundamental shift is about control. And unless the legal and regulatory frameworks evolve rapidly, the terms of engagement will be set, not by policy or users, but by whoever owns the box. Which is why, in the age of AI, the right to be forgotten may become the most valuable human right we have. Not just because your data could be used against you—but because your identity itself can now be captured, modeled, and monetized in ways that persist beyond your control. Your patterns, preferences, emotional triggers, and psychological fingerprints don't disappear when the session ends. They live on inside a system that never forgets, never sleeps, and never stops optimizing. Without the ability to revoke access to your data, you don't just lose privacy. You lose leverage. You lose the ability to opt out of prediction. You lose control over how you're remembered, represented, and replicated. The right to be forgotten isn't about hiding. It's about sovereignty. And in a world where AI systems like ChatGPT will increasingly shape our choices, our identities, and our outcomes, the ability to walk away may be the last form of freedom that still belongs to you.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Broadcom is no longer the 'poor man's Nvidia' in the AI race
Artificial intelligence (AI) continues to be a key theme of Big Tech earnings, as Alphabet (GOOG, GOOGL) kicked off "Magnificent Seven" earnings with very high additional AI capital expenditure (CapEx), a positive sign for AI chipmakers. Nancy Tengler, CEO and chief investment officer of Laffer Tengler Investments, and Stacy Rasgon, managing director and senior analyst at Bernstein, share their thoughts on two major AI chip players: Nvidia (NVDA) and Broadcom (AVGO). To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Catalysts here. I think you guys are on the same page when it comes to Nvidia. You've got a buy equivalent rating on it, Stacey. Nancy likes that one. Let's talk about Broadcom for a minute because Nancy, this is one that you've liked for a while. Um, do you still like it? What are you going to be looking for from Broadcom, Nancy, going forward? Yeah, we do, Julie. I mean, it's our largest holding across all of our large cap equity strategies, member of our 12 best, our five for 25. I think, uh, and it's outperformed Nvidia pretty handily over the last year, almost double the returns for Nvidia on a trailing one year. We've always called it the poor man's Nvidia. I think we're going to have to come up with a new name. But one of the things that we're going to be paying attention to is, of course, um, the AI revenues. We we've we've seen those compound at 60 plus percent. They've announced new partnerships. We want to hear more about that. Um, it seems that the rest of the business, the rest of the chip business may have bottomed. We'd like to hear some some information and and confirmation about that. And then I just think, you know, it's just going to be about the future guidance. And Hock Tan has demonstrated he can acquire companies, make them accretive quickly. We bought the stock when, uh, it sold off on the computer associates that used to be the name of the company they acquired. Wall Street didn't like it. They turned it around, made it a very positive acquisition. So we we'll be listening for that, too. Are there any acquisitions they're they're planning to make? And I certainly hope one of them is not Intel. Yeah, that would be something. Uh, Stacey, um, along with Nvidia, is Broadcom sort of, are those the sort of must-owns in the chip space? Yeah, I frankly, in in chips, it hasn't been great outside of AI, right? I mean, AI's been super strong. The analog, more diversified guys, like the people who were playing those on cyclical recovery, some of those prints so far this earning season have not not been so great. There's worries about pull forward and everything else. Again, you got companies like Intel which which frankly are a basket case. I mean, if it wasn't for AI, this space would not be doing very well. So I I do like the AI names. We cover Nvidia and Broadcom. I like them both. Um, Broadcom is is just more expensive than it used to be. That's the only only, you know, it was Right. I guess hence Nancy's comment that they're going to have to rename it from the poor man's video. Yeah, and look, you know, you got to remember Broadcom like not all that long ago was like 16 times earnings, like now it's like the multiple's like like doubled, right? Um, they are showing a lot of AI upside. A lot of that comes next year, but they they're clearly, I mean even the last earnings call a couple of months ago, they're clearly calling for upside in their AI revenues next year on more inference demand. They're a massive player on AI networking, right? So there's there there's a a big play there. And and and Nancy, I think, is right, they have the core semi business which admittedly has been lousy. They're not the only ones. Everybody in though in those kinds of markets has has been lousy. It it doesn't look like getting any worse at least. I we can we can argue about when it's going to start getting better. I don't know yet, but at least it isn't getting worse. Um, you know, if you're looking in in into the near term, I mean you could argue, again, we we like both stocks. Nvidia is cheaper. And you know, you know, they just they just got their China licenses, um, reinstated, so there's probably more upside to their AI numbers this year for Nvidia versus Broadcom. I think the Broadcom AI upside comes next year and Broadcom's a little more expensive. Um, and then there's a whole ASIC versus, you know, GPU debate. But I I think you can own them both. Like I I I like them both. And again, AI is the only thing in semis right now that fundamentally is really working.
