True. The Rolex set would not replace their Rolex with a new iWatch, because they could afford both and then some. But the iWatch would end up on their wrists, not in their jewel-encrusted watch collection.
Go to the right streets or restaurants in major cities. You'll see many who can afford Rolexes do not leave them in their bedrooms.
While there is a certain cachet to the Apple brand, a $499 watch does not match the appeal of a $10,000 Rolex, Omega or even high end Tag Heuer. Each one resonates with its owner in a specific way that goes far beyond showing off bling. An iWatch that millions and millions may share will not displace that identity, particularly since it is not a mostly invisible item such as a phone.
Picture how dweebish it would look to be holding your girly iWatch up to your face while delicately poking at it with your finger or worse yet whispering sweet secrets into its microphone.
Where should I put my headphones then: in iWatch or iPhone. YOu don't seriously think about iWatch as a independent smartphone, don't you?
3. What would you like to integrate from watch? Current time, perhaps? Already done.... Watch without apps that can really put a substantial value to users is just...well, watch.
4. Apps are there to interact with user. Either via screen (which is too small on watch, obviously) or via Siri-like solutions. If you really want to use them, they need "base station" (phone) to communicate with, which will of course suck batteries dry in a no time at all if a watch is to be of reasonable size.
You obviously actively misread my post, and probably simply don't want to get it. … You're talking about Bluetooth headsets and wonder where to "put your headphone in"? It's connected via BT to your iPhone, of course. Why do you think I'd think the iWatch would be a separate phone? I never mentioned anything like it.
3. You get the integration part totally the wrong way 'round. I don't want any of a watches features integrated with the phone, I want thousands of apps to be able to use the iWatch as a display right on my wrist, while the phone can rest in my pants or bag or coat.
4. The screen on the watch doesn't _have_ to be too small for several reasons. If you've actually read about Apple's patent application, you know that the screen isn't your typical watch display. Plus: Not all information comes in longish paragraphs you have to read and understand. Sometimes an icon is enough. But it can even give you directions, for example, showing you part of the map and an arrow that tells you where to go. (Walking directions, not driving, don't even try to misread again.)
You obviously actively misread my post, and probably simply don't want to get it. … You're talking about Bluetooth headsets and wonder where to "put your headphone in"? It's connected via BT to your iPhone, of course. Why do you think I'd think the iWatch would be a separate phone? I never mentioned anything like it.
3. You get the integration part totally the wrong way 'round. I don't want any of a watches features integrated with the phone, I want thousands of apps to be able to use the iWatch as a display right on my wrist, while the phone can rest in my pants or bag or coat.
4. The screen on the watch doesn't _have_ to be too small for several reasons. If you've actually read about Apple's patent application, you know that the screen isn't your typical watch display. Plus: Not all information comes in longish paragraphs you have to read and understand. Sometimes an icon is enough. But it can even give you directions, for example, showing you part of the map and an arrow that tells you where to go. (Walking directions, not driving, don't even try to misread again.)
don't underestimate other people, this is my logic put it in? stick it in, connect it, who cares... Bluetooth or cable, both have disadvantages, the main question is where to, depending of the role of the iWatch...are you clear with that? Are you sure you know how would iWatch be "integrated" into wearable "ecosystem"? how would it be positioned between phone, headsets, siri, siri with headsets?
3. You obviously disagree with me saying "...Apps are there to interact with user. Either via screen (which is too small on watch, obviously) or via Siri-like solutions.." ?
4. you constantly believe people you are talking to are morons who misread your postings, yet you fail again to comprehend the essence of other people's arguments. Apps, you are mentioning are delivering small and very doubtful value, IMHO. Widget applications on watch simply don't bring the value expected, this is why Apple left small iPod mini concept. If there would be a value in that, Apple could simply connect this existing device with iPhone and offer massive widget SDK to developers. I am not saying this is not possible or it won't happen. I just see very small value in it and I believe it makes much more sense developing Siri further, than making such large enterprise with iWatch.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
True. The Rolex set would not replace their Rolex with a new iWatch, because they could afford both and then some. But the iWatch would end up on their wrists, not in their jewel-encrusted watch collection.
Go to the right streets or restaurants in major cities. You'll see many who can afford Rolexes do not leave them in their bedrooms.
While there is a certain cachet to the Apple brand, a $499 watch does not match the appeal of a $10,000 Rolex, Omega or even high end Tag Heuer. Each one resonates with its owner in a specific way that goes far beyond showing off bling. An iWatch that millions and millions may share will not displace that identity, particularly since it is not a mostly invisible item such as a phone.
Picture how dweebish it would look to be holding your girly iWatch up to your face while delicately poking at it with your finger or worse yet whispering sweet secrets into its microphone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by poksi
Where should I put my headphones then: in iWatch or iPhone. YOu don't seriously think about iWatch as a independent smartphone, don't you?
3. What would you like to integrate from watch? Current time, perhaps? Already done.... Watch without apps that can really put a substantial value to users is just...well, watch.
4. Apps are there to interact with user. Either via screen (which is too small on watch, obviously) or via Siri-like solutions. If you really want to use them, they need "base station" (phone) to communicate with, which will of course suck batteries dry in a no time at all if a watch is to be of reasonable size.
You obviously actively misread my post, and probably simply don't want to get it.
3. You get the integration part totally the wrong way 'round. I don't want any of a watches features integrated with the phone, I want thousands of apps to be able to use the iWatch as a display right on my wrist, while the phone can rest in my pants or bag or coat.
4. The screen on the watch doesn't _have_ to be too small for several reasons. If you've actually read about Apple's patent application, you know that the screen isn't your typical watch display. Plus: Not all information comes in longish paragraphs you have to read and understand. Sometimes an icon is enough. But it can even give you directions, for example, showing you part of the map and an arrow that tells you where to go. (Walking directions, not driving, don't even try to misread again.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fryke
You obviously actively misread my post, and probably simply don't want to get it.
3. You get the integration part totally the wrong way 'round. I don't want any of a watches features integrated with the phone, I want thousands of apps to be able to use the iWatch as a display right on my wrist, while the phone can rest in my pants or bag or coat.
4. The screen on the watch doesn't _have_ to be too small for several reasons. If you've actually read about Apple's patent application, you know that the screen isn't your typical watch display. Plus: Not all information comes in longish paragraphs you have to read and understand. Sometimes an icon is enough. But it can even give you directions, for example, showing you part of the map and an arrow that tells you where to go. (Walking directions, not driving, don't even try to misread again.)
don't underestimate other people, this is my logic
3. You obviously disagree with me saying "...Apps are there to interact with user. Either via screen (which is too small on watch, obviously) or via Siri-like solutions.." ?
4. you constantly believe people you are talking to are morons who misread your postings, yet you fail again to comprehend the essence of other people's arguments. Apps, you are mentioning are delivering small and very doubtful value, IMHO. Widget applications on watch simply don't bring the value expected, this is why Apple left small iPod mini concept. If there would be a value in that, Apple could simply connect this existing device with iPhone and offer massive widget SDK to developers. I am not saying this is not possible or it won't happen. I just see very small value in it and I believe it makes much more sense developing Siri further, than making such large enterprise with iWatch.