Honestly I don't want one and I work with a lot of early adopters and none of them want one. No one is talking about it. It truly seems like a device for athletes or the wealthy.
It's probable that this device is a required stepping stone to more advanced technology, like (as I have said before) solar cells embedded in the surface to help get this thing power, more efficient battery cells, etc.
I don't doubt that Apple will eventually make this a winner. It's possible we just need to see the price come down and the "killer app" that makes it take off.
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.
No, my post was a meticulous take down of your mind-numbingly ,anti-intellectual "Apple Watch requires the phone, so obviously Apple knows nothing about sports" conclusion. I supported that with actual facts and context, relating to the research that Apple does with their products and the Apple Watch, specifically. You never had an "argument" to begin with, just a childish statement, that is support by zero facts, and is blatantly untrue in the face of reality.
You're standing by your statement, that the richest company in the world who has hired well-known experts in the fitness field, collectively "knows nothing" about sports and fitness? Really, there can be no other reason for their technical choices than "they know nothing" about fitness? It's just based on pure ignorance on their part? That's fine, you're free to double-down on that, and people can conclude about your logical ability what they will. But don't pretend you laid out any kind of "argument". Also, convenient how you ignore my entire post and define it as a "personal attack" so you can ignore everything that was stated. Yes, my "belief system" is threatened, even though I don't recall alluding to any kind of "belief system" besides basic logic. Oh wait, you're going with the whole "Apple cult" thing, eh? Well done.
While you're quite right ... I don't think the laws of physics need to be changed to add GPS. Looking at how Apple handled such challenges on the original iPhone, some clever software power management may be all that is needed. It's not like GPS wouldn't be useful on the watch by itself. And it really boils down to user needs. We already know using the watch to make phone calls will only give you 3 hours of continuous talk time. Playing music drops to 6 hours of continuous listening time. Those are big power draws, and arguably should not have been included on a 1st gen device which is already power challenged -- but they are there at the users option. So I don't see the issue with adding gps in the future under similar restricted circumstances, especially with better power management - it's there if you need it.
I don't doubt that Apple will eventually make this a winner. It's possible we just need to see the price come down and the "killer app" that makes it take off.
A number of reviewers -- e.g., Farhad Manjoo in the NYT -- have said the same thing.
So, what is the 'killer app' that made the iPhone take off? The iPad?
A number of reviewers -- e.g., Farhad Manjoo in the NYT -- have said the same thing.
So, what is the 'killer app' that made the iPhone take off? The iPad?
To me, it's very childish thinking that in this day and age a hardware product needs a "killer app", when there's hundreds of thousands of apps out there, used by millions of people for different things. What is the "killer app" of the Mac? They're just great products. For me, there isn't ONE single thing about the Apple Watch that makes it a must buy, but rather the totality of its versatility. I sold my pebble because although I loved the notifications aspect, I didn't care for any other aspect of the product, either hardware (cheap plastic) or software, which was very limited. The Apple Watch will have the best build quality of any current smartwatch, the best executed software, and the most versatility through apps.
To me, it's very childish thinking that in this day and age a hardware product needs a "killer app", when there's hundreds of thousands of apps out there, used by millions of people for different things. What is the "killer app" of the Mac? They're just great products. For me, there isn't ONE single thing about the Apple Watch that makes it a must buy, but rather the totality of its versatility. I sold my pebble because although I loved the notifications aspect, I didn't care for any other aspect of the product, either hardware (cheap plastic) or software, which was very limited. The Apple Watch will have the best build quality of any current smartwatch, the best executed software, and the most versatility through apps.
I think the ?Watch will be interesting. Honestly, no one needs one, but I plan to order a Sport version as soon as I wake up on 10 April, at which time I fully expect it to be sold out. I always like to stay current with the latest technology so $400 is a fair price to pay for getting on board with the newest Apple kit. I expect to wait several weeks to receive it but that is no big deal. I'm more patient in my old age.
I think the ?Watch will be interesting. Honestly, no one needs one, but I plan to order a Sport version as soon as I wake up on 10 April, at which time I fully expect it to be sold out. I always like to stay current with the latest technology so $400 is a fair price to pay for getting on board with the newest Apple kit. I expect to wait several weeks to receive it but that is no big deal. I'm more patient in my old age.
That's a very fair attitude.
With the ?Watch I've been very intrigued, especially because I'm a watch person, I love wearing my watch so a product that connects to the other devices I have and offers more than simple horologe functionality, that's a bonus. Wearable technology is very interesting, I think I've convinced myself that one of the Sport versions (for this first iteration) is not much to spend, it'll give me basic time-keeping functionality plus all the other stuff day 1, and beyond that who knows the great things developers and users will come up with to increase functionality and take advantage of this new area of tech. Spread out the cost over the life of the product, subtract a solid resale value and it's not much money to spend per month or week on something you find interesting.
Have you already selected the watch/band combo? You're really not going to go in-store and try one on first? I'm going to make myself wait until I've seen it on my wrist first, for me it's mainly because I have such small wrists I want to make sure it (the 42mm one) doesn't look odd.
Well the will it or won't discussion is still in full bloom... Like anyone really knows for sure. IMO if a person is a fairly intense (open to definition) smart phone user, this could / would be a very usefull item; use the watch to short cut many everyday things. If not, the benefits / usefulness seem rather limited. If I was a power phone user(my term) I'd give serious consideration.... Alas I'm not, so probably won't puchase one (my inner geek is mighty curious though and may win out!). After a year or so I suspect we'll know what the market really thinks.
This article seems like hedging AI against an initial adrenaline rush sale and then ultimate failure in the long term...after all, relying on an iPhone to fully work, having a terrible battery life as well as a bad design are not very positive signs, right?
That is pure comedy... well, not gold. Silver maybe? I love that you post something that is literally the exact opposite of the articles statement as "what it seems to be saying."
There is probably a lawyer joke about reading comprehension in there somewhere.
You need to promise you will never stop posting. I only read the comments for your comedy. Please, when the watch is setting sales records over the next year, just keep posting your drivel. Double down on the stupid. Keep up the dumb fight. You guys are part of mine morning reading along with comics like SMBC, and you get me through the day. Never stop...
So true. Funnily enough if you want to see more of this type of humour head off to the comments on the Guardian's article on the restarting of the LHC, and try some of the troll posts on that. It's amusing but also somewhat depressing that people are so enthusiastic to display their stupidity.
To me, it's very childish thinking that in this day and age a hardware product needs a "killer app", when there's hundreds of thousands of apps out there, used by millions of people for different things. What is the "killer app" of the Mac? They're just great products. For me, there isn't ONE single thing about the Apple Watch that makes it a must buy, but rather the totality of its versatility. I sold my pebble because although I loved the notifications aspect, I didn't care for any other aspect of the product, either hardware (cheap plastic) or software, which was very limited. The Apple Watch will have the best build quality of any current smartwatch, the best executed software, and the most versatility through apps.
Couldn't agree more. At the end of the day, it's fundamentally about tools to make our lives easier and better: offer greater us greater convenience, enable us to communicate better, connect better, work better, and while at it, do it in a way that makes it fun, easy to use, and most importantly, a joy to use with nicely designed hardware and software.
This is, for me, the essence of Apple that some people (and most competitors) will never get.
BLAH, BLAH, RANT RANT. This is just the start of a new member of the Apple family and even though it is very small and in its infancy, it has a lot of possibities to grow and develope into a great and very usefull device. They have pack a lot if new tech into this first gen ?Watch i can only imagin what may be next. It may take time. Apple has time, they plan in long term, and to me that is smart thinking. Meanwhile I am counting down the days 5days 3hours and counting.
Ps: let me be the first one to say, welcome to the family ?Watch
I got a bad feeling about those sales. When the iPhone came out, I'd been spending the previous two years looking for a cell phone that was useful for more than just calls. None were and most were junk. I suspect there were millions like me, hence the success of the iPhone.
On the other hand, I'm not frustrated with what my watch does and doubt my experience is unique. If anything, the clocks in cell phones have led many to abandon watches altogether.
I am excited, however, about the potential for some of the ideas that were developed for this watch to be incorporated into the iPhone. Apple could make it smart enough to detect when users look at the screen when a call comes in. If they put the iPhone back down, it sends the call to voice mail. It they raise it to their face, it accepts the call. Call that the "Spatially Aware" feature.
I also wouldn't mind a banded wrist/ankle device that signals via vibrations in ways like the watch does%u2014but at a far more reasonable price. One of Apple's talking points about it phone is that it signals people without being 'in the face' of those they're with. This iWrist or whatever would do that and do it as a reasonable cost for an iPhone accessory.
You're underestimating the importance of convenience and connectedness. We're used to a different level of both in the post-iPhone world.
The biggest advantage of the Apple Watch, IMO, is that it can't take/send selfies -- the iPhone remains in your pocket!
... this is the Watch Bird watching the Watch Bird watch me ...
Having the internet with you everywhere was a huge benefit with the iPhone and the contextual nature of the screen that let you type when you needed to but use the whole display for the browser, videos, photos and apps the rest of the time. One of the taglines on the original iPhone was "the internet in your pocket". As Flickr shows, it's quite popular as a camera.
The iPad isn't as mobile as an iPhone but it offered a more comfortable media consumption experience than a laptop. The big difference between gaming on a laptop and on an iPad is that the iPad made it fit into your life. To get a game on a Mac or PC, it still has a cumbersome setup and load routine and you have to keep shutting it down. They tend to be more immersive too so it's not easy to put them down quickly. The iPad just suspends everything so it was way more pick-up-and-play. The iPad is also better for reading books than a laptop and iPhone and better for browsing/shopping than the iPhone.
Apple seems to be pushing the fitness and utility categories with the watch. I expect photography is classed as a utility in the above graphs. It's clear from the graphs that the watch can't replace at least 80% of the usage of either the iPad or iPhone. That's a good thing in a way because it's not trying to compete with them. The risk is that people won't care enough about the usage categories it caters to like fitness and more convenient notifications.
80% of adults don't even do 2.5 hours of moderate fitness activity per week. The watch tracks all activity but it suggests to me that most people won't identify with the Sport model of watch. The everyday watch really should have been the cheapest because specialty users tend to pay more for things anyway. I think this would push people more into looking at the stainless steel model, which starts at $499 and they're not going to want a rubber sport band. The everyday watch would be stainless steel with the buckles or loops, which is $649-749. This is Swiss watch territory (average of Swiss watch sales is $685). Although people pay this for iPhones, it's over 2 years. iPhone (subsidized) ASP is $604, iPad (unsubsidized) ASP is $441. For an ASP to hit those levels, more than half the sale have to be under that value. The watch I consider to be an everyday watch starts at $649.
Like I said before though, the bar for success is low. How many companies in the world can make $1b revenue at all let alone on an accessory? The iPod sales are sitting at $2.2b ($160 ASP). To top iPod revenues, they just have to sell 5m watches at $450 and they have direct marketing to a 400 million+ active userbase.
People said the same thing about cell phones 10 years ago. No way a cell phone can take the place of a laptop. No way the battery can last long enough. No way the screen is big enough, no way the cpu can be fast enough, no way........
Your lack of vision is obvious.
"Lack of vision" would be an apt description because I'd need pretty good vision to browse a website on a 1.5"-1.7" display. Take the following article on a standard news site:
One video and 739 words. The video would look like this, you can't even read the name Breitling on that smartwatch and the display would probably shut off 10 seconds in:
Given that you could only see 20 words at a time, the article would require scrolling 37 pages - try swiping your finger 37 times over your wrist and tell me how visionary that feels.
Not to mention that websites are monetized by ads that they have to fit in there somewhere. No typing, no photo taking, no games, no browsing, no books. It'll be fitness, music, notifications, payments and some utility widgets. It's like Dashboard/Notification Panel for your iPhone. This will stop some people using their phones so frequently in the same way the notification panels, Control Center and widgets keep people from opening the full apps. There's no way they could get by without the full apps entirely.
The funniest benefit for the watch is for iPhone 6 Plus users being able to stop hauling a large phone in and out their pockets or purses. 'we want a big 5.5" phone', 'hmm, it's too big, give us a 1.5" screen so we don't have to use it'.
The biggest advantage of the Apple Watch, IMO, is that it can't take/send selfies
... Yet. I look for a FaceTime camera to be added, possibly by 2nd gen, but definitely by the 3rd. However, as is, the watch can be used for a viewfinder and remote camera trigger, for an iPhone, which can be placed anywhere ...
... Yet. I look for a FaceTime camera to be added, possibly by 2nd gen, but definitely by the 3rd. However, as is, the watch can be used for a viewfinder and remote camera trigger, for an iPhone, which can be placed anywhere ...
Comments
Honestly I don't want one and I work with a lot of early adopters and none of them want one. No one is talking about it. It truly seems like a device for athletes or the wealthy.
It's probable that this device is a required stepping stone to more advanced technology, like (as I have said before) solar cells embedded in the surface to help get this thing power, more efficient battery cells, etc.
I don't doubt that Apple will eventually make this a winner. It's possible we just need to see the price come down and the "killer app" that makes it take off.
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.
No, my post was a meticulous take down of your mind-numbingly ,anti-intellectual "Apple Watch requires the phone, so obviously Apple knows nothing about sports" conclusion. I supported that with actual facts and context, relating to the research that Apple does with their products and the Apple Watch, specifically. You never had an "argument" to begin with, just a childish statement, that is support by zero facts, and is blatantly untrue in the face of reality.
You're standing by your statement, that the richest company in the world who has hired well-known experts in the fitness field, collectively "knows nothing" about sports and fitness? Really, there can be no other reason for their technical choices than "they know nothing" about fitness? It's just based on pure ignorance on their part? That's fine, you're free to double-down on that, and people can conclude about your logical ability what they will. But don't pretend you laid out any kind of "argument". Also, convenient how you ignore my entire post and define it as a "personal attack" so you can ignore everything that was stated. Yes, my "belief system" is threatened, even though I don't recall alluding to any kind of "belief system" besides basic logic. Oh wait, you're going with the whole "Apple cult" thing, eh? Well done.
I don't doubt that Apple will eventually make this a winner. It's possible we just need to see the price come down and the "killer app" that makes it take off.
A number of reviewers -- e.g., Farhad Manjoo in the NYT -- have said the same thing.
So, what is the 'killer app' that made the iPhone take off? The iPad?
A number of reviewers -- e.g., Farhad Manjoo in the NYT -- have said the same thing.
So, what is the 'killer app' that made the iPhone take off? The iPad?
To me, it's very childish thinking that in this day and age a hardware product needs a "killer app", when there's hundreds of thousands of apps out there, used by millions of people for different things. What is the "killer app" of the Mac? They're just great products. For me, there isn't ONE single thing about the Apple Watch that makes it a must buy, but rather the totality of its versatility. I sold my pebble because although I loved the notifications aspect, I didn't care for any other aspect of the product, either hardware (cheap plastic) or software, which was very limited. The Apple Watch will have the best build quality of any current smartwatch, the best executed software, and the most versatility through apps.
To me, it's very childish thinking that in this day and age a hardware product needs a "killer app", when there's hundreds of thousands of apps out there, used by millions of people for different things. What is the "killer app" of the Mac? They're just great products. For me, there isn't ONE single thing about the Apple Watch that makes it a must buy, but rather the totality of its versatility. I sold my pebble because although I loved the notifications aspect, I didn't care for any other aspect of the product, either hardware (cheap plastic) or software, which was very limited. The Apple Watch will have the best build quality of any current smartwatch, the best executed software, and the most versatility through apps.
I think the ?Watch will be interesting. Honestly, no one needs one, but I plan to order a Sport version as soon as I wake up on 10 April, at which time I fully expect it to be sold out. I always like to stay current with the latest technology so $400 is a fair price to pay for getting on board with the newest Apple kit. I expect to wait several weeks to receive it but that is no big deal. I'm more patient in my old age.
I think the ?Watch will be interesting. Honestly, no one needs one, but I plan to order a Sport version as soon as I wake up on 10 April, at which time I fully expect it to be sold out. I always like to stay current with the latest technology so $400 is a fair price to pay for getting on board with the newest Apple kit. I expect to wait several weeks to receive it but that is no big deal. I'm more patient in my old age.
That's a very fair attitude.
With the ?Watch I've been very intrigued, especially because I'm a watch person, I love wearing my watch so a product that connects to the other devices I have and offers more than simple horologe functionality, that's a bonus. Wearable technology is very interesting, I think I've convinced myself that one of the Sport versions (for this first iteration) is not much to spend, it'll give me basic time-keeping functionality plus all the other stuff day 1, and beyond that who knows the great things developers and users will come up with to increase functionality and take advantage of this new area of tech. Spread out the cost over the life of the product, subtract a solid resale value and it's not much money to spend per month or week on something you find interesting.
Have you already selected the watch/band combo? You're really not going to go in-store and try one on first? I'm going to make myself wait until I've seen it on my wrist first, for me it's mainly because I have such small wrists I want to make sure it (the 42mm one) doesn't look odd.
IMO if a person is a fairly intense (open to definition) smart phone user, this could / would be a very usefull item; use the watch to short cut many everyday things. If not, the benefits / usefulness seem rather limited. If I was a power phone user(my term) I'd give serious consideration.... Alas I'm not, so probably won't puchase one (my inner geek is mighty curious though and may win out!).
After a year or so I suspect we'll know what the market really thinks.
This article seems like hedging AI against an initial adrenaline rush sale and then ultimate failure in the long term...after all, relying on an iPhone to fully work, having a terrible battery life as well as a bad design are not very positive signs, right?
That is pure comedy... well, not gold. Silver maybe? I love that you post something that is literally the exact opposite of the articles statement as "what it seems to be saying."
There is probably a lawyer joke about reading comprehension in there somewhere.
You need to promise you will never stop posting. I only read the comments for your comedy. Please, when the watch is setting sales records over the next year, just keep posting your drivel. Double down on the stupid. Keep up the dumb fight. You guys are part of mine morning reading along with comics like SMBC, and you get me through the day. Never stop...
So true. Funnily enough if you want to see more of this type of humour head off to the comments on the Guardian's article on the restarting of the LHC, and try some of the troll posts on that. It's amusing but also somewhat depressing that people are so enthusiastic to display their stupidity.
To me, it's very childish thinking that in this day and age a hardware product needs a "killer app", when there's hundreds of thousands of apps out there, used by millions of people for different things. What is the "killer app" of the Mac? They're just great products. For me, there isn't ONE single thing about the Apple Watch that makes it a must buy, but rather the totality of its versatility. I sold my pebble because although I loved the notifications aspect, I didn't care for any other aspect of the product, either hardware (cheap plastic) or software, which was very limited. The Apple Watch will have the best build quality of any current smartwatch, the best executed software, and the most versatility through apps.
Couldn't agree more. At the end of the day, it's fundamentally about tools to make our lives easier and better: offer greater us greater convenience, enable us to communicate better, connect better, work better, and while at it, do it in a way that makes it fun, easy to use, and most importantly, a joy to use with nicely designed hardware and software.
This is, for me, the essence of Apple that some people (and most competitors) will never get.
Ps: let me be the first one to say, welcome to the family ?Watch
First rule of the troll: stubborn intransigence.
The biggest advantage of the Apple Watch, IMO, is that it can't take/send selfies -- the iPhone remains in your pocket!
... this is the Watch Bird watching the Watch Bird watch me ...
I'd say it's more usage categories. Gaming and social networking are huge time fillers for smartphones:
Gaming has increased since those 2012 stats too:
https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/2015/average-time-spent-playing-games-on-mobile-devices-has-increased-57-percent-since-2012/
Having the internet with you everywhere was a huge benefit with the iPhone and the contextual nature of the screen that let you type when you needed to but use the whole display for the browser, videos, photos and apps the rest of the time. One of the taglines on the original iPhone was "the internet in your pocket". As Flickr shows, it's quite popular as a camera.
The iPad isn't as mobile as an iPhone but it offered a more comfortable media consumption experience than a laptop. The big difference between gaming on a laptop and on an iPad is that the iPad made it fit into your life. To get a game on a Mac or PC, it still has a cumbersome setup and load routine and you have to keep shutting it down. They tend to be more immersive too so it's not easy to put them down quickly. The iPad just suspends everything so it was way more pick-up-and-play. The iPad is also better for reading books than a laptop and iPhone and better for browsing/shopping than the iPhone.
Apple seems to be pushing the fitness and utility categories with the watch. I expect photography is classed as a utility in the above graphs. It's clear from the graphs that the watch can't replace at least 80% of the usage of either the iPad or iPhone. That's a good thing in a way because it's not trying to compete with them. The risk is that people won't care enough about the usage categories it caters to like fitness and more convenient notifications.
Most people don't seem to care about fitness:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cdc-80-percent-of-american-adults-dont-get-recommended-exercise/
80% of adults don't even do 2.5 hours of moderate fitness activity per week. The watch tracks all activity but it suggests to me that most people won't identify with the Sport model of watch. The everyday watch really should have been the cheapest because specialty users tend to pay more for things anyway. I think this would push people more into looking at the stainless steel model, which starts at $499 and they're not going to want a rubber sport band. The everyday watch would be stainless steel with the buckles or loops, which is $649-749. This is Swiss watch territory (average of Swiss watch sales is $685). Although people pay this for iPhones, it's over 2 years. iPhone (subsidized) ASP is $604, iPad (unsubsidized) ASP is $441. For an ASP to hit those levels, more than half the sale have to be under that value. The watch I consider to be an everyday watch starts at $649.
Like I said before though, the bar for success is low. How many companies in the world can make $1b revenue at all let alone on an accessory? The iPod sales are sitting at $2.2b ($160 ASP). To top iPod revenues, they just have to sell 5m watches at $450 and they have direct marketing to a 400 million+ active userbase.
"Lack of vision" would be an apt description because I'd need pretty good vision to browse a website on a 1.5"-1.7" display. Take the following article on a standard news site:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/24/tech/apple-watch-baselworld-2015/index.html
One video and 739 words. The video would look like this, you can't even read the name Breitling on that smartwatch and the display would probably shut off 10 seconds in:
Given that you could only see 20 words at a time, the article would require scrolling 37 pages - try swiping your finger 37 times over your wrist and tell me how visionary that feels.
Not to mention that websites are monetized by ads that they have to fit in there somewhere. No typing, no photo taking, no games, no browsing, no books. It'll be fitness, music, notifications, payments and some utility widgets. It's like Dashboard/Notification Panel for your iPhone. This will stop some people using their phones so frequently in the same way the notification panels, Control Center and widgets keep people from opening the full apps. There's no way they could get by without the full apps entirely.
The funniest benefit for the watch is for iPhone 6 Plus users being able to stop hauling a large phone in and out their pockets or purses. 'we want a big 5.5" phone', 'hmm, it's too big, give us a 1.5" screen so we don't have to use it'.
"Pardon me, Sir, but wouldn’t you find it more convenient to wear a[n Apple] watch like everyone else?”
With apologies to Yogi Berra
you still dont get it. No one is saying the Watch screen will always be under 2 inches.
again you have no vision.
Umm.... that's not what he's saying.
Calm down a bit.
... Yet. I look for a FaceTime camera to be added, possibly by 2nd gen, but definitely by the 3rd. However, as is, the watch can be used for a viewfinder and remote camera trigger, for an iPhone, which can be placed anywhere ...
Yes, this is true.
We're not in the post-Selfie world yet, sadly.