or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple's wearable 'iWatch' not expected to ship until early 2015
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's wearable 'iWatch' not expected to ship until early 2015 - Page 2

post #41 of 136

BREAKING: No one freaking knows!

post #42 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So Apple's getting in the game of vaporwear?

 

Do you even know what "vaporware" is? Considering you're using it to describe an announcement... I'd say you don't have a clue.

 

Vaporware is defined as being an announced product that does not yet exist and never materializes - never released.

Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
Disclaimer: The things I say are merely my own personal opinion and may or may not be based on facts. At certain points in any discussion, sarcasm may ensue.
Reply
post #43 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So Apple's getting in the game of vaporwear? It seems odd that they would announce something in the fall but not have it available to ship for the holidays. If it's not ready why announce it now? 


Why was the iPhone announced months before the release. Why was the iPad. For the same reason this might be. The FCC. All applications are public record. Apple might be able to get them to hold back that the application was filed but when the whole thing is approved, its going to get out. Apple's choice is to let it and have someone else announce it or go ahead and do it themselves. 

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #44 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post
 

Here's an idea.  Introduce it at the Sept 9th event.  Tell the world the approximate date it will ship.  Tell the world that Apple will preview it in stores for a two, or maybe three, week period beginning on the date the new iPhones go on sale in Apple stores. 

 

Cue the stores of stores being robbed for display units. 

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #45 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

The might have to do this to get developer buy in. In particular this kind of functionality will need devs, and therefore I believe there will be a limited release to people who are devs.

Yeah ...

There is nothing in the iOS beta 5 (that anyone has found) to support a specific iWatch or wearable.

There was no iOS Beta 6 release, last week, to developers -- though carrier partners got a newer beta.

The next drop is due 9/1 (Labor Day) or 9/2 ...

This would normally be the GM release (with request for app store submissions) for iDevices announced 9/9 with availability ~= 1 week later.

The iOS 8 SDK includes pretty flexible screen size capabilities, already. And, assumably, the system software for the new iPhones will scale existing apps ... so developers aren't faced with much difficulty or a hard deadline to support new screen sizes.


If there are iWatch/iWearable device announcements on 9/9 with imminent delivery -- this gives developers zero warning/ability to support them.


From this I deduce that if Apple announces iWatch/iWearable devices on 9/9, they will have delivery dates in late October at the earliest --
Assuming that a new iOS 8 release supporting the iWatch/iWearable devices is made available to developers on 9/9.


Then, somewhere later, in all this comes new iPads and new AppleTV with iOS 8 enhancements for things like split screen (run 2 apps at once in foreground), drag and drop, stylus support, apps on the AppleTV, AppleTV [smart] Home Server ...


So, there could be lots of iOS 8.x releases ...

Ohh ... I think I need to create a POP chart ...
"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 #46 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So Apple's getting in the game of vaporwear?
Not anymore than with any other product release.

Remember this is about "managing expectations". A company like Apple would have a prerelease, like suggested, to keep the speculation from getting out of hand. When people's expectations grow wildly beyond reality a company has to cool the speculation or risk disappointing customers.
Quote:
It seems odd that they would announce something in the fall but not have it available to ship for the holidays.
If a product depends upon the holidays for sales it won't be much of a product for Apple. Beyond that you seem to forget that for years all of Apples hardware was released in Janurary.
Quote:
If it's not ready why announce it now?
Did you not read about managing expectations.
Quote:
Unless Apple is that worried about it leaking? Or are they getting in the business of showing off prototypes so Cook can say to Wall Street "see we are innovating"? I'd love to call this rumor bunk, but the source is usually very accurate.
Really your perspective is totally screwed up here.
post #47 of 136

So let's take a historical look at this from a developers perspective:

 

When the iPhone was announced, it was announced early (five months) because it needed to be tested in the wild and get FCC approval.  When it went on sale, it was expensive and of course everyone wanted to build apps for it.  Steve Jobs famously said on stage that you could build web apps for it. Do you think that was their actual intention? No. I don't think so.  I think they needed to get the device to market which gave them a year to get things like Xcode and the App Store up and running.  Apple is the king of MVP (minimal viable product) and this created a lot of buzz.

 

So fast forward to 2010. Apple announces the iPad but gives a lot less lead time. But at this point, people were already making apps and they smartly allowed iPhone apps to work on the iPad.  This lead time allowed developers to either make an iPad version of their app before actual hardware was available to test on, but also allowed their apps to work on the new device. This made the iPad a great tool "out of the box", but also allowed developers to very quickly ramp up their apps.  I made one of the first apps for the iPad, but still had to wait for the iPad to arrive so I could test, fix and upload to the app store.

 

Fast forward to 2014. Apple is preparing to bring out a new device category. I call it "new" because it's not going to be like any other smart watch (I don't believe).  The trouble is that this time they are shrinking the size of the device and the screen.  They can't just have apps run in a stretched mode, but need great apps on release. They now have millions of developers anticipating something new. How do you roll out a new device category to the public with great apps?

 

Simple. You invite as many media and high-profile developers as you can to an announcement. You make the SDK immediately available and ship devices to DEVELOPERS in 2-4 weeks.  While they are busy making the latest and greatest stuff, you ramp up production now that the cat is out of the bag and you ship in December.  That's why the announcement is so early this year. That's why there is a huge mystery structure outside of the venue. This gives developers about 2-3 months to make great stuff and tell all the millions of their users that something is coming.

 

Apple simple fans the flame and will have an immediate success if done right.

post #48 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

It’s Apple. There are always demo models.

 

 

Not true when they won't ship the product relatively soon. The original iPhone as a new product was announced Jan 2007 with no hands on demo units. First hands on were at the end of June.

 

The first iPhone reveal has an (alleged) interesting behind the scenes story where at the time of announcement, the iPhone was still very much a work in progress. The demo during the announcement was the only way they found to show all of the features without having the phone crashing, the so called golden-path. They then had a few months to fix it all before putting it into production. I hope this isn't the same for the wearable product (or any for that matter), and what will be announced will be much closer to production that the original iPhone was when it was announced.

 

If there is a gap between announcement and availability, we can all surely bet the photocopiers are coming out in the meantime.

post #49 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

So is the watch [a new product category]. It’s exactly the same.

 

That's not fair - the poster clearly meant that the iPhone used hard-to-get-a-hold of parts because it was such a new category (not for Apple, but for the industry); Blackberry even called an emergency meeting where they thought that this thing can't be real IIRC.  No way any company could catch up in 6 months to iPhone in 2007.  (Still they only did it because it has to clear FCC, not because they had a jump on competition)

 

For an "iWatch" the competition could see the renders/demo product and in 6 months easily copy the design and turn out a production model with the ubiquitous availability of touch screens, mobile processors etc.  It's a different landscape for sure.

 

I think the only reason Apple would announce it early is because it has to go though FCC, because they promised stuff this year (sort of and I really doubt this would be a reason), or because it has to go through some other regulatory body (like a Health arm of the government or however it works down there).  Or MAYBE to show it to developers, but it seems like WWDC would have been the time for that, if it wasn't in production yet anyway.

post #50 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkichline View Post
 

So let's take a historical look at this from a developers perspective:

 

When the iPhone was announced, it was announced early (five months) because it needed to be tested in the wild and get FCC approval.  When it went on sale, it was expensive and of course everyone wanted to build apps for it.  Steve Jobs famously said on stage that you could build web apps for it. Do you think that was their actual intention? No. I don't think so.  I think they needed to get the device to market which gave them a year to get things like Xcode and the App Store up and running.  Apple is the king of MVP (minimal viable product) and this created a lot of buzz.

 

So fast forward to 2010. Apple announces the iPad but gives a lot less lead time. But at this point, people were already making apps and they smartly allowed iPhone apps to work on the iPad.  This lead time allowed developers to either make an iPad version of their app before actual hardware was available to test on, but also allowed their apps to work on the new device. This made the iPad a great tool "out of the box", but also allowed developers to very quickly ramp up their apps.  I made one of the first apps for the iPad, but still had to wait for the iPad to arrive so I could test, fix and upload to the app store.

 

Fast forward to 2014. Apple is preparing to bring out a new device category. I call it "new" because it's not going to be like any other smart watch (I don't believe).  The trouble is that this time they are shrinking the size of the device and the screen.  They can't just have apps run in a stretched mode, but need great apps on release. They now have millions of developers anticipating something new. How do you roll out a new device category to the public with great apps?

 

Simple. You invite as many media and high-profile developers as you can to an announcement. You make the SDK immediately available and ship devices to DEVELOPERS in 2-4 weeks.  While they are busy making the latest and greatest stuff, you ramp up production now that the cat is out of the bag and you ship in December.  That's why the announcement is so early this year. That's why there is a huge mystery structure outside of the venue. This gives developers about 2-3 months to make great stuff and tell all the millions of their users that something is coming.

 

Apple simple fans the flame and will have an immediate success if done right.

 

This makes more sense than anything else I've read, here or otherwise.

post #51 of 136
Interesting ...

My grandson's birthday is 9/5. He wants a new watch. He is trying to decide on popular watches costing between $80 and $150 (the family would all contribute).

I suggested that he might want to wait for the 9/9 announcement as Apple is rumored to be announcing a watch.


After thinking about it for a while, he said: "No, if I got the new iWatch -- it'd only get ripped off at school."


He has an iPhone 5 and about 80% of his friends/classmates have iPhones ...

I guess being first with the latest iDevice has its risks ...
"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 #52 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

The might have to do this to get developer buy in. In particular this kind of functionality will need devs, and therefore I believe there will be a limited release to people who are devs.

Why do you believe Apple will give developers a play here?
post #53 of 136

Good. I've said from the very beginning, it does not make sense to ship this during the extremely busy fall/christmas where they have enough new products to sell. Showing it off now and selling in 2015 makes perfect sense. There's pros and cons to every approach, but but it's fucking mind-numbing how some of you can call this "vaporware". This is Apple we're talking about, they're not in that business. The iPhone and iPad were shown off much earlier than launch- they were new product categories, and so is this, no matter how many shitty smartwatches are out today. 

post #54 of 136

my guess is its all about a quality experience. the device really has no 3rd party apps right now.  (picture your iphone with no 3rd party apps)

so, end the rumors, release the SDK to allow all of those (rumored) health care entities create their useful software for the device.  that will allow for a better and useful item to be on your wrist from day one.

post #55 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post
 

 

Cue the stores of stores being robbed for display units. 

They are likely iOS devices with a kill switch. Other than as a collector's item, I can't see them as having much intrinsic value.

post #56 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So Apple's getting in the game of vaporwear? It seems odd that they would announce something in the fall but not have it available to ship for the holidays. If it's not ready why announce it now? Unless Apple is that worried about it leaking? Or are they getting in the business of showing off prototypes so Cook can say to Wall Street "see we are innovating"? I'd love to call this rumor bunk, but the source is usually very accurate.

 

Not the 'wearable' market Apple was aiming for I'm sure :P 

post #57 of 136

The 5 was a GREAT phone but people expected some kind of physics-defying magical miracle.  When that didn't happen the stock slumped.

 

Same thing could happen now -- people will be bummed when they discover the Apple wearable does not offer magical spells or actual teleportation or the option to cure major diseases.

 

Expectations are so high disappointment is guaranteed in the short term.  That's why it makes sense to bundle the 2 announcements, the slightly bummer (the wearable that won't project holograms) and the candy (new phones available now!).

 

Of course, a year from now, both the new phones and the wearable will be rocking the sales.

 

This is just about managing short term expectations, in my uninformed ignorant personal opinion of course!

post #58 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

The might have to do this to get developer buy in. In particular this kind of functionality will need devs, and therefore I believe there will be a limited release to people who are devs.

Why do you believe Apple will give developers a play here?

Do you actually believe that Apple can release a device like this without developer support?

I might have agreed under the Steve Jobs era (Apple had been screwed over by Microsoft for their openness -- and Steve never forgot).

IMO, one of the overarching messages of WWDC 2014 was a new openness in Apple's relationship to the world and especially to developers.

It would be a big mistake to limit developer access to Apple's iWatch/iWearable devices -- thus giving developers less incentive to support Apple devices than, say, the Pebble, or Android wearables.

We are entering an era where timing (more than capability or style ) is becoming the most important aspect of a product's success.

Ballmer chasséd around yelling: "Developers, Developers, Developers ... "

Shakespeare said it better:

There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.


IMO, developers are the force that drives the tide ...
Edited by Dick Applebaum - 8/29/14 at 11:35am
"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 #59 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Not anymore than with any other product release.

Remember this is about "managing expectations". A company like Apple would have a prerelease, like suggested, to keep the speculation from getting out of hand. When people's expectations grow wildly beyond reality a company has to cool the speculation or risk disappointing customers.
If a product depends upon the holidays for sales it won't be much of a product for Apple. Beyond that you seem to forget that for years all of Apples hardware was released in Janurary.
Did you not read about managing expectations.
Really your perspective is totally screwed up here.
But when people like me have complained about most if not all hardware being announced in the fall the response is that it makes total sense because the holiday season is when people buy things. I'm not arguing that Apple should announce everything in the fall, far from it. It just seems odd to announce something in the fall and not have it available for Christmas. This seems like the kind if device that would be a great Christmas gift.
post #60 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlewisphilly View Post

my guess is its all about a quality experience. the device really has no 3rd party apps right now.  (picture your iphone with no 3rd party apps)
so, end the rumors, release the SDK to allow all of those (rumored) health care entities create their useful software for the device.  that will allow for a better and useful item to be on your wrist from day one.

Wouldn't the World Wide Developers Conference be the place to release an SDK? I mean that's the event developers attend. These hardware events are usually just for the press.
post #61 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

That's not fair - the poster clearly meant that the iPhone used hard-to-get-a-hold of parts because it was such a new category (not for Apple, but for the industry); Blackberry even called an emergency meeting where they thought that this thing can't be real IIRC.  No way any company could catch up in 6 months to iPhone in 2007.  (Still they only did it because it has to clear FCC, not because they had a jump on competition)

For an "iWatch" the competition could see the renders/demo product and in 6 months easily copy the design and turn out a production model with the ubiquitous availability of touch screens, mobile processors etc.  It's a different landscape for sure.

I think the only reason Apple would announce it early is because it has to go though FCC, because they promised stuff this year (sort of and I really doubt this would be a reason), or because it has to go through some other regulatory body (like a Health arm of the government or however it works down there).  Or MAYBE to show it to developers, but it seems like WWDC would have been the time for that, if it wasn't in production yet anyway.

Yes. That's what I tried to point out.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
post #62 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Why do you believe Apple will give developers a play here?

I am not a dev or programmer, but I would think that any Xcode stuff that even vaguely references an iWatch/iTime would be pretty prone to leaks. But then, my impression from the community was the Swift announcement took everyone by complete surprise.

 

You can write iOS apps without actually having a device to run them on, right? The xcode thingy does some sort of simulator?

post #63 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post
 
Do you actually believe that Apple can release a device like this without developer support?

Definitely. The iWatch with its tiny screen is not going to be suitable for complex apps anyway. All of the major developers with watch-like apps will be given early access to the apis. Everything standard that Apple will produce is already well underway and the specialty apps from health organizations and home integration companies are probably well along with their apps that will leverage the new hardware features. Apple will ship a very functional watch without the general developers. We don't need any fart apps for the watch on day one.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #64 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjtomlin View Post

Do you even know what "vaporware" is? Considering you're using it to describe an announcement... I'd say you don't have a clue.

Vaporware is defined as being an announced product that does not yet exist and never materializes - never released.
I made that comment because the other day people here we calling the new LG and Samsung watch leaks vaporware. If those things are vaporware than certainly an Apple device announced now but not available for 3-6 months is vaporware too.
post #65 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by rlewisphilly View Post

my guess is its all about a quality experience. the device really has no 3rd party apps right now.  (picture your iphone with no 3rd party apps)
so, end the rumors, release the SDK to allow all of those (rumored) health care entities create their useful software for the device.  that will allow for a better and useful item to be on your wrist from day one.

Wouldn't the World Wide Developers Conference be the place to release an SDK? I mean that's the event developers attend. These hardware events are usually just for the press.

Yes, but they would have to open the kimono on the features of a new, unannounced product -- thus destroying the surprise.

When you are talking about enhancements to existing products (screen size, TouchID, 64-bit, Metal, etc.) the SDK does [very] little to destroy the surprise of the announcement of these new versions.
"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 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Do you actually believe that Apple can release a device like this without developer support?

I might have agreed under the Steve Jobs era (Apple had been screwed over by Microsoft for their openness -- and Steve never forgot).

IMO, one of the overarching messages of WWDC 2014 was a new openness in Apple's relationship to the world and especially to developers.

It would be a big mistake to limit developer access to Apple's iWatch/iWearable devices -- thus giving developers less incentive to support Apple devices than, say, the Pebble, or Android wearables.

We are entering an era where timing (more than capability or style ) is becoming the most important aspect of a product's success.

Ballmer chasséd around yelling: "Developers, Developers, Developers ... "

Shakespeare said it better:

There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.


IMO, developers are the force that drives the tide ...

I don't disagree. I just feel that any app worthwhile would run through the iPhone's display and that the development would be rather quick. As stated before I think it's going to be a rudimentary device and it will take some time anyway to take full advantage of it. Like with the iPhone itself.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
post #67 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

 
Definitely. The iWatch with its tiny screen is not going to be suitable for complex apps anyway. All of the major developers with watch-like apps will be given early access to the apis. Everything standard that Apple will produce is already well underway and the specialty apps from health organizations and home integration companies are probably well along with their apps that will leverage the new hardware features. Apple will ship a very functional watch without the general developers. We don't need any fart apps for the watch on day one.

Totally disagree ...

Your answer assumes that only Apple has the answers for these devices -- and that only Apple can innovate with these devices.

If you look around, you can see evidence that those are bad assumptions.

Remember that Steve said that 3rd-party apps for the iPhone would be limited to web apps ...

The original Touch Screen tech and later TouchID tech come from 3rd parties.

Then there's the free Hyperlapse app from Instagram that synchs an iPhone camera and gyroscope to create the equivalent of a $15,000 video setup:

http://www.wired.com/2014/08/hyperlapse-instagrams-new-app-is-like-a-15000-video-setup-in-your-hand/


IMO, Apple should open its tech as much as possible ... if only, to determine which tech companies it wants to buy!

Edit:

I remember Bill Atkinson and a couple of other Apple employees came into our Sunnyvale store after a trip to evaluate the Commodore Amiga APU (which was superior to Apple's 68000 APU). Paraphrasing Bill: "It was nice -- but we can do that in software"

I think that Bill's statement rings more true to day than back in the mid 1980s -- because hardware advances have far outstripped the software's ability to exploit them.

Said more succinctly: Apple cannot possibly hire and manage enough programmers [developers] to exploit their hardware ... And, I think they know that!

Timing! Timing! Timing!
Edited by Dick Applebaum - 8/29/14 at 12:10pm
"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 #68 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Yes, but they would have to open the kimono on the features of a new, unannounced product -- thus destroying the surprise.

When you are talking about enhancements to existing products (screen size, TouchID, 64-bit, Metal, etc.) the SDK does [very] little to destroy the surprise of the announcement of these new versions.
Then announce the device at WWDC and say it will be available for sale before Christmas. If we don't get a product for sale this year that tells me Apple is far off from having a product good enough to sell.
post #69 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post
 

 

That's not fair - the poster clearly meant that the iPhone used hard-to-get-a-hold of parts because it was such a new category (not for Apple, but for the industry); Blackberry even called an emergency meeting where they thought that this thing can't be real IIRC.  No way any company could catch up in 6 months to iPhone in 2007.  (Still they only did it because it has to clear FCC, not because they had a jump on competition)

 

For an "iWatch" the competition could see the renders/demo product and in 6 months easily copy the design and turn out a production model with the ubiquitous availability of touch screens, mobile processors etc.  It's a different landscape for sure.

 

I think the only reason Apple would announce it early is because it has to go though FCC, because they promised stuff this year (sort of and I really doubt this would be a reason), or because it has to go through some other regulatory body (like a Health arm of the government or however it works down there).  Or MAYBE to show it to developers, but it seems like WWDC would have been the time for that, if it wasn't in production yet anyway.

 

Unless that iWatch has some health component that has to get not FCC approval, but FDA approval. No one would be ready to start gearing up for that.

post #70 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by WonkoTheSane View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Do you actually believe that Apple can release a device like this without developer support?

I might have agreed under the Steve Jobs era (Apple had been screwed over by Microsoft for their openness -- and Steve never forgot).

IMO, one of the overarching messages of WWDC 2014 was a new openness in Apple's relationship to the world and especially to developers.

It would be a big mistake to limit developer access to Apple's iWatch/iWearable devices -- thus giving developers less incentive to support Apple devices than, say, the Pebble, or Android wearables.

We are entering an era where timing (more than capability or style ) is becoming the most important aspect of a product's success.

Ballmer chasséd around yelling: "Developers, Developers, Developers ... "

Shakespeare said it better:

There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.


IMO, developers are the force that drives the tide ...

I don't disagree. I just feel that any app worthwhile would run through the iPhone's display and that the development would be rather quick. As stated before I think it's going to be a rudimentary device and it will take some time anyway to take full advantage of it. Like with the iPhone itself.

Except, one of the big advantages to an iWatch is that the iPhone stays in your pocket or purse. If all a 3rd-party app can do is notify you through the iWatch to take out your iPhone ... why bother?

Rather, have a cloud or iPhone app that interacts with the iWatch, e.g.:

Here's a graph of your [whatever] activity * for today (tap to show graph against yesterday, week, month, etc.)

* Activity can be anything from a walk, workout, bike route, stock/portfolio performance, budget (can I afford to buy those ...).

I assume that you will be able to buy those ... with the iWatch (via the iPhone or cloud).

When it comes to other, headless, wearables it's a little difficult to predict what notifications, if any, the wearable can receive ... But, if an Apple-branded app can send those notifications, why shouldn't a 3rd-party app be able to do so too?

With apologies to Tony Orlando:  Buzz three times on the shoulder if you'll meet me -- twice on the hip means you ain't gonna' show ...
"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 #71 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Totally disagree ...

Your answer assumes that only Apple has the answers for these devices -- and that only Apple can innovate with these devices.
 

Not at all. I'm talking for release only, not forever. Apple and its trusted major developers are perfectly capable of having a software suite suitable for launch. Everyone else can wait until after the launch. Just like they did with the M7 and 64 bit. They gave some high end game makers advance hardware and SDKs so they would have some cool stuff to show at the announcement. A delay of the launch is not necessarily BECAUSE, ALL the developers need advanced preparation time. All the major apps will get advanced SDKs and hardware to test.


Edited by mstone - 8/29/14 at 12:47pm

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #72 of 136
I think it's odd that we have seen iPhone 6 parts for months. We have even seen nearly functional devices, but haven't seen even a watchband for an iWatch that is supposed to be announced in under 2 weeks. Even if they aren't going into production until 2015 you'd think some parts would be floating around the supply chain somewhere.
post #73 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Except, one of the big advantages to an iWatch is that the iPhone stays in your pocket or purse. If all a 3rd-party app can do is notify you through the iWatch to take out your iPhone ... why bother?

Rather, have a cloud or iPhone app that interacts with the iWatch, e.g.:

Here's a graph of your [whatever] activity * for today (tap to show graph against yesterday, week, month, etc.)

* Activity can be anything from a walk, workout, bike route, stock/portfolio performance, budget (can I afford to buy those ...).

I assume that you will be able to buy those ... with the iWatch (via the iPhone or cloud).

When it comes to other, headless, wearables it's a little difficult to predict what notifications, if any, the wearable can receive ... But, if an Apple-branded app can send those notifications, why shouldn't a 3rd-party app be able to do so too?

With apologies to Tony Orlando:  Buzz three times on the shoulder if you'll meet me -- twice on the hip means you ain't gonna' show ...

Again, I don't think we are in disagreement here. I just think that for release they do not require dev support. Bit they can have exactly what you laid out read plus the usual two or three invited debs to showcase their apps. That's will be sufficient for starters. Then it can roll out and give the debs the chance to develop and fully exploit the new features.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, my opinion, man.
Reply
post #74 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Totally disagree ...


Your answer assumes that only Apple has the answers for these devices -- and that only Apple can innovate with these devices.

 
Not at all. I'm talking for release only, not forever. Apple and its trusted major developers are perfectly capable of having a software suite suitable for launch. Everyone else can wait until after the launch. Just like they did with the M7 and 64 bit. They gave some high end game makers advance hardware and SDKs so they would have some cool stuff to show at the announcement.

No problem with that!

I misunderstood your position.

And that approach avoids the very difficult situation where the SDK release destroys the product announcement surprise.

And, it encourages developers to innovate to where they become a member of the select few!


We're in agreement!
"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 #75 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Wouldn't the World Wide Developers Conference be the place to release an SDK? I mean that's the event developers attend. These hardware events are usually just for the press.

In an ideal world, I suspect Apple would have liked to have this ready 3 months ago so that they could have done exactly that.

 

Having said that everything about the iOS release and the Xcode changes points to unusual and changeable screen sizes and making your apps work no matter what.  I'm sure there are plenty of developers who could have their apps working in a small-screened device within days of any announcement.  Once Apple announces the hardware specifics, they can drop the other foot and give developers all the necessary details.

post #76 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Then announce the device at WWDC and say it will be available for sale before Christmas. If we don't get a product for sale this year that tells me Apple is far off from having a product good enough to sell.

If we don't get a product for sale this year that tells me that Apple isn't ready to sell a product until next year.  How is that tautology interesting?

post #77 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post
 

 

That's not fair - the poster clearly meant that the iPhone used hard-to-get-a-hold of parts because it was such a new category (not for Apple, but for the industry); Blackberry even called an emergency meeting where they thought that this thing can't be real IIRC.  No way any company could catch up in 6 months to iPhone in 2007.  (Still they only did it because it has to clear FCC, not because they had a jump on competition)

 

For an "iWatch" the competition could see the renders/demo product and in 6 months easily copy the design and turn out a production model with the ubiquitous availability of touch screens, mobile processors etc.  It's a different landscape for sure.

 

I think the only reason Apple would announce it early is because it has to go though FCC, because they promised stuff this year (sort of and I really doubt this would be a reason), or because it has to go through some other regulatory body (like a Health arm of the government or however it works down there).  Or MAYBE to show it to developers, but it seems like WWDC would have been the time for that, if it wasn't in production yet anyway.


I'd say the number one reason to announce early is to give devs time to build apps for it.


Edited by Eric Swinson - 8/29/14 at 1:05pm
post #78 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Swinson View Post
 


I'd say the number one reason to announce is to give dev times to build apps for it.

I expect part of the timing (assuming that's what they announce on the 9th) is that the iPhone 6 is ready to go.  It could be that if they weren't announcing the iPhone 6 they wouldn't be holding an iWatch event this soon (assuming it's not ready to be sold until next year).  But if Apple announced the 6 and said nothing about a watch, the news would be "no iWatch from Apple" rather than "new iPhone here; iWatch coming soon."

post #79 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

So Apple's getting in the game of vaporwear? It seems odd that they would announce something in the fall but not have it available to ship for the holidays. If it's not ready why announce it now? Unless Apple is that worried about it leaking? Or are they getting in the business of showing off prototypes so Cook can say to Wall Street "see we are innovating"? I'd love to call this rumor bunk, but the source is usually very accurate.

 

Steve Jobs did the same thing with iPhone.  The logic here is two-fold:  (1) if it's a new product category that won't cannibalize an existing Apple product, then there is no harm, and (2) some benefit might be gained by keeping potential customers from buying something else from a competitor in the meantime (like, during Christmas).

 

But the rumor still may be bunk.  I'm just saying that if it were true, it would not be indicative of vaporwear nor would it be unprecedented for Apple to do.

 

Thompson

post #80 of 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazda 3s View Post
 

So if Apple shows it September, and doesn't ship it until 2015, wouldn't that be the "vaporware" that everyone accuses other manufacturers of pulling off? 

Not if when they announce it they also show a working prototype (at least some major features) and tell you exactly when to expect it.  As with Steve Jobs and iPhone in January of 2007.

 

Some other companies announce they are working on something and don't show it.  They typically don't say when you'll get it either.  For all we know, it might as well be vapor.  Hence the name "vaporware".

 

Thompson

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple's wearable 'iWatch' not expected to ship until early 2015