You know you have no case here, and so you aren't even responding to my post. So, you are telling us that every watch manufacturer should not make a Micky Mouse face because some maker, far in the past, has already done it? Do you have any idea as to how many watch makers have licensed Disney characters for watches? Several dozen, including some of the most expensive makers of watches.. You really are trolling, aren't you?
No I'm simply saying that Apple has had this face for 3 years now. It's not new. Not trolling just simply saying that for 3 years it looks no better than my old 6g iPod Nano does?
Haven't you ever seen one?
How about these? And of course, according to pazuzi, ALL of these mechanical watches have hands,recognizable hands, and are SO much much easier to read than Apple's.
One of my favs.
If you have to ask the price, you should sell your house first.
So you avert your eyes every time you look at the time on your phone? No hands.
I think you're stepping into a grey area as far as screen size. Is 1.5" too small for pictures? probably. Is it too small for long emails or texts? probably. Is it too small for webpages? probably. But Apple didn't demonstrate those (except for pics which seemed silly) things. Instead they demonstrated short messages, taps, map directions, simple finger drawings and a honeycomb of apps icons that get larger as they move to the center. Those all seem like smart design choices. They are too simple for me to bother pulling out my phone for but still communication and information I would like to interact with. So the Apple Watch will never become our primary device of communication because it's not designed to be. It's designed to fill in the gaps where an iPhone is too much and nothing is too little.
All that makes perfect sense- a Niche product. Not Nietzsche.
How about these? And of course, according to pazuzi, ALL of these mechanical watches have hands,recognizable hands, and are SO much much easier to read than Apple's.
No I'm simply saying that Apple has had this face for 3 years now. It's not new. Not trolling just simply saying that for 3 years it looks no better than my old 6g iPod Nano does?
Haven't you ever seen one?
It doesn't have to be NEW. It just has to be available. What about that don't you get? Yes, Ive got a Nano, and a LunaTik band that I got when I gave money to their Kickstarter project. The problem is that its far too big, and too difficult to charge. I have to take it out of the case for that. It isn't practical, so I stopped using it.
Alright already- we get it- you have a watch fetish and will get an apple watch regardless. Wear it well.
I don't think you DO get it. It seems to fly right by you.
And I'm not buying one this year, at least. I may never buy one, I have three watches now. The point is that you are making unsupportable statements, and I've called you out on them, but you won't respond.
Knowing the copycats, I think Apple should secure deals with Bloomingdale's, Macy's etc. to exclusively carry ?Watch as the only smart watch and keep a mini display like iPhone/iPad/iPod.
They should also have fashion brands sign exclusive deals to design bands exclusively for Apple. From lower priced brands like Calvin Klein/Ecko to higher end like Gucci/Burberry.
How do you lump in Calvin Klein with Marc Ecko? Calvin Klein still makes high end clothes whereas Ecko does not.
It doesn't have to be NEW. It just has to be available. What about that don't you get? Yes, Ive got a Nano, and a LunaTik band that I got when I gave money to their Kickstarter project. The problem is that its far too big, and too difficult to charge. I have to take it out of the case for that. It isn't practical, so I stopped using it.
I use mine every other day to listen to music at the gym. Clips on my clothes no chance of banging it as a watch.
Three years to design a $350 iPhone accessory that sits on your wrist so that people don't have to go to all the trouble of taking their iPhone out of their pocket to look at it? I guess this is what passes for "innovation" in the post-Steve era.
Dear me. This is cretinous by any standard. If you're going to be a troll, at least try and be a good one (oxymoronic, of course).
I'm curious to see this watch in person. I remember when everyone said the tablet was a bad idea....until the tablet wasn't such a bad idea.
People said the iPad was a bad idea because there wasn't a clear set of exclusive usage scenarios. Developers helped make it worthwhile and the form factor is compelling vs a laptop. There's a usage breakdown here:
The most popular things people like to do are common across multiple computing platforms. The watch platform can't do the top 5. It's not immersive, powerful nor highly functional. It's basically a notification center on your wrist. There's nothing wrong with that but is that worth $350+?
When it comes to the design, I think that having Jony Ive's name helps but that's not always a good thing. Jony Ive's success has a weight to it that can drive sales of anything he makes. Previously, the only thing that stood between him and the outside would have been Steve. That filter is not there any more because there's no way that Tim would exert any creative filtering on Ive's work so what we get now is the unfiltered Ive.
Can anyone imagine Steve sitting with the watch and fiddling with the crown dial to navigate the watch UI?
i understand you guys are just script kiddies and fanboys, and that you aren't professional (or even very good) writers so i don't expect much. your use of the word "then" here, to join the two thoughts about jobs' resignation and his death, implies that his death is something steve consciously chose to do.
"he consciously decided to resign", then "he consciously decided to die". and i imagine that couldn't be further from the truth. but, hey, it's ok. cuz you're fanboys and not writers.
Here's and idea for you: leave the Strunk and White alone for a bit, have a wash (you'll feel loads better) and go talk to someone you like the look of. Tell them about connectives if you like, maybe even show them your Angroid device if you're feeling daring. Who knows where it might lead.
Jobs resigned as Apple's chief executive in August 2011, then died in October of that year.
i understand you guys are just script kiddies and fanboys, and that you aren't professional (or even very good) writers so i don't expect much. your use of the word "then" here, to join the two thoughts about jobs' resignation and his death, implies that his death is something steve consciously chose to do.
"he consciously decided to resign", then "he consciously decided to die". and i imagine that couldn't be further from the truth. but, hey, it's ok. cuz you're fanboys and not writers.
Your criticism is misplaced; the sentence is clear and grammatically correct. There are many sentences which can be interpreted ambiguously, but that doesn't mean that the grammar is poor.
Well, I actually think that Tim Cook is and will be the company's "standard bearer." His blitz of media access lately is what convinces me of that. But in a more collaborative way than we saw from Jobs... vis a vis Jony and his media appearances.
The iPhone 6 should be your default choice; but the iPhone 6 Plus is probably smaller than you think it is. Stylistically, the Plus will probably operate more like an iPad Nano than an iPhone; buying extra storage today will save you a lot of heartbreak in the near future.
This reviewer has more experience and credibility on things Apple than 95% of the people who post here. He likes them.
Just confirms that this was Steve idea, so Cook can not take credit for it. I would say anything new not incremental product changes are Steve's idea just being played out. over the next few years. Steve said he left a roadmap of products for them to work on.
Nah; Steve Jobs would never have let this watch be released.
Three years to design a $350 iPhone accessory that sits on your wrist so that people don't have to go to all the trouble of taking their iPhone out of their pocket to look at it? I guess this is what passes for "innovation" in the post-Steve era.
You could describe the original iPhone as an iTunes accessory so that people don't have to go to all the trouble of carrying a separate mobile phone and iPod.
Because you are a low end type you have no idea what the fashion watch industry is like. The ?Watch is not about being an iPhone accessory, it’s going to be part of the high end fashion industry. While you might not spend more than $10 for a cheap Timex (if at all) this product will be for the people who buy TAG Heuer, Movado, Burberry, Victorinox, etc., watches that are in the $1000 price range and higher. Apple made the right decision here not to wallow in the shallow end of the gene pool market wise. You’ll be seeing the ?Watch on the wrists of celebrities and CEOs, not basement nerds with no disposable income.
If that is the goal then that should be a concern for all of us. Apple started and flourished because of "basement nerds" aka. consumers. Steve and Steve were literal garage nerds. Their focus—and greatest success—has always been to make complicated technology accessible and useful to consumers. It is still unclear to me what problem a smartwatch is solving (regardless of OS flavor). The Mac, iPod, and iPhone were crystal clear and game-changing improvements to existing technology. The aWatch is being billed as such but I'm left wondering why.
So what about the 99.9% of the world that doesn't wear TAG Heuer? Not racing to the bottom of the barrel, I get. Excluding everyday consumers I don't get. If high end accessories for CEOs is the Apple of the future I'll keep warm in the basement with my Apple computers.
Comments
No I'm simply saying that Apple has had this face for 3 years now. It's not new. Not trolling just simply saying that for 3 years it looks no better than my old 6g iPod Nano does?
Haven't you ever seen one?
How about these? And of course, according to pazuzi, ALL of these mechanical watches have hands,recognizable hands, and are SO much much easier to read than Apple's.
One of my favs.
If you have to ask the price, you should sell your house first.
All that makes perfect sense- a Niche product. Not Nietzsche.
Alright already- we get it- you have a watch fetish and will get an apple watch regardless. Wear it well.
So, what, there are two faces? And I like the smiley face on the one side.
Hey, a Tom Clancy watch.
I really like this. It’s equal parts stupid and hideous.
No I'm simply saying that Apple has had this face for 3 years now. It's not new. Not trolling just simply saying that for 3 years it looks no better than my old 6g iPod Nano does?
Haven't you ever seen one?
It doesn't have to be NEW. It just has to be available. What about that don't you get? Yes, Ive got a Nano, and a LunaTik band that I got when I gave money to their Kickstarter project. The problem is that its far too big, and too difficult to charge. I have to take it out of the case for that. It isn't practical, so I stopped using it.
Alright already- we get it- you have a watch fetish and will get an apple watch regardless. Wear it well.
I don't think you DO get it. It seems to fly right by you.
And I'm not buying one this year, at least. I may never buy one, I have three watches now. The point is that you are making unsupportable statements, and I've called you out on them, but you won't respond.How do you lump in Calvin Klein with Marc Ecko? Calvin Klein still makes high end clothes whereas Ecko does not.
By whom?
I use mine every other day to listen to music at the gym. Clips on my clothes no chance of banging it as a watch.
People said the iPad was a bad idea because there wasn't a clear set of exclusive usage scenarios. Developers helped make it worthwhile and the form factor is compelling vs a laptop. There's a usage breakdown here:
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2013/10/interesting-new-study-shows-the-usage-breakdown-for-the-ipad.html
The most popular things people like to do are common across multiple computing platforms. The watch platform can't do the top 5. It's not immersive, powerful nor highly functional. It's basically a notification center on your wrist. There's nothing wrong with that but is that worth $350+?
When it comes to the design, I think that having Jony Ive's name helps but that's not always a good thing. Jony Ive's success has a weight to it that can drive sales of anything he makes. Previously, the only thing that stood between him and the outside would have been Steve. That filter is not there any more because there's no way that Tim would exert any creative filtering on Ive's work so what we get now is the unfiltered Ive.
Can anyone imagine Steve sitting with the watch and fiddling with the crown dial to navigate the watch UI?
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB118532502435077009
Here's and idea for you: leave the Strunk and White alone for a bit, have a wash (you'll feel loads better) and go talk to someone you like the look of. Tell them about connectives if you like, maybe even show them your Angroid device if you're feeling daring. Who knows where it might lead.
Jobs resigned as Apple's chief executive in August 2011, then died in October of that year.
i understand you guys are just script kiddies and fanboys, and that you aren't professional (or even very good) writers so i don't expect much. your use of the word "then" here, to join the two thoughts about jobs' resignation and his death, implies that his death is something steve consciously chose to do.
"he consciously decided to resign", then "he consciously decided to die". and i imagine that couldn't be further from the truth. but, hey, it's ok. cuz you're fanboys and not writers.
Your criticism is misplaced; the sentence is clear and grammatically correct. There are many sentences which can be interpreted ambiguously, but that doesn't mean that the grammar is poor.
Well, I actually think that Tim Cook is and will be the company's "standard bearer." His blitz of media access lately is what convinces me of that. But in a more collaborative way than we saw from Jobs... vis a vis Jony and his media appearances.
Someone has to pick up the design mantle left by Steve. No better person than Ive.
Except that Ive has been designing products before Steve died. I think the last two designs (iP6, Watch) are not the best Ive has done though.
To put it mildly.
Except that Ive has been designing products before Steve died. I think the last two designs (iP6, Watch) are not the best Ive has done though.
http://voices.suntimes.com/business-2/iphone-6-vs-6-plus-andy-ihnatko-has-one-question-for-you/
Bottom line
The iPhone 6 should be your default choice; but the iPhone 6 Plus is probably smaller than you think it is. Stylistically, the Plus will probably operate more like an iPad Nano than an iPhone; buying extra storage today will save you a lot of heartbreak in the near future.
This reviewer has more experience and credibility on things Apple than 95% of the people who post here. He likes them.
Just confirms that this was Steve idea, so Cook can not take credit for it. I would say anything new not incremental product changes are Steve's idea just being played out. over the next few years. Steve said he left a roadmap of products for them to work on.
Nah; Steve Jobs would never have let this watch be released.
Three years to design a $350 iPhone accessory that sits on your wrist so that people don't have to go to all the trouble of taking their iPhone out of their pocket to look at it? I guess this is what passes for "innovation" in the post-Steve era.
You could describe the original iPhone as an iTunes accessory so that people don't have to go to all the trouble of carrying a separate mobile phone and iPod.
You could; you'd be wrong.
Because you are a low end type you have no idea what the fashion watch industry is like. The ?Watch is not about being an iPhone accessory, it’s going to be part of the high end fashion industry. While you might not spend more than $10 for a cheap Timex (if at all) this product will be for the people who buy TAG Heuer, Movado, Burberry, Victorinox, etc., watches that are in the $1000 price range and higher. Apple made the right decision here not to wallow in the shallow end of the gene pool market wise. You’ll be seeing the ?Watch on the wrists of celebrities and CEOs, not basement nerds with no disposable income.
If that is the goal then that should be a concern for all of us. Apple started and flourished because of "basement nerds" aka. consumers. Steve and Steve were literal garage nerds. Their focus—and greatest success—has always been to make complicated technology accessible and useful to consumers. It is still unclear to me what problem a smartwatch is solving (regardless of OS flavor). The Mac, iPod, and iPhone were crystal clear and game-changing improvements to existing technology. The aWatch is being billed as such but I'm left wondering why.
So what about the 99.9% of the world that doesn't wear TAG Heuer? Not racing to the bottom of the barrel, I get. Excluding everyday consumers I don't get. If high end accessories for CEOs is the Apple of the future I'll keep warm in the basement with my Apple computers.