Actually that's exactly how things are and how they should be. No one has to prove non-existence. It's existence that has to be proven. This is why it's obvious that there is no god.
This comment section is exploding this morning. I don't want to go off topic too much, but about the whole god thing.. I think it's different than your example. I think the only one suffering from folding your arms and saying you won't believe there's a God until someone proves it is yourself. I personally think God is obvious, and we would have to disprove him. Here's why.. There's stuff. Where'd the stuff come from? The end.
Or maybe in your mind, everything is the way it is because it is the way it is. Planets circle the sun because they should. Gravity keeps cars driving on the ground because it's the law. Space exists because it's there.
I read the article, I don't see how the Watch continues the theme of giving everyone access to computers and thereby expanding human consciousness. In fact it seems like their entire design focus (Short Look, Glance, Lynch says: "You’re in the moment; just send it.") was on quick interations.
Well, "in the moment," is the opposite of deep conceptual thought. Understanding requires that you see a pattern, and that requires time to pass, so that multiple examples can happen and you can see their similarities and differences. A device that encourages you to stay in the moment discourages these kind of linkages, therefore discourages understanding, and far from raising consciousness, keeps it at the basic level. So this device is most definitely not a continuation of Bicycle for the Mind.
Bicycle for the Mind doesn't mean you have to be always in deep conceptual thoughts. That would be funny and pretentious. Plenty of people buy computers just to play mindless video games, or surf the web. That's why Apple also sell Computers for the Rest of Us. ^_^
The Watch is a different form factor. It's more accessible and facilitates quick access. Quick access doesn't mean discourage understanding. It's about efficiency. The user could be an expert in certain profession, and prefers to fulfill ad hoc his computing needs quickly.
Showing up in high fashion world is a natural extension. Apple always go the extra mile. If it's about Wearables, the fruit company will do all the homework to understand all the user nuances and make technologies invisible and fit in. After all, it is a diverse world. A Mac is for everyone from children, seniors, handicaps, LBGT folks, doctors, teachers, etc. to fashionistas. Being rich or trendy doesn't exclude you from Apple. We are a diverse lot.
I don't think those are $49. They look to be Apple Watch Edition sport bands with gold pins.
You can tell? I blew up the picture and it is metallic pixelated blob.
I said look like and not they are. The colors of the blobs look like the edition gold colors and not stainless. Plus those would be edition customers. I will have to look at the watch she got. Pretty sure if Mr Ive brings you an edition watch and let's you choose a band, it will be an edition band. Check he Instagram as there is a couple more pics and comments.
I'm not one of those people who stares at a WWDC logo and tries to divine what new things might be announced, or writes blog entries about hidden clues in keynote announcements. But I can certainly psychoanalyze myself: something just feels vaguely uncomfortable. A hunch, woman's intuition, I don't know, but it's there. And it seems like I'm not the only one, but I'm not drawing a conclusion from it. It just *feels* different, and not in an agreeable way.
If this his event was a stupid Bunga Bunga party, I'd agree with you, but this seems to be more "friends" and journalists kind of marketing event.
That said, I don't like the term socialite - it comes off as a term for privileged people who don't have a job or take care of their kids.
I said look like and not they are. The colors of the blobs look like the edition gold colors and not stainless. Plus those would be edition customers. I will have to look at the watch she got. Pretty sure if Mr Ive brings you an edition watch and let's you choose a band, it will be an edition band. Check he Instagram as there is a couple more pics and comments.
No way all of those are edition bsnds. One of the bands is orange another is yellow. Apple is not going to sell a gold watch with bright yellow and orange bands.
If this his event was a stupid Bunga Bunga party, I'd agree with you, <span style="line-height:1.4em;">but this seems to be more "friends" and journalists kind of marketing event. </span>
That said, I don't like the term socialite - it comes off as a term for privileged people who don't have a job or take care of their kids.
And an event that Apple did not publicize in any way. The only reason we're talking about it is because of photos that showed up on Instagram.
And an event that Apple did not publicize in any way
I think they did about a week ago, tho somewhat exclusively. In fact Ive was quoted at the time as saying 'Salone del Mobile has such a deep-rooted history of embracing excellence in design so I'm particularly excited to celebrate our newest and most personal product, alongside our friends and fellow designers, at this special event.'
Envy is alive and well. Jeez, it's a small event, not being promoted, with some watches involved. At the very least these people probably all used iPhones and will actually at least consider using the Watch, unlike when Microsoft was giving away Xbox 360's to people like Paris Hilton at the launch party in 2005.
I don't think any of us have enough info to be sure who is written all over this. Logic says it's not her, because she is VP of retail stores. At Burberry she was CEO, and thus able to do any stunt needed for the company.
This event may have Schiller with input from Newson, Ive and maybe Ahrendts written all over it in my opinion. People seem too quick to blame Ahrendts for Apple's Watch/fashion strategy. There's more evidence to suppose that Ive is the ultimate driving force behind it.
I think the big issue is that the attention and publicity this event is getting does not fit into the original DNA of Apple. That's why for some people is "off putting".
Steve did not allow a lot of high profile publicity, but Tim does. The irony is that as Apple employees, you're supposed to shun a lot of attention.
So to sum up, new bands are cool, hobnobbing with the elite, maybe not so much.
I think they did about a week ago, tho somewhat exclusively. In fact Ive was quoted at the time as saying 'Salone del Mobile has such a deep-rooted history of embracing excellence in design so I'm particularly excited to celebrate our newest and most personal product, alongside our friends and fellow designers, at this special event.'
It's a trade event. Meant as a platform to share ideas, get feedback, and discuss businesses in the design industry. Not purely high fashion. It's a design centric forum. Your quote says as much.
I read the article, I don't see how the Watch continues the theme of giving everyone access to computers and thereby expanding human consciousness. In fact it seems like their entire design focus (Short Look, Glance, Lynch says: "You’re in the moment; just send it.") was on quick interations.
Well, "in the moment," is the opposite of deep conceptual thought. Understanding requires that you see a pattern, and that requires time to pass, so that multiple examples can happen and you can see their similarities and differences. A device that encourages you to stay in the moment discourages these kind of linkages, therefore discourages understanding, and far from raising consciousness, keeps it at the basic level. So this device is most definitely not a continuation of Bicycle for the Mind.
Sure it is. What is a bicycle? It is a tool that makes it more efficient to get somewhere. That is all it is. It is not the be-all end-all. The Apple Watch reduces friction to employing the tool in your pocket (the iPhone) more efficiently. That is all it is.
I think the big issue is that the attention and publicity this event is getting does not fit into the original DNA of Apple. That's why for some people is "off putting".
Steve did not allow a lot of high profile publicity, but Tim does. The irony is that as Apple employees, you're supposed to shun a lot of attention.
So to sum up, new bands are cool, hobnobbing with the elite, maybe not so much.
Not much different from photographing with Obama and rock stars in the past. These are rock stars and patrons in the fashion world at a design show.
Lisa Jackson was photographed in green environment events. They even announced a new solar plant in China this week. Read somewhere it's near Tibet, which should be fortuitous for the folks living there. They are losing young people to the cities fast.
Tim was photographed in Palo Alto Apple Store, interviewed with various press recently, and also openly criticized an unfair labor law.
We will likely see them pop up in different places. It doesn't have to always align with you. their DNA is about design and product. People like Craig F., Tim C., and Phil S. are not even well dressed by fashion world standards. And they don't mind getting photographed in their own clothes.
Adding focus on green environment, staff diversity, and being trendy are just additional capabilities. Their development, logistics and manufacturing are processing the new challenges as we speak.
It's a trade event. Meant as a platform to share ideas, get feedback, and discuss businesses in the design industry. Not purely high fashion. It's a design centric forum. Your quote says as much.
I think the big issue is that the attention and publicity this event is getting does not fit into the original DNA of Apple. That's why for some people is "off putting".
Steve did not allow a lot of high profile publicity, but Tim does. The irony is that as Apple employees, you're supposed to shun a lot of attention.
So to sum up, new bands are cool, hobnobbing with the elite, maybe not so much.
And so it was, like you say.
But suppose Apple has a new role to play now that requires it to expand its mindshare into new spheres of influence? Not only upward into fashion, for example, but outward into hip-hop?
In other words, the global electronic mind-amplification business mandates full global coverage. Apple only has to keep its motives "pure," as Steve said, and "just make great products for people." Old timers will be unhappy at every step of the expansion. The Watches sure look good, though, and Beats headphones are going to improve.
To me Apple Watch is the most egalitarian product Apple has ever released. The $349 Sport Watch has the exact same capabilities as the $10K Edition Watch. Apple will sell more watches in one month than all of Android Wear combined in one year. And that's partly because of marketing events like this. Jony Ive gave singer Sam Smith a watch. He posted a picture of it on Instagram. The picture got over 140K views and 1600 comments. That's esentially free marketing. The kind of marketing nobody else could buy.
I understand that point of view and there is certainly marketing value in having celebs wear/use your products, but I have to agree with those who feel that this just doesn't smell right. It's saying that "if you're a super-rich member of the elite, we're going to hand these expensive devices out like candy even though you could actually afford to buy one, but if you're a regular Joe, get on line and pay the money". I feel like it's catering to the 1%.
And that photo of someone picking out a band reminds me of the scene in "The Godfather" (or maybe "Godfather II") where they're passing jewels around the table.
Personally, if Apple is going to hand out watches as a marketing campaign, I'd rather see them hand them out to up-and-coming music or visual artists, scientists, engineers, writers, performers, volunteer doctors, people who build schools in poor countries, etc. - people who are highly creative and/or actively socially conscious, but who don't yet have much money. Then Apple could do stories on how those people use the watch for some good, not just giving the watch to some Euro-trash model who will probably trade it for a bit of coke anyway or shove it in the drawer when they're released to the masses and no longer super-hip to wear.
I understand that point of view and there is certainly marketing value in having celebs wear/use your products, but I have to agree with those who feel that this just doesn't smell right. It's saying that "if you're a super-rich member of the elite, we're going to hand these expensive devices out like candy even though you could actually afford to buy one, but if you're a regular Joe, get on line and pay the money". I feel like it's catering to the 1%.
And that photo of someone picking out a band reminds me of the scene in "The Godfather" (or maybe "Godfather II") where they're passing jewels around the table.
Personally, if Apple is going to hand out watches as a marketing campaign, I'd rather see them hand them out to up-and-coming music or visual artists, scientists, engineers, writers, performers, volunteer doctors, people who build schools in poor countries, etc. - people who are highly creative and/or actively socially conscious, but who don't yet have much money. Then Apple could do stories on how those people use the watch for some good, not just giving the watch to some Euro-trash model who will probably trade it for a bit of coke anyway or shove it in the drawer when they're released to the masses and no longer super-hip to wear.
Well...
I reckon Apple DO give out free watches to "up-and-coming music or visual artists, scientists, engineers, writers, performers, volunteer doctors, people who build schools in poor countries, etc." These people may be working with Apple on HealthKit, ResearchKit, HomeKit and whatever KIt. They may be under NDA. Secondly, these up-and-coming people may be rich too. Should Apple take the Watch away from them ?
In fact, I see a common mistake repeated here. Folks who show up in expensive clothes are not necessarily rich. They may be heavily in debt, or those are rented/borrowed/sponsored. The folks in the Italian design show are people working in the design industry. There may be influential people there. In addition, these rich people can be *more* hardworking and talented than your average Joe. Should Apple take the Watch away from them ?
People should just stop "discriminating" against the riches. I am from a poor family. My parents saved $$$ to buy me a Mac decades ago. I wrote software on it and have a good job now. I don't hate or fear the rich people. A few photographs don't scare me (Am I supposed to hate or fear them ?). The way I see it: With Apple going into the fashion world, it would mean that the exchange is bilateral. Apple learn from and influence them. They learn from and influence Apple back. In the process, the rest of us will have lot's of opportunities.
As for how people use the watch for good, I think we should wait for the watches to be out first. :-D
Right now, you can go check out Christy Turlington's blog. The app developers are working feverishly on watch apps. We should be able to see them on the watches in a few weeks' time.
Hopefully it will be over after the official Releas. Rich people like to feel special and pamper. So I understand apple right now. I just hope it doesn't become the norm.
Are you kidding? This is just the beginning. Apple has taken a giant step into a completely different sandbox from where they started. And unless Apple completely redefines the fashion industry, this kind of thing will continue as they compete for prestige and acceptance by the fashion elite. Fashion is defined by seasons and Apple will likely take steps to keep up with it, ensuring not only that their watch is technologically up to date, but on the cutting edge of fashion trends. Their actions of late are proof of their seriousness to be considered as part of the fashionable paragons, and that they will do what it takes to achieve that acceptance. Apple clearly doesn't want to be seen as a tech company that makes a premiere smartwatch, they seemingly want to be a prestige watchmaker in their own right.
Comments
This comment section is exploding this morning. I don't want to go off topic too much, but about the whole god thing.. I think it's different than your example. I think the only one suffering from folding your arms and saying you won't believe there's a God until someone proves it is yourself. I personally think God is obvious, and we would have to disprove him. Here's why.. There's stuff. Where'd the stuff come from? The end.
Or maybe in your mind, everything is the way it is because it is the way it is. Planets circle the sun because they should. Gravity keeps cars driving on the ground because it's the law. Space exists because it's there.
Bicycle for the Mind doesn't mean you have to be always in deep conceptual thoughts. That would be funny and pretentious. Plenty of people buy computers just to play mindless video games, or surf the web. That's why Apple also sell Computers for the Rest of Us. ^_^
The Watch is a different form factor. It's more accessible and facilitates quick access. Quick access doesn't mean discourage understanding. It's about efficiency. The user could be an expert in certain profession, and prefers to fulfill ad hoc his computing needs quickly.
Showing up in high fashion world is a natural extension. Apple always go the extra mile. If it's about Wearables, the fruit company will do all the homework to understand all the user nuances and make technologies invisible and fit in. After all, it is a diverse world. A Mac is for everyone from children, seniors, handicaps, LBGT folks, doctors, teachers, etc. to fashionistas. Being rich or trendy doesn't exclude you from Apple. We are a diverse lot.
I said look like and not they are. The colors of the blobs look like the edition gold colors and not stainless. Plus those would be edition customers. I will have to look at the watch she got. Pretty sure if Mr Ive brings you an edition watch and let's you choose a band, it will be an edition band. Check he Instagram as there is a couple more pics and comments.
I'm not one of those people who stares at a WWDC logo and tries to divine what new things might be announced, or writes blog entries about hidden clues in keynote announcements. But I can certainly psychoanalyze myself: something just feels vaguely uncomfortable. A hunch, woman's intuition, I don't know, but it's there. And it seems like I'm not the only one, but I'm not drawing a conclusion from it. It just *feels* different, and not in an agreeable way.
If this his event was a stupid Bunga Bunga party, I'd agree with you, but this seems to be more "friends" and journalists kind of marketing event.
That said, I don't like the term socialite - it comes off as a term for privileged people who don't have a job or take care of their kids.
No way all of those are edition bsnds. One of the bands is orange another is yellow. Apple is not going to sell a gold watch with bright yellow and orange bands.
And an event that Apple did not publicize in any way. The only reason we're talking about it is because of photos that showed up on Instagram.
I think the big issue is that the attention and publicity this event is getting does not fit into the original DNA of Apple. That's why for some people is "off putting".
Steve did not allow a lot of high profile publicity, but Tim does. The irony is that as Apple employees, you're supposed to shun a lot of attention.
So to sum up, new bands are cool, hobnobbing with the elite, maybe not so much.
4 days ago.
http://www.wallpaper.com/watches-and-jewellery/the-big-reveal-road-testing-the-apple-watch-at-salone-del-mobile-2015/8706#115564
It's a trade event. Meant as a platform to share ideas, get feedback, and discuss businesses in the design industry. Not purely high fashion. It's a design centric forum. Your quote says as much.
Design is Apple's DNA.
I read the article, I don't see how the Watch continues the theme of giving everyone access to computers and thereby expanding human consciousness. In fact it seems like their entire design focus (Short Look, Glance, Lynch says: "You’re in the moment; just send it.") was on quick interations.
Well, "in the moment," is the opposite of deep conceptual thought. Understanding requires that you see a pattern, and that requires time to pass, so that multiple examples can happen and you can see their similarities and differences. A device that encourages you to stay in the moment discourages these kind of linkages, therefore discourages understanding, and far from raising consciousness, keeps it at the basic level. So this device is most definitely not a continuation of Bicycle for the Mind.
Sure it is. What is a bicycle? It is a tool that makes it more efficient to get somewhere. That is all it is. It is not the be-all end-all. The Apple Watch reduces friction to employing the tool in your pocket (the iPhone) more efficiently. That is all it is.
Not much different from photographing with Obama and rock stars in the past. These are rock stars and patrons in the fashion world at a design show.
Lisa Jackson was photographed in green environment events. They even announced a new solar plant in China this week. Read somewhere it's near Tibet, which should be fortuitous for the folks living there. They are losing young people to the cities fast.
Tim was photographed in Palo Alto Apple Store, interviewed with various press recently, and also openly criticized an unfair labor law.
We will likely see them pop up in different places. It doesn't have to always align with you. their DNA is about design and product. People like Craig F., Tim C., and Phil S. are not even well dressed by fashion world standards. And they don't mind getting photographed in their own clothes.
Adding focus on green environment, staff diversity, and being trendy are just additional capabilities. Their development, logistics and manufacturing are processing the new challenges as we speak.
http://appleinsider.com/articles/15/04/14/apple-watch-to-make-special-appearance-at-2015-salone-del-mobile-in-milan
FWIW the previous reveal event was also fairly exclusive and staged in Paris.
And so it was, like you say.
But suppose Apple has a new role to play now that requires it to expand its mindshare into new spheres of influence? Not only upward into fashion, for example, but outward into hip-hop?
In other words, the global electronic mind-amplification business mandates full global coverage. Apple only has to keep its motives "pure," as Steve said, and "just make great products for people." Old timers will be unhappy at every step of the expansion. The Watches sure look good, though, and Beats headphones are going to improve.
Not just AI. Many Apple centric blog sites talked about it. It's their job to forward relevant news.
Some cited Tim Bradshow from the Wall magazine as the source.
To me Apple Watch is the most egalitarian product Apple has ever released. The $349 Sport Watch has the exact same capabilities as the $10K Edition Watch. Apple will sell more watches in one month than all of Android Wear combined in one year. And that's partly because of marketing events like this. Jony Ive gave singer Sam Smith a watch. He posted a picture of it on Instagram. The picture got over 140K views and 1600 comments. That's esentially free marketing. The kind of marketing nobody else could buy.
I understand that point of view and there is certainly marketing value in having celebs wear/use your products, but I have to agree with those who feel that this just doesn't smell right. It's saying that "if you're a super-rich member of the elite, we're going to hand these expensive devices out like candy even though you could actually afford to buy one, but if you're a regular Joe, get on line and pay the money". I feel like it's catering to the 1%.
And that photo of someone picking out a band reminds me of the scene in "The Godfather" (or maybe "Godfather II") where they're passing jewels around the table.
Personally, if Apple is going to hand out watches as a marketing campaign, I'd rather see them hand them out to up-and-coming music or visual artists, scientists, engineers, writers, performers, volunteer doctors, people who build schools in poor countries, etc. - people who are highly creative and/or actively socially conscious, but who don't yet have much money. Then Apple could do stories on how those people use the watch for some good, not just giving the watch to some Euro-trash model who will probably trade it for a bit of coke anyway or shove it in the drawer when they're released to the masses and no longer super-hip to wear.
Firearms president.... that's not really good to me.
Why not? Are you a hoplophobe?
I understand that point of view and there is certainly marketing value in having celebs wear/use your products, but I have to agree with those who feel that this just doesn't smell right. It's saying that "if you're a super-rich member of the elite, we're going to hand these expensive devices out like candy even though you could actually afford to buy one, but if you're a regular Joe, get on line and pay the money". I feel like it's catering to the 1%.
And that photo of someone picking out a band reminds me of the scene in "The Godfather" (or maybe "Godfather II") where they're passing jewels around the table.
Personally, if Apple is going to hand out watches as a marketing campaign, I'd rather see them hand them out to up-and-coming music or visual artists, scientists, engineers, writers, performers, volunteer doctors, people who build schools in poor countries, etc. - people who are highly creative and/or actively socially conscious, but who don't yet have much money. Then Apple could do stories on how those people use the watch for some good, not just giving the watch to some Euro-trash model who will probably trade it for a bit of coke anyway or shove it in the drawer when they're released to the masses and no longer super-hip to wear.
Well...
I reckon Apple DO give out free watches to "up-and-coming music or visual artists, scientists, engineers, writers, performers, volunteer doctors, people who build schools in poor countries, etc." These people may be working with Apple on HealthKit, ResearchKit, HomeKit and whatever KIt. They may be under NDA. Secondly, these up-and-coming people may be rich too. Should Apple take the Watch away from them ?
In fact, I see a common mistake repeated here. Folks who show up in expensive clothes are not necessarily rich. They may be heavily in debt, or those are rented/borrowed/sponsored. The folks in the Italian design show are people working in the design industry. There may be influential people there. In addition, these rich people can be *more* hardworking and talented than your average Joe. Should Apple take the Watch away from them ?
People should just stop "discriminating" against the riches. I am from a poor family. My parents saved $$$ to buy me a Mac decades ago. I wrote software on it and have a good job now. I don't hate or fear the rich people. A few photographs don't scare me (Am I supposed to hate or fear them ?). The way I see it: With Apple going into the fashion world, it would mean that the exchange is bilateral. Apple learn from and influence them. They learn from and influence Apple back. In the process, the rest of us will have lot's of opportunities.
As for how people use the watch for good, I think we should wait for the watches to be out first. :-D
Right now, you can go check out Christy Turlington's blog. The app developers are working feverishly on watch apps. We should be able to see them on the watches in a few weeks' time.