Apple to sell two sizes of iWatch with flexible AMOLED displays this fall, prices to reach 'thousand

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 103
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    Kuo does a good job.
    Just because most X are bad does not make all Xs bad.
    mechanic wrote: »
    I don't think any of these analysts let that pesky thing call facts get in the way:).  When you make stuff up from your dreams who can dispute you lol:D .
  • Reply 62 of 103
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    Ass size, seating statistics, core move patterns and the revolutionary coccyx-safety control which calls 911 if you break the bone.

    solipsismx wrote: »
    What biometrics does your phone measure in your pocket?
  • Reply 63 of 103
    comleycomley Posts: 139member
    nobody has the faintest idea what it'll cost.

    £700 - £250 that's my guess

    The iWatch will face stiff competition
  • Reply 64 of 103
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member

    It's a really interesting idea that it could be a premium/designer product, I think the assumption up until now is that it would be cheaper than the iPhone. If it really is going to compete with traditional watches, they must have achieved a level of miniaturisation that others haven't, as others don't really look like traditional watches.

  • Reply 65 of 103
    comleycomley Posts: 139member
    Apple bring out the killer product if half of the rumours are true and then, approximately year later every technology company will Copy apples direction

    Way, back in 2008, Apple co-founder and renegade Steve Wozniak "let slip" to the Telegraph that "Apple's future could lie in an 'iWatch'." And, in April 2013, an Apple board member mentioned the word "watch."

    Apple CEO Tim Cook told attendees at All Things D that "the wrist is interesting" in May, thus kindling thousands of iWatch rumors across the web.
  • Reply 66 of 103
    Kuo's looking more of an Android fan to me than actually being a true analyst. NFC on iwatch?
  • Reply 67 of 103
    boblehbobleh Posts: 34member
    wurm5150 wrote: »
    Kuo just ruined his reputation on this..

    Exactly. I used to respect the guy but he got played on this. 1.3" - 1.5" display can never work. This brings a crucial problem called baby software. Tiny fonts, limited room for apps and contextual data, bad usability and overall poor and limited user experince. Exactly same as with the first smartphones with little screens and buttons. Apple would never ever launch a brand new product category as a traditional concept, design and with poor experience. The only solution to this is an all-band flexible display wrapped around your wrist, only this can fix baby software and be desruptive and futuristic at the same time.

    1.3" - 1.5" display is smoke and mirrors by Apple to confuse competition and analysts like Kuo. Apple knows these things leak and when it comes to a new product category, they do double down on secrecy and deal with multiple suppliers for components which will never make it into the final product.
  • Reply 68 of 103
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    What biometrics does your phone measure in your pocket?

    Nothing as of yet AFAIK, so we'll just have to wait for some hard evidence.
  • Reply 69 of 103
    boblehbobleh Posts: 34member
    As I got upset with the display size claim which is contrary to the most elementary Apple beliefs on software usability, experience, disruption and passion for paradigm shifts to bring products from the future, I totally overlooked this:

    "Battery life is expected to hit at least one day"

    Kuo has officially lost it.
  • Reply 70 of 103
    boblehbobleh Posts: 34member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    Kinetic charging and/or a solar-panel in the face could happen but I would doubt that. Perhaps they can use that flexible battery tech to make an ergonomic wrist band that looks decent and can extend the life of the device without having to be a huge battery in the main part of the device. (Note: the battery tech is flexible but I doubt they'd make the whole band highly flexible as this could pose certain safety and longevity hazards, but it could still be formed easier with this tech.)

    But how much "energy" could possibly be gained for a really small solar panel behind other components or a small kinetic motor? I wouldn't think much but I have no way of knowing this. What if one or both of those items added an average of 10% more life to the device? Would that be worth the cost, complexity and space needed for such options over a larger battery? I'd bet against any of that but I do believe that if any company can solve the riddle and make a usability-balanced, wrist-worn computer I think it's Apple.

    They could also leverage their M and A-series chip expertise to be more power efficient. I would expect them to use the M-series but an A-series as it stands now isn't practical. In fact, when we first heard about the M7 I thought about the wearables market and iFixit discovering it was a discreet chip, not built onto the A7 SoC helped back that up for me.

    Actually, Tag Heuer is about to release the first smartphone in the world with a solar cells film between the saphire glass and the display. It's called Meridiist Infinite. This makes use of the technology in the iWatch more real than ever before. As to the battery life, we will have to wait for the first tests.
  • Reply 71 of 103
    boblehbobleh Posts: 34member
    "the most expensive model in the lineup will carry a price tag of several thousand dollars"

    Another nonsense. Apple is positioned as the BMW of electronics, not a Ferrari. Reaching this premium positioning in consumers' minds takes many years, products and marketing dollars. Introducing a luxury product would only confuse customers as to what Apple is and stands for. That's why premium and luxury brands are always separated - see eg. Toyota and Lexus. This is marketing 101.

    Now when even Kuo turned out to be fake, what Apple analyst is left to be believed now? Sad.
  • Reply 72 of 103
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,326moderator
    hentaiboy wrote: »

    http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/03/28/apple-reaching-out-to-swiss-watchmakers-for-partnerships-tries-to-poach-horology-experts

    http://www.statisticbrain.com/wrist-watch-industry-statistics/

    Number of watches sold annually worldwide - 1,200,000,000
    Number of Swiss Watches sold annually - 29,200,000
    Number of watches produced by China annually - 663,000,000
    Number of watches produced by Hong Kong annually - 354,000.000
    Average cost of a Swiss watch - $739
    Average cost of a China watch - $3
    Switzerland watch market share in terms of value - 54 %
    Mechanical Watch market share - 77 %
    Electronic Watch market share - 23 %
    Swatch / Omega annual sales - $8,880,000,000
    Rolex annual sales - $4,500,000,000

    Swiss watches command 54% of the revenue with under 3% of the marketshare.

    Jony Ive wears a custom-made Jaeger LeCoultre Memovox watch, check eBay for used prices on that style of watch.

    It's not clear how they'd combine quality Swiss craftsmanship with what they do though. Out of all the smartwatches so far, the Moto 360 looks like the best design and there was a circular concept of an Apple one here:

    http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/15/4623566/iwatch-concept

    I don't think a digital watch like that would sell at a ~$1000+ mark.

    Sony sells their smartwatch for $99. At first, this looked like a good enough contender but look at the images on the following site:

    http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/26/5147676/sony-smartwatch-2-review

    That's not the right way to go and that reflects very badly on Sony IMO. The Galaxy Gear isn't selling well enough to attract counterfeits and is in the same league as the Sony:

    http://www.ibtimes.com/wearable-technology-flop-chinese-counterfeiters-say-galaxy-gear-doesnt-sell-well-mass-market-1543006
    http://blog.gsmarena.com/samsung-galaxy-gear-discounted-to-160/

    If the Moto 360 isn't too bulky and it performs well, I'd say it could sustain $300 and fits into the premium digital watch category. It looks a little bulky in the video here:



    If Apple does tackle the high price bracket, which would seem more likely after seeing Sony's and Samsung's efforts, it won't be high volume. But would they make a single model to appeal to the high-end consumer or a single model to compete with luxury watchmakers? If they partnered with Swiss watchmakers, I don't see how they can do both mechanical and digital without compromising either. I wouldn't see them doing something as bulky as the Moto 360.

    This kind of device really needs to wait for a boost in battery, kinetic and/or solar charging technology.
  • Reply 73 of 103
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,992member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by hentaiboy View Post

     

    FAIL

     

    THIS is why people spend thousands of dollars on watches:

     


     

    Try tens, hundreds or thousands of thousands of dollars for a watch.

     

    Platinum would be nice.

  • Reply 74 of 103
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    I wonder if the 2 sizes mentioned in this article are male and female sizes, as against high end model and low end model. And they are both high end.
  • Reply 75 of 103
    comleycomley Posts: 139member
    Apple has hired a raft of medical and sleep experts to work on its iWatch project
  • Reply 76 of 103
    boblehbobleh Posts: 34member
    ascii wrote: »

    There will be two sizes, one for males and one for females. Women have smaller wrists, that's why you need a smaller, narrower device. And that's why the current smartwatches fail to find a massmarket succes. See eg Moto 360 - all the marketing materials I have seen so far picture only men. No wonder for such a bulky device. And it is bulky because you cannot squeeze 21st technology into a legacy design made for just measuring time. And you end up missing a huge female, teen, kids and seniors market.

    Apple has patented a solution to make the device smaller and thinner, appealing to all ages and sexes and one which is truly revolutionary - an all-band flexible display with flexible components. This requires braveness to shift the current paradigm of what a watch is, use of cutting-edge technology and huge engineering and investment efforts. Why only Apple can do this and others fail taking the easy route? Let me quote the Designed in California ad: "If everyone is busy making everything, how can anyone perfect anything?".
  • Reply 77 of 103
    marvfoxmarvfox Posts: 2,275member

    This is for idiots who have money to burn.A waste of time and money period. any decent watch is just as good without all the bells and whistles attached to it.

  • Reply 78 of 103
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bobleh View Post



    Apple has patented a solution to make the device smaller and thinner, appealing to all ages and sexes and one which is truly revolutionary - an all-band flexible display with flexible components. This requires braveness to shift the current paradigm of what a watch is, use of cutting-edge technology and huge engineering and investment efforts. Why only Apple can do this and others fail taking the easy route? Let me quote the Designed in California ad: "If everyone is busy making everything, how can anyone perfect anything?".

    If anyone can do it they can. We are talking about the company who has spent years shaving millimetres off their products. Maybe that's the reason for the recent baseband hiring also, they want to make an LTE chip so small it can go in to an iWatch (a future generation, not the 1st one).

  • Reply 79 of 103

    I won't pay more than $300-$400 for one. I don't care how good it is or what it can do. If it's anything more than that, I'll start looking at a Pebble or some other "smart" watch, anything that isn't Android-powered (or Tarzan, or whatever the hell Scamdung calls it).

  • Reply 80 of 103
    netmagenetmage Posts: 314member
    tjwolf wrote: »
    Good point - thanks for pointing that out.  I do actually remember one of they payment related patents mentioning BT *and* NFC.  What's the max distance on NFC?  I vaguely remember it being just a few inches - if so, swiping one's wrist above a sensor doesn't seem so convenient - BT LE seems a lot more convenient.  But who knows.

    It could be a lot more convenient than taking out your phone and swiping it for payment - just put your arm up next to the sensor like your getting the plastic pen and you've paid.
Sign In or Register to comment.