or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple granted comprehensive 'iTime' smartwatch patent with in-strap circuitry, arm gesture support
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple granted comprehensive 'iTime' smartwatch patent with in-strap circuitry, arm gesture support - Page 2

post #41 of 100
iTime after iTime
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #42 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

iTime after iTime

Morris Day and the iTime
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #43 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuffe View Post

For sure it's going that way, as I said.  But it's nowhere near close to actually being there yet was my point, let's not be getting ahead of ourselves, taking it from the accessory side first then other than standard heart rate straps etc there are precious few non ANT+ devices for things like power meters and so fort, and those that are around are 1st gen products.  It's tipping, but its not tipped.  Either way NFC is toast.  Apple (and we) dodged a bullet with that tech...

In fitness equipment you might have a point, but as soon as we start talking about wearables (Fitbit, UP24, Pebble, etc), Bluetooth 4.0 (or occasionally an older iteration) is the only real player.
post #44 of 100
I have seen a few posts, including mine, that emphasized the iWatch as the evolution of the iPod Nano. Whether this is the case, or whether this is misdirection by Apple, or merely CYA patents remains to be seen. I am betting Apple is leveraging iPod--"the product that changed the world, and your life, is reborn to do it again."
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
A.k.a. AppleHead on other forums.
Reply
post #45 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post

(I‘ve Had) The iTime of My Life (Dirty Dancing)

iTime Is Running Out (of battery life), by Muse

 

;)

post #46 of 100

#212 reminds me of a scene in Max Headroom (80's) when they plugged the cops watch into the TV to view a crime scene that took place previously.

iClock or iPhase or iWrist ?

post #47 of 100

As interesting as the iWatch might be, I can't get too excited about wearing anything on my wrist.  I have a nice collection of watches with dead batteries and yes, the watches were replaced by my iPhone since it does a fine job of telling time. But the real reason they lie dormant is that I strongly dislike the physical presence of the watch on my arm.  It annoys me throughout the day.  It bangs into things and gets damaged - which also annoys me.  Even though the iWatch would offer myriad feature beyond time telling, I still can't ignore the liberty of not having a thing on my arm all day long.   Anyone else feel the same?

post #48 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
 

Not keen on the in-strap circuitry part.  Samsung rightly got skewered when the first version of their Gear watch had the camera in the strap; being able to replace the strap independently of the watch face is a pretty big deal.

 

instrap circuitry is key.   

1) it provided detection that the device is being worn (auto on/off)

2) antennas

3) it provides all the bio-telemetry.

4) componentry can be spread out to provide greater accuracy ( multiple accelerometers to better detect rotation).

 

As for separate replacement... same was said of batteries in phones.  If made correctly (flexible, non-breakable, non-degrading material, no hinges)  the only thing that needs field replacement will be the clasping mechanism.

post #49 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

I have seen a few posts, including mine, that emphasized the iWatch as the evolution of the iPod Nano. Whether this is the case, or whether this is misdirection by Apple, or merely CYA patents remains to be seen. I am betting Apple is leveraging iPod--"the product that changed the world, and your life, is reborn to do it again."

I will be surprised if the iWatch/Time runs iOS.  My guess it will be iPod's OS or a variant that allows for secure pairing to iOS devices and downloading of firmware upgrades that way.

 

I doubt it was misdirection, I really think it's CYA in that the decision/path hadn't been locked down at patent submission time.

post #50 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by sully54 View Post

A square watch. Ugh.

A flat phone - ugh

post #51 of 100

The iWatch is all about mobile payment. The compelling reason for wearing an iWatch will be mobile payment. 

post #52 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post
 

As interesting as the iWatch might be, I can't get too excited about wearing anything on my wrist.  I have a nice collection of watches with dead batteries and yes, the watches were replaced by my iPhone since it does a fine job of telling time. But the real reason they lie dormant is that I strongly dislike the physical presence of the watch on my arm.  It annoys me throughout the day.  It bangs into things and gets damaged - which also annoys me.  Even though the iWatch would offer myriad feature beyond time telling, I still can't ignore the liberty of not having a thing on my arm all day long.   Anyone else feel the same?

 

I agree with 90% of this.  I'm bi-dexterous: fine motor work/write right handed, therefore most of the time I wear my watch on my left hand, but I do power stuff with my left hand (throw, hammer (and hammer-throw ;-), tennis, golf).  and ambidextrous with a lot of stuff.  The watch gets a beating then (those self winding watches of the 70's were always over wound).   

 

 
I'm assuming that the iWatch will be the 'most indestructible computer on this planet or any(tm)'  (tm me... Apple, just a penny per 100 impressions, thanks), and the sapphire/kevlar/titanium/coated-with-polymers-that-emulate-your-mother's-caress-and-emits-lavender&rose-scent-when-warmed-beyond-30Deg-celsius  device will feel calming against your skin.
 
 

 I note that 80% of my iPhone handling when on the move is 'check the notifications and/or time and/or wireless reception'.    I'd love to have a device that

0) told me the time, scrollable notification list, and phone network status

1) told my heart rate on the fly

2) had detached mode 2 hours of songs on it BTed to BT Earbuds

3) tracked my GPS location accurately for later upload.

4) gave me a notification scroll  (I'm constantly needing reminders for meetings, important emails)

5) held my alarms/calendar for the next 24 hours

6) was waterproof (last iPhone was replaced for 'sweat immersion') (place iPhone in a waterproof container on my bike,kayak)

For those items, and especially the last, I'll deal with the 'thinnest, most powerful watch ever built (tm me, again)'

post #53 of 100

Quote:

Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post
 

As interesting as the iWatch might be, I can't get too excited about wearing anything on my wrist.  I have a nice collection of watches with dead batteries and yes, the watches were replaced by my iPhone since it does a fine job of telling time. But the real reason they lie dormant is that I strongly dislike the physical presence of the watch on my arm.  It annoys me throughout the day.  It bangs into things and gets damaged - which also annoys me.  Even though the iWatch would offer myriad feature beyond time telling, I still can't ignore the liberty of not having a thing on my arm all day long.   Anyone else feel the same?

 

Hell no...I feel pretty naked without a watch on my wrist.

 

I really don't get this whole "phones have replaced watches" sentiment. A phone might tell the time, but it's nowhere near as convenient as wearing a watch on your wrist - a quick glance is much easier than digging your phone out of your pocket. If (like me) you ride a motorcycle (and I admit this is a minority argument) a phone cannot replace the convenience of being able to quickly glance down and check the time). The watches I wear are mostly for fashion (a TAG Formula 1 being the main watch I wear) as a piece of jewelry however, but I'd never stop wearing a watch just because my iPhone has a clock on it. In fact, if there IS an iWatch, I'd definitely wear that in addition (not instead of) a regular watch and a phone :-)

post #54 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
 
Possibly, but a phone's battery is part of its function, whereas a watch strap is both aesthetic and also dictates its comfort.  I think making the strap non-replaceable would be seen as a significant failing of any such product.

The main issue is that all small mobile devices are designed with a series of compromises, small screen, small battery, small text, UI, etc. Using the watch band as extra space for electronics is a logical outcome, otherwise the body of the watch would be too large.  I don't wear a watch but when I did, I don't ever recall having to replace the band, because it was heavy duty metal. iDevices generally have a 2-4 year life span so most people will probably not need to replace the band before they replace the watch.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #55 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent McAnulty View Post

NFC is dead-end technology, as is Android.  In 2011, Apple was likely still coming to those conclusions.  Although you never know: perhaps the iPhone 6 5.5" will contain the new Adobe Flash NFC Pico-Projecting 3D Haptic Display.
NFC isn't dead end, just it's kinda misused. Apple has to support it, because NFC is what contactless payment cards use for various things. Here's a practical application, tell the watch to go into "contactless card mode (transit)" and use it to get on and off trains and buses. That's far more practical than whipping out the phone or keeping a dozen NFC cards in a wallet. A NFC chip part would be on the bottom part so you don't need to tilt your arm in an awkward angle to use it. For "communications networks" Bluetooth is still the best option.

Anyway that's partly why I haven't picked up an iPhone. I wanted to see both NFC and VoLTE before I'd absolutely get one. I can live without either, but I can also get by with my UMTS Nokia non-smartphone as long as Google doesn't break the maps app on it, as it hasn't been updated in 3 years. I'm pretty sure Microsoft isn't going to keep the Nokia maps working.

I'd even be fine seeing a return of the 3.5" size if the battery returned to 300 standby hours. I don't really want/care about larger screen sizes because I want something that fits in a pocket.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roly View Post

Quote:

Hell no...I feel pretty naked without a watch on my wrist.

I really don't get this whole "phones have replaced watches" sentiment.

I haven't worn a watch since the last one I had made a beep of death and was unsalvageable. I never liked wearing a watch because it would interfere with typing. I've seen one too many laptops where the person's metal watchband had scratched all the paint off it.
post #56 of 100
"Next month Samesung release S Time."

The "S" stands for "sh*t."
post #57 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roly View Post
 

Quote:

 

Hell no...I feel pretty naked without a watch on my wrist.

 

I really don't get this whole "phones have replaced watches" sentiment. A phone might tell the time, but it's nowhere near as convenient as wearing a watch on your wrist - a quick glance is much easier than digging your phone out of your pocket. If (like me) you ride a motorcycle (and I admit this is a minority argument) a phone cannot replace the convenience of being able to quickly glance down and check the time). The watches I wear are mostly for fashion (a TAG Formula 1 being the main watch I wear) as a piece of jewelry however, but I'd never stop wearing a watch just because my iPhone has a clock on it. In fact, if there IS an iWatch, I'd definitely wear that in addition (not instead of) a regular watch and a phone :-)

I was right there with you until the end.  I wear a watch 24x7 except when I'm in the shower or pool.  But there is NFW I'm going to wear two watches.

post #58 of 100
Apropos of nothing, when is Apple going to buy Beats.com? "BeatsbyDre.com" is not only a lousy domain address, it no longer reflects the ownership. Just buy beats.com, please.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #59 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post
 

 

instrap circuitry is key.  

1) it provided detection that the device is being worn (auto on/off)

2) antennas

3) it provides all the bio-telemetry.

4) componentry can be spread out to provide greater accuracy ( multiple accelerometers to better detect rotation).

 

As for separate replacement... same was said of batteries in phones.  If made correctly (flexible, non-breakable, non-degrading material, no hinges)  the only thing that needs field replacement will be the clasping mechanism.

Aside from the fact that you've just made up a bunch of functionality to justify the conclusion, none of those things make the watch strap key.  And beyond that, the watch strap being a pliable piece of material that would take some punishment means that Apple shouldn't embed critical components in it or make it a necessary part of the watch structure, it introduces vulnerability, as well as the truth that Apple just aren't very good at that sort of thing, their cables have a bad reputation for fraying, and their headphones are not very robust.  Apple are great at sealed units, not at flexible and durable parts.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #60 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

...as well as the truth that Apple just aren't very good at that sort of thing… Apple are great at sealed units, not at flexible and durable parts.

“PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in."
– Ed Colligan, Palm CEO, circa 2007

"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 #61 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by troehl View Post

I think the concept and the technology has rapidly developed since then and the patents described here are mostly out of date, except maybe the gestures. I don't think anybody has been talking about that yet.

Must be headed for a real Apple product since Sammy has filed a whole lotta patent applications for similar functionality in the past year. 1hmm.gif

https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=pts&hl=en&q=wearable+electronic+gesture&num=10&qscrl=1&gws_rd=ssl
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #62 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misa View Post

Anyway that's partly why I haven't picked up an iPhone. I wanted to see both NFC and VoLTE before I'd absolutely get one. I can live without either, but I can also get by with my UMTS Nokia non-smartphone as long as Google doesn't break the maps app on it, as it hasn't been updated in 3 years. I'm pretty sure Microsoft isn't going to keep the Nokia maps working.

That's a poor analogy. If you switch to your Nokia non-smartphone, you will lose a lot of useful functionality. I am not aware of any actual uses of NFC.

Can you name even one implementation of NFC that I can use in the real world today (that doesn't require me to live in Japan or wherever and have a local credit card)?
post #63 of 100

While iTime is kind of limiting, I still like it better than iWatch with its double meaning. I'm surprised Apple TV wasn't the iWatch when you think about it. 

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #64 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

While iTime is kind of limiting, I still like it better than iWatch with its double meaning. I'm surprised Apple TV wasn't the iWatch when you think about it. 

The technology wasn't there in 2007. It was barely there for the iPhone.

"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 #65 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


The technology wasn't there in 2007. It was barely there for the iPhone.

Obviously. Wasn't referencing the patent, merely the current/potential naming conventions. 

I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #66 of 100

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post
 

As interesting as the iWatch might be, I can't get too excited about wearing anything on my wrist. 

 

....the real reason [my watch collection] lies dormant is that I strongly dislike the physical presence of the watch on my arm.  It annoys me throughout the day.  It bangs into things and gets damaged - which also annoys me.  Even though the iWatch would offer myriad feature beyond time telling, I still can't ignore the liberty of not having a thing on my arm all day long.   Anyone else feel the same?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roly View Post
 

Hell no...I feel pretty naked without a watch on my wrist.

 

I really don't get this whole "phones have replaced watches" sentiment. A phone might tell the time, but it's nowhere near as convenient as wearing a watch on your wrist - a quick glance is much easier than digging your phone out of your pocket. If (like me) you ride a motorcycle (and I admit this is a minority argument) a phone cannot replace the convenience of being able to quickly glance down and check the time). The watches I wear are mostly for fashion (a TAG Formula 1 being the main watch I wear) as a piece of jewelry however, but I'd never stop wearing a watch just because my iPhone has a clock on it. In fact, if there IS an iWatch, I'd definitely wear that in addition (not instead of) a regular watch and a phone :-)


I'm with WelshDog and then some.  I feel positively liberated since I quit strapping/unstrapping an appliance on my wrist multiple times a day.  And it's almost hard to look around any interior environment (car, home) without the time on display somewhere.  In retrospect in this day and age, to my (admittedly strange) mind, more slave bracelet than fashion accessory.

Also one less damn object to maintain, manage, keep track of. 

 

And in my case, with an allergy to base metal, there are very few watches I can even wear without breaking out, i.e., all plastic with the watch mounted on top of the strap, or solid 14K gold (with special hard to come by custom hypoallergenic wrist pins). 

I even experienced a strong desire to photoshop the damn things out of my pics as well - they were always (sometimes glaring) distraction points in nice human compositions....


And something that has to be charged more often, is likely more susceptible to liquid damage, and has more things that require fiddling with or fixing, well... ....nawww, a big no sale here....

....except for the medical monitoring part since I'm getting up in years......  ....that could be life-enhancing and even life-saving, so the rumors that that's a main focus of Apple's take mean I may still end up with one....

In which case I hope there's a pendant version that can be worn around the neck....

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #67 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post
 

 

AFAIK there is a watch out there already using gestures. The key to these watches will be sensors. And I personally believe a killer feature would be decent music playback. It's be nice to have a set of Beats and a watch and go for your jog.

Wouldn't it make more sense to build a iPod nano-like player directly into the Beats wireless headphones?

For your sake, I hope you're right.
Reply
For your sake, I hope you're right.
Reply
post #68 of 100

I work in a medical laboratory, and when I am gloved up in the biosafety cabinet, I can't pull out my phone when I get a ton of notifications. Having that on my wrist would let me know if it's something actually important that I need to pay attention to right then. Substituting for various NFC-enabled cards would be great too, as would be gesturing or using the watch screen to control TVs and other devices, as would be health sensor stuff. Diabetics like my friend would especially appreciate the ability to check blood sugar without a finger prick, if the technology exists for that. So while I stopped wearing a watch a while ago, I'd go back for a capable enough smart device.

post #69 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


“PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in."
– Ed Colligan, Palm CEO, circa 2007

While that's a funny call back, you can't use it as a ready baked answer for Apple entering any conceivable industry.  Apple had no evident experience in mobile computing when Ed Colligan made those comments (apart from the Newton, which was actually pretty good, though didn't sell amazingly - Ed forgot about that), but Apple do have form with pliable materials, and as mentioned, their cables seem to fray at an above average rate, and I've lost track of the pairs of headphones I've gone through.  If those are the benchmarks for a watch strap with embedded circuitry then they aren't good benchmarks.

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #70 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post
 

While that's a funny call back, you can't use it as a ready baked answer for Apple entering any conceivable industry.  Apple had no evident experience in mobile computing when Ed Colligan made those comments (apart from the Newton, which was actually pretty good, though didn't sell amazingly - Ed forgot about that), but Apple do have form with pliable materials, and as mentioned, their cables seem to fray at an above average rate, and I've lost track of the pairs of headphones I've gone through.  If those are the benchmarks for a watch strap with embedded circuitry then they aren't good benchmarks.

I have to assume they would likely use a metal or glass-coated watch band for the premium feel, as well as to protect the electronics. A well-built non-plastic watchband is never going to fray like a flimsy earbud wire, and would be more than sufficient to protect the circuitry.

post #71 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

Possibly, but a phone's battery is part of its function, whereas a watch strap is both aesthetic and also dictates its comfort.  I think making the strap non-replaceable would be seen as a significant failing of any such product.

Stop thinking that way. Imagine instead Apple offering up a standard interface where you can mix and match components at will.
post #72 of 100

Huh?  What components?  There's only the strap and the watch unit, unless you're foreseeing some sort of charm bracelet of electronics.

 

...

 

Now there's an idea!

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #73 of 100
Originally Posted by huglev View Post
Excited about Jobs' last project to launch soon.

 

Love of humanity, can we get better policing of the concern trolling?

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply

“The only thing more insecure than Android is its userbase.” – Can’t Remember

Reply
post #74 of 100

Don't you have to express concern in order to be labelled a concern troll?

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #75 of 100
The iWatch will not look anything like the patent picture. And the data that it will be sharing is evident when you see the iOS 8 Health App.
post #76 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

He can't dream about it now.

Because he has nightmares instead.

I wish we could all have his nightmares then.

"According to U.S. Securities and Exchange (SEC) documents, Ballmer owns more than 333 million shares in Microsoft. At Monday's closing price of $44.83, those shares were valued at $14.9 billion. 1eek.gif

On the day before Ballmer stepped aside, Microsoft's share price was $36.48, putting his portfolio's worth at just over $12.1 billion. Because of the 23% increase in share value since Feb. 3, Ballmer's Microsoft holdings have appreciated in value by almost $2.8 billion.

The "Nadella Effect" -- Wall Street's assumption that the new CEO will turn around Microsoft's fortunes" (via Network world)
http://www.networkworld.com/article/2456429/data-center/nadella-effect-makes-ballmer-2-8b-richer.html?source=NWWNLE_nlt_daily_pm_2014-07-22#tk.rss_all

I doubt Ballmer loses much sleep.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #77 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


I wish we could all have his nightmares then.

"According to U.S. Securities and Exchange (SEC) documents, Ballmer owns more than 333 million shares in Microsoft. At Monday's closing price of $44.83, those shares were valued at $14.9 billion. 1eek.gif

On the day before Ballmer stepped aside, Microsoft's share price was $36.48, putting his portfolio's worth at just over $12.1 billion. Because of the 23% increase in share value since Feb. 3, Ballmer's Microsoft holdings have appreciated in value by almost $2.8 billion.

The "Nadella Effect" -- Wall Street's assumption that the new CEO will turn around Microsoft's fortunes"

I doubt he loses much sleep.

 

Plus Ballmer is still on the MS board of directors. He's like a bad penny.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #78 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I wish we could all have his nightmares then.

"According to U.S. Securities and Exchange (SEC) documents, Ballmer owns more than 333 million shares in Microsoft. At Monday's closing price of $44.83, those shares were valued at $14.9 billion. 1eek.gif

On the day before Ballmer stepped aside, Microsoft's share price was $36.48, putting his portfolio's worth at just over $12.1 billion. Because of the 23% increase in share value since Feb. 3, Ballmer's Microsoft holdings have appreciated in value by almost $2.8 billion.

The "Nadella Effect" -- Wall Street's assumption that the new CEO will turn around Microsoft's fortunes" (via Network world)
http://www.networkworld.com/article/2456429/data-center/nadella-effect-makes-ballmer-2-8b-richer.html?source=NWWNLE_nlt_daily_pm_2014-07-22#tk.rss_all

I doubt Ballmer loses much sleep.

In a world where Kanye West has a net worth of a $100,000,000 I wouldn't place too much importance on judging the true worth of a person by their bank balance.

And how will the world look back on the legacy of Steve Ballmer in twenty years?
post #79 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

In a world where Kanye West has a net worth of a $100,000,000 I wouldn't place too much importance on judging the true worth of a person by their bank balance.

And how will the world look back on the legacy of Steve Ballmer in twenty years?

Looking at Ballmer I doubt he's alive in 20 years.

And I agree with you. The size of your bankroll has never been a good indication of your worth as a person. Sadly a lot of folks seem to think money does make them a smarter and more valuable human being than those less-well-off. I've seen a lot of posters even here denegrate others that have less in the way of financial resources than they do, believing themselves to be "more worthy". I'm sure you've seem those posts too.
Edited by Gatorguy - 7/22/14 at 1:15pm
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #80 of 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Looking at Ballmer I doubt he's alive in 20 years.

We'll have to see how things develop develop develop develop.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple granted comprehensive 'iTime' smartwatch patent with in-strap circuitry, arm gesture support