or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple reportedly has 100-person team working on unannounced smartwatch
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple reportedly has 100-person team working on unannounced smartwatch - Page 2

post #41 of 89
There might be a good demand for wearables, even in a watch form, (obviously not for wear by workers in fields that require heavy duty hand use, unless also available in other form factors)

I am a lifelong wristwatch hater, they drive me crazy, lame stupid timepieces. I've been offered fine watches and don't want them. I know many people who love their watches. Etc. blah blah blah.

However, for some reason I got mad that the original watch size Nano was redesigned before I could buy one. I seemed to be fascinated with the idea of getting some nice wrist straps and turning on the clock face and having a tiny iPod too. Then there's that Dick Tracy watch thing from the comic strips, ages ago, would be nice to do Face Time or have Siri help you. It also would be easier to see the time on my wrist I guess...

I'd also like to see a watch fob, lanyard thing. I want it to be capable of making a FaceTime call, although that is probably a ways away yet. Agree with Spammy that sports/medical applications will be prominent.

If they could make this thing continually charge on available light, wow! I would buy my first 'watch' !

The point is, I want one of these things, yet I don't like watches, so there is clearly some appeal there, even to me. There are a lot of companies trying to make a watch wearable, so they must see the interest there.

The key issue to solve in this watch idea is mainly the audio implementation IMHO.
Edited by palomine - 2/12/13 at 8:58pm
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
post #42 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewyboy View Post

#1 I am beyond glad that you my friend are not any type of management in a good CE company.
#2 You are the reason Apple does not do focus groups. You, like the majority of the worlds population, cannot imagine beyond the small boxes that you live in. If device A has been used for function A, why would a variation of device A be any better? Hint: It's device B in the format of device A that does functions a-p.

He is the kind of people at VZ who rejected the iPhone when it was offered to them and then made a song and dance about the rejection.

post #43 of 89
100 designers? Or 100 engineers and designers? In the engineering works, this distinction is clear. In Apple, it is particularly strong. In the Samsung trial, it was revealed that the design team reporting to Ive was very small. So it's unlikely that there are 100 designers working on this. The team that developed the original iPod was also quite lean. Consider this rumor unlikely to be true.
post #44 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98 View Post

 

"Recuperation in demand for luxury watches post recession, robust demand from developing markets especially Asia-Pacific and rising popularity of fashionable, vintage and innovative models are forecast to drive market growth."

 

 

If Apple was interested to satisfy 0.1% of the population (most reach people on the planet), iPhone would have been golden plated with the diamond Apple logo on the back.

 

What? You think the iPhone 5 is comparable to a Timex watch? That it's not a luxury item? That the entire $49 billion is luxury items only? What's your point?

 

I suppose you still think that a $49 billion market is people getting rid of their watches. (and I missed the part where it said that only 0.1% of the population was buying watches. Oh, that's right, you didn't even read the article.)

 

... and what could be more fashionable and innovative than an Ive designed smart watch.


Edited by island hermit - 2/12/13 at 9:58pm
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #45 of 89
appleiwatch130210.png

Future Smartwatches = Digital handcuffs

*when slide to unlock becomes a cost option*
We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.- Marshall McLuhan

Join 'The New Middle Class Movement' @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Ne...45269528896164
Reply
We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.- Marshall McLuhan

Join 'The New Middle Class Movement' @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Ne...45269528896164
Reply
post #46 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter236 View Post

Most people do it by looking at the time in their cars, or on their computer or phone. Their is no need for another watch. This iWatch will take sales away from the iPhone, which is not good for profits.

The iPhone/iPod touch ate into traditional iPod profits. I guess that was a bad idea, too. When shareholder profits stall innovation that's where I have a problem with it.
post #47 of 89
There's already an Italian smart watch that works with iPhone, it's $400 though, probably around what apple will charge. That's a lot for saving yourself from reaching into your pocket.
post #48 of 89
That $400 Italian 'I'm Watch' is garbage. Their newer one will be priced under $200 and will most likely still be garbage.
We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.- Marshall McLuhan

Join 'The New Middle Class Movement' @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Ne...45269528896164
Reply
We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.- Marshall McLuhan

Join 'The New Middle Class Movement' @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Ne...45269528896164
Reply
post #49 of 89
Steve said they cracked the puzzle for Apple TV. Guess it's the iWatchTV.
post #50 of 89

Autumn 2012 : Apple reinvents the watch: iWatch (human skin surface currents being used to transmit information to earphones). At that time, rumors already circulated that Apple was secretly working on a way to convey the audio information directly to the brain. Other rumors from sources (which insisted to remain unidentified) also speculated that Apple was working on the most secret project of its history (code name « Wozniak »), aiming at implementing a neuronal version of the iOS into the human brain (the only minor remaining technical difficulty being to implement into it a 5.1 encoded audio information).

post #51 of 89
@jason98 @peter236 @loserInsertNumber

You're the living proof of why Apple's Apple, and you're not them.
Thankyou for existing, you have a purpose in life.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #52 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by caldog View Post

Actually quite the opposite. First, it may be called an iwatch but telling the time will be the least of its abilities.  Your phone isn't just a phone anymore right?   The iWatch will be a huge compliment to the iPhone increasing sales.  You will need to have both to take full advantage.  The watch will display incoming texts, calls, reminders, notes, emails, all handled by Siri and your iPhone.  It will be an information hub.  If you don't have the iPhone it won't be of much use.  If it's a huge hit you will see a huge increase in iPhone sales.

It looks like the iWatch and the iPhone working in tandem will take sales away from iPad, which again is not good for sales.

post #53 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by caldog View Post

Actually quite the opposite. First, it may be called an iwatch but telling the time will be the least of its abilities.  Your phone isn't just a phone anymore right?   The iWatch will be a huge compliment to the iPhone increasing sales.  You will need to have both to take full advantage.  The watch will display incoming texts, calls, reminders, notes, emails, all handled by Siri and your iPhone.  It will be an information hub.  If you don't have the iPhone it won't be of much use.  If it's a huge hit you will see a huge increase in iPhone sales.

Either it will be an information hub (add security and payment functionality) or maybe it will turn out to be a standalone device. When you carry an iPad or notebook you end up to take 3 to 4 devices with you. I would be perfectly content if Apple could either add phone functionality to the iPad or build this wearable device as a standalone working "iPhone mini" plus BT headset.

 

Then again, because a wristwatch is very much a fashion item, it should not hold a big display. I don't think people would wear an Apple branded computerlike thing on their arms. I hope it will turn out as something more like a bracelet - not as slim as the Nike fuelband though. I am very curious what Apple comes up with.

post #54 of 89
I happened to see this article this morning before reading AI. It addresses almost every point raised here by previous posters, and a couple more.

http://kfury.com/what-an-apple-watch-is-good-for

I'm not sure that I would go for one, but then, I'm an old fart who still wears a self-winding analog clock face wristwatch, even though I have iPhone and multiple other devices that tell time.

A device such as the one described in the above article does sound useful though.
/bs
Reply
/bs
Reply
post #55 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post

100 designers? Or 100 engineers and designers? In the engineering works, this distinction is clear. In Apple, it is particularly strong. In the Samsung trial, it was revealed that the design team reporting to Ive was very small. So it's unlikely that there are 100 designers working on this. The team that developed the original iPod was also quite lean. Consider this rumor unlikely to be true.

 

I recall a history that said the iPhone also had "100" total people assigned to it.  

 

Seems to be a favorite number at Apple for major projects.  It no doubt includes support personnel.

 

Judging from past histories, probably 1/3 to 1/2 are engineers, designers, developers.  The rest would be managers, secretaries, assistants, tech writers, ad copywriters, model makers, patent attorneys, testers, and so forth.

 

Do you recall what was said at trial about the core team size?  Thanks!


Edited by KDarling - 2/13/13 at 4:55am
post #56 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter236 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by caldog View Post

Actually quite the opposite. First, it may be called an iwatch but telling the time will be the least of its abilities.  Your phone isn't just a phone anymore right?   The iWatch will be a huge compliment to the iPhone increasing sales.  You will need to have both to take full advantage.  The watch will display incoming texts, calls, reminders, notes, emails, all handled by Siri and your iPhone.  It will be an information hub.  If you don't have the iPhone it won't be of much use.  If it's a huge hit you will see a huge increase in iPhone sales.

It looks like the iWatch and the iPhone working in tandem will take sales away from iPad, which again is not good for sales.

 

No...

 

It will be a basic cell phone in a watch (or wrist band) form factor.

 

At an unlocked, unsubsidized  price of $150--$250, it will meet the basic phone needs of most emerging, feature phone and prepaid phone markets.

 

Those who want smartphone features, when they wish, will carry a companion device (iPod Touch, iPad Mini, iPad) that contains no cell radios -- rather interfaces [BT tethered to] the phone on your wrist.


Edited by Dick Applebaum - 2/13/13 at 5:06am
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #57 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

 

No...

 

It will be a basic cell phone in a watch (or wrist band) form factor.

 

At an unlocked, unsubsidized  price of $150--$250, it will meet the basic phone needs of most emerging, feature phone and prepaid phone markets.

 

Those who want smartphone features, when they wish, will carry a companion device (iPod Touch, iPad Mini, iPad) that contains no cell radios -- rather interfaces [BT tethered to] the phone on your wrist.

yeah ... the iPhone nano ... and you can wear on the beach. It buys you a mojito at the bar.

post #58 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by palomine View Post

THowever, for some reason I got mad that the original watch size Nano was redesigned before I could buy one. I seemed to be fascinated with the idea of getting some nice wrist straps and turning on the clock face and having a tiny iPod too.

Let me introduce you to a place where you can still buy that product. ebay.com
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #59 of 89

If they can make the cell phone parts small enough, I can see upscale markets for a wristband phone.

 

Consider sports fans buying wristband phones with the colors and logos of their favorite teams.

 

It also could be a great promotional item for any cause, group or organization.

 

I can just see the Hillary 2016 wristbands now.

 

... Instead of wearing a red, pink or green ribbon or buying a Poppy, you could buy a wristband to promote (and have a portion donated to) your favorite charity.


Edited by Dick Applebaum - 2/13/13 at 5:38am
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #60 of 89

A wrist-mounted device with a gyroscopic sensor could be used to capture gestures in 3-d space, blurring the lines between an epileptic fit and operating your iPhone.

 

Wonder if iWatch is the main reason for the seemingly over-generous settlement with Swiss Railways.

post #61 of 89

PROBABLY NOT A PHONE

 

Most people are not going to want to use a watch phone with speaker.  Most people also dislike wearing Bluetooth earpieces.

 

So, if it were a watch phone, I'd design it so it unsnaps (magnetically?  slide?) from the bracelet / strap and can be held to the user's ear.

 

However, I doubt it's a watch phone.  Far more likely to be an info / control hub for your iPhone.  (It would sell better if it were compatible with other phones, but Apple usually doesn't roll that way.)

 

MY SMARTWATCH EXPERIENCE - STOPPED TAKING OUT THE PHONE EXCEPT TO SURF THE WEB

 

My Android based WIMM developer touchscreen smartwatch had an app that was able to remote many phone widget displays to the watch screen.   For example, one of my favorite widgets displays the current moon phase.  Using the remoter app, that display was echoed on the smartwatch.  My phone could stay deep in a winter coat pocket.

 

While I was wearing that smartwatch, I got used to referring to it instead of digging out my phone.  

 

Who's calling?  Check the watch.  What's the time in India for a conference call?  Check the world map clock app.   Wife asks me the weather forecast?  Check the watch weather app.  Need a reminder in 15 minutes?  Set the timer on the watch (really easy).   What's the latest news?  Check the RSS app.   Are there any WiFi hotspots around?  Use a hotspot mapper on the watch.  Which way is North?  Compass app.  What's my next appointment?  Calendar app.  Facebook alerts?  Check the watch.  Left my phone behind?  Watch buzzes when the Bluetooth link drops.   Etc.

 

Everything on that watch sync'd over WiFi, not Bluetooth, btw.  It was both a totally standalone watch that way, and/or could be linked via Bluetooth to a phone.  It was also super easy to write your own Android apps for it, plus it had a watchface SDK to make both analog and digital clocks.

 

The only reason I stopped wearing and using it, was because charging it each day was a pain.  Battery life is critical for making these things desirable.

 

The WIMM... no longer available... bought out by some company...

 


Edited by KDarling - 2/13/13 at 5:47am
post #62 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by apersona View Post

A wrist-mounted device with a gyroscopic sensor could be used to capture gestures in 3-d space, blurring the lines between an epileptic fit and operating your iPhone.

 

Wonder if iWatch is the main reason for the seemingly over-generous settlement with Swiss Railways.

 

My granddaughter told me about a dating service for old farts like me…

 

It goes something like this:

1) you wear a device -- in this case, a wristband phone

 

2) when lonely, you just "poosh the button" and say "Help, I've fallen [for you] and can't get up!"

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #63 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

PROBABLY NOT A PHONE

 

Most people are not going to want to use a watch phone with speaker.  Most people also dislike wearing Bluetooth earpieces.

 

It would be no different, and more private than holding a phone to your ear.

 

instead, you just raise your empty hand and cup your ear.  Sensors in the wristband would activate directional, noise-canceling speaker and microphone.

 

 

Quote:
The only reason I stopped wearing and using it, was because charging it each day was a pain.  Battery life is critical for making these things desirable.

 

I think the way to address that is to have the battery component in the band itself,  where it attaches to the watch face.


Edited by Dick Applebaum - 2/13/13 at 6:04am
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #64 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

It would be no different, and more private than holding a phone to your ear.

 

instead, you just raise your empty hand and cup your ear.  Sensors in the wristband would activate directional, noise-canceling speaker and microphone.

 

Hold your hand up to your cheek like you usually hold a phone.

 

Now hold your wrist up to your ear.  Ouch.  

 

I don't think a wrist speaker can be that private if you only held your hand up to your cheek.

 

Reminds me of that finger tip concept phone a couple of years ago.  You held your hand up like you were mimicking a phone:

 

 

post #65 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

It would be no different, and more private than holding a phone to your ear.

 

instead, you just raise your empty hand and cup your ear.  Sensors in the wristband would activate directional, noise-canceling speaker and microphone.

 

Maybe.  

 

Hold your hand up to your cheek like you usually hold a phone.

 

Now hold your wrist up to your ear.  Ouch.  

 

I don't think a wrist speaker can be that private if you only held your hand up to your cheek.

 

No, raise your empty hand to your ear -- just as you would if you had a phone in your hand.

 

Cup your ear with your empty hand, if you like.

 

The wristband directional microphone would be in the same approximate position as the [missing] phone microphone.

 

The directional noise-canceling speaker would point directly to your ear.

 

Cupping your ear with the empty hand and/or white noise emitted by the wristband would provide greater privacy than a current phone.

 

Try it!  It [your empty hand] fits perfectly!

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #66 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

No, raise your empty hand to your ear -- just as you would if you had a phone in your hand.

 

Cup your ear with your empty hand, if you like.

 

Right.  Sorry!  Missed the part about cupping your ear at first.

post #67 of 89
Um, I did not read any Samsung executive names in that list? ;P
post #68 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98 View Post

Well the world is getting rid of watches. An entire generation of people is growing up who never ever worn them. I don't see apple can reach a sizable market with such a product.

 

What? Have you not seen the under 25 crowd? All they wear are these oversized watches. 

post #69 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by titusm View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

 

No...

 

It will be a basic cell phone in a watch (or wrist band) form factor.

 

At an unlocked, unsubsidized  price of $150--$250, it will meet the basic phone needs of most emerging, feature phone and prepaid phone markets.

 

Those who want smartphone features, when they wish, will carry a companion device (iPod Touch, iPad Mini, iPad) that contains no cell radios -- rather interfaces [BT tethered to] the phone on your wrist.

yeah ... the iPhone nano ... and you can wear on the beach. It buys you a mojito at the bar.

 

Yeah, as opposed to carrying (and possibly losing, have stolen) your iPhone, your wallet or room key...

 

i can visualize Luxury hotels/spas/cruises issuing wristband phones and iPads to each person on check-in.

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #70 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by nudist View Post

Sure some people may say that they don't need a watch because their phone display the time. But can you really say that the experience of fumbling in your pocket for your phone and clicking the backlight button to show the time is a good one. I definitely don't still interesting to see what Apple might come up with. .  .
 

 

I've not owned a watch for over 20 years and I have never been late for anything : ) 

 

I, myself, never understood the need to wear something that just told you what time it was. But then again, my life has never been time driven like that (I don't punch a clock and when I need to be at meetings, my phone or computer reminds me). 

post #71 of 89

I think this is very cool. But it must have NFC. Imagine paying with your watch, or opening your door! That would be cool! I want one!

post #72 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

 

No...

 

It will be a basic cell phone in a watch (or wrist band) form factor.

 

At an unlocked, unsubsidized  price of $150--$250, it will meet the basic phone needs of most emerging, feature phone and prepaid phone markets.

 

Those who want smartphone features, when they wish, will carry a companion device (iPod Touch, iPad Mini, iPad) that contains no cell radios -- rather interfaces [BT tethered to] the phone on your wrist.

 

 

I support this. I can already see on the Apple Event screen : "Apple reinvents the watch, and again the Phone"

post #73 of 89
Since it would have contact with skin, it could provide biometric monitoring and feedback. It could be a real winner with runners, athletes, people who need to monitor their blood pressure, etc.
post #74 of 89
This is all quite exciting, I maybe getting sucked into all this recent hype, but it seems like an iWatch maybe imminent, if so I'm looking forward to see what Apple comes up with, and hope Samsung doesn't come along to spoil the party too soon. This together with the - sort of announcement..? That Apple is planning a major TV related event next month, seems to show that Apple might of got its mojo back! If it really ever lost it...
post #75 of 89

It will not be a basic cell phone in a watch form.  Battery technology isn't there yet, no way to have enough talk time on that small of a battery.  And who wants to hold their wrist up to their ears to talk on the phone?  That seems totally ridiculous.

post #76 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

 

I recall a history that said the iPhone also had "100" total people assigned to it.  

 

Seems to be a favorite number at Apple for major projects.  It no doubt includes support personnel.

 

Judging from past histories, probably 1/3 to 1/2 are engineers, designers, developers.  The rest would be managers, secretaries, assistants, tech writers, ad copywriters, model makers, patent attorneys, testers, and so forth.

 

Do you recall what was said at trial about the core team size?  Thanks!

 

 

Designers from both Apple and Samsung testified at the trial. While Samsung designers made allusions to fishbowls and other sources of inspiration, the Apple designers divulged from tangible and interesting tidbits. One of them (I don't recall the name) testified that most Apple products are designed by 20 or so designers sitting around a table. That is the size of Ive's team working on most of their products!

 

But, as mentioned above, the number of 100 may refer to the entire team, including engineers and software developers. It is unusual, however, to refer to an electrical engineer as a "designer" even if he is designing a circuit board. This title, unless used more specifically, is typically reserved for industrial designers.

post #77 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by apersona View Post

A wrist-mounted device with a gyroscopic sensor could be used to capture gestures in 3-d space, blurring the lines between an epileptic fit and operating your iPhone.

 

Wonder if iWatch is the main reason for the seemingly over-generous settlement with Swiss Railways.


That's an interestingly orthogonal thought. But perhaps too orthogonal? Having said that, I still don't get why they didn't simply switch to a different design of the iPad clock face.


Edited by stelligent - 2/13/13 at 1:37pm
post #78 of 89

iBand.

post #79 of 89
Hopefully people will see island hermits link and finally realise this 'I don't wear a watch so neither does anyone else' mentality is stupid.

The argument is often that a phone can also tell you the time. How long ago did rings, earrings, necklaces or ties cease to be useful. Most of those never where, the others probably not since we lived in caves. Humans like things that are nice. Function is often optional. A Rolex can convey style (apparently!) and wealth. Look at the Casio range of watches, some are excellent, but does anyone think half the functions are really, remotely useful? Stopwatch to 100th second like you could press the button to even the nearest 1/2 second? Altimeter? Yes, some will find it useful but most have it to make them look like the sort of person who would find it useful. It's all fashion statement, show, decoration, personal statement and a small degree of function. Nothing wrong with that either. Plus the time on my wrist is more convenient than the time in my pocket that I must get out and activate.

The watch is no longer any more useful than a 4x4 or a Ferrari in London or than a pair of cuff links since buttons were invented. They remain popular, desirable, intimate, personal objects that people covet.
post #80 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


You're absolutely right. The TV hardware sales are much smaller.

This source says that the number is around 50 M units in a quarter - or 200 M units per hear. At $1000 per TV, that's $200 B. Add in the watches and you have $250 B - so the analyst is expecting Apple to capture 1/3 of the total market - which is just plain absurd. Those are both well-established markets with strongly entrenched market leaders and very little profit potential. To think that Apple will come in with a premium priced product and take a third of the market is crazy.


Yes, they did it with iPads, but that was not an strongly established mature markets. Let's look at mobile phones. At launch, Jobs said Apple wanted a couple percent - and the analysts thought that was unreasonable. Even now - after 7 years of the most successful product launches in history and products that completely revolutionized the industry, Apple has around 10% of the entire mobile market.

So why are TVs and watches so different that anyone would reasonably predict Apple to get 1/3 of the entire market? Nothing. It's pure hype intended to create unrealistic expectations.

Not to beat a dead horse, but I did not see unit per year numbers anywhere in that source article. Perhaps is is in the linked full story pdf. Nonetheless, assuming that the yearly unit television sales are 200M, the average sale price is far lower than $1,000USD. It is likely closer to $650USD. (My Wolfram Alpha query, "average cost of a television" resulted in a median price of $649USD. A low-end 15" Coby goes for $94.98 and a 90" Sharp goes for $9,999.98.). 200M TV units at that median price gets you to about $129.8B in global revenue for televisions (not the entire TV industry including content).

 

Also, the global watch market was $46.6B, not $50B as you rounded to upthread. That's a big difference. With the TV hardware revenues, that gets us to a total of $176.4B USD.

 

Lastly, the contention was Apple capturing 20% of the combined market, not 33.3% (1/3) of those markets, collectively. That's another big difference. So, your numbers were rather fuzzy, again. What we have now is 20% of $176.4B, which is $35.28B in revenue that someone "inanely" projected Apple could generate in profit in the foreseeable future. 

 

Considering that Apple reported $155.97B in revenue in FY 2012 (as compared to "only" $32.48B four years earlier in 2008: http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/aapl/financials) suggests that even if Apple's revenue growth slowed substantially, it could easily report over $200B in annual revenue in the foreseeable future-perhaps in five years or less. 

 

It is not only not inane, or not possible, but perhaps actually likely that a single breakout product of Apple's could generate 20% of the revenues in the TV and watch markets. Interestingly, the $35.28B figure represents close to 20% of Apple's current revenue. If Apple can scoop up well over $30-40B in revenue from the telephone (iPhone) and PC (iPad) industries, why not from the TV and watch industries?

 

We know that Apple's iPad accounted for 20% of its 2012 revenues and iPhone accounted for 53% of its revenues: http://www.macrumors.com/2012/01/24/apple-reports-best-quarter-ever-in-q1-2012-13-06-billion-profit-on-46-33-billion-in-revenue/. Furthermore, from a market share (and absolutely from a revenue and profit share) perspective, Apple has demonstrated a keen ability to do exactly what you say is inane to consider. It can capture greater than 20% of a market it enters very quickly. On a related note, it also can drive a significant proportion of its own revenue with a single breakout product. 

 

It is not pure hype and the expectations are not unrealistic, but actually supported by historical data.

For your sake, I hope you're right.
Reply
For your sake, I hope you're right.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple reportedly has 100-person team working on unannounced smartwatch