My mom is 84. She has an iPhone and an iPad. I'm thinking of getting her an ?Watch so she doesn't have to take her phone out of her pockets. But not sure yet because of the recharge requirements -- if she forgets to charge it, or put it on, then what good does it do her. And Her hands shake.
So do people with Parkinson's. I bet Michael J Fox has an iPhone too.
So you're saying the first gen watch is a big fail because a button press is required to use ?Pay and some people might have a hard time pressing the button?
Is he saying the watch requires an iPhone to actually make a payment using ?Pay? So you can't run out for a jog wearing only the watch and buy a bottle of Gatorade, without your iPhone nearby?
Yes. This was described when the watch was announced. The watch requires an iPhone for almost everything.
Yes. This was described when the watch was announced. The watch requires an iPhone for almost everything.
According to 9to5Mac:
Apparently, the Apple Watch is going to use a PIN code to authorize Apple Pay, after which the device will remain authorized as long as it remains on your wrist. It accomplishes this using one or more of the sensors on the back of the watch, which can intelligently determine if you’ve taken it off. After you’ve taken it off, the watch is locked out from being to work with Apple Pay until you enter your PIN again.
And Rene Ritchie from iMore:
Thanks to sensors on the Apple Watch’s back, the device can tell when it’s being worn and when it has been taken off. When you first put the watch on, you must enter a code. When the watch is removed from your wrist, the watch locks itself and can’t be used for payments unless the code is entered again.
So you're saying the first gen watch is a big fail because a button press is required to use ?Pay and some people might have a hard time pressing the button?
No. You said that. I'm saying you're unfairly painting the elderly with the stereotype that they are technophobes, or otherwise technologically incompetent. You seem to be saying Apple needn't take their concerns into consideration because they and people like them won't even be using the products.
Yes. This was described when the watch was announced. The watch requires an iPhone for almost everything.
Except I clearly recall somebody from Apple saying at the announcement last year that you could leave your phone at home and still make payments with ?Pay on the watch. But Eddy Cue seems to be saying now the phone has to be nearby. Hopefully this will be cleared up on Monday.
This made me laugh lol , no not really , I just didn't get who the actual reporting article was from until I saw the cnet link . I think the watch is a good edition for the people with an iPhone 5 or 5 s and still don't plan on upgrading , some like the smaller form factor . Apple pay on the watch is at the bottom of my personal list , it's simple and one handed to pay with my iPhone 6. And in a store I've gotten accustomed to having it my hand ready for payment . The watch sounds a little cumbersome if I have to double press the crown then find the card hold my wrist to the terminal . Now the card automatically comes up when near the terminal and just place thumb and done .
Having to do a double press of buttons on the Apple Watch sounds very fiddly indeed. For the old, who tend to shake, even more so. Much easier to simply rest your thumb on the Home button of the iPhone.
I'm surprised at this and will reserve complete judgment until I've tried it in an Apple Store.
You are completely shook.
Desperately trying to minimize the awesome potential of the watch.
Your saltiness on this subject is delicuios.
Enjoy your ban iin a few months. I have a feeling they may reach 15 million sold in 3 months.
60 million in the first year?
We'll see. I predict less than 10 million, making it a failure.
Unfortunately, Tim Cook has already said that he's not going to release sales figures, so we can presume it will sell poorly. Steve Jobs would have released figures.
Except I clearly recall somebody from Apple saying at the announcement last year that you could leave your phone at home and still make payments with ?Pay on the watch. But Eddy Cue seems to be saying now the phone has to be nearby. Hopefully this will be cleared up on Monday.
I don't recall that. What they clearly said was you could leave your iPhone behind and listen to music and get movement data.
That being said, I agree that it would be a major disappointment if it is impossible to use ApplePay without the phone, but I think you are confused about how the watch handles authentication. You need to authenticate it once when you first put it on and it remains authenticated until you take it off. From what Cue says, authentication happens automatically if you are within range of your iPhone. If not, you punch in a pin. No big deal.
Having to do a double press of buttons on the Apple Watch sounds very fiddly indeed. For the old, who tend to shake, even more so. Much easier to simply rest your thumb on the Home button of the iPhone.
I'm surprised at this and will reserve complete judgment until I've tried it in an Apple Store.
If an old person is able to navigate an iPhone and virtual keyboard with their "shaking", why the **** wouldn't they able to double press a button? And even if they did, as if that demographic will in any way influence the success of the Watch. Talk about desperate reaching. And spare us your "reserving judgement" horse-shit. You've been attacking and mocking the Apple Watch since the second it was unveiled. You've never, ever reserved judgement for anything.
But then again, you're the same poster that is vile enough to equate legalizing gay marriage to the Holocaust, but there's really nothing else that needs to be said.
Nifty gadget, still ugly though. Too fat, but you have to start somewhere. When battery tech allows they will slim it down just like they do with all their devices. I still don't want to wear a watch though.
Note: BF please stop thumbs upping my posts. I disagree with 99.9% of your comments and you thumbs upping my remarks does not make me your ally. You are on my block list so STFU!
Unfortunately, Tim Cook has already said that he's not going to release sales figures, so we can presume it will sell poorly. Steve Jobs would have released figures.
I've lost track of how many times you pull SJ out of the grave only to serve your agenda of bashing Apple and Cook. You're the last person on earth that would have any clue what Steve would and wouldn't have done, since you clearly don't understand anything about Apple to begin with. I hope you have enough class to never post here again once reality contradicts all your shitty predictions of doom. But we all know you don't have an ounce of it.
Also, I don't see how the hell even 10M in a few months would be considered a "failure" since the combined lifetime sales of every smartwatch in existence is like 700K. You do realize the original iPhone took 3 months to sell 1M, and the iPad took 23 days? And yet, 10M in just over half a year is a "failure" for a product that you admittedly have very low expectations for to begin with? You have absolutely no context of history, nor any depth of analysis.
In addition, the Apple exec confirmed Apple Watch will enable owners of iPhone 5, 5s and 5c handsets, which do not have NFC chips, to make touchless Apple Pay transactions.
I think that is a great example of Apple doing their best to support existing customers. The argument that they force you to upgrade doesn't hold water here. But they still get another purchase from you. It's actually quite brilliant!
I still have an iPhone 4 that serves me well enough day to day.
Slurpy, it would be great if you could respond without attacking the person behind the comments. When I read your comment, I actually think less of you than the person you are responding to, and that's a shame.
Having to do a double press of buttons on the Apple Watch sounds very fiddly indeed. For the old, who tend to shake, even more so. Much easier to simply rest your thumb on the Home button of the iPhone.
I'm surprised at this and will reserve complete judgment until I've tried it in an Apple Store.
Apple has that covered. Old, shaky people can just stick with the phone then. :P Either way, Apple has made a sale, right?
Is he saying the watch requires an iPhone to actually make a payment using ?Pay? So you can't run out for a jog wearing only the watch and buy a bottle of Gatorade, without your iPhone nearby?
There's plenty of arm and leg straps for the phone. Hardly a concern.
. You need to authenticate it once when you first put it on and it remains authenticated until you take it off. From what Cue says, authentication happens automatically if you are within range of your iPhone. If not, you punch in a pin. No big deal.
That would be a real security hole if authentication happens automatically when you put on the watch. Then anyone could steal your watch and phone while on the charger, and use it without knowing your code, or having your fingerprints.
There's plenty of arm and leg straps for the phone. Hardly a concern.
While he does clearly take every opportunity to disparage Apple I believe Apple would be remiss to force ?Pay to only be usable when an iPhone is connected.
Think of this way. Apple has included on-board storage, BT, and SW to allow for you to play music from ?Watch. Convenient and useful for a jog or visit to the gym, right?
Now what if I told you while it all happens via ?Watch you still need to have your iPhone tethered via BT for that to work? Would you then reply with, "There's plenty of arm and leg straps for the phone. Hardly a concern." your point about straps is still correct, is it not?
That's essentially what Cue may have indicated by his comments yesterday. I hope he didn't he didn't state all the ways in which ?Pay can be used.
It makes sense that you will be able to use only the attached and authentices ?Watch for paynents, even if there is an additional authentication step for each payment while your iPhone is not tethered.
Comments
So you're saying the first gen watch is a big fail because a button press is required to use ?Pay and some people might have a hard time pressing the button?
Yes. This was described when the watch was announced. The watch requires an iPhone for almost everything.
According to 9to5Mac:
And Rene Ritchie from iMore:
Really hoping to see this kind of thing announced widely at the Clippers games.
Funny. What are the chances?
60 million in the first year?
We'll see. I predict less than 10 million, making it a failure.
Unfortunately, Tim Cook has already said that he's not going to release sales figures, so we can presume it will sell poorly. Steve Jobs would have released figures.
I don't recall that. What they clearly said was you could leave your iPhone behind and listen to music and get movement data.
That being said, I agree that it would be a major disappointment if it is impossible to use ApplePay without the phone, but I think you are confused about how the watch handles authentication. You need to authenticate it once when you first put it on and it remains authenticated until you take it off. From what Cue says, authentication happens automatically if you are within range of your iPhone. If not, you punch in a pin. No big deal.
This sounds worse than using the iPhone.
Having to do a double press of buttons on the Apple Watch sounds very fiddly indeed. For the old, who tend to shake, even more so. Much easier to simply rest your thumb on the Home button of the iPhone.
I'm surprised at this and will reserve complete judgment until I've tried it in an Apple Store.
If an old person is able to navigate an iPhone and virtual keyboard with their "shaking", why the **** wouldn't they able to double press a button? And even if they did, as if that demographic will in any way influence the success of the Watch. Talk about desperate reaching. And spare us your "reserving judgement" horse-shit. You've been attacking and mocking the Apple Watch since the second it was unveiled. You've never, ever reserved judgement for anything.
But then again, you're the same poster that is vile enough to equate legalizing gay marriage to the Holocaust, but there's really nothing else that needs to be said.
Nifty gadget, still ugly though. Too fat, but you have to start somewhere. When battery tech allows they will slim it down just like they do with all their devices. I still don't want to wear a watch though.
Note: BF please stop thumbs upping my posts. I disagree with 99.9% of your comments and you thumbs upping my remarks does not make me your ally. You are on my block list so STFU!
Unfortunately, Tim Cook has already said that he's not going to release sales figures, so we can presume it will sell poorly. Steve Jobs would have released figures.
I've lost track of how many times you pull SJ out of the grave only to serve your agenda of bashing Apple and Cook. You're the last person on earth that would have any clue what Steve would and wouldn't have done, since you clearly don't understand anything about Apple to begin with. I hope you have enough class to never post here again once reality contradicts all your shitty predictions of doom. But we all know you don't have an ounce of it.
Also, I don't see how the hell even 10M in a few months would be considered a "failure" since the combined lifetime sales of every smartwatch in existence is like 700K. You do realize the original iPhone took 3 months to sell 1M, and the iPad took 23 days? And yet, 10M in just over half a year is a "failure" for a product that you admittedly have very low expectations for to begin with? You have absolutely no context of history, nor any depth of analysis.
I think that is a great example of Apple doing their best to support existing customers. The argument that they force you to upgrade doesn't hold water here. But they still get another purchase from you. It's actually quite brilliant!
I still have an iPhone 4 that serves me well enough day to day.
You're utterly disgusting.
Slurpy, it would be great if you could respond without attacking the person behind the comments. When I read your comment, I actually think less of you than the person you are responding to, and that's a shame.
This sounds worse than using the iPhone.
Having to do a double press of buttons on the Apple Watch sounds very fiddly indeed. For the old, who tend to shake, even more so. Much easier to simply rest your thumb on the Home button of the iPhone.
I'm surprised at this and will reserve complete judgment until I've tried it in an Apple Store.
Apple has that covered. Old, shaky people can just stick with the phone then. :P Either way, Apple has made a sale, right?
Is he saying the watch requires an iPhone to actually make a payment using ?Pay? So you can't run out for a jog wearing only the watch and buy a bottle of Gatorade, without your iPhone nearby?
There's plenty of arm and leg straps for the phone. Hardly a concern.
While he does clearly take every opportunity to disparage Apple I believe Apple would be remiss to force ?Pay to only be usable when an iPhone is connected.
Think of this way. Apple has included on-board storage, BT, and SW to allow for you to play music from ?Watch. Convenient and useful for a jog or visit to the gym, right?
Now what if I told you while it all happens via ?Watch you still need to have your iPhone tethered via BT for that to work? Would you then reply with, "There's plenty of arm and leg straps for the phone. Hardly a concern." your point about straps is still correct, is it not?
That's essentially what Cue may have indicated by his comments yesterday. I hope he didn't he didn't state all the ways in which ?Pay can be used.
It makes sense that you will be able to use only the attached and authentices ?Watch for paynents, even if there is an additional authentication step for each payment while your iPhone is not tethered.