Interesting analysis. I think we've all been spoiled by the immense success of the iPhone, and to some extent the iPad. There's likely nothing that Apple could ever produce in the future that would even approximate that success. There will invariably be a lot of ecosystem enhancements that won't bring in as much revenue, but will greatly enhance the Apple experience (e.g. Car Play, Apple Watch, Apple TV). However, I think your analysis is a bit too pessimistic:
1) I think Apple will expand the market and demand for a watch, leading to some bigger estimates. (I've never cared about wearing a watch before, but I'm chomping at the bit for an Apple Watch).
2) The halo effect will bring more people into the iPhone/Apple ecosystem, thus adding to its value.
3) I think that the bands and accessories may bring in even more revenue and profit for Apple than the watches themselves, both from Apple made bands as well as Made for Apple Watch licensed bands.
I'm increasingly convinced that the ?Watch will very soon be a watch in name and minor functionality, only. I prefer to think that the goal for this device is biometrics input. I just cannot imagine that what Apple has revealed is in any sense the prime objective for this device. I'll say again that I think spectrometry will feature at some point.
I'm increasingly convinced that the ?Watch will very soon be a watch in name and minor functionality, only... I'll say again that I think spectrometry will feature at some point.
It'll be interesting to see how they make a compelling upgrade. With products like the Mac, iPad, iPhone, they can always fall back on design changes or performance boosts. The Watch size doesn't give much room to change the design and performance doesn't really matter because it doesn't do anything that needs it.
It has very little appeal to begin with because they are selling to people who already have iPhones (it requires the phone). The upgrade cycles will be very long, I doubt people will buy more than once every 5 years. Even then, what would initial buyers upgrade for? It has a sharp, OLED display already, it has all the sensors so it would really just be for better battery life. I suppose they'll be able to make it more compact.
I'm going to be an early adopter for the Apple Watch but I see a few clear upgrade reasons that will also have me buying a 2nd generation Apple Watch:
1) Sensors - The sensors included in version 1.0 are very basic. Many were assuming advanced sensors such as blood glucose and other advanced sensor-on-skin technology. This is a hardware feature that cannot be improved upon by software or swapped out like the bands. Eventually, some Apple Watch users will require more advanced sensors as prescribed by their doctors to complete their overall health profile. Maybe not as soon as 2015 but Apple Watch is on track to become the standard for health monitoring outside of the doctor's visit so patients will soon have a good excuse to spring for the latest Apple Watch even though they already own a fully functioning older model.
2) Design - Apple is poised to take advantage of the one and only product always visible to everyone around you. Every season will usher in a new line of Apple Watch. Size and shape will always be similar but such has always been the case with phones and tablets too. The colors and design cues will signify the "summer" watch vs. the "fall" line of Apple Watches the same way the addition of a scarf or fall colors indicate fashion trends. This could just lead to annual aesthetic changes or possibly multiple changes per year to match each season. That release schedule might not be Apple's style but Apple Watch is a fully realized fashion item subject to the whims of designers and consumers wanting to stay in touch with trends, both digital and non-digital.
3) Accessories - There are hardware sensors and features in the latest iPhones that no one saw coming thanks in part to developers. Tim Cook specifically mentioned a bluetooth headset (presumable Apple is working on their own) and using Apple Watch to control Apple TV. With an Apple Watch app store in the works, the floodgates to all of those iOS 3rd party developers has opened up wide. It's only a matter of time before Apple begins adding internals and external accessories to compliment the slew of apps and hardware accessories that will be released. I wish I could be more specific and had a better imagination but I'm confident we will see so many applications that none of us ever saw coming.
4) Power & Charging - The magsafe charging system that Apple Watch employs now is only contactless charging, not true wireless charging. This can only be achieved by redesigning the power and battery systems of the Apple Watch. Also, the band-changing clasp system only seems to be mechanical but what if future Apple Watches included a simple battery contact system also? This would allow Apple to capitalize on their wrist band battery patent to double or triple battery life on the Apple Watch.
5) Screen - Apple Watch uses an OLED screen with a pentile display. There is a lot of work to be done to improve performance and power consumption of these screens. Imagine an Apple Watch that is ON all the time because the screen is so efficient. That will not happen for another 3-5 years but it will happen eventually alongside many other improvements. All Apple has to do is space each improvement out accordingly so the user is satisfied now but also on the hook for the next model's feature.
Some call this planned obsolescence but it is the nature of all technology that is sustainable and survives as a business model and Apple is better at this game than any company in history.
If you're in any app, you navigate by touch alone. If you press the home button, you're leaving the app. That's not taking you one step back; it's taking you away.
Aside from accessibility, the home button has only really got Touch ID going for it. I hate the double tap on the iPhone for app switching, as I much prefer the four finger swipe on my iPad. Why can't we have a two or three finger swipe on the iPhone? There's enough room. I try and avoid the home button as much as possible on the iPad.
What are you talking about? Of course it takes you back one step. By one step, that's what I mean. It's a back button. Not for typing letters, or turning pages back in a book, but moving one step back on the DEVICE. That's the whole point to it. You don't like the button, but that's just you.
Benj, sometimes you amaze me! If that's really how you feel, that it shouldn't have been done in the first place, then none of your other comments about it are of any consequence.
They know exactly what they are talking about. They deliberately try to come up with ways to get under people's skin. They don't have conversations because they never intend to have an actual conversation. They just spin negativity towards Apple and derail threads, such as this one. They have been doing this for so long. It is so obvious and blatant. Can you please tell me why these trolls are not banned? Why are they allowed to rack up their post count with bullshit, so that they seem credible to people who don't follow there threads regularly (who then respond to them without knowing that there is no point)? It seems ridiculous to give people carte blanche so long as no ad hominems are used.
I've always believed that people have the right to say what they want on a public forum. As long as what they are saying isn't incendiary in some substantial way, or personally insulting, though even there, some expression of annoyance at another poster is ok, then fine. If I don't like it, I'll say so. If others don't, they can say so.
If the person is harsh in a constant, repeating and frustrating manor, I'll mention it, and will possibly give an infraction, or eliminate that post.
But, it can be difficult to tell who is just frustrated themselves at something, and is expressing that frustration here, for a while, and someone who is an intentional troll. I'll sometime send them a personal message, outlining what I expect from people, often that helps, if the person is just not understanding the required interactional niceties.
If it doesn't help, no doubt, shortly they will get banned, either by me, or some other.
I believe it's a flawed concept and will be Apple's biggest failure, sadly, since the Newton. Maybe in several years' time it could succeed, but it seems to be ahead of its time technologically.
I have a Newton 2000. The Newton wasn't a failure. The third edition, the 2100, was really pretty good. It also saw rising sales. If apple wasn't in trouble, and possibly, if Jobs wasn't still ticked at getting "fired" by Scully, he might have kept it. Back then, 300,000 sales in the last year was pretty good for a $1,000 device. I remember estimates of over 600,000 sales for the next year, before he discontinued it (along with much of the rest of the company, including the much beloved Studio Monitors).
But remember a very important fact about this, something that many people today aren't aware of. When Apple was looking into the Newton, there wasn't a mobile processor. Apple looked at all the processor families at the time, and then went to Acorn Computer. Apple felt that their Desktop ARM chip had the best possibilities. They convinced Acorn, and VSLI, the manufacturer of the Desktop ARM chip to form a new company with them, which they called ARM, to design and manufacturer mobile chips. apple contributed the concepts, the microcode, some firmware, and I suppose some other things as well. This became the chip Apple used. As we know, this chip took over the handheld industry.
Apple divested themselves of their ARM stock, in the early 2000's. I imagine that it was either they needed the money, or felt that the company was of no use to them. I've always felt annoyed at that. If Apple still owned a third, or so, of ARM, things might be different.
I've always believed that people have the right to say what they want on a public forum. As long as what they are saying isn't incendiary in some substantial way, or personally insulting, though even there, some expression of annoyance at another poster is ok, then fine. If I don't like it, I'll say so. If others don't, they can say so.
If the person is harsh in a constant, repeating and frustrating manor, I'll mention it, and will possibly give an infraction, or eliminate that post.
But, it can be difficult to tell who is just frustrated themselves at something, and is expressing that frustration here, for a while, and someone who is an intentional troll. I'll sometime send them a personal message, outlining what I expect from people, often that helps, if the person is just not understanding the required interactional niceties.
If it doesn't help, no doubt, shortly they will get banned, either by me, or some other.
Thank you for the reply. I'm sure moderating is a frustrating thing. It seems to me that when a poster is consistently negative and consistently strings out arguments regarding points that were ridiculous to begin with, that they could be identified fairly easily as a troll and justifiably banned as their actions deliberately take away from the any conversation. A lot of times they just drop some ridiculous or inflammatory statement at the beginning of a thread and wait for the inevitable responses. I realize that they will probably just start a new account after being banned, but at least they won't be able to build up a post count and obtain a false credibility. I also realize that this is easier said and done, and a sisyphean task, but unfortunately Apple seems to bring out some very petty and determined trolls.
Thank you for the reply. I'm sure moderating is a frustrating thing. It seems to me that when a poster is consistently negative and consistently strings out arguments regarding points that were ridiculous to begin with, that they could be identified fairly easily as a troll and justifiably banned as their actions deliberately take away from the any conversation. A lot of times they just drop some ridiculous or inflammatory statement at the beginning of a thread and wait for the inevitable responses. I realize that they will probably just start a new account after being banned, but at least they won't be able to build up a post count and obtain a false credibility. I also realize that this is easier said and done, and a sisyphean task, but unfortunately Apple seems to bring out some very petty and determined trolls.
We don't ban by name of the user, or their username.
Some of these guys are actually amusing in the way they write their posts, even if not intentionally so. But responding to some of the trolls is also sometimes cathartic for the one responding. It's interesting having some of them around. It's not all bad.
Thank you for the reply. I'm sure moderating is a frustrating thing. It seems to me that when a poster is consistently negative and consistently strings out arguments regarding points that were ridiculous to begin with, that they could be identified fairly easily as a troll and justifiably banned as their actions deliberately take away from the any conversation. A lot of times they just drop some ridiculous or inflammatory statement at the beginning of a thread and wait for the inevitable responses. I realize that they will probably just start a new account after being banned, but at least they won't be able to build up a post count and obtain a false credibility. I also realize that this is easier said and done, and a sisyphean task, but unfortunately Apple seems to bring out some very petty and determined trolls.
We don't ban by name of the user, or their username.
Some of these guys are actually amusing in the way they write their posts, even if not intentionally so. But responding to some of the trolls is also sometimes cathartic for the one responding. It's interesting having some of them around. It's not all bad.
Quite.
It's often amusing to see trolls being handed a slice of humble pie. Maybe one day, they'll learn a lesson or two.
This is a very good article..this apple watch is very awesome..i think people are like this watch..and like this posts..i like this article..i also head this post in http://www.Iamaddictedtoyou.com
Comments
Interesting analysis. I think we've all been spoiled by the immense success of the iPhone, and to some extent the iPad. There's likely nothing that Apple could ever produce in the future that would even approximate that success. There will invariably be a lot of ecosystem enhancements that won't bring in as much revenue, but will greatly enhance the Apple experience (e.g. Car Play, Apple Watch, Apple TV). However, I think your analysis is a bit too pessimistic:
1) I think Apple will expand the market and demand for a watch, leading to some bigger estimates. (I've never cared about wearing a watch before, but I'm chomping at the bit for an Apple Watch).
2) The halo effect will bring more people into the iPhone/Apple ecosystem, thus adding to its value.
3) I think that the bands and accessories may bring in even more revenue and profit for Apple than the watches themselves, both from Apple made bands as well as Made for Apple Watch licensed bands.
I'm increasingly convinced that the ?Watch will very soon be a watch in name and minor functionality, only. I prefer to think that the goal for this device is biometrics input. I just cannot imagine that what Apple has revealed is in any sense the prime objective for this device. I'll say again that I think spectrometry will feature at some point.
Best wishes.
I'm increasingly convinced that the ?Watch will very soon be a watch in name and minor functionality, only... I'll say again that I think spectrometry will feature at some point.
Best wishes.
Oh - and tasting and sniffing.
It'll be interesting to see how they make a compelling upgrade. With products like the Mac, iPad, iPhone, they can always fall back on design changes or performance boosts. The Watch size doesn't give much room to change the design and performance doesn't really matter because it doesn't do anything that needs it.
It has very little appeal to begin with because they are selling to people who already have iPhones (it requires the phone). The upgrade cycles will be very long, I doubt people will buy more than once every 5 years. Even then, what would initial buyers upgrade for? It has a sharp, OLED display already, it has all the sensors so it would really just be for better battery life. I suppose they'll be able to make it more compact.
I'm going to be an early adopter for the Apple Watch but I see a few clear upgrade reasons that will also have me buying a 2nd generation Apple Watch:
1) Sensors - The sensors included in version 1.0 are very basic. Many were assuming advanced sensors such as blood glucose and other advanced sensor-on-skin technology. This is a hardware feature that cannot be improved upon by software or swapped out like the bands. Eventually, some Apple Watch users will require more advanced sensors as prescribed by their doctors to complete their overall health profile. Maybe not as soon as 2015 but Apple Watch is on track to become the standard for health monitoring outside of the doctor's visit so patients will soon have a good excuse to spring for the latest Apple Watch even though they already own a fully functioning older model.
2) Design - Apple is poised to take advantage of the one and only product always visible to everyone around you. Every season will usher in a new line of Apple Watch. Size and shape will always be similar but such has always been the case with phones and tablets too. The colors and design cues will signify the "summer" watch vs. the "fall" line of Apple Watches the same way the addition of a scarf or fall colors indicate fashion trends. This could just lead to annual aesthetic changes or possibly multiple changes per year to match each season. That release schedule might not be Apple's style but Apple Watch is a fully realized fashion item subject to the whims of designers and consumers wanting to stay in touch with trends, both digital and non-digital.
3) Accessories - There are hardware sensors and features in the latest iPhones that no one saw coming thanks in part to developers. Tim Cook specifically mentioned a bluetooth headset (presumable Apple is working on their own) and using Apple Watch to control Apple TV. With an Apple Watch app store in the works, the floodgates to all of those iOS 3rd party developers has opened up wide. It's only a matter of time before Apple begins adding internals and external accessories to compliment the slew of apps and hardware accessories that will be released. I wish I could be more specific and had a better imagination but I'm confident we will see so many applications that none of us ever saw coming.
4) Power & Charging - The magsafe charging system that Apple Watch employs now is only contactless charging, not true wireless charging. This can only be achieved by redesigning the power and battery systems of the Apple Watch. Also, the band-changing clasp system only seems to be mechanical but what if future Apple Watches included a simple battery contact system also? This would allow Apple to capitalize on their wrist band battery patent to double or triple battery life on the Apple Watch.
5) Screen - Apple Watch uses an OLED screen with a pentile display. There is a lot of work to be done to improve performance and power consumption of these screens. Imagine an Apple Watch that is ON all the time because the screen is so efficient. That will not happen for another 3-5 years but it will happen eventually alongside many other improvements. All Apple has to do is space each improvement out accordingly so the user is satisfied now but also on the hook for the next model's feature.
Some call this planned obsolescence but it is the nature of all technology that is sustainable and survives as a business model and Apple is better at this game than any company in history.
What are you talking about? Of course it takes you back one step. By one step, that's what I mean. It's a back button. Not for typing letters, or turning pages back in a book, but moving one step back on the DEVICE. That's the whole point to it. You don't like the button, but that's just you.
Sorry I'm so late in responding, but I've been away from the Tehran for several days.
I wish you well, and hope to read your posts from the recovery room soon.
Benj, sometimes you amaze me! If that's really how you feel, that it shouldn't have been done in the first place, then none of your other comments about it are of any consequence.
I've always believed that people have the right to say what they want on a public forum. As long as what they are saying isn't incendiary in some substantial way, or personally insulting, though even there, some expression of annoyance at another poster is ok, then fine. If I don't like it, I'll say so. If others don't, they can say so.
If the person is harsh in a constant, repeating and frustrating manor, I'll mention it, and will possibly give an infraction, or eliminate that post.
But, it can be difficult to tell who is just frustrated themselves at something, and is expressing that frustration here, for a while, and someone who is an intentional troll. I'll sometime send them a personal message, outlining what I expect from people, often that helps, if the person is just not understanding the required interactional niceties.
If it doesn't help, no doubt, shortly they will get banned, either by me, or some other.
Best wishes for a speedy recovery.
I have a Newton 2000. The Newton wasn't a failure. The third edition, the 2100, was really pretty good. It also saw rising sales. If apple wasn't in trouble, and possibly, if Jobs wasn't still ticked at getting "fired" by Scully, he might have kept it. Back then, 300,000 sales in the last year was pretty good for a $1,000 device. I remember estimates of over 600,000 sales for the next year, before he discontinued it (along with much of the rest of the company, including the much beloved Studio Monitors).
But remember a very important fact about this, something that many people today aren't aware of. When Apple was looking into the Newton, there wasn't a mobile processor. Apple looked at all the processor families at the time, and then went to Acorn Computer. Apple felt that their Desktop ARM chip had the best possibilities. They convinced Acorn, and VSLI, the manufacturer of the Desktop ARM chip to form a new company with them, which they called ARM, to design and manufacturer mobile chips. apple contributed the concepts, the microcode, some firmware, and I suppose some other things as well. This became the chip Apple used. As we know, this chip took over the handheld industry.
Apple divested themselves of their ARM stock, in the early 2000's. I imagine that it was either they needed the money, or felt that the company was of no use to them. I've always felt annoyed at that. If Apple still owned a third, or so, of ARM, things might be different.
I've always believed that people have the right to say what they want on a public forum. As long as what they are saying isn't incendiary in some substantial way, or personally insulting, though even there, some expression of annoyance at another poster is ok, then fine. If I don't like it, I'll say so. If others don't, they can say so.
If the person is harsh in a constant, repeating and frustrating manor, I'll mention it, and will possibly give an infraction, or eliminate that post.
But, it can be difficult to tell who is just frustrated themselves at something, and is expressing that frustration here, for a while, and someone who is an intentional troll. I'll sometime send them a personal message, outlining what I expect from people, often that helps, if the person is just not understanding the required interactional niceties.
If it doesn't help, no doubt, shortly they will get banned, either by me, or some other.
Thank you for the reply. I'm sure moderating is a frustrating thing. It seems to me that when a poster is consistently negative and consistently strings out arguments regarding points that were ridiculous to begin with, that they could be identified fairly easily as a troll and justifiably banned as their actions deliberately take away from the any conversation. A lot of times they just drop some ridiculous or inflammatory statement at the beginning of a thread and wait for the inevitable responses. I realize that they will probably just start a new account after being banned, but at least they won't be able to build up a post count and obtain a false credibility. I also realize that this is easier said and done, and a sisyphean task, but unfortunately Apple seems to bring out some very petty and determined trolls.
We don't ban by name of the user, or their username.
Some of these guys are actually amusing in the way they write their posts, even if not intentionally so. But responding to some of the trolls is also sometimes cathartic for the one responding. It's interesting having some of them around. It's not all bad.
Quite.
It's often amusing to see trolls being handed a slice of humble pie. Maybe one day, they'll learn a lesson or two.