or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Mac_128

Nope. Watches will not be sold to walk-in customers at brick and mortar stores on April 24th, they will only be available as pre-orders until Apple advises otherwise, and they have not set a date when the watches will be available for purchase in the stores. If you could line up outside an Apple Store with an equal chance of buying one on the 24th, there would be no issue. But you can't.Yeah that's ethical. And constrains supplies for others. But hey, as long as people...
Yup, even Apple is not immune from that mentality, and it cost them $21 million.
It is designed to look at photos, so it should be wider than narrower to address that need as well since most photos tend to be landscape, following this argument. For instance, the remote camera app does not give a true viewfinder of what the iPhone camera is seeing. Most pictures taken with the iPhone are going to be 16x9 landscape. The Watch might account for this, but it will still be smaller than on a round watch which is more versatile for both height and width....
But I've already demonstrated graphically that none of that has to be compromised on the Watch as it currently exists. Indeed, with a round shape, photos can be larger since photos tend to be more horizontal than vertical, making round a somewhat more versatile display choice to accommodate everything the watch can do, than square. The only real complaint I see you have against a round watch is that round would be wider than the rectangular watch currently is. However,...
Exactly. The Watch is a hybrid. It's designed to be a watch and text display. So the overall shape doesn't matter. If it's square the round shapes are constrained by the display, but if it's round, the text box doesn't have to be compromised at all, while offering additional space to include other information, while maximizing the text which can be displayed. If anything, round is probably better to get more overall screen space as this graphic demonstrates: 
 According to this it's 80%, so your math is off:  I didn't see it the same way ... those apps are designed to maximize a rectangular screen. They would design them differently if it were round. And for the ones that display a block of text, I've already shown that the Watch handily displays the text without any compromise on a round watch without the developer doing anything. And then there's this from the Watch Kit  So it seems like the developer doesn't have to worry...
Here's some photoshop mockups I did 1:1. The first is the watch with the usable display area delineated. Not the slight reduction of the 38mm inside the 42mm. Keep in mind Ive chose not to have the image extend under the curved crystal because it would distort the image. The display could absolutely extend to the edge. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/23/shape-things-come  Now we have the round watch overplayed on the Watch, making it only slightly wider, but...
Here's the link where I clarified my original post: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/185708/initial-apple-watch-stock-dries-up-in-minutes-shipping-times-quickly-jump-to-4-6-weeks#post_2707617  Either way, the word "essentially" from my first post on the topic implies the same thing. I never, ever claimed Apple WAS a build to order company. That was your inference, and yours alone. I very clearly in both instances likened Cook's tight supply chain to a BTO company.
I don't know where that graphic came from, or what the numbers are intended to mean, but to my eye they look identical. I guess I'll just have to get busy and create my own graphics in photoshop.  That said, why are half the pixels wasted? I see it as there are more pixels on a higher resolution display than on the square format -- it's not like letterbox on a TV. And they wouldn't be wasted, to the contrary they will display information like the time and date, which...
In that case we're in total agreement. ;-)
New Posts  All Forums: