Apple Watch: First impressions from an afternoon with Cupertino's new wearable

1911131415

Comments

  • Reply 201 of 300
    Yeah! And reverse left right taps for directions
  • Reply 202 of 300

    As is sycophancy.

  • Reply 203 of 300
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post





    Anything but a seven-day week would be a disaster, from the point of view of the 13-month restoration imperative. (28 days divides into 4 7-day weeks.) I say imperative because we must recalibrate our time and season sense to harmonize with the Earth-Moon-Sun system. The Moon is the timing signal for much of Earth life, including especially humans, with our cognitive engagement with visible environment signals. The 13-moon calendar goes back to Neanderthals, and was universal in human society until the patriarchists appeared about 3000 BC, breaking our ties to nature as the primal act of authoritarian control over all but the patriarchs and their sons.



    As examples of how we are timed by the moon: the 28-day ovulation cycle, the 10-moonth gestation period of the human fetus—280 days.



    That’s true, and the Islamic calendar is still fully lunar. However, what matters more for people and especially for peasants is the recurrence cycle of the seasons, and that is fixed by the orbit of the Earth around the Sun alone. That’s why the Ramadan's fast drifts each year—but old Arabs were nomad tribes and had little connexion with plow and harvests, whereas the other people, starting with the Greeks and the Egyptians (the Nile's yearly flood) had every reason to invent a calendar linked to the Sun, so that they could predict easily when to plow, sow and harvest.

  • Reply 204 of 300
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    1) This info about being able to reverse the bands and display for left-handed use only came out later in the day and still isn't common knowledge among tech site readers as far as I can tell.


    2) Rolex et al. don't have a crown that needs to be used often, hence the concern.

     

    I gather there aren't any left-handed divers.

     

    But there is still no reason for the vitriolic comments on a product that has yet to be launched.

  • Reply 205 of 300
    onhka wrote: »
    I gather there aren't any left-handed divers.

    I'm not a diver but I thought those had dials on the top. Do you still need to use the crown often? If so, I guess that would be an issue, although there are left-handed Rolexes according to my search.
    But there is still no reason for the vitriolic comments on a product that has yet to be launched.

    Comments and concerns, fine, but not vitriolic comments.
  • Reply 206 of 300
    "Hepatic feedback" ?

    Now that *would* be a first. Perhaps to alert you when you’ve had too much to drink ?

    Apart from this, nice one Dan.
  • Reply 207 of 300

    I could live with the Black Classic Buckle.

     

    Can't live with the watch itself. Too big, rectangular, chunky and black.

  • Reply 208 of 300
    The reason Apple haven't differentiated by gender is because they know that many men would need the smaller size, which is 38mm tall. Even that is probably too big. The larger size is a huge wart; it looked farcical on Tim Cook's wrist.

    In other words, neither of these watches come close to being the proportions of a lady's watch. The smaller one is equivalent to a very big gentleman's watch, and the larger one a humungous one.

    My watch is 35mm diameter. I would describe it as an average-sized men's watch. It's fairly big, but looks perfectly proportioned on the wrist. It's also considerably thinner than the Apple watch. Apple haven't provided the dimensions of the depth or width of their watch.
  • Reply 209 of 300
    'Rather than aiming at everyone right off the bat, Apple is aiming at fashion-conscious young people and more mature individuals who are price-insensitive.'

    Translation:

    'Due to the fundamental flaw of a tiny screen on your wrist, Apple is aiming at taste-free hipsters and old rich farts with more money than sense.'
  • Reply 210 of 300
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by kimmie92592 View Post



    So Apple made a nice watch for men. What about women? This is way too huge for women. Yuck!

     

    You don't really need a watch. Otherwise, ask your husband to get you a traditional one as a present.

  • Reply 211 of 300
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EauVive View Post



    Or with 13 hours instead of 12 (that was already made for Auguste Comte, I believe, though I'm not sure and Google does not find anything relevant. Modern version http://www.cafepress.fr/+13_hour_skeleton_clock_wall_clock,410859929 — specially dedicated to triskaidekaphobics). 



    Metric time would be, well – unsettling. But why not? Our system is based on Babylonian divisions imagined more than 4,000 years ago. It could be somewhat refreshed…




    We absolutely should go back to 13 months. The Babylonian twelve months is a crime against nature for which we're still paying, actually more with each passing "moonth" that we ignore the harmony of the solar system that we are immersed in. The proverbial "year and a day" is 13 X 28 days = 364 days, plus one day off to get over the New Year's hangover.

     

    I like the idea of 13 months. It's a Fibonacci number. Sounds natural to me.

  • Reply 212 of 300
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DewMe View Post

     

    I think this is a product that exemplifies what makes Apple unique in the market - an amazing integration of hardware, software, and user experience. Is the hardware bigger and less radically amazing that we dreamed about in our PhotoShop-augmented-reality dreams? Absolutely. Problem is this little thing called physics and material science and state of the art in component and manufacturing technology. Just like the original iPad1 (which I still have a use on occasion) the then state of the art in technology that could be built affordable at huge scale placed hard limits of what Apple could do to deliver at a hardware level. The original iPad was kind of thick and heavy by todays standards, but by the standards of the day in tablets (like the Windows Tablet Edition monstrosities) the iPad1 was amazing at all levels. Additionally the amazing integration of HW+SW+UX in the iPad1 defined a product category that has withstood the test of time, exactly as the iPhone had done years earlier. The things that will establish the Apple Watch as the next category defining product will depend heavily on the SW+UX that Apple is able to deliver in an unique way on a HW platform they have optimized for their product and its users. 

     

    You could argue that this is an apologist's perspective - and to the degree that walking on water and perpetual motion machines are benchmarks you'd be correct. But as a Version 1.0 product that must demonstrate huge and attainable potential for growth the current Apple Watch is the best we've seen so far because of the things Apple does very well. The utility is obvious, so the next challenge is to deliver battery life that will attract mainstream Apple customers.

     

    So nothing has really changed between what Apple is able to accomplish over its competitors. Competitors who don't have total control over the essential building blocks for envisioning, creating, and manufacturing high precision, world class, non-commodity products that are surrounded by a vast ecosystem of life enriching media and services will continue to struggle against Apple. 

     

    The Apple Watch is all about creating another value delivery mechanism for the ever growing Apple media and services ecosystem. 


     

    The problem is that when the first iPad came out, it was amazing; it looked superb, sleek and fresh. The problem with the Apple Watch is that it already looks clunky and dated.

     

    When it comes in round with a white face, magnificent battery life, is independent of the iPhone and is as thin as a regular watch, then it might be worth buying. 

  • Reply 213 of 300
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by EauVive View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post





    We absolutely should go back to 13 months. The Babylonian twelve months is a crime against nature for which we're still paying, actually more with each passing "moonth" that we ignore the harmony of the solar system that we are immersed in. The proverbial "year and a day" is 13 X 28 days = 364 days, plus one day off to get over the New Year's hangover.



    Wasn't that the Egyptian system? You'd need one extra day every four year, too. What name would you suggest for the 13th month? Jobember? :)


     

    Frostember.

  • Reply 214 of 300
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post



    There is no hypocrisy involved  because you don't wear an iPhone on your wrist.  The iPhone 6 is 6.9mm thick and it goes in your pocket - the ?watch is 11mm thick and goes on your wrist.  In terms of thickness, it's worse than if you were wearing an iPhone.



    I am wondering how the security and payment thing works as the watch doesn't have a touch ID sensor.  Can you make a payment via the watch without first using the touch ID sensor on the paired phone?



    How does the NFC payment work if it's paired to an iPhone 5?  I would guess a PIN, or could you not use it for payments with an iPhone 5 at all?



    It seems to be the best smart-watch anyone has come up with to-date.  That said, I don't need a smart watch in my life and only very occasionally use a watch.  It is too thick and chunky for my taste.  

    I am sure the ?watch 6 will be a marvel.




    I hadn't seen any info on its measured thickness. Thanks for that. 11mm is about .44 inches, compared with the Moto 360 at .5" and with its considerably larger face. I think the Apple watch compares favorably in that regard.

     

    11mm? My watch is 5mm! 

     

    Gordon Bennett. Wake me up in five years.

  • Reply 215 of 300

    They showed the two women running, with one wearing the watch.  Size looked fine, and that was not a large woman!

  • Reply 216 of 300
    I don't think the size will be an issue. Typical Rolex sports watches, for example, are around 40 mm in diameter, and vary from 10 to 15 mm thick. Those dimensions are common for modern watches. In terms of smart watches, the Pebble steel, which does not feel at all large, is 40 mm tall and also 11 mm thick. Thin minimalist designs may be appealing, but are simply unrealistic with the energy storage technology currently available.

    There is also nothing wrong with charging every night - in fact in some ways it's easier because it is a set routine. I find that the Pebble lasts the advertised five days or so, but then I forget to charge it when it does run low because it's not a regular habit. What a watch does need is the battery capacity to last as long as its owner, which is potentially at least 18 hours - maybe more, depending on lifestyle.
  • Reply 217 of 300

    The hate from the haters have been impressive in this thread.

    Thank you!

  • Reply 218 of 300
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,077member
    nexusphan wrote: »
    Moto 360 is only .4" <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Neither watch is too thick.</span>

    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">This is a watch. It's a fashion accessory first and </span>
    everyone<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> has different tastes. For me, the Moto 360 is almost identical to the dimensions on my "traditional" watch, which I like, and others won't. More options are </span>
    always<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> a good thing.</span>


    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">That being said, this article has some clear points where the author is in left field and being extremely biased.</span>

    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Google did not try to shrink Android. They did the exact opposite of that. It's completely different in looks, interactions and functionality. Apple's watch is much closer to a shrunk </span>
    version<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> of iOS than Android Wear is.</span>

    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">And then voice control. Android had it years before iOS and it's never been advertised as a personal assistant. Why try and claim Google copied siri? They didn't in the slightest. Why would you even go there in a watch article?</span>

    The copying nonsense has to stop. Google is not going to even look at this Apple watch. Google has a completely different vision of what a smartwatch should be which is only Google Now cards for quick and easy information. (Glances borrowed heavily from this - which is good, because it's great on wear)

    Apple got the customization options spot on here. Really impressed there. Really disappointed in the $350 for a no steel and off brand tempered glass version. Unfortunately I find the interface and navigation confusing and bloated. I look forward to interacting with it in person and hope to be proven wrong, even if the looks don't fit my specific tastes.


    I'm going to look at the htc one and moto 360

    The iPhone6 is basically a bigger screen which androids have long had. The pimple on the back of the iPhone 6 is just horrible.

    The watch costs a lot and really seems to require two hands. Needs to be more voice driven like android wear, but Apple needs to really ramp up Siri.

    At one point I wondered where Dr Dre was. And with the watch I was wondering where Henry winkler was
  • Reply 219 of 300
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    11mm? My watch is 5mm! 

    Gordon Bennett. Wake me up in five years.

    Just because you have a girly wrist doesn't mean that watch is too big. The tag heuer aquaracer is 41mm and 11mm thick. So the large version is the same size as a comparable diver style luxury watch. A bit bigger too since it's rectagular so wears larger.

    My cheap but thin $300 skagen is 41mm and 8mm thick. And it's a relatively low profile watch which is my preference. I consider it a disposable watch. Pretty but not classic styling (will look dated in a couple years), mass manufactured quartz of so-so quality. The apple watch is massively better. I just wish it came in titanium.

    700

    8mm. So half again as thick. Given that the apple watch is not advertised as a slim watch this is a non-issue. 9-10mm would be better but 11mm is okay (unless your cuffs are tight anyway).

    http://www.amazon.com/Skagen-Denmark-Titanium-Watch-803XLTRB/dp/B004VCSHVW/ref=sr_1_32?s=apparel&ie=UTF8&qid=1410403559&sr=1-32&keywords=Titanium+watch+skagen

    It's on the slightly larger end of a normal men's watch but not freakishly so.

    700

    The Patek is 36mm. Folks that have tried it state it's smaller on your wrist than the pictures would make you think.

    "The Apple Watch is available in both 38 mm and 42 mm. I tried them both on, and they both worked perfectly on my wrist. They didn't exaggerate the options and make one decidedly male oriented at 44 mm and a girly equivalent at 35 mm or the like. Any man, woman, or child could pull off either size with ease. This may not seem like much, but remember this is Apple's first watch, and it would be a very easy mistake to make it too big or too small. I'm sure there was much discussion about making it larger – how could there not be? It would've made the entire interface bigger, bolder, more recognizable from afar and easier to use. The fact that they chose to actually make the thing wearable shows a great deal of restraint. The 38 mm example is particularly nice on the wrist as seen here."

    700

    http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review

    That's perfectly reasonable looking.
  • Reply 220 of 300

    I haven't owned a watch in ten years but will give this baby a look.

     

    My decision to buy, or have true interest, however, will hinge on whether I can jump for iOS8.  I am not interested in the new iPhones at the moment because of iOS7.  Once 8 is released I will spend some time at my local shop to see if I like it or not.

Sign In or Register to comment.