or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Rumor: Prototypes of Apple's iOS-powered 'iWatch' face battery life issues
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Prototypes of Apple's iOS-powered 'iWatch' face battery life issues - Page 2

post #41 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You don't need to be a genius to know that a small wearable computer will have battery life issues at the current state of the art, but Apple has a long history of not releasing a product before it has a reasonable UX, which certainly includes battery life. Four to 5 days would be great but I don't think 2 to 3 days wouldn't be bad.

 

The UI for a wrist computer might be different than for a handheld iDevice.  For example, the back of the watch and inside of the wristband could [be trained to] recognize the wearer's wrist muscle movements to initiate certain functions without ever touching the device.  For example the following gesture could...

 

 

Feel free to add your own gestures/functions 1wink.gif

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

2) Is taking off a watch daily something the average person will want to do? That could the affect the user experience to have to fiddle with a clasp twice a day. I suppose those that wear designer watches take it off daily at least to shower and such a small battery might be able to charge within the time it takes to do one's daily ablutions.

3) It can't be as easy to remove as a slap bracelet or it'll be an even larger target for thieves than the iPhone if they can't just grab your wrist as you walk by to steal your wearable computer. I have to assume Apple has thought of this, not to mention that a slap bracelet seems pretty tacky for apparel. Then again, Geordi wore a headband on his face so anything is possible.

 

A slap bracelet is, by definition, easy to put on and take off.  

 

The unique device ID could be registered by a specific user, and locked if lost or stolen -- it would have little value to thieves.

 

Just because existing slap bracelets are tacky doesn't mean that an Apple slap bracelet would be tacky or cheap.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I'm not buying one because I don't wear wrist watches anymore. Too bad it can't be self winding or solar powered like some watches are.

If they can get the power requirements low enough couldn't they potentially use a tiny electromagnetic motor that charges the device by the natural motion of the wearer's arm?

 

I don't wear watches anymore either.  However, I have a self-winding Omega (ca 1971) that I dug out, shook for a few seconds, set -- and it keeps perfect time.

 

I also bought a battery Fairchild LED watch (ca 1973) -- here's a women's version (couldn't find mine or a picture of it):

 

 

 

AIR, this cost $195 in 1973 ($800-$1,000) in 2013 dollars.  It weighed a ton!   AIR, the battery cost $10-$15 and lasted 6 months. The display was normally off -- you had to push a button to see the time.

 

Quite a difference between the price/capability of the rumored Apple wristband computer.

 

Aside:  For those who never heard of Fairchild [Semiconductor] -- they are said to be the "founder" of Silicon Valley:

 

 

 

Quote:

Company history

[edit]1956

The historic marker at the Fairchild building at which the traitorous eight set up shop and the first commercially practical integrated circuit was invented
The building at 844 Charleston Road, Palo Alto, California, at which the first commercially practical integrated circuit was invented

In 1956, William Shockley opened Shockley Semiconductor Laboratory as a division of Beckman Instruments in Mountain View, California; his plan was to develop a new type of "4-layer diode" that would work faster and have more uses than then-current transistors. At first he attempted to hire some of his former colleagues from Bell Labs, but none were willing to move to the West Coast or work with Shockley again. Instead he founded the core of the new company with what he considered the best and brightest graduates coming out of American engineering schools.

Only a year later, the staff of eight engineers decided to leave Shockley and form their own company. The group later became known as the traitorous eight. The eight men were Julius BlankVictor GrinichJean HoerniEugene KleinerJay LastGordon MooreRobert Noyce, and Sheldon Roberts. Looking for funding on their own project, they turned to Sherman Fairchild's Fairchild Camera and Instrument, an Eastern U.S. company with considerable military contracts.[1] In 1957 the Fairchild Semiconductor division was started with plans on making silicon transistors at a time when germanium was still the most common material for semiconductor use.

According to Sherman Fairchild, Noyce's impassioned presentation of his vision was the reason Sherman Fairchild had agreed to create the semiconductor division for the traitorous eight. Noyce advocated the use of silicon as substrate — since the material costs would consist of sand and a few fine wires, the major cost would be in the manufacturing process. Noyce also expressed his belief that silicon semiconductors would herald the start of disposable appliances that, due to cheap electronic components, would not be repaired but merely discarded when worn out.[2]

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Semiconductor

 

 

By far, the most interesting part [to me] of this rumor is that the wristband computer will run iOS (as opposed to iPad Nano iOS).  This means that, as technology allows, Apple can extend the capabilities of this device to make it the only iDevice you always have with you!

"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 #42 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

A prototype of a rumored product that might not actually exist might possibly have battery life issues?

 

This is unacceptable. Steve Jobs would never have allowed this. This company is nose-diving into irrelevancy. Sell all your stock. I'm done with Apple. Just one more example of the incompetency of Tim Cook. He needs to resign ASAP. It's like the 90's all over again. 

 

Am I doing it right?

 

You need a preamble stating that you're a "long-time Apple fan", then list all your Apple devices...

"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 #43 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkell31 View Post

Wasn't a iTV update or something supposed to be coming out? Not holding my breath on a iWatch.

Remember, they cracked the nut regarding the interface with iTV. The wristremote will accompany your iTV. And by coïncidence do a lot more as wel...
Just my two coins.
post #44 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I like Slice. No 'i'.

And what youth resistance? "Youth" are "resistant" to anything… until it's made "cool". I don't imagine many kids listen to the radio anymore, but Internet radio? They wouldn't go without it.

I have to think that anything you wear on your wrists will not be associated with the word slice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

By far, the most interesting part [to me] of this rumor is that the wristband computer will run iOS (as opposed to iPad Nano iOS).  This means that, as technology allows, Apple can extend the capabilities of this device to make it the only iDevice you always have with you!

I think that is the most implausible part of this story. Apple didn't even adopt iOS for their touchscreen iPod Nano but instead built a unique UI for what I presume is still PicoOS to run atop it.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #45 of 62
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A new report claims Apple hopes its alleged "iWatch" will offer between 4 and 5 days of use between charges, but current prototypes get about half that.

 

That's a huge problem.  Apple would need to figure out how a user would charge such a watch.  (Inductive charger pad on a desk?  Yuck.  Take it off and plug it in?  Yuck.)

 

 

Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Citigroup's Oliver Chen noted that current watch makers see margins of about 60 percent on their products, suggesting that an "iWatch" could be a hugely profitable device for Apple.

 

 

"Hugely profitable" on a per-unit basis.  But how many would they sell?  Would Apple want to spend all the time, money, and effort required to design, test, iterate, perfect, integrate, market, and support such a smart watch?  It might be better for them to spend all that time, money, and effort on other products and services.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #46 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You don't need to be a genius to know that a small wearable computer will have battery life issues at the current state of the art, but Apple has a long history of not releasing a product before it has a reasonable UX, which certainly includes battery life. Four to 5 days would be great but I don't think 2 to 3 days wouldn't be bad.

 

A wearable computer like an iWatch would also require far less power than a smartphone. No power-sapping cellular chip (one of the biggest consumers of electrical energy), a screen that's probably 1/3rd the size of the iPhone (and probably a new IGZO screen further reducing power), a much smaller (and efficient) SoC that probably runs at a really low frequency 99% of the time would all contribute to better battery life. Add to that the fact the iWatch won't run full-blown Apps that require lots of processor/graphics power. Plus, as mentioned, it could have solar or small generators to get power from the sun and/or movement to augment the battery.

 

As to charging, well this is where wireless comes in. I don't wear a watch anymore, but when I did I always took it off at night and put it on the nightstand beside the bed (along with my glasses, keys, wallet). So now I'd put my iWatch down on the little wireless charging pad it comes with. Or, if Apple has the extended range wireless (that they recently filed a patent on), then my iWatch would get charged by using my Macbook or keyboard that supports it. And at home I only need to have my iWatch within 3 feet of the charger for it to get topped up. If I'm in my car the wireless dongle will charge it without having to take it off.

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply

Author of The Fuel Injection Bible

Reply
post #47 of 62

This site is becoming a joke every day! A rumor about bad battery life on a rumored product - WOW! AI - Do you bother checking the source of validating the story! Are Apple day trader and hedge fund managers getting that desperate that they will come up with any kind of negative story on Apple to drive the price down? Pathetic and sick!

post #48 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


For showering I would assume so, especially if it has a leather band, but I'm not so sure about sleeping. That said, I'm not exactly and authority on watches as I stopped wearing them once I got a cellphone.


Yeah I wouldn't know either because I quit wearing my watch soon after I got my first iPhone 5 years ago

post #49 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A new report claims Apple hopes its alleged "iWatch" will offer between 4 and 5 days of use between charges, but current prototypes get about half that.

 

That's a huge problem.  Apple would need to figure out how a user would charge such a watch.  (Inductive charger pad on a desk?  Yuck.  Take it off and plug it in?  Yuck.)

 

 

Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Citigroup's Oliver Chen noted that current watch makers see margins of about 60 percent on their products, suggesting that an "iWatch" could be a hugely profitable device for Apple.

 

 

"Hugely profitable" on a per-unit basis.  But how many would they sell?  Would Apple want to spend all the time, money, and effort required to design, test, iterate, perfect, integrate, market, and support such a smart watch?  It might be better for them to spend all that time, money, and effort on other products and services.

 

I couldn't find any estimate of the number of watches sold per year.

 

But it is worth remembering that when the iPhone was announced in 2007, Steve Jobs set a goal of 10 million phones for 2008 -- 1% of the total phone market.

 

 

Quote:
Apple has revealed that the company has met its self-imposed goal of selling 10 million iPhones in calendar 2008. 

Steve Jobs first described the goal in January 2007 when he introduced the iPhone. The 10 million iPhone sales represented 1% of mobile phones sold at that time. 

With today's financial results, Apple revealed that the iPhone 3G had sold 6,892,000 units this quarter alone, and when combined with previous and current iPhone sales apparently add up to over 10 million with two more months to go.

 

http://www.macrumors.com/2008/10/21/apple-reaches-10-million-iphone-sales-goal-for-2008/

"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 #50 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyb0731 View Post


Yeah I wouldn't know either because I quit wearing my watch soon after I got my first iPhone 5 years ago

Your first "iPhone 5" years ago or first "iPhone" 5 years ago. 1smile.gif

I still have and wear my watch. Then again I have OCD and people might die if I don't wear one during the day. Nah, just a habit.
post #51 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark View Post


Your first "iPhone 5" years ago or first "iPhone" 5 years ago. 1smile.gif

I still have and wear my watch. Then again I have OCD and people might die if I don't wear one during the day. Nah, just a habit.


first "iPhone" 5 years ago haha

post #52 of 62

Who even bothers to wear a watch these days?    

 

As  for expectations i don't think any reasonable person would expect an iWatch to run for months on one charge.     Honestly it isn't a big deal to take it off at the end of the night to charge.    That is if you could actually higher people to we're watches these days, as it is.a watch is generally a sign of a mentally unhealthy individuals that you would rather avoid. It is sort of like the middle class equivalent of a hoodie - gangster wear.  

 

Mind you this is run time but think about this what happens if you actually use some of those functions that iOS supports.   I'd be surprised if you get 4 hours out of the device.   

 

In the end all of these glowing dreams of massive profits for Apple will likely go up in smoke when it is realized that they device doesn't really live up to the promise.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

Gee it is going to be a failure, my watch already runs years in a single battery why would I want to have a watch that only lasts a few days before needing a power up.

 

They should not call it a watch since the word watch implies certain sets of experiences for the everyday user.

 

It will be like calling a manure pile a bed of roses.

 

Words and user experience around those words create a lasting impression on people. When you hear the word Watch what are all the thinks you think about and expect from something that is called a watch.

post #53 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

In retrospect, it seems a little silly that he wouldn't have just regrown his eyes from his own stem cells, since we're doing that alreadylol.gif
Stem cell technology is not capable of actually creating/growing organs.
A common use, is to treat diseases/illnesses caused by generic defects.
I think I know what I am talking about as I degrees in Chemistry and Biochemistry.
post #54 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Who even bothers to wear a watch these days?    

 

As  for expectations i don't think any reasonable person would expect an iWatch to run for months on one charge.     Honestly it isn't a big deal to take it off at the end of the night to charge.    That is if you could actually higher people to we're watches these days, as it is.a watch is generally a sign of a mentally unhealthy individuals that you would rather avoid. It is sort of like the middle class equivalent of a hoodie - gangster wear.  

 

Mind you this is run time but think about this what happens if you actually use some of those functions that iOS supports.   I'd be surprised if you get 4 hours out of the device.   

 

In the end all of these glowing dreams of massive profits for Apple will likely go up in smoke when it is realized that they device doesn't really live up to the promise.  

post #55 of 62

I'm thinking Apple will need 14nm tech for this along with flexible zinc battery tech.   I just don't see today's tech delivering good results.   Even if they come out earlier it will still be another version one product, more a proof of concept if you will.   Solar charging will likely play a role as will other energy harvesting tech.   

 

As such I still believe Apple will have a hard time finding enough guinea pigs - err early adopters to make the device a success.   I never really adapted to wearing watches so I have a hard time believing that this device will be all that attractive to me.    Further if you look at an iPhone it is a lot of bulk to keep on ones wrist.    This sorta has me thinking it won't have cell phone functionality.    

 

Interesting times, I have to wonder when Apple will start working on an embeddable computer.   Implantable would be the better word, a communications device implanted right into ones skull.   

post #56 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfts View Post


Stem cell technology is not capable of actually creating/growing organs.
A common use, is to treat diseases/illnesses caused by generic defects.
I think I know what I am talking about as I degrees in Chemistry and Biochemistry.

If anyone is interested in the current state of stem cell research:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/health/research/scientists-make-progress-in-tailor-made-organs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #57 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post

As there seems to be a lot of youth resistance to the concept of a watch, then obviously "iWatch" isn't going to be a popular description.

So perhaps blogs should call it something else?  iBand?  iBracelet?  iHand?

Ideas?

Today's youth only finds it cool if it's tattooed or pierced.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #58 of 62
Originally Posted by hfts View Post
Stem cell technology is not capable of actually creating/growing organs.

 

Not capable or… not paying attention? And the media could very well have screwed up the interpretation, but you'd think that if it's genuinely impossible to do that a chemist or biologist would have, you know, corrected them by now.

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply

Originally Posted by helia

I can break your arm if I apply enough force, but in normal handshaking this won't happen ever.
Reply
post #59 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Who even bothers to wear a watch these days?

People with taste and money

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/fashion/2013/jan/27/luxury-watches-defy-downturn

Shut up and go away, you useless, pathetic FUDmonger - Tallest Skil
Reply
Shut up and go away, you useless, pathetic FUDmonger - Tallest Skil
Reply
post #60 of 62
You know with current testing on a device like this would probably be about a day(more like 16 hours) next year about 3 days, 2015 about 2 weeks, 2016 about a month. If Apple can have something better than this I would be surprised.
post #61 of 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

You need a preamble stating that you're a "long-time Apple fan", then list all your Apple devices...

And then say that you're seriously considering the Samsung wristwatch because it's got an 8 inch screen
post #62 of 62

I'm very interested in an iWatch.

 

For the first generation, Apple will have to decide which radios to include: wifi, bluetooth, and cellular.  My belief is that cellular would use up too much power.  So, it will probably only have wifi and bluetooth.

 

I don't know about others, but the 6th gen iPod nano was obviously (to me) an iWatch prototype.  That is a good start.  If the iWatch only has wifi and bluetooth, it will work like a mini iPod touch that is always synchronized with your iPhone and/or router.  This way, you can get alerts, info, and the internet on the iWatch.

 

The interface has to be done right and easy-to-understand.  The watch itself has to be reliable: a charge should last for at least three days and the sync with the iPhone should "just work."  Water resistant and durable.

 

To make the iWatch successful, Apple only has to customize the most basic apps for the smaller screen: Messages, Calendar, Photos, Stocks, Maps, Weather, Notes, Clock, Calculator, Contacts, and Mail (like on the original iPhone).

 

Yes, I believe there will be a camera on the iWatch.  And Siri will be available.  They should skip Safari on the iWatch.

 

Will the iWatch be able to tether to the iPhone for voice calls?  I don't suggest it with the first gen.  Maybe the second generation, when they introduce the iWatch App Store.

 

They could also add more health-related functions.  Stuff that you see in the Basis watch and the Jawbone Up.


Edited by melmel - 3/5/13 at 4:05am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Rumor: Prototypes of Apple's iOS-powered 'iWatch' face battery life issues