iPhone 6 & Apple Watch reveals lived up to the hype for Wall Street, investors have high hopes for A

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 107
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Did Apple say anything about using Apple Pay via the Apple Watch when you have a iPhone 4S-5S [basically a phone that works with the Apple Watch, but doesn't itself have NFC]?  You would think it should work, but I can see Apple pulling a Siri and requiring an iPhone 6 anyway.
    I heard it will work if you own an Apple Watch.
  • Reply 82 of 107
    rogifan wrote: »
    frood wrote: »
    It is somewhat true, but its going to come down to if the functionality outweighs the cludginess.  If someone told me Apple had partnered with someone to make these watches, from the looks, I would have guessed 'Armitron'
    Really? You think this looks like something that was designed by a 1st year design student?

    Erhm, I'm guessing he is praising Apple for the design of the watch:

    Wiki:
    "E. Gluck Corporation, founded in 1956 by its current President, Eugen Gluck, is an American watch manufacturer headquartered in Long Island City, New York. E. Gluck Corporation manufactures watches under two flagship brand names, Armitron and Anne Klein. As of 1999, Armitron had the fifth largest share of all watch purchasers, by brand, in the United States. As of 2005, Armitron ranks as one of the top ten fine and fashion watch brands in the US, along with Timex, Fossil, Seiko, Citizen, Casio, Guess, Bulova, Movado, and Pulsar."
  • Reply 83 of 107
    What I'd buy... is an 'iPhone Mini.' The 750x1334 resolution of the iPhone 6 at the 401ppi density of the 6 gives a screen size of 3.8". Given shrinkage of bezels, this would come in at around the same size as the original iPhone thru the iPhone 4S - which is an excellent size for a portable device!
  • Reply 84 of 107

    Yes, because women don't wear watches, ever, and a watch must hurt you to be "masculine"... So, how is a Samsung, LG, or Moto watch masculine? Is ugly and badly put together synonym with masculine these days?

     

    Considering most watches are unwieldy monsters nobody but techies would want on their wrists, calling it "feminine" is one hell of a compliment; a first for smart watches for sure.

  • Reply 85 of 107
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by cali View Post





    He knows that. He's just trollin'.

    see?

    And STILL no 6c was announced.



    bye-bye colorful people image

    You'll have to wait until next year. I have a feeling Apple might keep the 4" size around, and that's when the next "C" model will come around... with at least TouchID, and probably fitted with 5S internals. 

  • Reply 86 of 107

    I'm going to attempt to jump on the 6 Plus 64 GB. That's the bargain phone, and it'll replace my Galaxy Tab 3 for tablet use. I am a little concerned about how it'll fit in my pocket, though... 

  • Reply 87 of 107
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,195moderator
    one9deuce wrote: »
    Does the idea of a phone in your pocket that can only make phone calls seem ridiculous in 2014? No texting, no email, no FaceTime, no still camera, no video camera, no GPS, no music player, no watching movies or television shows, no clock, no calendar, no alarm, no calculator, no voicemail, no photo album, no games, no Apps, no Internet...

    A phone that just makes phone calls. Seems almost absurd.

    Will people in a decade feel that way about a watch that only tells time?

    The Apple Watch doesn't do much more than analog watches without the smartphone. You can't use Siri without the phone so no texting, no email, no notifications, no FaceTime, no still camera, no video camera, no GPS, no movies or TV shows, no voicemail, no internet, no maps.

    On its own, it has the clock, can play music, has an alarm, maybe a calculator, it has some apps, I doubt any worthwhile games.
    rogifan wrote:
    Ouch.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/11088667/Apple-Watch-too-feminine-and-looks-like-it-was-designed-by-students-says-LVMH-executive.html

    EDIT: and I see Business Insider is running with this story so expect it to be all over Twitter and tech sites soon. Sigh.

    I thought it looked a bit feminine but there's a couple of designs that look more masculine:

    1000

    1000

    and what's more manly than kissing a beautiful woman while you're out jogging:

    1000

    I agree it's not timeless though and I don't like the design. For one thing, the crown dial places a restriction on how thin it can become unless they eventually get rid of it. The design they chose seems to match up with the phone with the curved edges so consistent at least but it comes across as quite amateur looking, which is not something that could be said about the original iPhone or iPad - they were both completely iconic. This will be visible when we see how many people follow Apple's design choice and I suspect very few smartwatch makers will.
  • Reply 88 of 107
    rogifan wrote: »
    Ouch.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/11088667/Apple-Watch-too-feminine-and-looks-like-it-was-designed-by-students-says-LVMH-executive.html

    EDIT: and I see Business Insider is running with this story so expect it to be all over Twitter and tech sites soon. Sigh.

    So? What should he say? "We welcome the competition"? "We expect our sales to fall twenty percent"? LOL!
  • Reply 89 of 107
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    I watched Apple's keynote again and I'm not sure I agree with Ben Thompson so much anymore. Tim Cook was very clear on how they're positioning the device. He said it was:


    [LIST=1]
    [*]A precise time piece, infinitely customizable
    [*]An intimate communication device
    [*]A comprehensive health and fitness platform
    [/LIST]

    He also said "and so much more" and gave examples of using it to control his Apple TV or as a walkie-talkie. Maybe Ben Thompson's issue is with the "so much more" part but I think we should reserve judgement until we see what developers do with the platform. Let's not forget that they spent very little time on HomeKit or HealthKit which leads me to believe there's a lot about this watch capabilities we don't know yet. Imagine a 2nd or 3rd generation Apple Watch that is a stand alone device with an App Store full of amazing and useful apps. This could be another case where Apple is thinking long term and the rest of us are thinking 'what does this do for me now'.

    I also remembered that Ben Thompson was one who said notifications don't belong on the iPad and it shouldn't have split screen multitasking either.
  • Reply 90 of 107
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    So? What should he say? "We welcome the competition"? "We expect our sales to fall twenty percent"? LOL!

    Of course not, but saying it looks like something designed by a first year design student is a pretty low blow. The people who actually saw it in person seem to have a completely different impression than everyone else.
  • Reply 91 of 107
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Marvin wrote: »

    I agree it's not timeless though and I don't like the design. For one thing, the crown dial places a restriction on how thin it can become unless they eventually get rid of it. The design they chose seems to match up with the phone with the curved edges so consistent at least but it comes across as quite amateur looking, which is not something that could be said about the original iPhone or iPad - they were both completely iconic. This will be visible when we see how many people follow Apple's design choice and I suspect very few smartwatch makers will.

    I agree that it's a bit bulky but I don't agree that it looks amateurish, especially the bands. The initial hands on review below from Benjamin Clymer is quite good and balanced. He points out flaws but also how precise the mechanical design is and how Apple nailed the bands. If the watch face was round instead of square I think people's impressions would be quite different. I also think people's impression will change once they are able to see one in person and try it on. Andy Ihnatko said Moto 360 is nice but Apple watch feels better.

    http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review
  • Reply 92 of 107
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,366member
    rogifan wrote: »
    I'm not one to say what Steve Jobs would or wouldn't do, but I do wonder if he would have approved this watch at its current bulk, or said to wait a year until they can get it slimmer. I think Apple had to release the iWatch now to fit with their iPhone 6 marketing plan. What better way to sell watches than to offer a revolutionary payment system through it as the only option for the iPhone 5 series which accounts for the largest installed base of iPhone users? It also makes buying the Larger iPhones easier since with the watch, you can leave the phone in your purse, briefcase, pocket, or gym bag. I wonder what the effective range of the watch is from the iPhone?

    It looks nice, and I think they did a good job with it -- it's hands down the best smart watch out there -- but I understand the amateurish comments. It's thick, squarish, with a clunky button. The digital crown is fantastic, but that button ... The saving grace is the fit and finish, and the beautiful display. Next year's iWatch will be the one to have, and early adopters will as usual get screwed a little. Functionally it needs to eventually work with all Apple devices, and as a stand alone device. Do we know what it does now by itself if the iPhone is not nearby?
  • Reply 93 of 107
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post



    The only disappointment for me was the 16GB storage being the base on the new iPhones. That just feels cheap. Even as a shareholder it feels cheap.



    That being said, they weren't kidding about the watch. Switzerland is in trouble, and Apple is playing in a completely different league than the likes of Samsung and the rest of the Droid Kidz. Some people claim the Moto 270 looks better, it's still a worthless device with obsolete hardware though.



    Planning on getting one for my mother in law who has no interest in apps or digital music! For some folks, it's perfect. My wife and I plan to upgrade to the 64!

  • Reply 94 of 107
    rogifan wrote: »
    Of course not, but saying it looks like something designed by a first year design student is a pretty low blow. The people who actually saw it in person seem to have a completely different impression than everyone else.

    Insults from a guy in an industry that is being directly challenged should be taken at a discount.
  • Reply 95 of 107
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    mac_128 wrote: »
    I'm not one to say what Steve Jobs would or wouldn't do, but I do wonder if he would have approved this watch at its current bulk, or said to wait a year until they can get it slimmer. I think Apple had to release the iWatch now to fit with their iPhone 6 marketing plan. What better way to sell watches than to offer a revolutionary payment system through it as the only option for the iPhone 5 series which accounts for the largest installed base of iPhone users? It also makes buying the Larger iPhones easier since with the watch, you can leave the phone in your purse, briefcase, pocket, or gym bag. I wonder what the effective range of the watch is from the iPhone?

    It looks nice, and I think they did a good job with it -- it's hands down the best smart watch out there -- but I understand the amateurish comments. It's thick, squarish, with a clunky button. The digital crown is fantastic, but that button ... The saving grace is the fit and finish, and the beautiful display. Next year's iWatch will be the one to have, and early adopters will as usual get screwed a little. Functionally it needs to eventually work with all Apple devices, and as a stand alone device. Do we know what it does now by itself if the iPhone is not nearby?

    I think they're announcing it now because of developers. If they waited a year or two Android Wear would have a huge lead in terms of developer support. For me the success of Apple Watch will ultimately be what 3rd party developers do with it. I think version 1 is all about getting developers on board and showing the possibilities of the device. I liked some of the examples they showed off like using it to check in at the airport or to unlock your hotel room door. Imagine the possibilities once they have a stand alone device!

    Jim Dalrymple's site has a good post up where it lists a bunch of negative quotes from MacRumors users. When I first read them I thought they were comments about Apple watch. They actually were comments from 2001 about the iPod. Pull up clam chowder on iPod, iPhone and iPad and it sounds exactly like what people are saying about Apple Watch.
  • Reply 96 of 107
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by one9deuce View Post





    Those Swiss watch makers could definitely be around in 100 years, they make amazing and beautiful watches. But here's the thing about Apple introducing the Apple Watch, it reminds me of the iPhone introduction. It's not as Earth shattering as that (can anything ever be again?) but there is one big similarity, ask yourself this:



    Does the idea of a phone in your pocket that can only make phone calls seem ridiculous in 2014? No texting, no email, no FaceTime, no still camera, no video camera, no GPS, no music player, no watching movies or television shows, no clock, no calendar, no alarm, no calculator, no voicemail, no photo album, no games, no Apps, no Internet...



    A phone that just makes phone calls. Seems almost absurd.



    Will people in a decade feel that way about a watch that only tells time?

     

    To compare the butt-**** ugly, unoriginal and absolutely underwhelming AppleWatch with the revolutionary and ground-shattering iPhone (which simply recreated the whole mobile phone market) is ludicrous, to say the least. 

  • Reply 97 of 107
    brlawyer wrote: »
    To compare the butt-**** ugly, unoriginal and absolutely underwhelming AppleWatch with the revolutionary and ground-shattering iPhone (which simply recreated the whole mobile phone market) is ludicrous, to say the least. 

    Taste is personal.
  • Reply 98 of 107
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,195moderator
    rogifan wrote: »
    I agree that it's a bit bulky but I don't agree that it looks amateurish, especially the bands. The initial hands on review below from Benjamin Clymer is quite good and balanced. He points out flaws but also how precise the mechanical design is and how Apple nailed the bands. If the watch face was round instead of square I think people's impressions would be quite different. I also think people's impression will change once they are able to see one in person and try it on.

    They did a good job with the bands and I agree if it had been round, it would have been different but the crown button has to go too, it's not symmetric. That site you linked to shows an Omega watch next to the Apple Watch:

    1000 1000

    1000

    The round clock face looks silly on the square display, in a round peg square hole way. Such a small tweak but such a huge difference in appearance.

    Moto 360 has been selling out within hours of the launch - they might have had a limited production run of course:

    http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/5/6111433/motorola-is-already-sold-out-of-its-moto-360-smartwatch

    Round is more than just aesthetic - when you do pinch-zoom, your fingers don't go off the edge at any angle as it's the same width. You can twist around the bezel for actions without obscuring the view. You can have app pages again so none of this giant grid of tiny icons. The page dots can be round the screen edge with say 9 icons per page and twisting round the bezel would switch the pages out. The animation could even behave like an eclipse so each icon circle just gets replaced by the next page's icon and a page with fewer icons just eclipses the extra icons out to black.

    The single button would be the home button. The screen would go off when the wrist falls down or tap-hold the button can put it to sleep manually.

    It's not too late to change it, Apple's one isn't approved by the FCC yet. The 1.8" and 1.6" displays of the Moto and LG are too big. the Apple watch is 1.65" tall for the large one and 1.5" for the smaller one. Perhaps 1.5" and 1.3" circular diameter would suffice and they'd just have metal parts sticking out top and bottom like the Omega watch so the straps are the same. Add in some solar glass for charging and get it to 24 hour battery life.

    I think the Apple Watch is probably already waterproof although they haven't said so. The components are covered in resin. Waterproof would be nice but additionally a cellular connection (even old 2G would suffice). Being able to wear one in the pool to track swimming lengths and get notifications and use Siri would be nice.
  • Reply 99 of 107
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post





    They did a good job with the bands and I agree if it had been round, it would have been different but the crown button has to go too, it's not symmetric. That site you linked to shows an Omega watch next to the Apple Watch:











    The round clock face looks silly on the square display, in a round peg square hole way. Such a small tweak but such a huge difference in appearance.



    Moto 360 has been selling out within hours of the launch - they might have had a limited production run of course:



    http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/5/6111433/motorola-is-already-sold-out-of-its-moto-360-smartwatch



    Round is more than just aesthetic - when you do pinch-zoom, your fingers don't go off the edge at any angle as it's the same width. You can twist around the bezel for actions without obscuring the view. You can have app pages again so none of this giant grid of tiny icons. The page dots can be round the screen edge with say 9 icons per page and twisting round the bezel would switch the pages out. The animation could even behave like an eclipse so each icon circle just gets replaced by the next page's icon and a page with fewer icons just eclipses the extra icons out to black.



    The single button would be the home button. The screen would go off when the wrist falls down or tap-hold the button can put it to sleep manually.



    It's not too late to change it, Apple's one isn't approved by the FCC yet. The 1.8" and 1.6" displays of the Moto and LG are too big. the Apple watch is 1.65" tall for the large one and 1.5" for the smaller one. Perhaps 1.5" and 1.3" circular diameter would suffice and they'd just have metal parts sticking out top and bottom like the Omega watch so the straps are the same. Add in some solar glass for charging and get it to 24 hour battery life.



    I think the Apple Watch is probably already waterproof although they haven't said so. The components are covered in resin. Waterproof would be nice but additionally a cellular connection (even old 2G would suffice). Being able to wear one in the pool to track swimming lengths and get notifications and use Siri would be nice.

     

    They have already explained that the butt-**** ugly AppleWatch is water-resistant, NOT waterproof.

  • Reply 100 of 107
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by brlawyer View Post

     

     

    They have already explained that the butt-**** ugly AppleWatch is water-resistant, NOT waterproof.


    I've a dive computer (and an analog mechanical backup watch) so waterproof is irrelevant to me.  The same with the ability to withstand being run over by an SUV, another whiner metric as I recall.

     

    IIRC both terms are standardized with specific metrics that need to be met?

Sign In or Register to comment.