They are so hard to use though. You have to look at it, check out where the arms are, then think about what time that means it is. Most of them don't even have numbers too, so then you're left counting the marks to see which number it represents.
A digital watch you can just glance at, and see the time.
You can also set it for the more sensible 24 hour time and not be bothered by all that, "Is it 12:00 AM or 12:00 PM?" nonsense.
History repeats. MP3 players. Smartphones. Tablets. There is a pattern. Inferior products are in the market for some time before Apple releases its superior product. Then, everyone tries to copy.
This time, I hope Microsoft and Google can both start releasing their smart watches before the iWatch is released. It will be a lot of fun to watch.
Some of you can never understand the point on mp3 players. It's just one item in your list, but it bugs me. Apple had a complete and well marketed system there. Quality had nothing to do with it. It was difficult to get battery service. Sound was no better than average. Their earbud designs from that era were horrible (note the updated design). I owned a couple of them, including a nano. In both cases they were a lot better with a pair of foldable sennheisers, but as buggy as itunes is, that distribution method combined with their marketing made very mediocre hardware into a great success.
Well, the venturebeat article that this is taken from does state that, sometimes, Samsung sends out prototypes that don't mirror the final designs, but also guesses that the final thing probably won't be far off what were looking at here.
Which seems ridiculous. I have to agree with the people saying that this looks rushed - done for the sake of getting some kind of touchscreen smart watch out before the competition. And a 10 hour battery life? Are you expected to turn this thing off when you're not looking at it to try and conserve the meagre battery?
As for the mention of Samsung S-Voice, I can imagine that voice commands could play a big role in controlling a device like this. It has web access and, arguably, one of the most common web activities is searching for a quick bit of information. Can you imagine trying to type on something like this? I've not used Samsung voice recognition since my S2, but it was pretty shocking back then. Things might have improved muchly though, I don't know.
I have a phone... I stopped needing a watch long ago. I understand a fitness band for when a watch is too heavy and or lot's of water etc may be involved but that's it. Don't need a watch anymore. Just like I don't need my grandfathers slide rule, HP calculator, day-timer, low end camera, separate iPod, GPS and often even my laptop. I have a programable device that does all of that.
Some of you can never understand the point on mp3 players. It's just one item in your list, but it bugs me. Apple had a complete and well marketed system there. Quality had nothing to do with it. It was difficult to get battery service. Sound was no better than average. Their earbud designs from that era were horrible (note the updated design). I owned a couple of them, including a nano. In both cases they were a lot better with a pair of foldable sennheisers, but as buggy as itunes is, that distribution method combined with their marketing made very mediocre hardware into a great success.
You never used the MP3 players of the era did you? Their sound quality was far worse than the iPods. Their ear buds were equally as bad. Their UI's were beyond horrible. They were USB 1.0 slow.
Some of you can never understand the point on mp3 players. It's just one item in your list, but it bugs me. Apple had a complete and well marketed system there. Quality had nothing to do with it. It was difficult to get battery service. Sound was no better than average. Their earbud designs from that era were horrible (note the updated design). I owned a couple of them, including a nano. In both cases they were a lot better with a pair of foldable sennheisers, but as buggy as itunes is, that distribution method combined with their marketing made very mediocre hardware into a great success.
Without getting into a discussion on the perceived quality, etc. you can not argue that the success of the iPod defined that market, provided the launching pad for legitimate online music stores, and brought us to the current smartphone market.
Samsung has been known to test devices in large shells and even purposely leak incorrect images of devices to throw people of. Anything and everything can change about this device.
Samsung has been known to test devices in large shells and even purposely leak incorrect images of devices to throw people of. Anything and everything can change about this device.
yes of course. the final version will look a lot more like what everyone expects Apple to come up with. ;-)
And then they will show prior art to explain how they had those prototypes in the works much before Apple even registered the iWatch name...
my take is that basically they have covered all possible grounds with what a 'smart' watch might end up having in terms of features. Then they can swing the design and refine the concepts any which way the market leader takes this segment forward.
Lo and behold! A new product segment is born. Hence forth it shall be called a Phat Watch...
And who the hell wants to do FaceTime/Skype on a smart watch, really?!? Just hold your arm up in that position for 30 seconds and tell me it's a good idea.
Samsung will fix their watch to look like that of Apple as soon as Apple releases theirs. They will go back to the drawing board like they did with the tablet and commence massive copying.
"SOOOOOOOOOOOOO COOOOOOOOOOOOOL I WATCHED IT SO MANY TIMES IT MADE ME TINGLE WITH EXCITEMENT I BLUDDY GOT GOOSE BUMPS I WANT IT? HOPE ITS NOT TOO PRICEY"
Disappointment on the way for some people. I don't like how Samsung gets all the press when Sony does a better job and got to market first. Their watch looks a lot nicer, check the metal strap model at 1:24:
Well, maybe I just fell out of the habit since digital clocks have been around for most of my life, but yeah, really. I'm often faced with one of those clocks with just the marks and I have to say to myself " … well, that one is the three, so … four, five, … so that mans 25, and the short hand is closer to the twelve than the one after it, so that means it's 12:25!" Seriously.
At least I can still do it. I have a nephew who is now in his late 30's who just can't tell time with an analogue clock at all! He was born right about the same time as digital clocks came into being and he never learned how to tell time the old way. He wears a digital watch on his wrist all the time for that reason. He's far from an idiot so I'm sure there are many others in the same situation.
Well, maybe I just fell out of the habit since digital clocks have been around for most of my life, but yeah, really. I'm often faced with one of those clocks with just the marks and I have to say to myself " … well, that one is the three, so … four, five, … so that mans 25, and the short hand is closer to the twelve than the one after it, so that means it's 12:25!" Seriously.
At least I can still do it. I have a nephew who is now in his late 30's who just can't tell time with an analogue clock at all! He was born right about the same time as digital clocks came into being and he never learned how to tell time the old way. He wears a digital watch on his wrist all the time for that reason. He's far from an idiot so I'm sure there are many others in the same situation.
My 7 yr old son had lots of time reading homework last year so it's not like it isn't be taught.
Comments
This is a basinga, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jj.yuan
History repeats. MP3 players. Smartphones. Tablets. There is a pattern. Inferior products are in the market for some time before Apple releases its superior product. Then, everyone tries to copy.
This time, I hope Microsoft and Google can both start releasing their smart watches before the iWatch is released. It will be a lot of fun to watch.
Some of you can never understand the point on mp3 players. It's just one item in your list, but it bugs me. Apple had a complete and well marketed system there. Quality had nothing to do with it. It was difficult to get battery service. Sound was no better than average. Their earbud designs from that era were horrible (note the updated design). I owned a couple of them, including a nano. In both cases they were a lot better with a pair of foldable sennheisers, but as buggy as itunes is, that distribution method combined with their marketing made very mediocre hardware into a great success.
Which seems ridiculous. I have to agree with the people saying that this looks rushed - done for the sake of getting some kind of touchscreen smart watch out before the competition. And a 10 hour battery life? Are you expected to turn this thing off when you're not looking at it to try and conserve the meagre battery?
As for the mention of Samsung S-Voice, I can imagine that voice commands could play a big role in controlling a device like this. It has web access and, arguably, one of the most common web activities is searching for a quick bit of information. Can you imagine trying to type on something like this? I've not used Samsung voice recognition since my S2, but it was pretty shocking back then. Things might have improved muchly though, I don't know.
I understand a fitness band for when a watch is too heavy and or lot's of water etc may be involved but that's it. Don't need a watch anymore. Just like I don't need my grandfathers slide rule, HP calculator, day-timer, low end camera, separate iPod, GPS and often even my laptop. I have a programable device that does all of that.
And that watch looks ugly!
You never used the MP3 players of the era did you? Their sound quality was far worse than the iPods. Their ear buds were equally as bad. Their UI's were beyond horrible. They were USB 1.0 slow.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
Some of you can never understand the point on mp3 players. It's just one item in your list, but it bugs me. Apple had a complete and well marketed system there. Quality had nothing to do with it. It was difficult to get battery service. Sound was no better than average. Their earbud designs from that era were horrible (note the updated design). I owned a couple of them, including a nano. In both cases they were a lot better with a pair of foldable sennheisers, but as buggy as itunes is, that distribution method combined with their marketing made very mediocre hardware into a great success.
Without getting into a discussion on the perceived quality, etc. you can not argue that the success of the iPod defined that market, provided the launching pad for legitimate online music stores, and brought us to the current smartphone market.
I was about to ask for a citation as I don't remember a story of Samsung doing so. According to this tho, you are correct.
http://www.phonedog.com/2012/04/20/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-video-leak-teases-device-internals-housed-by-dummy-outer-shell/
yes of course. the final version will look a lot more like what everyone expects Apple to come up with. ;-)
And then they will show prior art to explain how they had those prototypes in the works much before Apple even registered the iWatch name...
my take is that basically they have covered all possible grounds with what a 'smart' watch might end up having in terms of features. Then they can swing the design and refine the concepts any which way the market leader takes this segment forward.
Lo and behold! A new product segment is born. Hence forth it shall be called a Phat Watch...
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcom006
Wow, Samsung, wow...
And who the hell wants to do FaceTime/Skype on a smart watch, really?!? Just hold your arm up in that position for 30 seconds and tell me it's a good idea.
[VIDEO]
[VIDEO]
"SOOOOOOOOOOOOO COOOOOOOOOOOOOL I WATCHED IT SO MANY TIMES IT MADE ME TINGLE WITH EXCITEMENT I BLUDDY GOT GOOSE BUMPS I WANT IT? HOPE ITS NOT TOO PRICEY"
Disappointment on the way for some people. I don't like how Samsung gets all the press when Sony does a better job and got to market first. Their watch looks a lot nicer, check the metal strap model at 1:24:
[VIDEO]
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
Reportedly, it will have more than 10 hours of battery life.
More than 10 hours as in 11 hours, or more than 10 hours as in a week of battery life?
They might want to rethink that.
http://www.omegawatches.com/spirit/jamesbond
You might as well wind it every 10 hours, except that winding only takes a moment, while this requires several hours on a charger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
C'mon really?
Well, maybe I just fell out of the habit since digital clocks have been around for most of my life, but yeah, really. I'm often faced with one of those clocks with just the marks and I have to say to myself " … well, that one is the three, so … four, five, … so that mans 25, and the short hand is closer to the twelve than the one after it, so that means it's 12:25!" Seriously.
At least I can still do it. I have a nephew who is now in his late 30's who just can't tell time with an analogue clock at all! He was born right about the same time as digital clocks came into being and he never learned how to tell time the old way. He wears a digital watch on his wrist all the time for that reason. He's far from an idiot so I'm sure there are many others in the same situation.
My 7 yr old son had lots of time reading homework last year so it's not like it isn't be taught.