Can you explain that? I could definitely see that band being used in conjunction with the data port.
The pictures I've seen that show the port indicate it's covered with a metal cover and the Watch does not come with a tool to open it. In addition, once uncovered it may become susceptible to dirt or water damage. I don't foresee any user access to this under normal circumstances and certainly not for a device where users may be switching out bands quite often.
Apple won't allow access because of users. Not because of security. Right now you can mount replaceable bands "right side up" or "upside down" depending on which wrist you wear your watch, right? That wouldn't work with some strap that must somehow manage to click into and connect with a recessed port that is protected from access.
Can you explain that? I could definitely see that band being used in conjunction with the data port.
The data port is not as much of an issue as the power. The data can be sent by Bluetooth as long as the wristband has power. Although it would be nice to get the power through that port, the Watch is already a little weak in the battery department. Maybe the wristband has a battery that can be charged wirelessly as well. Sounds like kind of hassle though unless the wristband has its own charger and you could charge both watch and the band at the same time. One advantage of that arrangement though is that both halves of the wristband could be used for sensors.
The data port is not as much of an issue as the power. The data can be sent by Bluetooth as long as the wristband has power. Although it would be nice to get the power through that port, the Watch is already a little weak in the battery department. Maybe the wristband has a battery that can be charged wirelessly as well. Sounds like kind of hassle though unless the wristband has its own charger and you could charge both watch and the band at the same time. One advantage of that arrangement though is that both halves of the wristband could be used for sensors.
A Bluettoth band? Maybe from a third party. I can't see Apple going that route.
The pictures I've seen that show the port indicate it's covered with a metal cover and the Watch does not come with a tool to open it. In addition, once uncovered it may become susceptible to dirt or water damage. I don't foresee any user access to this under normal circumstances and certainly not for a device where users may be switching out bands quite often.
I don't think that's a major hurdle. The port exists so water, dust, sweat, oil and anything else can get in there since it's not hermaphroditically sealed and placing something else over it the connects squarely with the pins could probably make the seal tighter. Plus, the real sealant is on the inside of the casing.
If ti's about getting the port cover off, why can't Apple do that for users or offer a tool to pop it off that comes with the smart band?
The data port is not as much of an issue as the power. The data can be sent by Bluetooth as long as the wristband has power. Although it would be nice to get the power through that port, the Watch is already a little weak in the battery department. Maybe the wristband has a battery that can be charged wirelessly as well. Sounds like kind of hassle though unless the wristband has its own charger and you could charge both watch and the band at the same time. One advantage of that arrangement though is that both halves of the wristband could be used for sensors.
BT uses it's own power and if the smart band isn't using the watch's charging ring to power itself you end up with what I'd call an unfortunate solution where both the watch and the smar-tband need to be charged independently. You also then have to remove the watch daily when power being shared over the smart band could also include an additional battery as well additional sensors. Of course, that assumes the "diagnostic port" can also be used to share power which I haven't seen confirmed or denied.
Since certain medical devices need to be approved, and/or require a prescription, the solution is quite simple:
If you want to use an advanced medical band, then Apple will install it for you. They'll remove the data port and install the band correctly. Further, they could even "activate" something in the Watch software to make the port usable with the appropriate band (meaning an aftermarket company couldn't make bands and sell them to people for self-installation).
While I agree there could be issues with giving people access to this port, I just can't see Apple placing such a port in the location it is without having given thought to future uses down the road.
There is a wrist worn device called a GlucoWatch which does measure blood sugar non-invasively, but it is a prescription device. Measuring glucose through the skin is not usually intended as a replacement for finger stick meters. It is used mostly to chart trends. For the Watch to measure glucose and also blood pressure, one would have to keep the wristband quite tight which could be uncomfortable for the fashion or casual user. Not just a nice extra feature but something for people who have a serious medical condition.
Blood measurement including glucose is the holy grail, but I can't see that being measures through a loose wristband. Some kind of third party sensor, perhaps. What happened to Google's contact lenses?
Woohoo! Now my watch will confirm that I am alive!
More seriously, monitoring vitals and location will be great for the chronically ill and elderly, and an Apple Watch/iPhone system would probably cost effective versus current solutions (which are relatively primitive). Check out Healthsense, they are a leader in this area.
Can you explain that? I could definitely see that band being used in conjunction with the data port.
From the moment I learned about the existence of th sport I had the feeling that it must serve a purpose that is more than diagnostics.
Maybe that was the plan all along, considering the challenges related to packaging and the fact that different sensors require different contacts. Plus the potential ability to buy specific wrists that serve a tailored purpose, such as glucose monitoring, which may neb important for some users, but not at all to others.
I have this dream about the iWatch. The band could be where certain sensor are incorporated. So a diabetic would buy the iWatch body/face with the diabetic sensor band. That band might cost a pretty penny and be subsidized by insurance. A fitness junkie or athlete buys the sports band. Someone who merely wants an iWatch for its notifications capabilities and ability to run their iPhone Apps remotely would get the band with no special sensors. And some folks will get multiple bands, sports band for the daytime, dress band for evening, different colors, etc. and perhaps all the bands incorporate the battery, so when you switch bands you get a full charge (presumably your extra bands are stored atop your included inductive charger).
Comments
A highly plausible rumor, and a brilliant move by Apple.
I don't find it remotely plausible. A band that can be replaced by users will not have access to that data port. This rumor is a bust.
Yeah, Apple sucks at security...
/s
The pictures I've seen that show the port indicate it's covered with a metal cover and the Watch does not come with a tool to open it. In addition, once uncovered it may become susceptible to dirt or water damage. I don't foresee any user access to this under normal circumstances and certainly not for a device where users may be switching out bands quite often.
(I hate to link to the Verge, but...) http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/4/8543033/apple-watch-hidden-port-charging-battery-strap
Apple won't allow access because of users. Not because of security. Right now you can mount replaceable bands "right side up" or "upside down" depending on which wrist you wear your watch, right? That wouldn't work with some strap that must somehow manage to click into and connect with a recessed port that is protected from access.
Not gonna happen. No way.
Can you explain that? I could definitely see that band being used in conjunction with the data port.
The data port is not as much of an issue as the power. The data can be sent by Bluetooth as long as the wristband has power. Although it would be nice to get the power through that port, the Watch is already a little weak in the battery department. Maybe the wristband has a battery that can be charged wirelessly as well. Sounds like kind of hassle though unless the wristband has its own charger and you could charge both watch and the band at the same time. One advantage of that arrangement though is that both halves of the wristband could be used for sensors.
A Bluettoth band? Maybe from a third party. I can't see Apple going that route.
A Bluettoth band? Maybe from a third party. I can't see Apple going that route.
Perhaps but if you are going to measure body temperature it would likely need to be away from the watch due to the heat generated from the device.
I don't think that's a major hurdle. The port exists so water, dust, sweat, oil and anything else can get in there since it's not hermaphroditically sealed and placing something else over it the connects squarely with the pins could probably make the seal tighter. Plus, the real sealant is on the inside of the casing.
If ti's about getting the port cover off, why can't Apple do that for users or offer a tool to pop it off that comes with the smart band?
BT uses it's own power and if the smart band isn't using the watch's charging ring to power itself you end up with what I'd call an unfortunate solution where both the watch and the smar-tband need to be charged independently. You also then have to remove the watch daily when power being shared over the smart band could also include an additional battery as well additional sensors. Of course, that assumes the "diagnostic port" can also be used to share power which I haven't seen confirmed or denied.
Since certain medical devices need to be approved, and/or require a prescription, the solution is quite simple:
If you want to use an advanced medical band, then Apple will install it for you. They'll remove the data port and install the band correctly. Further, they could even "activate" something in the Watch software to make the port usable with the appropriate band (meaning an aftermarket company couldn't make bands and sell them to people for self-installation).
While I agree there could be issues with giving people access to this port, I just can't see Apple placing such a port in the location it is without having given thought to future uses down the road.
Well if true this would be a good reason why the current bands might not fit 2nd generation watches depending on what's involved.
Why? This sounds like a way for Apple to make improvements to the watch without having to release a new watch every year.
Edit -- partial answer to my own question http://www.diabetes.co.uk/news/2015/jun/google-patents-blood-glucose-measuring-contact-lens-98878153.html
https://www.novartis.com/news/media-releases/novartis-license-google-smart-lens-technology
By the way that former Google Life Sciences segment has been spun out into its own company.
Blood pressure???
Pretty good indication this is horse doo...
THIS JUST IN:
Samsung said to be developing line of "S Straps" to take advantage of the hidden port... err, wait...
But anyway, the mystery port plot thickens...
It's great that Apple had the insights to implement this for current watch owners.
Now that the rumor might have even a shred of fact, bet that Samsung is racing to copy, uhm.. I mean... "innovate" their own version.
Woohoo! Now my watch will confirm that I am alive!
More seriously, monitoring vitals and location will be great for the chronically ill and elderly, and an Apple Watch/iPhone system would probably cost effective versus current solutions (which are relatively primitive). Check out Healthsense, they are a leader in this area.
Its own company that will be reporting independently to the SEC or just a company under the Alphabet umbrella?
Can you explain that? I could definitely see that band being used in conjunction with the data port.
From the moment I learned about the existence of th sport I had the feeling that it must serve a purpose that is more than diagnostics.
Maybe that was the plan all along, considering the challenges related to packaging and the fact that different sensors require different contacts. Plus the potential ability to buy specific wrists that serve a tailored purpose, such as glucose monitoring, which may neb important for some users, but not at all to others.
Predicted, by me, in April of last year. Happy to see this might be in the pipeline...
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/178071/apple-to-sell-two-sizes-of-iwatch-with-flexible-amoled-displays-this-fall-prices-to-reach-thousands-of-dollars#post_2513582