or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple to sell two sizes of iWatch with flexible AMOLED displays this fall, prices to reach 'thousands of dollars'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple to sell two sizes of iWatch with flexible AMOLED displays this fall, prices to reach... - Page 3

post #81 of 103

Compared to using a phone, of course you're right.  But If the iWatch used BT LE, you wouldn't even have to hold out your arm - just tap your watch to approve the payment.  Slightly less energy expenditure than stretching out your arm [purely 1st-world problem, I understand :-)

post #82 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedGeminiPA View Post

I won't pay more than $300-$400 for one. I don't care how good it is or what it can do. If it's anything more than that, I'll start looking at a Pebble or some other "smart" watch, anything that isn't Android-powered (or Tarzan, or whatever the hell Scamdung calls it).

The Apple rumor claims their "smartwatch" will presumably have it's own SIM. That's somewhat akin to combining an iPhone and a watch. That the resultant price might approach and even exceed $1000 shouldn't be a surprise. Samsung's similarly-rumored-to-soon-ship SIM-enabled version of their watch has been estimated to be no less than $850 or so.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #83 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

The Apple rumor claims their "smartwatch" will presumably have it's own SIM. That's somewhat akin to combining an iPhone and a watch. That the resultant price might approach and even exceed $1000 shouldn't be a surprise. Samsung's similarly-rumored-to-soon-ship SIM-enabled version of their watch has been estimated to be no less than $850 or so.

The avg cust isn't going to pay that much for a watch. that's more expensive than an iPhone.
post #84 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by dunestock View Post

Pfffft. iDon't want one

 

Then why are you here commenting?

It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
It's only after you've lost everything that you're free to do anything.

Tyler Durden | Fight Club
Reply
post #85 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by hentaiboy View Post
 

FAIL

 

THIS is why people spend thousands of dollars on watches:

 

I do tend to agree, but this is also a $2000 watch. If Apple is going after the luxury watch market it make sense since there is no way to make s cheap watch that does everything people want, and again people with money like stuff like this and it is a fashion statement. So no kiddies buy this unless your a teen idiot. 

 

post #86 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

I do tend to agree, but this is also a $2000 watch. If Apple is going after the luxury watch market it make sense since there is no way to make s cheap watch that does everything people want, and again people with money like stuff like this and it is a fashion statement. So no kiddies buy this unless your a teen idiot. 

[image]

Why is that $2k?

"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 #87 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/03/28/apple-reaching-out-to-swiss-watchmakers-for-partnerships-tries-to-poach-horology-experts

http://www.statisticbrain.com/wrist-watch-industry-statistics/

Number of watches sold annually worldwide - 1,200,000,000
Number of Swiss Watches sold annually - 29,200,000
Number of watches produced by China annually - 663,000,000
Number of watches produced by Hong Kong annually - 354,000.000
Average cost of a Swiss watch - $739
Average cost of a China watch - $3
Switzerland watch market share in terms of value - 54 %
Mechanical Watch market share - 77 %
Electronic Watch market share - 23 %
Swatch / Omega annual sales - $8,880,000,000
Rolex annual sales - $4,500,000,000

Swiss watches command 54% of the revenue with under 3% of the marketshare.

Jony Ive wears a custom-made Jaeger LeCoultre Memovox watch, check eBay for used prices on that style of watch.

It's not clear how they'd combine quality Swiss craftsmanship with what they do though. Out of all the smartwatches so far, the Moto 360 looks like the best design and there was a circular concept of an Apple one here:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/15/4623566/iwatch-concept

I don't think a digital watch like that would sell at a ~$1000+ mark.

Sony sells their smartwatch for $99. At first, this looked like a good enough contender but look at the images on the following site:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/26/5147676/sony-smartwatch-2-review

That's not the right way to go and that reflects very badly on Sony IMO. The Galaxy Gear isn't selling well enough to attract counterfeits and is in the same league as the Sony:

http://www.ibtimes.com/wearable-technology-flop-chinese-counterfeiters-say-galaxy-gear-doesnt-sell-well-mass-market-1543006
http://blog.gsmarena.com/samsung-galaxy-gear-discounted-to-160/

If the Moto 360 isn't too bulky and it performs well, I'd say it could sustain $300 and fits into the premium digital watch category. It looks a little bulky in the video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrqZl2QIz0c#t=19

If Apple does tackle the high price bracket, which would seem more likely after seeing Sony's and Samsung's efforts, it won't be high volume. But would they make a single model to appeal to the high-end consumer or a single model to compete with luxury watchmakers? If they partnered with Swiss watchmakers, I don't see how they can do both mechanical and digital without compromising either. I wouldn't see them doing something as bulky as the Moto 360.

This kind of device really needs to wait for a boost in battery, kinetic and/or solar charging technology.

(I have nothing to add, I just don't want this post to be missed)

"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 #88 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

(I have nothing to add, I just don't want this post to be missed)

Nothing changes with Apple. Apple is a premium, not a luxury brand. They sell iPods priced in hundreds, not hifi vinyl record players costing thousands. They sell iPhones priced in hundreds, not diamond-encrusted luxury phones like Vertu and Tag Heuer costing thousands. And the same will apply for iWatch, it will be a premium product with value based on a unique concept reiventing the watch and wearable category, seamless integration of hardware, software and services, and great user experince. And on the other hand, its value won't be based on a luxury price tag and expression of upper class social status.

This is all Apple 101. Apple is not creating a watch with a digital twist and a luxury price tag. Apple is making a revolutionary wearable device.
post #89 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobleh View Post

Actually, Tag Heuer is about to release the first smartphone in the world with a solar cells film between the saphire glass and the display. It's called Meridiist Infinite. This makes use of the technology in the iWatch more real than ever before. As to the battery life, we will have to wait for the first tests.
The offspring of the Nokia

You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
You can't spell appeal without Apple.
Reply
post #90 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


Why is that $2k?

Because it is a Movado and you pay for the name, it a fashion statement and suck as a watch, I know I own one, not that one, and you can not easily tell what time it is especially when it dark out. They have ones which are more expensive than that.

 

So it not always about the finish hand crafted machinery 

post #91 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobleh View Post

Nothing changes with Apple. Apple is a premium, not a luxury brand. They sell iPods priced in hundreds, not hifi vinyl record players costing thousands. They sell iPhones priced in hundreds, not diamond-encrusted luxury phones like Vertu and Tag Heuer costing thousands. And the same will apply for iWatch, it will be a premium product with value based on a unique concept reiventing the watch and wearable category, seamless integration of hardware, software and services, and great user experince. And on the other hand, its value won't be based on a luxury price tag and expression of upper class social status.

This is all Apple 101. Apple is not creating a watch with a digital twist and a luxury price tag. Apple is making a revolutionary wearable device.

That is typically what they do but mainly they do things that buyers respect. Do people really respect luxury mobile phones? They are seen as gaudy and tacky. Swiss watches on the other hand are highly respected by people who can afford them and people who can't.

Also, there's an accessible price range that would still be considered high. A $2000 laptop is pretty expensive but accessible to millions.

There are a couple of problems with the whole watch idea for Apple in that it's jewellery and that requires projecting a unique design onto it. Apple products have a unique design but with the intent of the design not distracting you from the use of the product. A watch is the opposite. It is there to be admired in its own right.

If they make this design too accessible then it loses some appeal because it can be the watch everyone at the party is wearing rather than one that suits your particular style and price range.

The cheap smartwatch makers tried to focus on functionality over style. Will.i.am showed off his own smartwatch that's also a phone here:



Too much functionality and it needs a big battery and to be charged every day. Too little functionality and you may as well buy a normal watch.

The Moto 360 I think hits a good balance if they can pull off the concept suitably well - elegant design as a watch, functional enough to be worthwhile over a normal watch, should be cheap enough to be accessible to a lot of people. If it has to be charged daily though or worse doesn't last a whole day then that's not particularly good.

We still don't have any firm evidence at all that Apple is considering it. This all happened with the TV set for years - supply chain rumors, possible talks with Loewe, panel size estimates. Nothing came of it. It would be nice to see even little circles of sapphire sitting on a desk so we'd have a vague hint that all the speculation is even worth spending time on.
post #92 of 103
I think Kuo has lost the plot this time around!
post #93 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

It would be nice to see even little circles of sapphire sitting on a desk so we'd have a vague hint that all the speculation is even worth spending time on.

Do you think a circular display is the way to go? I think it is and up until Moto's recent mockup I hadn't heard of anyone else, besides me, considering that route.

"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 #94 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


When speaking about a new product category from Apple, one must forget two words: 1. Traditional, 2. Name of the existing category - ie watch in this case. What we will get is a revolutionary, never before seen wearable device. Those expecting either a watch or a smartwatch will be in for a disappointment. On the other hand, those expecting a device from the future with never before seen looks and functions will be in for a treat.

Now try to adopt Apple's think different mentality, forget the word watch and look at the most concrete evidence of the rumored Apple device in the form of their patent:



Now this is the real iWatch, ticking all points of a disruptive product:

- revolutionary concept
- allows endless customization through downloadable skins
- all-band display allows for proper apps with contextual data (eg health and fitness graphs) - contrary to baby software on small smartwatch screens
- vertical UI, with content rotating based on your wrist's position and angle so it is always viewable
- contextual data viewing, eg raising a hand while running shows fitness data
- cutting edge sensors, with aim to change one's behavior


This is the next Apple mass-market hit for all ages and sexes. Expect a Johny Ivy video keenly talking about the purity and simplicity of its circular design based on the time continuity. Expect a huge success for Apple. Just don't expect a watch or a smartwatch. It will be a brand new category.

PS Anything else, especially a traditional watch with added connectivity and sensors, would crash the Apple stock, get Tim Cook fired, and damage Apple's desruptive inovator image for years. Just as with the iPhone, Apple is betting the whole company on iWatch, no doubt about it.
post #95 of 103

Right now my iPhone 5s tracks my steps...

post #96 of 103

The issue with that is I don't think current credit card processors support Bluetooth LE payment, but they already exist with NFC, so unless Apple can persuade businesses to update their processors, easier to work with what is there.

 

So this adds NFC to iPhone with less friction than changing iPhone or having to pull your phone out.

post #97 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Do you think a circular display is the way to go? I think it is and up until Moto's recent mockup I hadn't heard of anyone else, besides me, considering that route.

As soon as I saw the iwatch concept with the circular face back in this thread:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/159351/inside-samsungs-galaxy-note-3-gear-media-blitz-in-times-square/40#post_2390343

it looked like the better way to go. When the circular display is shown next to the rectangular displays in the Moto video, the rectangular ones just look completely the wrong design. The Moto design looks much better and so it should being designed on a Mac (you can see the MBP hooked to the Cinema Display and 3D printer):


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobleh 
Now this is the real iWatch, ticking all points of a disruptive product

That kind of strap has too many technical problems such as making glass and the display flexible enough to be able to go right round the wrist. Then having latched batteries that don't explode due to the leverage on the connections. The band will naturally want to spring open so it has to be held closed very firmly but it has to be comfortable. Given that it couldn't be figure-hugging, where does the resistance come from to be able to interact with it without it slipping round the wrist? Samsung has a product that tries to be more of a band:



Apple buys the displays from the likes of Samsung so if that's where curved display technology has reached, that's all there is for Apple too.

That's not to say such a different form factor isn't the way to go but it has to be practical.
post #98 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

As soon as I saw the iwatch concept with the circular face back in this thread:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/159351/inside-samsungs-galaxy-note-3-gear-media-blitz-in-times-square/40#post_2390343

it looked like the better way to go. When the circular display is shown next to the rectangular displays in the Moto video, the rectangular ones just look completely the wrong design. The Moto design looks much better and so it should being designed on a Mac (you can see the MBP hooked to the Cinema Display and 3D printer):

video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnerqDWwVgg

That kind of strap has too many technical problems such as making glass and the display flexible enough to be able to go right round the wrist. Then having latched batteries that don't explode due to the leverage on the connections. The band will naturally want to spring open so it has to be held closed very firmly but it has to be comfortable. Given that it couldn't be figure-hugging, where does the resistance come from to be able to interact with it without it slipping round the wrist? Samsung has a product that tries to be more of a band:

video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6dTUe3SRtI

Apple buys the displays from the likes of Samsung so if that's where curved display technology has reached, that's all there is for Apple too.

That's not to say such a different form factor isn't the way to go but it has to be practical.

1) I really think round is the best way to go but after seeing that 2nd video I am thinking about an iPod-like line up (which didn't happen overnight) that has a wide range of types along varying sizes, features and price point. That Samsung smartwatch looks like it would be good for an entry-level design that focuses more on the youth or active people whereas the Moto design looks to me like it could be more expensive offering.

2) I'd imagine that a round display has it's own issues with manufacturing and cost. Nest doesn't even use a round display for their thermostat despite it appearing as if they do.

3) One thing I have seen plenty of is that when the mention of a flexible battery, board or display are mentioned that most then assume the final product would also be flexible, but as you note with the battery, such tech may be best suited for easy fitting permanently into a curved design.

"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 #99 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetMage View Post
 

The issue with that is I don't think current credit card processors support Bluetooth LE payment, but they already exist with NFC, so unless Apple can persuade businesses to update their processors, easier to work with what is there.

 

So this adds NFC to iPhone with less friction than changing iPhone or having to pull your phone out.

 

The banks that started offering it here, send out a sticker for the back of your iPhone,

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #100 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Do you think a circular display is the way to go? I think it is and up until Moto's recent mockup I hadn't heard of anyone else, besides me, considering that route.

Circular shape is good for analogue watch, but IMO sucks for digital content.

Square, or at least square-ish watch, like Omega De Ville, would be the way to go. Still good for analogue watch simulation, and much more natural for digital content.

post #101 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133 View Post

Circular shape is good for analogue watch, but IMO sucks for digital content.

Square, or at least square-ish watch, like Omega De Ville, would be the way to go. Still good for analogue watch simulation, and much more natural for digital content.


In my opinion, both circular and square designs are not suitable for digital content. This design goes hundreds years back when it was built around one function only - measuring time. Squeezing modern apps into this limited space can never work, it produces a problem called baby software. We've been here before pre-2007 with the first smartphones. Their small displays ran software with such limitations and poor operabilty which were acceptable only to a niche market of tech enthuziasts. This is not a mass market solution to a 21st century wearable device.

I believe Apple is asking the same questions as when they were developing the iPhone and coming with the solution to expand the screen at the expense of the buttons. Why do we have such a tiny screen and such large attachable bands? Do the bands bring more value for the user than a tiny display? Can one large flexible display replace the bands and at the same time work the same function as holding the device on your wrist (similar to - can iPhone's large screen work the same function as buttons?).

This is what Apple is working on, that's why they've been working on the device for so many years, that's why they have Bob, Johny, their entire all-star team and hundreds of others on this project. Because they're working on another product from the future, another revolution, just as they did with the iPhone. Companies who took the easy way, started with the legacy watch design and slapped a tiny display, sensors and connection onto it - they're already done because it's largely not too difficult. And we already know the market results - it sells to only an enthuziasts niche, just like the first smartphones.

If you want a smartwatch, this watch and connectivity crossover, it's already here. If you want a true 21st century wearable device, a true reinvention worthy of Apple's brand, just wait a little longer, it will be the iWatch. A category of its own.
Edited by Bobleh - 4/11/14 at 4:28am
post #102 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobleh View Post

Why do we have such a tiny screen and such large attachable bands? Do the bands bring more value for the user than a tiny display? Can one large flexible display replace the bands and at the same time work the same function as holding the device on your wrist (similar to - can iPhone's large screen work the same function as buttons?).

The bands aren't large. Here's a ladies watch:



Also, what's the point in powering a display on both sides of your wrist when you can only see one side at a time?

The watch used to be an essential accessory for people to know what time it was but it has become an item of jewellery and people like to personalize it with different straps made of gold and silver metal, chains of different styles, black, brown, white leather.

A large band that goes all the way round is like what Will.i.am has in the video above. It's far too bulky, it leaves a big gap inside because it's rigid and the display still can't go right round it.

The circular style allows the software to get more width without being bulky all the way round. The UI shown here looks fine:




The problem comes from enabling that functionality. When you are wandering around, how does the watch get all that information about where you are and service info? If it's all via the phone in someone's pocket then it's just a second screen and non-essential. If you have to take the phone anyway then how would a digital watch + phone be better than say an Omega watch + phone? How can it last long on battery if it has an always-on cellular connection or wifi? Is daily charging something watch-wearers want to be doing? We do it with phones ok but we don't wear our phones.

If Apple is working on a watch at all, I think they will try to make it worth doing and not just do a Sony or Samsung half-assed attempt at shoe-horning a smartphone into a watch. Motorola's concept looks well thought-out but we'll have to wait and see what the execution is like. It's all very well showing a guy on a bus glancing at his watch and it showing a map of where he is but the reality is very different. How does the watch know he wants to see the map? How long does it take to triangulate his position, GPS, Wifi, cellular? It can't do continuous tracking. How does it even load the map? How do you access and launch the app you want (swipe, swipe, swipe is slow), speech for everything would be annoying in public. How do you add an app to the watch?

I would personally love a GPS watch with an offline map to show location-aware information (vector maps pre-cached when near a computer). This doesn't need cellular and doesn't use much battery. It would however be nice to have a persistent data connection of some kind. GPRS is slow but it would just be for text data. Having passes is cool - it would be good for example to be able to buy a bus ticket and then just swipe the watch from the barcode screen on the bus or show the pass to the driver. This would use a fingerprint for authentication on the side button. Still fairly gimmicky though and I wouldn't want to pay $300 for one, nor would I want to charge it every day.
post #103 of 103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


Hi Marvin

The bands aren't large. Here's a ladies watch:

While caring about beautiful design, primary function of every Apple device is enabling great software and services through revolutionary hardware. From this point of view, a large display holds much higher value than attachable bands. The shown ladies watch's primary function is jewelery and that's not a business Apple competes or wants to compete in. Still, I can see an iWatch and a piece of jewelery worn at the same time, it's common for ladies to have several bracelets.

Also, what's the point in powering a display on both sides of your wrist when you can only see one side at a time?

A huge benefit of AMOLED displays is they can power individual pixels, not the whole screen. The biggest advantage of the interactive bracelet concept is that you can easily see context ie apart from eg today's fitness data, you also see yesterday's and the day before data. Same with app icons. This is not possible on the classic watch form factor and it is crucial for proper software. Another advantage is that you can see your data from any angle and position, however you hold your wrist, it can simply rotate to always be in your eye sight. This also holds a crucial wow factor, so important for marketing and capturing eg teen market's attention. I still remember the amazement of rotating my first iPhone to change the portrait and landscape views.

The watch used to be an essential accessory for people to know what time it was but it has become an item of jewellery and people like to personalize it with different straps made of gold and silver metal, chains of different styles, black, brown, white leather.

I believe fashion customization through software and downloadable skins is the next big thing. This is Apple's domain, not leather bands and employing sawing machines.

A large band that goes all the way round is like what Will.i.am has in the video above. It's far too bulky, it leaves a big gap inside because it's rigid and the display still can't go right round it.

If this can be realized by a musican's start-up, than wait for the product from the biggest and best electronics company on the planet :-) Also, watch out for the news on flexible technology, it's the 2014's buzz word. Just as Apple brought multitouch screens to mass market in 2007, they will do the same for flexible technology in 2014. That is why Apple has taken so much time with iWatch, that's where a lot of their engineering and billions went.

As to Moto 360 - it's a rather nice niche product. Reminds me of 2006 Blackberries - nice niche phones. Then the iPhone came and we never looked back. And while the iPhone provided a unique design and business template for future products and categories, no one really learned and the same mistakes are repeated over and over again.

Otherwise you raise some fair points. Look forward to iWatch, you'll be blown away. I already am and I have only seen a couple of Apple patents.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple to sell two sizes of iWatch with flexible AMOLED displays this fall, prices to reach 'thousands of dollars'