Not convinced at all. Many people don't charge their phones every night - I for example have it plugged in (charging / syncing ...) a lot during the day at work, and in the car when I travel. At weekend I charge at night.
If Apple can get 2 or 3 days (modest usage) then fine, requiring nightly charge - not fine.
The people that don't charge their phones every night are either the ones that don't need to (like you) or the ones that run out of power in the middle of the next day. I am a light to moderate phone user and I probably could just get by on 2 days but I would never risk it. If your routine is to charge it nightly (I suspect about 90% of iPhone users do) then your new routine would be to charge your phone and Apple watch nightly. It's not rocket science.
rogifan wrote: »
And circular displays are?
Bu the point is iPads are in a completely different battery class than iPhones and wearables. iPads have about 5x the battery so they need 5x less charging than phones and wearables.
Which is why I believe that some people have far too high expectations for the battery life on a tiny smart watch.
I really want this watch and while I will probably get it, I'm really going to have to retrain myself on how I interact with my watch. Currently I have a kinetic Seiko and it never comes off. I wear it in the shower, I wear it in the ocean, sleeping, at the lake, out on the town, etc. It literally never comes off, it never needs to be charged, it just works. It's going to be next to impossible for smart watches to replace that simplicity, but you are also gaining a lot more capabilities with this watch, so there will be pros and cons.
Buy 2. Yes, that's a half joking. But it would work for you although you'd have to take it off to switch...
cali wrote: »
NO. not at all.
When Steve Jobs announce the iPod he said it was more than just an MP3 player because it featured "Apple Design". That philosophy died yesterday.
I was so excited before the reveal that I even drew a possible mockup. It was a flexible display that wraps around the top of your wrist like a balance bracelete.
I guess I was expecting an iPod/iPhone/iPad-scale revolution.
Rocket science isn't that difficult to comprehend - now rocket engineering can get pretty tricky...
I think I can just about grasp that routines would have to change, they WOULD, thats obvious (not being rocket science and all) but my point is that having to do that to something strapped to your wrist, and having to take a charger every time you travelled is a big pain in the ass.
I believe Apple will NOT ship, until that can get several days of moderate use between charges.
Achieving that is akin to rocket science, but Apple are more than capable.
I'd like to ask an obvious question.
Why is this not solar powered? Solar cells can easily be placed under certain surfaces, like the black borders on screens.
How do I know this? My current solar powered watch.
Even if you are only able to fit a few photovoltaic cells, carrying it around with you should allow for a significant amount of power recharging or at the least minimize the DAILY charging requirement.
Sorry Apple but this Revision 1 of your watch feels like a dud. Let's get with the advancements in solar energy technology.
I think Apples bet in this case is lots more people have compatible iPhones than do Macs (not PC's)? And the thing is, it wouldn't be difficult to convince him (so I'd need no luck). Lots of people arent anti-iOS or anti-Android; yes some pick based on price, but lots pick what works for them also (screen size, software flexibility ("cognitive headache")). He's an engineer. If he were to use an Apple watch next to Samsung Gear, I'd bet money he'd pick the Apple watch and not because he knows I'm heavily invested into Apple's ecosystem, but because he'd clearly see which is the more responsive, better optioned and better feeling device. I know that statement can't be said for all shoppers out there, but it can be said for some. However, it's no good to him currently; he doesn't have an iPhone.
And gen 1 I'd bet can work alone (via some software update), *if* Apple wanted it to.
Those people are insignificant.
Believe me, there are plenty of people who will be buying this ?Watch.
And $349 is only for the cheapest model! People will be spending over a thousand for certain models I believe.
This is a luxury item, a companion watch for an iPhone.
sony NEX / Nikon cameras I do not charge every night,
Lol...then you aren't taking any/many pictures every day. I have 3 batteries for my Nikon. I've burned through 2 in a day. One sits in the charger (its a smart one so it won't fry) in case I'm stupid and forget to charge after using my camera after grabbing my camera one day discovering it had a half charge and the spare was flat. I had to use my phone after a bit.
I do. My iPads get heavy use during the day. I make it a habit to plug them in each night.
My iPads get heavy use too. In fact we use iPads as document distribution for things we build and design. They are amazing for this ( good reader) but they are plugged in enough while not being used, and simply not charged 7 nights a week, habitually like you do.
The watch is strapped to my wrist - so its not going to get plugged in to something as frequently -
if you can deal with charging a watch nightly - great - many people will dislike the pain.
A) because it looks like ass
because it generates so little power that it's meaningless. Your solar powered watch uses practically no power. Smart watches with active displays (as opposed to eInk) are energy hogs.
The kinetic charging makes more sense that solar, no? You'd have to take your watch off an sit it in direct sunlight because sunlight doesn't hit your write that readily and you'd have to factor in the fact that electronics don't like heat.
But for both kinetic or solar, you'd have to consider the electronics required to make it work and what that would do to the size of the device vs the amount of power that could be generated.
They're not magicians?
right_said_fred wrote: »
...having to take a charger every time you travelled is a big pain in the ass.
Thats true - most days I take NO pictures, somedays quite a few - and yes - I have extra batteries always on charge. SO what I don't have to do, is habitually plug in my cameras nightly. I can easily to away for the night, and now perhaps take my RX100, and don't have to remember a charger, or even a spare battery.
Perhaps the "revolution" such as it is: is in the actual functionality?
Rather than rectangles?
I do like the classic Cartier Tanks though, and that doesn't diminish the advances offered by the Apple Watch one bit.
I dont - i use my iPad Ir frequently through the day, and evening, ( i have a couple) and I don't need to charge them nightly.
When I go on a couple of day business trip, i too take my cordless toothbrush, but i don't need to take the charger.
nightly charging of the ?watch would be ( & I doubt apple will let it happen) a reason that many people will either not buy, or buy, then neglect it in a draw after the novelty wears off
And how many times a day do you brush your teeth?
I assumed it's just a USB cable on one end and a round magsafe on the other end. The AC power adapter is the same as the iPhone so only need to bring a cable with you to charge the watch too. Unless you buy the fancy Apple Watch Edition which has the jewelry case that doubles as a charger but no one would lug that around when they can just bring a cable.