It will fail. The first big failure from Apple in the 21st century.
How are you so sure. It may not be a home run but a double or triple is still pretty good. Oh and the iPod HiFi failed first.
Ha!
The iPod HiFi worked for me ...
The neigbor over the back fence was in the 6th consecutive day of loud rehearsals of his band ... 5:00 PM - 11:00 PM ... all requests to turn it down were ignored ...
Checked with the other neighbors ... put the iPod HiFi on the back patio aimed over the fence ... cranked the volume to max ... played about 15 minutes of marching bands *, bugle calls, calliope and circus music ... crickets ...
Great posts from you. You have your finger on the pulse.
Why do you need a watch in your pocket as well as one on your wrist? Imagine if when wrist watches were invented, the inventor said, "You must also carry around a pocket watch in your pocket in order to be able to use the wrist watch." I don't think the wrist watch would have taken off.
So it is with the Apple Watch and the iPhone. Apple, in their daftness, decided that one must carry two watches around in order to use the one on your wrist. Looney!
Too many watches spoil the broth.
If Cook's not careful, he's going to need two watches on his person in order to juggle the moonlighting job that he'll need to earn a crust when he gets kicked out of Apple.
Easily. My iPhone isn't easily accessible all the time. Why struggle to whip it out when I can look at my wrist.
Cook isn't going anywhere because the watch isn't going to fail.
I reckon they announced this way too soon. I can't help thinking they have already figured out how to make it considerably thinner and more desirable and the next improved model is just around the corner. It seems like it's been around for ages. I do hope they sell shit loads so I can get my hands on the much improved next version.
Given the specs on the apple watch, I predict a flop. One thing to watch for: does apple correct the watch weaknesses before launch, so does it launch in spite of the weaknesses?
Withings Active' Pop at $150 looks like a winner. Now, this has the functionality, 8 month battery, waterproof to 30m.
As much as I want Apple to sell over 10 million AppleWatches in 2015 I honestly can't see it happening. I mainly want an AppleWatch for the biometric sensors and the data they can give and that's about it. I wear watches and I don't see anything wrong with AppleWatch being dependent on iPhone ownership. I don't like the short battery life of any high-end smartwatch. I'd want at least three days use before charging although I realize this isn't possible with present battery technology. I don't need a smartwatch beeping out notifications or reminders. I'm sure I will be buying an AppleWatch because as an Apple shareholder it's easily affordable and I'd like to wear one.
However, I can't picture the average consumer, even those who might want an AppleWatch plunking down $400 for a device that can't possibly be ready for prime-time based on the limitations of current technology. Despite being dependent upon an iPhone, it still needs to be charged daily. That's my main gripe with any smartwatch with a color display. I'm too used to my Casio G-Shock Solar watches that never require any charging or batteries for years. AppleWatch would end up as a second watch on my wrist and mainly being used on weekends. I'm not making predictions about sales. I know I could be way off the mark in terms of how Apple markets the AppleWatch. I can only hope they have something up their sleeves to sell AppleWatches that go beyond my short-sighted thinking.
They only need 2.5% of compatible Iphone owners in december 2015 (about 400M) to buy a watch to reach 10M; yes, that low. They don't even need to be a mass market phenomena with their own consumers for it to sell that much!! I'm betting on 15-20M minimum.
As for charging daily. Why would that be? What's the use case for this?
It wholy depends on what your going to do with it : (going on how long a Ipod nano lasts (about the same size as the biggest watch).
- If you use it just as a watch it could last more than a week.
- As an Ipod like device with bluetooth, 2 days.
- Intense use (all day notifications/replies), using apps and playing music. 1 day.
That's not even taking into acount the possibility of getting a 14nm SOC and the use of AMOLED (both using a lot less energy than the nano).
I reckon they announced this way too soon. I can't help thinking they have already figured out how to make it considerably thinner and more desirable and the next improved model is just around the corner. It seems like it's been around for ages. I do hope they sell shit loads so I can get my hands on the much improved next version.
They'll prefer keeping it the same size and beating the crap out of the others in battery life by putting a 14 nm SOC inside. BTW, its not that thick compared to currently selling normal watches. The main module is about 10mm thick with 1.5mm smaller round disk that slightly dig in the wrist. The thinnest men's watches are barely less than that.
Much with just a glance, many without taking your iPhone out of your pocket, a lot without even your iPhone nearby, and a slew more coming when the thousands of developers release their new and/or updated apps
Why would I spend $500 on average for a Apple Watch? [...] So now besides replacing your iPhone every 2 years, you'll be replacing your Apple Watch every what, 2-4 years at $500 a pop on top of that phone and for what? Because you're to lazy to grab your big old phone that's on you already? [...]
Are you going to buy the cheapest $350 version or spend even more? Anyone???
youre not making sense -- while the ASP may be $500 because it averages the $350 low-end and the unknown high-ends, you as individual would need not spend $500 on an AW. my partner and i plan to buy them at $350/ea. seems a good deal for a wireless ipod w/ activity tracking -- my daily walking, standing and exertion goals. not to mention we can use while jogging them instead of our phones, as theyre lighter and less visible to criminals (i live in an urban environment where people get mugged). plus i can buy something after my jog w/o even needing a wallet. sign me up...
so congrats -- now you know two people who plan on buying them.
With as many Americans dropping out and soon to be dropping out of the workforce, the Apple Watch as retirement gift couldn't be coming out at a better time.
Much with just a glance, many without taking your iPhone out of your pocket, a lot without even your iPhone nearby, and a slew more coming when the thousands of developers release their new and/or updated apps
Purchase may hinge for some on whether they need accessibility to information beyond what a phone offers. I know there are any number of occasions where a wearable device is a lot more convenient than something I'd have to hold in a hand after getting it out of wherever it's stored. Other times, not. Sort of like the relationship between a laptop computer and an iPhone computer. And I have both....
I think it is a mistake to initially limit the ?Watch to the iPhone. Obviously the iPad and iPod Touch both support the same iOS as the phone, so why not maximize the debatable early adoption rate by making it available to everyone with an Apple device, regardless if it's an iPhone or not? The iPad in particular, as most people who own a tablet, regardless if they use a Windows PC, or Android-based smartphone, will most likely own an iPad. This is especially true for older customers, those who grew up wearing watches and, the most likely candidates for the ?Watch.
I wonder if some of the watch apps that make sense to copy will appear in other iOS devices. Until we se them we won't know but imagine if the unlock screen on the iPhone automatically showed more interactive or usable apps once I activate it using finger sensor, rather than that boring grid of icons? Why not program it to display a certain app on owning the phone? Like for instance a big watch face or health app . How about it displays say an alarm clock app if I pick up phone during sleep hours. If phone is really smart it should be able to predict what app I need to have up or at least I can program it to have certain apps come up when I need them?
What can it do that you're iPhone can't? Why fork out $350+ for a device you'll be lucky to get 5 years out of? I couldn't wear a watch at work if I wanted to and I don't. I stopped wearing watches after I got my first cell phone. I don't need two clocks on me. The watch doesn't have built in GPS, that means even for fitness, you need your phone on you and the iPhone has it's own sensors already other then Heart Rate.
I'm just fine using my phone to pay for things, I don't need to spend $350+ because I'm so lazy and just want to reach out with my wrist and pay that way. It's once thing to spend +/- $100 on some type of fitness band. You're not out a lot of money if it gets damaged or outdated and battery life is generally days. No Smart Watch is flying off the shelf yet. Pebble has been doing pretty good. But even them I don't think have hit a million in sales. Maybe in the Hundred thousands. Samscum released 6 this year alone and none have done all that good. The Moto360 has gotten some sales, but even that hasn't been huge. How is the Apple Watch going to change any of that??? Where's the market??? I sure havn't seen a Smart Watch market. I've seen a dying watch market that's been going on for many years.
I'll wait for that rumored 12" iPad and get that. The Apple Watch, HAHAHA No sale here or from anyone else I know and most all of them have iPhones and iPads also!!! Here's a idea, do something with AppleTV as it's been getting outdated and passed over by pretty much everyone else. What's it's been now, 3 years. I know I got my first one before I got my house and that's been over 2 years now, so ya, I think it's been 3 years and Apple is being passed up in that area. A area with real growth!!! It's not watches, it's streaming content!!!
You are missing the point the reason apples devices sell in the multi millions is because we know apple designs high quality tech that actually works. You logic is flawed. Just because a nasty bare bones $100 device doesn't sell does mean there isn't a market for a premium device. The history of the iPod, iPhone, iPad and iMac fully demonstrates this phenomenon. Consumers will buy a better device in the multi million if they belive it adds enough vale to their lives. The simply fact is all these cheap Nast wearables thatcthe rest of the companies having been throwing at the wall a la Samsung to see if one will stick is and nver will work. Only apple really gets it.
Comments
Ha!
The iPod HiFi worked for me ...
The neigbor over the back fence was in the 6th consecutive day of loud rehearsals of his band ... 5:00 PM - 11:00 PM ... all requests to turn it down were ignored ...
Checked with the other neighbors ... put the iPod HiFi on the back patio aimed over the fence ... cranked the volume to max ... played about 15 minutes of marching bands *, bugle calls, calliope and circus music ... crickets ...
* I played trumpet in HS a JC Marching Bands ,,,
And the monkey wrapped his tail around the flag pole ... https://itunes.apple.com/au/album/national-emblem-famous-marches/id388283898 #2 National Emblem March
Easily. My iPhone isn't easily accessible all the time. Why struggle to whip it out when I can look at my wrist.
Cook isn't going anywhere because the watch isn't going to fail.
Withings Active' Pop at $150 looks like a winner. Now, this has the functionality, 8 month battery, waterproof to 30m.
As much as I want Apple to sell over 10 million AppleWatches in 2015 I honestly can't see it happening. I mainly want an AppleWatch for the biometric sensors and the data they can give and that's about it. I wear watches and I don't see anything wrong with AppleWatch being dependent on iPhone ownership. I don't like the short battery life of any high-end smartwatch. I'd want at least three days use before charging although I realize this isn't possible with present battery technology. I don't need a smartwatch beeping out notifications or reminders. I'm sure I will be buying an AppleWatch because as an Apple shareholder it's easily affordable and I'd like to wear one.
However, I can't picture the average consumer, even those who might want an AppleWatch plunking down $400 for a device that can't possibly be ready for prime-time based on the limitations of current technology. Despite being dependent upon an iPhone, it still needs to be charged daily. That's my main gripe with any smartwatch with a color display. I'm too used to my Casio G-Shock Solar watches that never require any charging or batteries for years. AppleWatch would end up as a second watch on my wrist and mainly being used on weekends. I'm not making predictions about sales. I know I could be way off the mark in terms of how Apple markets the AppleWatch. I can only hope they have something up their sleeves to sell AppleWatches that go beyond my short-sighted thinking.
They only need 2.5% of compatible Iphone owners in december 2015 (about 400M) to buy a watch to reach 10M; yes, that low. They don't even need to be a mass market phenomena with their own consumers for it to sell that much!! I'm betting on 15-20M minimum.
As for charging daily. Why would that be? What's the use case for this?
It wholy depends on what your going to do with it : (going on how long a Ipod nano lasts (about the same size as the biggest watch).
- If you use it just as a watch it could last more than a week.
- As an Ipod like device with bluetooth, 2 days.
- Intense use (all day notifications/replies), using apps and playing music. 1 day.
That's not even taking into acount the possibility of getting a 14nm SOC and the use of AMOLED (both using a lot less energy than the nano).
I reckon they announced this way too soon. I can't help thinking they have already figured out how to make it considerably thinner and more desirable and the next improved model is just around the corner. It seems like it's been around for ages. I do hope they sell shit loads so I can get my hands on the much improved next version.
They'll prefer keeping it the same size and beating the crap out of the others in battery life by putting a 14 nm SOC inside. BTW, its not that thick compared to currently selling normal watches. The main module is about 10mm thick with 1.5mm smaller round disk that slightly dig in the wrist. The thinnest men's watches are barely less than that.
I know what he was referring to. He said it's a bad name because it's more than a watch, hence my comment about the iPhone which is more than a phone.
People are correctly focusing on it as a timepiece because that is what Apple have called it: a watch.
No they didn't!
Why would I spend $500 on average for a Apple Watch? [...] So now besides replacing your iPhone every 2 years, you'll be replacing your Apple Watch every what, 2-4 years at $500 a pop on top of that phone and for what? Because you're to lazy to grab your big old phone that's on you already? [...]
Are you going to buy the cheapest $350 version or spend even more? Anyone???
youre not making sense -- while the ASP may be $500 because it averages the $350 low-end and the unknown high-ends, you as individual would need not spend $500 on an AW. my partner and i plan to buy them at $350/ea. seems a good deal for a wireless ipod w/ activity tracking -- my daily walking, standing and exertion goals. not to mention we can use while jogging them instead of our phones, as theyre lighter and less visible to criminals (i live in an urban environment where people get mugged). plus i can buy something after my jog w/o even needing a wallet. sign me up...
so congrats -- now you know two people who plan on buying them.
Originally Posted by Onhka
People are correctly focusing on it as a timepiece because that is what Apple have called it: a watch.
No they didn't!
Maybe I'm missing your point, but I nearly think it has "Watch" in the name of the product.
So an iPhone.
One's enough for me.
So an iPhone.
One's enough for me.
And thus: Not simply a one function timepiece.
Purchase may hinge for some on whether they need accessibility to information beyond what a phone offers. I know there are any number of occasions where a wearable device is a lot more convenient than something I'd have to hold in a hand after getting it out of wherever it's stored. Other times, not. Sort of like the relationship between a laptop computer and an iPhone computer. And I have both....
You are missing the point the reason apples devices sell in the multi millions is because we know apple designs high quality tech that actually works. You logic is flawed. Just because a nasty bare bones $100 device doesn't sell does mean there isn't a market for a premium device. The history of the iPod, iPhone, iPad and iMac fully demonstrates this phenomenon. Consumers will buy a better device in the multi million if they belive it adds enough vale to their lives. The simply fact is all these cheap Nast wearables thatcthe rest of the companies having been throwing at the wall a la Samsung to see if one will stick is and nver will work. Only apple really gets it.
Maybe I'm missing your point, but I nearly think it has "Watch" in the name of the product.
Apple didn't call it: a watch. Like they didn't call their mobile phone: a phone. Like you don't call your mom: a mother
That last really deserves a Touché from the OP!
They called it Apple Watch. If it's not a watch, then is it an apple?