NYT cites absence of top iOS apps in search of Apple Watch failure

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 74
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    atlapple wrote: »

    The lack of apps is a key sign because developers aren't going to invest time and money into making apps for a product they feel hasn't taken off. That's just pure logic. 

    No it's not. 1. Facebook was released more than a year after the iPad. 2. When was the watch Sdk released?
  • Reply 62 of 74
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,544member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AtlApple View Post

     

    The lack of apps is a key sign because developers aren't going to invest time and money into making apps for a product they feel hasn't taken off. That's just pure logic. 


     

    I think that

    a) the initial API explicitly being a stopgap implementation until the full native API would be released, and 

    b) the full native API not actually being available to customers until this autumn, and

    c) anything released for the initial API requiring a complete re-design, and

    d) developers using that time period to figure out what actually makes a GOOD Apple Watch app

    are more likely explanations why there aren't too many apps out there right now. 

     

    I don't think lukewarm customer response has anything to do with it, and I really don't think response has been lukewarm, at all. I believe the Watch has taken off quite satisfactorily, and I think that any serious iOS app developer is looking very hard at whether — and how — to add a Watch version of their app. 

  • Reply 63 of 74
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,031member
    Srsly, no one needs FB on a watch. Don't need a 20000 word article to prove it.
  • Reply 64 of 74
    anomeanome Posts: 1,533member
    The same <em>New York Times</em> author who is today scrounging for signs of failure related to Apple Watch similarly ignored customer satisfaction numbers back in 2009 when he called Apple "oblivious" for not jumping on the netbook fad bandwagon, and in parallel crafted a story that consumers in Japan "<a href="http://appleinsider.com/articles/09/02/28/japanese_hate_for_iphone_all_a_big_mistake">hated</a>" the iPhone, ostensibly because it wasn't enough like existing Japanese phones.
    I don't get the thing about the netbook bandwagon. As I recall, netbooks arose as a reaction to the MacBook Air. Apple said "you don't always need lots of power and a big hard disk", and others took that to a ludicrous extreme, while lacking the elegance in design, and possibly missing the whole point.

    Then, as you say, the iPad came out and rendered the whole category irrelevant. And yet the MacBook Air is still doing quite well, and they've now got the MacBook, which is in much the same position (overpriced, underfeatured, but with great potential for the future) as the Air was on debut.

    [EDIT] Fixed my quote tags.
  • Reply 65 of 74

    The only thing I would question in the piece is Wristly’s 97% satisfaction figure. '97% satisfaction' sounds like only a tiny, traitorous, oddball 3% were less than knocked out by their new Apple Watch. But the actual stats were: 

     

    66% Very satisfied/Delighted

    31% Somewhat satisfied 

     

    Is combining the two percentages naughty ? I think so:  ‘Somewhat satisfied’ is certainly not the same as ‘Delighted’.

     

    To give the same figures a different but equally valid twist one could say: “One third of Apple Watch users less than fully satisfied with purchase” (31% 'somewhat satisfied' + 2% 'neither satisfied nor dissatisfied’ + 1% 'somewhat dissatisfied’). Suddenly we’ve jumped from an apparent 3% discontent to a seeming 34%.

     

    Lies and damned lies once again, though this should not detract from DED’s thesis of piss-poor reporting by the NYT.

     

    More at http://iurl.no/02665

  • Reply 66 of 74
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by djsherly View Post



    Srsly, no one needs FB on a watch. Don't need a 20000 word article to prove it.



    No-one needs FB full stop

  • Reply 67 of 74
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,597member
    Totally with you dude. Well done for being brave enough to say. I see the "DED trolls" are out to get you. Obviously not a democracy here. How dare you have your own mind! ;)

    Actually the two of you sound kind of mindless....
  • Reply 68 of 74
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,176member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Does Google pay you to be here?  I mean seriously.  I've never read you write a single positive thing about Apple.
    Really? Then you didn't even read the very first post in this very thread. You should do so as there was some good info there.
  • Reply 69 of 74
    freerangefreerange Posts: 1,597member
    anome wrote: »
    I don't get the thing about the netbook bandwagon. As I recall, netbooks arose as a reaction to the MacBook Air. Apple said "you don't always need lots of power and a big hard disk", and others took that to a ludicrous extreme, while lacking the elegance in design, and possibly missing the whole point.

    Then, as you say, the iPad came out and rendered the whole category irrelevant. And yet the MacBook Air is still doing quite well, and they've now got the MacBook, which is in much the same position (overpriced, underfeatured, but with great potential for the future) as the Air was on debut.

    [EDIT] Fixed my quote tags.

    The MacBook Air is not a netbook by any stretch of the imagination. Net books have a much smaller footprint than an Air and historically grossly underpowered in every way. In other words, they were hard to use junk.
  • Reply 70 of 74
    anomeanome Posts: 1,533member
    freerange wrote: »
    The MacBook Air is not a netbook by any stretch of the imagination. Net books have a much smaller footprint than an Air and historically grossly underpowered in every way. In other words, they were hard to use junk.
    I never said they were. I just said that other manufacturers, when they saw the MacBook Air, tried to apply the same principles - Light, easy to carry, less storage with a focus on the cloud - and came up with the netbook. They missed out the design and the usability aspects of the MacBook Air, and focussed on the price. In a way, they were an attempt to prove that you could do a MacBook Air style device for much less than Apple was charging. In this regard, they failed dismally, proving once again that most PC manufacturers don't get what Apple are doing.
  • Reply 71 of 74
    yoyo2222yoyo2222 Posts: 144member

    NYT is as reliable a tech journal as the WSJ. <Sarcasm>

  • Reply 72 of 74
    yoyo2222yoyo2222 Posts: 144member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post





    To be fair, I read the NYT more than any other newspaper. Their political and international reporting are outstanding, as are their travel, cooking, arts, movies, and education sections.



    Their tech reporting is quite poor. I used to like Pogue a lot, but he's gone some place that I never visit any more.



    I couldn't agree more.

  • Reply 73 of 74
    evilutionevilution Posts: 1,399member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Glasses Man View Post



    What does the apple watch do exactly?

     

    It allows you to use Apple Pay without having to own the iPhone 6 and 6+.

    It allows you to use Apple Pay without having to get your iPhone out.

    It allows you to use Apple Pay even if you don't have your iPhone.

    It gives you haptic feedback when you set a GPS walking route so you don't have to keep looking at your iPhone, have it out all the time and possibly have it snatched.

    It tells the time without having to get your phone out.

    You can access SIRI without having to get your iPhone out.

     

    However, currently, all of the apps are pretty much pointless but they aren't the selling point of the watch.

Sign In or Register to comment.