I wonder if any watch company execs will read this...
The watch industry is already all too familiar with being the poster child of Paradigm Shift victimization with the whole Timex story. They aren't likely to go through that twice.
The Apple Watch isn't the next iPhone or iPod.
I haven't worn a watch in 15 years and don't plan to any time again soon unless it's a fashion statement (and trust me, it won't be an Apple).
Most people don't wear watches anymore as cellphones, computers, displays, cars, children's toys, microwaves, tv's... you name it - have the time.
The watch is more of a fringe product like the Apple TV. Lots of competitors doing specific things a lot better - maybe not 'everything' as cohesive as the Apple Watch - but it's a watch. It's a fringe product.
Current sales numbers and market projections validate this point.
Apple needs to 'think bigger' and start taking on Google with the Glass and Driverless cars and Drone mail delivery.
Having a cool and high-tech 'buggy whip' doesn't make it any less irrelevant.
The Storm is proof that they did NOT ignore the iPhone threat. The took it very seriously. RIM was just incapable of creating a competing product.
True. also that they let Verizon pressure them to rush it out the door before it was a finalized, quality product means they didn't ha the internal design discipline needed to compete with Apple or be an apple like team.
Lets be realistic, there was nothing Blackberry or any other company could have done about combatting Apple.
Google seemed to do an ok job of it -- their engineers testified that once they saw the iPhone, they changed their design and product in order to be more like it. doing so saved their skins..
The Apple Watch isn't the next iPhone or iPod.
I haven't worn a watch in 15 years and don't plan to any time again soon unless it's a fashion statement (and trust me, it won't be an Apple).
Nor have I, stopped wearing watches twenty years ago. Until last month. Now I have an AW strapped to my wrist every day.
Most people don't wear watches anymore as cellphones, computers, displays, cars, children's toys, microwaves, tv's... you name it - have the time.
The watch is more of a fringe product like the Apple TV. Lots of competitors doing specific things a lot better - maybe not 'everything' as cohesive as the Apple Watch - but it's a watch. It's a fringe product.
some people never get it. Here we go: the watch is a generalist product. The things it does can be done better with various specialist products, but the fact that it does them in one device to a level that is "good enough" is its secret sauce. Same with the iPad and iPhone -- technically not as good as a feature phone with a long battery, or a blackberry with a keyboard, or a canon point and shoot camera, or an iPod with a huge hard drive....but it does all of those things good enough, in one device.
Current sales numbers and market projections validate this point.
Oh Jesus. Nobody knows the sales numbers. Nobody. But the estimates and guesses peg it at millions, far higher than the entire wearables market to date.
Apple needs to 'think bigger' and start taking on Google with the Glass and Driverless cars and Drone mail delivery.
nonsense. Google glass was a failure. Why? It's a specialist tool they tried pitching to the mass market. And drone delivery? What are you smoking?
The watch industry is already all too familiar with being the poster child of Paradigm Shift victimization with the whole Timex story. They aren't likely to go through that twice.
The Apple Watch isn't the next iPhone or iPod.
I haven't worn a watch in 15 years and don't plan to any time again soon unless it's a fashion statement (and trust me, it won't be an Apple).
Most people don't wear watches anymore as cellphones, computers, displays, cars, children's toys, microwaves, tv's... you name it - have the time.
The watch is more of a fringe product like the Apple TV. Lots of competitors doing specific things a lot better - maybe not 'everything' as cohesive as the Apple Watch - but it's a watch. It's a fringe product.
Current sales numbers and market projections validate this point.
Apple needs to 'think bigger' and start taking on Google with the Glass and Driverless cars and Drone mail delivery.
Having a cool and high-tech 'buggy whip' doesn't make it any less irrelevant.
I might suggest that making sweeping statements like "most" people don't wear watches anymore, is likely to be significantly off-base. Unless you're saying most people [you know], don't wear watches. Watch-wearers is still a big market, even if the smartphone has had an impact on watch wearing in general. They're not just for time keeping, because if they were, we would not have as many companies offering as many options for watch styles. Watches can be, for many people, a piece of jewelry or a statement of wealth or to show their penchant for technology (old or new). I don't wear a necklace or earrings (like I did in college 25 years ago) or any other bracelet, but my watch is always on my wrist when I'm awake...and sometimes when I sleep too.
I actually wear my Seiko automatic watch for all sorts of reasons, including time telling, the fact that it never needs a new battery or a "charge", is waterproof enough for me to not have to worry about swimming, rain, etc.. It's also one tough watch, being dropped, worn while chopping wood and wrenching on my cars, yet it's very sophisticated as it does not have a typical watch face and I've never seen anyone else with the same model (so it has some exclusivity to it as well). In fact, I've gotten compliments on it many times with people saying they've never seen anything like it. No, it's not a fine Swiss timepiece, but it's kept great time over the past 10 years and has required zero service. The sapphire lens is scratch-free, and the scratches on the stainless body and band are just reminders of the fact that I've worn the watch for things many people would never do wearing a watch or other jewelry.
I'm tempted to get an Apple Watch, but I know my Seiko will remain my main watch for all the above listed reasons.
"Then there was whichever of the two CEOs wasting his time thinking about buying a sports team. On top of any other lessons, number one is keep your eye on the ball ALL THE TIME"
If he was buying a football team he presumably *did* have his eye on the ball all the time - while he should have been minding the store at RIM.
Apple needs to 'think bigger' and start taking on Google with the Glass and Driverless cars and Drone mail delivery.
Driverless cars and drone mail delivery ? I think it’s clear you’re not an industry observer.
Apple has no plans to create a driverless car: it’s way outside their core competencies. Just think about it: who wants to be shepherded around at 45mph ? These things would only work in cities, and that’s why god invented taxis. Think too of the legal indemnities: one accident and you have the mother of all law suites.
Drone mail delivery is just a vapourware/publicity gimmick. Imagine the headlines: AMAZON DRONE CRASHES INTO SCHOOL PLAYGROUND or FAULTY GPS SENDS AMAZON DRONE INTO 747 FINAL APPROACH PATH, DESTROYING ENGINE.
And given that yanks have more guns than sense, they’d make a great alternative for hunting targets out of season...
They don't get it, even now; the virtual keyboard is and was as at least as easy to use as a dumb thumb keyboard and security was never an issue with the iPhone (it's only marketing that can 'sell' that and in reality Apple had security in mind from the start and was very focused to tick all the boxes of the security checklists deemed important by industry).
Driverless cars and drone mail delivery ? I think it’s clear you’re not an industry observer.
Apple has no plans to create a driverless car: it’s way outside their core competencies.
Apple had no foothold in the luxury jewellery/accessory market either, and yet…there they are.
Driverless cars are not an "if", but a "when", at this point. My gut says they'll be commonplace by 2040…but I'm not an industry observer.
I would be VERY surprised if Apple weren't actively researching this technology and figuring out how to make it work.
Drone mail delivery, I don't think will pan out. Drones being gun targets isn't really a problem in technologically advanced societies outside of the US, as guns are regulated, but I don't think it can be as efficient as it needs to be.
They don't get it, even now; the virtual keyboard is and was as at least as easy to use as a dumb thumb keyboard and security was never an issue with the iPhone (it's only marketing that can 'sell' that and in reality Apple had security in mind from the start and was very focused to tick all the boxes of the security checklists deemed important by industry).
Apple's basic approach was to err on the side of greater security, but aimed at private users — hence the sandboxing etc.
They didn't provide full device encryption until the iPhone 3GS, nor a Data Protection API until iOS 4/iPhone 4.
Driverless cars are not an "if", but a "when", at this point. My gut says they'll be commonplace by 2040…but I'm not an industry observer.
I would be VERY surprised if Apple weren't actively researching this technology and figuring out how to make it work.
Drone mail delivery, I don't think will pan out. Drones being gun targets isn't really a problem in technologically advanced societies outside of the US, as guns are regulated, but I don't think it can be as efficient as it needs to be.
I don’t disagree that driverless cars may happen in the distant future and in closely prescribed circumstances (in otherwise pedestrianised city centres, for example), and I agree that Apple are monitoring the technology. My point is that a car is such a leap from Apple’s core skills (unlike the ?Watch) that it is extremely unlikely to happen.
My comments about shooting down Amazon drones weren’t meant to be taken too seriously, but because of the inherent safety problems it would be insane for Amazon to deploy them in urban areas. (Apart from the safety angle, imagine if Amazon’s expensive drone lands in my garden by mistake: under UK law I can charge Amazon for its return, in the same way hot air ballooners have to pay farmers a release fee if they land in their fields. The legal/safety/practical implications are insurmountable).
In the Australian outback delivery drones might be practical, but I think their chief purpose is to get column inches of publicity in the non-tech media for Amazon.
The real truth is that there was nothing RIM could do when Apple decided to build a smartphone.
Not necessarily. This would have required a radical change at RIM, but they could have switched to a software focus much earlier than they did and partnered with Google on Android. Of course, then they would have become one of many Android OEMs.
The reality is that Apple was always going to cede the low end of the market, where volumes are much higher but profits much lower. Nokia used to dominate that realm. Then Samsung, and now companies like Xiaomi are aiming for it. Google provided the common OS in Android and since then there really have been no viable alternatives besides Android and iOS.
They don't get it, even now; the virtual keyboard is and was as at least as easy to use as a dumb thumb keyboard and security was never an issue with the iPhone (it's only marketing that can 'sell' that and in reality Apple had security in mind from the start and was very focused to tick all the boxes of the security checklists deemed important by industry).
To be clear, most processes on the original iOS (including user-facing applications) executed with root privileges, presumably aiding the very first jailbreak exploit, which arrived immediately after the iPhone's release. The sandbox appears to have been introduced some time later, probably along with the app store. (http://www.cnet.com/news/the-iphones-biggest-security-pitfall-all-applications-run-as-root/)
Apple had no foothold in the luxury jewellery/accessory market either, and yet…there they are.
Driverless cars are not an "if", but a "when", at this point. My gut says they'll be commonplace by 2040…but I'm not an industry observer.
I would be VERY surprised if Apple weren't actively researching this technology and figuring out how to make it work.
Drone mail delivery, I don't think will pan out. Drones being gun targets isn't really a problem in technologically advanced societies outside of the US, as guns are regulated, but I don't think it can be as efficient as it needs to be.
All we know about driverless cars is that they run fine in perfectly good conditions. When a company like Google tells you that they have never ever ever crashed, I feel that they have never ever ever been tested properly. Most of the reasons why you test is to catch the bugs, of course, and I don't think Google has produced perfect software in any of their products, certainly not in version 1.
For that reason , outside limited routes and sequestered roads deliberately designed for driverless cars, I don't see this taking off.
Google seemed to do an ok job of it -- their engineers testified that once they saw the iPhone, they changed their design and product in order to be more like it. doing so saved their skins..
They don't make any money off Android, and pretty much no one else does either. Sure, they have market share but that hasn't proven to be a very compelling metric when gauging business success.
The watch industry is already all too familiar with being the poster child of Paradigm Shift victimization with the whole Timex story. They aren't likely to go through that twice.
The Apple Watch isn't the next iPhone or iPod.
I haven't worn a watch in 15 years and don't plan to any time again soon unless it's a fashion statement (and trust me, it won't be an Apple).
Most people don't wear watches anymore as cellphones, computers, displays, cars, children's toys, microwaves, tv's... you name it - have the time.
The watch is more of a fringe product like the Apple TV. Lots of competitors doing specific things a lot better - maybe not 'everything' as cohesive as the Apple Watch - but it's a watch. It's a fringe product.
Current sales numbers and market projections validate this point.
Apple needs to 'think bigger' and start taking on Google with the Glass and Driverless cars and Drone mail delivery.
Having a cool and high-tech 'buggy whip' doesn't make it any less irrelevant.
Haha. you lament that no one wears watches yet you try to push Google Glass on people? Irony.
There's a lot wrong with this post, lets dissect it shall we?
Quote:
Just think about it: who wants to be shepherded around at 45mph ?
Obviously driverless cars limited to 45mph won't sell, but where do you get the notion that they will be slow? If anything, the improved reaction times of driverless cars will make the case for faster vehicles.
Quote:
These things would only work in cities, and that’s why god invented taxis.
Not really. Something like the Google automated car will start off in cities that are carefully mapped, but on the other hand there's the Tesla Model S autopilot that only does highway. As for your taxi nonsense, you realize taxis would be cheaper, roomier, and safer without the driver, right?
Quote:
Think too of the legal indemnities: one accident and you have the mother of all law suites.
This nonsense appears far too often. You will be easily able to buy insurance based on the driving record of your self-driving car. Obviously, that cost will be less because they will have a clearly better driving record before they are allowed on the road. Eventually, as their record improves, the insurance will be less and less until it is just rolled into the price of the vehicle.
Quote:
Drone mail delivery is just a vapourware/publicity gimmick
You finally said something right. Amazon drone delivery is nothing but a PR stunt, and won't happen anytime soon.
Comments
I wonder if any watch company execs will read this...
The watch industry is already all too familiar with being the poster child of Paradigm Shift victimization with the whole Timex story. They aren't likely to go through that twice.
The Apple Watch isn't the next iPhone or iPod.
I haven't worn a watch in 15 years and don't plan to any time again soon unless it's a fashion statement (and trust me, it won't be an Apple).
Most people don't wear watches anymore as cellphones, computers, displays, cars, children's toys, microwaves, tv's... you name it - have the time.
The watch is more of a fringe product like the Apple TV. Lots of competitors doing specific things a lot better - maybe not 'everything' as cohesive as the Apple Watch - but it's a watch. It's a fringe product.
Current sales numbers and market projections validate this point.
Apple needs to 'think bigger' and start taking on Google with the Glass and Driverless cars and Drone mail delivery.
Having a cool and high-tech 'buggy whip' doesn't make it any less irrelevant.
Am using a BlackBerry Passport, and can run all Android apks on it in addition to BlackBerry apps.
True. also that they let Verizon pressure them to rush it out the door before it was a finalized, quality product means they didn't ha the internal design discipline needed to compete with Apple or be an apple like team.
Google seemed to do an ok job of it -- their engineers testified that once they saw the iPhone, they changed their design and product in order to be more like it. doing so saved their skins..
Nor have I, stopped wearing watches twenty years ago. Until last month. Now I have an AW strapped to my wrist every day.
some people never get it. Here we go: the watch is a generalist product. The things it does can be done better with various specialist products, but the fact that it does them in one device to a level that is "good enough" is its secret sauce. Same with the iPad and iPhone -- technically not as good as a feature phone with a long battery, or a blackberry with a keyboard, or a canon point and shoot camera, or an iPod with a huge hard drive....but it does all of those things good enough, in one device.
Oh Jesus. Nobody knows the sales numbers. Nobody. But the estimates and guesses peg it at millions, far higher than the entire wearables market to date.
nonsense. Google glass was a failure. Why? It's a specialist tool they tried pitching to the mass market. And drone delivery? What are you smoking?
The watch industry is already all too familiar with being the poster child of Paradigm Shift victimization with the whole Timex story. They aren't likely to go through that twice.
The Apple Watch isn't the next iPhone or iPod.
I haven't worn a watch in 15 years and don't plan to any time again soon unless it's a fashion statement (and trust me, it won't be an Apple).
Most people don't wear watches anymore as cellphones, computers, displays, cars, children's toys, microwaves, tv's... you name it - have the time.
The watch is more of a fringe product like the Apple TV. Lots of competitors doing specific things a lot better - maybe not 'everything' as cohesive as the Apple Watch - but it's a watch. It's a fringe product.
Current sales numbers and market projections validate this point.
Apple needs to 'think bigger' and start taking on Google with the Glass and Driverless cars and Drone mail delivery.
Having a cool and high-tech 'buggy whip' doesn't make it any less irrelevant.
I might suggest that making sweeping statements like "most" people don't wear watches anymore, is likely to be significantly off-base. Unless you're saying most people [you know], don't wear watches. Watch-wearers is still a big market, even if the smartphone has had an impact on watch wearing in general. They're not just for time keeping, because if they were, we would not have as many companies offering as many options for watch styles. Watches can be, for many people, a piece of jewelry or a statement of wealth or to show their penchant for technology (old or new). I don't wear a necklace or earrings (like I did in college 25 years ago) or any other bracelet, but my watch is always on my wrist when I'm awake...and sometimes when I sleep too.
I actually wear my Seiko automatic watch for all sorts of reasons, including time telling, the fact that it never needs a new battery or a "charge", is waterproof enough for me to not have to worry about swimming, rain, etc.. It's also one tough watch, being dropped, worn while chopping wood and wrenching on my cars, yet it's very sophisticated as it does not have a typical watch face and I've never seen anyone else with the same model (so it has some exclusivity to it as well). In fact, I've gotten compliments on it many times with people saying they've never seen anything like it. No, it's not a fine Swiss timepiece, but it's kept great time over the past 10 years and has required zero service. The sapphire lens is scratch-free, and the scratches on the stainless body and band are just reminders of the fact that I've worn the watch for things many people would never do wearing a watch or other jewelry.
I'm tempted to get an Apple Watch, but I know my Seiko will remain my main watch for all the above listed reasons.
If he was buying a football team he presumably *did* have his eye on the ball all the time - while he should have been minding the store at RIM.
Sorry.
BlackBerry made fun of the iPhone when released. There you are now.
Apple needs to 'think bigger' and start taking on Google with the Glass and Driverless cars and Drone mail delivery.
Driverless cars and drone mail delivery ? I think it’s clear you’re not an industry observer.
Apple has no plans to create a driverless car: it’s way outside their core competencies. Just think about it: who wants to be shepherded around at 45mph ? These things would only work in cities, and that’s why god invented taxis. Think too of the legal indemnities: one accident and you have the mother of all law suites.
Drone mail delivery is just a vapourware/publicity gimmick. Imagine the headlines: AMAZON DRONE CRASHES INTO SCHOOL PLAYGROUND or FAULTY GPS SENDS AMAZON DRONE INTO 747 FINAL APPROACH PATH, DESTROYING ENGINE.
And given that yanks have more guns than sense, they’d make a great alternative for hunting targets out of season...
Driverless cars and drone mail delivery ? I think it’s clear you’re not an industry observer.
Apple has no plans to create a driverless car: it’s way outside their core competencies.
Apple had no foothold in the luxury jewellery/accessory market either, and yet…there they are.
Driverless cars are not an "if", but a "when", at this point. My gut says they'll be commonplace by 2040…but I'm not an industry observer.
I would be VERY surprised if Apple weren't actively researching this technology and figuring out how to make it work.
Drone mail delivery, I don't think will pan out. Drones being gun targets isn't really a problem in technologically advanced societies outside of the US, as guns are regulated, but I don't think it can be as efficient as it needs to be.
They don't get it, even now; the virtual keyboard is and was as at least as easy to use as a dumb thumb keyboard and security was never an issue with the iPhone (it's only marketing that can 'sell' that and in reality Apple had security in mind from the start and was very focused to tick all the boxes of the security checklists deemed important by industry).
Apple's basic approach was to err on the side of greater security, but aimed at private users — hence the sandboxing etc.
They didn't provide full device encryption until the iPhone 3GS, nor a Data Protection API until iOS 4/iPhone 4.
Driverless cars are not an "if", but a "when", at this point. My gut says they'll be commonplace by 2040…but I'm not an industry observer.
I would be VERY surprised if Apple weren't actively researching this technology and figuring out how to make it work.
Drone mail delivery, I don't think will pan out. Drones being gun targets isn't really a problem in technologically advanced societies outside of the US, as guns are regulated, but I don't think it can be as efficient as it needs to be.
I don’t disagree that driverless cars may happen in the distant future and in closely prescribed circumstances (in otherwise pedestrianised city centres, for example), and I agree that Apple are monitoring the technology. My point is that a car is such a leap from Apple’s core skills (unlike the ?Watch) that it is extremely unlikely to happen.
My comments about shooting down Amazon drones weren’t meant to be taken too seriously, but because of the inherent safety problems it would be insane for Amazon to deploy them in urban areas. (Apart from the safety angle, imagine if Amazon’s expensive drone lands in my garden by mistake: under UK law I can charge Amazon for its return, in the same way hot air ballooners have to pay farmers a release fee if they land in their fields. The legal/safety/practical implications are insurmountable).
In the Australian outback delivery drones might be practical, but I think their chief purpose is to get column inches of publicity in the non-tech media for Amazon.
Not necessarily. This would have required a radical change at RIM, but they could have switched to a software focus much earlier than they did and partnered with Google on Android. Of course, then they would have become one of many Android OEMs.
The reality is that Apple was always going to cede the low end of the market, where volumes are much higher but profits much lower. Nokia used to dominate that realm. Then Samsung, and now companies like Xiaomi are aiming for it. Google provided the common OS in Android and since then there really have been no viable alternatives besides Android and iOS.
They don't get it, even now; the virtual keyboard is and was as at least as easy to use as a dumb thumb keyboard and security was never an issue with the iPhone (it's only marketing that can 'sell' that and in reality Apple had security in mind from the start and was very focused to tick all the boxes of the security checklists deemed important by industry).
To be clear, most processes on the original iOS (including user-facing applications) executed with root privileges, presumably aiding the very first jailbreak exploit, which arrived immediately after the iPhone's release. The sandbox appears to have been introduced some time later, probably along with the app store. (http://www.cnet.com/news/the-iphones-biggest-security-pitfall-all-applications-run-as-root/)
Apple had no foothold in the luxury jewellery/accessory market either, and yet…there they are.
Driverless cars are not an "if", but a "when", at this point. My gut says they'll be commonplace by 2040…but I'm not an industry observer.
I would be VERY surprised if Apple weren't actively researching this technology and figuring out how to make it work.
Drone mail delivery, I don't think will pan out. Drones being gun targets isn't really a problem in technologically advanced societies outside of the US, as guns are regulated, but I don't think it can be as efficient as it needs to be.
All we know about driverless cars is that they run fine in perfectly good conditions. When a company like Google tells you that they have never ever ever crashed, I feel that they have never ever ever been tested properly. Most of the reasons why you test is to catch the bugs, of course, and I don't think Google has produced perfect software in any of their products, certainly not in version 1.
For that reason , outside limited routes and sequestered roads deliberately designed for driverless cars, I don't see this taking off.
Google seemed to do an ok job of it -- their engineers testified that once they saw the iPhone, they changed their design and product in order to be more like it. doing so saved their skins..
They don't make any money off Android, and pretty much no one else does either. Sure, they have market share but that hasn't proven to be a very compelling metric when gauging business success.
Haha. you lament that no one wears watches yet you try to push Google Glass on people? Irony.
I've been wearing a watch for 25-30 years.
There's a lot wrong with this post, lets dissect it shall we?
Obviously driverless cars limited to 45mph won't sell, but where do you get the notion that they will be slow? If anything, the improved reaction times of driverless cars will make the case for faster vehicles.
Not really. Something like the Google automated car will start off in cities that are carefully mapped, but on the other hand there's the Tesla Model S autopilot that only does highway. As for your taxi nonsense, you realize taxis would be cheaper, roomier, and safer without the driver, right?
This nonsense appears far too often. You will be easily able to buy insurance based on the driving record of your self-driving car. Obviously, that cost will be less because they will have a clearly better driving record before they are allowed on the road. Eventually, as their record improves, the insurance will be less and less until it is just rolled into the price of the vehicle.
You finally said something right. Amazon drone delivery is nothing but a PR stunt, and won't happen anytime soon.