Apple Watch designers detail years of research and refinements that went into its development

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 118
    dr millmossdr millmoss Posts: 5,403member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    AppleWatch is not a clock silly snail.

     

    Its a computer on your wrist.

     

    Why do you think no smartphone, laptop, desktop, or table have round screens?  Because its an incredibly inefficent design.


     

    The facetiousness of my comment should not have been that hard to miss.

  • Reply 22 of 118
    sog35 wrote: »
     


    Because clocks have round dials. Silly rabbit.

    AppleWatch is not a clock silly snail.

    Its a computer on your wrist.

    Why do you think no smartphone, laptop, desktop, or table have round screens?  Because its an incredibly inefficent design.<img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="56634" data-type="61" src="http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/56634/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 347px">

    A circle is simply a more attractive shape to wear on the wrist. That's why most watches are round.

    As to efficiency, the Apple Watch has huge margins, and is actually very inefficient in terms of usable screen space. As Marvin has demonstrated, a round watch is actually more efficient for displaying the kind of information you are likely to want in a watch.
  • Reply 23 of 118
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by vrf View Post

     

    Shame that they spent so many years on a project that will probably not be a major long term success. It won't sell big at the beginning, and no one is going to upgrade this thing.


     

    interesting comment. mind if i see your product portfolio, so i can appropriately weight your statements?

  • Reply 24 of 118
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by woodycurmudgeon View Post



    I don't understand how they spent years on making something that simply looks like a miniature iPhone with a strap. I also don't get how they go on and on about honoring the history of the watch by making something which really looks nothing like a watch.



    In both respects the Huawei Watch announced at MWC is a vastly better looking device. I have no doubt at all that Apple will sell shed loads of their watch, but their over the top and self congratulatory marketing masturbation over the device is nauseating.

     

    1) how much like a traditional phone did the iphone look? yeah not at all. thats how much. 

     

    2) so a product that doesnt exist is already better than a real product that will be on the shelves in a few weeks. right.

     

    3) all marketing is self-congratulatory. thats the whole point of it. thats how companies, you know, encourage people to buy stuff.

  • Reply 25 of 118
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    You mean this cheap POS?

     

    Looks like a $10 watch with fake gold

     

     


     

    omg that thing is ridiculous. thats the thing he thought looked better than an AW? jesus...who would put that hubcap on their arm?!? i just want something functional and out of the way. AW looks perfect for this.

  • Reply 26 of 118
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

     

    Because clocks have round dials. Silly rabbit.


     

    but a smartwatch doesnt contain any round dials. it doesnt contain any mechanical dials at all. so why on earth should its form not follow its function and use an artificial form? one that makes its actual function (app interactions) more difficult? (lists on a round screen are about as functional as TV on a round screen -- not much).

  • Reply 27 of 118
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post

     

     

    The facetiousness of my comment should not have been that hard to miss.


     

    not knowing you, it can definitely be missed. a sarcasm tag is pretty useful.

  • Reply 28 of 118
    mrboba1mrboba1 Posts: 275member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post





    A circle is simply a more attractive shape to wear on the wrist. That's why most watches are round.



    As to efficiency, the Apple Watch has huge margins, and is actually very inefficient in terms of usable screen space. As Marvin has demonstrated, a round watch is actually more efficient for displaying the kind of information you are likely to want in a watch.

     

    Watches are round because they have a watch face. Watch faces have round dials. THAT is why most watches are round. Please don't confuse the two (attractiveness vs utility).  It just hasn't been changed because no one had a need to change it.

     

    AppleWatch is not a simple timepiece, therefore has no need to be round. Therefore, it can be changed. Just like the first iMac looked nothing like any other computer in the world. How many called it attractive vs gaudy? Does it matter? Enough liked it so it sold like hotcakes and stopped the hemorrhaging.

     

    "Attractive" is a mere subjective term that applies one's taste to something. One person's "attractive" is another's "gaudy" or any other number of descriptive terms. Eye of the beholder.

     

    I like it, I will get one. You don't and you won't.

     

    I bet there are enough like me which will make those like you irrelevant.

  • Reply 29 of 118
    jmc54jmc54 Posts: 202member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post





    That's okay; thousands will.



    On a more constructive note, it will be interesting to actually see the Apple Watch being used on a wrist. Two keynotes gone, yet not one demo of the watch in its natural environment. That seems wrong to me.



    Having the screen turn on automatically when you raise your arm sounds clever in principle, but what is it like in practice? Is it instant? Does it come on inadvertently when working out in the gym or sitting in a dark theatre?



    Much more than the iPhone, there are so many unanswered questions that could really affect everyday usage that Apple have left hanging. We will have to go by reviews and anecdotal feedback to ascertain its worth.



    One would expect the most avid Apple fans to leap in early, but buying this blind is to put an awful lot of trust in it, much more so than buying a phone or tablet.



    I'm interested but share some of these concerns. I'll be waiting on the sidelines for a bit to see what level of developer support materializes and see how this actually works in the wild!

  • Reply 30 of 118
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,492member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PScooter63 View Post

     

    I can't wait to try one on, and put it through its paces.  But then, I'd also have to give up my beloved-but-aging 4S.  Maybe this will be the lynchpin.  8-)


    Agreed, me too. There's a rumor Apple will offer iPhone models with upgraded internals but smaller screens than the iPhone 6. I'd be on board with that myself. iPhone 6 is cool, but I like my 5s size, particularly if I can leave it in my pocket (or the other room) most of the time.

  • Reply 31 of 118
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

    With all the initial PR on it I've no doubt a lot of Apple fans are holding their stock.

    At least it hasn't gone the way of GTAT yet (good thing I stayed away from that one!).

  • Reply 32 of 118
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    A circle is not more attractive.  It is just the bias that people have had for decades.  


    The reason for a circle is that we have had 'hands' of fixed sizes going around in a circle. So it was an aesthetically natural shape to track the movement.

     

    Smartwatches will probably alter that perspective in a few years. For example, there is no reason why we could not have, say an oval- or rhomboid- (or amoeba-) shaped watch with 'hands' that dynamically adjust as it goes around. (Not that I would contemplate wearing something like that, but just pointing out the possibility!).

  • Reply 33 of 118
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mrboba1 View Post

     

    I like it, I will get one. You don't and you won't.


    He's banned now (yea!).

     

    Let's hope it's for long enough that we won't know (or care) if he did not.

  • Reply 34 of 118
    boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,416member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    A circle is not more attractive.  It is just the bias that people have had for decades.  


    The reason for a circle is that we have had 'hands' of fixed sizes going around in a circle. So it was an aesthetically natural shape to track the movement.

    Smartwatches will probably alter that perspective in a few years. For example, there is no reason why we could not have, say an oval- or rhomboid- (or amoeba-) shaped watch with 'hands' that dynamically adjust as it goes around. (Not that I would contemplate wearing something like that, but just pointing out the possibility!).


    I wonder whether it's more accurate to assume that watches were initially round because sundials were round first?

    I don't know that anyone ever engineered a square or rectangular sundial,

    but once these became portable - especially in the form of wristwatches - numerous examples of angular design appeared.

  • Reply 35 of 118
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,589member
    I don't understand how they spent years on making something that simply looks like a miniature iPhone with a strap. I also don't get how they go on and on about honoring the history of the watch by making something which really looks nothing like a watch.

    In both respects the Huawei Watch announced at MWC is a vastly better looking device. I have no doubt at all that Apple will sell shed loads of their watch, but their over the top and self congratulatory marketing masturbation over the device is nauseating.

    The only thing I find nauseating is your ridiculous maturbatory rant. Trolling for a Huawei turd? Of, please....
  • Reply 36 of 118
    Benjamin Frost: No doubt about it this was made for women. I hope and pray Apple can sell a few thousand but this will be another failure by Tim Cook.

    I didn't know Tim Cook had made a failure yet.
  • Reply 37 of 118
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,949member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post





    A circle is simply a more attractive shape to wear on the wrist. That's why most watches are round.



    As to efficiency, the Apple Watch has huge margins, and is actually very inefficient in terms of usable screen space. As Marvin has demonstrated, a round watch is actually more efficient for displaying the kind of information you are likely to want in a watch.

    You have been trained by marketers and now believe that a round watch is more attractive, with ever present peer pressure to reinforce this.

     

    Nothing to be ashamed of.

     

    But I doubt that the future will hold the round watch shape as anything but traditional. Maybe that will be enough for it to survive.

  • Reply 38 of 118
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    There are two narratives I'm seeing with the watch that I think Apple needs to do a better job of controlling. One is that the product was conceived and then Apple tried finding a use case after the fact (i.e. a solution looking for a problem). The second is that your iPhone is an annoyance and the watch is here to save you from that. There are answers for both but I haven't seen Apple articulate them very well if at all. I know convenience isn't the easiest thing to articulate and people really will only appreciate it through use of the product, but the media will run with this solution looking for a problem meme if Apple lets them.
  • Reply 39 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    There are two narratives I'm seeing with the watch...

     

    Where?  (Links?)  Genuinely interested.

    Edit: you're referring to that Wired article, aren't you?

  • Reply 40 of 118
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by boredumb View Post

     

    I wonder whether it's more accurate to assume that watches were initially round because sundials were round first?

    I don't know that anyone ever engineered a square or rectangular sundial,

    but once these became portable - especially in the form of wristwatches - numerous examples of angular design appeared.


    There are plenty of square, rectangular, and so-called vertical sundials. Some going back at least as far as the 15th/16th cent. I've seen many in my travels in Europe, Turkey, India, etc.

Sign In or Register to comment.