So yes, less than 10 million would be a flop. As we know that this watch will not make much difference to the bottom line, it’s all about Apple's reputation. That's where the real damage is likely to be done, which bodes ill for the future, as this is the first new product of the post-Jobs era. The long-term question of whether Apple can produce another Jobs-sized hit is about to be revealed, or not, due to Cook's decision to with-hold sales figures. If he really had confidence in it, he would have broken it out as a separate category, as Jobs did for the iPhone and the iPad.
The hilarious thing is that no one holds any other company to those kinds of hyperbolic requirements to avoid doom. No one says, "Google must sell 10 million Android Wear devices or Google's reputation is ruined and bodes ill for the future!" It has to be a separate category! It has to be "Jobs-sized" hit!
A "Jobs-sized" hit is 5.41 million. That's the total number of iPhones sold in the first year on the market. Steve Ballmer's Windows Mobile still outsold iPhone that first year. Was the iPhone a Failure? Doomed? Bodes ill for the future? I'm sure naysayers like you would've claimed that.
Hello? Are you not paying attention? The watch does nothing without being tethered to an iPhone. The NFC chip in the watch only allows older iPhones to make payments. The iPhone is required to make the transaction with the cellular signal. The watch will never do it alone, ever. People can pay just as quickly with their iPhone. The watch will not make a transaction faster.
LOL! The "cellular signal" is required to make the transaction? That's the most idiotic thing I've read from you - and believe me there were a lot of other contenders. Your ignorance of how the technology actually works might be excusable if you didn't come on here pretending to be an expert and telling other people how little they know. All of the network communications will be handled by the POS system - not the "cellular signal". You may need to have a phone present - but if so, I guarantee it will work even if you're in a "no service" area.
The other thing that gets me about this whole thread is that so many people are talking about the watch as if it's a one-trick-pony and equating its success or failure as a product to whether Apple Pay is usable or not. There are dozens of other features of the watch and therefore dozens of other reasons to buy one!
And as far as shakey hands or even people with only one arm are concerned, I don't think that Apple Pay via the watch can be labelled a failure because a minuscule fraction of iPhone users will have trouble pressing a button twice! How many iPhone 6 and 6+'s will be sold during the 12 months following its release? Conservatively 200 million? And how many iPhone 5 and 5s's are already out there? Easily another 200 million (probably a lot more). So there will be 400+ million devices out there capable of working with the Apple Watch. Even if only 3 people out of every hundred decide to try the watch out - that's 12 million watches sold - already 20% higher than bf's ridiculous prediction! And I'll bet it's more like 1 in 10 that buy the watch - so my prediction (which is easily as good as any analysts) is 40-45 million (or more) watches sold in the first 12 months of availability. If I'm right, that means there will be 350 million or more compatible iPhone owners who opt not to buy the watch - and its likely those who can't press buttons will be amongst them - or perhaps they'll buy the watch for other features and just opt not to use Apple Pay on it.
I guess I was just sensitive since I was personally attacked in this forum just the other day. The internet could be a fun, happy place if there were no humans on this Earth to ruin it. :P
LOL! The "cellular signal" is required to make the transaction? That's the most idiotic thing I've read from you - and believe me there were a lot of other contenders. Your ignorance of how the technology actually works might be excusable if you didn't come on here pretending to be an expert and telling other people how little they know. All of the network communications will be handled by the POS system - not the "cellular signal". You may need to have a phone present - but if so, I guarantee it will work even if you're in a "no service" area.
The other thing that gets me about this whole thread is that so many people are talking about the watch as if it's a one-trick-pony and equating its success or failure as a product to whether Apple Pay is usable or not. There are dozens of other features of the watch and therefore dozens of other reasons to buy one!
And as far as shakey hands or even people with only one arm are concerned, I don't think that Apple Pay via the watch can be labelled a failure because a minuscule fraction of iPhone users will have trouble pressing a button twice! How many iPhone 6 and 6+'s will be sold during the 12 months following its release? Conservatively 200 million? And how many iPhone 5 and 5s's are already out there? Easily another 200 million (probably a lot more). So there will be 400+ million devices out there capable of working with the Apple Watch. Even if only 3 people out of every hundred decide to try the watch out - that's 12 million watches sold - already 20% higher than bf's ridiculous prediction! And I'll bet it's more like 1 in 10 that buy the watch - so my prediction (which is easily as good as any analysts) is 40-45 million (or more) watches sold in the first 12 months of availability.
You see how he says the iPhone makes the payment, even though he's aware it has no NFC HW in it, which he follows up by stating Near Field Communication requires a cellular connection. I can't imagine someone on this site can be that ignorant of common technological concepts which only leaves an intent on trolling. I guess that's another swing of my personal ban hammer.
So yes, less than 10 million would be a flop. As we know that this watch will not make much difference to the bottom line, it’s all about Apple's reputation. That's where the real damage is likely to be done, which bodes ill for the future, as this is the first new product of the post-Jobs era. The long-term question of whether Apple can produce another Jobs-sized hit is about to be revealed, or not, due to Cook's decision to with-hold sales figures. If he really had confidence in it, he would have broken it out as a separate category, as Jobs did for the iPhone and the iPad.
I'm not likely to buy into apple watch as I'm dead on happy with my iPhone, iPad, MBP and Air combination. However, I think apple watch will be a massive success. You sound a lot like the doomsayers when iPhone 1 launched, and when Air "1" launched, not enough battery time, too little memory and storage, no USB etc etc. As second, third and fourth gen watches emerge as part of the ecosystem my prediction is this will be a great product. What you will have as an apple customer is the ability to pick all sorts of devices to suit your own preferences and circumstance all of which are part of the one ecosystem. I don't understand why you have such a down on this yet to launch product.
I'm just seeing it as I see it. I could be completely wrong, which would be a blessing for my shares.
I just don't really see the point of the Apple Watch. Even if it settles into a steady niche, I don't think it’s a path that Apple should have gone down, because it lacks the focus of the current iDevices; it doesn't have a compelling reason to exist. Just because Apple can get into a market doesn't mean to say that it should.
Also, having seen the Apple Watch in action, I've been dismayed at the poor interface and buggy responsiveness.
You can't judge the Apple Watch from the original iPhone. You judge it from eight years of refinement of iDevices. That's a very high bar.
And as far as shakey hands or even people with only one arm are concerned, I don't think that Apple Pay via the watch can be labelled a failure because a minuscule fraction of iPhone users will have trouble pressing a button twice!
The devil is in the detail.
As Solip has alluded, one of the pains of Siri is having to press and hold to activate it. It may sound like a tiny thing having to do a double press, but that's the kind of detail that matters. I don't think it’s the best solution.
It's a community, and there's no excuse for calling someone a 6 year old boy. It's just plain rude. Why should responsible and polite behaviour not apply to the Internet? Anyway, enough of sidetracking this topic... back on topic.
I'm just seeing it as I see it. I could be completely wrong, which would be a blessing for my shares.
I just don't really see the point of the Apple Watch. Even if it settles into a steady niche, I don't think it’s a path that Apple should have gone down, because it lacks the focus of the current iDevices; it doesn't have a compelling reason to exist. Just because Apple can get into a market doesn't mean to say that it should.
Also, having seen the Apple Watch in action, I've been dismayed at the poor interface and buggy responsiveness.
You can't judge the Apple Watch from the original iPhone. You judge it from eight years of refinement of iDevices. That's a very high bar.
one of the pains of Siri is having to press and hold to activate it. It may sound like a tiny thing having to do a double press, but that's the kind of detail that matters.
What about raising your watch in the air? Isn't that one of the supposed ways to activate the display, much like raising the iPhone to your ear will activate Siri?
It will be interesting to see what kind of real world feedback Apple gets once the early adopters start using the watch. These motion based technologies are in their infancy and I can see accidentally activating the display like this all the time. And as anyone knows, it's activating the display which sucks battery life more than anything.
As Solip has alluded, one of the pains of Siri is having to press and hold to activate it. It may sound like a tiny thing having to do a double press, but that's the kind of detail that matters. I don't think it’s the best solution.
As far as Siri is concerned, I'm sure you know that the press and hold is *A* way to activate Siri but not the only way. If the device is plugged into power, you can say "Hey Siri" to get her attention and there's another option you can configure so that all you have to do is raise the device to your ear and start talking.
Perhaps likewise with the Apple Watch, the double press of the crown may just be one of several configurable ways to confirm a purchase. When there is little or no *real* information available, I don't know why many people (and especially you) are so quick to assume the worst - especially when it comes to Apple's track record for thinking things through completely and implementing features in a simple, straightforward and most importantly usable fashion!
By now, when conceptualizing a possible issue or a complexity with a new, unreleased, undocumented feature; instead of assuming that you singlehandedly have come up with an issue or use case that Apple's research, design and development teams hadn't even considered - and then denigrating Apple for completely missing the boat on an issue you've decided hasn't been addressed - a better approach might simply be to "wonder what clever way Apple came up with to mitigate this potential problem."
That's fine that it doesn't require any authentication once it's on your wrist and actively tethered to your iPhone, but if that's the only way ?Pay can be used on ?Watch despite having it's own NFC HW, which includes the secure element, then they are dropping the ball. It should be independent of an iPhone after it's been setup so you can put it next to an NFC reader and have your cards appear, once it's been authenticated when put on until it's removed. But if that wasn't mentioned by Cue then I have to concede by saying @Dick Applebaum was right.
Why don't we do some reading before we set our mouths off?
As far as Siri is concerned, I'm sure you know that the press and hold is *A* way to activate Siri but not the only way. If the device is plugged into power, you can say "Hey Siri" to get her attention and there's another option you can configure so that all you have to do is raise the device to your ear and start talking.
Perhaps likewise with the Apple Watch, the double press of the crown may just be one of several configurable ways to confirm a purchase. When there is little or no *real* information available, I don't know why many people (and especially you) are so quick to assume the worst - especially when it comes to Apple's track record for thinking things through completely and implementing features in a simple, straightforward and most importantly usable fashion!
By now, when conceptualizing a possible issue or a complexity with a new, unreleased, undocumented feature; instead of assuming that you singlehandedly have come up with an issue or use case that Apple's research, design and development teams hadn't even considered - and then denigrating Apple for completely missing the boat on an issue you've decided hasn't been addressed - a better approach might simply be to "wonder what clever way Apple came up with to mitigate this potential problem."
And power from a battery pack or plugged in the car works just as well. (Unfortunately for some, it may be more pain getting their foot out of their mouths than holding down the power button for a split or so.)
As to your last point, that would take some higher level of intelligence than normally seen around here.
l have no idea what ... But I've got a feeling that sumpin' big is going on!
Gruber notes the venue has historically been reserved for bigger events, but I think having a demo area again and/or invites for the fashion world as well as the tech world could be the reason, not some unexpected products or reveals.
That said, I'd love to see more stuff announced for the first new product category under Cook.
Comments
Apple alone sold 74 million iPhones last quarter.
So yes, less than 10 million would be a flop. As we know that this watch will not make much difference to the bottom line, it’s all about Apple's reputation. That's where the real damage is likely to be done, which bodes ill for the future, as this is the first new product of the post-Jobs era. The long-term question of whether Apple can produce another Jobs-sized hit is about to be revealed, or not, due to Cook's decision to with-hold sales figures. If he really had confidence in it, he would have broken it out as a separate category, as Jobs did for the iPhone and the iPad.
The hilarious thing is that no one holds any other company to those kinds of hyperbolic requirements to avoid doom. No one says, "Google must sell 10 million Android Wear devices or Google's reputation is ruined and bodes ill for the future!" It has to be a separate category! It has to be "Jobs-sized" hit!
A "Jobs-sized" hit is 5.41 million. That's the total number of iPhones sold in the first year on the market. Steve Ballmer's Windows Mobile still outsold iPhone that first year. Was the iPhone a Failure? Doomed? Bodes ill for the future? I'm sure naysayers like you would've claimed that.
The other thing that gets me about this whole thread is that so many people are talking about the watch as if it's a one-trick-pony and equating its success or failure as a product to whether Apple Pay is usable or not. There are dozens of other features of the watch and therefore dozens of other reasons to buy one!
And as far as shakey hands or even people with only one arm are concerned, I don't think that Apple Pay via the watch can be labelled a failure because a minuscule fraction of iPhone users will have trouble pressing a button twice! How many iPhone 6 and 6+'s will be sold during the 12 months following its release? Conservatively 200 million? And how many iPhone 5 and 5s's are already out there? Easily another 200 million (probably a lot more). So there will be 400+ million devices out there capable of working with the Apple Watch. Even if only 3 people out of every hundred decide to try the watch out - that's 12 million watches sold - already 20% higher than bf's ridiculous prediction! And I'll bet it's more like 1 in 10 that buy the watch - so my prediction (which is easily as good as any analysts) is 40-45 million (or more) watches sold in the first 12 months of availability. If I'm right, that means there will be 350 million or more compatible iPhone owners who opt not to buy the watch - and its likely those who can't press buttons will be amongst them - or perhaps they'll buy the watch for other features and just opt not to use Apple Pay on it.
I guess I was just sensitive since I was personally attacked in this forum just the other day. The internet could be a fun, happy place if there were no humans on this Earth to ruin it. :P
It's the Internet. Never take it personally.
You see how he says the iPhone makes the payment, even though he's aware it has no NFC HW in it, which he follows up by stating Near Field Communication requires a cellular connection. I can't imagine someone on this site can be that ignorant of common technological concepts which only leaves an intent on trolling. I guess that's another swing of my personal ban hammer.
The smartphone market is 2.5 million a year?
Apple alone sold 74 million iPhones last quarter.
So yes, less than 10 million would be a flop. As we know that this watch will not make much difference to the bottom line, it’s all about Apple's reputation. That's where the real damage is likely to be done, which bodes ill for the future, as this is the first new product of the post-Jobs era. The long-term question of whether Apple can produce another Jobs-sized hit is about to be revealed, or not, due to Cook's decision to with-hold sales figures. If he really had confidence in it, he would have broken it out as a separate category, as Jobs did for the iPhone and the iPad.
I'm not likely to buy into apple watch as I'm dead on happy with my iPhone, iPad, MBP and Air combination. However, I think apple watch will be a massive success. You sound a lot like the doomsayers when iPhone 1 launched, and when Air "1" launched, not enough battery time, too little memory and storage, no USB etc etc. As second, third and fourth gen watches emerge as part of the ecosystem my prediction is this will be a great product. What you will have as an apple customer is the ability to pick all sorts of devices to suit your own preferences and circumstance all of which are part of the one ecosystem. I don't understand why you have such a down on this yet to launch product.
I'm just seeing it as I see it. I could be completely wrong, which would be a blessing for my shares.
I just don't really see the point of the Apple Watch. Even if it settles into a steady niche, I don't think it’s a path that Apple should have gone down, because it lacks the focus of the current iDevices; it doesn't have a compelling reason to exist. Just because Apple can get into a market doesn't mean to say that it should.
Also, having seen the Apple Watch in action, I've been dismayed at the poor interface and buggy responsiveness.
You can't judge the Apple Watch from the original iPhone. You judge it from eight years of refinement of iDevices. That's a very high bar.
And as far as shakey hands or even people with only one arm are concerned, I don't think that Apple Pay via the watch can be labelled a failure because a minuscule fraction of iPhone users will have trouble pressing a button twice!
The devil is in the detail.
As Solip has alluded, one of the pains of Siri is having to press and hold to activate it. It may sound like a tiny thing having to do a double press, but that's the kind of detail that matters. I don't think it’s the best solution.
you've likely seen it by now, but apple patented a process for making hardened gold.
I read that last night. Solip posted some links. It as interesting.
It's the Internet. Never take it personally.
It's a community, and there's no excuse for calling someone a 6 year old boy. It's just plain rude. Why should responsible and polite behaviour not apply to the Internet? Anyway, enough of sidetracking this topic... back on topic.
I'm just seeing it as I see it. I could be completely wrong, which would be a blessing for my shares.
I just don't really see the point of the Apple Watch. Even if it settles into a steady niche, I don't think it’s a path that Apple should have gone down, because it lacks the focus of the current iDevices; it doesn't have a compelling reason to exist. Just because Apple can get into a market doesn't mean to say that it should.
Also, having seen the Apple Watch in action, I've been dismayed at the poor interface and buggy responsiveness.
You can't judge the Apple Watch from the original iPhone. You judge it from eight years of refinement of iDevices. That's a very high bar.
Where have you seen Apple watch in action?
one of the pains of Siri is having to press and hold to activate it. It may sound like a tiny thing having to do a double press, but that's the kind of detail that matters.
What about raising your watch in the air? Isn't that one of the supposed ways to activate the display, much like raising the iPhone to your ear will activate Siri?
It will be interesting to see what kind of real world feedback Apple gets once the early adopters start using the watch. These motion based technologies are in their infancy and I can see accidentally activating the display like this all the time. And as anyone knows, it's activating the display which sucks battery life more than anything.
As far as Siri is concerned, I'm sure you know that the press and hold is *A* way to activate Siri but not the only way. If the device is plugged into power, you can say "Hey Siri" to get her attention and there's another option you can configure so that all you have to do is raise the device to your ear and start talking.
Perhaps likewise with the Apple Watch, the double press of the crown may just be one of several configurable ways to confirm a purchase. When there is little or no *real* information available, I don't know why many people (and especially you) are so quick to assume the worst - especially when it comes to Apple's track record for thinking things through completely and implementing features in a simple, straightforward and most importantly usable fashion!
By now, when conceptualizing a possible issue or a complexity with a new, unreleased, undocumented feature; instead of assuming that you singlehandedly have come up with an issue or use case that Apple's research, design and development teams hadn't even considered - and then denigrating Apple for completely missing the boat on an issue you've decided hasn't been addressed - a better approach might simply be to "wonder what clever way Apple came up with to mitigate this potential problem."
That's fine that it doesn't require any authentication once it's on your wrist and actively tethered to your iPhone, but if that's the only way ?Pay can be used on ?Watch despite having it's own NFC HW, which includes the secure element, then they are dropping the ball. It should be independent of an iPhone after it's been setup so you can put it next to an NFC reader and have your cards appear, once it's been authenticated when put on until it's removed. But if that wasn't mentioned by Cue then I have to concede by saying @Dick Applebaum was right.
Why don't we do some reading before we set our mouths off?
Great read: Macworld UK Apple Watch review?, Mar 6, 2015
Yes, why don't you do some reading, like the word "if" clearly stated before I "dropping the ball."
As far as Siri is concerned, I'm sure you know that the press and hold is *A* way to activate Siri but not the only way. If the device is plugged into power, you can say "Hey Siri" to get her attention and there's another option you can configure so that all you have to do is raise the device to your ear and start talking.
Perhaps likewise with the Apple Watch, the double press of the crown may just be one of several configurable ways to confirm a purchase. When there is little or no *real* information available, I don't know why many people (and especially you) are so quick to assume the worst - especially when it comes to Apple's track record for thinking things through completely and implementing features in a simple, straightforward and most importantly usable fashion!
By now, when conceptualizing a possible issue or a complexity with a new, unreleased, undocumented feature; instead of assuming that you singlehandedly have come up with an issue or use case that Apple's research, design and development teams hadn't even considered - and then denigrating Apple for completely missing the boat on an issue you've decided hasn't been addressed - a better approach might simply be to "wonder what clever way Apple came up with to mitigate this potential problem."
And power from a battery pack or plugged in the car works just as well. (Unfortunately for some, it may be more pain getting their foot out of their mouths than holding down the power button for a split or so.)
As to your last point, that would take some higher level of intelligence than normally seen around here.
Yes, why don't you do some reading, like the word "if" clearly stated before I "dropping the ball."
As you can see, I used the collective 'we' rather than single you out.
However, I would suggest that if you had done YOUR homework, there would be no need to to use if at all.
Now that's just a foolish thing to say.
Big event tomorrow --- with some unexpected surprises ...
Not exactly an exercise in precarious limb crawling there. How about some guesses?
For example: I would be surprised if there are some new BT headphones announced since you'll need that for ?Watch.
I have no idea what ... But I've got a feeling that sumpin' big is going on!
Gruber notes the venue has historically been reserved for bigger events, but I think having a demo area again and/or invites for the fashion world as well as the tech world could be the reason, not some unexpected products or reveals.
That said, I'd love to see more stuff announced for the first new product category under Cook.