I agree with everything in the article. Except i think it'll be a few quarters before we can know whether or not it flops. The first two quarters, sales will be strong. Supply will no doubt be constrained and there will be a long list of excited fans waiting to get their watches. But after that? Will the general iPhone using public plunk down $350+ for notifications on their wrists? I seriously doubt it. By then the tech press will have thoroughly reviewed it and we'll further appreciate the limited set of predictable features and lack of anything truly wow. I expect up to five million units sold initially, after which sales fall dramatically.
[CONTENTEMBED=/t/184640/inside-the-highly-customizable-companion-app-that-will-connect-your-apple-watch-to-your-iphone/40#post_2671122 layout=inline]<span style="line-height:1.4em;">Was the GMT based on the Inca, Mayan, Druid or Gregorian calendar</span>
<img alt="1confused.gif" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies/1confused.gif" style="line-height:1.4em;">
[/CONTENTEMBED]
GMT does not need a calendar as it is only relevant for 24 hours and then it repeats. People who are using local time might be concerned which side of the international date line they were on.
Yes, but didn't earlier sailors, navigating with a sextant, need to consider the calendar as well as GMT to determine their location?
Indeed. Lots of very confident predictions of ?Watch failure. If the product is successful (as I predict), will we see as many mea culpas? Unlikely. They will rely on moving the goal posts.
Apple is investing in this as the next platform. To Apple, success is not immediate financial, but how to grow this platform over the next 5 years. It starts as a companion to iPhone, but will gain more autonomy, more functions, and better battery life over next few releases.
So some have listed their reasons why it will not be successful (which boils down to them not conceiving of a use for themselves), so here is some arguments on why it will likely be successful:
- Sweet spot of price for Apple's target markets (as noted above $350 is not "expensive" for something a person wants, for hundreds of millions of people. A night out a restaurant will set a couple back over $100 these days). A good price point for meaningful gifts for family/loved ones.
- Minor conveniences add up. Estimates are that today people pull out their phone over 100 times/day, mostly to check the time or messages.
- New ways of communicating with close friends/family (communication is the lynch pin of attraction of devices and services). Asian markets with the sketches could be huge.
- Built in core apps have usability to many today: health, fitness, iPod music, ?Pay, secure entry
- Expect a few "hit apps" at a minimum.
- Many people will buy "cool new" stuff.
- iPhone user base of over 500M to start with.
I understand why so many media & bloggers write the stuff they do - being "anti-Apple" has proven to be one of the most reliable ways to get traffic for their articles. I have less understanding why commenters on forums do so, as there is no financial gain for them.
Understand that comments on forums represent opinions. Surely everyone is entitled to theirs.
I'm totally willing to admit if I'm wrong. Just as I hope those who believe the AppleWatch will be a runaway smash do the same, should it fail.
And the reasons you tout for why the Watch will be a success boils down to pure conjecture.
Because we know people will buy cool new stuff? How did the Apple G4Cube do? Apple Newton anyone?
They've had their share of failures too. Just saying.
I'm a long time Apple fan and user, but I also don't drink the koolaid and accept everything Cupertino spews out.
I'd loved to be proven wrong. As I've noted, the Watch will do well because of fanboys and early adopters. It will take off if there's is a killer business app or purpose beyond convenience.
1) Hundreds of years of market for watches and several years of fitness trackers show that wrist-worn devices are successful.
2) Again, do you realize how silly it sounds to say that in 2002 (or earlier) that "MP3 players" fixed a major problem people had? Do you know how few "MP3 players" were sold before 2002? Your memory is tricking into believing the iPod was something it was not. There was no golden ticket. There was Eureka! moment as soon as everyone saw it the first time. It literally took YEARS before it took off, yet, if ?Watch does multiples of what the iPod did post iTunes Store, iTunes on Windows, and iPod mini it'll be called a failure, just like the iPad was in 2010 despite being the fastest growing and selling consumer tech ever made.
edit: PS: I will say, unequivocally, that that the wearable electronics market is the cusp of being the next big thing with sales into the double digit billions within a few years.
Are you joking? Wearables are not on the cusp of anything. They're a niche market that only hardcore techies find interesting. the public has never embraced them and unless someone comes out with something truly revolutionary, I don't see that changing. Some people have just convinced themselves that wearables are "the next big thing" despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary.
And yes, MP3 players did fix a major problem. Instead of carrying my Walkman and a bunch of tapes or CDs, I just needed to carry one device with all my music on it. The Apple Watch fixes no such problem. It just adds a little convenience because now I don't need to pull my phone out of my pocket. That's all.
Except that portable CD players were only about $90 at the time the iPod launched, which made the iPod very expensive. The iPod took off because of the iTunes Music Store, not because of the ClickWheel.
What do you think will be the iTunes equivalent for the Apple Watch? (ie - iTunes - easy access to digital music)
When that thing can monitor b/p, heartrate and diagnose you by peeing on it... then I might consider buying one.
My 19-year-old granddaughter is aways on her phone!
She was home sick, bored, and we'd been trying to straighten out her finances -- she has her first credit card and is trying to build a credit history.
I thought that Apple Pay on the Apple Watch might appeal to her -- and hinted I might buy her an Apple Watch if she got control of her finances.
So, she watched the entire hour + of the Apple Watch announcement video ...
What she thought was the best thing ...
Transit! When in San Francisco, knowing when the next bus is coming and when to get off ...
Go figure???
My personal opinion, is Convenience -- most all the capabilities * of the iPhone without needing to pull out the iPhone.
* I don't like to be tethered to anything. Carrying an iPhone is being tethered to an iPhone! The Apple Watch can be setup to be less of a tether than the iPhone (less disruptive and more precise notifications).
"I'm sure there is a lot of potential... but... unlike the iPhone and the iPad which seemed to be filling a gap, I just can't see the Apple Watch taking off right away (I agree with Inkling... they're a solution in search of a problem). Over time I can see there might be added functionality that will increase its popularity but as far as convenience being one of the benefits... hmmmm... between pulling an iPhone out of my pocket and working with something on my wrist... 6 of one... imho."
By the way... who the f*ck said that MP3 players fixed a "major" problem. Certainly not me. They did fix a problem, though, bulkiness and inconvenience. People wanted music... the mp3 player made it easy to take music with them. I thought the iPod was a breakthrough product when i first saw it.
1) So you think the iPod fixed a problem, just not a major one. Is that why you believe it took years for a very expensive and limited player to become popular? Why do you believe the wearables market is inventing a problem despite your other comments that talk about a completely different argument? Comments like "there is a lot of potential" and how Newton was a brilliant idea that had bad timing." Those does jibe with inventing a problem, but rather not being the right solution for a problem. Wearables are coming and it will be a larger market than we've ever seen before in the field of electronics.
2) You seem to still be ignoring how the portable CD player and CD player in the car were the accepted solutions and the iPod was the problem for all the reasons already mentioned. There was no "OMG, this is brilliant!" among the masses when Jobs introduced it and CompUSA was carrying it. It took YEARS to gain traction because it took YEARS for people to see the light.
3) You need to stop thinking about ?Watch as replacing the same task as on your iPhone (as noted by your 6 of 1 comment). It's doing things the iPhone isn't tasked to do, or isn't tasked to do well. How can I make a payment from ?Pay without my iPhone on me? How I can get a subtle reminder that I'm leaving a restaurant without my iPhone on me? How can my Mac auto-lock when I leave my desk? How can my iPhone know if I'm about to go into cardiac arrest? How can I get subtle left and right turn walking directions whilst traveling without having to have my face and ears buried in some sort of map? How can I have my iPhone auto-lock on me if it's stolen while in use on the subway? How can I have my iPhone give me a subtle reminder that my blood-glucose levels are dangerously low when in my front pocket? How can I get a calendar reminder while on a run without having to pull out my phone or even have my phone on me at all? Remember that Woz first had to clear his design with HP before he could sell it on his own. They couldn't see what good would do for people to have their own personal computer at home. To store recipes? Really? Good luck with that shitty idea, Woz.
I just don't see it in the Apple Watch. Not yet, at least. It reminds me more of the Newton. Great idea. Bad timing. Not the right implementation... restricted by current technology.
And you don't see how Newton is a precursor to the iPhone and iPad? I'm guessing you don't think those were solutions looking for a problem, and you just compared Newton to ?Watch. That phrase is not synonymous with being too quick to come to market with an inferior product. If that was your argument from the beginning I could that PoV, as I already stated I thought the wearable market seemed to still be a couple years out from taking off, but I was very, very clear about [@]Inkling[/@] and your comment about the term a solution in search of a problem.
For me this companion app will be the biggest reason why Apple Watch will not sell much. Apple has long been criticized for the lack of "customization" but it was made on purpose to favor immediate use and ease of use.
"Look, I have a problem with my watch"
"Let me fiddle through thousands of switches and pages and find it"
That's what Microsoft is about, not apple.
I cannot customize the color of the minutes on the watch face? Who cares!! It just works.
That is what Apple used to be all about. If you had the skills, on OS X, you could customize all of it, with scripts and even Automator. But you didn't HAVE TO. You COULD.
Now you have to fiddle around a complicated setting process to be able to use your watch.
Why?! The engineers seem to be winning at Apple.
Buy the Watch.
Put it on your Wrist.
Watch says "Hello! I'm Apple Watch"
10 seconds automatic configuration.
End of story.
Then, if you WANT, then you can have the mickey mouse face or whatever, but not like that. Not on an endless list of switches you have to turn on and off each with sub-menu.
No. Some icons, the watch face should be selectable "cover flow style" with the face being animated on the iPhone screen live telling time.
Something along these lines.
But not what I see.
I don't like it a single bit.
I think I'll buy the Withings Activite Pop instead. It emobodies what I expected from Apple much better.
Also, I am curious about how often will Apple update the HW. If it is yearly I'll never buy it.
It has to be at least every two years. Otherwise I won't spend that amount of money for a product that gets old in 12 months.
I'm guessing you didn't grow up in a time when it was FUN to dig through the settings of whatever hardware or software to see what it was capable of.
They want this watch to be extremely personal, more so than the iPhone, Mac, or iPad. Besides, people are more computer savvy these days. It's not hard to figure out.
Are you joking? Wearables are not on the cusp of anything. They're a niche market that only hardcore techies find interesting.
Just like that smartphone was just for hardcore techies and business people before 2007. :rolleyes:
the public has never embraced them and unless someone comes out with something truly revolutionary,
Even in the same post you've gone from "wearables are not on the cusp of anything" and "a niche market that only hardcore techies find interesting" to a statement about the tech advancing that it could revolutionary. No shit, Cumberbatch!
I don't see that changing. Some people have just convinced themselves that wearables are "the next big thing" despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary.
Ah, now you're back to seeing the state of the art not advancing. No breakthroughs? You really want to say that wearables won't be a massive market? Even Beats, a very young company, has come in to make their wearables very popular in a short amount of time. Do you not think that ever shrinking electronics using even less power will never find their ways onto (and into) your person. The headphones have been around for many decades, and now we are on the cusp of advancing that goal.
And yes, MP3 players did fix a major problem.
[@]island hermit[/@] says it wasn't a major problem so you two can discuss that separately.
Instead of carrying my Walkman and a bunch of tapes or CDs, I just needed to carry one device with all my music on it. The Apple Watch fixes no such problem. It just adds a little convenience
So solving a problem, major or otherwise, where other solution are already considered the status quo, it isn't adding convenience as the primary solution, especially when it's excessively more expensive than current solutions? :???: You'll have to explain that to me.
...because now I don't need to pull my phone out of my pocket. That's all.
There is no other way for me to say this except to say that if you truly ONLY see ?Watch as saving you the trouble of pulling your iPhone out of your pocket then I feel very sorry for you because you will undoubtedly be missing pretty much everything else this beautiful world has to offer if your view is that myopic. And, again, I say this a someone who has no intention of buying ?Watch at this point or any point in the future, just as I will likely never buy an iPad again, yet I can clearly see the utility it offers others.
PS: In the land of the lazy convenience is king. From that phrase and the level of laziness I read in your previous comment I predict you will eventually buy and/or "smartwatch."
That's over 300 miles per hour. How would that have been possible then? Even Dr. Emmett Brown had issues getting a train to 88 MPH in 1855.
1) So you think the iPod fixed a problem, just not a major one. Is that why you believe it took years for a very expensive and limited player to become popular? Why do you believe the wearables market is inventing a problem despite your other comments that talk about a completely different argument? Comments like "there is a lot of potential" and how Newton was a brilliant idea that had bad timing." Those does jibe with inventing a problem, but rather not being the right solution for a problem. Wearables are coming and it will be a larger market than we've ever seen before in the field of electronics.
2) You seem to still be ignoring how the portable CD player and CD player in the car were the accepted solutions and the iPod was the problem for all the reasons already mentioned. There was no "OMG, this is brilliant!" among the masses when Jobs introduced it and CompUSA was carrying it. It took YEARS to gain traction because it took YEARS for people to see the light.
3) You need to stop thinking about ?Watch as replacing the same task as on your iPhone (as noted by your 6 of 1 comment). It's doing things the iPhone isn't tasked to do, or isn't tasked to do well. How can I make a payment from ?Pay without my iPhone on me? How I can get a subtle reminder that I'm leaving a restaurant without my iPhone on me? How can my Mac auto-lock when I leave my desk? How can my iPhone know if I'm about to go into cardiac arrest? How can I get subtle left and right turn walking directions whilst traveling without having to have my face and ears buried in some sort of map? How can I have my iPhone auto-lock on me if it's stolen while in use on the subway? How can I have my iPhone give me a subtle reminder that my blood-glucose levels are dangerously low when in my front pocket? How can I get a calendar reminder while on a run without having to pull out my phone or even have my phone on me at all? Remember that Woz first had to clear his design with HP before he could sell it on his own. They couldn't see what good would do for people to have their own personal computer at home. To store recipes? Really? Good luck with that shitty idea, Woz.
And you don't see how Newton is a precursor to the iPhone and iPad? I'm guessing you don't think those were solutions looking for a problem, and you just compared Newton to ?Watch. That phrase is not synonymous with being too quick to come to market with an inferior product. If that was your argument from the beginning I could that PoV, as I already stated I thought the wearable market seemed to still be a couple years out from taking off, but I was very, very clear about @Inkling and your comment about the term a solution in search of a problem.
Well, from everything that you've said it appears that you agree with what I said. It's going to take a while for this thing to take off.
Moving on... because we just keep saying the same things over and over...
The "wearables" market will be huge... agreed... but... is the Apple Watch the thing that will make the wearables market move? Is Apple sticking too close to the watch metaphor? Is Apple's corporate culture restricting Apple's ability to think more out of the box?
Macintosh - like no other computer of the time in looks and function
iMac - like no other computer of the time in looks and then enhanced by OSX
iPhone - like no other computer of the time in looks and function
The wearables market will be huge... but is Apple the company that will make it happen.
I just don't think the Apple Watch is that product.
Yep! On the Apple Developer forums, it's hard to get some straight answers on the Apple Watch -- likely, to avoid giving competitors information on an unreleased product.
But, sometimes you can infer answers from how a related question is answered. My inference is that the Apple Watch must be Near (within 2 meters) of the iPhone -- or too much power will be required for lost/reconnections and retransmissions ...
But, I really don't know!
I think losing the connection outside of 2m would be a huge HUGE defect. I am about as big a proponent of Apple Watch as you'll find here, but I would be HUGELY disappointed in such a limit. If solid connection within 100m, regardless of obstacles or environment, is pretty good. Between these two is much room for disappointment (or opportunity for a boost device.)
Hey - the BTLE stuff works as a "finding" technology too I think. Key tags are being made to help find lost stuff. Meaning theoretically and app can help track your to a lost iPhone in range; or a lost Apple Watch in range. Right?
Are you joking? Wearables are not on the cusp of anything. They're a niche market that only hardcore techies find interesting. the public has never embraced them and unless someone comes out with something truly revolutionary, I don't see that changing. Some people have just convinced themselves that wearables are "the next big thing" despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary.
Let me give you a hypothetical:
~ 25% of the US population is age 55 and over.
People can wear an Apple Watch that measures your pulse (among other biometrics). Sometime; later this year, there will be an Apple Watch app that detects irregularity in the wearer's pulse rate -- and through the tethered iPhone send an alert to your doctor, relative, 911, whomever ...
Now, for an anecdote:
At about midnight, on Feb 18 -- it will be 14 years since my wife died, unexpectedly, while watching TV in the family room, I was less that 40 feet away, on the computer in the den ...
Lucy was 59 years old! She would have been 73 on Jan 29.
I would give everything to have had the Apple Watch tech -- it could have saved her life.
I will buy an Apple Watch for My daughter and my 3 grandkids ...
My 19-year-old granddaughter is aways on her phone!
She was home sick, bored, and we'd been trying to straighten out her finances -- she has her first credit card and is trying to build a credit history.
I thought that Apple Pay on the Apple Watch might appeal to her -- and hinted I might buy her an Apple Watch if she got control of her finances.
So, she watched the entire hour + of the Apple Watch announcement video ...
What she thought was the best thing ...
Transit! When in San Francisco, knowing when the next bus is coming and when to get off ...
Go figure???
My personal opinion, is Convenience -- most all the capabilities * of the iPhone without needing to pull out the iPhone.
* I don't like to be tethered to anything. Carrying an iPhone is being tethered to an iPhone! The Apple Watch can be setup to be less of a tether than the iPhone (less disruptive and more precise notifications).
That's interesting, Dick. Hopefully she can get on the transit with the watch as well.
Here's my story about convenience... our new Honda Civic. Never do I have to pull anything out of my pocket. I put the key fob in my pocket and the car opens and starts without every having to reach to get the keys. That's convenience.
The Apple Watch might be a start but it is already anachronistic imo. We still have to look at it, we still have to fiddle with it, we still have to charge it...
The day when a wearable is not even noticed until it is needed... and even then "it" decides when you need it most of the time... that's what I want to see.
[quote name="island hermit" url="/t/184640/inside-the-highly-customizable-companion-app-that-will-connect-your-apple-watch-to-your-iphone/80#post_2671237"]Well, from everything that you've said it appears that you agree with what I said. It's going to take a while for this thing to take off.[/QUOTE]
I said that from the beginning… I mean when it was introduced. What I never said is there was some [I]invented[/I] problem, which equates to late night solutions found on infomercials.
[QUOTE]The "wearables" market will be huge... agreed... but... is the Apple Watch the thing that will make the wearables market move? Is Apple sticking too close to the watch metaphor? Is Apple's corporate culture restricting Apple's ability to think more out of the box?[/QUOTE]
I've made it no secret I've hated most of Apple's name choices, but they don't seem to hinder sales and may increase them. iPhone was hurt with phone in the name so why should ?Watch? I'd think by now we should at least trust Apple to know a little bit about how to release a new product. Do you think Ive would been OK with it if he didn't think it was ready to be a 1st generation product? I don't, because if Apple didn't have the parts ready then who does? I don't think anyone and I certainly don't think Apple would pull a Samsung to jump to release something so they can say "First!" or "Me too!" This is their wheelhouse. They have mastered integrated their own chips into their own programming language into their own code on their own HW to be as advanced and as efficient as possible. If there was a chink in the armour I think I would have noticed with the iPhone 6 series.
[QUOTE]I just don't think the Apple Watch is that product.[/QUOTE]
If you had said, "I just don't think the [U]first generation[/U] Apple Watch is that product," I could get behind that article as my time frame for wearables taking off is still a couple years out.
Yep! On the Apple Developer forums, it's hard to get some straight answers on the Apple Watch -- likely, to avoid giving competitors information on an unreleased product.
But, sometimes you can infer answers from how a related question is answered. My inference is that the Apple Watch must be Near (within 2 meters) of the iPhone -- or too much power will be required for lost/reconnections and retransmissions ...
But, I really don't know!
I think losing the connection outside of 2m would be a huge HUGE defect. I am about as big a proponent of Apple Watch as you'll find here, but I would be HUGELY disappointed in such a limit. If solid connection within 100m, regardless of obstacles or environment, is pretty good. Between these two is much room for disappointment (or opportunity for a boost device.)
Developers are under NDA -- so I can't discuss that here. If you are an iOS developer, go on the WatchKit forum and read through the posts regarding refreshing or reloading a table displayed on the Watch.
It's my inference that a max of 2 meters is required for operation because of battery drain. Certainly, the Watch could detect you were going beyond 2 meters and alert you to get closer to the paired iPhone.
As to a boost device, I don't think Apple wants any interception, retransmission or boosting of the communication between the Watch and it's paired iPhone.
Hey - the BTLE stuff works as a "finding" technology too I think. Key tags are being made to help find lost stuff. Meaning theoretically and app can help track your to a lost iPhone in range; or a lost Apple Watch in range. Right?
As I've stated before, I have most of the iBeacons (including the Tile Key-Tags) -- and they are not that good at finding things more than 4 or 5 meters away.
Pinging an iPhone with Find My Phone is easier (if the iPhone has power).
I've made it no secret I've hated most of Apple's name choices, but they don't seem to hinder sales and may increase them. iPhone was hurt with phone in the name so why should ?Watch? I'd think by now we should at least trust Apple to know a little bit about how to release a new product. Do you think Ive would been OK with it if he didn't think it was ready to be a 1st generation product? I don't, because if Apple didn't have the parts ready then who does? I don't think anyone and I certainly don't think Apple would pull a Samsung to jump to release something so they can say "First!" or "Me too!" This is their wheelhouse. They have mastered integrated their own chips into their own programming language into their own code on their own HW to be as advanced and as efficient as possible. If there was a chink in the armour I think I would have noticed with the iPhone 6 series.
If you had said, "I just don't think the first generation Apple Watch is that product," I could get behind that article as my time frame for wearables taking off is still a couple years out.
You're not getting what I said.
Is the watch metaphor even the product that will make the wearables market big?
Forget about chips. Forget about watches. Think about the product that would increase convenience in your life. Is it even a watch?
I agree with everything in the article. Except i think it'll be a few quarters before we can know whether or not it flops. The first two quarters, sales will be strong. Supply will no doubt be constrained and there will be a long list of excited fans waiting to get their watches. But after that? Will the general iPhone using public plunk down $350+ for notifications on their wrists? I seriously doubt it. By then the tech press will have thoroughly reviewed it and we'll further appreciate the limited set of predictable features and lack of anything truly wow. I expect up to five million units sold initially, after which sales fall dramatically.
Sound reasonable. Besides who wants a tinier screen to do anything?
Well, from everything that you've said it appears that you agree with what I said. It's going to take a while for this thing to take off.
Moving on... because we just keep saying the same things over and over...
The "wearables" market will be huge... agreed... but... is the Apple Watch the thing that will make the wearables market move? Is Apple sticking too close to the watch metaphor? Is Apple's corporate culture restricting Apple's ability to think more out of the box?
Macintosh - like no other computer of the time in looks and function
iMac - like no other computer of the time in looks and then enhanced by OSX
iPhone - like no other computer of the time in looks and function
The wearables market will be huge... but is Apple the company that will make it happen.
I just don't think the Apple Watch is that product.
I want Apple in my living room up on my wall.
Not on my wrist.
Comments
I agree with everything in the article. Except i think it'll be a few quarters before we can know whether or not it flops. The first two quarters, sales will be strong. Supply will no doubt be constrained and there will be a long list of excited fans waiting to get their watches. But after that? Will the general iPhone using public plunk down $350+ for notifications on their wrists? I seriously doubt it. By then the tech press will have thoroughly reviewed it and we'll further appreciate the limited set of predictable features and lack of anything truly wow. I expect up to five million units sold initially, after which sales fall dramatically.
Yes, but didn't earlier sailors, navigating with a sextant, need to consider the calendar as well as GMT to determine their location?
Moot point, today, with GPS.
If you enjoy peeing on your electronics I can diagnose you right here and now.
Hell, people on here constantly shit on Samsung products all the time.
Nope. Just the horizon and two stars.
You were right it does require the time
http://www.clipperlight.com/howusesextant.html
Indeed. Lots of very confident predictions of ?Watch failure. If the product is successful (as I predict), will we see as many mea culpas? Unlikely. They will rely on moving the goal posts.
Apple is investing in this as the next platform. To Apple, success is not immediate financial, but how to grow this platform over the next 5 years. It starts as a companion to iPhone, but will gain more autonomy, more functions, and better battery life over next few releases.
So some have listed their reasons why it will not be successful (which boils down to them not conceiving of a use for themselves), so here is some arguments on why it will likely be successful:
- Sweet spot of price for Apple's target markets (as noted above $350 is not "expensive" for something a person wants, for hundreds of millions of people. A night out a restaurant will set a couple back over $100 these days). A good price point for meaningful gifts for family/loved ones.
- Minor conveniences add up. Estimates are that today people pull out their phone over 100 times/day, mostly to check the time or messages.
- New ways of communicating with close friends/family (communication is the lynch pin of attraction of devices and services). Asian markets with the sketches could be huge.
- Built in core apps have usability to many today: health, fitness, iPod music, ?Pay, secure entry
- Expect a few "hit apps" at a minimum.
- Many people will buy "cool new" stuff.
- iPhone user base of over 500M to start with.
I understand why so many media & bloggers write the stuff they do - being "anti-Apple" has proven to be one of the most reliable ways to get traffic for their articles. I have less understanding why commenters on forums do so, as there is no financial gain for them.
Understand that comments on forums represent opinions. Surely everyone is entitled to theirs.
I'm totally willing to admit if I'm wrong. Just as I hope those who believe the AppleWatch will be a runaway smash do the same, should it fail.
And the reasons you tout for why the Watch will be a success boils down to pure conjecture.
Because we know people will buy cool new stuff? How did the Apple G4Cube do? Apple Newton anyone?
They've had their share of failures too. Just saying.
I'm a long time Apple fan and user, but I also don't drink the koolaid and accept everything Cupertino spews out.
I'd loved to be proven wrong. As I've noted, the Watch will do well because of fanboys and early adopters. It will take off if there's is a killer business app or purpose beyond convenience.
Are you joking? Wearables are not on the cusp of anything. They're a niche market that only hardcore techies find interesting. the public has never embraced them and unless someone comes out with something truly revolutionary, I don't see that changing. Some people have just convinced themselves that wearables are "the next big thing" despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary.
And yes, MP3 players did fix a major problem. Instead of carrying my Walkman and a bunch of tapes or CDs, I just needed to carry one device with all my music on it. The Apple Watch fixes no such problem. It just adds a little convenience because now I don't need to pull my phone out of my pocket. That's all.
My 19-year-old granddaughter is aways on her phone!
She was home sick, bored, and we'd been trying to straighten out her finances -- she has her first credit card and is trying to build a credit history.
I thought that Apple Pay on the Apple Watch might appeal to her -- and hinted I might buy her an Apple Watch if she got control of her finances.
So, she watched the entire hour + of the Apple Watch announcement video ...
What she thought was the best thing ...
Transit! When in San Francisco, knowing when the next bus is coming and when to get off ...
Go figure???
My personal opinion, is Convenience -- most all the capabilities * of the iPhone without needing to pull out the iPhone.
* I don't like to be tethered to anything. Carrying an iPhone is being tethered to an iPhone! The Apple Watch can be setup to be less of a tether than the iPhone (less disruptive and more precise notifications).
That's over 300 miles per hour. How would that have been possible then? Even Dr. Emmett Brown had issues getting a train to 88 MPH in 1855.
1) So you think the iPod fixed a problem, just not a major one. Is that why you believe it took years for a very expensive and limited player to become popular? Why do you believe the wearables market is inventing a problem despite your other comments that talk about a completely different argument? Comments like "there is a lot of potential" and how Newton was a brilliant idea that had bad timing." Those does jibe with inventing a problem, but rather not being the right solution for a problem. Wearables are coming and it will be a larger market than we've ever seen before in the field of electronics.
2) You seem to still be ignoring how the portable CD player and CD player in the car were the accepted solutions and the iPod was the problem for all the reasons already mentioned. There was no "OMG, this is brilliant!" among the masses when Jobs introduced it and CompUSA was carrying it. It took YEARS to gain traction because it took YEARS for people to see the light.
3) You need to stop thinking about ?Watch as replacing the same task as on your iPhone (as noted by your 6 of 1 comment). It's doing things the iPhone isn't tasked to do, or isn't tasked to do well. How can I make a payment from ?Pay without my iPhone on me? How I can get a subtle reminder that I'm leaving a restaurant without my iPhone on me? How can my Mac auto-lock when I leave my desk? How can my iPhone know if I'm about to go into cardiac arrest? How can I get subtle left and right turn walking directions whilst traveling without having to have my face and ears buried in some sort of map? How can I have my iPhone auto-lock on me if it's stolen while in use on the subway? How can I have my iPhone give me a subtle reminder that my blood-glucose levels are dangerously low when in my front pocket? How can I get a calendar reminder while on a run without having to pull out my phone or even have my phone on me at all? Remember that Woz first had to clear his design with HP before he could sell it on his own. They couldn't see what good would do for people to have their own personal computer at home. To store recipes? Really? Good luck with that shitty idea, Woz.
And you don't see how Newton is a precursor to the iPhone and iPad? I'm guessing you don't think those were solutions looking for a problem, and you just compared Newton to ?Watch. That phrase is not synonymous with being too quick to come to market with an inferior product. If that was your argument from the beginning I could that PoV, as I already stated I thought the wearable market seemed to still be a couple years out from taking off, but I was very, very clear about [@]Inkling[/@] and your comment about the term a solution in search of a problem.
They want this watch to be extremely personal, more so than the iPhone, Mac, or iPad. Besides, people are more computer savvy these days. It's not hard to figure out.
Just like that smartphone was just for hardcore techies and business people before 2007. :rolleyes:
Even in the same post you've gone from "wearables are not on the cusp of anything" and "a niche market that only hardcore techies find interesting" to a statement about the tech advancing that it could revolutionary. No shit, Cumberbatch!
Ah, now you're back to seeing the state of the art not advancing. No breakthroughs? You really want to say that wearables won't be a massive market? Even Beats, a very young company, has come in to make their wearables very popular in a short amount of time. Do you not think that ever shrinking electronics using even less power will never find their ways onto (and into) your person. The headphones have been around for many decades, and now we are on the cusp of advancing that goal.
[@]island hermit[/@] says it wasn't a major problem so you two can discuss that separately.
So solving a problem, major or otherwise, where other solution are already considered the status quo, it isn't adding convenience as the primary solution, especially when it's excessively more expensive than current solutions? :???: You'll have to explain that to me.
There is no other way for me to say this except to say that if you truly ONLY see ?Watch as saving you the trouble of pulling your iPhone out of your pocket then I feel very sorry for you because you will undoubtedly be missing pretty much everything else this beautiful world has to offer if your view is that myopic. And, again, I say this a someone who has no intention of buying ?Watch at this point or any point in the future, just as I will likely never buy an iPad again, yet I can clearly see the utility it offers others.
PS: In the land of the lazy convenience is king. From that phrase and the level of laziness I read in your previous comment I predict you will eventually buy and/or "smartwatch."
That's over 300 miles per hour. How would that have been possible then? Even Dr. Emmett Brown had issues getting a train to 88 MPH in 1855.
1) So you think the iPod fixed a problem, just not a major one. Is that why you believe it took years for a very expensive and limited player to become popular? Why do you believe the wearables market is inventing a problem despite your other comments that talk about a completely different argument? Comments like "there is a lot of potential" and how Newton was a brilliant idea that had bad timing." Those does jibe with inventing a problem, but rather not being the right solution for a problem. Wearables are coming and it will be a larger market than we've ever seen before in the field of electronics.
2) You seem to still be ignoring how the portable CD player and CD player in the car were the accepted solutions and the iPod was the problem for all the reasons already mentioned. There was no "OMG, this is brilliant!" among the masses when Jobs introduced it and CompUSA was carrying it. It took YEARS to gain traction because it took YEARS for people to see the light.
3) You need to stop thinking about ?Watch as replacing the same task as on your iPhone (as noted by your 6 of 1 comment). It's doing things the iPhone isn't tasked to do, or isn't tasked to do well. How can I make a payment from ?Pay without my iPhone on me? How I can get a subtle reminder that I'm leaving a restaurant without my iPhone on me? How can my Mac auto-lock when I leave my desk? How can my iPhone know if I'm about to go into cardiac arrest? How can I get subtle left and right turn walking directions whilst traveling without having to have my face and ears buried in some sort of map? How can I have my iPhone auto-lock on me if it's stolen while in use on the subway? How can I have my iPhone give me a subtle reminder that my blood-glucose levels are dangerously low when in my front pocket? How can I get a calendar reminder while on a run without having to pull out my phone or even have my phone on me at all? Remember that Woz first had to clear his design with HP before he could sell it on his own. They couldn't see what good would do for people to have their own personal computer at home. To store recipes? Really? Good luck with that shitty idea, Woz.
And you don't see how Newton is a precursor to the iPhone and iPad? I'm guessing you don't think those were solutions looking for a problem, and you just compared Newton to ?Watch. That phrase is not synonymous with being too quick to come to market with an inferior product. If that was your argument from the beginning I could that PoV, as I already stated I thought the wearable market seemed to still be a couple years out from taking off, but I was very, very clear about @Inkling and your comment about the term a solution in search of a problem.
Well, from everything that you've said it appears that you agree with what I said. It's going to take a while for this thing to take off.
Moving on... because we just keep saying the same things over and over...
The "wearables" market will be huge... agreed... but... is the Apple Watch the thing that will make the wearables market move? Is Apple sticking too close to the watch metaphor? Is Apple's corporate culture restricting Apple's ability to think more out of the box?
Macintosh - like no other computer of the time in looks and function
iMac - like no other computer of the time in looks and then enhanced by OSX
iPhone - like no other computer of the time in looks and function
The wearables market will be huge... but is Apple the company that will make it happen.
I just don't think the Apple Watch is that product.
Yep! On the Apple Developer forums, it's hard to get some straight answers on the Apple Watch -- likely, to avoid giving competitors information on an unreleased product.
But, sometimes you can infer answers from how a related question is answered. My inference is that the Apple Watch must be Near (within 2 meters) of the iPhone -- or too much power will be required for lost/reconnections and retransmissions ...
But, I really don't know!
I think losing the connection outside of 2m would be a huge HUGE defect. I am about as big a proponent of Apple Watch as you'll find here, but I would be HUGELY disappointed in such a limit. If solid connection within 100m, regardless of obstacles or environment, is pretty good. Between these two is much room for disappointment (or opportunity for a boost device.)
Hey - the BTLE stuff works as a "finding" technology too I think. Key tags are being made to help find lost stuff. Meaning theoretically and app can help track your to a lost iPhone in range; or a lost Apple Watch in range. Right?
Let me give you a hypothetical:
~ 25% of the US population is age 55 and over.
People can wear an Apple Watch that measures your pulse (among other biometrics). Sometime; later this year, there will be an Apple Watch app that detects irregularity in the wearer's pulse rate -- and through the tethered iPhone send an alert to your doctor, relative, 911, whomever ...
Now, for an anecdote:
At about midnight, on Feb 18 -- it will be 14 years since my wife died, unexpectedly, while watching TV in the family room, I was less that 40 feet away, on the computer in the den ...
Lucy was 59 years old! She would have been 73 on Jan 29.
I would give everything to have had the Apple Watch tech -- it could have saved her life.
I will buy an Apple Watch for My daughter and my 3 grandkids ...
My 19-year-old granddaughter is aways on her phone!
She was home sick, bored, and we'd been trying to straighten out her finances -- she has her first credit card and is trying to build a credit history.
I thought that Apple Pay on the Apple Watch might appeal to her -- and hinted I might buy her an Apple Watch if she got control of her finances.
So, she watched the entire hour + of the Apple Watch announcement video ...
What she thought was the best thing ...
Transit! When in San Francisco, knowing when the next bus is coming and when to get off ...
Go figure???
My personal opinion, is Convenience -- most all the capabilities * of the iPhone without needing to pull out the iPhone.
* I don't like to be tethered to anything. Carrying an iPhone is being tethered to an iPhone! The Apple Watch can be setup to be less of a tether than the iPhone (less disruptive and more precise notifications).
That's interesting, Dick. Hopefully she can get on the transit with the watch as well.
Here's my story about convenience... our new Honda Civic. Never do I have to pull anything out of my pocket. I put the key fob in my pocket and the car opens and starts without every having to reach to get the keys. That's convenience.
The Apple Watch might be a start but it is already anachronistic imo. We still have to look at it, we still have to fiddle with it, we still have to charge it...
The day when a wearable is not even noticed until it is needed... and even then "it" decides when you need it most of the time... that's what I want to see.
I said that from the beginning… I mean when it was introduced. What I never said is there was some [I]invented[/I] problem, which equates to late night solutions found on infomercials.
[QUOTE]The "wearables" market will be huge... agreed... but... is the Apple Watch the thing that will make the wearables market move? Is Apple sticking too close to the watch metaphor? Is Apple's corporate culture restricting Apple's ability to think more out of the box?[/QUOTE]
I've made it no secret I've hated most of Apple's name choices, but they don't seem to hinder sales and may increase them. iPhone was hurt with phone in the name so why should ?Watch? I'd think by now we should at least trust Apple to know a little bit about how to release a new product. Do you think Ive would been OK with it if he didn't think it was ready to be a 1st generation product? I don't, because if Apple didn't have the parts ready then who does? I don't think anyone and I certainly don't think Apple would pull a Samsung to jump to release something so they can say "First!" or "Me too!" This is their wheelhouse. They have mastered integrated their own chips into their own programming language into their own code on their own HW to be as advanced and as efficient as possible. If there was a chink in the armour I think I would have noticed with the iPhone 6 series.
[QUOTE]I just don't think the Apple Watch is that product.[/QUOTE]
If you had said, "I just don't think the [U]first generation[/U] Apple Watch is that product," I could get behind that article as my time frame for wearables taking off is still a couple years out.
Developers are under NDA -- so I can't discuss that here. If you are an iOS developer, go on the WatchKit forum and read through the posts regarding refreshing or reloading a table displayed on the Watch.
It's my inference that a max of 2 meters is required for operation because of battery drain. Certainly, the Watch could detect you were going beyond 2 meters and alert you to get closer to the paired iPhone.
As to a boost device, I don't think Apple wants any interception, retransmission or boosting of the communication between the Watch and it's paired iPhone.
As I've stated before, I have most of the iBeacons (including the Tile Key-Tags) -- and they are not that good at finding things more than 4 or 5 meters away.
Pinging an iPhone with Find My Phone is easier (if the iPhone has power).
I've made it no secret I've hated most of Apple's name choices, but they don't seem to hinder sales and may increase them. iPhone was hurt with phone in the name so why should ?Watch? I'd think by now we should at least trust Apple to know a little bit about how to release a new product. Do you think Ive would been OK with it if he didn't think it was ready to be a 1st generation product? I don't, because if Apple didn't have the parts ready then who does? I don't think anyone and I certainly don't think Apple would pull a Samsung to jump to release something so they can say "First!" or "Me too!" This is their wheelhouse. They have mastered integrated their own chips into their own programming language into their own code on their own HW to be as advanced and as efficient as possible. If there was a chink in the armour I think I would have noticed with the iPhone 6 series.
If you had said, "I just don't think the first generation Apple Watch is that product," I could get behind that article as my time frame for wearables taking off is still a couple years out.
You're not getting what I said.
Is the watch metaphor even the product that will make the wearables market big?
Forget about chips. Forget about watches. Think about the product that would increase convenience in your life. Is it even a watch?
539.617058239 km/hr
That's over 300 miles per hour. How would that have been possible then? Even Dr. Emmett Brown had issues getting a train to 88 MPH in 1855.
I know. Perhaps my maths need some work.
The formula for the longitude circumference at a given latitude is:
C = 2 pi r cos(x)
where pi = 3.14159, r = the earth's equatorial radius = 6378 km, and x is the angle of latitude.
The latitude for London is 51.5072
2 * 3.14159 * 6378 * .32317138189 = 12950.8093977 km
divide that by 24 hours = 539.617058238 km/hr then add 1 millionth
Sound reasonable. Besides who wants a tinier screen to do anything?
I want Apple in my living room up on my wall.
Not on my wrist.