WRONG -> Once the watch advances to the point of not needing the iPhone to make it function it might be interesting to have, but until then I'll just use my non-distracting analogue watch which tells me the time.
WRONG - > think the watch will eventually be banned from use while driving
WRONG -> distracting to have messages flashing on your wrist while trying to drive
WRONG-> , struggling with the digital crown while you drive head on into a semi-truck.
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/182238/next-generation-apple-watch-rumored-to-boast-more-sensors-fitness-capabilities/40#post_2596178" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span><div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Pharmkid02</strong> <a href="/t/182238/next-generation-apple-watch-rumored-to-boast-more-sensors-fitness-capabilities/40#post_2596178"><img src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" class="inlineimg" alt="View Post"/></a><br/><br/>When will samsung copy the crown feature of the apple watch?</div></div><p> </p>
they already have a prototype ready in their labs ready for December
One thing I noticed during the presentation, an inconsistency.
The new iPhones were demoed to be able to acknowledge a payment only through the use of Touch ID. The new apple watch was also shown to be able to be waved in front of an NFC device for payment. So my thought is that the watch contains NFC, but why and how is there an inconsistency in the need to authenticate with your finger print via Touch ID?
I wonder if the pairing process between Phone & Watch entails a TouchID press, then the two become "married" at the sub-atomic level of TouchID. Hmmmm.
I'm geeking out big time about the watch. I was STARING at Apple's watch-pages. I had the same urges that my six year old would have if I held ice cream in front of her face but wouldn't give it to her. Embarrassing Confession: I could feel how much I wanted to have it.
It was the same with the very fist iPod Nano. I wasn't even a music guy, and when I first saw it with that "Gimme, gimmie that" sing-songy commerical where the hands were waving it around, I had a 2GB one for $249 two days later. Their projects are magic.
It would be so shockingly out of character for Apple to not iteratively improve a device that I think it essentially is assumed that v2 will improve the hardware and software.
When I look at the difference between the vain glory demo and the original iPhone Steve introduced I find myself trying to imagine what a similar difference would look like between Apple Watch now and just a few years from now.
I've got to believe Apple will allow 3rd party straps for the watch.
Be difficult to prevent it. It appears entirely mechanical. I'm sure there are companies already trying to tool up prototypes based on the video footage to get them ready to sell as close to the product release as possible.
If later generations include sensors in the strap and there's a verification between watch and strap then that would be more difficult.
If this device had debuted at a Samsung convention it would have been laughed off the stage but because its got a fruit logo on it, its suddenly amazing and revolutionary.
Holy crap, the first gen isn't even available for presale yet. FFS give it a rest on the useless predictions.
And no, I'm not buying one, ever, so it doesn't even matter to me. I'll be amazingly lucky if I end up with a new iPhone to replace my iPhone 4, within the next two years. I've not worn watches or any other decor of any kind since early high school, and I've no interest in wearable tech.
One thing I noticed during the presentation, an inconsistency.
The new iPhones were demoed to be able to acknowledge a payment only through the use of Touch ID. The new apple watch was also shown to be able to be waved in front of an NFC device for payment. So my thought is that the watch contains NFC, but why and how is there an inconsistency in the need to authenticate with your finger print via Touch ID?
This was answered by Apple after the event, iirc. Pass code plus skin contact.
The Apple Watch as an integrated product will, much like what the iPad did for tablet computing and the iPhone did for mobile phones, redefine the entire smartwatch product category. Of course it will continue to evolve across all fronts including hardware, software, human interaction, machine-to-machine (M2M) interaction, internet of things (IoT), and highly contextual and immersive integration with other products including health care, entertainment, automotive, transportation, safety, remote sensing, ... etc. The Apple Watch is not a standalone device or even just a watch, it's another highly intelligent node and human and machine interaction point in the ever expanding Apple Connected Ecosystem.
One takeaway from the Apple Watch announcement that I'm not seeing anyone talking about on these hardware obsessed gadget sites is the stunning user experience of the Apple Watch software and included applications. Just as we've seen user experience concepts and workflows migrate from IOS into the OS X space I fully expect we're going to see Apple Watch software influences find their way into iPad, iPhone, Mac, and Apple TV. Hardware, fabrication, and manufacturing technologies will continue to give Apple and its competitors more options for miniaturization, energy utilization, performance, and form factors. But the thing that makes all of those physical qualities meaningful is the software, user experience, and the connectedness of Apple products. Nobody is even close to Apple in this regard - today. As long as Apple's competitors keep fooling themselves into believing that they can beat Apple based on gigahertz, megapixels, colors, shapes, sizes, and price they will never even catch up to Apple in the future, and Apple will never stand still.
The Apple Watch as an integrated product will, much like what the iPad did for tablet computing and the iPhone did for mobile phones, redefine the entire smartwatch product category. Of course it will continue to evolve across all fronts including hardware, software, human interaction, machine-to-machine (M2M) interaction, internet of things (IoT), and highly contextual and immersive integration with other products including health care, entertainment, automotive, transportation, safety, remote sensing, ... etc. The Apple Watch is not a standalone device or even just a watch, it's another highly intelligent node and human and machine interaction point in the ever expanding Apple Connected Ecosystem.
One takeaway from the Apple Watch announcement that I'm not seeing anyone talking about on these hardware obsessed gadget sites is the stunning user experience of the Apple Watch software and included applications. Just as we've seen user experience concepts and workflows migrate from IOS into the OS X space I fully expect we're going to see Apple Watch software influences find their way into iPad, iPhone, Mac, and Apple TV. Hardware, fabrication, and manufacturing technologies will continue to give Apple and its competitors more options for miniaturization, energy utilization, performance, and form factors. But the thing that makes all of those physical qualities meaningful is the software, user experience, and the connectedness of Apple products. Nobody is even close to Apple in this regard - today. As long as Apple's competitors keep fooling themselves into believing that they can beat Apple based on gigahertz, megapixels, colors, shapes, sizes, and price they will never even catch up to Apple in the future, and Apple will never stand still.
I'm not seeing anyone talking about the stunning user experience of the Apple Watch software and included applications.
That's something odd about the launch because the watches all seem to be running a pre-made demo loop. This guy had a tough time undoing the magnetic clasp:
[VIDEO]
One of the hands-on demos managed to get what looks like an Apple employee to show it off and the software looks terrible (his demo starts about 0:35):
[VIDEO]
The UI was lagging when he panned and scrolled apps, the crown zoom was choppy, it wan't responding well to gestures, it shut the screen off too quickly and when he turned it on using the crown it went back to the apps as it's the home button (the iPhone and iPad don't go home when you wake them with the home button as they have slide to unlock). Slide to unlock doesn't make all that much sense on a watch because of how often you would want to look at it but that means no security - maybe they'll have a gesture unlock. The drawing app for sending gestures looked bad because the watch can't be held steady like a phone, it's one hand only, so if the strap isn't tight enough, the watch face moves around making your doodle look really rough (the plus is that people who want to draw intricate penis shapes will be foiled but to those people that's a downside).
They have a while to get the software running more smoothly but I don't get why so much of this looks rushed when it's been in development for years. The focus on health is a complete misstep. There's a reason why 3/4 of people are overweight and it's not by accident. You can't solve it by asking people to invest in an expensive watch and bundle a fitness app. The Wii sold over 100 million units (at least 23m Wii-Fit units) and it hasn't sorted the problem:
"I didn't use it every day, or even every week, but since the very first time the game told me I was fat, it never really left my mind. I hate Wii fit so much. Sure, it indirectly helped me lose 10 pounds, but I f'ing hate it. Bear with me on this long post with minimal mention of the game or hardware - the game is not what will make you fit."
Fitness needs a certain state of mind, not a reminder. I went to a doctor once for a checkup and she told me I was overweight and I just felt like arguing about it because as far as I was concerned, I was perfectly fine. What started me exercising was seeing my stomach overhanging my belt in the mirror, I didn't want that so I sorted it out (no, I didn't just buy a bigger belt). A reminder to exercise does nothing because I want to see the problem and the results. Different exercises produce different results.
People will do exactly what they do with every fitness gimmick, which is use it for a few days or weeks and then dismiss the whole fitness part. 'Oh my watch says I've only taken 100 steps today, big deal'. Tim is a single guy and works in operations. When you're single, you try to keep yourself looking good because your goal is not to be single. Looking good includes not wearing a cheap looking watch. So the market for this is people who don't care about their appearance, which is married or unattractive people who've given up hope, neither of whom care about keeping in shape because they have no goal state that keeping in shape satisfies. It has no GPS so people genuinely interested in fitness aren't going to get it for fitness purposes.
If they wanted to focus on fitness, they could simply have gone the fitbit route. Not had a display with apps. This means long battery life, even with GPS. It could have done the Valentines Day gesture thing, it could tell the time, it would be a lot cheaper, it wouldn't compete for space with jewellery. It wouldn't necessarily play music but they own Beats, the headphones can do that and it could work to an extent with Apple Pay in that it can show totals in text and use NFC.
It's terrible. I have to say, it was hard for me to get over how ugly the watch looked on his wrist. I noticed it fit badly; it was wobbling all over the place. So bloody big, too. I would just never wear such a monstrosity on my wrist.
As you say, the gestures are awful at the moment—so stilted and prone to not working. The question is, can Apple make it all fluid by its debut? It's kind of sad seeing it looking so poor in its very first hands-on demo. Kevin's didn't count as he wasn't wearing it and the demo was probably on rails. Compare to Job's demo of the iPhone, which was so slick and well done, and in proper real-world, real-time usage.
It all looks so fiddly, damn it. I can't believe it doesn't default to the time when you hold it up. It's a watch!
Your points about fitness are so astute. It's just not a good selling point.
I think Apple should can the whole thing and start again or abandon it.
" I can't believe it doesn't default to the time when you hold it up. It's a watch!",, No, actually it isn't. (and, yes, I know what the name is, the iPad is not a "pad" either).
Now can a user SET it to default to a time display? Time will tell.
" I can't believe it doesn't default to the time when you hold it up. It's a watch!",, No, actually it isn't. (and, yes, I know what the name is, the iPad is not a "pad" either).
Now can a user SET it to default to a time display? Time will tell.
Come now. Your level of pedantry exceeds even mine.
The iPad isn't called a pad, it's called an iPad. There is no great precedent for it.
The ?Watch is called a watch. There's no ambiguity. It's named directly after the centuries old tradition of watches.
As you say, the gestures are awful at the moment—so stilted and prone to not working. The question is, can Apple make it all fluid by its debut? It's kind of sad seeing it looking so poor in its very first hands-on demo. Kevin's didn't count as he wasn't wearing it and the demo was probably on rails. Compare to Job's demo of the iPhone, which was so slick and well done, and in proper real-world, real-time usage.
Do you like being consistently wrong? Job's demo was completely on rails.
"It’s hard to overstate the gamble Jobs took when he decided to unveil the iPhone back in January 2007. Not only was he introducing a new kind of phone — something Apple had never made before — he was doing so with a prototype that barely worked.
...
The iPhone could play a section of a song or a video, but it couldn’t play an entire clip reliably without crashing. It worked fine if you sent an e-mail and then surfed the Web. If you did those things in reverse, however, it might not. Hours of trial and error had helped the iPhone team develop what engineers called “the golden path,” a specific set of tasks, performed in a specific way and order, that made the phone look as if it worked.
But even when Jobs stayed on the golden path, all manner of last-minute workarounds were required to make the iPhone functional.
...
None of these kludges fixed the iPhone’s biggest problem: it often ran out of memory and had to be restarted if made to do more than a handful of tasks at a time. Jobs had a number of demo units onstage with him to manage this problem. If memory ran low on one, he would switch to another while the first was restarted. But given how many demos Jobs planned, Grignon worried that there were far too many potential points of failure. If disaster didn’t strike during one of the dozen demos, it was sure to happen during the grand finale, when Jobs planned to show all the iPhone’s top features operating at the same time on the same phone."
The watch is light years ahead of this stage if it runs at all in any kind of real world environment.
Quote:
It all looks so fiddly, damn it. I can't believe it doesn't default to the time when you hold it up. It's a watch!
It can. The default home screen is the watch face. At 0:36 when first brought up it's a watch face and then jumped to the apps screen, probably as a glitch since he sounded surprised.
In this demo the watch face appears first (1 min mark) and stays but sleeps to quickly.
So again, an objection without merit.
This video also shows the watch on a woman's arm and it's clearly not gargantuan. It's the same size as a large woman's watch. It's not dainty but not monstrous as you claim.
Comments
When will samsung copy the crown feature of the apple watch?
they already have a prototype ready in their labs ready for DecemberWRONG - > think the watch will eventually be banned from use while driving
WRONG -> distracting to have messages flashing on your wrist while trying to drive
WRONG-> , struggling with the digital crown while you drive head on into a semi-truck.
They are shameless. I wouldn't be surprised.
Never buy first gen.
Life's too short to wait for "the perfect", If a device satisfies with it's current functionality why ever not get it?
I have a question. Is the watch seen in the picture is the exact design and form of iWatch to be released next year?
Apple's got a webpage set showing all the models.
One thing I noticed during the presentation, an inconsistency.
The new iPhones were demoed to be able to acknowledge a payment only through the use of Touch ID. The new apple watch was also shown to be able to be waved in front of an NFC device for payment. So my thought is that the watch contains NFC, but why and how is there an inconsistency in the need to authenticate with your finger print via Touch ID?
I wonder if the pairing process between Phone & Watch entails a TouchID press, then the two become "married" at the sub-atomic level of TouchID. Hmmmm.
I'm geeking out big time about the watch. I was STARING at Apple's watch-pages. I had the same urges that my six year old would have if I held ice cream in front of her face but wouldn't give it to her. Embarrassing Confession: I could feel how much I wanted to have it.
It was the same with the very fist iPod Nano. I wasn't even a music guy, and when I first saw it with that "Gimme, gimmie that" sing-songy commerical where the hands were waving it around, I had a 2GB one for $249 two days later. Their projects are magic.
Can't wait.
When I look at the difference between the vain glory demo and the original iPhone Steve introduced I find myself trying to imagine what a similar difference would look like between Apple Watch now and just a few years from now.
Be difficult to prevent it. It appears entirely mechanical. I'm sure there are companies already trying to tool up prototypes based on the video footage to get them ready to sell as close to the product release as possible.
If later generations include sensors in the strap and there's a verification between watch and strap then that would be more difficult.
And no, I'm not buying one, ever, so it doesn't even matter to me. I'll be amazingly lucky if I end up with a new iPhone to replace my iPhone 4, within the next two years. I've not worn watches or any other decor of any kind since early high school, and I've no interest in wearable tech.
This was answered by Apple after the event, iirc. Pass code plus skin contact.
Apple's got a webpage set showing all the models.
Thank you. I visited their website and found this model with other designs as well.
The Apple Watch as an integrated product will, much like what the iPad did for tablet computing and the iPhone did for mobile phones, redefine the entire smartwatch product category. Of course it will continue to evolve across all fronts including hardware, software, human interaction, machine-to-machine (M2M) interaction, internet of things (IoT), and highly contextual and immersive integration with other products including health care, entertainment, automotive, transportation, safety, remote sensing, ... etc. The Apple Watch is not a standalone device or even just a watch, it's another highly intelligent node and human and machine interaction point in the ever expanding Apple Connected Ecosystem.
One takeaway from the Apple Watch announcement that I'm not seeing anyone talking about on these hardware obsessed gadget sites is the stunning user experience of the Apple Watch software and included applications. Just as we've seen user experience concepts and workflows migrate from IOS into the OS X space I fully expect we're going to see Apple Watch software influences find their way into iPad, iPhone, Mac, and Apple TV. Hardware, fabrication, and manufacturing technologies will continue to give Apple and its competitors more options for miniaturization, energy utilization, performance, and form factors. But the thing that makes all of those physical qualities meaningful is the software, user experience, and the connectedness of Apple products. Nobody is even close to Apple in this regard - today. As long as Apple's competitors keep fooling themselves into believing that they can beat Apple based on gigahertz, megapixels, colors, shapes, sizes, and price they will never even catch up to Apple in the future, and Apple will never stand still.
That's a lot of hot air meaning nothing.
That's something odd about the launch because the watches all seem to be running a pre-made demo loop. This guy had a tough time undoing the magnetic clasp:
[VIDEO]
One of the hands-on demos managed to get what looks like an Apple employee to show it off and the software looks terrible (his demo starts about 0:35):
[VIDEO]
The UI was lagging when he panned and scrolled apps, the crown zoom was choppy, it wan't responding well to gestures, it shut the screen off too quickly and when he turned it on using the crown it went back to the apps as it's the home button (the iPhone and iPad don't go home when you wake them with the home button as they have slide to unlock). Slide to unlock doesn't make all that much sense on a watch because of how often you would want to look at it but that means no security - maybe they'll have a gesture unlock. The drawing app for sending gestures looked bad because the watch can't be held steady like a phone, it's one hand only, so if the strap isn't tight enough, the watch face moves around making your doodle look really rough (the plus is that people who want to draw intricate penis shapes will be foiled but to those people that's a downside).
They have a while to get the software running more smoothly but I don't get why so much of this looks rushed when it's been in development for years. The focus on health is a complete misstep. There's a reason why 3/4 of people are overweight and it's not by accident. You can't solve it by asking people to invest in an expensive watch and bundle a fitness app. The Wii sold over 100 million units (at least 23m Wii-Fit units) and it hasn't sorted the problem:
http://gizmodo.com/5083987/the-wii-fit-review-six-months-later
"I didn't use it every day, or even every week, but since the very first time the game told me I was fat, it never really left my mind. I hate Wii fit so much. Sure, it indirectly helped me lose 10 pounds, but I f'ing hate it. Bear with me on this long post with minimal mention of the game or hardware - the game is not what will make you fit."
Fitness needs a certain state of mind, not a reminder. I went to a doctor once for a checkup and she told me I was overweight and I just felt like arguing about it because as far as I was concerned, I was perfectly fine. What started me exercising was seeing my stomach overhanging my belt in the mirror, I didn't want that so I sorted it out (no, I didn't just buy a bigger belt). A reminder to exercise does nothing because I want to see the problem and the results. Different exercises produce different results.
People will do exactly what they do with every fitness gimmick, which is use it for a few days or weeks and then dismiss the whole fitness part. 'Oh my watch says I've only taken 100 steps today, big deal'. Tim is a single guy and works in operations. When you're single, you try to keep yourself looking good because your goal is not to be single. Looking good includes not wearing a cheap looking watch. So the market for this is people who don't care about their appearance, which is married or unattractive people who've given up hope, neither of whom care about keeping in shape because they have no goal state that keeping in shape satisfies. It has no GPS so people genuinely interested in fitness aren't going to get it for fitness purposes.
If they wanted to focus on fitness, they could simply have gone the fitbit route. Not had a display with apps. This means long battery life, even with GPS. It could have done the Valentines Day gesture thing, it could tell the time, it would be a lot cheaper, it wouldn't compete for space with jewellery. It wouldn't necessarily play music but they own Beats, the headphones can do that and it could work to an extent with Apple Pay in that it can show totals in text and use NFC.
That second demo you linked:
Oh. My. Goodness.
It's terrible. I have to say, it was hard for me to get over how ugly the watch looked on his wrist. I noticed it fit badly; it was wobbling all over the place. So bloody big, too. I would just never wear such a monstrosity on my wrist.
As you say, the gestures are awful at the moment—so stilted and prone to not working. The question is, can Apple make it all fluid by its debut? It's kind of sad seeing it looking so poor in its very first hands-on demo. Kevin's didn't count as he wasn't wearing it and the demo was probably on rails. Compare to Job's demo of the iPhone, which was so slick and well done, and in proper real-world, real-time usage.
It all looks so fiddly, damn it. I can't believe it doesn't default to the time when you hold it up. It's a watch!
Your points about fitness are so astute. It's just not a good selling point.
I think Apple should can the whole thing and start again or abandon it.
" I can't believe it doesn't default to the time when you hold it up. It's a watch!",, No, actually it isn't. (and, yes, I know what the name is, the iPad is not a "pad" either).
Now can a user SET it to default to a time display? Time will tell.
Come now. Your level of pedantry exceeds even mine.
The iPad isn't called a pad, it's called an iPad. There is no great precedent for it.
The ?Watch is called a watch. There's no ambiguity. It's named directly after the centuries old tradition of watches.
As you say, the gestures are awful at the moment—so stilted and prone to not working. The question is, can Apple make it all fluid by its debut? It's kind of sad seeing it looking so poor in its very first hands-on demo. Kevin's didn't count as he wasn't wearing it and the demo was probably on rails. Compare to Job's demo of the iPhone, which was so slick and well done, and in proper real-world, real-time usage.
Do you like being consistently wrong? Job's demo was completely on rails.
"It’s hard to overstate the gamble Jobs took when he decided to unveil the iPhone back in January 2007. Not only was he introducing a new kind of phone — something Apple had never made before — he was doing so with a prototype that barely worked.
...
The iPhone could play a section of a song or a video, but it couldn’t play an entire clip reliably without crashing. It worked fine if you sent an e-mail and then surfed the Web. If you did those things in reverse, however, it might not. Hours of trial and error had helped the iPhone team develop what engineers called “the golden path,” a specific set of tasks, performed in a specific way and order, that made the phone look as if it worked.
But even when Jobs stayed on the golden path, all manner of last-minute workarounds were required to make the iPhone functional.
...
None of these kludges fixed the iPhone’s biggest problem: it often ran out of memory and had to be restarted if made to do more than a handful of tasks at a time. Jobs had a number of demo units onstage with him to manage this problem. If memory ran low on one, he would switch to another while the first was restarted. But given how many demos Jobs planned, Grignon worried that there were far too many potential points of failure. If disaster didn’t strike during one of the dozen demos, it was sure to happen during the grand finale, when Jobs planned to show all the iPhone’s top features operating at the same time on the same phone."
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/and-then-steve-said-let-there-be-an-iphone.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
The watch is light years ahead of this stage if it runs at all in any kind of real world environment.
It can. The default home screen is the watch face. At 0:36 when first brought up it's a watch face and then jumped to the apps screen, probably as a glitch since he sounded surprised.
In this demo the watch face appears first (1 min mark) and stays but sleeps to quickly.
So again, an objection without merit.
This video also shows the watch on a woman's arm and it's clearly not gargantuan. It's the same size as a large woman's watch. It's not dainty but not monstrous as you claim.