but you're also kind of exaggerating here. To be independent of iPhone, it only needs two more "radios" to add to the two it already has.
It may be a matter of semantics but it's no exaggeration.
To be independent of the iPhone it needs a GPS radio and cellular radio(s). I use the plural since there are multiple frequencies involved and some of them may require a different radio for a range or type of frequencies.
The iPhone 6 has a Qualcomm WFR1620 GSM/CDMA/W-CDMA/LTE Receiver and a Qualcomm WTR1625L GSM/CDMA/W-CDMA/LTE RxD Transceiver.
So, how would Apple work that? Can those chips be fitted into the Watch as it's currently designed? Does Qualcomm or someone have smaller versions? Or can smaller versions be had if some of the bands are dropped? Then you have a Watch that is independent only in certain areas/countries. And you have poorer battery life.
Apple will choose a feature set that it thinks appeals to the most users. The Watch is on the thick side for a lot of us "regular" wearers, not to mention haute couture.
I think we'll see a thinner Watch before we see a fully independent Watch, though I do think Apple will want to gave it more functionality away from the iPhone if not grant its complete independence.
Not that there aren't either shape in either category. Apple chose a rectangular watch because it is a more popular shape in the fashion world, and Apple wants that cachet.
First I don't know that to be the case, I've been leafing through some fashion magazines while traveling lately, and they are full of high end watch ads. Not a single one was rectangular. If there's some exclusive segment of haute couture that currently finds rectangular more fashionable, then the taste makers seem to be moving away from that as fast as possible, which is bad news for Apple, since it just makes their design look even more like "last year's" watch than it already does.
And second, Apple was pretty clear, they chose rectangular because that is the best way to display text. It was actually the best move since it enables them to introduce a new OS and work out the bugs that's easiest for the developers to work within, as well as best meets all customers needs for presenting information. A good round UI is going to be difficult to craft (as evidenced by current offerings) and take some time to implement, as well as making it easy on the developers to port their software back and forth. But it's coming.
Here's hoping it works without an iPhone, retains longer battery life, and isn't as chunky looking.
The 38mm version is about the same size as my other watches and isn't as chunky looking as the 42mm version. No problem with getting caught up in the cuffs on most of my long sleeve shirts either.
I wear my Apple Watch from 7:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m. and it usually has more than 50% battery when I take it off. (I don't load the watch companion apps for all of my iPhone 3rd party apps, which I think is one of the keys to good battery performance. Just load what you want to use. Some of those 3rd party watch apps are battery hogs.)
Comments
To be independent of the iPhone it needs a GPS radio and cellular radio(s). I use the plural since there are multiple frequencies involved and some of them may require a different radio for a range or type of frequencies.
The iPhone 6 has a Qualcomm WFR1620 GSM/CDMA/W-CDMA/LTE Receiver and a Qualcomm WTR1625L GSM/CDMA/W-CDMA/LTE RxD Transceiver.
So, how would Apple work that? Can those chips be fitted into the Watch as it's currently designed? Does Qualcomm or someone have smaller versions? Or can smaller versions be had if some of the bands are dropped? Then you have a Watch that is independent only in certain areas/countries. And you have poorer battery life.
Apple will choose a feature set that it thinks appeals to the most users. The Watch is on the thick side for a lot of us "regular" wearers, not to mention haute couture.
I think we'll see a thinner Watch before we see a fully independent Watch, though I do think Apple will want to gave it more functionality away from the iPhone if not grant its complete independence.
And second, Apple was pretty clear, they chose rectangular because that is the best way to display text. It was actually the best move since it enables them to introduce a new OS and work out the bugs that's easiest for the developers to work within, as well as best meets all customers needs for presenting information. A good round UI is going to be difficult to craft (as evidenced by current offerings) and take some time to implement, as well as making it easy on the developers to port their software back and forth. But it's coming.
I wear my Apple Watch from 7:00 a.m. - 11:00 p.m. and it usually has more than 50% battery when I take it off. (I don't load the watch companion apps for all of my iPhone 3rd party apps, which I think is one of the keys to good battery performance. Just load what you want to use. Some of those 3rd party watch apps are battery hogs.)