I’ll take this opportunity to say that I, too, am not convinced that wearables will go mainstream with the launch of the Apple Watch.
It will be interesting to see how successful it is in the first few months. Obviously, it's a given that it will fail compared to the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad, but will Cook give it the chop Newton-style, or will he let Ive potter over it in the preserved Barn like the other hobby, the Apple TV?
I, for one, predict that Cook will be leading a Barn-dance over its premature grave, sadly.
We shall find out soon.
A year from now, I suspect that you will be eating humble pie...
My marker is on 20M Apple Watches in calendar year 2015; 10% of iPhone sales.
This guy is great and has done a fantastic job with the company. I looked hard at them, but they just don't have coverage that suits me, a world in which Verizon is still king.. Increase the network and you'll be soon ahead of the other two!!
I hope 2015 will be the year that everyone keeps their phone in their bag.
It is just plain annoying when you are talking to someone who is constantly glancing at his phablet. And speaking of phablets, they take up the whole friggin' table space! Very rude.
For that alone, I'd like the ? watch to be a huge success: Wearing your digital life on your sleeve is less offensive than putting it on the table.
Perhaps this is the most intriguing topic for the wearables: how will it change personal behavior? The deeply flawed Google Glass evidenced this in spades. The GG is certainly interesting technology; and it has some potential in select applications, but as an everyday consumer wearable, it was a huge failure. Places demanded their removal as a condition of entry. Others were assaulted and robbed for them because of their cost and resale price. Oh, and lets not forget making you look like a freak.
Apple Watch promises the same sort of questions that the original series of mobile devices did. Even the huge brick cell phones permitted uber rich to be pulled out of some personal interaction at the whim of another. Cell phones got smaller, replaced pagers, and now smartphones are so large that even having one in your packet is uncomfortable while sitting. I am conscious of people putting cell phones on the table, wondering if I am less important than their next tweet. When I set mine out, it is to get it out of my pocket, and I consciously place it face down. If it is someone I just met, I even tell them "it's off; i just need it out of my pocket."
Surely Apple Watch will have a "quick silence" feature. And of course, everything in between. Taptic only; notifications only from VIPs; geofencing options; plenty I'm sure third parties will develop. (And of course, for you deeply geeky, I expect a resurgence of people actually learning morse code. That's right - an app will convert a text to good old fashioned dots and dashes. Welcome to the 19th century.) My marker on the killer app though will take a bit of evolution not available in the first release. Somehow, Apple needs to get the tech to allow 911 calls with a GPS location. Perhaps that's the only stand-alone cell and GPS function, but with that onboard, you have a bona-fide safety device every parent will want on their kid. And its a small step to a personal lo-jack from there.
Cell phones and pagers changed how people interact, not all of it good, but few can argue the utility. Apple Watch will do the same.
20 million units? That is a fairly large number for a device we know very little about but costs a whole lot of money.
“It is 1958. IBM passes up the chance to buy a fledgling company that has just invented a new technology, called Xerography. Two years later Xerox is born and IBM has been kicking itself ever since."
"It is 10 years later, the late 60s. Digital Equipment and others invent the mini computer. IBM dismisses the mini computer as too small to do serious computing and unimportant to their business. DEC grows to become a multi hundred million dollar corporation before IBM finally enters the mini computer market."
"It is now ten years later. The late 70s. In 1977, Apple, a young fledgling company on the west coast invents the Apple II, the first personal computer as we know it today. IBM dismisses the personal computer as too small to do serious computing and unimportant to their business.”
“It is now 1984. It appears IBM wants it all. Apple is perceived to be the only hope to offer IBM a run for its money. Dealers, originally welcoming IBM with open arms, now fear an IBM dominated and controlled future. They are increasingly turning back to Apple as the only force that can ensure their future freedom! IBM is aiming its guns to the last obstacle to industry control—Apple. Will Big Blue dominate the entire computer industry? The entire information age? Was George Orwell right?”
Considering that it has probably as much processor power as a Iphone 5, not sure what your talking about. I calculated that just using a 20nm process and ultra low clock it could run all day long as a Blue tooth music player. What uses the most power is the screen, not even the processor. Wifi is too power hungry, but the new standard from bluetooth increases throughput and makes it possible for it to replace WIFI as a TCP/IP transport. Wouldn't be surprised if routers start supporting it (and Apple pay), very soon. Then, people would only need a Bluetooth to WIFI (or CELL) on themselves (not neading a bulky battery on their wrist, (not even a phone) to access the net with the watch.
You're forgetting about the battery. Mobile devices are all very powerful today but very few run at full power because of limited battery size and capacity. Forget about the Apple Watch. It probably will never use more than 25% of it's actual processing power because of battery limitations. But why should it? It requires an iPhone which does most of the work to run apps and connect to the internet so why wouldn't Apple use that?
I think they'd be a decent carrier if they actually had coverage outside of cities. I used to have them and they were just okay. They're still on 2G data where I live while everyone else is at at least 4G LTE. Maybe once they get some subscribers they'll spend some money and build out its network throughout the US.
Have T-Mobile. With the exception of a few dead spots in my city, it's been absolutely fantastic. I stream iTunes Radio from 7a til 10p. Forgot that AM/FM still exists. Audio quality is unlike any other carrier I've been with. Converted my family and my significant other's family to T-Mobile. Never looked back. And the data roll-over is pissing off a lot of my friends that are stuck in contracts. Sucks to be with anyone else.
I have T-Mobile. I nickname it T-Slobile. Or T-Nobile.
Because it is unreliable, slow, and I get No Service a lot of the time.
I live in Sacramento and travel to the Bay Area and in both locations (major metro areas) I get spotty service. This could be due to the terrain of SF being very hilly. But a lot of times I see the signal change from LTE to 4G to E just standing there. Mostly it is LTE, but it is still pretty flaky. Also, if you are not in the downtown epicenter, forget about getting anything more than 1 or 2 bars. And that's if you're lucky.
If it weren't for Wi-Fi calling on my 5s, I wouldn't be able to make calls reliably. And that's unacceptable. But you get what you pay for.
I have been pretty unsatisfied with them.
What saves them is their cost (I only pay $40/ month) and no contracts.
However my phone is unlocked, and I am free to go to any other carrier if they choose to become more competitive with T-Mobile's pricing. Either that or T-Mobile start getting its act together and provide better cellular reliability.
This guy is great and has done a fantastic job with the company. I looked hard at them, but they just don't have coverage that suits me, a world in which Verizon is still king.. Increase the network and you'll be soon ahead of the other two!!
As far as I know, profits has been declining since he's started this new campaign with the company. I can't call that a fantastic job, personally.
I love Apple but can't see a huge demand for the iwatch when people have their iPhone with them already that does more.
I've been skeptical about the watch before it even launched. I posted by beliefs on here when it came out and was attacked by the hardcore Apple fans. A few months later, I'm still not convinced. It could be because we, or I, don't wear jewelry and have little value it in (EDIT: and/or it may not even be targeted to the normal tech audience to begin with). I do know that the markup on high-end non-smartwatches are huge, however. If they could capture a fraction of that market, while seeking a higher than average selling price, that would be huge for Apple as a company. It could push up their overall gross margins.
I do know that the markup on high-end non-smartwatches are huge, however. If they could capture a fraction of that market, while seeking a higher than average selling price, that would be huge for Apple as a company. It could push up their overall gross margins.
A high-end traditional watch manufactured by craftsman can last for decades and is something that can be cherished. Will a 2 year old Apple Watch manufactured by overworked Chinese assemblers have the same longevity and lasting appeal? Today, I would say no. I'm not convinced that a traditional high-end watch and the Apple Watch are competing in the same space. I think Apple is trying to create a new Beats-type market for smart watches.
I have yet to see this discussed anywhere, but what are we expecting at the "magical" $350 starting price point? Will it be the 38 mm watch or 42 mm watch or both? Will it even come with a wrist strap or will that be extra?? I think some of those wrist bands being price north of $100 themselves. I can see a 42 mm Apple Watch with a Link Bracelet band being easily $500.
Will a 2 year old Apple Watch manufactured by overworked Chinese assemblers have the same longevity and lasting appeal?
You're losing me on that question. Why are the Chinese overworked and no other watch maker employees are? That seems to take a potentially legitimate question about traditional watch v CE upgrade cycles and adds too much hyperbole to make it anything but rhetorical.
I have yet to see this discussed anywhere, but what are we expecting at the "magical" $350 starting price point? Will it be the 38 mm watch or 42 mm watch or both?
We simply don't know yet. I could make a case for each, but I'm leaning toward the smaller size being less expensive because there will be a good reduction in component costs from the casing materials, battery and display.
Will it even come with a wrist strap or will that be extra??
The default strap will be included. You can even see on the digital crown that each style/SKU has a band associated.
I think some of those wrist bands being price north of $100 themselves. I can see a 42 mm Apple Watch with a Link Bracelet band being easily $500.
When you go gold the cost would be a lot higher for the metal bands.
You're forgetting about the battery. Mobile devices are all very powerful today but very few run at full power because of limited battery size and capacity. Forget about the Apple Watch. It probably will never use more than 25% of it's actual processing power because of battery limitations. But why should it? It requires an iPhone which does most of the work to run apps and connect to the internet so why wouldn't Apple use that?
I didn't forget anything. A 14nm low power processor has all the processing power of a Iphone 5 even if used a lot. If the processor is fast enough, it can be mostly idle (even if say playing mp3s all day long) and still give you great processing power.
Everything in the phone is using less power every year. So, what we are not gaining with better batteries we are getting otherwise.
Eventually, the watch will run fuly independentaly; battery density and processors chipset will allow it. You'l still need a bigger screen because your not watching a movie on your watch ;-).
I’ll take this opportunity to say that I, too, am not convinced that wearables will go mainstream with the launch of the Apple Watch.
It will be interesting to see how successful it is in the first few months. Obviously, it's a given that it will fail compared to the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad, but will Cook give it the chop Newton-style, or will he let Ive potter over it in the preserved Barn like the other hobby, the Apple TV?
I, for one, predict that Cook will be leading a Barn-dance over its premature grave, sadly.
We shall find out soon.
As an early user of the pebble watch, I predict the Apple watch will become a necessary gadget for many. There have been many attempts to contact me that, with just a phone, would have been missed. I need assurance I can be reached for possible medical and emergency situations. Once you become accustomed to its function, it's hard to do without. Apple will probably blow the others away.
melgross a sage comment re: outspokenness. Still have to say I like this guy. Crashing that AT&T party? That was badass.
So can I hack the Apple Watch to use with my Galaxy Note? Half-kidding. Since the thing is so big sometimes it's hard to take in and out of my skinny jeans pocket. Kidding. Mostly. Hipsters with iPhone 6, ya'll know.
Comments
I’ll take this opportunity to say that I, too, am not convinced that wearables will go mainstream with the launch of the Apple Watch.
It will be interesting to see how successful it is in the first few months. Obviously, it's a given that it will fail compared to the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad, but will Cook give it the chop Newton-style, or will he let Ive potter over it in the preserved Barn like the other hobby, the Apple TV?
I, for one, predict that Cook will be leading a Barn-dance over its premature grave, sadly.
We shall find out soon.
A year from now, I suspect that you will be eating humble pie...
My marker is on 20M Apple Watches in calendar year 2015; 10% of iPhone sales.
Na ... you can see the color in his eyes still.
I hope 2015 will be the year that everyone keeps their phone in their bag.
It is just plain annoying when you are talking to someone who is constantly glancing at his phablet. And speaking of phablets, they take up the whole friggin' table space! Very rude.
For that alone, I'd like the ? watch to be a huge success: Wearing your digital life on your sleeve is less offensive than putting it on the table.
Perhaps this is the most intriguing topic for the wearables: how will it change personal behavior? The deeply flawed Google Glass evidenced this in spades. The GG is certainly interesting technology; and it has some potential in select applications, but as an everyday consumer wearable, it was a huge failure. Places demanded their removal as a condition of entry. Others were assaulted and robbed for them because of their cost and resale price. Oh, and lets not forget making you look like a freak.
Apple Watch promises the same sort of questions that the original series of mobile devices did. Even the huge brick cell phones permitted uber rich to be pulled out of some personal interaction at the whim of another. Cell phones got smaller, replaced pagers, and now smartphones are so large that even having one in your packet is uncomfortable while sitting. I am conscious of people putting cell phones on the table, wondering if I am less important than their next tweet. When I set mine out, it is to get it out of my pocket, and I consciously place it face down. If it is someone I just met, I even tell them "it's off; i just need it out of my pocket."
Surely Apple Watch will have a "quick silence" feature. And of course, everything in between. Taptic only; notifications only from VIPs; geofencing options; plenty I'm sure third parties will develop. (And of course, for you deeply geeky, I expect a resurgence of people actually learning morse code. That's right - an app will convert a text to good old fashioned dots and dashes. Welcome to the 19th century.) My marker on the killer app though will take a bit of evolution not available in the first release. Somehow, Apple needs to get the tech to allow 911 calls with a GPS location. Perhaps that's the only stand-alone cell and GPS function, but with that onboard, you have a bona-fide safety device every parent will want on their kid. And its a small step to a personal lo-jack from there.
Cell phones and pagers changed how people interact, not all of it good, but few can argue the utility. Apple Watch will do the same.
A year from now, I suspect that you will be eating humble pie...
My marker is on 20M Apple Watches in calendar year 2015; 10% of iPhone sales.
20 million units? That is a fairly large number for a device we know very little about but costs a whole lot of money.
20 million units? That is a fairly large number for a device we know very little about but costs a whole lot of money.
“It is 1958. IBM passes up the chance to buy a fledgling company that has just invented a new technology, called Xerography. Two years later Xerox is born and IBM has been kicking itself ever since."
"It is 10 years later, the late 60s. Digital Equipment and others invent the mini computer. IBM dismisses the mini computer as too small to do serious computing and unimportant to their business. DEC grows to become a multi hundred million dollar corporation before IBM finally enters the mini computer market."
"It is now ten years later. The late 70s. In 1977, Apple, a young fledgling company on the west coast invents the Apple II, the first personal computer as we know it today. IBM dismisses the personal computer as too small to do serious computing and unimportant to their business.”
“It is now 1984. It appears IBM wants it all. Apple is perceived to be the only hope to offer IBM a run for its money. Dealers, originally welcoming IBM with open arms, now fear an IBM dominated and controlled future. They are increasingly turning back to Apple as the only force that can ensure their future freedom! IBM is aiming its guns to the last obstacle to industry control—Apple. Will Big Blue dominate the entire computer industry? The entire information age? Was George Orwell right?”
Considering that it has probably as much processor power as a Iphone 5, not sure what your talking about. I calculated that just using a 20nm process and ultra low clock it could run all day long as a Blue tooth music player. What uses the most power is the screen, not even the processor. Wifi is too power hungry, but the new standard from bluetooth increases throughput and makes it possible for it to replace WIFI as a TCP/IP transport. Wouldn't be surprised if routers start supporting it (and Apple pay), very soon. Then, people would only need a Bluetooth to WIFI (or CELL) on themselves (not neading a bulky battery on their wrist, (not even a phone) to access the net with the watch.
You're forgetting about the battery. Mobile devices are all very powerful today but very few run at full power because of limited battery size and capacity. Forget about the Apple Watch. It probably will never use more than 25% of it's actual processing power because of battery limitations. But why should it? It requires an iPhone which does most of the work to run apps and connect to the internet so why wouldn't Apple use that?
I think they'd be a decent carrier if they actually had coverage outside of cities. I used to have them and they were just okay. They're still on 2G data where I live while everyone else is at at least 4G LTE. Maybe once they get some subscribers they'll spend some money and build out its network throughout the US.
Which company does that sound like now? Funny how you become what you once hated.
Have T-Mobile. With the exception of a few dead spots in my city, it's been absolutely fantastic. I stream iTunes Radio from 7a til 10p. Forgot that AM/FM still exists. Audio quality is unlike any other carrier I've been with. Converted my family and my significant other's family to T-Mobile. Never looked back. And the data roll-over is pissing off a lot of my friends that are stuck in contracts. Sucks to be with anyone else.
I have T-Mobile. I nickname it T-Slobile. Or T-Nobile.
Because it is unreliable, slow, and I get No Service a lot of the time.
I live in Sacramento and travel to the Bay Area and in both locations (major metro areas) I get spotty service. This could be due to the terrain of SF being very hilly. But a lot of times I see the signal change from LTE to 4G to E just standing there. Mostly it is LTE, but it is still pretty flaky. Also, if you are not in the downtown epicenter, forget about getting anything more than 1 or 2 bars. And that's if you're lucky.
If it weren't for Wi-Fi calling on my 5s, I wouldn't be able to make calls reliably. And that's unacceptable. But you get what you pay for.
I have been pretty unsatisfied with them.
What saves them is their cost (I only pay $40/ month) and no contracts.
However my phone is unlocked, and I am free to go to any other carrier if they choose to become more competitive with T-Mobile's pricing. Either that or T-Mobile start getting its act together and provide better cellular reliability.
This guy is great and has done a fantastic job with the company. I looked hard at them, but they just don't have coverage that suits me, a world in which Verizon is still king.. Increase the network and you'll be soon ahead of the other two!!
As far as I know, profits has been declining since he's started this new campaign with the company. I can't call that a fantastic job, personally.
I love Apple but can't see a huge demand for the iwatch when people have their iPhone with them already that does more.
I've been skeptical about the watch before it even launched. I posted by beliefs on here when it came out and was attacked by the hardcore Apple fans. A few months later, I'm still not convinced. It could be because we, or I, don't wear jewelry and have little value it in (EDIT: and/or it may not even be targeted to the normal tech audience to begin with). I do know that the markup on high-end non-smartwatches are huge, however. If they could capture a fraction of that market, while seeking a higher than average selling price, that would be huge for Apple as a company. It could push up their overall gross margins.
So you're still skeptical, because it hasn't launched yet.
I do know that the markup on high-end non-smartwatches are huge, however. If they could capture a fraction of that market, while seeking a higher than average selling price, that would be huge for Apple as a company. It could push up their overall gross margins.
A high-end traditional watch manufactured by craftsman can last for decades and is something that can be cherished. Will a 2 year old Apple Watch manufactured by overworked Chinese assemblers have the same longevity and lasting appeal? Today, I would say no. I'm not convinced that a traditional high-end watch and the Apple Watch are competing in the same space. I think Apple is trying to create a new Beats-type market for smart watches.
I have yet to see this discussed anywhere, but what are we expecting at the "magical" $350 starting price point? Will it be the 38 mm watch or 42 mm watch or both? Will it even come with a wrist strap or will that be extra?? I think some of those wrist bands being price north of $100 themselves. I can see a 42 mm Apple Watch with a Link Bracelet band being easily $500.
You're losing me on that question. Why are the Chinese overworked and no other watch maker employees are? That seems to take a potentially legitimate question about traditional watch v CE upgrade cycles and adds too much hyperbole to make it anything but rhetorical.
We simply don't know yet. I could make a case for each, but I'm leaning toward the smaller size being less expensive because there will be a good reduction in component costs from the casing materials, battery and display.
The default strap will be included. You can even see on the digital crown that each style/SKU has a band associated.
When you go gold the cost would be a lot higher for the metal bands.
You're forgetting about the battery. Mobile devices are all very powerful today but very few run at full power because of limited battery size and capacity. Forget about the Apple Watch. It probably will never use more than 25% of it's actual processing power because of battery limitations. But why should it? It requires an iPhone which does most of the work to run apps and connect to the internet so why wouldn't Apple use that?
I didn't forget anything. A 14nm low power processor has all the processing power of a Iphone 5 even if used a lot. If the processor is fast enough, it can be mostly idle (even if say playing mp3s all day long) and still give you great processing power.
Everything in the phone is using less power every year. So, what we are not gaining with better batteries we are getting otherwise.
Eventually, the watch will run fuly independentaly; battery density and processors chipset will allow it. You'l still need a bigger screen because your not watching a movie on your watch ;-).
As an early user of the pebble watch, I predict the Apple watch will become a necessary gadget for many. There have been many attempts to contact me that, with just a phone, would have been missed. I need assurance I can be reached for possible medical and emergency situations. Once you become accustomed to its function, it's hard to do without. Apple will probably blow the others away.
melgross a sage comment re: outspokenness. Still have to say I like this guy. Crashing that AT&T party? That was badass.
So can I hack the Apple Watch to use with my Galaxy Note? Half-kidding. Since the thing is so big sometimes it's hard to take in and out of my skinny jeans pocket. Kidding. Mostly. Hipsters with iPhone 6, ya'll know.