A prototype of a rumored product that might not actually exist might possibly have battery life issues?
This is unacceptable. Steve Jobs would never have allowed this. This company is nose-diving into irrelevancy. Sell all your stock. I'm done with Apple. Just one more example of the incompetency of Tim Cook. He needs to resign ASAP. It's like the 90's all over again.
Am I doing it right?
You need a preamble stating that you're a "long-time Apple fan", then list all your Apple devices...
Wasn't a iTV update or something supposed to be coming out? Not holding my breath on a iWatch.
Remember, they cracked the nut regarding the interface with iTV. The wristremote will accompany your iTV. And by coïncidence do a lot more as wel...
Just my two coins.
And what youth resistance? "Youth" are "resistant" to anything… until it's made "cool". I don't imagine many kids listen to the radio anymore, but Internet radio? They wouldn't go without it.
I have to think that anything you wear on your wrists will not be associated with the word slice.
By far, the most interesting part [to me] of this rumor is that the wristband computer will run iOS (as opposed to iPad Nano iOS). This means that, as technology allows, Apple can extend the capabilities of this device to make it the only iDevice you always have with you!
I think that is the most implausible part of this story. Apple didn't even adopt iOS for their touchscreen iPod Nano but instead built a unique UI for what I presume is still PicoOS to run atop it.
A new report claims Apple hopes its alleged "iWatch" will offer between 4 and 5 days of use between charges, but current prototypes get about half that.
That's a huge problem. Apple would need to figure out how a user would charge such a watch. (Inductive charger pad on a desk? Yuck. Take it off and plug it in? Yuck.)
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Citigroup's Oliver Chen noted that current watch makers see margins of about 60 percent on their products, suggesting that an "iWatch" could be a hugely profitable device for Apple.
"Hugely profitable" on a per-unit basis. But how many would they sell? Would Apple want to spend all the time, money, and effort required to design, test, iterate, perfect, integrate, market, and support such a smart watch? It might be better for them to spend all that time, money, and effort on other products and services.
You don't need to be a genius to know that a small wearable computer will have battery life issues at the current state of the art, but Apple has a long history of not releasing a product before it has a reasonable UX, which certainly includes battery life. Four to 5 days would be great but I don't think 2 to 3 days wouldn't be bad.
A wearable computer like an iWatch would also require far less power than a smartphone. No power-sapping cellular chip (one of the biggest consumers of electrical energy), a screen that's probably 1/3rd the size of the iPhone (and probably a new IGZO screen further reducing power), a much smaller (and efficient) SoC that probably runs at a really low frequency 99% of the time would all contribute to better battery life. Add to that the fact the iWatch won't run full-blown Apps that require lots of processor/graphics power. Plus, as mentioned, it could have solar or small generators to get power from the sun and/or movement to augment the battery.
As to charging, well this is where wireless comes in. I don't wear a watch anymore, but when I did I always took it off at night and put it on the nightstand beside the bed (along with my glasses, keys, wallet). So now I'd put my iWatch down on the little wireless charging pad it comes with. Or, if Apple has the extended range wireless (that they recently filed a patent on), then my iWatch would get charged by using my Macbook or keyboard that supports it. And at home I only need to have my iWatch within 3 feet of the charger for it to get topped up. If I'm in my car the wireless dongle will charge it without having to take it off.
This site is becoming a joke every day! A rumor about bad battery life on a rumored product - WOW! AI - Do you bother checking the source of validating the story! Are Apple day trader and hedge fund managers getting that desperate that they will come up with any kind of negative story on Apple to drive the price down? Pathetic and sick!
For showering I would assume so, especially if it has a leather band, but I'm not so sure about sleeping. That said, I'm not exactly and authority on watches as I stopped wearing them once I got a cellphone.
Yeah I wouldn't know either because I quit wearing my watch soon after I got my first iPhone 5 years ago
A new report claims Apple hopes its alleged "iWatch" will offer between 4 and 5 days of use between charges, but current prototypes get about half that.
That's a huge problem. Apple would need to figure out how a user would charge such a watch. (Inductive charger pad on a desk? Yuck. Take it off and plug it in? Yuck.)
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Citigroup's Oliver Chen noted that current watch makers see margins of about 60 percent on their products, suggesting that an "iWatch" could be a hugely profitable device for Apple.
"Hugely profitable" on a per-unit basis. But how many would they sell? Would Apple want to spend all the time, money, and effort required to design, test, iterate, perfect, integrate, market, and support such a smart watch? It might be better for them to spend all that time, money, and effort on other products and services.
I couldn't find any estimate of the number of watches sold per year.
But it is worth remembering that when the iPhone was announced in 2007, Steve Jobs set a goal of 10 million phones for 2008 -- 1% of the total phone market.
Quote:
Apple has revealed that the company has met its self-imposed goal of selling 10 million iPhones in calendar 2008.
Steve Jobs first described the goal in January 2007 when he introduced the iPhone. The 10 million iPhone sales represented 1% of mobile phones sold at that time.
With today's financial results, Apple revealed that the iPhone 3G had sold 6,892,000 units this quarter alone, and when combined with previous and current iPhone sales apparently add up to over 10 million with two more months to go.
As for expectations i don't think any reasonable person would expect an iWatch to run for months on one charge. Honestly it isn't a big deal to take it off at the end of the night to charge. That is if you could actually higher people to we're watches these days, as it is.a watch is generally a sign of a mentally unhealthy individuals that you would rather avoid. It is sort of like the middle class equivalent of a hoodie - gangster wear.
Mind you this is run time but think about this what happens if you actually use some of those functions that iOS supports. I'd be surprised if you get 4 hours out of the device.
In the end all of these glowing dreams of massive profits for Apple will likely go up in smoke when it is realized that they device doesn't really live up to the promise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64
Gee it is going to be a failure, my watch already runs years in a single battery why would I want to have a watch that only lasts a few days before needing a power up.
They should not call it a watch since the word watch implies certain sets of experiences for the everyday user.
It will be like calling a manure pile a bed of roses.
Words and user experience around those words create a lasting impression on people. When you hear the word Watch what are all the thinks you think about and expect from something that is called a watch.
In retrospect, it seems a little silly that he wouldn't have just regrown his eyes from his own stem cells, since we're doing that already.
Stem cell technology is not capable of actually creating/growing organs.
A common use, is to treat diseases/illnesses caused by generic defects.
I think I know what I am talking about as I degrees in Chemistry and Biochemistry.
As for expectations i don't think any reasonable person would expect an iWatch to run for months on one charge. Honestly it isn't a big deal to take it off at the end of the night to charge. That is if you could actually higher people to we're watches these days, as it is.a watch is generally a sign of a mentally unhealthy individuals that you would rather avoid. It is sort of like the middle class equivalent of a hoodie - gangster wear.
Mind you this is run time but think about this what happens if you actually use some of those functions that iOS supports. I'd be surprised if you get 4 hours out of the device.
In the end all of these glowing dreams of massive profits for Apple will likely go up in smoke when it is realized that they device doesn't really live up to the promise.
I'm thinking Apple will need 14nm tech for this along with flexible zinc battery tech. I just don't see today's tech delivering good results. Even if they come out earlier it will still be another version one product, more a proof of concept if you will. Solar charging will likely play a role as will other energy harvesting tech.
As such I still believe Apple will have a hard time finding enough guinea pigs - err early adopters to make the device a success. I never really adapted to wearing watches so I have a hard time believing that this device will be all that attractive to me. Further if you look at an iPhone it is a lot of bulk to keep on ones wrist. This sorta has me thinking it won't have cell phone functionality.
Interesting times, I have to wonder when Apple will start working on an embeddable computer. Implantable would be the better word, a communications device implanted right into ones skull.
Stem cell technology is not capable of actually creating/growing organs.
Not capable or… not paying attention? And the media could very well have screwed up the interpretation, but you'd think that if it's genuinely impossible to do that a chemist or biologist would have, you know, corrected them by now.
You know with current testing on a device like this would probably be about a day(more like 16 hours) next year about 3 days, 2015 about 2 weeks, 2016 about a month. If Apple can have something better than this I would be surprised.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
A prototype of a rumored product that might not actually exist might possibly have battery life issues?
This is unacceptable. Steve Jobs would never have allowed this. This company is nose-diving into irrelevancy. Sell all your stock. I'm done with Apple. Just one more example of the incompetency of Tim Cook. He needs to resign ASAP. It's like the 90's all over again.
Am I doing it right?
You need a preamble stating that you're a "long-time Apple fan", then list all your Apple devices...
Remember, they cracked the nut regarding the interface with iTV. The wristremote will accompany your iTV. And by coïncidence do a lot more as wel...
Just my two coins.
I have to think that anything you wear on your wrists will not be associated with the word slice.
I think that is the most implausible part of this story. Apple didn't even adopt iOS for their touchscreen iPod Nano but instead built a unique UI for what I presume is still PicoOS to run atop it.
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
A new report claims Apple hopes its alleged "iWatch" will offer between 4 and 5 days of use between charges, but current prototypes get about half that.
That's a huge problem. Apple would need to figure out how a user would charge such a watch. (Inductive charger pad on a desk? Yuck. Take it off and plug it in? Yuck.)
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Citigroup's Oliver Chen noted that current watch makers see margins of about 60 percent on their products, suggesting that an "iWatch" could be a hugely profitable device for Apple.
"Hugely profitable" on a per-unit basis. But how many would they sell? Would Apple want to spend all the time, money, and effort required to design, test, iterate, perfect, integrate, market, and support such a smart watch? It might be better for them to spend all that time, money, and effort on other products and services.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
You don't need to be a genius to know that a small wearable computer will have battery life issues at the current state of the art, but Apple has a long history of not releasing a product before it has a reasonable UX, which certainly includes battery life. Four to 5 days would be great but I don't think 2 to 3 days wouldn't be bad.
A wearable computer like an iWatch would also require far less power than a smartphone. No power-sapping cellular chip (one of the biggest consumers of electrical energy), a screen that's probably 1/3rd the size of the iPhone (and probably a new IGZO screen further reducing power), a much smaller (and efficient) SoC that probably runs at a really low frequency 99% of the time would all contribute to better battery life. Add to that the fact the iWatch won't run full-blown Apps that require lots of processor/graphics power. Plus, as mentioned, it could have solar or small generators to get power from the sun and/or movement to augment the battery.
As to charging, well this is where wireless comes in. I don't wear a watch anymore, but when I did I always took it off at night and put it on the nightstand beside the bed (along with my glasses, keys, wallet). So now I'd put my iWatch down on the little wireless charging pad it comes with. Or, if Apple has the extended range wireless (that they recently filed a patent on), then my iWatch would get charged by using my Macbook or keyboard that supports it. And at home I only need to have my iWatch within 3 feet of the charger for it to get topped up. If I'm in my car the wireless dongle will charge it without having to take it off.
This site is becoming a joke every day! A rumor about bad battery life on a rumored product - WOW! AI - Do you bother checking the source of validating the story! Are Apple day trader and hedge fund managers getting that desperate that they will come up with any kind of negative story on Apple to drive the price down? Pathetic and sick!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
For showering I would assume so, especially if it has a leather band, but I'm not so sure about sleeping. That said, I'm not exactly and authority on watches as I stopped wearing them once I got a cellphone.
Yeah I wouldn't know either because I quit wearing my watch soon after I got my first iPhone 5 years ago
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
A new report claims Apple hopes its alleged "iWatch" will offer between 4 and 5 days of use between charges, but current prototypes get about half that.
That's a huge problem. Apple would need to figure out how a user would charge such a watch. (Inductive charger pad on a desk? Yuck. Take it off and plug it in? Yuck.)
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Citigroup's Oliver Chen noted that current watch makers see margins of about 60 percent on their products, suggesting that an "iWatch" could be a hugely profitable device for Apple.
"Hugely profitable" on a per-unit basis. But how many would they sell? Would Apple want to spend all the time, money, and effort required to design, test, iterate, perfect, integrate, market, and support such a smart watch? It might be better for them to spend all that time, money, and effort on other products and services.
I couldn't find any estimate of the number of watches sold per year.
But it is worth remembering that when the iPhone was announced in 2007, Steve Jobs set a goal of 10 million phones for 2008 -- 1% of the total phone market.
Quote:
Apple has revealed that the company has met its self-imposed goal of selling 10 million iPhones in calendar 2008.
Steve Jobs first described the goal in January 2007 when he introduced the iPhone. The 10 million iPhone sales represented 1% of mobile phones sold at that time.
With today's financial results, Apple revealed that the iPhone 3G had sold 6,892,000 units this quarter alone, and when combined with previous and current iPhone sales apparently add up to over 10 million with two more months to go.
http://www.macrumors.com/2008/10/21/apple-reaches-10-million-iphone-sales-goal-for-2008/
Your first "iPhone 5" years ago or first "iPhone" 5 years ago.
I still have and wear my watch. Then again I have OCD and people might die if I don't wear one during the day. Nah, just a habit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jungmark
Your first "iPhone 5" years ago or first "iPhone" 5 years ago.
I still have and wear my watch. Then again I have OCD and people might die if I don't wear one during the day. Nah, just a habit.
first "iPhone" 5 years ago haha
Who even bothers to wear a watch these days?
As for expectations i don't think any reasonable person would expect an iWatch to run for months on one charge. Honestly it isn't a big deal to take it off at the end of the night to charge. That is if you could actually higher people to we're watches these days, as it is.a watch is generally a sign of a mentally unhealthy individuals that you would rather avoid. It is sort of like the middle class equivalent of a hoodie - gangster wear.
Mind you this is run time but think about this what happens if you actually use some of those functions that iOS supports. I'd be surprised if you get 4 hours out of the device.
In the end all of these glowing dreams of massive profits for Apple will likely go up in smoke when it is realized that they device doesn't really live up to the promise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64
Gee it is going to be a failure, my watch already runs years in a single battery why would I want to have a watch that only lasts a few days before needing a power up.
They should not call it a watch since the word watch implies certain sets of experiences for the everyday user.
It will be like calling a manure pile a bed of roses.
Words and user experience around those words create a lasting impression on people. When you hear the word Watch what are all the thinks you think about and expect from something that is called a watch.
A common use, is to treat diseases/illnesses caused by generic defects.
I think I know what I am talking about as I degrees in Chemistry and Biochemistry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Who even bothers to wear a watch these days?
As for expectations i don't think any reasonable person would expect an iWatch to run for months on one charge. Honestly it isn't a big deal to take it off at the end of the night to charge. That is if you could actually higher people to we're watches these days, as it is.a watch is generally a sign of a mentally unhealthy individuals that you would rather avoid. It is sort of like the middle class equivalent of a hoodie - gangster wear.
Mind you this is run time but think about this what happens if you actually use some of those functions that iOS supports. I'd be surprised if you get 4 hours out of the device.
In the end all of these glowing dreams of massive profits for Apple will likely go up in smoke when it is realized that they device doesn't really live up to the promise.
I'm thinking Apple will need 14nm tech for this along with flexible zinc battery tech. I just don't see today's tech delivering good results. Even if they come out earlier it will still be another version one product, more a proof of concept if you will. Solar charging will likely play a role as will other energy harvesting tech.
As such I still believe Apple will have a hard time finding enough guinea pigs - err early adopters to make the device a success. I never really adapted to wearing watches so I have a hard time believing that this device will be all that attractive to me. Further if you look at an iPhone it is a lot of bulk to keep on ones wrist. This sorta has me thinking it won't have cell phone functionality.
Interesting times, I have to wonder when Apple will start working on an embeddable computer. Implantable would be the better word, a communications device implanted right into ones skull.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hfts
Stem cell technology is not capable of actually creating/growing organs.
A common use, is to treat diseases/illnesses caused by generic defects.
I think I know what I am talking about as I degrees in Chemistry and Biochemistry.
If anyone is interested in the current state of stem cell research:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/health/research/scientists-make-progress-in-tailor-made-organs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Today's youth only finds it cool if it's tattooed or pierced.
Originally Posted by hfts
Stem cell technology is not capable of actually creating/growing organs.
Not capable or… not paying attention? And the media could very well have screwed up the interpretation, but you'd think that if it's genuinely impossible to do that a chemist or biologist would have, you know, corrected them by now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Who even bothers to wear a watch these days?
People with taste and money
http://www.guardian.co.uk/fashion/2013/jan/27/luxury-watches-defy-downturn
And then say that you're seriously considering the Samsung wristwatch because it's got an 8 inch screen