Rumor: Apple's 'iWatch' will come in two sizes, three models when it launches this fall

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 39
    blazarblazar Posts: 270member
    The 360 is too big. We do NOT need a simple cellphone extension device.

    Game changing would be authenticated payments, substantial health contribution (doubtful), or authenticated home control. None of these should be dependent on a phone.

    Battery life needs to be amazing and wirelessly charged (tesla style at a distance).

    Anything that is simply a cellphone extender, we have no reason to buy.

    I wouldn't be suprised if they went for a different watch for different primary functions in order to maximize battery life for early versions.

    Smartwatches or other wearables WILL be huge if you let your imagination run wild. I can imagine so many simple functions such as the elimination of your keys and credit card to name a few.

    If the watch doesnt have touch ID, im gonna get suspicious about its usefulness immediately.

    The android watches have NO purpose except to show others that you are a dork.
  • Reply 22 of 39
    wonkothesanewonkothesane Posts: 1,404member
    I don't care so min about the size. The real important question is: but will it b(l)end? ;)
  • Reply 23 of 39
    boblehbobleh Posts: 34member
    IOS 8 is strongly hinting at iWatch features such as voice messaging and quick contextual replies. The UI and experience as demonstrated is in my opinion not portable to neither 1.6" nor 1.8" display. In fact, no software, let alone Apple-class apps and user experience is possible on such tiny displays. Just look at Android Wear. I cannot agree more with John Gruber from Daring Fireball who refers to it as "half-baked mess".

    I expect Apple to introduce the largest display ever created for a wearable device. Though large, a thin profile and flexible materials will make it look sleek and futuristic. Just as the iPhone did not look like any other phone before it, the iWatch will not look like any other watch/wearable ever created.
  • Reply 24 of 39
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

    Apple is said to be planning to release a wrist-worn device this fall with touchscreen sizes of 1.6 and 1.8 inches, with the larger having an option for sapphire...

     

    How stupid do they think we are?

  • Reply 25 of 39
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    Can these rumors get any sillier?

    iWatch Rolex - $899 - Available 11-14-2014

    iWatch Timex -$499 - Available 10-24-2014

  • Reply 26 of 39
    h2ph2p Posts: 269member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple v. Samsung View Post





    ...The iwatch will only work with iphones.

    You can't possibly know that. Just because Samsung has their Gear dependent on (only a couple of) their phones.

     

    I believe a number of the "killer apps" will be non-iPhone related... BUT, of course, it will sync and/or be controlled by iPhone/iPad/iPod/iCloud!!!

     

    Imagine being able to push the results of an iWatch app to iCloud (automatically and for free, of course). Manipulate and work with the data on your Mac OR PC... but it wouldn't sync with Android phones. Screw them.

     

    This would make the iWatch have the accessibility to PC users much like the iPod. Perhaps Apple would release these as Mac only at first (like iPod) -- followed up with an update in 6 months or so for the PC. A Proof-of-Concept strategy. This scenario is unlikely because of the massive success of the ENTIRE company once iPods were PC compatible. Why wait?

  • Reply 27 of 39
    h2ph2p Posts: 269member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Trubador View Post



    Introducing the iWatchAir and the iWatchMini. ;-)



    Or would it be the iBandAir and the iBandMini?



    LOL

    And there could be a special category of Apple Care called iBandAid, yes?

  • Reply 28 of 39
    arlorarlor Posts: 514member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post



    "Rumor: Apple's 'iWatch' will come in two sizes, three models when it launches this fall"



    What a shitty headline, including the launching in the fall as a fact, when it's anything but.

     

    Did you miss the word "rumor"? If you'd accused AI of writing a pointless article based on meaningless speculation, I'd be with you, but the word "rumor" eliminates the problem you're complaining about. Would you prefer "Rumor: Apple's rumored 'iWatch' is rumored to be produced in two sizes and rumored to be produced in three models when it's rumored to be launched, purportedly in the fall"?

  • Reply 29 of 39
    iaeeniaeen Posts: 588member
    arlor wrote: »
    Did you miss the word "rumor"? If you'd accused AI of writing a pointless article based on meaningless speculation, I'd be with you, but the word "rumor" eliminates the problem you're complaining about. Would you prefer "Rumor: Apple's rumored 'iWatch' is rumored to be produced in two sizes and rumored to be produced in three models when it's rumored to be launched, purportedly in the fall"?

    To be fair, your proposed headline is more explicit.
  • Reply 30 of 39
    vaporlandvaporland Posts: 358member
    zoetmb wrote: »
    iWatch ... can fail ... if the product isn't that great and then Samsung or someone else copies it and puts it out at half the price. 

    It would help if the competition can make a profit doing so...
  • Reply 31 of 39
    waybacmacwaybacmac Posts: 309member

    The way I see it, the reason for all the confusion over the "iWatch" is because the sources of the rumors continue to believe there is only one type of iWatch. How the heck can anyone get any decent battery life in a decent size and shape if they stuff one thing with all possible sensors and functions? OK, maybe someday but I don't see the technology being there now.

     

    I am still holding to my belief that Apple will introduce three types of "iWatch" (but won't use that name): 1) a sports/fitness device, 2) a health monitor device, and (later on) an upscale, luxury watch OR technology that would add limited notification functions to existing luxury brands thru licensing. While I'm skeptical about these rumors, they would nearly fit my 1) and 2) proposals. And, yes, I think Apple is smart enough to have men's and women's versions - something Google's macho male engineers don't comprehend.

  • Reply 32 of 39
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by waybacmac View Post

     

     And, yes, I think Apple is smart enough to have men's and women's versions - something Google's macho male engineers don't comprehend.


    If you'd been to Latin America recently, you may have noticed that fashionable men are wearing watches the size of dinner plates and their wives are apparently wearing their husband's previous not as large chronometers simply as a luxury fashion statment. Pretty funny actually.

  • Reply 33 of 39
    ingelaingela Posts: 217member
    zoetmb wrote: »
    A collectible market?   You can only have a collectible market when supply is heavily limited.   Apple produces mass-market items that sell in the tens of millions of units.   There's no such thing as a collectible market in that case.   What collectible items from Apple are there today (aside possibly from a working Apple ][ )?

    And how can Apple fumble?    If the product isn't that great and then Samsung or someone else copies it and puts it out at half the price. 

    Besides, with the possible exception of exercise monitoring, what purpose will an iWatch serve that an iPhone doesn't already serve?    How many devices do people want to own before they've said "enough"?    Are people really going to carry an iWatch, an iPhone, an iPad and possibly a computer as well?    Even with iCloud, the sync issues can drive one nuts. 


    Nike mass produces shoes but there is a huge collector base for their Air Jordans.

    This is not a category Samsung can drop their prices to steal Apple's sales. This is far diffrent. Android devices are great utility products but known as second rate and disposable. That’s not a trait for a product you will wear on your wrist for all to see. Apple is associated with quality high end devices. They have cultivated this image over decades. It will be the advantage neccesary for a product category that is equal parts fashion and utility. Android has foiled itself for this type of product.

    Android Wear from the looks of things seems to be happy and stuck as the Payless Shoes to Apples name brand. Low margin, low quality. No need to wonder what brand people would preffer given the choice. which would be on their Christmas list.
  • Reply 34 of 39
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,491member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by vaporland View Post





    It would help if the competition can make a profit doing so...

     

    Consumers don't care whether Samsung (or any other company) makes a profit.   If they can get a device they consider nearly as good for less money, that can affect whether Apple will be successful in this market for as long as Samsung (or others) are willing to lose money selling a line of products.    

     

    Having said that, Apple's track record over many years has been that they can demand higher prices for their products than the competition.   But that ability does erode over time and to my understanding, Apple's Mac sales in the last quarter were pretty poor, although that may have more to do with the consumer market moving away from computers entirely in favor of Pads, etc. 

  • Reply 35 of 39
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

     

     

    But that ability does erode over time and to my understanding, Apple's Mac sales in the last quarter were pretty poor, although that may have more to do with the consumer market moving away from computers entirely in favor of Pads, etc. 


     

    It seems your understanding is pretty poor.

  • Reply 36 of 39
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,491member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by piot View Post

     

     

    It seems your understanding is pretty poor.


    No, it's your understanding that is poor:

     

    For the most recent quarter:

    Apple's share of the U.S. computer market slipped again during the second quarter of 2014 despite a global trend towards growth in the PC marketplace after tablets like the iPad cannibalized sales. 

     





    Source: IDC



    According to IDC's preliminary results for the most recent June quarter, Apple continued to bleed marketshare in the U.S. PC industry, ending the three-month period as the only top-five PC vendor to have ceded ground year-to-year.



    For the quarter, Apple held 10 percent of the market on shipments of about 1.68 million Macs, down from 10.9 percent in the year ago period. The company's growth shrunk 1.7 percent year-over-year, leaving Apple in fourth place behind HP, Dell and Lenovo. 

  • Reply 37 of 39
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

     

    For the most recent quarter:

    Apple's share of the U.S. computer market slipped again during the second quarter of 2014....

     

    US only. Estimates.... and "Preliminary" estimates at that! Show me Apple's official shipment numbers for Q2. 

     

     

    You simply made a mistake with that but this one....

     

    despite a global trend towards growth in the PC marketplace after tablets like the iPad cannibalized sales. 

     

    ... is complete bollocks.

     

    Ten consecutive months of falling PC sales as noted by IDC. That is a trend. But it's not growth.

     

     

    Look, we'll have to wait a few days for Apple to announce their figures.... but currently, Apple's previous two quarters showed sales increases for Macs. The Mac's global market share is at it's highest since 1994. The installed base has doubled in the last five years.

     

    So yes, I stick by my first response. Your understanding of the figures and indeed Apple's business model leaves a lot to be desired.

  • Reply 38 of 39
    marvfoxmarvfox Posts: 2,275member

    Pretty stupid I say!

  • Reply 39 of 39
    I'd love an Apple wearable. I've seen precious few smartwatches that I would want to wear; just a couple posted by Relic and others on another thread. None of these mock ups appeal to me.

    The iPhone and iPad are lovely slabs that appeal to all ages and classes. But something you wear? That's such a personal thing. I really can't see some giant screen on your wrist appealing to more than the usual suspects. An inflexible bracelet is a non-starter. All the watch mock ups or Android ones are much too thick. It would have to be no thicker than a slim mechanical watch.

    Still haven't seen a compelling reason for it. Mobile payments and a lock for your Apple stuff seem good ones, but it seems too soon for payments. Health and fitness are fluff.
Sign In or Register to comment.