The AR glasses, another wearable, could be quite the game changer, and put the wearables category into the iPhone space in terms of revenue. Some fashion challenges involving wearing glasses in the first place, but the make or break will be what features and functions it can provide to users. If they are good, AR glasses could be as common at sun glasses.
I think the focus of tech people on the glasses is quite wrong. In these days and age why there is no one improves the function of the glasses first instead of these fancy techs like AR. I’d buy that in a heartbeat. Functions like auto dimming, auto UV protected, improves contrast, Night Sight, be able to change from glasses to sunglasses automatically, can adjusted itself for both near-sighted and far-sighted automatically etc.
The AR glasses, another wearable, could be quite the game changer, and put the wearables category into the iPhone space in terms of revenue. Some fashion challenges involving wearing glasses in the first place, but the make or break will be what features and functions it can provide to users. If they are good, AR glasses could be as common at sun glasses.
I think the focus of tech people on the glasses is quite wrong. In these days and age why there is no one improves the function of the glasses first instead of these fancy techs like AR. I’d buy that in a heartbeat. Functions like auto dimming, auto UV protected, improves contrast, Night Sight, be able to change from glasses to sunglasses automatically, can adjusted itself for both near-sighted and far-sighted automatically etc.
My dumb glasses already do about 2/3rds of your list. Auto dimming in sunlight, improves contrast, improves sharpness, UV protected, and near/far sighted automatically. And I had flip up/flip down shades at certain times.
The fancy features like magnification or seeing in the dark will need cameras and a projector, the same components as all these AR glasses or smart glasses are expected to have.
The AR glasses, another wearable, could be quite the game changer, and put the wearables category into the iPhone space in terms of revenue. Some fashion challenges involving wearing glasses in the first place, but the make or break will be what features and functions it can provide to users. If they are good, AR glasses could be as common at sun glasses.
I think the focus of tech people on the glasses is quite wrong. In these days and age why there is no one improves the function of the glasses first instead of these fancy techs like AR. I’d buy that in a heartbeat. Functions like auto dimming, auto UV protected, improves contrast, Night Sight, be able to change from glasses to sunglasses automatically, can adjusted itself for both near-sighted and far-sighted automatically etc.
My dumb glasses already do about 2/3rds of your list. Auto dimming in sunlight, improves contrast, improves sharpness, UV protected, and near/far sighted automatically. And I had flip up/flip down shades at certain times.
and the Watch has really only just gotten started. Loads of untapped potential.
I've spoken to more than one person who has expressed the desire to get an Apple Watch as a full-on phone replacement. One was an Android user who would was ready to pull the trigger before I explained that it was still technically an iPhone accessory.
Anyone want to place bets against the next WatchOS going fully untethered?
I see two main directions for Apple Watch: phone replacement (as you said) and health monitor.
How about fob/key/pass card access for home, car, hotel rooms and secured workspaces? Just wave your watch versus pulling something out of your pocket or memorizing a combination (which some Airbnb spaces use for access).
This is one use case category that doesn’t fall to the phone at the moment. It could, but like developing countries that skipped right over wireline telephone communication to cellular, current controlled access technologies could skip the phone and go from legacy (keys, pass cards and fobs) direct to wearables.
and the Watch has really only just gotten started. Loads of untapped potential.
I've spoken to more than one person who has expressed the desire to get an Apple Watch as a full-on phone replacement. One was an Android user who would was ready to pull the trigger before I explained that it was still technically an iPhone accessory.
Anyone want to place bets against the next WatchOS going fully untethered?
I've been wearing an LTE Apple Watch for 3 months now and I still have trouble realizing that I really only need my phone for things FaceBook and Web browsing The watch can do everything else. Admittedly its restricted in messages and email, but it serves adequately even those areas for shortish amounts of time.
and the Watch has really only just gotten started. Loads of untapped potential.
I've spoken to more than one person who has expressed the desire to get an Apple Watch as a full-on phone replacement. One was an Android user who would was ready to pull the trigger before I explained that it was still technically an iPhone accessory.
Anyone want to place bets against the next WatchOS going fully untethered?
I see two main directions for Apple Watch: phone replacement (as you said) and health monitor.
Because of the small screen, the Watch has inherent limitations as a replacement for an iPhone. That said, it serves well for short periods of time as a substitute for the phone.
I never wanted an Apple Watch seems like replicating my iPhone not to mention another device to charge. I don't wear a watch at all
Yeh, looked at objectively based on functionality I would agree. Well, that is, I would agree if did not own one and wear it all day, every day. Suddenly you find that it is nearly as irreplaceable as your iPhone. It's hard to explain, but essentially, it just makes life better -- but it does that through seemingly countless small ways that individually are nothing to brag about, but collectively make a very big contribution.
The feeling of untethered liberation one feels when using the Apple Watch with AirPods to listen to music is hard to describe.
I was thinking last night that it would be kind of cool if Apple released an update to the iPod Nano, perhaps called the iPod Pico, that would be based on the AirPods Pro platform with several gigs of music storage directly on the headphones. No other device required once the "Pico" is loaded, not even an Apple Apple. Of course the UX would be via Siri and taps on the Pico.
Yup. Did the Watch+JayBird Vista thing this morning’s run. Not having your phone with you makes a pretty big difference here.
Well, I’m confused about what you are saying. At some point, Apple can put 4, 8, 16 GB of NAND in the AirPods, ship an AirPods app like the iOS Watch app, and people can transfer audio to the AirPods. So, yes, the may go there if it is more efficient than streaming from the host device, and if there is a market of people who want to go around with just AirPods.
Not sure what you mean by iPod Pico, other it just being AirPods with user addressable storage in it. I do think an Apple Music specific client device would be an interesting product. You buy the product, no contracts, no dealing with the carrier, enter your Apple Music credentials, and away you go. The monthly Apple Music subscription pays for the cellular data service (like Kindles cellular data). A modern iPod like device, that gets all its playable content from Apple Music, and maybe podcasts too.
If I am understanding the OP correctly... I think the "Pico" would actually be a set of headphones ( Airpods ) marketed as an iPod, with internal storage built into the Airpods themselves.
The AR glasses, another wearable, could be quite the game changer, and put the wearables category into the iPhone space in terms of revenue. Some fashion challenges involving wearing glasses in the first place, but the make or break will be what features and functions it can provide to users. If they are good, AR glasses could be as common at sun glasses.
No. The public simply will not accept these things as normal. Remember Google Glass and the glass-holes. We already have people falling down escalators and into water fountains while playing on their phones. Imagine what AR glasses would add to that mix.
I believe that the use case(s) that will drive real volume for AR glasses has not yet been defined. Apple may launch a product that makes everybody eventually see these things as necessary rather than just a niche gaming product.
i always wonder why people need like a "use case" for AR glasses. its simply gonna be smartphones linked with our bodies even further. and its the stepping stone to the smart contact lenses we eventually will wear. which then are the stepping stones to the inevitable brain implant.
I never wanted an Apple Watch seems like replicating my iPhone not to mention another device to charge. I don't wear a watch at all
Well, you’re mistaken about it replicating the phone. As for charging, I have a bedside charging mount and I can slap it on even in the dark. One is already charging the phone so it requires nothing special to charge the watch also. Many people don’t like wearing a watch to bed and remove it anyway, so again no hardship.
The AR glasses, another wearable, could be quite the game changer, and put the wearables category into the iPhone space in terms of revenue. Some fashion challenges involving wearing glasses in the first place, but the make or break will be what features and functions it can provide to users. If they are good, AR glasses could be as common at sun glasses.
No. The public simply will not accept these things as normal. Remember Google Glass and the glass-holes. We already have people falling down escalators and into water fountains while playing on their phones. Imagine what AR glasses would add to that mix.
It’s a concern but we’ll have to wait and see what they come up with. I’m not against the concept, clearly Google didn’t think it through.
The feeling of untethered liberation one feels when using the Apple Watch with AirPods to listen to music is hard to describe.
I was thinking last night that it would be kind of cool if Apple released an update to the iPod Nano, perhaps called the iPod Pico, that would be based on the AirPods Pro platform with several gigs of music storage directly on the headphones. No other device required once the "Pico" is loaded, not even an Apple Watch. Of course the UX would be via Siri and taps on the Pico.
Personally, I've already moved past "locally-stored music" and Apple knows that the vast majority of [young] consumers are, too. YouTube is so popular for music listening for so many young people, and it's pure streaming. Streaming has been with us for years now, just in different forms. Now it's come to us for pure music listening, replacing our locally-organized libraries. I think I've listened to 2 or 3 of my purchased songs in the past 4 years. Yah. Streaming has eclipsed it entirely.
The feeling of untethered liberation one feels when using the Apple Watch with AirPods to listen to music is hard to describe.
I was thinking last night that it would be kind of cool if Apple released an update to the iPod Nano, perhaps called the iPod Pico, that would be based on the AirPods Pro platform with several gigs of music storage directly on the headphones. No other device required once the "Pico" is loaded, not even an Apple Watch. Of course the UX would be via Siri and taps on the Pico.
Personally, I've already moved past "locally-stored music" and Apple knows that the vast majority of [young] consumers are, too. YouTube is so popular for music listening for so many young people, and it's pure streaming. Streaming has been with us for years now, just in different forms. Now it's come to us for pure music listening, replacing our locally-organized libraries. I think I've listened to 2 or 3 of my purchased songs in the past 4 years. Yah. Streaming has eclipsed it entirely.
That's generally true But reasons still do exist: 1) Where the song (or the desired version of the song) doesn't exist in the streaming library. And, 2) To save battery life on the watch because, when its running all of its features, such as heart rate monitoring while streaming music, that little battery doesn't always last long enough for something like a marathon run. Or, for that matter, if you simply want all day battery life from the watch. Another reason might be a long trip where LTE is not available.
It bears repeating what the tech blog crowd said about the Apple Watch when it was announced. I wish AI would republish those comment threads so we can remind ourselves of who the complete idiots who sling their negativity around here constantly are.
These guys make they money being anti-Apple. Most times they research sucks and it’s all click bait. They’ve sold they journalistic souls to the highest bidder. I remember when c|net was actually pretty informative and ‘techie’ for a tech novice like me at the time. Don’t know if they were losing money but were taken over by I think CBS and it went downhill ever since. Even Brian Tong bolted. Not to mentioned the likes of ZDNET and the rest. Shit sells the truth does not apparently.
Comments
https://www.bkstr.com/northernarizonastore/search/keyword/airpod
I've been wearing an LTE Apple Watch for 3 months now and I still have trouble realizing that I really only need my phone for things FaceBook and Web browsing The watch can do everything else. Admittedly its restricted in messages and email, but it serves adequately even those areas for shortish amounts of time.
Because of the small screen, the Watch has inherent limitations as a replacement for an iPhone. That said, it serves well for short periods of time as a substitute for the phone.
Yeh, looked at objectively based on functionality I would agree. Well, that is, I would agree if did not own one and wear it all day, every day. Suddenly you find that it is nearly as irreplaceable as your iPhone. It's hard to explain, but essentially, it just makes life better -- but it does that through seemingly countless small ways that individually are nothing to brag about, but collectively make a very big contribution.
If I am understanding the OP correctly... I think the "Pico" would actually be a set of headphones ( Airpods ) marketed as an iPod, with internal storage built into the Airpods themselves.
if anyone is wondering what the view through the glasses will look like, i found this very convincing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJg02ivYzSs
dont anyone tell me this is unrealistic after seeing the smartphone rise over the last decade.
Personally, I've already moved past "locally-stored music" and Apple knows that the vast majority of [young] consumers are, too. YouTube is so popular for music listening for so many young people, and it's pure streaming. Streaming has been with us for years now, just in different forms. Now it's come to us for pure music listening, replacing our locally-organized libraries. I think I've listened to 2 or 3 of my purchased songs in the past 4 years. Yah. Streaming has eclipsed it entirely.