So is this Apple PR saying "Jony help us out here we're getting killed by celebrity photo hack"? If it's a deliberate leak I'm not so sure it's a good idea as it only intensifies the hype machine and really puts pressure on Apple to deliver the goods.
Yeah see, the thing is, noone fucking asked you. Quite pathetic how you feel the need to inject your vitriolic brand of politics and xenophobia into absolutely everything. Do us a favor and keep that useless vomit to yourself.
Yeah thats the way to raise the quality of comments. Great job /s
Hard to believe something said by Ive would actually get leaked.
However, it makes for a good news story. The Swiss are quite stubborn (and arrogant) when it comes to watches. So much so they stood by and watched as Asian manufacturers embraced quartz while they stood by their time-tested mechanical watch industry.
The quote sort of implies that Apple is going to do a repeat of the Asians in terms of taking a huge bite out of Swiss watch producers.
In the realm of dedicated watches, the world's first GPS watch cost $2300. This watch uses GPS signals to synch your watch to the local time as you cross time zones (versus using the radio signals normally used to synch high-end watches with an atomic clock as you change time zones). $2300 for a watch that tells you the time, has some chronograph features, and updates itself as you cross time zones. How do you get $2300 for a watch with no more functionality than one included app on any modern smartphone? Two words: Style. Materials.
Apple's iWatch will perform hundreds of functions. Add some Apple style and you boost the price. Make a model incorporating precious metals, like gold or platinum and you boost the price higher. But Apple has a third potential means of boosting the price. Apple can, and as widely speculated, will, add some sophisticated health monitoring functions not yet available on any available consumer wearable.
Now imagine if Apple were to add some of these health monitoring sensors not in the body of the iWatch, but in easily attachable bands. A diabetic would buy the band with blood glucose monitoring sensors, and pay a pretty penny for it, perhaps subsidized by insurance. A sports enthusiast/athlete will buy the sports band with sensors to monitor UV exposure, pulse rate, etc. With interchangeable bands, an iWatch owner could switch from a sports band to a more formal band for wearing the iWatch when going out in the evening. If the bands incorporate the batteries, then switching to another band gets you a full charge, and the switched out band gets set down on the included inductive charger.
Now how much would you pay?
In the fullness of time, all of the traditional watch makers are vulnerable. The utility of a watch as a timepiece has already been wholly disrupted by technology. Gone are the days when people check the time 100 times a day; smartphones with reminders and appointment calendars inform us of our time-based commitments, and these devices are looked at for a variety of purposes throughout the day, with the time ever present on screen. Smart watches will first supplant ordinary watches as a more functional fashion accessory. And with smart watch functionality soon becoming expected, luxury smart watches will come on the scene where they will displace those luxury watches whose functionality extends only to telling the time and a few other time-based functions. A technology ecosystem will be a critical part of the picture, and this is something none of the existing luxury watchmakers can bring to the market in any meaningful way compared with the technology giants currently moving into this space. Within 10 years, the notion of a luxury watch will be synonymous with luxury smart watch and the Rolexes of the world will be on the path to extinction.
Advice to the luxury watch makers: partner with tech giants, if they'll even have you.
Cook has certainly doubled down on the security surrounding the iWatch. Not one single leaked photo or anything. The iPhone 6 on the other hand.....
I think the focus is spot on. The leaks set realistic expectations for the next iPhone. Even though touch ID was leaked, we didn't know how well it would end up working. The software usually has some undisclosed features, etc. So in the end keeping the truly new stuff secret is very important. Swift, 64-bit, and the IBM deal caught everyone off guard. Pretty good track record where it counts. Even iWatch and Payments, etc... Tim has hinted at both of those and they don't really have anything other than possible deals with companies with zero actually details and a bazillion artist renderings of what an iWatch might look like. Oh and this second hand rumor without a quote or whatever you want to call this.
I remember a story from my youth where the US was fixated on outdoing watches made in Switzerland ...
As the story goes American technology produced a golden wire as fine as a human hair. Gloating, they sent it to the Swiss along with a message saying: "What do you think of this?"
Before long, the package was returned with a note that said: "Look at this closely."
Examination under a microscope showed that the Swiss had drilled a hole through the fine wire ... Lengthwise!
I still haven't been able to make out those little laser drilled holes in my 2010 MacBook Air that the webcam indicator light shines through. I think Apple can do in volume and at production line speeds whatever the Swiss or any other fine watch makers have shown the ability to do.
It could be BS. But, there is nothing specific about the iWatch being related, so technically it could Apple priming the pump on purpose, like Eddy Cue did this year.
So is this Apple PR saying "Jony help us out here we're getting killed by celebrity photo hack"? If it's a deliberate leak I'm not so sure it's a good idea as it only intensifies the hype machine and really puts pressure on Apple to deliver the goods.
Which is only a problem if they don't have the goods already on hand to deliver in six days. I sure hope they do.
If I wanted to build a new product in complete secrecy, in a country with an existing high technology manufacturing industry and workforce, and if that product was so compact in size that most assembly tasks needed to be performed by machine, where would I look for manufacturing and even parts sourcing?
For secrecy, I'd look to a country with a monoculture that holds honor in high regard. Where every worker, down to the lowest paid, takes seriously his total commitment to the company and the quality of the product being produced.
For technology manufacturing expertise and automation, I'd look to a country where automated manufacturing is at its pinnicle.
For bespoke and miniaturized components that need to be designed from whole cloth, I might look to the companies and industry of a country with a long history of high tech manufacturing.
What country has all of the above attributes? Japan.
I've got an unnamed source who says "yeah right." Anyone want to write a lengthy article padded with the usual boilerplate text and gaudy iWatch concept photos?
I decided to research Nick Bilton, the author of the NY Times article. After doing so, I had to wonder if the British-American might be telling the truth instead of blatantly lying about his Apple sources. I still do not want to believe Nick is telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. No matter what though, the article has and will spark conversation about Apple's supposed entry into the wearables arena next week.
JUST FOR FUN, HERE IS MY INITIAL RESPONSE TO THE ARTICLE...
I read the New York Times article and decided to call it bull shit! Apple was mentioned just to give the story click bait material. In my opinion, Intel was not the focus of the story because Intel (like Samsung) has repeatedly made grandiose statements only to watch everything fail. Now the company has chosen to focus its attention on wearable devices. The NY Times decided it needed to include Apple in the story and chose to lie.
There were 21 paragraphs in the NY Times article. Intel was first mentioned at paragraph 17. Apple was mentioned at paragraph 4. If the story was REALLY about Intel, Intel should have been mentioned BEFORE any reference to Apple was ever made.
Here is paragraph 5 of the article... While we don’t have much of an idea whatthe coveted iWatch will look like, I was able to glean one small detail from people at Apple who work on the company’s wearables.
And the rest is history! We all know we can trust the NY Times to tell us the truth!!
Guess what? If Apple chose to sue the pristine, honest, above board publication for libel, the NY Times and the author of the story would be protected by US law since they cannot be forced to reveal sources. The NY Times knows this and is willing to lie because it knows it can get away with the lie to sell a story.
Oh well. This story should fill the digital airwaves tonight and tomorrow. This story will also be rehashed next week IF a wearable device is revealed by Apple and the device does not put Switzerland on notice. I look forward to reading how the NY Times rips Jony for his bravado instead of telling the truth that it lied about him in the first place.
I was wondering about this a while ago. I think the watch industry as we know it now, (the luxury one) is doomed, certainly. But is it because of the iwatch, not so sure.
As some have mentioned watches are a personal thing. As long as smart watches don't get that involved that you NEED to replace that thing on your wrist, many people won't.
I'm a watch enthusiast myself and I think for me it takes a pretty strong reason to use a smart watch.
- battery life - functionality - ruggedness - looks
None of the existing smart watches are there yet (most of them you have to press a button to see the time!) and battery life is mediocre at best.
I wear automatic watches so I never really need to worry them running out of steam. The few battery powered watches I have are sitting in a drawer with empty batteries.
Comments
Tim needs to double down on iCloud ... Publicly ... Before 9/9 ...
Gruber has a very good analysis of the trade offs ...
Yeah thats the way to raise the quality of comments. Great job /s
Hard to believe something said by Ive would actually get leaked.
However, it makes for a good news story. The Swiss are quite stubborn (and arrogant) when it comes to watches. So much so they stood by and watched as Asian manufacturers embraced quartz while they stood by their time-tested mechanical watch industry.
The quote sort of implies that Apple is going to do a repeat of the Asians in terms of taking a huge bite out of Swiss watch producers.
In the realm of dedicated watches, the world's first GPS watch cost $2300. This watch uses GPS signals to synch your watch to the local time as you cross time zones (versus using the radio signals normally used to synch high-end watches with an atomic clock as you change time zones). $2300 for a watch that tells you the time, has some chronograph features, and updates itself as you cross time zones. How do you get $2300 for a watch with no more functionality than one included app on any modern smartphone? Two words: Style. Materials.
Apple's iWatch will perform hundreds of functions. Add some Apple style and you boost the price. Make a model incorporating precious metals, like gold or platinum and you boost the price higher. But Apple has a third potential means of boosting the price. Apple can, and as widely speculated, will, add some sophisticated health monitoring functions not yet available on any available consumer wearable.
Now imagine if Apple were to add some of these health monitoring sensors not in the body of the iWatch, but in easily attachable bands. A diabetic would buy the band with blood glucose monitoring sensors, and pay a pretty penny for it, perhaps subsidized by insurance. A sports enthusiast/athlete will buy the sports band with sensors to monitor UV exposure, pulse rate, etc. With interchangeable bands, an iWatch owner could switch from a sports band to a more formal band for wearing the iWatch when going out in the evening. If the bands incorporate the batteries, then switching to another band gets you a full charge, and the switched out band gets set down on the included inductive charger.
Now how much would you pay?
In the fullness of time, all of the traditional watch makers are vulnerable. The utility of a watch as a timepiece has already been wholly disrupted by technology. Gone are the days when people check the time 100 times a day; smartphones with reminders and appointment calendars inform us of our time-based commitments, and these devices are looked at for a variety of purposes throughout the day, with the time ever present on screen. Smart watches will first supplant ordinary watches as a more functional fashion accessory. And with smart watch functionality soon becoming expected, luxury smart watches will come on the scene where they will displace those luxury watches whose functionality extends only to telling the time and a few other time-based functions. A technology ecosystem will be a critical part of the picture, and this is something none of the existing luxury watchmakers can bring to the market in any meaningful way compared with the technology giants currently moving into this space. Within 10 years, the notion of a luxury watch will be synonymous with luxury smart watch and the Rolexes of the world will be on the path to extinction.
Advice to the luxury watch makers: partner with tech giants, if they'll even have you.
Cook has certainly doubled down on the security surrounding the iWatch. Not one single leaked photo or anything. The iPhone 6 on the other hand.....
I think the focus is spot on. The leaks set realistic expectations for the next iPhone. Even though touch ID was leaked, we didn't know how well it would end up working. The software usually has some undisclosed features, etc. So in the end keeping the truly new stuff secret is very important. Swift, 64-bit, and the IBM deal caught everyone off guard. Pretty good track record where it counts. Even iWatch and Payments, etc... Tim has hinted at both of those and they don't really have anything other than possible deals with companies with zero actually details and a bazillion artist renderings of what an iWatch might look like. Oh and this second hand rumor without a quote or whatever you want to call this.
Here, here, now. Slurpy has more right to smack down that fetid blowhard than the the blowhard has to stink up the thread in the first place.
Which the blowhard does repeatedly out of some sociopathology due to bad toilet training or whatever.
A bit of hubris Johnny ...
I remember a story from my youth where the US was fixated on outdoing watches made in Switzerland ...
As the story goes American technology produced a golden wire as fine as a human hair. Gloating, they sent it to the Swiss along with a message saying: "What do you think of this?"
Before long, the package was returned with a note that said: "Look at this closely."
Examination under a microscope showed that the Swiss had drilled a hole through the fine wire ... Lengthwise!
So is this Apple PR saying "Jony help us out here we're getting killed by celebrity photo hack"? If it's a deliberate leak I'm not so sure it's a good idea as it only intensifies the hype machine and really puts pressure on Apple to deliver the goods.
Which is only a problem if they don't have the goods already on hand to deliver in six days. I sure hope they do.
Is this a controlled leak or something?
I decided to research Nick Bilton, the author of the NY Times article. After doing so, I had to wonder if the British-American might be telling the truth instead of blatantly lying about his Apple sources. I still do not want to believe Nick is telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. No matter what though, the article has and will spark conversation about Apple's supposed entry into the wearables arena next week.
JUST FOR FUN, HERE IS MY INITIAL RESPONSE TO THE ARTICLE...
I read the New York Times article and decided to call it bull shit! Apple was mentioned just to give the story click bait material. In my opinion, Intel was not the focus of the story because Intel (like Samsung) has repeatedly made grandiose statements only to watch everything fail. Now the company has chosen to focus its attention on wearable devices. The NY Times decided it needed to include Apple in the story and chose to lie.
There were 21 paragraphs in the NY Times article. Intel was first mentioned at paragraph 17. Apple was mentioned at paragraph 4. If the story was REALLY about Intel, Intel should have been mentioned BEFORE any reference to Apple was ever made.
Here is paragraph 5 of the article... While we don’t have much of an idea whatthe coveted iWatch will look like, I was able to glean one small detail from people at Apple who work on the company’s wearables.
And the rest is history! We all know we can trust the NY Times to tell us the truth!!
Guess what? If Apple chose to sue the pristine, honest, above board publication for libel, the NY Times and the author of the story would be protected by US law since they cannot be forced to reveal sources. The NY Times knows this and is willing to lie because it knows it can get away with the lie to sell a story.
Oh well. This story should fill the digital airwaves tonight and tomorrow. This story will also be rehashed next week IF a wearable device is revealed by Apple and the device does not put Switzerland on notice. I look forward to reading how the NY Times rips Jony for his bravado instead of telling the truth that it lied about him in the first place.
I stand corrected.
He does appear to have a different point of view from some and is not afraid to explain or stand up for it.
Let's cut his fucking head off and upload the video onto the internet as an example against this kind of thing.
The important thing is that Google ads were served.
As some have mentioned watches are a personal thing. As long as smart watches don't get that involved that you NEED to replace that thing on your wrist, many people won't.
I'm a watch enthusiast myself and I think for me it takes a pretty strong reason to use a smart watch.
- battery life
- functionality
- ruggedness
- looks
None of the existing smart watches are there yet (most of them you have to press a button to see the time!) and battery life is mediocre at best.
I wear automatic watches so I never really need to worry them running out of steam. The few battery powered watches I have are sitting in a drawer with empty batteries.
Yes it's the chocolate ... always has been ... always will be …