That concept truly nailed how Apple products look like. It looks so shiny, rounded and soft. The screen won't be that size, but that may be the best concept I've ever seen. The bracelet is exactly like what I imagined for the iwatch myself. Just a big ring. What's simpler than that?
I agree, Clemy.
It looks so superior to the earlier square concept. That was too much like the Pebble. I hope Apple does indeed make something like this. They will show Nike and the rest how it's done.
Also, this looks like the first real application of a "curved' screen. The curved TV's and LG cellphones look novel but only seem to make the screen curved b/c they can.
I know there is some benefit to viewing the curved TV's.
Functionality will be just as important as price. It could be $99 and it wouldn't sell if people didn't see it as useful. People already have a phone that acts as a computer that fits in their pockets. An iWatch would have to incorporate functions beyond that which would: a) not cannibalize iPhone sales and/or make enough money to not worry about that; b) have functions not available on the iPhone [and/or available on the phone but not on the watch... limited functionality], yet attractive enough for people to want it.
Apple has sold over:
400,000,000 iPhones
200,000,000 iPads
350,000,000 iPods
and you dismiss the possiblity of them selling 50,000,000 iWatches in the first year of release?
A product that will be much cheaper than the iPad/iPhone/iPod during its opening release?
In 2012 the dying iPod sold 35,000,000 units at an ASP very close to $299.
And you don't think a brand new product could sell more than that?
Those other products didn't sell that many in their first year and have far higher utility than a watch. The iPhone was 6 million, the iPad was 15 million.
Despite the lower price, $200+ is expensive in its class of digital watches. Sony's smartwatch (the first smartwatch) was $99 and now $77:
Samsung says 800k Galaxy Gears sold in its first 2 months last year but then we hear nothing. No reports about topping 1 million or 2 million. What they do is fill the retail channels first and if the units don't sell well, they are bundled with other products or they cut the prices:
It can't be selling all that well on its own if they have to cut prices by about 1/3 within 4 months and release a follow-up product so soon after. They even refer to their own watch as 'bulky'.
The watch market is large but the vast majority of digital watches sold are cheap watches and the high value ones are Swiss watches. There's a market for high-end digital watches but it's a small market. I have no doubt that Apple could make a better watch than Samsung but Samsung currently makes the leading product in that market and 800k in 2 months exceeded their expectations. 50 million per year would be 10x that volume.
Medical applications and biometric data is interesting to average consumers for about 5 minutes. Who sits around wondering what their heart rate is or body temperature? If you feel fine, you don't think about it.
The bottom line is what problem will this watch solve? Telling the time doesn't matter any more. We get notifications already on the phone and most people don't get enough to warrant putting them on the wrist. It can't have a headphone jack, wifi isn't likely (so it has to be used alongside a phone anyway), it has no keyboard, putting cameras on it would be tricky too. The Gear can be made to run full Android apps but it's crazy because the screen is so small:
My proposition for such a device to be anything other than a hobby is that the device must extend the life of the user's iPhone by a significant margin which I believe can only be achieved by pushing notifications to the device so the user needn't peruse their device upon every notification.
Never mind a dang watch get at least a 4.5 inch iphone out their im not gonna wait another year for a bigger phone
I do not understand the obsession some have with a larger screen on a smartphone.
Since the beginning of recorded history advances in telecommunications have been marked by improvements in availability, portability and reliability. Advances in portability primarily resulted from miniaturization, microminiaturization and, most recently, nanotechnology.
My proposition for such a device to be anything other than a hobby is that the device must extend the life of the user's iPhone by a significant margin which I believe can only be achieved by pushing notifications to the device so the user needn't peruse their device upon every notification.
That's one very good application... we're up to $49 so far.
I do not understand the obsession some have with a larger screen on a smartphone.
Since the beginning of recorded history advances in telecommunications have been marked by improvements in availability, portability and reliability. Advances in portability primarily resulted from miniaturization, microminiaturization and, most recently, nanotechnology.
i could care less about the phone its more of a portable personal computer and media consumption device give me a 5.5 or 6inch ipad with wifi or data
Comments
Nice try.
Thanks.
That concept truly nailed how Apple products look like. It looks so shiny, rounded and soft. The screen won't be that size, but that may be the best concept I've ever seen. The bracelet is exactly like what I imagined for the iwatch myself. Just a big ring. What's simpler than that?
I agree, Clemy.
It looks so superior to the earlier square concept. That was too much like the Pebble. I hope Apple does indeed make something like this. They will show Nike and the rest how it's done.
Also, this looks like the first real application of a "curved' screen. The curved TV's and LG cellphones look novel but only seem to make the screen curved b/c they can.
I know there is some benefit to viewing the curved TV's.
Best.
You probably want to stop reading a rumors site then.
that iwatch concept in this article looks fine. and it would be great if we could put iwatch on leg also!
why is it so hard to believe that 1 out of 5 iPhone users would be willing to buy a watch for $299?
In one year at a cost as $299 with a limited feature set in this global economy?
Tens of millions of watches in the $100-$300 range get sold every year.
So now you've gone from saying $299 to between $100 and $300. Is this the same argument you are making or a new one?
you are just here to argue. Sorry I won't play your pathetic game.
Apple has sold over:
400,000,000 iPhones
200,000,000 iPads
350,000,000 iPods
and you dismiss the possiblity of them selling 50,000,000 iWatches in the first year of release?
A product that will be much cheaper than the iPad/iPhone/iPod during its opening release?
Did I miss an Apple announcement?
if you want just facts you should stay off of a rumor site like this.
if you don't know we are speculating then good luck on the rest of your life.
Well, the other guy, Ireland, is speculating that you are wrong.
I think you are here just to insult people.
In one year at a cost as $299 with a limited feature set in this global economy?
One only has to look at first year iPod, IPhone and iPad sales. They didn't reach even close to 58 million sales... total for all three.
iPod started at $399
iPhone started at $799
iPad started at $499
I'm assuming the watch would be about $299
Functionality will be just as important as price. It could be $99 and it wouldn't sell if people didn't see it as useful. People already have a phone that acts as a computer that fits in their pockets. An iWatch would have to incorporate functions beyond that which would: a) not cannibalize iPhone sales and/or make enough money to not worry about that; b) have functions not available on the iPhone [and/or available on the phone but not on the watch... limited functionality], yet attractive enough for people to want it.
You know what I like about you, Sog?
Those other products didn't sell that many in their first year and have far higher utility than a watch. The iPhone was 6 million, the iPad was 15 million.
Despite the lower price, $200+ is expensive in its class of digital watches. Sony's smartwatch (the first smartwatch) was $99 and now $77:
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-SmartWatch-version-Android-Bluetooth/dp/B007VG6ZC8
That sold 200,000 in its first year globally:
http://asia.cnet.com/sony-sold-200000-units-of-the-first-smartwatch-62221692.htm
Samsung says 800k Galaxy Gears sold in its first 2 months last year but then we hear nothing. No reports about topping 1 million or 2 million. What they do is fill the retail channels first and if the units don't sell well, they are bundled with other products or they cut the prices:
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/others/news/samsung-slashes-galaxy-gear-smartwatch-price-to-rs-14990-476950
http://androidandme.com/2014/02/news/samsung-drops-price-of-galaxy-gear-by-120-in-india-might-cut-price-globally/
It can't be selling all that well on its own if they have to cut prices by about 1/3 within 4 months and release a follow-up product so soon after. They even refer to their own watch as 'bulky'.
The watch market is large but the vast majority of digital watches sold are cheap watches and the high value ones are Swiss watches. There's a market for high-end digital watches but it's a small market. I have no doubt that Apple could make a better watch than Samsung but Samsung currently makes the leading product in that market and 800k in 2 months exceeded their expectations. 50 million per year would be 10x that volume.
Medical applications and biometric data is interesting to average consumers for about 5 minutes. Who sits around wondering what their heart rate is or body temperature? If you feel fine, you don't think about it.
The bottom line is what problem will this watch solve? Telling the time doesn't matter any more. We get notifications already on the phone and most people don't get enough to warrant putting them on the wrist. It can't have a headphone jack, wifi isn't likely (so it has to be used alongside a phone anyway), it has no keyboard, putting cameras on it would be tricky too. The Gear can be made to run full Android apps but it's crazy because the screen is so small:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/10/microscopic-android-how-to-get-real-apps-running-on-the-samsung-galaxy-gear/
What does the iWatch do and who is it for?
That, sir, is the Final Jeopardy answer.
My proposition for such a device to be anything other than a hobby is that the device must extend the life of the user's iPhone by a significant margin which I believe can only be achieved by pushing notifications to the device so the user needn't peruse their device upon every notification.
Never mind a dang watch get at least a 4.5 inch iphone out their im not gonna wait another year for a bigger phone
I do not understand the obsession some have with a larger screen on a smartphone.
Since the beginning of recorded history advances in telecommunications have been marked by improvements in availability, portability and reliability. Advances in portability primarily resulted from miniaturization, microminiaturization and, most recently, nanotechnology.
Okay. Go buy something from someone else, then.
That, sir, is the Final Jeopardy answer.
My proposition for such a device to be anything other than a hobby is that the device must extend the life of the user's iPhone by a significant margin which I believe can only be achieved by pushing notifications to the device so the user needn't peruse their device upon every notification.
Okay. Go buy something from someone else, then.
Thats how you loose market share. I hope that is not apples attitude
I do not understand the obsession some have with a larger screen on a smartphone.
Since the beginning of recorded history advances in telecommunications have been marked by improvements in availability, portability and reliability. Advances in portability primarily resulted from miniaturization, microminiaturization and, most recently, nanotechnology.
i could care less about the phone its more of a portable personal computer and media consumption device give me a 5.5 or 6inch ipad with wifi or data
Why not a 7.9" or 9.7" device then or for that matter a 60" screen?