Compared to using a phone, of course you're right. But If the iWatch used BT LE, you wouldn't even have to hold out your arm - just tap your watch to approve the payment. Slightly less energy expenditure than stretching out your arm [purely 1st-world problem, I understand :-)
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).
The Apple rumor claims their "smartwatch" will presumably have it's own SIM. That's somewhat akin to combining an iPhone and a watch. That the resultant price might approach and even exceed $1000 shouldn't be a surprise. Samsung's similarly-rumored-to-soon-ship SIM-enabled version of their watch has been estimated to be no less than $850 or so.
The Apple rumor claims their "smartwatch" will presumably have it's own SIM. That's somewhat akin to combining an iPhone and a watch. That the resultant price might approach and even exceed $1000 shouldn't be a surprise. Samsung's similarly-rumored-to-soon-ship SIM-enabled version of their watch has been estimated to be no less than $850 or so.
The avg cust isn't going to pay that much for a watch. that's more expensive than an iPhone.
THIS is why people spend thousands of dollars on watches:
I do tend to agree, but this is also a $2000 watch. If Apple is going after the luxury watch market it make sense since there is no way to make s cheap watch that does everything people want, and again people with money like stuff like this and it is a fashion statement. So no kiddies buy this unless your a teen idiot.
I do tend to agree, but this is also a $2000 watch. If Apple is going after the luxury watch market it make sense since there is no way to make s cheap watch that does everything people want, and again people with money like stuff like this and it is a fashion statement. So no kiddies buy this unless your a teen idiot.
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:
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:
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.
(I have nothing to add, I just don't want this post to be missed)
(I have nothing to add, I just don't want this post to be missed)
Nothing changes with Apple. Apple is a premium, not a luxury brand. They sell iPods priced in hundreds, not hifi vinyl record players costing thousands. They sell iPhones priced in hundreds, not diamond-encrusted luxury phones like Vertu and Tag Heuer costing thousands. And the same will apply for iWatch, it will be a premium product with value based on a unique concept reiventing the watch and wearable category, seamless integration of hardware, software and services, and great user experince. And on the other hand, its value won't be based on a luxury price tag and expression of upper class social status.
This is all Apple 101. Apple is not creating a watch with a digital twist and a luxury price tag. Apple is making a revolutionary wearable device.
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.
Because it is a Movado and you pay for the name, it a fashion statement and suck as a watch, I know I own one, not that one, and you can not easily tell what time it is especially when it dark out. They have ones which are more expensive than that.
So it not always about the finish hand crafted machinery
Nothing changes with Apple. Apple is a premium, not a luxury brand. They sell iPods priced in hundreds, not hifi vinyl record players costing thousands. They sell iPhones priced in hundreds, not diamond-encrusted luxury phones like Vertu and Tag Heuer costing thousands. And the same will apply for iWatch, it will be a premium product with value based on a unique concept reiventing the watch and wearable category, seamless integration of hardware, software and services, and great user experince. And on the other hand, its value won't be based on a luxury price tag and expression of upper class social status.
This is all Apple 101. Apple is not creating a watch with a digital twist and a luxury price tag. Apple is making a revolutionary wearable device.
That is typically what they do but mainly they do things that buyers respect. Do people really respect luxury mobile phones? They are seen as gaudy and tacky. Swiss watches on the other hand are highly respected by people who can afford them and people who can't.
Also, there's an accessible price range that would still be considered high. A $2000 laptop is pretty expensive but accessible to millions.
There are a couple of problems with the whole watch idea for Apple in that it's jewellery and that requires projecting a unique design onto it. Apple products have a unique design but with the intent of the design not distracting you from the use of the product. A watch is the opposite. It is there to be admired in its own right.
If they make this design too accessible then it loses some appeal because it can be the watch everyone at the party is wearing rather than one that suits your particular style and price range.
The cheap smartwatch makers tried to focus on functionality over style. Will.i.am showed off his own smartwatch that's also a phone here:
[VIDEO]
Too much functionality and it needs a big battery and to be charged every day. Too little functionality and you may as well buy a normal watch.
The Moto 360 I think hits a good balance if they can pull off the concept suitably well - elegant design as a watch, functional enough to be worthwhile over a normal watch, should be cheap enough to be accessible to a lot of people. If it has to be charged daily though or worse doesn't last a whole day then that's not particularly good.
We still don't have any firm evidence at all that Apple is considering it. This all happened with the TV set for years - supply chain rumors, possible talks with Loewe, panel size estimates. Nothing came of it. It would be nice to see even little circles of sapphire sitting on a desk so we'd have a vague hint that all the speculation is even worth spending time on.
It would be nice to see even little circles of sapphire sitting on a desk so we'd have a vague hint that all the speculation is even worth spending time on.
Do you think a circular display is the way to go? I think it is and up until Moto's recent mockup I hadn't heard of anyone else, besides me, considering that route.
When speaking about a new product category from Apple, one must forget two words: 1. Traditional, 2. Name of the existing category - ie watch in this case. What we will get is a revolutionary, never before seen wearable device. Those expecting either a watch or a smartwatch will be in for a disappointment. On the other hand, those expecting a device from the future with never before seen looks and functions will be in for a treat.
Now try to adopt Apple's think different mentality, forget the word watch and look at the most concrete evidence of the rumored Apple device in the form of their patent:
Now this is the real iWatch, ticking all points of a disruptive product:
- revolutionary concept
- allows endless customization through downloadable skins
- all-band display allows for proper apps with contextual data (eg health and fitness graphs) - contrary to baby software on small smartwatch screens
- vertical UI, with content rotating based on your wrist's position and angle so it is always viewable
- contextual data viewing, eg raising a hand while running shows fitness data
- cutting edge sensors, with aim to change one's behavior
This is the next Apple mass-market hit for all ages and sexes. Expect a Johny Ivy video keenly talking about the purity and simplicity of its circular design based on the time continuity. Expect a huge success for Apple. Just don't expect a watch or a smartwatch. It will be a brand new category.
PS Anything else, especially a traditional watch with added connectivity and sensors, would crash the Apple stock, get Tim Cook fired, and damage Apple's desruptive inovator image for years. Just as with the iPhone, Apple is betting the whole company on iWatch, no doubt about it.
The issue with that is I don't think current credit card processors support Bluetooth LE payment, but they already exist with NFC, so unless Apple can persuade businesses to update their processors, easier to work with what is there.
So this adds NFC to iPhone with less friction than changing iPhone or having to pull your phone out.
Do you think a circular display is the way to go? I think it is and up until Moto's recent mockup I hadn't heard of anyone else, besides me, considering that route.
As soon as I saw the iwatch concept with the circular face back in this thread:
it looked like the better way to go. When the circular display is shown next to the rectangular displays in the Moto video, the rectangular ones just look completely the wrong design. The Moto design looks much better and so it should being designed on a Mac (you can see the MBP hooked to the Cinema Display and 3D printer):
Now this is the real iWatch, ticking all points of a disruptive product
That kind of strap has too many technical problems such as making glass and the display flexible enough to be able to go right round the wrist. Then having latched batteries that don't explode due to the leverage on the connections. The band will naturally want to spring open so it has to be held closed very firmly but it has to be comfortable. Given that it couldn't be figure-hugging, where does the resistance come from to be able to interact with it without it slipping round the wrist? Samsung has a product that tries to be more of a band:
[VIDEO]
Apple buys the displays from the likes of Samsung so if that's where curved display technology has reached, that's all there is for Apple too.
That's not to say such a different form factor isn't the way to go but it has to be practical.
it looked like the better way to go. When the circular display is shown next to the rectangular displays in the Moto video, the rectangular ones just look completely the wrong design. The Moto design looks much better and so it should being designed on a Mac (you can see the MBP hooked to the Cinema Display and 3D printer):
video:
That kind of strap has too many technical problems such as making glass and the display flexible enough to be able to go right round the wrist. Then having latched batteries that don't explode due to the leverage on the connections. The band will naturally want to spring open so it has to be held closed very firmly but it has to be comfortable. Given that it couldn't be figure-hugging, where does the resistance come from to be able to interact with it without it slipping round the wrist? Samsung has a product that tries to be more of a band:
video:
Apple buys the displays from the likes of Samsung so if that's where curved display technology has reached, that's all there is for Apple too.
That's not to say such a different form factor isn't the way to go but it has to be practical.
1) I really think round is the best way to go but after seeing that 2nd video I am thinking about an iPod-like line up (which didn't happen overnight) that has a wide range of types along varying sizes, features and price point. That Samsung smartwatch looks like it would be good for an entry-level design that focuses more on the youth or active people whereas the Moto design looks to me like it could be more expensive offering.
2) I'd imagine that a round display has it's own issues with manufacturing and cost. Nest doesn't even use a round display for their thermostat despite it appearing as if they do.
3) One thing I have seen plenty of is that when the mention of a flexible battery, board or display are mentioned that most then assume the final product would also be flexible, but as you note with the battery, such tech may be best suited for easy fitting permanently into a curved design.
The issue with that is I don't think current credit card processors support Bluetooth LE payment, but they already exist with NFC, so unless Apple can persuade businesses to update their processors, easier to work with what is there.
So this adds NFC to iPhone with less friction than changing iPhone or having to pull your phone out.
The banks that started offering it here, send out a sticker for the back of your iPhone,
Do you think a circular display is the way to go? I think it is and up until Moto's recent mockup I hadn't heard of anyone else, besides me, considering that route.
Circular shape is good for analogue watch, but IMO sucks for digital content.
Square, or at least square-ish watch, like Omega De Ville, would be the way to go. Still good for analogue watch simulation, and much more natural for digital content.
Comments
Compared to using a phone, of course you're right. But If the iWatch used BT LE, you wouldn't even have to hold out your arm - just tap your watch to approve the payment. Slightly less energy expenditure than stretching out your arm [purely 1st-world problem, I understand :-)
The Apple rumor claims their "smartwatch" will presumably have it's own SIM. That's somewhat akin to combining an iPhone and a watch. That the resultant price might approach and even exceed $1000 shouldn't be a surprise. Samsung's similarly-rumored-to-soon-ship SIM-enabled version of their watch has been estimated to be no less than $850 or so.
The avg cust isn't going to pay that much for a watch. that's more expensive than an iPhone.
Pfffft. iDon't want one
Then why are you here commenting?
FAIL
THIS is why people spend thousands of dollars on watches:
I do tend to agree, but this is also a $2000 watch. If Apple is going after the luxury watch market it make sense since there is no way to make s cheap watch that does everything people want, and again people with money like stuff like this and it is a fashion statement. So no kiddies buy this unless your a teen idiot.
Why is that $2k?
(I have nothing to add, I just don't want this post to be missed)
Nothing changes with Apple. Apple is a premium, not a luxury brand. They sell iPods priced in hundreds, not hifi vinyl record players costing thousands. They sell iPhones priced in hundreds, not diamond-encrusted luxury phones like Vertu and Tag Heuer costing thousands. And the same will apply for iWatch, it will be a premium product with value based on a unique concept reiventing the watch and wearable category, seamless integration of hardware, software and services, and great user experince. And on the other hand, its value won't be based on a luxury price tag and expression of upper class social status.
This is all Apple 101. Apple is not creating a watch with a digital twist and a luxury price tag. Apple is making a revolutionary wearable device.
Why is that $2k?
Because it is a Movado and you pay for the name, it a fashion statement and suck as a watch, I know I own one, not that one, and you can not easily tell what time it is especially when it dark out. They have ones which are more expensive than that.
So it not always about the finish hand crafted machinery
That is typically what they do but mainly they do things that buyers respect. Do people really respect luxury mobile phones? They are seen as gaudy and tacky. Swiss watches on the other hand are highly respected by people who can afford them and people who can't.
Also, there's an accessible price range that would still be considered high. A $2000 laptop is pretty expensive but accessible to millions.
There are a couple of problems with the whole watch idea for Apple in that it's jewellery and that requires projecting a unique design onto it. Apple products have a unique design but with the intent of the design not distracting you from the use of the product. A watch is the opposite. It is there to be admired in its own right.
If they make this design too accessible then it loses some appeal because it can be the watch everyone at the party is wearing rather than one that suits your particular style and price range.
The cheap smartwatch makers tried to focus on functionality over style. Will.i.am showed off his own smartwatch that's also a phone here:
[VIDEO]
Too much functionality and it needs a big battery and to be charged every day. Too little functionality and you may as well buy a normal watch.
The Moto 360 I think hits a good balance if they can pull off the concept suitably well - elegant design as a watch, functional enough to be worthwhile over a normal watch, should be cheap enough to be accessible to a lot of people. If it has to be charged daily though or worse doesn't last a whole day then that's not particularly good.
We still don't have any firm evidence at all that Apple is considering it. This all happened with the TV set for years - supply chain rumors, possible talks with Loewe, panel size estimates. Nothing came of it. It would be nice to see even little circles of sapphire sitting on a desk so we'd have a vague hint that all the speculation is even worth spending time on.
Do you think a circular display is the way to go? I think it is and up until Moto's recent mockup I hadn't heard of anyone else, besides me, considering that route.
When speaking about a new product category from Apple, one must forget two words: 1. Traditional, 2. Name of the existing category - ie watch in this case. What we will get is a revolutionary, never before seen wearable device. Those expecting either a watch or a smartwatch will be in for a disappointment. On the other hand, those expecting a device from the future with never before seen looks and functions will be in for a treat.
Now try to adopt Apple's think different mentality, forget the word watch and look at the most concrete evidence of the rumored Apple device in the form of their patent:
Now this is the real iWatch, ticking all points of a disruptive product:
- revolutionary concept
- allows endless customization through downloadable skins
- all-band display allows for proper apps with contextual data (eg health and fitness graphs) - contrary to baby software on small smartwatch screens
- vertical UI, with content rotating based on your wrist's position and angle so it is always viewable
- contextual data viewing, eg raising a hand while running shows fitness data
- cutting edge sensors, with aim to change one's behavior
This is the next Apple mass-market hit for all ages and sexes. Expect a Johny Ivy video keenly talking about the purity and simplicity of its circular design based on the time continuity. Expect a huge success for Apple. Just don't expect a watch or a smartwatch. It will be a brand new category.
PS Anything else, especially a traditional watch with added connectivity and sensors, would crash the Apple stock, get Tim Cook fired, and damage Apple's desruptive inovator image for years. Just as with the iPhone, Apple is betting the whole company on iWatch, no doubt about it.
Right now my iPhone 5s tracks my steps...
The issue with that is I don't think current credit card processors support Bluetooth LE payment, but they already exist with NFC, so unless Apple can persuade businesses to update their processors, easier to work with what is there.
So this adds NFC to iPhone with less friction than changing iPhone or having to pull your phone out.
As soon as I saw the iwatch concept with the circular face back in this thread:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/159351/inside-samsungs-galaxy-note-3-gear-media-blitz-in-times-square/40#post_2390343
it looked like the better way to go. When the circular display is shown next to the rectangular displays in the Moto video, the rectangular ones just look completely the wrong design. The Moto design looks much better and so it should being designed on a Mac (you can see the MBP hooked to the Cinema Display and 3D printer):
[VIDEO]
That kind of strap has too many technical problems such as making glass and the display flexible enough to be able to go right round the wrist. Then having latched batteries that don't explode due to the leverage on the connections. The band will naturally want to spring open so it has to be held closed very firmly but it has to be comfortable. Given that it couldn't be figure-hugging, where does the resistance come from to be able to interact with it without it slipping round the wrist? Samsung has a product that tries to be more of a band:
[VIDEO]
Apple buys the displays from the likes of Samsung so if that's where curved display technology has reached, that's all there is for Apple too.
That's not to say such a different form factor isn't the way to go but it has to be practical.
1) I really think round is the best way to go but after seeing that 2nd video I am thinking about an iPod-like line up (which didn't happen overnight) that has a wide range of types along varying sizes, features and price point. That Samsung smartwatch looks like it would be good for an entry-level design that focuses more on the youth or active people whereas the Moto design looks to me like it could be more expensive offering.
2) I'd imagine that a round display has it's own issues with manufacturing and cost. Nest doesn't even use a round display for their thermostat despite it appearing as if they do.
3) One thing I have seen plenty of is that when the mention of a flexible battery, board or display are mentioned that most then assume the final product would also be flexible, but as you note with the battery, such tech may be best suited for easy fitting permanently into a curved design.
The issue with that is I don't think current credit card processors support Bluetooth LE payment, but they already exist with NFC, so unless Apple can persuade businesses to update their processors, easier to work with what is there.
So this adds NFC to iPhone with less friction than changing iPhone or having to pull your phone out.
The banks that started offering it here, send out a sticker for the back of your iPhone,
Circular shape is good for analogue watch, but IMO sucks for digital content.
Square, or at least square-ish watch, like Omega De Ville, would be the way to go. Still good for analogue watch simulation, and much more natural for digital content.