They didn't need to build a car to get iOS into some high-end cars either. All you need is the right technology and the right partners and boom, high-end wearables. Let's see what Angela Ahrendts can do coming from Burberry.
Battery life is key and until someone solves that problem any solution is not going to be desirable. if you have to remember to charge your watch all the time and that changing period changes depending on how you use the device any given day then people will not use it.
It not like a laptop or cell phone which we all know need to be charged up or plugged in every day, watches do not have that end user experience and they will need to be a serious paradigm shift in how people use and perceive a watch.
Subtle point here, Swatch is NOT a luxury brand. Typically they retail for less than $200 and are considered more jewelry. When I lived in Europe, it seemed everyone had at least one, sometimes several that they interchangeably wore.
Swatch itself is not a luxury brand. However, the Swatch Group owns multiple brands in all price categories including luxury brands Blancpain, Bregeut, Harry Winston, and Omega as well as mid-range brands like Longines and Tissot. The latter three all have some visibility in sports timing.
An Apple iWatch poses a serious threat to Swatch because Swatch is heavily involved in endorsing a lot of action sports like beach volleyball, snowboarding, BMX, surfing, mountain biking, etc.
High end watches like the ones Ive wears retail for thousands of dollars, in some cases a lot more than that. I doubt Apple will get into the high end watch business, or that they'll be able to design a high end watch, for say $300 or less. I still think Apple's initial wearable play will go down the path of Nike Fuelband more than high end watch. All the rumors about stuff they've been working on point to health more than Google Now/notification type stuff.
EDIT: let me be clear, I'm not suggesting Apple couldn't design a beautiful high end watch, I just don't think they could do it in a competitive price range. I fully expect any wearable from Apple to be premium and command a premium price, but that doesn't mean it will be thousands of dollars.
I'm not following your argument. I don't expect Apple to make a range of wrist-worn wireless iPhone peripheral devices that compete on price and luxury as the highest-end wristwatch market, but I do expect them to produce something that is attractive and fashionable for this nascent market segment that Ive and company would be proud to wear.
Yes battery life is key. I believe Apple has a patent on putting a solar cell beneath the watch face. Apple always thinking. Hey maybe the watch solar cell is on sapphire??/
It must be some very specific patent because I have a Citizen eco-drive that has been running continuously since 1993 that has a the solar cell beneath the watch face.
I'm not following your argument. I don't expect Apple to make a range of wrist-worn wireless iPhone peripheral devices that compete on price and luxury as the highest-end wristwatch market, but I do expect them to produce something that is attractive and fashionable for this nascent market segment that Ive and company would be proud to wear.
That's where I'm skeptical, or why I think what they're designing won't be a watch. But hey if they can design a device that has the look of a high-end timepiece but is priced competitively within the current wearables space, then more power too them.
That's where I'm skeptical, or why I think what they're designing won't be a watch. But hey if they can design a device that has the look of a high-end timepiece but is priced competitively within the current wearables space, then more power too them.
To be clear, I've been trying to terms like wrist-worn device for probably over a year now. I don't think smart or watch are good descriptors because they have connotations that are far too limited in scope, but most importantly seem to evoke a predetermined idea of either trying to be the watch and/or smartphone we desire.
Yes battery life is key. I believe Apple has a patent on putting a solar cell beneath the watch face. Apple always thinking. Hey maybe the watch solar cell is on sapphire??/
My guess is that the so called iWatch is an add on consisting three main parts which can be applied to any (and certainly luxury) watch abiding by some standards set by Apple
Main parts would be a transparent glass pane capable of projecting the iWatch functions when relevant, an add-under electronics container dimesized and twice the thickness and a brace containing more electronics, battery and maybe touchscreen stuff.
Partners are required to minimize the height of the clock mechanics and abide to fixed diameters. This way style remains free while adding smartwatch features. It's kind of the Apple in the car way I think.
This is where Apple's chip manufacturing is going to come in. They can make a very specialized, very low-power chip that uses very little power and offloads anything remotely intensive to the iphone. Couple that with an oled screen with interfaces designed to avoid lighting up the whole panel (likely a motivating factor in ios7's sparseness), plus solar trickle charging, plus kinetic charging, plus a flexible thin battery in the strap... you could end up with something pretty magical.
The watch business may be the most highly niched market of all. Some customers will want a sport-styled watch, others a prestige fashion watch, some will want Mickey and Minnie watches, and many will want several styles to suit their different business and leisure activities. Plus, some customers will be looking for $200 watches, and others for $2,000 watches. Or $20,000 watches. If Apple gives all of us several choices, the potential sales are mind-boggling.
I've always maintained that wearables is as much fashion as it is high tech and that the right business model is Swatch brought a few notches upmarket. No, Apple will not be selling any $10K watches any day soon but they will hire the world's foremost experts in precision micro-scale mechanical engineering and materials and the products that Apple will come up with will be beautiful in the Jobs-Ivian or jobsivian (claiming copyright right now) sense.
That Swatch guy sounds a lot like that Palm CEO remarking how computer guys can't just barge into the phone business and expect to succeed.
Apple's vision for wearables looks more and more like it's way beyond what Samsung and Google and the rest of the also rans could conceive of. No wonder it's taking 'so long'.
They didn't need to build a car to get iOS into some high-end cars either. All you need is the right technology and the right partners and boom, high-end wearables. Let's see what Angela Ahrendts can do coming from Burberry.
this is slightly different, where the 'style' of the car's 'infotainment' interface is evolving from decades (maybe only years) of consumer experience. Mid and 'low-luxury' cars have a 3 year half life for most people (lease new, 24-36 months, or buy, and keep until 36,000 sort of the low end of warranties now), therefore like phones, consumers continually upgrading.
Watches have been around for centuries, and high-end multi-function ('complicated') chronometers for over a century. They feel they 'grok' the consumer experience, quite well thank you. And those $XX,000 watches ... they last for years. And stuffing an iOS interface into a lower end watch may be a non-starter in terms of price and margin on both ends.
The watch makers may say "danke nein' and go their merry way. Much like most of the wireless carriers did 7 years ago. It will only take one.
Apple's vision for wearables looks more and more like it's way beyond what Samsung and Google and the rest of the also rans could conceive of. No wonder it's taking 'so long'.
And now the also rans are out trying to buy Swiss watch companies.
This is where Apple's chip manufacturing is going to come in. They can make a very specialized, very low-power chip that uses very little power and offloads anything remotely intensive to the iphone. Couple that with an oled screen with interfaces designed to avoid lighting up the whole panel (likely a motivating factor in ios7's sparseness), plus solar trickle charging, plus kinetic charging, plus a flexible thin battery in the strap... you could end up with something pretty magical.
Subtle point here, Swatch is NOT a luxury brand. Typically they retail for less than $200 and are considered more jewelry. When I lived in Europe, it seemed everyone had at least one, sometimes several that they interchangeably wore.
Perhaps you should take a look at the brands Swatch owns, they are also a major Swiss movement and component maker.
Hayek and Swatch pretty much saved the Swiss watch industry when the influx of cheap Japanese quartz watches began.
This is where Apple's chip manufacturing is going to come in. They can make a very specialized, very low-power chip that uses very little power and offloads anything remotely intensive to the iphone. Couple that with an oled screen with interfaces designed to avoid lighting up the whole panel (likely a motivating factor in ios7's sparseness), plus solar trickle charging, plus kinetic charging, plus a flexible thin battery in the strap... you could end up with something pretty magical.
Swatch itself is not a luxury brand. However, the Swatch Group owns multiple brands in all price categories including luxury brands Blancpain, Bregeut, Harry Winston, and Omega as well as mid-range brands like Longines and Tissot. The latter three all have some visibility in sports timing.
An Apple iWatch poses a serious threat to Swatch because Swatch is heavily involved in endorsing a lot of action sports like beach volleyball, snowboarding, BMX, surfing, mountain biking, etc.
Luxury brands like that are all mechanical or electro-mechanical movements. The expertise they can port to a smartwatch is quite limited to materials including sapphire faces and what is confortable to wear. They know a lot too about longlife batteries and kinetic wounding but the constraints are so different I dont see that porting well to what is essentially a tiny computer or at least a wireless screen with the cpu in the phone.
Comments
because the companies have little faith in the potential of smart watches
Sounds like all the nonsense that was said before the iPod, iPhone and iPad came out.
Easy solution; make it an automatic.
Subtle point here, Swatch is NOT a luxury brand. Typically they retail for less than $200 and are considered more jewelry. When I lived in Europe, it seemed everyone had at least one, sometimes several that they interchangeably wore.
Swatch itself is not a luxury brand. However, the Swatch Group owns multiple brands in all price categories including luxury brands Blancpain, Bregeut, Harry Winston, and Omega as well as mid-range brands like Longines and Tissot. The latter three all have some visibility in sports timing.
An Apple iWatch poses a serious threat to Swatch because Swatch is heavily involved in endorsing a lot of action sports like beach volleyball, snowboarding, BMX, surfing, mountain biking, etc.
I'm not following your argument. I don't expect Apple to make a range of wrist-worn wireless iPhone peripheral devices that compete on price and luxury as the highest-end wristwatch market, but I do expect them to produce something that is attractive and fashionable for this nascent market segment that Ive and company would be proud to wear.
To Maestro64
Yes battery life is key. I believe Apple has a patent on putting a solar cell beneath the watch face. Apple always thinking. Hey maybe the watch solar cell is on sapphire??/
It must be some very specific patent because I have a Citizen eco-drive that has been running continuously since 1993 that has a the solar cell beneath the watch face.
To be clear, I've been trying to terms like wrist-worn device for probably over a year now. I don't think smart or watch are good descriptors because they have connotations that are far too limited in scope, but most importantly seem to evoke a predetermined idea of either trying to be the watch and/or smartphone we desire.
You are on the right track. Apple was granted a patent for a touch based solar panel last year. What is amazing is the patent was filed back in 2008! Here is a link to information about the patent... http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/02/apple-wins-a-shocker-with-2008-touch-based-solar-panel-patent.html#more.
Main parts would be a transparent glass pane capable of projecting the iWatch functions when relevant, an add-under electronics container dimesized and twice the thickness and a brace containing more electronics, battery and maybe touchscreen stuff.
Partners are required to minimize the height of the clock mechanics and abide to fixed diameters. This way style remains free while adding smartwatch features. It's kind of the Apple in the car way I think.
This is where Apple's chip manufacturing is going to come in. They can make a very specialized, very low-power chip that uses very little power and offloads anything remotely intensive to the iphone. Couple that with an oled screen with interfaces designed to avoid lighting up the whole panel (likely a motivating factor in ios7's sparseness), plus solar trickle charging, plus kinetic charging, plus a flexible thin battery in the strap... you could end up with something pretty magical.
I've always maintained that wearables is as much fashion as it is high tech and that the right business model is Swatch brought a few notches upmarket. No, Apple will not be selling any $10K watches any day soon but they will hire the world's foremost experts in precision micro-scale mechanical engineering and materials and the products that Apple will come up with will be beautiful in the Jobs-Ivian or jobsivian (claiming copyright right now) sense.
That Swatch guy sounds a lot like that Palm CEO remarking how computer guys can't just barge into the phone business and expect to succeed.
Apple's vision for wearables looks more and more like it's way beyond what Samsung and Google and the rest of the also rans could conceive of. No wonder it's taking 'so long'.
They didn't need to build a car to get iOS into some high-end cars either. All you need is the right technology and the right partners and boom, high-end wearables. Let's see what Angela Ahrendts can do coming from Burberry.
this is slightly different, where the 'style' of the car's 'infotainment' interface is evolving from decades (maybe only years) of consumer experience. Mid and 'low-luxury' cars have a 3 year half life for most people (lease new, 24-36 months, or buy, and keep until 36,000 sort of the low end of warranties now), therefore like phones, consumers continually upgrading.
Watches have been around for centuries, and high-end multi-function ('complicated') chronometers for over a century. They feel they 'grok' the consumer experience, quite well thank you. And those $XX,000 watches ... they last for years. And stuffing an iOS interface into a lower end watch may be a non-starter in terms of price and margin on both ends.
The watch makers may say "danke nein' and go their merry way. Much like most of the wireless carriers did 7 years ago. It will only take one.
ho, ho, ho ... is it the study of santa clause?... bah-dum-bah /rim shot
Apple's vision for wearables looks more and more like it's way beyond what Samsung and Google and the rest of the also rans could conceive of. No wonder it's taking 'so long'.
And now the also rans are out trying to buy Swiss watch companies.
This is where Apple's chip manufacturing is going to come in. They can make a very specialized, very low-power chip that uses very little power and offloads anything remotely intensive to the iphone. Couple that with an oled screen with interfaces designed to avoid lighting up the whole panel (likely a motivating factor in ios7's sparseness), plus solar trickle charging, plus kinetic charging, plus a flexible thin battery in the strap... you could end up with something pretty magical.
I agree. And how would this feel for magical?
Subtle point here, Swatch is NOT a luxury brand. Typically they retail for less than $200 and are considered more jewelry. When I lived in Europe, it seemed everyone had at least one, sometimes several that they interchangeably wore.
Perhaps you should take a look at the brands Swatch owns, they are also a major Swiss movement and component maker.
Hayek and Swatch pretty much saved the Swiss watch industry when the influx of cheap Japanese quartz watches began.
Hayek is the Jobs of Swiss watches.
Solar + kinetic energies... http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/02/talk-about-timing-apples-wristwatch-patent-arrives.html.
Swatch itself is not a luxury brand. However, the Swatch Group owns multiple brands in all price categories including luxury brands Blancpain, Bregeut, Harry Winston, and Omega as well as mid-range brands like Longines and Tissot. The latter three all have some visibility in sports timing.
An Apple iWatch poses a serious threat to Swatch because Swatch is heavily involved in endorsing a lot of action sports like beach volleyball, snowboarding, BMX, surfing, mountain biking, etc.
Luxury brands like that are all mechanical or electro-mechanical movements. The expertise they can port to a smartwatch is quite limited to materials including sapphire faces and what is confortable to wear. They know a lot too about longlife batteries and kinetic wounding but the constraints are so different I dont see that porting well to what is essentially a tiny computer or at least a wireless screen with the cpu in the phone.