Apple Watch gets teardown treatment, unannounced data port remains in production units

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 73
    mcdarkmcdark Posts: 28member

    Interesting to note it's actually easier to replace the battery and screen than it is on the best of the Android Wear watches, the Moto 360. That gets only 3/10 for repairability compared to the Apple Watch's 5/10. Who could have predicted that?

     

    https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Motorola+Moto+360+Teardown/28891

  • Reply 62 of 73
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,541member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post





    I suspect there was a lot of discussion around what to cal the device Apple eventually named "the ?watch." By calling it a watch, the mind instantly assumes that time-keeping is its primary purpose when that function is in a far second-place. Apple may have called it a "watch" to qualify it as a luxury item...or since it attaches to the body where a watch usually resides.

    I would say they went with "watch" as that is the most recognizable device to wear on your wrist.  You have to start with what most people are familiar with - same reason the iPhone was called a "phone", when it was really more a pocket computer with a phone app.  More people at the time were buying phones vs. pocket computers.

  • Reply 63 of 73
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,541member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by d4NjvRzf View Post

    "What matters as a timepiece is what it’s like using Apple Watch to check the time. My big concern, from the get-go, is the fact that Apple Watch’s screen remains off until you tap the screen (or one of the buttons) or it detects, via its accelerometer and gyroscope (and perhaps other sensors?) that you’ve moved your wrist into a “tell the time” position....

     

     I’ve worn a watch every day since I was in 7th grade, almost 30 years ago. I’m used to being able to see the time with just a glance whenever there is sufficient light. Apple Watch is somewhat frustrating in this regard. Even when Wrist Raise detection works perfectly, it takes a moment for the watch face to appear. There’s an inherent tiny amount of lag that isn’t there with a regular watch...."


    It is true there is a lag (now), but it is also release 1 of generation 1 of the product.  So you have to give some regard to improvements in that, given it is entirely software.  Let's have a bit of patience before we rain down the criticism that "it sucks as a watch" (paraphrasing).

     

    There is also an upside in that times with "insufficient" light, the Apple Watch (and other smart watches) work better than a traditional watch.

     

    Also, related to the watch function is the additional information in the complications that a traditional watch cannot convey.  That has a value as well directly related to its "watch" function.  So even in the regards to ?Watch as a "time piece", it is pretty good.  Biggest drawback (to this entire new category) is the daily charging.  That is a function of technology of the time, and no miracle is on the horizon to make it go a week or better.

  • Reply 64 of 73
    d4njvrzfd4njvrzf Posts: 797member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post





    Actually, that idea is incorrect. Warrantees are a marketing device first and foremost. Marketing use warranties to instill confidence in completing a purchase.As usual, the big type giveth and the small type takeith away.

    Warranties instill confidence because when (reputable) companies warrant a product for X years, they expect the failures after X years to be so rare or so inexpensive to repair that assuming the full costs of the failures will not cause significant financial burden. They're essentially telling the customer that they're confident enough that the product will work at least for X years that they're willing to put their money on the line. It's the same rationale that underpins Service Level Agreements that guarantee minimum uptimes, which basically provide warranties for services rather than material goods.

  • Reply 65 of 73
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

     

    Only one port, and it's a non-standard one at that. What was Apple thinking! Reminds me of my old 128K Mac... Steve Jobs would have loved this product!




    ROFLMAO!  

     

    <img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> 

  • Reply 66 of 73
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

     

    Only one port, and it's a non-standard one at that. What was Apple thinking! Reminds me of my old 128K Mac... Steve Jobs would have loved this product!


     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Cash907 View Post



    Are you insulting ifixit? Their tear down guides and support forums have saved me hundreds of dollars in repair fees, so I'm not understanding what your beef with them might possibly be.




    I can't speak for others but for me they served a great purpose back in another era. When we did pull our Macs to pieces and change parts out. Today's Apple products by enlarge are different, just as looking under the hood of a modern car is compared to the old days when anyone could strip down an engine with a few tools. In those days cars were highly unreliable, today's are extremely reliable for the most part but not for the average Joe to tinker with. The same is true of Apple gear. So the problem with iFixit is they criticize this and give low marks (and fodder for Apple haters) simply because they are from the era of changing your own spark plugs to stretch the car metaphor another mile. This is why many of us are poking fun. They try to make the strength of Apple's new designs seem like weaknesses and it is no different from the corner garage grease monkey moaning that a 2015 BMW engine is crap because he is not able to fiddle with the carburetor manually.



    I agree 100% I was one of those 128K Mac buyers that quickly cut a trace or two and solder in a component or two to take advantage of the ability it had builtin to support 512K. I also installed a third party 68020 upgrade and third party sockets so I could upgrade to 2GB ram in my Plus. Wouldn't have thought of that after the SE and II came out.

     

    Not to take away from the main point of your comment but I was surprised by only a single port -- and its not MagSafe!

  • Reply 67 of 73
    I hope that the port allows me to overclock the CPU, so it can run faster. Really, the best way to have tomorrow's gadgets and fashions is to have a clock that is already in the future, by say, at least 10%.
  • Reply 68 of 73
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    slurpy wrote: »
    Only gonna consider buying this if I can update the RAM, SSD, CPU, and everything else. I also want every component to be easily accessible, with standard screws, as well as being able to easily flash the OS. This is very important to me, and to the vast majority of consumers.

    Sounds like the average linux-opensource-zealot :)

    Honestly, I've never historically worn a watch, and even when I had one, I wore it until it started malfunctioning and did a long beep-of-death. It went through three straps before that happened.

    Getting people to want a watch is difficult because a lot of people stopped wearing watches when they started carrying cell phones.

    Me personally. I go outside without a watch, phone or other electronic toy, and I feel no pressure to know what time it is, though sometimes I screw up and wind up arriving at businesses before they open or just after they close.
  • Reply 69 of 73
    vuduvudu Posts: 28member

    If you don’t want one - don’t buy one!

     

    I’m not in any hurry until someone can make a case why I need, or should want an iWatch, but other people might.

  • Reply 70 of 73

    I Returned mine because it refused to sync with my Newton.:rolleyes:

  • Reply 71 of 73
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,577member
    FYI In the EU it's 2 years as a minimum.

    That's a DEALER warranty, though, not a manufacturer's warranty, and it only covers flaws extant at the time of purchase - i.e. that show up within the first six months. After that, it's up to the customer to prove that the problem is a manufacturing, material, or design flaw.

    Details in implementation differ from country to country, but that's the basic gist of the EU warranty law. It's not what most people think it is.
  • Reply 72 of 73
    singularitysingularity Posts: 1,328member
    spheric wrote: »
    That's a DEALER warranty, though, not a manufacturer's warranty, and it only covers flaws extant at the time of purchase - i.e. that show up within the first six months. After that, it's up to the customer to prove that the problem is a manufacturing, material, or design flaw.

    Details in implementation differ from country to country, but that's the basic gist of the EU warranty law. It's not what most people think it is.
    True but it's great start and a few companies have got into trouble by trying to give just a year.
Sign In or Register to comment.