digitalclips wrote: »
Time to add a prefix to your handle then maybe?
No backtracking here
And yet you immediately do it again.
Every other 'smart' watch, just got flushed down the toilet.
This is true innovation, everyone else just shrunk a crap phone and mounted it on your wrist. The software just set Tizen back 10 years.
Nah, but I've lost interest. Have fun with your watch.
Nah, but I've lost interest.
Ah, “I’m leaving, therefore I’m right.” Please learn how to do math. It costs less than the iPhone.
Oh, I’m not getting one.
fair enough, these are just mock ups and they give size options which is better than everyone else. I'm interested to see if it doesn't require a data plan, others do.
Can't wait to pay $350 for something that requires a data plan, is annoyingly large, and does nothing to assuage my fears that the UI will be annoying to work.
... I'm interested to see if it doesn't require a data plan, others do.
Backtracking now? Your first post said "...that requires a data plan", now you're backtracking? Like posting BS fabrications and hope someone takes your nonsense as fact? BS posters like you are why forums are just infested with contaminants.
Looks beautiful IMO. Not sure if I'll buy one, but I'm definitely intrigued. Looks a lot better than I was anticipating.
You are right, I'm backtracking. This watch will just tether off your phones data, tough news for all those on grandfathered unlimited plans. While it is sharing that data, you now have a phone and a watch doing things like monitoring traffic or sending directions which means you have two sources eating up your data plan. Sound about right? Or think it will need a $10 add on or something like that from US carriers, that require add ons like a tablet would do?
mac-daddy wrote: »
I bought the iPhone 5 nearly 2 years ago. When I go to buy the iPhone 6 on 9/19 I will pay $199
I think the stock tanked on the looks alone. No, I don't think round is the answer either, but I was hoping for something a little sleeker/band like device. I do like the functionality and the less I have to pull anything from my pockets the better. Maybe the limitations are technology related and we chuckle at this first iteration in a few years.
SpamSandwich wrote: »
I'll definitely be getting the Sport.
Oh, and Apple just killed Swatch.
It requires an iPhone so you're wrong about the "data plan": long range communications is performed through BT and WiFi via the iPhone and out LTE from there; hence no LTE chip to suck power off the small watch power storage..
Comes in multiple sizes: so you're wrong about "annoyingly large"
And thus your credibility for judging the UI? Yeah, not much.
Dreams should be left alone for the dreamers.
I was also expecting a band like device. This thing does look nice though. I personally don't mind pulling out my phone at all though. I'd much rather interact with my iPhone than any smartwatch.
So since there are multiple sizes that are annoyingly large, I'm wrong? As to pairs with the phone for WiFi, sounds like tethering, right? I'll let you catch up to my latest concern about that.
I thought so too until I saw the sports scores and swiping your wrist to pay. That would help out at a drive-thru and free up your hands. Now just make it unlock my house and I'll be good.
I remember thinking a smart key for a car was no big deal until I bought one that came with it.
The Apple watch is no laptop. "sounds like"? Not really.