Gene sure does like to poll the teens.
Exactly. 18-24 is the young adult realm. I'm guessing he wasn't polling that group.
Teenage design tastes are fickle just as the moving from dance to dance or more fittingly hashtag to hashtag. I don't think Apple is looking to that demographic at all. It's pretty evident when every ? Watch is more expensive than the iPod Touch.
You're getting teen and 18-24 and 25-38 confused. Walking Dead is among the highest rated show in the 18-49 group. The Voice also targets 18-49.
No I'm not getting confused. Are you saying Walking Dead is not one of the highest rated teen shows? Nor the voice? Because if so, the trade publications disagree ...
I've been saying this since Tim Cook first showed off the taptic engine. Once kids figure out they can communicate while leaving their iPhones in their pockets during class, there will be a run on these watches.
You laugh. That is *precisely* what they will do.
And as soon as the Watch contains integral GPS and at least a rudimentary cell capability for at least 911, parents will be getting them for their kids. Apple will have a lo-jack for your kid.
And as soon as the Watch contains integral GPS and at least a rudimentary cell capability for at least 911, parents will be getting them for their kids. Apple will have a lo-jack for your kid.
smart watches are already banned in my kids HS, from tests that is.
As for lo-jack for your kid, an iPhone already has gps.
And as soon as the Watch contains integral GPS and at least a rudimentary cell capability for at least 911, parents will be getting them for their kids. Apple will have a lo-jack for your kid.
I'm not laughing. I'm dead serious. But the GPS thing suddenly takes on new importance. That's exactly right, if the watch has GPS that could enable it to be tracked without an iPhone (of course your kids can always take it off). The question is, how will the signal get onto a network without the iPhone? Now of course, if there's some rudimentary cell service for 911 calling, that could likewise serve as a conduit. I have a Tagg GPS tracker for my dog, and it periodically checks in via a cellular network to report locations, which it also reports on demand.
I wonder even, since Apple has such a fascination with its own networks, if they couldn't also implement something like FireChat on the watch enabling it to transmit coordinates, or messages via any Apple product in range?
smart watches are already banned in my kids HS, from tests that is.
As for lo-jack for your kid, an iPhone already has gps.
Yep. But all current smartwatches require you look at them for info. Apple Watch can be put under your sock. I can see some kids suddenly paying attention in history class to the section on Vietnam and the US POWs learning the "tap code."
And the Find My iPhone function will lead parents right to where their kid dropped it. Or where an evildoer dumped it. IIRC, some person kickstarted a pair of sneakers with a lo-jack in them. And you can buy lo-jack tags for your pets now too. I suppose some teens might object to wearing a collar though.
Oh God I knew the Applelogists would fill the comments section.
Your taking Munster seriously? Really? This is the guy that still has delusions of an Apple Television. LOL. No one here has to apologize for apple either. They need no apology.
I'm not laughing. I'm dead serious. But the GPS thing suddenly takes on new importance. That's exactly right, if the watch has GPS that could enable it to be tracked without an iPhone (of course your kids can always take it off). The question is, how will the signal get onto a network without the iPhone? Now of course, if there's some rudimentary cell service for 911 calling, that could likewise serve as a conduit. I have a Tagg GPS tracker for my dog, and it periodically checks in via a cellular network to report locations, which it also reports on demand.
I wonder even, since Apple has such a fascination with its own networks, if they couldn't also implement something like FireChat on the watch enabling it to transmit coordinates, or messages via any Apple product in range?
Didn't mean to suggest you weren't serious. My bad, sorry.
I like the FireChat concept you describe. Comcast did sorta have a PR problem when they did something similar with their base stations. On the Apple devices there is more of a quid pro quo though - unlike the comcast model, Apple users get something immediate ans tangible by their use. Many comcast users never connect outside their houses.
Gruber's comments about tapic feedback on DaringFireBall was kinda interesting:
Quote from Daringfireball:
"Imagine:
You’re 16. You’re in school. You’re sitting in class. You have a crush on another student — you’ve fallen hard. You can’t stop thinking about them. You suspect the feelings are mutual — but you don’t know. You’re afraid to just come right out and ask, verbally — afraid of the crushing weight of rejection. But you both wear an Apple Watch. So you take a flyer and send a few taps. And you wait. Nothing in response. Dammit. Why are you so stupid? Whoa — a few taps are sent in return, along with a hand-drawn smiley face. You send more taps. You receive more taps back. This is it. You send your heartbeat. It is racing, thumping. Your crush sends their heartbeat back.
You’re flirting. Not through words. Not through speech. Physically flirting, by touch. And you’re not even in the same classroom. Maybe you don’t even go to the same school.
I’m not saying digital touch is only for teenagers. I’m not saying it’s only for flirting. But the scenario above exemplifies the ways that digital touch opens the door to forms of remote communication that most of us haven’t ever considered. Non-verbal, non-visual, physical communication across any distance. This could be something big."
No I'm not getting confused. Are you saying Walking Dead is not one of the highest rated teen shows? Nor the voice? Because if so, the trade publications disagree ...
You are getting confused. Among young viewers means "what do young viewers watch". The relevant question is "what is the most common watcher of the show" (the mode)? Or more specifically "what is the most valuable watcher of the show in terms of ad dollars", which is 18-49.
You could find that MacGyver is the most popular show among 100-105 year olds, but that doesn't mean that there's any sort of real audience.
I had one of the first iPhones. I held it up in front of my community college class and asked how many of them would be getting one. No hands went up. By the time I retired in 2009 the iPhone was the most popular brand in my classes. They don't know what they want until they want it.
This thread is pretty much perfect troll fodder. As if these surveys ever fucking mean anything. Not a single normal consumer has used an Apple watch, and even if you go to the Apple Store you can't really experience one. This product will become more popular organically, through a network effect of seeing others wearing it, asking about it, then wanting and buying it.
The iPhone took 3 months to sell 1M. Now it sells 75M/qtr. The Apple Watch already has sold 1M.
The Apple Watch will likely follow a path similar to the original 2007 iPhone. That phone was a big seller over time, but sales really skyrocketed as exposure increased and more and more people had a chance to see it firsthand and discover how truly different it was from anything else at the time. I wasn't planning on purchasing an Apple Watch, but once in the store, seeing it, trying it on, and using it---it sold itself. Mine is arriving over the summer.
I had one of the first iPhones. I held it up in front of my community college class and asked how many of them would be getting one. No hands went up. By the time I retired in 2009 the iPhone was the most popular brand in my classes. They don't know what they want until they want it.
No teen wants to go first. They're all standing around watching what their peers are gonna do.
Gene sure does like to poll the teens.
Exactly. 18-24 is the young adult realm. I'm guessing he wasn't polling that group.
Teenage design tastes are fickle just as the moving from dance to dance or more fittingly hashtag to hashtag. I don't think Apple is looking to that demographic at all. It's pretty evident when every ? Watch is more expensive than the iPod Touch.
I think interest will spark once the watch is in actual circulation. Right now you can't get one and it looks like a few months before most people will have one delivered. Once production has ramped up and they see them in the wild teens will be interested. I expect the watch to be big during the holidays.
You are getting confused. Among young viewers means "what do young viewers watch". The relevant question is "what is the most common watcher of the show" (the mode)? Or more specifically "what is the most valuable watcher of the show in terms of ad dollars", which is 18-49.
No I'm not. I have clearly given you ratings that suggest the 12-18 group is also figuring in significantly into the ratings. Nobody said it was the top rated group within that demographic, only that that entire demographic scored highly in the ratings. Let's say 18-49 won the ratings, that doesn't mean that 12-18 didn't also rank highly. Why include 12-18 in 12-34 if it doesn't represent a sizable demographic?
Show me where it says 12-18 year olds don't watch Walking Dead or the Voice in any significant numbers. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.
... why would Fox want to air a family friendly version at an earlier timeslot if not to appeal to a younger demographic. Why would parents be upset with the TV-14 rating if their teenage kids weren't watching it?
And how long do you think this 17 year old kid has been watching the show?
Comments
"Teenage
designtastes are fickle ..."Fixed that for you
You're getting teen and 18-24 and 25-38 confused. Walking Dead is among the highest rated show in the 18-49 group. The Voice also targets 18-49.
No I'm not getting confused. Are you saying Walking Dead is not one of the highest rated teen shows? Nor the voice? Because if so, the trade publications disagree ...
http://www.wetpaint.com/walking-dead/articles/2014-01-03-most-popular-show-young-viewers
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/03/20/abc-familys-pretty-little-liars-season-3-finale-becomes-1st-series-in-tv-history-to-amass-over-1-million-total-airtime-tweets/174272/
http://variety.com/gallery/walking-dead-most-popular-cable-shows-among-young-viewers-duck-dynasty/
http://variety.com/2015/tv/ratings/ratings-nbcs-voice-dominates-ok-return-for-foxs-following-1201445198/
I've been saying this since Tim Cook first showed off the taptic engine. Once kids figure out they can communicate while leaving their iPhones in their pockets during class, there will be a run on these watches.
You laugh. That is *precisely* what they will do.
And as soon as the Watch contains integral GPS and at least a rudimentary cell capability for at least 911, parents will be getting them for their kids. Apple will have a lo-jack for your kid.
You laugh. That is *precisely* what they will do.
And as soon as the Watch contains integral GPS and at least a rudimentary cell capability for at least 911, parents will be getting them for their kids. Apple will have a lo-jack for your kid.
smart watches are already banned in my kids HS, from tests that is.
As for lo-jack for your kid, an iPhone already has gps.
You laugh. That is *precisely* what they will do.
And as soon as the Watch contains integral GPS and at least a rudimentary cell capability for at least 911, parents will be getting them for their kids. Apple will have a lo-jack for your kid.
I'm not laughing. I'm dead serious. But the GPS thing suddenly takes on new importance. That's exactly right, if the watch has GPS that could enable it to be tracked without an iPhone (of course your kids can always take it off). The question is, how will the signal get onto a network without the iPhone? Now of course, if there's some rudimentary cell service for 911 calling, that could likewise serve as a conduit. I have a Tagg GPS tracker for my dog, and it periodically checks in via a cellular network to report locations, which it also reports on demand.
I wonder even, since Apple has such a fascination with its own networks, if they couldn't also implement something like FireChat on the watch enabling it to transmit coordinates, or messages via any Apple product in range?
smart watches are already banned in my kids HS, from tests that is.
As for lo-jack for your kid, an iPhone already has gps.
Yep. But all current smartwatches require you look at them for info. Apple Watch can be put under your sock. I can see some kids suddenly paying attention in history class to the section on Vietnam and the US POWs learning the "tap code."
And the Find My iPhone function will lead parents right to where their kid dropped it. Or where an evildoer dumped it. IIRC, some person kickstarted a pair of sneakers with a lo-jack in them. And you can buy lo-jack tags for your pets now too. I suppose some teens might object to wearing a collar though.
Oh God I knew the Applelogists would fill the comments section.
Your taking Munster seriously? Really? This is the guy that still has delusions of an Apple Television. LOL. No one here has to apologize for apple either. They need no apology.
I'm not laughing. I'm dead serious. But the GPS thing suddenly takes on new importance. That's exactly right, if the watch has GPS that could enable it to be tracked without an iPhone (of course your kids can always take it off). The question is, how will the signal get onto a network without the iPhone? Now of course, if there's some rudimentary cell service for 911 calling, that could likewise serve as a conduit. I have a Tagg GPS tracker for my dog, and it periodically checks in via a cellular network to report locations, which it also reports on demand.
I wonder even, since Apple has such a fascination with its own networks, if they couldn't also implement something like FireChat on the watch enabling it to transmit coordinates, or messages via any Apple product in range?
Didn't mean to suggest you weren't serious. My bad, sorry.
I like the FireChat concept you describe. Comcast did sorta have a PR problem when they did something similar with their base stations. On the Apple devices there is more of a quid pro quo though - unlike the comcast model, Apple users get something immediate ans tangible by their use. Many comcast users never connect outside their houses.
Gruber's comments about tapic feedback on DaringFireBall was kinda interesting:
"Imagine:
You’re 16. You’re in school. You’re sitting in class. You have a crush on another student — you’ve fallen hard. You can’t stop thinking about them. You suspect the feelings are mutual — but you don’t know. You’re afraid to just come right out and ask, verbally — afraid of the crushing weight of rejection. But you both wear an Apple Watch. So you take a flyer and send a few taps. And you wait. Nothing in response. Dammit. Why are you so stupid? Whoa — a few taps are sent in return, along with a hand-drawn smiley face. You send more taps. You receive more taps back. This is it. You send your heartbeat. It is racing, thumping. Your crush sends their heartbeat back.
You’re flirting. Not through words. Not through speech. Physically flirting, by touch. And you’re not even in the same classroom. Maybe you don’t even go to the same school.
I’m not saying digital touch is only for teenagers. I’m not saying it’s only for flirting. But the scenario above exemplifies the ways that digital touch opens the door to forms of remote communication that most of us haven’t ever considered. Non-verbal, non-visual, physical communication across any distance. This could be something big."
No I'm not getting confused. Are you saying Walking Dead is not one of the highest rated teen shows? Nor the voice? Because if so, the trade publications disagree ...
You are getting confused. Among young viewers means "what do young viewers watch". The relevant question is "what is the most common watcher of the show" (the mode)? Or more specifically "what is the most valuable watcher of the show in terms of ad dollars", which is 18-49.
You could find that MacGyver is the most popular show among 100-105 year olds, but that doesn't mean that there's any sort of real audience.
http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2015/03/31/tv-ratings-broadcast-top-25-the-voice-tops-adults-18-49-ncis-wins-with-total-viewers-for-the-week-ending-march-29-2015/381512/
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/26/nbc-lures-back-viewers-with-the-voice-and-revolution/?_r=0
This thread is pretty much perfect troll fodder. As if these surveys ever fucking mean anything. Not a single normal consumer has used an Apple watch, and even if you go to the Apple Store you can't really experience one. This product will become more popular organically, through a network effect of seeing others wearing it, asking about it, then wanting and buying it.
The iPhone took 3 months to sell 1M. Now it sells 75M/qtr. The Apple Watch already has sold 1M.
Food for thought.
Mine is arriving over the summer.
I'm sorry, but variation of Bejeweled is not a killer app.
you must be lost. this site caters to Apple enthusiasts.
Doesn't matter. What matters is that Apple customers fill those Apple Stores. And they do, so keep trollin' in vain.
No teen wants to go first. They're all standing around watching what their peers are gonna do.
I think interest will spark once the watch is in actual circulation. Right now you can't get one and it looks like a few months before most people will have one delivered. Once production has ramped up and they see them in the wild teens will be interested. I expect the watch to be big during the holidays.
You are getting confused. Among young viewers means "what do young viewers watch". The relevant question is "what is the most common watcher of the show" (the mode)? Or more specifically "what is the most valuable watcher of the show in terms of ad dollars", which is 18-49.
No I'm not. I have clearly given you ratings that suggest the 12-18 group is also figuring in significantly into the ratings. Nobody said it was the top rated group within that demographic, only that that entire demographic scored highly in the ratings. Let's say 18-49 won the ratings, that doesn't mean that 12-18 didn't also rank highly. Why include 12-18 in 12-34 if it doesn't represent a sizable demographic?
Show me where it says 12-18 year olds don't watch Walking Dead or the Voice in any significant numbers. Otherwise, you're just blowing smoke.
This article certainly suggests there's an audience in the under 18 crowd ... http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/20/showbiz/tv/walking-dead-family-friendly/
... why would Fox want to air a family friendly version at an earlier timeslot if not to appeal to a younger demographic. Why would parents be upset with the TV-14 rating if their teenage kids weren't watching it?
And how long do you think this 17 year old kid has been watching the show?
http://www.inquisitr.com/1753381/the-walking-dead-cast-surprises-teen-battling-cancer-at-comic-con/
And how about these 10 year old fans routinely asking the shows composer for an autograph?
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/walking-dead-composer-kids-shouldnt-740250
And here we have The Walking Dead being nominated in the Teen Choice Awards, for best breakout show in 2011.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_The_Walking_Dead#Teen_Choice_Awards
Oh and here we have The Voice as a nominee as favorite reality show from the 2013 & 2014 Kids Choice awards:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Kids'_Choice_Awards#Favorite_TV_Show
And gee, here the Voice won best breakout series in 2010 on the Teen Choice Awards, and on and on ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teen_Choice_Award_for_Choice_Breakout_Series
But you seem to have much better handle on this than I do. I'm sure there are no notable numbers of 12-18 year kids watching either of those shows. /s