Apple Watch revealed: A wrist-worn, personalized communications & fitness device with 'digital crown

145791014

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 267
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,973member
    eauvive wrote: »

    You’re right. Sometime in the future, a miniaturized chip with NFC capabilities will be implanted under the skin at birth, and we will have all data stored in it: identity, criminal offenses, bank accounts, health problems, etc.

    That's scary.
  • Reply 122 of 267
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

     

     

    Bluetooth to iPhone, iPhone’s Wi-Fi to local Wi-Fi network.

     

    Like they said, it requires an iPhone to work. You couldn’t listen to music on the watch anyway.


    that's exactly my point, it wasn't a question.  So basically this watch is out for runners if you can't listen to music on it without taking a phone with you.  Or cycling or any other active sport where you want to take as little with you as possible.  To me, that's a fail!

    I bike a lot in the park here in town and everyone (even cyclists...dangerous) have headphones on.  So if you can't use it like an iPod (not even sync a couple playlists) and you have to take your phone with you as well....what's the point?

  • Reply 123 of 267
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    That's scary.



    But nevertheless it is coming. Watch (duh!) ‘Logan's run’, the 1976 (or 1967?) film. In some ways very prophetic. Hell, it even guessed the success of online dating sites way before any of them existed.

  • Reply 124 of 267
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 4,442member

    Well as other have pointed, no real statement about battery life, it was definitely omitted on purpose. You know the first users will be playing with it all the time so it will not make it through the day and then we will have Apple Watch Batterygate.

  • Reply 125 of 267
    chiachia Posts: 692member
    eauvive wrote: »
    Watch is like smoking. When you've one, you check time every five seconds. When you really get rid of it (and, as I said, for me wearing a watch is an ancient story), you just realize how futile this is and how seldom in a day you really need to have a precise reading of time. Besides, your brain develop a sort of time-awareness that is just hobbled when you wear a wristwatch. 

    Speak for yourself, I hope you don't work in a career that is time dependent or relies on timetables such as healthcare, transport or even the military.
  • Reply 126 of 267
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

     

    I'd imagine if it can control apps on your mac and (as Tim said, his  Apple TV), then there must be some sort of independent element about the device.  I think it's telling that they did not give you much about the specs.  No storage options?  so you can only control things like a remote, not store music or playlists.  So if i want to go out for a run or cycling and want to listen to a podcast or music, I still have to bring a device I can stream from.  I don't see a headphone jack.  Where does the music come from?  Blutooth i'd presume but not sure from the iPhone or the Apple Watch?


    Music might be controlled on the AppleWatch while it's stored and played off the linked iPhone to the head/earphones of choice, wireless or wired... At least what was demo'd was storing photos on it, I didn't see music anyway.

     

    But anyway even on a run or bike ride the odds are an iPhone would be taken for communication at the very least. But having control access right on a  wrist would be nice, with the iPhone tucked away somewhere secure.

  • Reply 127 of 267
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

     

    that's exactly my point, it wasn't a question.  So basically this watch is out for runners if you can't listen to music on it without taking a phone with you.  Or cycling or any other active sport where you want to take as little with you as possible.  To me, that's a fail!

    I bike a lot in the park here in town and everyone (even cyclists...dangerous) have headphones on.  So if you can't use it like an iPod (not even sync a couple playlists) and you have to take your phone with you as well....what's the point?


    Hell why not just buy one of those little iPods if ALL you want is lightweight music?

     

    Nano, Nano?

     

    Or just do the Shuffle?

  • Reply 128 of 267
    Yaaaaawn!
  • Reply 129 of 267

    Thinking about it. If I'm going to carry around a 5.5 inch screen in my pocket, an iWatch might be quite appealing.

  • Reply 130 of 267
    chia wrote: »
    Speak for yourself, I hope you don't work in a career that is time dependent or relies on timetables such as healthcare, transport or even the military.

    Well no. But time presence is almost cloying. Clocks are everywhere: stations, cars, billboards, bus stops, shop signs, computers, smartphones… it has never been so easy to live without a watch than today…
  • Reply 131 of 267
    It must be nice to not have to know the exact time, like many of you claim you don't. Well, I don't...now, but I spent many years taking the bus to work. I'd ride one downtown and then walk around the corner to catch an outbound bus, which was always on time because this was its second stop. If my inbound route was on time too, great. Sometimes we'd really run behind though, and if we were more than 5 or 6 minutes behind, I could jump out at one point and run a block over to catch my outbound bus a few stops later. So yeah, I had to know the time to the second. Fishing a huge phone out of my pocket and turning it on every couple of minutes would have been hugely inconvenient, as would staring at it all the time. I just can't comprehend this "I can just check the time on my phone" business. 110 years after the wristwatch was invented, you've reinvented the pocket watch—only this time without a fob, so you have to fish around in your pocket for it. Extremely awkward.
  • Reply 132 of 267
    When I was listening to Kevin presenting the Apple Watch, I was thinking:


     


    I miss Steve Jobs.

     

    I was supplanting Jobs in his place, imagining the excited, captivating inflection in his voice, as opposed to the low monotonous tone of Kevin's. Jobs infected us with his enthusiasm. He had ebb and flow, he created an intense focus that drew you in. 

     

    I still love Apple. But my hopes for their shares are tempered. 

     

    My hit rate is not so great for recent Apple: I wasn't enamoured with the iPhone, and thought the iPad would be huge, so 50%. I fear that the Apple Watch is a miss. Too big, too clunky-looking, not a compelling use-case. If I can do mobile payments with my iPhone, do I really want to wear a huge watch to do the same thing? I still may be swayed once I see it in a shop. 

     

    I've just measured my watch-35mm in diameter. The smaller Apple Watch is not too much larger, possibly. The big one is way too large. I thought it all looked too fiddly in the Keynote. For me, the first mistake was when Kevin gave the demo using the watch on a stand-that's how I would have imagined Microsoft doing it! He should have demoed it on his wrist, so we could truly see how usable it was. I can see why he didn't; I guess it might have looked ungainly with the video feed wire dangling from it.

     

    If it had been Jobs, he would have immediately dwelt lovingly on some physical aspect of the watch. It's like Jurassic Park: in every film, they were careful to have someone touch a dinosaur bone, in order to bring them to life. I never felt that the Apple watch came to life, and considering that it's the most personal product that Apple have potentially made, I feel that this was a significant mistake.

  • Reply 133 of 267
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by alcstarheel View Post

     

    I like it. I like it a lot. I think the implications are huge. Especially with the Fitness app giving you these goals of globally recommended fitness/caloric intake levels. It'll make it that much easier to become healthier.

     

    It also looks nice. It's not ostentatious. It's not in your face. It is customizable. It is not shoehorning a mobile OS into 2" screen. It's not 270º when claiming to be 360º.

     

    Side Note:

     

    Now with HomeKit, HealthKit, and WatchKit, how soon before people start trademarking "_____kit" names?


     

    Spam won the bet with 120 minutes.

  • Reply 134 of 267
    So you have to have your iPhone with you at all times to be able to track your distance when working out? How about this- I won't buy it and use the iPhone apps I already use to do these same things.
  • Reply 135 of 267
    hill60hill60 Posts: 6,989member

    Two words:-

     

    battery life

  • Reply 136 of 267

    that's my only concern... will the watch still be functional (e.g. tracking all of my data, displaying the time and doing non-internet dependent things) ... i just feel its a huge miss on apple's part to not think about the fact that i might not want to carry my phone with me when i'm doing something as simple as going on a run.

  • Reply 137 of 267
    nhtnht Posts: 4,386member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post

     

    Well, I'll be interested to see one.  I have to admit, it does look nice, but what it actually does will be the key thing for me.

     

    My problem is my watch is a piece of jewelry first, and a timepiece second.  As a piece of jewelry, I don't want to wear the same thing on my wrist as everyone else does, so the fact that I can see this selling loads makes me less likely to want one.


     

    Get the gold one...then a custom face...

  • Reply 138 of 267
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gwmac View Post

     

    Thank God they have one in gold. I do not ever want to wear plastic on my wrist that is seen in public and at work. I love the variety for many tastes. This immediately made the competition look cheap and obsolete. (more than they already were)

     

    Anyone want to buy a Breitlling? 

     

    Wall Street seems pleased. AAPL up 2.37




    I'll give you two Apple watches for your Breitling, provided it is not Breitlling of course. If it is the new Colt, I might add an iPhone 6 plus

  • Reply 139 of 267
    512ke512ke Posts: 781member

    "So you have to have your iPhone with you at all times to be able to track your distance when working out? How about this- I won't buy it and use the iPhone apps I already use to do these same things."

     

    Really?  You can't just go for a run wearing only the phone and have it track your distance?

     

    Those new phones are too big to take for a run, for me at least.  

     

    The watch is only going to be useful for working out if you don't need a ginormous phone lol.

     

    I'm sure the final version will let you use the $350 phone to measure your distance all by itself.

  • Reply 140 of 267
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 512ke View Post

     

    "So you have to have your iPhone with you at all times to be able to track your distance when working out? How about this- I won't buy it and use the iPhone apps I already use to do these same things."

     

    Really?  You can't just go for a run wearing only the phone and have it track your distance?

     

    Those new phones are too big to take for a run, for me at least.  

     

    The watch is only going to be useful for working out if you don't need a ginormous phone lol.

     

    I'm sure the final version will let you use the $350 phone to measure your distance all by itself.


    But the watch work connected to an iPhone, so you'd need the phone anyway, unless I'm some how mistaken.

Sign In or Register to comment.