Apple applies for 'iWatch' trademark in Mexico and Taiwan

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Following news of Apple's "iWatch" trademark filing in Japan, identical applications were made public in Mexico and Taiwan on Monday, adding to the mounting pile of reports pointing to the company's possible entry into the wearable computing device market.

iWatch
Artist's rendition of purported Apple smartwatch. | Source: Yrving Torrealba


Like the Japan filing, Apple requested protection of the "iWatch" moniker in Mexico and Taiwan on June 3, just two days prior to yet another application in Russia. All requests pertain to computing hardware or, more specifically, portable computing devices.

Included in of the filing with Mexico's Institute of Industrial Property, as first discovered by 9to5Mac, Apple includes a basic graphic of the name, which reads "IWATCH" in bold block letters. Also noted in the document is Apple's name and address at 1 Infinite Loop in Cupertino, though the application was lodged by a local law firm.

iWatch
Graphic included in Apple's Mexican "iWatch" trademark application.


According to a separate report by MacRumors, the Taiwan filing also bears the same graphic and notes Apple's name and California headquarters.

While there has yet to be any "leaks" surrounding the supposed device, many reports cite insiders as saying Apple is hard at work on the "iWatch" project. Also unknown is what form the purported device will take, though most believe it will look like an advanced wristwatch.

AppleInsider was first to discover a U.S. Apple patent filing in February for a wearable computing device that boasted a flexible touchscreen fitted to a bendable bracelet.

Due to cost and the current state of technology, such a design is unlikely to appear anytime soon, though the technical features detailed by the invention could make it into a possible first-generation product.

Other tech companies like Apple rival Samsung have already announced that they will be rolling out "smart watch" products later in 2013. With the exception of Google Glass, the head-mounted augmented reality "glasses" device, most are believed to be wrist-worn.

Most recently, Apple's partner manufacturer Foxconn announced it will debut an iPhone-compatible smart watch this year, complete with biometric data sensors and low-level remote control features.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 44
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,063member


    I'd better register iWatch in Zimbabwe quick.


     


    I can't really see an iWatch like the one shown take off if only because it seems so anachronistic to strap a piece of tech onto your wrist. Maybe if they can embed it into a tattoo, it may work.

  • Reply 2 of 44
    mhiklmhikl Posts: 471member
    Why has Apple not applied earlier? I wonder if there aren't others who've patented this name to make ready coin from Apple.

    Or is this name intended for something other than a wristwatch, as others have speculated?
  • Reply 3 of 44

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post


    I'd better register iWatch in Zimbabwe quick.


     


    I can't really see an iWatch like the one shown take off if only because it seems so anachronistic to strap a piece of tech onto your wrist. Maybe if they can embed it into a tattoo, it may work.



    Here's Apple patent filing for "iWatch."  You can read all about it;


     


    http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/02/talk-about-timing-apples-wristwatch-patent-arrives.html

  • Reply 4 of 44
    smurfmansmurfman Posts: 119member
    mhikl wrote: »
    Or is this name intended for something other than a wristwatch, as others have speculated?

    Yeah, that's what I'm thinking too. Successor to the AppleTV?? It may include a wearable iPod/Remote with microphone and built in Siri for AppleTV as well as the accelerometer, gyroscope, etc for games.
  • Reply 5 of 44
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,360member


    I don't like that the artist's rendition of an "iWatch" is being shown, because it looks really bad, IMO. The article would be better with no image, and people would just have to use their imagination for a change, since I don't think that anybody knows exactly what the supposed "iWatch" is going to look like or when it's coming out. I just hope that it looks nothing like that stupid looking rendition.


     


    Apple needs to change the game completely again, otherwise don't even bother making it. The iWatch had better be so damn cool looking and have some really incredible features, so that when it is finally revealed, people will be like "damn!, I need one of those!".

  • Reply 6 of 44
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,063member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Shameer Mulji View Post


    Here's Apple patent filing for "iWatch."  You can read all about it;


     


    http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/02/talk-about-timing-apples-wristwatch-patent-arrives.html



     


    Yeah, I have no doubt that they will design one internally and to quite a lot of work on it, if only to work out the type of things that they may need to patent. This is a luxury afforded a company with limitless resources. 


     


    Nevertheless it is my opinion that tech that straps to your wrist, (unless it enables you to fly) is a non starter other than tiny niche markets for runners and the like. Especially with iPods and iPhones getting more clever and compact. You are always going to want a decent sized (read iPhone size) screen in your pocket and that object will do whatever a strap on wrist device will do. Thats how I see it.


     


    The iWatch will be like the portable DAT recorder if it were ever made. A strange amalgamation of digital and analog, neither fish nor fowl. I'm sure that others will beat Apple to it thinking that they have got one over Apple by getting it to market first but it's a red herring.


  • Reply 7 of 44
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post


     


    Yeah, I have no doubt that they will design one internally and to quite a lot of work on it, if only to work out the type of things that they may need to patent. This is a luxury afforded a company with limitless resources. 


     


    Nevertheless it is my opinion that tech that straps to your wrist, (unless it enables you to fly) is a non starter other than tiny niche markets for runners and the like. Especially with iPods and iPhones getting more clever and compact. You are always going to want a decent sized (read iPhone size) screen in your pocket and that object will do whatever a strap on wrist device will do. Thats how I see it.


     


    The iWatch will be like the portable DAT recorder if it were ever made. A strange amalgamation of digital and analog, neither fish nor fowl. I'm sure that others will beat Apple to it thinking that they have got one over Apple by getting it to market first but it's a red herring.




     


    I'm not sure I totally agree with you but I worry about the same thing.  Unless this hypothetical product has all kinds of aspects that we don't yet know about, it seems certain that it's a niche product at best.  I know I have no use for any of it's purported functions and I'm sure large numbers of other people are in the same boat as well.  


     


    I'm most surprised at the "iWatch" name if it's true that they are going with it.  It suggests a hugely popular generic, category destroying item in the same way as 'iPhone" did, but while everyone needs a phone or portable computer of some kind and it's uses are many, I just can't see that any more than a few percent of the populace needs an "iWatch."  


     


    Most people don't wear wrist watches.  


    Most people don't give a crap about how many steps they walk or what their heart rate is.  


     


    I can see the value of moving Siri our of your pocket and onto your wrist, but again, most people just don't use Siri that much that it's necessary.  


    Most people also don't get enough notifications to make having them appear on your wrist worthwhile either.  


     


    The whole thing is worrisome to me.  Feels like it's too early or perhaps simply a mistake.  

  • Reply 8 of 44
    quazzequazze Posts: 21member
    The hypothetical (yet valid) game: wristwatch or AppleTV?

    What if iWatch is intended to be the television set everyone thinks Apple is coming out with -- and Apple has fooled the entire world (publishers, consumers, investors/analysts, etc) that iWatch is a wristwatch by feeding/leaking out false information to toss everyone a curve ball once the TV comes out?

    - Apple is secretive
    - Apple thought outside the box acquiring the iPad trademark
    - Apple has outlets to leak false information to create distraction
    - Apple must shock the world yet again to pump life into the stock [darn you WallStreet!]

    My guess: It's a big question mark that I love reading about. :-)
  • Reply 9 of 44
    dreyfus2dreyfus2 Posts: 1,069member
    Right now I am rather reminded of that "iSlate.com" smokescreen Apple put up to fool Ballmer into presenting a completely unusable "HP Slate PC" hastily before Apple finally revealed the iPad, ignoring all that "slate" nonsense completely.

    Calling whatever wearable device "iWatch" would imply that its primary function is being a watch. I can't really believe that. It might wrap around the wrist, but it certainly won't be a watch first.
  • Reply 10 of 44
    Registering a trade mark does result a product launch. May be it's just a protection of the Apple branded "i". May be that's all.

    I would not be so enthusiastic
  • Reply 11 of 44
    palegolaspalegolas Posts: 1,273member
    Let's watch the watch race. Bring out the popcorn!!

    I've got this feeling the smart watch frenzy in the industry that we're seeing now got started with a rumor from Apple. And everybody was like "Crap, we better not miss the train like we did with the iPhone. Let's all make smart watches."

    A friend of mine is running this wristwatch online store, making serious money. There's high demand. But most customers buy fun, retro, luxurious style watches. A one-design-fits-all might not be what people would strap on at a mass scale, since a bracelet is really something most people, I assume, would like to reflect on your personal style.

    Another question is charging.. How would you charge it? The moment you need to take it off and plug it in is the moment it'll flop. Yet a freaking charger?? It better be inductive charging or sun charging this time. But sun charging over night might prove difficult..
    I'll stop now. I'm just eager to see what comes out of this :-)
  • Reply 12 of 44
    suddenly newtonsuddenly newton Posts: 13,737member
    They should have kept the original name: iPod Nano (6th generation).
  • Reply 13 of 44
    matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


     


    I'm not sure I totally agree with you but I worry about the same thing.  Unless this hypothetical product has all kinds of aspects that we don't yet know about, it seems certain that it's a niche product at best.  I know I have no use for any of it's purported functions and I'm sure large numbers of other people are in the same boat as well.  


     


    I'm most surprised at the "iWatch" name if it's true that they are going with it.  It suggests a hugely popular generic, category destroying item in the same way as 'iPhone" did, but while everyone needs a phone or portable computer of some kind and it's uses are many, I just can't see that any more than a few percent of the populace needs an "iWatch."  


     


    Most people don't wear wrist watches.  


    Most people don't give a crap about how many steps they walk or what their heart rate is.  


     


    I can see the value of moving Siri our of your pocket and onto your wrist, but again, most people just don't use Siri that much that it's necessary.  


    Most people also don't get enough notifications to make having them appear on your wrist worthwhile either.  


     


    The whole thing is worrisome to me.  Feels like it's too early or perhaps simply a mistake.  



    Think about all the senior population in the world. How many of them? In China alone it is 200 million people. I'm sure in US, Europe and Japan it is about the same percentage-wise. Now if all these people could have a computer on their wrists to help monitor and report their health. How big a market is that?


  • Reply 14 of 44
    tribalogicaltribalogical Posts: 1,173member
    tricky Apple... a clever name for a TV Monitor...
  • Reply 15 of 44
    poksipoksi Posts: 481member


    Wrist watch makes no sense of whatsoever... If any accessory, it should be better bluetooth earphones with mic. THere is nothing Siri couldn't let me know over earphones that I would need to look on some iWatch. Such device is actually step back. We don't wear watches anymore. Only people having few thousand Euro watches are wearing them. They are of no practical use anymore. Why forcing people to start old habits all over again?

  • Reply 16 of 44
    realisticrealistic Posts: 1,126member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Quazze View Post



    The hypothetical (yet valid) game: wristwatch or AppleTV?



    What if iWatch is intended to be the television set everyone thinks Apple is coming out with -- and Apple has fooled the entire world (publishers, consumers, investors/analysts, etc) that iWatch is a wristwatch by feeding/leaking out false information to toss everyone a curve ball once the TV comes out?



    - Apple is secretive

    - Apple thought outside the box acquiring the iPad trademark

    - Apple has outlets to leak false information to create distraction

    - Apple must shock the world yet again to pump life into the stock [darn you WallStreet!]



    My guess: It's a big question mark that I love reading about. :-)


    Another option would be Apple has no planned iWatch product and is playing to all the iWatch rumors. Apple files trademark requests, at little cost ,slowly in major markets to feed the rumor so it distracts or sidetracks the competition into wasting resources developing their version of an iWatch.


     


    Another could be that the iWatch hype is way off on what it will have for features and what it will do. The slow or leaked trademark filings are meant to encourage other companies to release their version to 'beat' Apple to the market. Three to six months or more later Apple releases their iWatch and revolutionizes another product category.


     


    If IWATCH turns out to be the rumored TV product that would stun all the companies planning to compete with Apple's rumoured wrist based iWatch.

  • Reply 17 of 44
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,063member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    I'm most surprised at the "iWatch" name...



    I think they are just taunting Samsung to come up with the S-watch.


     


     


    If the iWatch was in fact a two way wrist video a la Dick Tracy then I think there'd be some traction. Probably 2nd on every boy's 60's list of must have gadgets, after the JetPak


  • Reply 18 of 44
    frykefryke Posts: 217member

    Quote:


    poksi wrote: "Wrist watch makes no sense of whatsoever... If any accessory, it should be better bluetooth earphones with mic. THere is nothing Siri couldn't let me know over earphones that I would need to look on some iWatch. Such device is actually step back. We don't wear watches anymore. Only people having few thousand Euro watches are wearing them. They are of no practical use anymore. Why forcing people to start old habits all over again?"



    You seriously think wearing a BT headset is in anyway less uncool than wearing a wristwatch? Or to answer your question of why forcing people to start old habits again…


     


    1.) The wrist is easily accessible. A quick glance can show you whether that vibrating phone in your pants really requires your current attention, without having to actually get your phone out.


     


    2.) The wrist is a good point for checking movement, so it's perfect for tracking your sleep and for waking you up with an unobtrusive vibration alarm.


     


    3.) The current "smart watches" have a couple of things in common, and with the iPhone, they're all missing good integration. Apple's all about good integration, and I'm looking forward to see what Apple can think of there.


     


    4.) While you, personally, obviously don't think a wristwatch is something nice to have on you, there are tons of people who actually like to have some information "handy". Putting a good, flexible screen there with infinite possibilities (apps) is a serious step forward.


     


    If you still want an earpiece, that's fine. But it's not a question of one OR the other for Apple. They can do both if they have really good ideas for both.

  • Reply 19 of 44
    noelosnoelos Posts: 101member
    I like this article. Some of it is totally bogus, but there's some interesting applications for a wrist-device.
    http://asktog.com/atc/apple-iwatch/
  • Reply 20 of 44
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,233member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by tribalogical View Post



    tricky Apple... a clever name for a TV Monitor...


    Clever :-)

Sign In or Register to comment.