It's far too small and you can't hold your wrist up like that for long periods of time, it would have to be on the underside of your wrist like some of the sports bands. Gaming and browsing are the highest usage cases for the phone. The battery life is far too short and the screen is too small to do long activities like these.
Ha! That little Opera browser is hilarious. I can't believe they actually programmed that.
I think you're right that smartwatches are a phone accessory - for now. But in the medium term I still think they will replace the phone outright. I don't see an inability to do web browsing as a barrier, since all the popular sites will make apps. Gaming? Well I think in 5 years cars will be autonomous and people will game in their car as it drives them around. Also in-home gaming will be far more immersive and realistic than we have now. So basically people won't care as much that they can't game with their carry computer.
I didn't think I'd be interested in an Apple Watch. I spent some time watching the videos while waiting for a flight back to the US on Friday and I'm certainly intrigued.
I'm in the same boat. I wear a Citizen daily. The refinement of the Apple Watch hardware and software (pending real reviews) seem very high, and it's drawing me in.
I see two types of buyers:
1) techies
2) those concerned with health
I think once the Apple Watch gets more advanced health-related hardware features (such as for diabetics), it will take off in the health sector. HealthKit seems to be flying under the radar, and I think it will be a huge advantage for those that need constant personal (but not intrusive) monitoring of some sort. Then you add the buy-in from the health providers, and it's icing on the cake.
Does anyone know if the Apple Watch will signal if the iPhone is "out of range"? Such as misplacing the iPhone accidentally?
To compare the iPhone's sheer innovative baggage with the me-too appeal of the AWatch is simply ludicrous, to say the least. The former was a TOTAL game changer and market creator from the get-go despite any shortcomings. So much so that one can't even remember how "smartphones" looked like before it.
The latter is just a tethered thingie with similar UI and features just like any other CURRENT smartphone, surely with the added advantage of Apple's care to detail. But nowhere, I repeat, nowhere near the jaw-dropping effect of the iPhone back then...not to mention SJ's phenomenal RDF, too.
Yet when the iPhone was released many people didn't see it as innovative, and said about almost exactly what you are saying about the watch. And a decade from now when this apple watch is seen as a game changer, and young kids are amazed that they used to make mechanical watches, and future trolls are bashing the apple car (or what have you) because it isn't a game changer the way the watch so clearly was, I will still be laughing.
After all, the iPhone/iPad/iPod is not new at all, but just like CURRENT (thanks for the caps lock so we all know just how seriously to take you) phones/tablets/music players and only Apple fanbois will buy them, amiright?
And thanks also for the RDF mention. Still playing the oldies.
As a side note: I just got my new bank card, it has (to my surprise) nfc in it and I can use it right away to do wireless payments on any terminal that supports nfc. Now this means that I can pay with one swipe of my wallet, and that's within the second. That's extremely convenient and cannot be improved on, the card is also extremely thin and light, compared to an iPhone, and it doesn't need a charge either. Some people here denied the possibility that banks in Europe would (want to) counter APay in advance, but it's clear now they did.
Cannot be improved upon? Really, when it comes to security? What happens if you lose your wallet? What about technologies that can intercept near-field communications between the card and the reader? Does it have some type of equivalent to the fingerprint authentication system that Apple has? Does it use some type of tokenization system?
As long as Apple Watch doesn't bring added value to a iPhone, but just increased convenience, the sales of Apple Watch will be limited to die hard fans or to people who have burning cash in their hands.
One cannot convince the man in a street to pay $400 to see his notifications 3 tenths of second faster on the Watch than on his iPhone, especially if one has become of certain age so the tiny characters on a Watch are too difficult to read without his reading glasses
The point is that the AWatch has no value without an iPhone.
When running you have to take two pieces of gear that weigh almost 300 grams, and believe me, when your a serious runner that's way to much.
It's also very inconvenient to run with a huge iPhone strapped to your arm, clearly Apple has no real knowledge about running or cycling or any other serious sport.
Serious cycling for example requires a bicycle to be ultra light, every gram counts (the athlete himself is also 'trained to the bone') and the added weight of an iPhone is unacceptable (it's also useless to read in bright daylight, a €20 device does a much better job).
The point is that the AWatch has no value without an iPhone.
When running you have to take two pieces of gear that weigh almost 300 grams, and believe me, when your a serious runner that's way to much.
It's also very inconvenient to run with a huge iPhone strapped to your arm, clearly Apple has no real knowledge about running or cycling or any other serious sport.
Serious cycling for example requires a bicycle to be ultra light, every gram counts (the athlete himself is also 'trained to the bone') and the added weight of an iPhone is unacceptable (it's also useless to read in bright daylight, a €20 device does a much better job).
The sheer hubris to state that "clearly Apple has no real knowledge about running or cycling or any other serious sport", while it's public knowledge that they have hired the best of the best in the fitness and medical fields while working on this product, and also set up a lab in which they have been conducting a myriad of testing with actual people for the last 1.5 yrs- is so insanely, stunningly, jaw-droppingly obtuse, that I don't even know how to respond. I'm sure they know a fuckload more than you about running or cycling, and the fact that the Apple Watch requires an iPhone for certian functions, because of the limitations of technology as well as useability, does not prove otherwise. I love how people like you pretend that Apple is simply oo lazy or incompetent to do even the most basic research, while the company has shown time and time again that is goes far beyond the investigative process of any other technology company when it creates it's products, whether it's the maufacturing process of the Apple Watch, which manufacturing experts are blown away by, or the extent to which they've tested and investigated the health and fitness functions.
The fact that you believe you've come to some great insight and Apple has not- that the Apple watch would obviously be better served independent of the phone in certain situations- is hilarious, but pathetic.
Cannot be improved upon? Really, when it comes to security? What happens if you lose your wallet? What about technologies that can intercept near-field communications between the card and the reader? Does it have some type of equivalent to the fingerprint authentication system that Apple has? Does it use some type of tokenization system?
It just works.
But seriously, I was talking about the speed with which you can pay.
NFC hyjacking is almost impossible, a device must be as close as a few cm to be able to power the card.
When your paranoid, you can buy a rfc shielded wallet (you have to add a second or so to your payment time).
When I lose my wallet - which never happend to me by the way - I can immediately block my account with my iPhone (that's usefull) so nothing to worry.
I can also limit the amount of money that can be transferred and the bank covers my loss if all goes wrong.
So, no risk at all and extremely convenient.
The haters have their attack narratives already set:
If it sells well, they will claim "Apple fans will buy anything from Apple"
If it tanks, they will claim "Tim Cook and Jony Ive are failures and Apple is DOOMED"
If it does OK but not great, then goal posts will be moved to fit one of the above narratives
You nailed the troll line perfectly. In other words no matter how it does they will claim failure. How many times have we heard this same crap. Every time Apple launches a new product. Every time.
The sheer hubris to state that "clearly Apple has no real knowledge about running or cycling or any other serious sport", while it's public knowledge that they have hired the best of the best in the fitness and medical fields while working on this product, and also set up a lab in which they have been conducting a myriad of testing with actual people for the last 1.5 yrs- is so insanely, stunningly, jaw-droppingly obtuse, that I don't even know how to respond. I'm sure they know a fuckload more than you about running or cycling, and the fact that the Apple Watch requires an iPhone for certian functions, because of the limitations of technology as well as useability, does not prove otherwise. I love how people like you pretend that Apple is simply oo lazy or incompetent to do even the most basic research, while the company has shown time and time again that is goes far beyond the investigative process of any other technology company when it creates it's products, whether it's the maufacturing process of the Apple Watch, which manufacturing experts are blown away by, or the extent to which they've tested and investigated the health and fitness functions.
The fact that you believe you've come to some great insight and Apple has not- that the Apple watch would obviously be better served independent of the phone in certain situations- is hilarious, but pathetic.
Ha ha, but no, when it comes to running and cycling not many people know more than I do.
But that's beside the point, I concluded that Apple didn't know sports because of the argument I made.
So, you can disagree about the arguments, but you didn't, instead you made it a personal attack.
It's always nice to see when someone's belief system is threatened.
The point is that the AWatch has no value without an iPhone.
When running you have to take two pieces of gear that weigh almost 300 grams, and believe me, when your a serious runner that's way to much.
It's also very inconvenient to run with a huge iPhone strapped to your arm, clearly Apple has no real knowledge about running or cycling or any other serious sport.
Serious cycling for example requires a bicycle to be ultra light, every gram counts (the athlete himself is also 'trained to the bone') and the added weight of an iPhone is unacceptable (it's also useless to read in bright daylight, a €20 device does a much better job).
Ha ha, but no, when it comes to running and cycling not many people know more than I do.
But that's beside the point, I concluded that Apple didn't know sports because of the argument I made.
So, you can disagree about the arguments, but you didn't, instead you made it a personal attack.
It's always nice to see when someone's belief system is threatened.
Wrong. The Watch works for fitness without the iPhone. Apple has stated this since September.
Ha ha, but no, when it comes to running and cycling not many people know more than I do.
But that's beside the point, I concluded that Apple didn't know sports because of the argument I made.
So, you can disagree about the arguments, but you didn't, instead you made it a personal attack.
It's always nice to see when someone's belief system is threatened.
Lol Im a serious runner and run with my iPhone every day. What utter bs. I put the iPhone in an arm holster and run with it to track gps, and the watch does not need your phone to track you. If you have been watching christy turlington burns on apples web sight you would know that. She stated that after a few runs with the phone and watch together that you don't need the phone anymore and actually says that the watch is very accurate. No personal attack here but you are seriously mistaken. By the way you can actually watch christy run with an iPhone in an arm band. If you don't think she's a serious runner then what is she?
it does not need gps to track you as christy turlington burns has said in her blog on apples sight. To quote her words:
Quote:
After you run with Apple Watch and your iPhone a few times, the Workout app knows more about your stride. So you can run on a treadmill or outside without your phone and still get a really accurate workout summary.
Lol Im a serious runner and run with my iPhone every day. What utter bs. I put the iPhone in an arm holster and run with it to track gps, and the watch does not need your phone to track you. If you have been watching christy turlington burns on apples web sight you would know that. She stated that after a few runs with the phone and watch together that you don't need the phone anymore and actually says that the watch is very accurate. No personal attack here but you are seriously mistaken. By the way you can actually watch christy run with an iPhone in an arm band. If you don't think she's a serious runner then what is she?
I also use an arm band (since day one), what else?
That doesn't make it convenient though.
Derived information is never as accurate as the real thing, so even if it is accurate it isn't accurate enough.
(Note that version two of the AWatch will have GPS of course...)
What I have seen from 'Christy' in the promotion clip looks serious (but not really fast though), she also seems a very likable person.
Very suitable for a promotion clip, you have to think about that.
Comments
It's far too small and you can't hold your wrist up like that for long periods of time, it would have to be on the underside of your wrist like some of the sports bands. Gaming and browsing are the highest usage cases for the phone. The battery life is far too short and the screen is too small to do long activities like these.
Ha! That little Opera browser is hilarious. I can't believe they actually programmed that.
I think you're right that smartwatches are a phone accessory - for now. But in the medium term I still think they will replace the phone outright. I don't see an inability to do web browsing as a barrier, since all the popular sites will make apps. Gaming? Well I think in 5 years cars will be autonomous and people will game in their car as it drives them around. Also in-home gaming will be far more immersive and realistic than we have now. So basically people won't care as much that they can't game with their carry computer.
Hah! Good one! I assume you are archiving all your posts so you can eat crow when they sell millions?
I didn't think I'd be interested in an Apple Watch. I spent some time watching the videos while waiting for a flight back to the US on Friday and I'm certainly intrigued.
I'm in the same boat. I wear a Citizen daily. The refinement of the Apple Watch hardware and software (pending real reviews) seem very high, and it's drawing me in.
I see two types of buyers:
1) techies
2) those concerned with health
I think once the Apple Watch gets more advanced health-related hardware features (such as for diabetics), it will take off in the health sector. HealthKit seems to be flying under the radar, and I think it will be a huge advantage for those that need constant personal (but not intrusive) monitoring of some sort. Then you add the buy-in from the health providers, and it's icing on the cake.
Does anyone know if the Apple Watch will signal if the iPhone is "out of range"? Such as misplacing the iPhone accidentally?
Yet when the iPhone was released many people didn't see it as innovative, and said about almost exactly what you are saying about the watch. And a decade from now when this apple watch is seen as a game changer, and young kids are amazed that they used to make mechanical watches, and future trolls are bashing the apple car (or what have you) because it isn't a game changer the way the watch so clearly was, I will still be laughing.
After all, the iPhone/iPad/iPod is not new at all, but just like CURRENT (thanks for the caps lock so we all know just how seriously to take you) phones/tablets/music players and only Apple fanbois will buy them, amiright?
And thanks also for the RDF mention. Still playing the oldies.
You always bring the laughs.
As a side note: I just got my new bank card, it has (to my surprise) nfc in it and I can use it right away to do wireless payments on any terminal that supports nfc. Now this means that I can pay with one swipe of my wallet, and that's within the second. That's extremely convenient and cannot be improved on, the card is also extremely thin and light, compared to an iPhone, and it doesn't need a charge either. Some people here denied the possibility that banks in Europe would (want to) counter APay in advance, but it's clear now they did.
Cannot be improved upon? Really, when it comes to security? What happens if you lose your wallet? What about technologies that can intercept near-field communications between the card and the reader? Does it have some type of equivalent to the fingerprint authentication system that Apple has? Does it use some type of tokenization system?
The point is that the AWatch has no value without an iPhone.
When running you have to take two pieces of gear that weigh almost 300 grams, and believe me, when your a serious runner that's way to much.
It's also very inconvenient to run with a huge iPhone strapped to your arm, clearly Apple has no real knowledge about running or cycling or any other serious sport.
Serious cycling for example requires a bicycle to be ultra light, every gram counts (the athlete himself is also 'trained to the bone') and the added weight of an iPhone is unacceptable (it's also useless to read in bright daylight, a €20 device does a much better job).
The point is that the AWatch has no value without an iPhone.
When running you have to take two pieces of gear that weigh almost 300 grams, and believe me, when your a serious runner that's way to much.
It's also very inconvenient to run with a huge iPhone strapped to your arm, clearly Apple has no real knowledge about running or cycling or any other serious sport.
Serious cycling for example requires a bicycle to be ultra light, every gram counts (the athlete himself is also 'trained to the bone') and the added weight of an iPhone is unacceptable (it's also useless to read in bright daylight, a €20 device does a much better job).
The sheer hubris to state that "clearly Apple has no real knowledge about running or cycling or any other serious sport", while it's public knowledge that they have hired the best of the best in the fitness and medical fields while working on this product, and also set up a lab in which they have been conducting a myriad of testing with actual people for the last 1.5 yrs- is so insanely, stunningly, jaw-droppingly obtuse, that I don't even know how to respond. I'm sure they know a fuckload more than you about running or cycling, and the fact that the Apple Watch requires an iPhone for certian functions, because of the limitations of technology as well as useability, does not prove otherwise. I love how people like you pretend that Apple is simply oo lazy or incompetent to do even the most basic research, while the company has shown time and time again that is goes far beyond the investigative process of any other technology company when it creates it's products, whether it's the maufacturing process of the Apple Watch, which manufacturing experts are blown away by, or the extent to which they've tested and investigated the health and fitness functions.
The fact that you believe you've come to some great insight and Apple has not- that the Apple watch would obviously be better served independent of the phone in certain situations- is hilarious, but pathetic.
It just works.
But seriously, I was talking about the speed with which you can pay.
NFC hyjacking is almost impossible, a device must be as close as a few cm to be able to power the card.
When your paranoid, you can buy a rfc shielded wallet (you have to add a second or so to your payment time).
When I lose my wallet - which never happend to me by the way - I can immediately block my account with my iPhone (that's usefull) so nothing to worry.
I can also limit the amount of money that can be transferred and the bank covers my loss if all goes wrong.
So, no risk at all and extremely convenient.
The haters have their attack narratives already set:
You nailed the troll line perfectly. In other words no matter how it does they will claim failure. How many times have we heard this same crap. Every time Apple launches a new product. Every time.
Ha ha, but no, when it comes to running and cycling not many people know more than I do.
But that's beside the point, I concluded that Apple didn't know sports because of the argument I made.
So, you can disagree about the arguments, but you didn't, instead you made it a personal attack.
It's always nice to see when someone's belief system is threatened.
Wrong. The Watch works for fitness without the iPhone. Apple has stated this since September.
Ha ha, but no, when it comes to running and cycling not many people know more than I do.
But that's beside the point, I concluded that Apple didn't know sports because of the argument I made.
So, you can disagree about the arguments, but you didn't, instead you made it a personal attack.
It's always nice to see when someone's belief system is threatened.
Lol Im a serious runner and run with my iPhone every day. What utter bs. I put the iPhone in an arm holster and run with it to track gps, and the watch does not need your phone to track you. If you have been watching christy turlington burns on apples web sight you would know that. She stated that after a few runs with the phone and watch together that you don't need the phone anymore and actually says that the watch is very accurate. No personal attack here but you are seriously mistaken. By the way you can actually watch christy run with an iPhone in an arm band. If you don't think she's a serious runner then what is she?
It doesn't, no GPS.
It doesn't, no GPS.
it does not need gps to track you as christy turlington burns has said in her blog on apples sight. To quote her words:
It doesn't, no GPS.
Dearie me, how can you survive without that? /s
I also use an arm band (since day one), what else?
That doesn't make it convenient though.
Derived information is never as accurate as the real thing, so even if it is accurate it isn't accurate enough.
(Note that version two of the AWatch will have GPS of course...)
What I have seen from 'Christy' in the promotion clip looks serious (but not really fast though), she also seems a very likable person.
Very suitable for a promotion clip, you have to think about that.
(Note that version two of the AWatch will have GPS of course...)
And you have no proof for this claim. Barring some massive battery technology revolution the Watch will not have dedicated GPS any time soon.
Out of real arguments? Dearie me.
Of course it will, and Apple will proclame that it is the best and most accurate GPS for such a device.
History is proof of that.