larrya

StrangeDays said:

mac_128 said:

StrangeDays said:

gatorguy said:

StrangeDays said:

mac_128 said:

blastdoor said:

I'm actually not too worried about this. 

The first gen watch was a little off target, but I think they righted the ship with version 3 of the OS and the current hardware lineup. 

If they can just keep pushing the product forward I think they'll do fine. 

The problem is -- that's a big "if". It seems difficult for Apple to continuously push multiple product lines forward at once. Only the iPhone consistently gets annual updates. 

While I agree, I do think it took too long to get a second model out. We've been looking at the exact same design since September 2014, which despite being a substantial improvement over Series 1, nevertheless lends to the perception it's an old model offering nothing new. And, I have believed since the beginning that the Apple Watch did too much, and things that most people are clearly not buying smart watches for, requiring a more complicated interface for some. Combined with a relatively high price compared to the fitness trackers most people seem to be opting for, and it becomes something of a luxury for the mass markets Apple needs to woo in order to make this thing as successful as their other product lines. But they are laying the groundwork for a big leap forward. If rumors are accurate, and the Apple Watch gains LTE and independence from the iPhone, it will likely take on a whole new life for some. A round watch, as alluded to by patent filings, will also help put the spotlight back on design as well, and keep pushing the innovation factor, over the fitness bands which seem to carry the bulk of the focus. And let's not forget Apple's health factor. The Trump presidency might well help Apple in that regulatory barriers to adding health features to the watch could be dropped, allowing them to bring truly useful features to the watch. I would generally trust Apple to thoroughly test their devices more than most vendors given the resulting lack of government regulation, and that will give Apple a leg up too in that area, since obviously Fitbit will benefit from the same deregulation.

Oh lord. More people who think design is how something looks, rather than how it works. And a rectangular display works better for information, which is why computer monitors, train/plane schedule displays, hell even just books, aren't round. Watches were round because of swinging arms, which, surprise, ain't dere no more.

People have expectations about what things should look like. I remember my mother making mashed potatoes and fresh bread for Easter, using food coloring to make the potatoes orange and the bread green. She had what she thought was a good reason too, celebrating spring and its colors. The taste probably didn't change at all but no one liked either of them. They didn't look like what they were expected to. No doubt there's a significant percentage of watch wearers that when they think of what a quality watch should look like one of the basics is that its round. A rectangular one doesn't look right to them.

That's fine, because those people are into watches as ornaments. In other words, form. But when it comes to function over form, rectangular won. See: books. 

People always bitch that apple is too into form over function, but here's proof that they aren't. And yet still the people bitch. Therein lies the lesson. 

Right, because there's nothing like reading a good book on your wrist, or watching a movie, or analyzing a spreadsheet? 

Jony Ive couldn't have been more clear -- the watch was designed for glances. Anything more and he suggests one pull out their iPhone. Round or square works just fine for such purposes. Something worn on a person's body is subject to the frivolities and whims of taste and style -- and most people are going to want what they want regardless of the ability to most efficiently display the contents of a document. If Apple doesn't address that need, then they will lose some market share. It's as simple as that. 

Are you really that daft? Nowhere did I suggest one read books on a wrist and never mentioned documents. But the display use case remains the same -- rendering blocks of content. This works best in a rectangle and not a circle; in the case of the watch it's text, lists, stacked content, etc... It makes the most sense for the same reason it makes sense in a book. Obviously that does not mean I'm saying "Read books on wrist!", so no idea what you're talking about.

Round watches exist because of swinging arms. The AW has no arms, thus it's not round -- it is function over form. So you keep waiting for your round AW...Meanwhile, I'll utilize the value I get from my actual product every day.

GeorgeBMac said:

freethinking said:

Apple needs to make either the press on the dial or press on the side button be the start / stop for tracking time. As it is the watch is worthless for any training, its super frustrating when you are at the end of a hard run and the bloody timer wont stop as the presses on the face are just ignored and time just keeps ticking.

It also needs an always on function during running so that you can quickly glance at the watch, as it is the delay for the screen to come on breaks your rhythm especially when going hard.  The heart rate monitor is so inaccurate that is serves as a novelty at best. 

I only apple let us developers have access to at least one of the push buttons we could fix these issues our selves. I guess the HR monitor can be fixed by forking out more $$$ for chest strap in true to apples new M.O. it just works if you pay more. 

A study by the Cleveland Clinic showed the Apple Watch heart monitor to be the most accurate of all wrist based monitors tested at 90% accuracy.   But, a chest strap, at 99% was more accurate than any wrist based heart rate tracker.   The deficiency is not with Apple but with the inherent inaccuracy of wrist based heart rate tracking trying to 'see' blood flow through the wrist.  Conversely, a chest strap uses the same technology as an EKG:  measuring the electronic signal of the beating heart itself.  

The Apple Watch can be paired with a chest strap and the wrist based monitor turned off.   The advantages are:
-- More accurate HR
-- More frequent sampling of HR
-- Less battery drain / better battery life

And the delay of the display going on does not bother me at all during a run even on a Series 0.  The only thing that does is that I have to snap my wrist up to turn on the display because simply rolling it up doesn't trigger the display to go on.   Always On would be nice -- but I doubt the tiny battery could handle that.

But, I agree that Apple should enable the physical buttons to stop exercise tracking because sweaty fingers simply don't work well on a touch screen.   I guess the geeks at Apple never had sweaty fingers...  They need to get serious athletes involved in their design & testing (and Nike is no longer for serious athletes)