I'm wondering of Liquid Metal could be used in this process.
Wow ... that's a thought!
EDIT: after thought ... if that's possible could this mean gold that is scratch and wear resistant? If so, I hope Apple has filed a patent assuming that's even possible. There would be more than watches that would benefit from gold as tough as that.
The good thing what I have been hearing about the ? watch is that it is designed to be an external screen for the iPhone. This is a very smart way to tackle the obsolescence issue. Want to upgrade your watch? Get a new iPhone!
I bought a 20 inch Apple Cinema Display in 2005 and I am still using it. The only thing I am changing is my mac mini and macbook pro.
So yes, smart move from Apple to make the ? watch "just" an external screen for the iPhone. It will justify its investment and guarantee its longevity.
? watch 1 is going to be a collector's item.
I don't think I have thought of WatchKit in its current iteration as being to protect the obsolescence of ?Watch, and I'm not completely sold on that being the reason, but I do think you make a compelling argument that can't be ignored. I hope it gets addressed in detail on the 9th.
Which takes me back to my orginal position prior to the formal announcment of the watch. How do you call this thing a watch? Watch is a grossly inadequate description.
I agree. It also creates a different mindset: You are okay to replace your iPod every other year. A watch on the contrary, is supposed to last significantly longer.
Apple really needs to figure out an after-service where they replace the batteries, especially for the ? watch edition ... they're in with some serious bespoke after-service competition of Rolex and the likes.
No one would buy a $10k watch that would be useless in 5 years.
There are, unfortunately, people so wealthy that spending $10k on a watch, or a pen or a ring is something they would hardly even notice out of their loose change.
If it had the iPhone UI and no digital crown I'd say you have a point but it does have a digital crown that shows that scrolling, zooming and selecting will be natural and easy, as well as an entirely new Ui designed around the input. That just seems like the worst possible argument against ?Watch.
Because you've personally tried the crown yourself?
If it had the iPhone UI and no digital crown I'd say you have a point but it does have a digital crown that shows that scrolling, zooming and selecting will be natural and easy, as well as an entirely new Ui designed around the input. That just seems like the worst possible argument against ?Watch.
Because you've personally tried the crown yourself?
One can reasonably speculate on the quality of something without actually trying it.
If it had the iPhone UI and no digital crown I'd say you have a point but it does have a digital crown that shows that scrolling, zooming and selecting will be natural and easy, as well as an entirely new Ui designed around the input. That just seems like the worst possible argument against ?Watch.
Because you've personally tried the crown yourself?
One can reasonably speculate on the quality of something without actually trying it.
If not, this entire thread would be moot, no?
Depends if you're being pro or anti Apple.
If you're pro, then speculation is good. If you're anti, then speculation is moot.
No one would buy a $10k watch that would be useless in 5 years.
I imagine Apple creating a bespoke after-service that takes care for those buying the ? watch edition. It'd be like a Lifelong Apple care, for the battery. This way they will be on par with the after-service Rolex and other luxury brands are offering.
This service would only work if the ? watch is designed as an external screen for the iPhone, which it appears to be.
No one would buy a $10k watch that would be useless in 5 years.
I imagine Apple creating a bespoke after-service that takes care for those buying the ? watch edition. It'd be like a Lifelong Apple care, for the battery. This way they will be on par with the after-service Rolex and other luxury brands are offering.
This service would only work if the ? watch is designed as an external screen for the iPhone, which it appears to be.
But the problem with keeping the watch dumb is that you can do everything with your phone, so why buy the watch? The convenience of doing some things very slightly quicker is not a compelling reason for having to wear a heavy, clunky watch on your wrist for most people.
Hence the likelihood that the Apple Watch will garner a niche level of sales.
If you're pro, then speculation is good. If you're anti, then speculation is moot.
Last I looked, AI is a largely pro-Apple forum. There are plenty to anti-Apple forums -- in fact, the vast majority of them -- that you're welcome to go to. If you post anti-Apple sentiments here, you should expect pushback.
As the old saying goes, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
But the problem with keeping the watch dumb is that you can do everything with your phone, so why buy the watch? The convenience of doing some things very slightly quicker is not a compelling reason for having to wear a heavy, clunky watch on your wrist for most people.
Hence the likelihood that the Apple Watch will garner a niche level of sales.
First, it is a watch. Lots of people like, and want to wear, watches. In fact, 1.2B of them were sold last year. Second, it has a ton of standalone functionality. It could act as a gateway for people to buy into other Apple products, such as an iPhone, once they've tried it as a standalone product (similar to how how the iPod became a gateway product for Apple). Third, there is the convenience aspect of it even for those who have the iPhone. Fourth, wearables will be a part of our CE future. Apple has a legitimate place in it, and should try to compete in that segment. This is Apple's foray into it. Do you have a suggestion in what else they should be doing in this arena? Fifth, there will be a segment of consumers for whom it will not add much, and they would not -- and need not -- buy it. As to whether that is a large or small number, we'll know in a couple of months, won't we.
You tell me. Did the original iPhone run Apps, and why?
Did the original Mac have a hard drive that you could install apps on, and why? Engineering. Complex things must start simply and grow in complexity. That's how all of human understanding works....which brought us from grass huts to enormous steel and glass skyscrapers.
But the problem with keeping the watch dumb is that you can do everything with your phone, so why buy the watch? The convenience of doing some things very slightly quicker is not a compelling reason for having to wear a heavy, clunky watch on your wrist for most people.
Hence the likelihood that the Apple Watch will garner a niche level of sales.
It is the same reason why you would buy a Cinema Display*. It is for comfort. You can leave your phone in the bag and have all e.g. notifications on your wrist. You could apply the same for ? pay, car keys etc. ... I get a sense what Tim Cook is getting at with the watch concept.
(*) For the Cinema Display it is productivity. Connecting your macbook air to a big external screen dramatically increases your screen estate and thus productivity.
it has a ton of standalone functionality. It could act as a gateway for people to buy into other Apple products, such as an iPhone, once they've tried it as a standalone product (similar to how how the iPod became a gateway product for Apple).
Nope. There's a lot of speculation about the ?Watch, but Apple is clear on this point -- it REQUIRES an iPhone. Folks who are interested in the watch only are looking at a minimum $1,000 investment with the addition of an iPhone.
Did the original Mac have a hard drive that you could install apps on, and why? Engineering. Complex things must start simply and grow in complexity. That's how all of human understanding works....which brought us from grass huts to enormous steel and glass skyscrapers.
Really.
The first iPhone was indeed capable of running apps. Jobs thought web apps would be sufficient. He had to be convinced to create the app store.
It looks gorgeous, but how many people under 40 still wear watches these days? While the Apple Watch is much more than a timekeeper, the question of whether or not it will become a mainstream item remains to be seen.
I'm under 40, domt wear a watch, and planning on getting one. It's the non-time functionality that offer value to me.
Comments
Wow ... that's a thought!
EDIT: after thought ... if that's possible could this mean gold that is scratch and wear resistant? If so, I hope Apple has filed a patent assuming that's even possible. There would be more than watches that would benefit from gold as tough as that.
I don't think I have thought of WatchKit in its current iteration as being to protect the obsolescence of ?Watch, and I'm not completely sold on that being the reason, but I do think you make a compelling argument that can't be ignored. I hope it gets addressed in detail on the 9th.
Which takes me back to my orginal position prior to the formal announcment of the watch. How do you call this thing a watch? Watch is a grossly inadequate description.
I agree. It also creates a different mindset: You are okay to replace your iPod every other year. A watch on the contrary, is supposed to last significantly longer.
Apple really needs to figure out an after-service where they replace the batteries, especially for the ? watch edition ... they're in with some serious bespoke after-service competition of Rolex and the likes.
There are, unfortunately, people so wealthy that spending $10k on a watch, or a pen or a ring is something they would hardly even notice out of their loose change.
If it had the iPhone UI and no digital crown I'd say you have a point but it does have a digital crown that shows that scrolling, zooming and selecting will be natural and easy, as well as an entirely new Ui designed around the input. That just seems like the worst possible argument against ?Watch.
Because you've personally tried the crown yourself?
I wouldn't go that far, but I do think that attractive people likely make the AppleWatch look better!
One can reasonably speculate on the quality of something without actually trying it.
If not, this entire thread would be moot, no?
Depends if you're being pro or anti Apple.
If you're pro, then speculation is good. If you're anti, then speculation is moot.
the alternative would make zero sense.
No one would buy a $10k watch that would be useless in 5 years.
I imagine Apple creating a bespoke after-service that takes care for those buying the ? watch edition. It'd be like a Lifelong Apple care, for the battery. This way they will be on par with the after-service Rolex and other luxury brands are offering.
This service would only work if the ? watch is designed as an external screen for the iPhone, which it appears to be.
But the problem with keeping the watch dumb is that you can do everything with your phone, so why buy the watch? The convenience of doing some things very slightly quicker is not a compelling reason for having to wear a heavy, clunky watch on your wrist for most people.
Hence the likelihood that the Apple Watch will garner a niche level of sales.
Last I looked, AI is a largely pro-Apple forum. There are plenty to anti-Apple forums -- in fact, the vast majority of them -- that you're welcome to go to. If you post anti-Apple sentiments here, you should expect pushback.
As the old saying goes, if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
First, it is a watch. Lots of people like, and want to wear, watches. In fact, 1.2B of them were sold last year. Second, it has a ton of standalone functionality. It could act as a gateway for people to buy into other Apple products, such as an iPhone, once they've tried it as a standalone product (similar to how how the iPod became a gateway product for Apple). Third, there is the convenience aspect of it even for those who have the iPhone. Fourth, wearables will be a part of our CE future. Apple has a legitimate place in it, and should try to compete in that segment. This is Apple's foray into it. Do you have a suggestion in what else they should be doing in this arena? Fifth, there will be a segment of consumers for whom it will not add much, and they would not -- and need not -- buy it. As to whether that is a large or small number, we'll know in a couple of months, won't we.
Did the original Mac have a hard drive that you could install apps on, and why? Engineering. Complex things must start simply and grow in complexity. That's how all of human understanding works....which brought us from grass huts to enormous steel and glass skyscrapers.
Really.
But the problem with keeping the watch dumb is that you can do everything with your phone, so why buy the watch? The convenience of doing some things very slightly quicker is not a compelling reason for having to wear a heavy, clunky watch on your wrist for most people.
Hence the likelihood that the Apple Watch will garner a niche level of sales.
It is the same reason why you would buy a Cinema Display*. It is for comfort. You can leave your phone in the bag and have all e.g. notifications on your wrist. You could apply the same for ? pay, car keys etc. ... I get a sense what Tim Cook is getting at with the watch concept.
(*) For the Cinema Display it is productivity. Connecting your macbook air to a big external screen dramatically increases your screen estate and thus productivity.
... for having to wear a heavy, clunky watch on your wrist for most people.
Give it time. This is ? watch 1. Jony Ive and their design team got themselves a great baseline for the future.
"No one"? Oil sheiks? New money Chinese? Hollywood celebrities?
Yeah.
The first iPhone was indeed capable of running apps. Jobs thought web apps would be sufficient. He had to be convinced to create the app store.
I'm under 40, domt wear a watch, and planning on getting one. It's the non-time functionality that offer value to me.