hardly ever. But it would be nice if the device wasn't totally useless without being tethered to a phone.
Think of the M7 chip. It's not totally worthless without an app that can read the data because it stores a week's worth of data that can then be read by any number of apps you install later.
There was, and I do see a path for certain sensors in the headphone phones for at least your temperature, and perhaps hydration, pulse rate and blood sugar.
PS: I do somewhat agree with @schlack about the sensors reporting to the phone but there has to be some sort of independent use for a wristwork device, like telling time and some other simple features typically found on a watch. An OLED display that is black with an ultra-thin Helvetica Neue dial that would turn on when you raise your wrist would be perfect for me.
I think long run the sensors will just be in our clothes. That is the logical place, it is close to your body, and little sensors will be so cheap they can be sewn in, and no great loss if they are never used. But we are not there yet so it will have to be in a wristwatch or earphones or something a bit more substantial than clothes. Well, maybe shoes are the one thing that could be done today.
Yes, there are some traditional features of watches that have value, but if the sensors migrated elsewhere, I'm not sure those features would be compelling on their own. I means there are clocks everywhere these days.
There was, and I do see a path for certain sensors in the headphone phones for at least your temperature, and perhaps hydration, pulse rate and blood sugar.
PS: I do somewhat agree with @schlack about the sensors reporting to the phone but there has to be some sort of independent use for a wristwork device, like telling time and some other simple features typically found on a watch. An OLED display that is black with an ultra-thin Helvetica Neue dial that would turn on when you raise your wrist would be perfect for me.
blood sugar is still a bit far, and your ear canal is probably not suitable for it.
Pulse OX may be possible (reflectively, although that is not as accurate as the pass thru at the finger), and that's a big seller for the COPD crowd.
The other is Blood Pressure. Which is one of the big 4 (Blood sugar, HR, BP, Temp) for real time monitoring.
I didn't consider a camera, NFC, or microphone as sensors.
Here is what Apple lists for the iPhone 5S:
Three-axis gyro
Accelerometer
Proximity sensor
Ambient light sensor
Fingerprint identity sensor
...and in the context of this device, Apple would not, could not, get away with calling some of these sensors. Of course, Apple isn't a party to the conversation, the device might include 5 body condition sensors and the 5 current ones you've listed.
I think long run the sensors will all just be in our clothes. That is the logical place, it is close to your body, and little sensors will be so cheap they can be sewn in, and no great loss if they are never used. But we are not there yet so it will have to be in a wristwatch or earphones or something a bit more substantial than clothes. Well, maybe shoes are the one thing that could be done today.
Yes, there are some traditional features of watches that have value, but if the sensors migrated elsewhere, I'm not sure those features would be compelling on their own. I means there are clocks everywhere these days.
The watch/earphone advantage, short and long term is the 'fixed' location and pressure. Even duplication is not a great solution: Having 7 blood pressure sensors (or temp) in a shirt is great if 5 aren't connected, but unless you're doing some pretty complex math, the pressure at your neck is different than your waist, under your arm, or at your wrist.
knowing it's on your wrist (or in your ear), and always there, give you a better longitudinal (relative ups and downs), and a calculated offset (wrist skin temps will be closer to 73deg, ear temps, closer to 98.6) for diagnostic purposes.
Only 10+ sensors for the Apple wearable? Where's the innovation in that? I'm fairly certain the Galaxy Gear 3 will have at least 20 sensors and be capable of jolting you back to life after you suffer a heart attack. It's no wonder Apple is struggling for survival. Tim Cook isn't creative enough. The Apple wearable would have had full life-support capabilities if Steve Jobs were alive. Total body stasis and intelligent nano-bot injection capabilities. 10+ sensors is so yawn-worthy. If it can't accurately tell me my life-span, then what good is it? Wall Street is really going to be disappointed if Apple can only sell about 5 million of these digital wrist-toys by the end of the year.
Imagine if they could cram all 10 sensors in to a pair of EarPods? Then it wouldn't even need a bluetooth transmitter to your phone, just plug it in in place of your normal exercise EarPods.
But probably it would have to go in to the Lightning port instead to transfer the sensor data. Wasn't there a rumour recently about Apple making Lightning earphones?
If the sensors were in EarPods, the functionality would be enhanced, dramatically in some respects. I believe that one of the biggest drivers of child visits to GPs in the US is ear infection. EarPods could be used to detect this using activated polymers and sense ear pressure to ensure that music isn't played too loudly - a serious concern for young people in a connected age. However, this would be an ancillary system rather than a constantly worn iWatch. Definitely a place for such capability though. :-)
...and in the context of this device, Apple would not, could not, get away with calling some of these sensors. Of course, Apple isn't a party to the conversation, the device might include 5 body condition sensors and the 5 current ones you've listed.
fingerprint is probably the only one that would not be a health sensor.
Proximity is important (to eliminate false positives... Loss of signal, sudden 2 foot drop... is he dead/ he fainting, or is he stripping down for a shower and tossing things in his bag... oh right, it's farther than 1" away from a warm blooded object (until the dog starts chewing on them)?)
gyro/accelerometer are motion/effort detection [crude... but it's the pedometer mph calculator]
light sensor... (Arm hasn't moved, pulse rate dropping to Basal minimums... Lights off, time is after 10pm... my guess... sleeping.)
Not that I'm arguing these are part of the 10. Just saying that most could be.
Back to the OP....
NFC is an interesting one. Somehow if I were in a gym, having the device that I'm on 'identify itself' (Is he doing jumping jacks or snatches, cycling or elliptical or treadmill?)
If they do come out with an iWatch I hope it doesn't look anything like all of the illustrations we see. They are just plain ugly. The drawings look as bad as what we are getting from Samsung and all of the other uninspired design teams. Considering the fashion people they have hired lately I would expect mass letters of resignation (including Ive's) if they ever released a wearable that pathetic.
Oh gosh, people, look at the source. It's WSJ. After Walt left, their pundits are the same usual bunch of looneys producing same clickbaiting BS as in Forbes or Motley Fool. Usual BS that has word "Apple" in it for clicks.
Whatever Apple will do, WSJ is not the place one would get even remotely informed predictions.
Are we waiting for this ?
What’s the ‘added’ value ?
Usability....price... in a market already over flooded with brands and models so much there is almost market saturation, and Apple is coming with a watch ! yeah right!
I remember years ago the Apple I-TV rumours and market speculations, the same situation on the markets as with watches, price margins and dozens of brands in all flavours.
Steve Jobs had ‘found the answer’ for breaking into this market...what happened ? Nothing!
In my opinion, at this moment Apple is surely working on some nice niche products...but an I-watch in 2014? no way ! There is simply NO demand for this and the technology is not ready yet, take batteries for ex. so much power needed to feed all this sensor-date, the most advanced tech watches like Samsung/Sony cannot hold out 24 hours, even with ‘wireless’ charging the drain is too high.
Because this is a rumour site, I make my own predictions :-)
2015 :break-thru of medical integration in more IOS devices.
2016 :possible launch of thru wearable devices with foldable OLED screens etc.and battery technology able to keep the device running for a week without disconnect of charging.
2018 - 2020 :break-thru of ‘real’ AI in IOS devices, Siri becomes more ‘human’
Just my opinion of course :-)
Disagree. Yes, there are lots of fitness bands (fitbit, jawbone, garmin,…) out there, but none of them does it right. Apple could blow them all out of the water and I have no doubt that people would pay more for a unit that does get it right. If this watch can track multiple health/fitness stats, gps your route, and send music to your headphones wirelessly via bluetooth, you've got a killer unit. They need a good way to socialize this activity too as people like to share and compare what they've done.
If the sensors were in EarPods, the functionality would be enhanced, dramatically in some respects. I believe that one of the biggest drivers of child visits to GPs in the US is ear infection. EarPods could be used to detect this using activated polymers and sense ear pressure to ensure that music isn't played too loudly - a serious concern for young people in a connected age. However, this would be an ancillary system rather than a constantly worn iWatch. Definitely a place for such capability though. :-)
I think you will see many complimentary hardware products coming to market.
Think of all the self-diegnostic tools people could use, and how this would change healthcare.
I really don't think it's going to be a square like the Galaxy Gear or upcoming LG watch. They aren't going to just make the ipod Nano bound to a watchband. It will be something more classy and futuristic, like a band with a flexible display, battery and circuitry where the top of the band IS the watch.
Comments
Think of the M7 chip. It's not totally worthless without an app that can read the data because it stores a week's worth of data that can then be read by any number of apps you install later.
I expect more from Apple then just a fitness devise.
Apple will do the unexpected.
Some say Apple can only use existing technology.
I say, the lack of knowledge of a process or product does not prove its lack of existence.
There was, and I do see a path for certain sensors in the headphone phones for at least your temperature, and perhaps hydration, pulse rate and blood sugar.
PS: I do somewhat agree with @schlack about the sensors reporting to the phone but there has to be some sort of independent use for a wristwork device, like telling time and some other simple features typically found on a watch. An OLED display that is black with an ultra-thin Helvetica Neue dial that would turn on when you raise your wrist would be perfect for me.
I think long run the sensors will just be in our clothes. That is the logical place, it is close to your body, and little sensors will be so cheap they can be sewn in, and no great loss if they are never used. But we are not there yet so it will have to be in a wristwatch or earphones or something a bit more substantial than clothes. Well, maybe shoes are the one thing that could be done today.
Yes, there are some traditional features of watches that have value, but if the sensors migrated elsewhere, I'm not sure those features would be compelling on their own. I means there are clocks everywhere these days.
There was, and I do see a path for certain sensors in the headphone phones for at least your temperature, and perhaps hydration, pulse rate and blood sugar.
PS: I do somewhat agree with @schlack about the sensors reporting to the phone but there has to be some sort of independent use for a wristwork device, like telling time and some other simple features typically found on a watch. An OLED display that is black with an ultra-thin Helvetica Neue dial that would turn on when you raise your wrist would be perfect for me.
blood sugar is still a bit far, and your ear canal is probably not suitable for it.
Pulse OX may be possible (reflectively, although that is not as accurate as the pass thru at the finger), and that's a big seller for the COPD crowd.
The other is Blood Pressure. Which is one of the big 4 (Blood sugar, HR, BP, Temp) for real time monitoring.
I didn't consider a camera, NFC, or microphone as sensors.
Here is what Apple lists for the iPhone 5S:
...and in the context of this device, Apple would not, could not, get away with calling some of these sensors. Of course, Apple isn't a party to the conversation, the device might include 5 body condition sensors and the 5 current ones you've listed.
I think long run the sensors will all just be in our clothes. That is the logical place, it is close to your body, and little sensors will be so cheap they can be sewn in, and no great loss if they are never used. But we are not there yet so it will have to be in a wristwatch or earphones or something a bit more substantial than clothes. Well, maybe shoes are the one thing that could be done today.
Yes, there are some traditional features of watches that have value, but if the sensors migrated elsewhere, I'm not sure those features would be compelling on their own. I means there are clocks everywhere these days.
The watch/earphone advantage, short and long term is the 'fixed' location and pressure. Even duplication is not a great solution: Having 7 blood pressure sensors (or temp) in a shirt is great if 5 aren't connected, but unless you're doing some pretty complex math, the pressure at your neck is different than your waist, under your arm, or at your wrist.
knowing it's on your wrist (or in your ear), and always there, give you a better longitudinal (relative ups and downs), and a calculated offset (wrist skin temps will be closer to 73deg, ear temps, closer to 98.6) for diagnostic purposes.
Only 10+ sensors for the Apple wearable? Where's the innovation in that? I'm fairly certain the Galaxy Gear 3 will have at least 20 sensors and be capable of jolting you back to life after you suffer a heart attack. It's no wonder Apple is struggling for survival. Tim Cook isn't creative enough. The Apple wearable would have had full life-support capabilities if Steve Jobs were alive. Total body stasis and intelligent nano-bot injection capabilities. 10+ sensors is so yawn-worthy. If it can't accurately tell me my life-span, then what good is it? Wall Street is really going to be disappointed if Apple can only sell about 5 million of these digital wrist-toys by the end of the year.
/s
Imagine if they could cram all 10 sensors in to a pair of EarPods? Then it wouldn't even need a bluetooth transmitter to your phone, just plug it in in place of your normal exercise EarPods.
But probably it would have to go in to the Lightning port instead to transfer the sensor data. Wasn't there a rumour recently about Apple making Lightning earphones?
If the sensors were in EarPods, the functionality would be enhanced, dramatically in some respects. I believe that one of the biggest drivers of child visits to GPs in the US is ear infection. EarPods could be used to detect this using activated polymers and sense ear pressure to ensure that music isn't played too loudly - a serious concern for young people in a connected age. However, this would be an ancillary system rather than a constantly worn iWatch. Definitely a place for such capability though. :-)
...and in the context of this device, Apple would not, could not, get away with calling some of these sensors. Of course, Apple isn't a party to the conversation, the device might include 5 body condition sensors and the 5 current ones you've listed.
fingerprint is probably the only one that would not be a health sensor.
Proximity is important (to eliminate false positives... Loss of signal, sudden 2 foot drop... is he dead/ he fainting, or is he stripping down for a shower and tossing things in his bag... oh right, it's farther than 1" away from a warm blooded object (until the dog starts chewing on them)?)
gyro/accelerometer are motion/effort detection [crude... but it's the pedometer mph calculator]
light sensor... (Arm hasn't moved, pulse rate dropping to Basal minimums... Lights off, time is after 10pm... my guess... sleeping.)
Not that I'm arguing these are part of the 10. Just saying that most could be.
Back to the OP....
NFC is an interesting one. Somehow if I were in a gym, having the device that I'm on 'identify itself' (Is he doing jumping jacks or snatches, cycling or elliptical or treadmill?)
Oh gosh, people, look at the source. It's WSJ. After Walt left, their pundits are the same usual bunch of looneys producing same clickbaiting BS as in Forbes or Motley Fool. Usual BS that has word "Apple" in it for clicks.
Whatever Apple will do, WSJ is not the place one would get even remotely informed predictions.
Wrong type of sensors. Think pulse, oximeter etc. Not near field etc
Disagree. Yes, there are lots of fitness bands (fitbit, jawbone, garmin,…) out there, but none of them does it right. Apple could blow them all out of the water and I have no doubt that people would pay more for a unit that does get it right. If this watch can track multiple health/fitness stats, gps your route, and send music to your headphones wirelessly via bluetooth, you've got a killer unit. They need a good way to socialize this activity too as people like to share and compare what they've done.
If the sensors were in EarPods, the functionality would be enhanced, dramatically in some respects. I believe that one of the biggest drivers of child visits to GPs in the US is ear infection. EarPods could be used to detect this using activated polymers and sense ear pressure to ensure that music isn't played too loudly - a serious concern for young people in a connected age. However, this would be an ancillary system rather than a constantly worn iWatch. Definitely a place for such capability though. :-)
I think you will see many complimentary hardware products coming to market.
Think of all the self-diegnostic tools people could use, and how this would change healthcare.
Wrong type of sensors. Think pulse, oximeter etc. Not near field etc
Glucose level would be awesome! (yes, I know I'm reaching quite a bit)