Problem with iWatch is people don't want to have to charge their watch every day. Most of us who wear watches put them on and forget about them (aside from looking at time etc). I cannot imagine having to charge my watch daily. Then will be the days someone forgets to charge their watch.
Are there 65 million people left in the world who would wear a new watch? Neither of my kids have ever worn any of the watches I have bought them, and none of their friends do either. Unless this replaces their phones I don't see how this rumour is possible.
With over $30 billion in sales annually, I'd say yes. More to the point, there are probably well over 1 billion people who would love a smart watch.
People don't wear watches like they used to. However, in Western culture at least, there is a growing number of people that run/bike/swim and there's always the ever popular golf.
From what I've seen and experienced for myself, the offerings from Polar/Timex/Suunto are either extremely limited, complicated, bulky or ugly or any combination of the previous four. Where Apple can step in, is by offering a very subtle and well designed device, that paired along with an iPhone would give the active user a killer must have combination.
I pretty much bet that such a device can find some 65 million clients worldwide.
For example, Strava is a wondeful app to have on your iPhone today. Problem is, you have to take out your iPhone in the middle of a run in order to see your progress. iWatch definitely solves that problem.
They would have to strike the perfect balance between jewelry and durability. People would have far less tolerance if their jewelry was easily scratched versus something that is hidden in a case like the iPhone. Not saying Apple cannot do it, just that it wouldn't be easy. A rubberized coating would be out of place as jewelry while a metallic face and band would not make the most sense as a fitness tool. Interesting times.
Apple's new teleporter will be wrist mounted and link with satellites over head. You will speak your destination and be transported there. The new data centers were never for iTunes, they were to store the kiloquads of data that are required to disassemble your atoms and re assemble them at the destination.
In related news, Apple buys several third world nations and flys its "flying saucer" headquarters there, totally bypassing us tax and DOJ efforts. Wall Street responds by tripling the stock value to 3000 per share, then in a big mood change, kills the stock totally.
Apple responds by buying Wall Street and replacing everyone with one new Mac Pro.
Actually Apple success came from selling products that people needed: communication, computing, playing music, etc, things that improved people’s life on their own not as accessories! What Apple did was drastically improve usability and experience to the point where more people could take advantage of new technology to do things that they already did in some form.
A smartwatch looks to be an accessory that might improve interactions with other devices but is limited in scope. It is not actually necessary for those interactions. It might have some biosensors that could be interesting for some people, but for most people will seem superfluous. It will be mostly about experience not new functionality
Well I don't think Apple would be driving so hard (if rumors about hirings and timelines going out a year or more) just to build an accessory with limited new functionality and/or scope. If the "accessory" angle was all there was to it, I think they could have shipped the iWatch already. They are apparently spending a very long time and effort on development. I think that they will surprise us with something more grand. That certainly is the impression that Tim Cook gave with his answer, and I believe Apple will be able to execute.
Regardless of the "accessory" point, the meaning of my original post was this: I was thinking of two products in particular that people didn't really see the need for until Apple put their version of the product out there: iPod and iPad. There were already MP3 players, but they generally sucked so badly that they only reinforced the notion of irrelevance. Same thing can be said of all tablet computers prior to iPad. But then Apple makes a product that is stellar and highly desirable, and it not only outsold the previous (lame) attempts by competitors, but it also created a sense of "need" where none was perceived before. So I maintain that their track record in this "need creation" is great, and your counterpoint that an "accessory" probably couldn't do this is a good one except for one fatal flaw: there is no evidence that this will only BE an accessory, and I think that we have enough hints to suggest that it will not be.
Am I the only one who would appreciate it if you stopped using that awful picture by Yrving Torrealba whenever you write about the rumoured watch? Watches, like glasses, are a personally fashionable extentions of the taste of the one wearing it, like with a bracelet, or a necklace, nail polish etc. I honestly think Apple will have to loosen up on the design here. There'll probably be high quality details like leather under it, textile and a somewhat toned down appearance. Not a massive plastic handcuff. Sorry for whining.. just ignore me...
Functionality could compel purchases, time display wristwatches are rejected due to their redundancy with other devices such as cellphones not because younger people view their wrists as somehow sacrosanct. To judge from the bangles, rubber bands etc. I see daily....
Admittedly I fail, for the moment, to see that compelling functionality... but then that's what Apple is for eh?
Facetime on a "watch" or small, thin and simple device that can also be to stuck on the dashboard, wheel, mirror or whatever via bluetooth will be a game changer. That makes "iWatch" a clever name. Apple needs to secure the rights to use "Dick Tracy" in their ads.
What is so dumb about the idea of Apple eventually making a 5 inch iPhone?
The LTE iPad mini does that segment better. Phablets are generally understood to be used for mobile computing, which the mini with it's larger screen does with a superior experience. Thought being if you're going to go big anyway, go big.
Facetime on a "watch" or small, thin and simple device that can also be to stuck on the dashboard, wheel, mirror or whatever via bluetooth will be a game changer. That makes "iWatch" a clever name. Apple needs to secure the rights to use "Dick Tracy" in their ads.
I don't know, his color palette would clash with iOS 7....
Am I the only one who would appreciate it if you stopped using that awful picture by Yrving Torrealba whenever you write about the rumoured watch? Watches, like glasses, are a personally fashionable extentions of the taste of the one wearing it, like with a bracelet, or a necklace, nail polish etc. I honestly think Apple will have to loosen up on the design here. There'll probably be high quality details like leather under it, textile and a somewhat toned down appearance. Not a massive plastic handcuff.
Sorry for whining.. just ignore me...
That's it! iWatch will be a prisoner monitoring system. The updated ankle bracelet... Maybe it should have been theyWatch? iCuffs is probably taken by those stupid power icon cuff links.
It's sort of hilarious to watch people declare that Apple shouldn't wear a watch because no one wears a watch.
It's sort of like saying they shouldn't sell a smartphone because everyone uses a feature phone.
How did that turn out for them?
1 billion people were already buying phones and the functionality of the iPhone was significantly better because it finally brought usable browsing to mobile and powerful apps. A smart watch is competing more with the smartphone than the dumbwatch while being less powerful.
There's a video of the Android GEAK watch here:
[VIDEO]
You can see various scenarios like checking email. The guy taps through a presentation on the watch and the graphics overlay says "sending email". It has voice to text so you'd have to use that for the whole thing as there's no keyboard. It has wifi to send email directly. Then he checks the weather info (makes sure to do it while near his wifi because it sure can't have cellular and wifi). It has GPS which is nice but it would need maps stored on the device for navigation. Then he uses the watch to tell the smartphone tied to his arm to take pervy pictures of the female runner. He gets his diet info and sits down to read news on the 1.5" 240x240 display. He goes to the business meeting where they all have Mac laptops and sends data through a nearby projector. Lastly he starts some sort of messaging with the people he's sitting next to (maybe the digital equivalent of writing numbers on napkins?).
It's basically a smartphone with a strap that can't make calls, has no cellular connectivity for data outside of wifi, relies on voice input for text (which requires network access), has too small a screen size and resolution for reading text. The battery is about 1/3 the size of a smartphone, maybe less so it'll have to find a way to draw around 0.5W maximum to make it through the day.
Some of the use cases are nice and it would be good for sports, especially navigation as you could for example see a map on your wrist while cycling or running. I think the uses cases where it has a lot of appeal have a very limited audience. By contrast, smartphone features are compelling for almost everyone with a dumbphone.
It may be worth making one - the Apple TV only sells 2 million units per quarter at $99 so 2 million watches per quarter at $199 would be better financially than the Apple TV. But would people buy a $199 watch that had no network connectivity when you were out and about unless you also had your smartphone in which case surely you'd use the smartphone most of the time. I don't think people are going to start dictating their tweets while walking down the street (I hope not anyway).
Having variable straps would allow people to personalise the devices and I'd say it's important to let people do that.
Comments
Originally Posted by boriscleto
How can you project shipments of a product that will never exist?
How can you maintain web traffic in an Apple news lull?
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
These watch theories have become a circle jerk for analysts.
The iWatch is the new "Apple television set."
That was my favorite line in the whole movie! Classic
What is so dumb about the idea of Apple eventually making a 5 inch iPhone?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Dodel
Are there 65 million people left in the world who would wear a new watch? Neither of my kids have ever worn any of the watches I have bought them, and none of their friends do either. Unless this replaces their phones I don't see how this rumour is possible.
With over $30 billion in sales annually, I'd say yes. More to the point, there are probably well over 1 billion people who would love a smart watch.
They would have to strike the perfect balance between jewelry and durability. People would have far less tolerance if their jewelry was easily scratched versus something that is hidden in a case like the iPhone. Not saying Apple cannot do it, just that it wouldn't be easy. A rubberized coating would be out of place as jewelry while a metallic face and band would not make the most sense as a fitness tool. Interesting times.
It should also run Android, because the iPhone is not Android enough.
It's sort of hilarious to watch people declare that Apple shouldn't wear a watch because no one wears a watch.
It's sort of like saying they shouldn't sell a smartphone because everyone uses a feature phone.
How did that turn out for them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
It should also run Android, because the iPhone is not Android enough.
If Apple make a 5 inch iPhone, it will kick the ass of any 5 inch Android phone anytime, anywhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eldernorm
Apple's new teleporter will be wrist mounted and link with satellites over head. You will speak your destination and be transported there. The new data centers were never for iTunes, they were to store the kiloquads of data that are required to disassemble your atoms and re assemble them at the destination.
In related news, Apple buys several third world nations and flys its "flying saucer" headquarters there, totally bypassing us tax and DOJ efforts. Wall Street responds by tripling the stock value to 3000 per share, then in a big mood change, kills the stock totally.
Apple responds by buying Wall Street and replacing everyone with one new Mac Pro.
Just saying.
That was very amusing!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ppietra
Actually Apple success came from selling products that people needed: communication, computing, playing music, etc, things that improved people’s life on their own not as accessories! What Apple did was drastically improve usability and experience to the point where more people could take advantage of new technology to do things that they already did in some form.
A smartwatch looks to be an accessory that might improve interactions with other devices but is limited in scope. It is not actually necessary for those interactions. It might have some biosensors that could be interesting for some people, but for most people will seem superfluous. It will be mostly about experience not new functionality
Well I don't think Apple would be driving so hard (if rumors about hirings and timelines going out a year or more) just to build an accessory with limited new functionality and/or scope. If the "accessory" angle was all there was to it, I think they could have shipped the iWatch already. They are apparently spending a very long time and effort on development. I think that they will surprise us with something more grand. That certainly is the impression that Tim Cook gave with his answer, and I believe Apple will be able to execute.
Regardless of the "accessory" point, the meaning of my original post was this: I was thinking of two products in particular that people didn't really see the need for until Apple put their version of the product out there: iPod and iPad. There were already MP3 players, but they generally sucked so badly that they only reinforced the notion of irrelevance. Same thing can be said of all tablet computers prior to iPad. But then Apple makes a product that is stellar and highly desirable, and it not only outsold the previous (lame) attempts by competitors, but it also created a sense of "need" where none was perceived before. So I maintain that their track record in this "need creation" is great, and your counterpoint that an "accessory" probably couldn't do this is a good one except for one fatal flaw: there is no evidence that this will only BE an accessory, and I think that we have enough hints to suggest that it will not be.
Thompson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie
If Apple make a 5 inch iPhone, it will kick the ass of any 5 inch Android phone anytime, anywhere.
Apple doesn't make a 5 inch iPhone, and it still kicks the ass of any 5 inch Android phone anytime, anywhere.
Sorry for whining.. just ignore me...
Admittedly I fail, for the moment, to see that compelling functionality... but then that's what Apple is for eh?
Facetime on a "watch" or small, thin and simple device that can also be to stuck on the dashboard, wheel, mirror or whatever via bluetooth will be a game changer. That makes "iWatch" a clever name. Apple needs to secure the rights to use "Dick Tracy" in their ads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Connie
What is so dumb about the idea of Apple eventually making a 5 inch iPhone?
The LTE iPad mini does that segment better. Phablets are generally understood to be used for mobile computing, which the mini with it's larger screen does with a superior experience. Thought being if you're going to go big anyway, go big.
Quote:
Originally Posted by city
Facetime on a "watch" or small, thin and simple device that can also be to stuck on the dashboard, wheel, mirror or whatever via bluetooth will be a game changer. That makes "iWatch" a clever name. Apple needs to secure the rights to use "Dick Tracy" in their ads.
I don't know, his color palette would clash with iOS 7....
That's it! iWatch will be a prisoner monitoring system. The updated ankle bracelet... Maybe it should have been theyWatch? iCuffs is probably taken by those stupid power icon cuff links.
1 billion people were already buying phones and the functionality of the iPhone was significantly better because it finally brought usable browsing to mobile and powerful apps. A smart watch is competing more with the smartphone than the dumbwatch while being less powerful.
There's a video of the Android GEAK watch here:
[VIDEO]
You can see various scenarios like checking email. The guy taps through a presentation on the watch and the graphics overlay says "sending email". It has voice to text so you'd have to use that for the whole thing as there's no keyboard. It has wifi to send email directly. Then he checks the weather info (makes sure to do it while near his wifi because it sure can't have cellular and wifi). It has GPS which is nice but it would need maps stored on the device for navigation. Then he uses the watch to tell the smartphone tied to his arm to take pervy pictures of the female runner. He gets his diet info and sits down to read news on the 1.5" 240x240 display. He goes to the business meeting where they all have Mac laptops and sends data through a nearby projector. Lastly he starts some sort of messaging with the people he's sitting next to (maybe the digital equivalent of writing numbers on napkins?).
http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/17/geak-watch-android-china/
Voice to text, wifi, bluetooth, NFC, GPS, FM radio, headphone jack, biometric sensors, 1GHz CPU, 512MB RAM, 4GB storage, 500mAh battery, 1.55" 240x240 display, $330.
It's basically a smartphone with a strap that can't make calls, has no cellular connectivity for data outside of wifi, relies on voice input for text (which requires network access), has too small a screen size and resolution for reading text. The battery is about 1/3 the size of a smartphone, maybe less so it'll have to find a way to draw around 0.5W maximum to make it through the day.
Some of the use cases are nice and it would be good for sports, especially navigation as you could for example see a map on your wrist while cycling or running. I think the uses cases where it has a lot of appeal have a very limited audience. By contrast, smartphone features are compelling for almost everyone with a dumbphone.
It may be worth making one - the Apple TV only sells 2 million units per quarter at $99 so 2 million watches per quarter at $199 would be better financially than the Apple TV. But would people buy a $199 watch that had no network connectivity when you were out and about unless you also had your smartphone in which case surely you'd use the smartphone most of the time. I don't think people are going to start dictating their tweets while walking down the street (I hope not anyway).
Having variable straps would allow people to personalise the devices and I'd say it's important to let people do that.