Or can we just get the body (because we already have the band from the previous watch)?
I think Apple is making this overly complicated. They should just offer the body as is, and sell the bands separately. It will definitely simplify their supply chain.
I agree, I think Apple should have sold all 3 models with a black sport band and then let you buy what bands you want. They would only have to worry about 3 SKUs that way and everyone could be happy. Forcing me to spend $1099 to get the black stainless steel body is ridiculous, but I am sure that is their intent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eightzero
Betcha you'll need new bands because the case will change. Apple already is a master of the supply chain, so that's not an issue for them. But the bands are for sure a high profit margin item.
There is no way that they will require new bands with every version of the watch. The ONLY saving grace to buying a $1k watch now would be that you can re-use the $500 band for years to come.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cakra
Why are all the Apple Watch sport models designed for females? Hey Apple men exercise too! But I don%u2019t know any man who would wear a candy green, baby blue, pink or white watch strap. Oh yeah they make the one all-black Darth Vader model but it%u2019s hard to work out with that big black helmet on%u2026 I need an Apple Watch sport with a black band, navy blue, or dark brown.
I am a male and plan on buying a blue and green sport band. Perhaps you need more color in your life? I don't know when blue and green were considered feminine colors.
One other marketing thing I just now noticed: Apple Watch is offered in 38mm and 42mm case sizes. Is this the first Apple Product specifically identified in metric MKS units? The new MacBook is a 12 inch product. The iPhone6 comes in 4.7 inch and 5.5 inch sizes (although thickness seems to be in mm.) iMacs are all spec'ed in inches.
Apple is like the russkies, son. They don't take a dump without having a plan...
There is no way that they will require new bands with every version of the watch. The ONLY saving grace to buying a $1k watch now would be that you can re-use the $500 band for years to come.
That doesn't sound very Apple-like to me.
People keep thinking this is like a traditional watch that last for decades. But it's not, it's an accessory to an iPhone. And as such, Apple has to do more than to sell to new customers every year, they have to get the old customers to upgrade -- and not just the watch itself.
If I had to guess, the watch itself will undergo subtle changes every year, thinner, more rectangular, round, centered digital crown, etc. But every two or three years (the typical upgrade cycle), perhaps they change the diameter of the band connection to accommodate a thinner profile, and create more room inside the watch for upgraded tech, maybe even to accommodate expansion ports for accessories in the bands. They will have a justification as they always do. Then old bands won't fit on the new tech and you'll have to upgrade everything. This is Apple's M.O.
Watch or no, anyone who buys an Apple product should expect everything about it will come with a 3-5 year expiration date. I just don't believe the ?Watch will be an exception.
People keep thinking this is like a traditional watch that last for decades. But it's not, it's an accessory to an iPhone. And as such, Apple has to do more than to sell to new customers every year, they have to get the old customers to upgrade -- and not just the watch itself.
If I had to guess, the watch itself will undergo subtle changes every year, thinner, more rectangular, round, centered digital crown, etc. But every two or three years (the typical upgrade cycle), perhaps they change the diameter of the band connection to accommodate a thinner profile, and create more room inside the watch for upgraded tech, maybe even to accommodate expansion ports for accessories in the bands. They will have a justification as they always do. Then old bands won't fit on the new tech and you'll have to upgrade everything. This is Apple's M.O.
Watch or no, anyone who buys an Apple product should expect everything about it will come with a 3-5 year expiration date. I just don't believe the ?Watch will be an exception.
I wouldn't doubt that in 3-5 years you may need new bands. My comment said that there is no way that they will make you get new bands every single version, which it sounds like you are in agreement with.
I wouldn't doubt that in 3-5 years you may need new bands. My comment said that there is no way that they will make you get new bands every single version, which it sounds like you are in agreement with.
Of course. You will get at least two years out of a watch band, just like all your accessories for the 5 will fit the 5s. My feeling is that the pressure will be so great to innovate in the smart watch now that all the competition know how high the new bar has been raised, both technologically and from a strictly fashion point of view, that Apple will definitely revise the bands sooner, rather than later. I bet 3 years is the limit depending on how frequently they end up updating the watch design.
... I don't need to squint and read emails/texts on a Watch size screen when I have the iPhone 6 in my pocket. I'm not sure who this appeals to besides women who keep their phones in their purses or pocketbooks.
It appeals to professionals who want to discretely see the arrival of an important email or text without whipping out their cell phones during meetings. It appeals to working parents who can see at a glance if their's a text or email from their teenager or the young child's daycare.
If you were talking to your employee and he pulled out a cell phone and started scrolling through messages, what would you think? What would you think if, instead, he looked totally engaged and focused on your conversation -- because you never noticed his quick glance at his watch when a text came in?
... I don't need to squint and read emails/texts on a Watch size screen when I have the iPhone 6 in my pocket. I'm not sure who this appeals to besides women who keep their phones in their purses or pocketbooks.
It appeals to professionals who want to discretely see the arrival of an important email or text without whipping out their cell phones during meetings. It appeals to working parents who can see at a glance if their's a text or email from their teenager or the young child's daycare.
If you were talking to your employee and he pulled out a cell phone and started scrolling through messages, what would you think? What would you think if, instead, he looked totally engaged and focused on your conversation -- because you never noticed his quick glance at his watch when a text came in?
Nice idea, but the reality is not so rosy.
The Apple Watch is off by default. You have to physically raise your arm to turn the screen on. And if the screen is black and suddenly lights up, your fellow professional will also notice. If you are in a business meeting, you are likely to be wearing a suit, and your watch will be covered. If you raise your sleeve, raise your arm and turn it towards you in order to read an email, you could hardly be less discreet.
Even if you could somehow keep the screen on and glance, it is immediately noticeable and distracting when someone glances at their watch mid-conversation. It is just as poor form as glancing at your phone.
Even if you could somehow keep the screen on and glance, it is immediately noticeable and distracting when someone glances at their watch mid-conversation. It is just as poor form as glancing at your phone.
On this I can totally agree with you. People have forgotten what it was like when everybody wore watches. Glancing at one when you were supposed to be paying attention to someone is the height of rudeness -- it suggests boredom, or worse disdain for the speaker. And it's always noticed.
It's hard to say how this behavior will play out however, since the phone on the table has become an accepted part of business. Perhaps it will be seen as a welcome change, but it will assuredly only be an amount of time before that too will be seen as just as annoying behavior.
Moreover, the iPhone is large enough to be seen laying on the table without picking it up and making a scene. Not so with the watch. Inevitably people will bring it close enough to see, and a message of any length requires scrolling, thus compounding the problem attributed to distracting behavior on the iPhone.
Even if you could somehow keep the screen on and glance, it is immediately noticeable and distracting when someone glances at their watch mid-conversation. It is just as poor form as glancing at your phone.
On this I can totally agree with you. People have forgotten what it was like when everybody wore watches. Glancing at one when you were supposed to be paying attention to someone is the height of rudeness -- it suggests boredom, or worse disdain for the speaker. And it's always noticed.
It's hard to say how this behavior will play out however, since the phone on the table has become an accepted part of business. Perhaps it will be seen as a welcome change, but it will assuredly only be an amount of time before that too will be seen as just as annoying behavior.
Moreover, the iPhone is large enough to be seen laying on the table without picking it up and making a scene. Not so with the watch. Inevitably people will bring it close enough to see, and a message of any length requires scrolling, thus compounding the problem attributed to distracting behavior on the iPhone.
Yes. Somehow, the phone on the table is more honest. It's obvious if you look at it, whereas glancing at your watch, you look shifty.
Yes. Somehow, the phone on the table is more honest. It's obvious if you look at it, whereas glancing at your watch, you look shifty.
Do you have to look though? The Watch site says that it will tap you on the wrist for notifications (it must have some kind of vibrating thing inside). It doesn't say whether you can set different vibrations for different senders though (e.g. 2 taps for your wife, 1 for your friend).
Yes. Somehow, the phone on the table is more honest. It's obvious if you look at it, whereas glancing at your watch, you look shifty.
Do you have to look though? The Watch site says that it will tap you on the wrist for notifications (it must have some kind of vibrating thing inside). It doesn't say whether you can set different vibrations for different senders though (e.g. 2 taps for your wife, 1 for your friend).
Yes, the haptic vibration could be useful, I’ll grant you that.
It’s yet another thing to check if you go to the theatre, though. Have I put my iPad on silence (made harder now without the mute switch)? Have I put my iPhone on silence? Have I put my watch on silence?
Betcha you'll need new bands because the case will change. Apple already is a master of the supply chain, so that's not an issue for them. But the bands are for sure a high profit margin item.
That's typically the one thing about an Apple product you don't expect to hear.
No, it's not. It will be interesting to see for myself, especially on things like user interfaces. How we interpret them can vary wildly from user to user but the points one of them brought up about the home button and how the watch didn't seem to have a similar "anchor" were indeed worrying if there isn't something else not so obvious at play.
Wouldn't be the first time Apple tripped something that would appear to be simple - that they clarify or update the interface if those concerns bare out will be key. Or better still pay attention to the feedback and address it before the release. A lot easier to do with software than hardware so there's still some hope.
I missed until looking over the new pages that not all the links are toollessly removable. Then again if you are just adjusting the size they probably all don't need to be. I wondered how they were going to handle the tapering, and now it's obvious - the tapered links are the ones that can't be removed. And it's also why they have multiple sizes of the bands too. Makes sense once you have some more time to digest...
Betcha you'll need new bands because the case will change.
And why would they do that? The bands don't attach to the whole case, just the mount points. The physical sizes aren't going to change unless they offer a round one (which would need a different style band anyway) - the users wrist is driving the size choices in the length and width. In the Z axis, depth, that's not changing unless there is some incredible breakthrough in battery tech.
And for those who love to talk about Apple planned obsolescence, exactly how long was the old 30 pin iPod dock connector out exactly? Like most Apple arguments, superficially interesting but absolute rubbish if you scrutinize them with minimal care.
Even if you could somehow keep the screen on and glance, it is immediately noticeable and distracting when someone glances at their watch mid-conversation. It is just as poor form as glancing at your phone.
Why are you assuming that glancing at the screen is going to be the only way to tell time with the Apple watch?
If Apple doesn't offer it, how long will it be before some enterprising developer releases an app that uses the taptic interface to tap your wrist on the hour, quarter hour, half past, etc. or at specific time checkpoints? No one is going to notice that and it won't matter what position your hand is in.
I often miss my phone vibrating, but I think a tap on the wrist is going to be far more noticeable. I'm excited about the Apple watch for that silent notification method more than anything else about it. That it has a display is a bonus as far as I am concerned.
One other marketing thing I just now noticed: Apple Watch is offered in 38mm and 42mm case sizes. Is this the first Apple Product specifically identified in metric MKS units?
It's about time. I wish more companies would just switch to metric. Biggest freaking mistake in the 70's was not following through on the switch. I think the US is also one of the few countries in the world still sticking to AM/PM crap too... 24 hour clock make so much more sense once you get used to them (and it's not really that hard either).
It’s yet another thing to check if you go to the theatre, though.
Why would you ever have your devices NOT in silence mode, especially with the watch? I look forward to the day when audible devices cause fierce social shunning and shaming.
Comments
What happens if Apple releases ? watch 2?:
Will we all need to buy the complete watch?
Or can we just get the body (because we already have the band from the previous watch)?
I think Apple is making this overly complicated. They should just offer the body as is, and sell the bands separately. It will definitely simplify their supply chain.
I agree, I think Apple should have sold all 3 models with a black sport band and then let you buy what bands you want. They would only have to worry about 3 SKUs that way and everyone could be happy. Forcing me to spend $1099 to get the black stainless steel body is ridiculous, but I am sure that is their intent.
Betcha you'll need new bands because the case will change. Apple already is a master of the supply chain, so that's not an issue for them. But the bands are for sure a high profit margin item.
There is no way that they will require new bands with every version of the watch. The ONLY saving grace to buying a $1k watch now would be that you can re-use the $500 band for years to come.
Why are all the Apple Watch sport models designed for females? Hey Apple men exercise too! But I don%u2019t know any man who would wear a candy green, baby blue, pink or white watch strap. Oh yeah they make the one all-black Darth Vader model but it%u2019s hard to work out with that big black helmet on%u2026 I need an Apple Watch sport with a black band, navy blue, or dark brown.
I am a male and plan on buying a blue and green sport band. Perhaps you need more color in your life? I don't know when blue and green were considered feminine colors.
One other marketing thing I just now noticed: Apple Watch is offered in 38mm and 42mm case sizes. Is this the first Apple Product specifically identified in metric MKS units? The new MacBook is a 12 inch product. The iPhone6 comes in 4.7 inch and 5.5 inch sizes (although thickness seems to be in mm.) iMacs are all spec'ed in inches.
Apple is like the russkies, son. They don't take a dump without having a plan...
Isn't using mm standard in the watch biz?
Yes, and I understand that watches are measured by the height of the watch casing, not the display, and not on an diagonal.
There is no way that they will require new bands with every version of the watch. The ONLY saving grace to buying a $1k watch now would be that you can re-use the $500 band for years to come.
That doesn't sound very Apple-like to me.
People keep thinking this is like a traditional watch that last for decades. But it's not, it's an accessory to an iPhone. And as such, Apple has to do more than to sell to new customers every year, they have to get the old customers to upgrade -- and not just the watch itself.
If I had to guess, the watch itself will undergo subtle changes every year, thinner, more rectangular, round, centered digital crown, etc. But every two or three years (the typical upgrade cycle), perhaps they change the diameter of the band connection to accommodate a thinner profile, and create more room inside the watch for upgraded tech, maybe even to accommodate expansion ports for accessories in the bands. They will have a justification as they always do. Then old bands won't fit on the new tech and you'll have to upgrade everything. This is Apple's M.O.
Watch or no, anyone who buys an Apple product should expect everything about it will come with a 3-5 year expiration date. I just don't believe the ?Watch will be an exception.
That doesn't sound very Apple-like to me.
People keep thinking this is like a traditional watch that last for decades. But it's not, it's an accessory to an iPhone. And as such, Apple has to do more than to sell to new customers every year, they have to get the old customers to upgrade -- and not just the watch itself.
If I had to guess, the watch itself will undergo subtle changes every year, thinner, more rectangular, round, centered digital crown, etc. But every two or three years (the typical upgrade cycle), perhaps they change the diameter of the band connection to accommodate a thinner profile, and create more room inside the watch for upgraded tech, maybe even to accommodate expansion ports for accessories in the bands. They will have a justification as they always do. Then old bands won't fit on the new tech and you'll have to upgrade everything. This is Apple's M.O.
Watch or no, anyone who buys an Apple product should expect everything about it will come with a 3-5 year expiration date. I just don't believe the ?Watch will be an exception.
I wouldn't doubt that in 3-5 years you may need new bands. My comment said that there is no way that they will make you get new bands every single version, which it sounds like you are in agreement with.
I wouldn't doubt that in 3-5 years you may need new bands. My comment said that there is no way that they will make you get new bands every single version, which it sounds like you are in agreement with.
Of course. You will get at least two years out of a watch band, just like all your accessories for the 5 will fit the 5s. My feeling is that the pressure will be so great to innovate in the smart watch now that all the competition know how high the new bar has been raised, both technologically and from a strictly fashion point of view, that Apple will definitely revise the bands sooner, rather than later. I bet 3 years is the limit depending on how frequently they end up updating the watch design.
... I don't need to squint and read emails/texts on a Watch size screen when I have the iPhone 6 in my pocket. I'm not sure who this appeals to besides women who keep their phones in their purses or pocketbooks.
It appeals to professionals who want to discretely see the arrival of an important email or text without whipping out their cell phones during meetings. It appeals to working parents who can see at a glance if their's a text or email from their teenager or the young child's daycare.
If you were talking to your employee and he pulled out a cell phone and started scrolling through messages, what would you think? What would you think if, instead, he looked totally engaged and focused on your conversation -- because you never noticed his quick glance at his watch when a text came in?
Nice idea, but the reality is not so rosy.
The Apple Watch is off by default. You have to physically raise your arm to turn the screen on. And if the screen is black and suddenly lights up, your fellow professional will also notice. If you are in a business meeting, you are likely to be wearing a suit, and your watch will be covered. If you raise your sleeve, raise your arm and turn it towards you in order to read an email, you could hardly be less discreet.
Even if you could somehow keep the screen on and glance, it is immediately noticeable and distracting when someone glances at their watch mid-conversation. It is just as poor form as glancing at your phone.
On this I can totally agree with you. People have forgotten what it was like when everybody wore watches. Glancing at one when you were supposed to be paying attention to someone is the height of rudeness -- it suggests boredom, or worse disdain for the speaker. And it's always noticed.
It's hard to say how this behavior will play out however, since the phone on the table has become an accepted part of business. Perhaps it will be seen as a welcome change, but it will assuredly only be an amount of time before that too will be seen as just as annoying behavior.
Moreover, the iPhone is large enough to be seen laying on the table without picking it up and making a scene. Not so with the watch. Inevitably people will bring it close enough to see, and a message of any length requires scrolling, thus compounding the problem attributed to distracting behavior on the iPhone.
Yes. Somehow, the phone on the table is more honest. It's obvious if you look at it, whereas glancing at your watch, you look shifty.
Yes. Somehow, the phone on the table is more honest. It's obvious if you look at it, whereas glancing at your watch, you look shifty.
Do you have to look though? The Watch site says that it will tap you on the wrist for notifications (it must have some kind of vibrating thing inside). It doesn't say whether you can set different vibrations for different senders though (e.g. 2 taps for your wife, 1 for your friend).
Yes. Somehow, the phone on the table is more honest. It's obvious if you look at it, whereas glancing at your watch, you look shifty.
Do you have to look though? The Watch site says that it will tap you on the wrist for notifications (it must have some kind of vibrating thing inside). It doesn't say whether you can set different vibrations for different senders though (e.g. 2 taps for your wife, 1 for your friend).
Yes, the haptic vibration could be useful, I’ll grant you that.
It’s yet another thing to check if you go to the theatre, though. Have I put my iPad on silence (made harder now without the mute switch)? Have I put my iPhone on silence? Have I put my watch on silence?
Then I’ll begin.
Betcha you'll need new bands because the case will change. Apple already is a master of the supply chain, so that's not an issue for them. But the bands are for sure a high profit margin item.
There will be an adaptor
No, it's not. It will be interesting to see for myself, especially on things like user interfaces. How we interpret them can vary wildly from user to user but the points one of them brought up about the home button and how the watch didn't seem to have a similar "anchor" were indeed worrying if there isn't something else not so obvious at play.
Wouldn't be the first time Apple tripped something that would appear to be simple - that they clarify or update the interface if those concerns bare out will be key. Or better still pay attention to the feedback and address it before the release. A lot easier to do with software than hardware so there's still some hope.
I missed until looking over the new pages that not all the links are toollessly removable. Then again if you are just adjusting the size they probably all don't need to be. I wondered how they were going to handle the tapering, and now it's obvious - the tapered links are the ones that can't be removed. And it's also why they have multiple sizes of the bands too. Makes sense once you have some more time to digest...
And why would they do that? The bands don't attach to the whole case, just the mount points. The physical sizes aren't going to change unless they offer a round one (which would need a different style band anyway) - the users wrist is driving the size choices in the length and width. In the Z axis, depth, that's not changing unless there is some incredible breakthrough in battery tech.
And for those who love to talk about Apple planned obsolescence, exactly how long was the old 30 pin iPod dock connector out exactly? Like most Apple arguments, superficially interesting but absolute rubbish if you scrutinize them with minimal care.
Thanks for reminding me why I no longer waste my time on that site...
Why are you assuming that glancing at the screen is going to be the only way to tell time with the Apple watch?
If Apple doesn't offer it, how long will it be before some enterprising developer releases an app that uses the taptic interface to tap your wrist on the hour, quarter hour, half past, etc. or at specific time checkpoints? No one is going to notice that and it won't matter what position your hand is in.
I often miss my phone vibrating, but I think a tap on the wrist is going to be far more noticeable. I'm excited about the Apple watch for that silent notification method more than anything else about it. That it has a display is a bonus as far as I am concerned.
It's about time. I wish more companies would just switch to metric. Biggest freaking mistake in the 70's was not following through on the switch. I think the US is also one of the few countries in the world still sticking to AM/PM crap too... 24 hour clock make so much more sense once you get used to them (and it's not really that hard either).
Why would you ever have your devices NOT in silence mode, especially with the watch? I look forward to the day when audible devices cause fierce social shunning and shaming.