Apple is too obsessed with making their devices thinner and lighter. They are overly focused on improving hardware instead of focusing on software and the user experience they were once known for. Fantastic hardware is useless if the software experience doesn't match up to it.
In general, okay, but a watch is a special case. I certainly don't care how thick my iMac is. And a thinner iPhone, while nice, is only in my hand about 1% of the time. A watch is on me nearly all the time, and the arm that holds it often moving around doing other things. Being so thin and light that I forget it's there sounds like a worthy goal to me, assuming the same degree of great UI.
This on the other hand would make the bands much more expensive and - possibly - would narrow the diversity of bands down. I'm not sure this is a wise move.
Personally, I don't think that the watch is thick. It is normal. Not thin, but normal....
Plus, I rather have the watch "thick" as it is now than having a thick(er) watch band!
And all of this is precisely why it won't happen.
I wonder if anyone's ever worked out what percentage of Apple patent applications ever turn up in a shipping products. From what I can tell, the only ones that show up are the ones that are granted a patent a year or so after the product has started shipping.
What you mean is: AI's very very very ridiculously stupid guess of how this might be used, is not correct. Duh. How anyone w/ an iq trivially above retarded could look at this patent application & think: "aha, they must be thinking about removing the Taptic Engine!" is entirely beyond me. They sell bands of over a half dozen materials, ranging in price from $50 to $500, & Apple Watch is popular in part because of a rich 3rd party band accessory market. I cannot even begin to fathom the enormity & expense of a project to seamlessly integrate a Taptic Engine into these all, lol. It is really cool that they're clearly exploring designing OPTIONS in bands for people with different use cases... or possibly even, this is for a screenless "Fitbit" type band wearable they're exploring. A while ago Apple also submitted a patent for a band that could inflate/deflate slightly, presumably to allow for accurate blood pressure readings. I'm wildly surprised that one of these moron AI editors didn't run the article: "Apple to integrate air powered size adjusting feature into all bands, including link bracelet... we know it seems impossible; but it's the only conclusion we can come up with, by superficially glancing at new patent!".
Sad to see name-calling, aspersions, and denigration are becoming the new discursive normal, legitimized by recent political changes. Thanks to mods for calling it out.
Apple is too obsessed with making their devices thinner and lighter. They are overly focused on improving hardware instead of focusing on software and the user experience they were once known for. Fantastic hardware is useless if the software experience doesn't match up to it.
Thinner and lighter is a requirement to overcome the heat barrier. A thick computer would retain much more heat. The only thing Apple is obsessed with is the heat, not thinness or lightness. The unusual thickness of the Watch is a proof of this. If Apple were not interested in improved user experience, they would omit the vibration and would make the Watch thinner. Our gain is the improved user experience at the expense of making the Watch thicker.
If this were the case we'd have thick laptops with big heat sinks and giant fans. Clearly its a balance between portability, sexiness and technical requirements.
And you already have those... All those fake laptops made with desktop parts...
Apple is too obsessed with making their devices thinner and lighter. They are overly focused on improving hardware instead of focusing on software and the user experience they were once known for. Fantastic hasinsinksrdware is useless if the software experience doesn't match up to it.
Thinner and lighter is a requirement to overcome the heat barrier. A thick computer would retain much more heat. The only thing Apple is obsessed with is the heat, not thinness or lightness. The unusual thickness of the Watch is a proof of this. If Apple were not interested in improved user experience, they would omit the vibration and would make the Watch thinner. Our gain is the improved user experience at the expense of making the Watch thicker.
Clearly, physics isn't your strength. Here's a math question for you: What takes longer to bring to a boil, if you have a 2000W heatcoil: 1 gallon of water or 10 gallons of water?
Computers don't have heatcoils but heatsinks and fans. 1 gallon of computer cools down much faster than 10 gallons of computer. It is the cool down time that matters, not the heat-up time.
I don't consider this likely to happen. There was a story not long ago from a former employee (was an outsider that came in) involved with the heart rate sensor development, and his original proposal was to put into the band as it would be more accurate on the underside of wrist. Apple's design team said no - needs to be in the case as they wanted the bands to be easily swapped.
At first I thought the watch was a bit too thick. But I've become used to it and really like it. However, if Apple were to make a thinner one (and they will), I be buying it.
Additionally, I have many colored wristbands, decided to just wear the original black band that came with it.
I also, have a plastic screen protector on it and can't even tell it's there. No bubbles.
I love my Apple Watch, as a runner, two clicks and I'm running!
I don't consider this likely to happen. There was a story not long ago from a former employee (was an outsider that came in) involved with the heart rate sensor development, and his original proposal was to put into the band as it would be more accurate on the underside of wrist. Apple's design team said no - needs to be in the case as they wanted the bands to be easily swapped.
That's the dilemma isn't it. You put the sensors in the band, you get much more accurate readings but you make the bands and the overall Watch buying experience more expensive. OTOH, you leave the sensors in the Watch, the bands are easily swappable, the Watch less expensive, but health / fitness readings are not as accurate.
(Warning! Yuck Alert!!!) The one physical change Apple should make -- and it is a non-trivial one -- is regarding the placement of the microphone. About once a month, Siri just would go deaf. Repeated calls to Apple Support were of no help. But I serendipitously figured out what's going on: Since the mic is against the skin, it tends to clog up. I clean it out, and it works fine (for another month).
(Before you get grossed out, and come up with witty rejoinders, etc., please recognize that natural exfoliation of dead skin cells is a natural part of the dust in homes, cars, and such. Just a part of life.)
Heh! Anan, I agree with you, but washing once in a while also helps.
I see from a prior post that you have the Series 2. I have the first gen. Is that washable, I wonder.
(Warning! Yuck Alert!!!) The one physical change Apple should make -- and it is a non-trivial one -- is regarding the placement of the microphone. About once a month, Siri just would go deaf. Repeated calls to Apple Support were of no help. But I serendipitously figured out what's going on: Since the mic is against the skin, it tends to clog up. I clean it out, and it works fine (for another month).
(Before you get grossed out, and come up with witty rejoinders, etc., please recognize that natural exfoliation of dead skin cells is a natural part of the dust in homes, cars, and such. Just a part of life.)
Heh! Anan, I agree with you, but washing once in a while also helps.
I see from a prior post that you have the Series 2. I have the first gen. Is that washable, I wonder.
(Warning! Yuck Alert!!!) The one physical change Apple should make -- and it is a non-trivial one -- is regarding the placement of the microphone. About once a month, Siri just would go deaf. Repeated calls to Apple Support were of no help. But I serendipitously figured out what's going on: Since the mic is against the skin, it tends to clog up. I clean it out, and it works fine (for another month).
(Before you get grossed out, and come up with witty rejoinders, etc., please recognize that natural exfoliation of dead skin cells is a natural part of the dust in homes, cars, and such. Just a part of life.)
Heh! Anan, I agree with you, but washing once in a while also helps.
I see from a prior post that you have the Series 2. I have the first gen. Is that washable, I wonder.
Yes. Rain, sink, and shower.
Rain, sink, and shower, I knew about. I've even seen support documents that say that you can clean out the digital crown with 10-15 seconds of warm water under the tap. But deliberate washing to get the dirt out of crevices is a bit more than that, especially if one is trying to get the water into little mic/speaker holes to clean them out.
This on the other hand would make the bands much more expensive and - possibly - would narrow the diversity of bands down. I'm not sure this is a wise move.
Personally, I don't think that the watch is thick. It is normal. Not thin, but normal....
Plus, I rather have the watch "thick" as it is now than having a thick(er) watch band!
Yes unless it's not the whole taptic engine. If they put the vibrating mass and springs in the band but the keep the electronics and coils to drive the mass inside the watch but much smaller package to get more battery.
I don't consider this likely to happen. There was a story not long ago from a former employee (was an outsider that came in) involved with the heart rate sensor development, and his original proposal was to put into the band as it would be more accurate on the underside of wrist. Apple's design team said no - needs to be in the case as they wanted the bands to be easily swapped.
That's the dilemma isn't it. You put the sensors in the band, you get much more accurate readings but you make the bands and the overall Watch buying experience more expensive. OTOH, you leave the sensors in the Watch, the bands are easily swappable, the Watch less expensive, but health / fitness readings are not as accurate.
The interesting part is that Apple's heart sensor is one of the most accurate now, and is often looked to as the standard when reviewing other devices with heart rate sensors.
so the question is - how much more accurate would it have been, since it's already within 5% of chest sensors? The answer is - not much.
apples decision seems to have been the correct one.
(Warning! Yuck Alert!!!) The one physical change Apple should make -- and it is a non-trivial one -- is regarding the placement of the microphone. About once a month, Siri just would go deaf. Repeated calls to Apple Support were of no help. But I serendipitously figured out what's going on: Since the mic is against the skin, it tends to clog up. I clean it out, and it works fine (for another month).
(Before you get grossed out, and come up with witty rejoinders, etc., please recognize that natural exfoliation of dead skin cells is a natural part of the dust in homes, cars, and such. Just a part of life.)
Heh! Anan, I agree with you, but washing once in a while also helps.
I see from a prior post that you have the Series 2. I have the first gen. Is that washable, I wonder.
Tim said that he showered with it. I wouldn't take into the bath however.
They better do something fast because Apple watch is a hideous design that's unflattering on the wrist!
Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but the design awards they've won for it say differently. Mine looks really nice, and I've received numerous comments from people to that effect.
This on the other hand would make the bands much more expensive and - possibly - would narrow the diversity of bands down. I'm not sure this is a wise move.
Personally, I don't think that the watch is thick. It is normal. Not thin, but normal....
Plus, I rather have the watch "thick" as it is now than having a thick(er) watch band!
Yes unless it's not the whole taptic engine. If they put the vibrating mass and springs in the band but the keep the electronics and coils to drive the mass inside the watch but much smaller package to get more battery.
And we're back to the water resistance thing. Bands move. The angle of attack to the case changes as you move. Apple has restrained that fail]rly well with their attachment method. But still, that connectors will be exposed to water at some point. At the very least, it would destroy the 50 meters rating the series 2 has. It that worth it? I doubt it.
perhaps at some time, Apple will come out with more case designs (but hopefully the same attachment method so o,d bands still work). Maybe they would have a divers watch, if they thought enough demand existed, and watches that may do more with bands, but not be more than slightly water resistant.
still, none if you have come up with how Apple could allow for relatively inexpensive interchangeable bands that would include the required Taptic elements, particularly for third party bands. It would kill the third party band industry, except for the few that would license the Taptic portion (if Apple decided to license that). That would make the less expensive Apple Watch models less desirable to people who want to buy inexpensive third party bands. I've bought a few myself, along with a couple of other Apple bands. Some of the third party leather bands are really nice, and high quality.
Comments
The thinner the better.
Going from my current 3 weeks (Garmin) to 1 week is more tolerable than going to daily charging.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2016/06/apple-watch-patents-cover-the-ultimate-selfie-camera-the-digital-crown-more.html
Computers don't have heatcoils but heatsinks and fans. 1 gallon of computer cools down much faster than 10 gallons of computer. It is the cool down time that matters, not the heat-up time.
Additionally, I have many colored wristbands, decided to just wear the original black band that came with it.
I also, have a plastic screen protector on it and can't even tell it's there. No bubbles.
I love my Apple Watch, as a runner, two clicks and I'm running!
Best
If they put the vibrating mass and springs in the band but the keep the electronics and coils to drive the mass inside the watch but much smaller package to get more battery.
so the question is - how much more accurate would it have been, since it's already within 5% of chest sensors? The answer is - not much.
apples decision seems to have been the correct one.
perhaps at some time, Apple will come out with more case designs (but hopefully the same attachment method so o,d bands still work). Maybe they would have a divers watch, if they thought enough demand existed, and watches that may do more with bands, but not be more than slightly water resistant.
still, none if you have come up with how Apple could allow for relatively inexpensive interchangeable bands that would include the required Taptic elements, particularly for third party bands. It would kill the third party band industry, except for the few that would license the Taptic portion (if Apple decided to license that). That would make the less expensive Apple Watch models less desirable to people who want to buy inexpensive third party bands. I've bought a few myself, along with a couple of other Apple bands. Some of the third party leather bands are really nice, and high quality.