Apple granted comprehensive 'iTime' smartwatch patent with in-strap circuitry, arm gesture support

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 100
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,973member
    iTime after iTime

    Morris Day and the iTime
  • Reply 42 of 100
    iaeeniaeen Posts: 588member
    stuffe wrote: »
    For sure it's going that way, as I said.  But it's nowhere near close to actually being there yet was my point, let's not be getting ahead of ourselves, taking it from the accessory side first then other than standard heart rate straps etc there are precious few non ANT+ devices for things like power meters and so fort, and those that are around are 1st gen products.  It's tipping, but its not tipped.  Either way NFC is toast.  Apple (and we) dodged a bullet with that tech...

    In fitness equipment you might have a point, but as soon as we start talking about wearables (Fitbit, UP24, Pebble, etc), Bluetooth 4.0 (or occasionally an older iteration) is the only real player.
  • Reply 43 of 100
    robin huberrobin huber Posts: 3,235member
    I have seen a few posts, including mine, that emphasized the iWatch as the evolution of the iPod Nano. Whether this is the case, or whether this is misdirection by Apple, or merely CYA patents remains to be seen. I am betting Apple is leveraging iPod--"the product that changed the world, and your life, is reborn to do it again."
  • Reply 44 of 100
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,350member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post



    (I‘ve Had) The iTime of My Life (Dirty Dancing)

    iTime Is Running Out (of battery life), by Muse

     

    ;)

  • Reply 45 of 100

    #212 reminds me of a scene in Max Headroom (80's) when they plugged the cops watch into the TV to view a crime scene that took place previously.

    iClock or iPhase or iWrist ?

  • Reply 46 of 100
    welshdogwelshdog Posts: 1,653member

    As interesting as the iWatch might be, I can't get too excited about wearing anything on my wrist.  I have a nice collection of watches with dead batteries and yes, the watches were replaced by my iPhone since it does a fine job of telling time. But the real reason they lie dormant is that I strongly dislike the physical presence of the watch on my arm.  It annoys me throughout the day.  It bangs into things and gets damaged - which also annoys me.  Even though the iWatch would offer myriad feature beyond time telling, I still can't ignore the liberty of not having a thing on my arm all day long.   Anyone else feel the same?

  • Reply 47 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

     

    Not keen on the in-strap circuitry part.  Samsung rightly got skewered when the first version of their Gear watch had the camera in the strap; being able to replace the strap independently of the watch face is a pretty big deal.


     

    instrap circuitry is key.   

    1) it provided detection that the device is being worn (auto on/off)

    2) antennas

    3) it provides all the bio-telemetry.

    4) componentry can be spread out to provide greater accuracy ( multiple accelerometers to better detect rotation).

     

    As for separate replacement... same was said of batteries in phones.  If made correctly (flexible, non-breakable, non-degrading material, no hinges)  the only thing that needs field replacement will be the clasping mechanism.

  • Reply 48 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post



    I have seen a few posts, including mine, that emphasized the iWatch as the evolution of the iPod Nano. Whether this is the case, or whether this is misdirection by Apple, or merely CYA patents remains to be seen. I am betting Apple is leveraging iPod--"the product that changed the world, and your life, is reborn to do it again."

    I will be surprised if the iWatch/Time runs iOS.  My guess it will be iPod's OS or a variant that allows for secure pairing to iOS devices and downloading of firmware upgrades that way.

     

    I doubt it was misdirection, I really think it's CYA in that the decision/path hadn't been locked down at patent submission time.

  • Reply 49 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sully54 View Post



    A square watch. Ugh.

    A flat phone - ugh

  • Reply 50 of 100

    The iWatch is all about mobile payment. The compelling reason for wearing an iWatch will be mobile payment. 

  • Reply 51 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

     

    As interesting as the iWatch might be, I can't get too excited about wearing anything on my wrist.  I have a nice collection of watches with dead batteries and yes, the watches were replaced by my iPhone since it does a fine job of telling time. But the real reason they lie dormant is that I strongly dislike the physical presence of the watch on my arm.  It annoys me throughout the day.  It bangs into things and gets damaged - which also annoys me.  Even though the iWatch would offer myriad feature beyond time telling, I still can't ignore the liberty of not having a thing on my arm all day long.   Anyone else feel the same?


     

    I agree with 90% of this.  I'm bi-dexterous: fine motor work/write right handed, therefore most of the time I wear my watch on my left hand, but I do power stuff with my left hand (throw, hammer (and hammer-throw ;-), tennis, golf).  and ambidextrous with a lot of stuff.  The watch gets a beating then (those self winding watches of the 70's were always over wound).   

     

     


    I'm assuming that the iWatch will be the 'most indestructible computer on this planet or any(tm)'  (tm me... Apple, just a penny per 100 impressions, thanks), and the sapphire/kevlar/titanium/coated-with-polymers-that-emulate-your-mother's-caress-and-emits-lavender&rose-scent-when-warmed-beyond-30Deg-celsius  device will feel calming against your skin.


     


     

     I note that 80% of my iPhone handling when on the move is 'check the notifications and/or time and/or wireless reception'.    I'd love to have a device that

    0) told me the time, scrollable notification list, and phone network status

    1) told my heart rate on the fly

    2) had detached mode 2 hours of songs on it BTed to BT Earbuds

    3) tracked my GPS location accurately for later upload.

    4) gave me a notification scroll  (I'm constantly needing reminders for meetings, important emails)

    5) held my alarms/calendar for the next 24 hours

    6) was waterproof (last iPhone was replaced for 'sweat immersion') (place iPhone in a waterproof container on my bike,kayak)

    For those items, and especially the last, I'll deal with the 'thinnest, most powerful watch ever built (tm me, again)'

  • Reply 52 of 100
    rolyroly Posts: 66member

    Quote:


    Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

     

    As interesting as the iWatch might be, I can't get too excited about wearing anything on my wrist.  I have a nice collection of watches with dead batteries and yes, the watches were replaced by my iPhone since it does a fine job of telling time. But the real reason they lie dormant is that I strongly dislike the physical presence of the watch on my arm.  It annoys me throughout the day.  It bangs into things and gets damaged - which also annoys me.  Even though the iWatch would offer myriad feature beyond time telling, I still can't ignore the liberty of not having a thing on my arm all day long.   Anyone else feel the same?


     

    Hell no...I feel pretty naked without a watch on my wrist.

     

    I really don't get this whole "phones have replaced watches" sentiment. A phone might tell the time, but it's nowhere near as convenient as wearing a watch on your wrist - a quick glance is much easier than digging your phone out of your pocket. If (like me) you ride a motorcycle (and I admit this is a minority argument) a phone cannot replace the convenience of being able to quickly glance down and check the time). The watches I wear are mostly for fashion (a TAG Formula 1 being the main watch I wear) as a piece of jewelry however, but I'd never stop wearing a watch just because my iPhone has a clock on it. In fact, if there IS an iWatch, I'd definitely wear that in addition (not instead of) a regular watch and a phone :-)

  • Reply 53 of 100
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post

     
    Possibly, but a phone's battery is part of its function, whereas a watch strap is both aesthetic and also dictates its comfort.  I think making the strap non-replaceable would be seen as a significant failing of any such product.


    The main issue is that all small mobile devices are designed with a series of compromises, small screen, small battery, small text, UI, etc. Using the watch band as extra space for electronics is a logical outcome, otherwise the body of the watch would be too large.  I don't wear a watch but when I did, I don't ever recall having to replace the band, because it was heavy duty metal. iDevices generally have a 2-4 year life span so most people will probably not need to replace the band before they replace the watch.

  • Reply 54 of 100
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    NFC is dead-end technology, as is Android.  In 2011, Apple was likely still coming to those conclusions.  Although you never know: perhaps the iPhone 6 5.5" will contain the new Adobe Flash NFC Pico-Projecting 3D Haptic Display.
    NFC isn't dead end, just it's kinda misused. Apple has to support it, because NFC is what contactless payment cards use for various things. Here's a practical application, tell the watch to go into "contactless card mode (transit)" and use it to get on and off trains and buses. That's far more practical than whipping out the phone or keeping a dozen NFC cards in a wallet. A NFC chip part would be on the bottom part so you don't need to tilt your arm in an awkward angle to use it. For "communications networks" Bluetooth is still the best option.

    Anyway that's partly why I haven't picked up an iPhone. I wanted to see both NFC and VoLTE before I'd absolutely get one. I can live without either, but I can also get by with my UMTS Nokia non-smartphone as long as Google doesn't break the maps app on it, as it hasn't been updated in 3 years. I'm pretty sure Microsoft isn't going to keep the Nokia maps working.

    I'd even be fine seeing a return of the 3.5" size if the battery returned to 300 standby hours. I don't really want/care about larger screen sizes because I want something that fits in a pocket.
    roly wrote: »
    Quote:

    Hell no...I feel pretty naked without a watch on my wrist.

    I really don't get this whole "phones have replaced watches" sentiment.

    I haven't worn a watch since the last one I had made a beep of death and was unsalvageable. I never liked wearing a watch because it would interfere with typing. I've seen one too many laptops where the person's metal watchband had scratched all the paint off it.
  • Reply 55 of 100
    "Next month Samesung release S Time."

    The "S" stands for "sh*t."
  • Reply 56 of 100
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Roly View Post

     

    Quote:

     

    Hell no...I feel pretty naked without a watch on my wrist.

     

    I really don't get this whole "phones have replaced watches" sentiment. A phone might tell the time, but it's nowhere near as convenient as wearing a watch on your wrist - a quick glance is much easier than digging your phone out of your pocket. If (like me) you ride a motorcycle (and I admit this is a minority argument) a phone cannot replace the convenience of being able to quickly glance down and check the time). The watches I wear are mostly for fashion (a TAG Formula 1 being the main watch I wear) as a piece of jewelry however, but I'd never stop wearing a watch just because my iPhone has a clock on it. In fact, if there IS an iWatch, I'd definitely wear that in addition (not instead of) a regular watch and a phone :-)


    I was right there with you until the end.  I wear a watch 24x7 except when I'm in the shower or pool.  But there is NFW I'm going to wear two watches.

  • Reply 57 of 100
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 30,727member
    Apropos of nothing, when is Apple going to buy Beats.com? "BeatsbyDre.com" is not only a lousy domain address, it no longer reflects the ownership. Just buy beats.com, please.
  • Reply 58 of 100
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,736member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post

     

     

    instrap circuitry is key.  

    1) it provided detection that the device is being worn (auto on/off)

    2) antennas

    3) it provides all the bio-telemetry.

    4) componentry can be spread out to provide greater accuracy ( multiple accelerometers to better detect rotation).

     

    As for separate replacement... same was said of batteries in phones.  If made correctly (flexible, non-breakable, non-degrading material, no hinges)  the only thing that needs field replacement will be the clasping mechanism.


    Aside from the fact that you've just made up a bunch of functionality to justify the conclusion, none of those things make the watch strap key.  And beyond that, the watch strap being a pliable piece of material that would take some punishment means that Apple shouldn't embed critical components in it or make it a necessary part of the watch structure, it introduces vulnerability, as well as the truth that Apple just aren't very good at that sort of thing, their cables have a bad reputation for fraying, and their headphones are not very robust.  Apple are great at sealed units, not at flexible and durable parts.

  • Reply 59 of 100
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    crowley wrote: »
    ...as well as the truth that Apple just aren't very good at that sort of thing… Apple are great at sealed units, not at flexible and durable parts.

    “PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in."
    – Ed Colligan, Palm CEO, circa 2007
  • Reply 60 of 100
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,020member
    troehl wrote: »
    I think the concept and the technology has rapidly developed since then and the patents described here are mostly out of date, except maybe the gestures. I don't think anybody has been talking about that yet.

    Must be headed for a real Apple product since Sammy has filed a whole lotta patent applications for similar functionality in the past year. :\

    https://www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=pts&hl=en&q=wearable+electronic+gesture&num=10&qscrl=1&gws_rd=ssl
Sign In or Register to comment.