NPD predicts wearable device hype will quickly cool off by 2016

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 42
    dobbydobby Posts: 797member

    "Recent rumors have suggested Apple will join the list of electronics makers who are attempting to cash in on the consumer hype for wearable devices."

    This whole wearable devices only started to make tech site news or so called 'hype' and become visible since rumors or hints came out that Apple were looking into it.

  • Reply 22 of 42
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    gqb wrote: »
    While Apple is no slam dunk for getting it right, to date there is no serious trend of wearables. The field isn't even to the nascent stage. Maybe a bit premature to be ringing the death bells?

    1) I've said this before: One thing I'd like to see from an Apple wrist-worn wearable is the ability for it to talk to my iPhone, iPad and Mac to lock and unlock when I'm within a certain range thus allowing it to mimic the intelligence we see in Sci-Fi movies when the human approaches a machine without it needing to have cameras to see the person and be sentient. This helps with convenience when you approach but also helps with security when you leave it, which also includes if your device is stolen on a subway (below). It could also be used to vibrate and/or make an audible sound when you leave your device in a place it doesn't register as a Home location (where the geofence would be larger and configurable). Someone had posted a keychain that did this but I can't remember who, what thread or the name of the product.

    2) What I really want to see are warbles that migrate into implants or swallowable CE. Instead of wearing the device I mention above for that feature it's implanted under the skin. Or instead of a device that measures biometrics it's implanted with a long life battery or is powered from your person, or something you swallow daily to monitor various biometrics.
  • Reply 23 of 42
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 18,015member
    I find these reports hilarious as well. They are almost never right. These kinds of groups said the iPod would never work, that the Zune would destroy it, that the iPhone would have no market, and that the iPad would fail. I don't pretend to know what Apple will release, but when and if they do, it will probably be another product we never knew we needed and now can't live without.
  • Reply 24 of 42
    No devices to speak of, technology at this point in beginning stages, just the beginning of research on portable medical devices and monitoring.
  • Reply 25 of 42
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    This is obviously only bad news for just Apple. /s

    Predictions that far in advance are worthless. Things change. Netbooks were suppose to be the greatest thing until Apple said "Here's the iPad".
  • Reply 26 of 42
    lord amhranlord amhran Posts: 902member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

     

     

    I wouldn't write it off until we see what Apple brings to the table, if they decide to bring anything at all.




    Agree 100%. Once Apple does or does not enter the market then we'll see and make predictions. Until then these guys are blowing farts in the wind.

  • Reply 27 of 42
    evilutionevilution Posts: 1,399member

    If Apple didn't enter this sector then I could quite believe it cooling by 2016. However, I suspect that Apple will and there'll be a massive spike in interest in the sector and loads of companies will try to make their own crappy versions.

  • Reply 28 of 42
    addicted44addicted44 Posts: 830member

    Since NPD thinks wearables are hype, for the first time I believe wearables are the next big thing.

  • Reply 29 of 42
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    "Cost efficient manufacturer". Using kids and slaves for building, and Apple for R&D. Yep, sounds "cost-effective".
  • Reply 30 of 42
    lightknightlightknight Posts: 2,312member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    1) I've said this before: One thing I'd like to see from an Apple wrist-worn wearable is the ability for it to talk to my iPhone, iPad and Mac to lock and unlock when I'm within a certain range thus allowing it to mimic the intelligence we see in Sci-Fi movies when the human approaches a machine without it needing to have cameras to see the person and be sentient. This helps with convenience when you approach but also helps with security when you leave it, which also includes if your device is stolen on a subway (below). It could also be used to vibrate and/or make an audible sound when you leave your device in a place it doesn't register as a Home location (where the geofence would be larger and configurable). Someone had posted a keychain that did this but I can't remember who, what thread or the name of the product.

    2) What I really want to see are warbles that migrate into implants or swallowable CE. Instead of wearing the device I mention above for that feature it's implanted under the skin. Or instead of a device that measures biometrics it's implanted with a long life battery or is powered from your person, or something you swallow daily to monitor various biometrics.
    Sounds like Jaron Lanier's tattoos.
  • Reply 31 of 42
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by WardC View Post

     

    The Samsung Galaxy Gear was a flop....the Google Glass is going to be a flop, if it's not already....but, the iWatch is bound to be something like we have never seen before or imagined for a wearable computer. I predict Apple's entry will blow us away, and set a new standard for the industry. Apple is taking their time and not entering the field until they have just what they want, and what they know the consumer will oooh and ahhh over...and millions will purchase. So, until Apple enters the field, whenever they do, I am not taking any credit in predictions of "when the wearable market will die out" -- because the real fun hasn't even started!!


    You make it sound like Google Glass was supposed to be a real product line.

  • Reply 32 of 42
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Sounds like Jaron Lanier's tattoos.

    I looked the guy up but I'm getting the tattoo reference.

    hmm wrote: »
    You make it sound like Google Glass was supposed to be a real product line.

    If it had been successful I'm sure that it would have been a "real" product line.
  • Reply 33 of 42
    taniwhataniwha Posts: 347member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wigby View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Taniwha View Post

     

    You're making a number of questionable assumptions yourself. The biggest player on the planet ??. There may not even be a game to play, and your favourite "Player" plays to a small, closed community when looked at from outside the US of A. 


    It's not about marketshare. It's about the fact that most companies are waiting to see what Apple does before entering the wearable market. it's about the fact that everyone currently in the wearable market will pivot their game the moment Apple announces their plans. The way Apple sees it, right now there are no wearable users to even address because the numbers are so small. That will change completely when they enter the market and then you will see a global shift towards wearables inside and outside of the USA.


    Basically you are simply making some kind of wild speculation based on blind faith that Apple will hit a home run with anything they do. History and rationality argue against that. 

     

    I think market share is more significant than you do. Let me give you a simple example. InCar entertainment. Over here in Germany apple has about 15% of the smartphone market. The German Auto manufacturers are unlikely to make a major commitment to an InCar entertainment technology that requires deep integration into the automation and control systems when this will NOT excite 85% of their customers. Now you may argue that people who by German HiTech autos are the same people who by Apple. I doubt that, but in any case I think the German Auto industry understand their market demographics better than Apple understands the german auto Industry International market demographics ... if you see what I mean. There will be some incentive for Apple in car as an option, but not as a core technology.

     

    So really I think Market share is a very major aspect in every field. You may or may not agree, but the whole discussion is absurdly speculative and lacking in facts. FFS we don*t even know IF apple will enter the wearables sector, and in which context. It's unlikely to be such a hit that it will make a huge market where one doesn't exist. I am supremely sceptical that there is anything like an Apple Magic Wand. 

  • Reply 34 of 42
    undefined
  • Reply 35 of 42
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    taniwha wrote: »
    Basically you are simply making some kind of wild speculation based on blind faith that Apple will hit a home run with anything they do. History and rationality argue against that. 

    I think market share is more significant than you do. Let me give you a simple example. InCar entertainment. Over here in Germany apple has about 15% of the smartphone market. The German Auto manufacturers are unlikely to make a major commitment to an InCar entertainment technology that requires deep integration into the automation and control systems when this will NOT excite 85% of their customers. Now you may argue that people who by German HiTech autos are the same people who by Apple. I doubt that, but in any case I think the German Auto industry understand their market demographics better than Apple understands the german auto Industry International market demographics ... if you see what I mean. There will be some incentive for Apple in car as an option, but not as a core technology.

    So really I think Market share is a very major aspect in every field. You may or may not agree, but the whole discussion is absurdly speculative and lacking in facts. FFS we don*t even know IF apple will enter the wearables sector, and in which context. It's unlikely to be such a hit that it will make a huge market where one doesn't exist. I am supremely sceptical that there is anything like an Apple Magic Wand. 

    For thinking marketshare is significant you oddly don't acknowledge the differences between unit share, revenue share, and profit share of various markets. I think Apple dominates the profit and revenue shares of all the major markets they are in.

    Furthermore, they have an amazing track record of only releasing products once the technology has matured to allow them to offer a great UX. You can look at all the comments about how the iPod, iPhone and iPad were going to fail for entering a saturated or uncaring market and having too few features and/or too few features at too high a price. Their history doesn't guarantee their future will be as glorious but to assume that Apple won't use the same consideration and focus when creating a new product category seems like a bad bet.
  • Reply 36 of 42
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post

     



    Agree 100%. Once Apple does or does not enter the market then we'll see and make predictions. Until then these guys are blowing farts in the wind.


     Which means that a Steveless Apple has to totally knock it out of the park.

    Otherwise - DOOM!

  • Reply 37 of 42
    dreyfus2dreyfus2 Posts: 1,072member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Taniwha View Post

     

    I think market share is more significant than you do. Let me give you a simple example. InCar entertainment. Over here in Germany apple has about 15% of the smartphone market. The German Auto manufacturers are unlikely to make a major commitment to an InCar entertainment technology that requires deep integration into the automation and control systems when this will NOT excite 85% of their customers. Now you may argue that people who by German HiTech autos are the same people who by Apple. I doubt that, but in any case I think the German Auto industry understand their market demographics better than Apple understands the german auto Industry International market demographics ... if you see what I mean. There will be some incentive for Apple in car as an option, but not as a core technology.


     

    This is a terrible example. Apple is first to roll out a technology that fully makes smartphone content available in the car without any ugly and unreliable workarounds like Ford Sync. CarPlay does not "require deep integration into the automation and control systems" at all. It is the car's OS that is fully in control and just provides access to the display, touch sensors and (if available) a few hardware buttons. CarPlay does not replace any software in the car, it is always an additional option. Manufacturers can implement CarPlay, Google's alternative and the me-too product MS has announced for 2100 all in the same car at the same time. None of them is mutually exclusive, the only proprietary thing for the time being maybe the Lightning connector required as long as there are no WiFi based versions. Any compliant car entertainment OS (mainly QNX, but others could easily do the same) can support many clients, just as you can connect an Apple TV and a Chromecast to the same TV set.

     

    And the top German "HiTech" car brands do both support CarPlay because their clients demand it. Both do still have more and better iOS than Android apps for their current systems. BMW was bombarded with requests and inquiries after they were missing from Apple's initial list of supporting partners and needed less than a week to row back and promise support. According to your theory they would all have to be Android-first, none of them is. Market share does not matter, what your clients ask for does.

  • Reply 38 of 42
    taniwhataniwha Posts: 347member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Taniwha View Post



    Basically you are simply making some kind of wild speculation based on blind faith that Apple will hit a home run with anything they do. History and rationality argue against that. 



    I think market share is more significant than you do. Let me give you a simple example. InCar entertainment. Over here in Germany apple has about 15% of the smartphone market. The German Auto manufacturers are unlikely to make a major commitment to an InCar entertainment technology that requires deep integration into the automation and control systems when this will NOT excite 85% of their customers. Now you may argue that people who by German HiTech autos are the same people who by Apple. I doubt that, but in any case I think the German Auto industry understand their market demographics better than Apple understands the german auto Industry International market demographics ... if you see what I mean. There will be some incentive for Apple in car as an option, but not as a core technology.



    So really I think Market share is a very major aspect in every field. You may or may not agree, but the whole discussion is absurdly speculative and lacking in facts. FFS we don*t even know IF apple will enter the wearables sector, and in which context. It's unlikely to be such a hit that it will make a huge market where one doesn't exist. I am supremely sceptical that there is anything like an Apple Magic Wand. 




    For thinking marketshare is significant you oddly don't acknowledge the differences between unit share, revenue share, and profit share of various markets. I think Apple dominates the profit and revenue shares of all the major markets they are in.



    Furthermore, they have an amazing track record of only releasing products once the technology has matured to allow them to offer a great UX. You can look at all the comments about how the iPod, iPhone and iPad were going to fail for entering a saturated or uncaring market and having too few features and/or too few features at too high a price. Their history doesn't guarantee their future will be as glorious but to assume that Apple won't use the same consideration and focus when creating a new product category seems like a bad bet.

    You are quite probably right that apple dominates the Revenue share and profit share ... with a steadily declining lead. Its always the case that the first into the market dominates for a while. How long still ? anybodys guess.

     

    I find it somewhat amusing that so many here in AI think that the massive profit that Apple is milking from their customers is somehow good for the customers. Its not. Its good for Apple and bad for everyone else.  

     

    But the lead in profitability says NOTHING about Apple's ability to break into the wearables market (which is probably an illusion anyway ) and create something entirely new and unforseen. In fact I wonder whether they have missed the bus entirely and will end up not even entering this particular game. In any event I can't see why there is ANY expectation that a new device class will induce millions worldwide to pay up large amounts of money for wearables .. while continuing to spend on the Smartphones and Tablets. It won't happen.

  • Reply 39 of 42
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    taniwha wrote: »
    You are quite probably right that apple dominates the Revenue share and profit share ... with a steadily declining lead. Its always the case that the first into the market dominates for a while. How long still ? anybodys guess.

    First into the market? Apple is usually the last but dominates because they do it right. Or are you going to argue that cell phones, tablets, and MP3 players didn't exist before Apple invented it. That's just your revisionist flavour of the hour as believe that spin will make Apple look weak but as soon as you need it to show that Apple wasn't first you'll point that out.
    I find it somewhat amusing that so many here in AI think that the massive profit that Apple is milking from their customers is somehow good for the customers. Its not. Its good for Apple and bad for everyone else.

    What you fail to understand is that operations efficiency, negotiation capabilities, and economics of scale which reflect the profit the company makes has no barring on whether that product is the best option for the customer's needs for a given price point. For some unfathomable reason you think, for example, if HTC made a 0.5% profit for the quarter it means they are altruistic and selling you a product at some bargain price when the truth is a combination of failures that gets you a lesser product with a worse UX, which is why Apple has a long history of coming in much later (even decades later) and dominating a market in short order from zero.
    But the lead in profitability says NOTHING about Apple's ability to break into the wearables market (which is probably an illusion anyway ) and create something entirely new and unforseen. In fact I wonder whether they have missed the bus entirely and will end up not even entering this particular game. In any event I can't see why there is ANY expectation that a new device class will induce millions worldwide to pay up large amounts of money for wearables .. while continuing to spend on the Smartphones and Tablets. It won't happen.

    Your level of wonderment about the nascent wearables market is on par with a dog's wonderment of the universe. Based on their history Apple will enter the market with the technology is there to allow them to offer a product with a specific use focus and certain level of UX. So far no one has come close so your claims that Apple has "missed the bus" are vacuous. This wearables market is less advanced now than the PMP, cell phones and tablets market were before Apple entered the ring and dominated out of the gate.

    Other companies should follow Apple's lead instead of bowing to mindless asshats with the attention span of toddlers that want a new toy every 5 minutes regardless of how well it's thought out.
  • Reply 40 of 42
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,073member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

     

    How can anybody predict anything about "wearables", when the biggest player on the planet has not even entered the game yet?

     


     

     

    The prediction will most probably be correct for everyone except Apple, once they finally enter the market.

Sign In or Register to comment.