February: "the Swatch chief announced competitors to both Apple Watch and Apple Pay".
March: "He was quick to point out that Swatch is unlikely to bring a full-fledged "smartwatch" to market ..., we don't want to produce a reduced, minimized mobile phone on your wrist."
?So the latest statement is that they won't compete. And they shouldn't. An NFC capable watch, onto which I can load one credit card (the one I use 99.9% of the time), for $ 99, is a nice complementary product to the Apple watch.
How to confirm a purchase if there is no display?
How do you know if a transaction went through?
How would you know if you actually paid something TWICE?
Pure stupidity.
This is like having a television without a screen.
Also, like I'd trust these guys with my credit card data being stored in some $95 product....
Don't get me wrong. I used like swatch a lot. Even own five or six of them. But 'le temps passe,' as they say.
That's not the point. The point is that March 2015 - not bringing out a smartwatch is an actual quote, while February 2015 - announced competitors to Apple Watch is just made up. And they contradict each other.
I am not defending Hayek. I am just pointing out that IA is inconsistent. They quote him in one sentence that he is not competing and in the next sentence imply that he is. It is just meant to stir derision of Swatch.
It seems to me that he never believed in, nor wanted to compete with, full smart watches, but always believed in, and is executing against, having some limited "smart" capabilities in regular watches. Whether he is right or wrong I do not know. But IA should not put words in people's mouth just to poke fun at them.
So what precisely is that? An analog watch face with a chip inside?
Why. Would. Anyone. Want. That?
How do you authenticate payments?
There a lot of use cases for a wearable that don't involve notifications for a lot of people. The ability to have a mobile payment system only, which may be able to do other things like unlock doors, start cars, etc. without wearing a black slab of glass strapped to ones wrist is appealing, especially to those who aren't ready to melt down their watch collections. I have an iPhone 5s, so I don't have ?Pay without an ?Watch. Something like this with widespread support would have been a good inexpensive alternative to the ?Watch, or as others have said -- in addition to the ?Watch for use at the beach or other areas where it might be subjected to extreme water immersion, like a water park. Putting chips and sensors in a Rolex might be the next step for traditional watch manufacturers, popular for a variety of reasons from cost to style.
As for the lack of a screen and authentication, how about the way the ?Watch handles it now. Haptic feedback to confirm a purchase. Press the crown to initiate a payment. Have a sensor that authorizes the watch as long as it's being worn, with the passcode being entered on the mobile phone. There are any numbers of reasonable ways to solve these problems -- it's not rocket surgery -- which are the least of the issues for me. I'd be more concerned about where I could use it and what kind of support is in place by banks and retailers.
So what precisely is that? An analog watch face with a chip inside?
Why. Would. Anyone. Want. That?
How do you authenticate payments?
Contactless payments in the UK do not require authentication. So for amounts under £30, this works just fine. And given that neither the iPhone nor the Apple watch in the UK can be used for amounts above £30, this will do for many people at a price of $99. I would get one (in addition to the Apple Watch), if only to use when going to the beach allowing me to leave the wallet at home.
There a lot of use cases for a wearable that don't involve notifications for a lot of people. The ability to have a mobile payment system only, which may be able to do other things like unlock doors, start cars, etc. without wearing a black slab of glass strapped to ones wrist is appealing, especially to those who aren't ready to melt down their watch collections. I have an iPhone 5s, so I don't have ?Pay without an ?Watch. Something like this with widespread support would have been a good inexpensive alternative to the ?Watch, or as others have said -- in addition to the ?Watch for use at the beach or other areas where it might be subjected to extreme water immersion, like a water park. Putting chips and sensors in a Rolex might be the next step for traditional watch manufacturers, popular for a variety of reasons from cost to style.
As for the lack of a screen and authentication, how about the way the aaWatch handles it now. Haptic feedback to confirm a purchase. Press the crown to initiate a payment. Have a sensor that authorizes the watch as long as it's being worn, with the passcode being entered on the mobile phone. There are any numbers of reasonable ways to solve these problems -- it's not rocket surgery -- which are the least of the issues for me. I'd be more concerned about where I could use it and what kind of support is in place by banks and retailers.
Well, you know how the Apple Watch works with the iPhone and the authenticated manner which you add credit cards and link the watch to the phone, with the added layer of passcode security.
So if my watch is lost or stolen, it is not an avenue for illicit use of my credit card.
So it will be interesting to see what Swatch is going in terms of authentication of adding and using your payment system of choice.
At the very least, the Bellamy is not in Apple's market nor a competitor.
Contactless payments in the UK do not require authentication. So for amounts under £30, this works just fine. And given that neither the iPhone nor the Apple watch in the UK can be used for amounts above £30, this will do for many people at a price of $99. I would get one (in addition to the Apple Watch), if only to use when going to the beach allowing me to leave the wallet at home.
Authentication may not be required in those cases, but it does not mean it is not the better way. I like the fact that authentication and tokenization is part of the infrastructure for any use. This is an essential element strategically for meaningful adoption.
I'd be more concerned about where I could use it and what kind of support is in place by banks and retailers.
Any merchant that accepts Contactless (required for Apple Pay also), would be able to accept a Swatch with an NFC chip. If I was on holidays and I had a choice between:
a) wearing my Apple Watch (not actually possible at the beach, on boats, camping, etc)
b) wearing a "normal" Swatch plus carry my wallet / credit card
c) spending $ 99 on a new Swatch that includes my credit card on an NFC chip
The choice is simple.
I hope this makes it up to Omega (with vibrating for VIP notifications), as this would then read: if I am out during the evening and I had a choice between:
a) wearing my Apple Watch (looking like a wanker)
b) wearing a "normal" watch plus checking my iPhone constantly for important notifications
c) buying an Omega that includes VIP notifications
Authentication may not be required in those cases, but it does not mean it is not the better way. I like the fact that authentication and tokenization is part of the infrastructure for any use. This is an essential element strategically for meaningful adoption.
I agree. If they ever allow Apple Pay for amounts over £30 in the UK, Apple Pay becomes an interesting service. At the moment, it is more cumbersome than just taking out the Contactless Card, tap and go.
The Apple watch payments are also convenient, but since ApplePay is limited to £ 30, an NFC chip in any old watch can do the same.
I am not sure how I would ever lose jy watch. And if you do, you would notice right away (much faster than you would notice if a credit card in your wallet is missing) and call your card company.
Any merchant that accepts Contactless (required for Apple Pay also), would be able to accept a Swatch with an NFC chip.
Are there enough details available to know this? Even merchants who can accept contactless payments also have to be willing to accept ?Pay. Even this chip seems to be limited to two banks in China based on the info in the article. And ?Pay is accepted at far fewer merchants than are able to accept contactless payments. This is one of the reasons why I don't think Apple is in any hurry to rush technology into all of their devices to utilize ?Pay. There's at least another year before there will be enough ?Pay support to ensure most of a customers transactions are compatible, and they can actually leave their wallet at home.
Any merchant that accepts Contactless (required for Apple Pay also), would be able to accept a Swatch with an NFC chip. If I was on holidays and I had a choice between:
a) wearing my Apple Watch (useless at the beach, on boats, camping, etc)
b) wearing a "normal" Swatch plus carry my wallet / credit card
c) spending $ 99 on a new Swatch that includes my credit card on an NFC chip
The choice is simple.
I hope this makes it up to Omega (with vibrating for VIP notifications), as this would then read: i<span style="line-height:1.4em;">f I am out during the evening and I had a choice between:</span>
a) wearing my Apple Watch (looking like a wanker) b) wearing a "normal" watch plus checking my iPhone constantly for important notifications c) buying an Omega that includes VIP notifications
the choice would also be easy.
Oh stop with the "looking like a wanker" nonsense. You don't have to like the design, but many do and it is impeccably and precisely crafted. Virtually everyone who sees mine comes away much more impressed that their negative or ambivalent feelings prior.
The Watch is expressly not competing with the design and function of other high end brands, and is rather redefining a large segment of the market which largely looks at expensive watches as status and visual adornment.
The NFC chip in your credit card is embedded in a $1.50 product.....
It's unlikely that I'll be using the '1.50' version in situations where I could be using my Watch or iPhone.
We don't have stuff like the £30 nonsense where we live, so your concerns for convenience are less relevant. And as to looking wankerish, I dare say it's unlikely that you'll look much better wearing what's pictured here.
I agree. If they ever allow Apple Pay for amounts over £30 in the UK, Apple Pay becomes an interesting service. At the moment, it is more cumbersome than just taking out the Contactless Card, tap and go.
The Apple watch payments are also convenient, but since ApplePay is limited to £ 30, an NFC chip in any old watch can do the same.
I am not sure how I would ever lose jy watch. And if you do, you would notice right away (much faster than you would notice if a credit card in your wallet is missing) and call your card company.
My perspective is long term, not the current limitations in the UK.
The multi-functionality of the watch, driven by App development and on top of the great core features Apple already provides with the Watch, categorize these one off, limited-scope products as superficial and, long term, unsatisfyng.
Comments
"FIRST!!!"
Oh, and there is Just One More Thing... There's a wifi logo on the strap sheath!
Why. Would. Anyone. Want. That?
How do you authenticate payments?
What part about 2013 in the story did you miss?
What a ridiculous product.
How to confirm a purchase if there is no display?
How do you know if a transaction went through?
How would you know if you actually paid something TWICE?
Pure stupidity.
This is like having a television without a screen.
Lol right It's a TV that gets the full package, but can only display one channel, the time channel lmao.
Also, like I'd trust these guys with my credit card data being stored in some $95 product....
Don't get me wrong. I used like swatch a lot. Even own five or six of them. But 'le temps passe,' as they say.
What part about 2013 in the story did you miss?
That's not the point. The point is that March 2015 - not bringing out a smartwatch is an actual quote, while February 2015 - announced competitors to Apple Watch is just made up. And they contradict each other.
I am not defending Hayek. I am just pointing out that IA is inconsistent. They quote him in one sentence that he is not competing and in the next sentence imply that he is. It is just meant to stir derision of Swatch.
It seems to me that he never believed in, nor wanted to compete with, full smart watches, but always believed in, and is executing against, having some limited "smart" capabilities in regular watches. Whether he is right or wrong I do not know. But IA should not put words in people's mouth just to poke fun at them.
What a ridiculous product.
How to confirm a purchase if there is no display?
How do you know if a transaction went through?
How would you know if you actually paid something TWICE?
Pure stupidity.
This is like having a television without a screen.
Same way as you do today on Contactless: the screen on the terminal tells you.
There a lot of use cases for a wearable that don't involve notifications for a lot of people. The ability to have a mobile payment system only, which may be able to do other things like unlock doors, start cars, etc. without wearing a black slab of glass strapped to ones wrist is appealing, especially to those who aren't ready to melt down their watch collections. I have an iPhone 5s, so I don't have ?Pay without an ?Watch. Something like this with widespread support would have been a good inexpensive alternative to the ?Watch, or as others have said -- in addition to the ?Watch for use at the beach or other areas where it might be subjected to extreme water immersion, like a water park. Putting chips and sensors in a Rolex might be the next step for traditional watch manufacturers, popular for a variety of reasons from cost to style.
As for the lack of a screen and authentication, how about the way the ?Watch handles it now. Haptic feedback to confirm a purchase. Press the crown to initiate a payment. Have a sensor that authorizes the watch as long as it's being worn, with the passcode being entered on the mobile phone. There are any numbers of reasonable ways to solve these problems -- it's not rocket surgery -- which are the least of the issues for me. I'd be more concerned about where I could use it and what kind of support is in place by banks and retailers.
So what precisely is that? An analog watch face with a chip inside?
Why. Would. Anyone. Want. That?
How do you authenticate payments?
Contactless payments in the UK do not require authentication. So for amounts under £30, this works just fine. And given that neither the iPhone nor the Apple watch in the UK can be used for amounts above £30, this will do for many people at a price of $99. I would get one (in addition to the Apple Watch), if only to use when going to the beach allowing me to leave the wallet at home.
Well, you know how the Apple Watch works with the iPhone and the authenticated manner which you add credit cards and link the watch to the phone, with the added layer of passcode security.
So if my watch is lost or stolen, it is not an avenue for illicit use of my credit card.
So it will be interesting to see what Swatch is going in terms of authentication of adding and using your payment system of choice.
At the very least, the Bellamy is not in Apple's market nor a competitor.
Authentication may not be required in those cases, but it does not mean it is not the better way. I like the fact that authentication and tokenization is part of the infrastructure for any use. This is an essential element strategically for meaningful adoption.
I'd be more concerned about where I could use it and what kind of support is in place by banks and retailers.
Any merchant that accepts Contactless (required for Apple Pay also), would be able to accept a Swatch with an NFC chip. If I was on holidays and I had a choice between:
a) wearing my Apple Watch (not actually possible at the beach, on boats, camping, etc)
b) wearing a "normal" Swatch plus carry my wallet / credit card
c) spending $ 99 on a new Swatch that includes my credit card on an NFC chip
The choice is simple.
I hope this makes it up to Omega (with vibrating for VIP notifications), as this would then read: if I am out during the evening and I had a choice between:
a) wearing my Apple Watch (looking like a wanker)
b) wearing a "normal" watch plus checking my iPhone constantly for important notifications
c) buying an Omega that includes VIP notifications
the choice would also be easy.
Also, like I'd trust these guys with my credit card data being stored in some $95 product....
The NFC chip in your credit card is embedded in a $1.50 product.....
Authentication may not be required in those cases, but it does not mean it is not the better way. I like the fact that authentication and tokenization is part of the infrastructure for any use. This is an essential element strategically for meaningful adoption.
I agree. If they ever allow Apple Pay for amounts over £30 in the UK, Apple Pay becomes an interesting service. At the moment, it is more cumbersome than just taking out the Contactless Card, tap and go.
The Apple watch payments are also convenient, but since ApplePay is limited to £ 30, an NFC chip in any old watch can do the same.
I am not sure how I would ever lose jy watch. And if you do, you would notice right away (much faster than you would notice if a credit card in your wallet is missing) and call your card company.
Oh stop with the "looking like a wanker" nonsense. You don't have to like the design, but many do and it is impeccably and precisely crafted. Virtually everyone who sees mine comes away much more impressed that their negative or ambivalent feelings prior.
The Watch is expressly not competing with the design and function of other high end brands, and is rather redefining a large segment of the market which largely looks at expensive watches as status and visual adornment.
It's unlikely that I'll be using the '1.50' version in situations where I could be using my Watch or iPhone.
We don't have stuff like the £30 nonsense where we live, so your concerns for convenience are less relevant. And as to looking wankerish, I dare say it's unlikely that you'll look much better wearing what's pictured here.
My perspective is long term, not the current limitations in the UK.
The multi-functionality of the watch, driven by App development and on top of the great core features Apple already provides with the Watch, categorize these one off, limited-scope products as superficial and, long term, unsatisfyng.