I am asking a question, but really, I would like your opinion. Why should one develop a 2.0 Apple Watch App when their 1.0 Apple Watch App has close to the same functionality? Other than the fact that the 2.0 app would have its own distinct name and one could then charge separately for it.
I was really hoping personally for a calendar UI to be incorporated with the 2.0 version, but it wasn't to be.
If the funtionality really wouldn't change between the two and you don't need any new 2.0 features, then the main reason that really sticks out to me would be that the user could use the app without needing their phone nearby.
Perhaps test your app for responsiveness. Since less communication might be required between a 2.x Watch app and the iPhone, it might respond significantly faster to user interactions, even given the exact same functionality.
I like everybody's answers. My Apple Watch app would not do well in the wild without its iPhone. The iPhone creates the data for the Apple Watch. But what would have really nailed it for me and caused me to switch to 2.0 in a heartbeat, is if they had added a calendar UI to the mix. Something that would allow the user to select two dates from a calendar.
I put in a feature enhancement in the bug reporter, but it was eventually rejected as being a duplicate of another request. I was hopeful that 2.0 would include a calendar UI, but it was not to be. Apple, please put a calendar UI into Watchkit.
I think that if the iPad could get to communicate with the Apple Watch via bluetooth, WiFi, to share data, then it would open up the Apple Watch for more use.
If v2 is an update, there is no charge to existing customers. If v2 is a new, unique app, then it's not an update.
Sometimes a v2, as an example, is pushed so the dev can mod locked items, such as name, keyword, screenshots, etc.
