Apple announces Apple Watch
- Thread starter Volotaire
- Start date
- Status
bluetooth will likely sip more of your battery though since they are constantly connected.
And not sure how well you will be able to actually read emails on 1.63" watch. You will basically read notifications and use phone for everything more than that... at least i would.
Battery for smartwatch is pretty important... especially since it requires special charger. I would not want to have to carry charger around everywhere.
One of the major points of Ipad was that it has very long battery run time, same for iPhone, especially when compared to Androids of 2-3 years ago.
crazygambit
Member
There is a difference if you're in a meeting and want to look at the time without every one on the table realizing you're bored.
Then again it's not a $350 difference, plus this is just too ugly.
Not sure if I want one.
Kind of can't believe it doesn't charge with lightning port, but I can understand the reasons (water) not a fan of another crazy charging system.
I am kind of interested in the heart tracking, not sure of the novelty of that would wear off quickly though... I'm not really into fitness.
I think the software looks pretty good. The design is not terrible but not like omg I need it as a fashion accessory.
On the fence. Probably skip this version and see.
Kind of can't believe it doesn't charge with lightning port, but I can understand the reasons (water) not a fan of another crazy charging system.
I am kind of interested in the heart tracking, not sure of the novelty of that would wear off quickly though... I'm not really into fitness.
I think the software looks pretty good. The design is not terrible but not like omg I need it as a fashion accessory.
On the fence. Probably skip this version and see.
Bulbo Urethral Baggins
Banned
The 360 is a generic round watch with too large of a face. It's boring as hell. Round watches are so 9/8/14.
The messaging stuff uses Bluetooth Low Energy, as far as I know, at least it was that way for Continuity between iOS/OS X. I assume the same technology will be used for iPhone/Watch communication which means it shouldn't really drain much energy.
I see this thrown around a lot, but how do we know it wasn't part of a roadmap Steve left before he died?
BruiserBear
Banned
The circular shape of the 360 limits the real estate for a screen. I feel like people make these types of snap judgements without thinking about how much thought they put into the design. They didn't just make it rectangular because that was easiest route.
So you're saying a company would never, ever exaggerate or leave things unclear because of obvious reasons?
And whoah at missing the point. We know the Moto 360 doesn't hold up for a single day. We know Apple didn't show figures for the Apple Watch battery life. We know gadgets haven't evolved much when it comes to battery life in general. People are just using their common sense right now. We all hope that thing can get through a solid day, but why should we actually believe it does at this point?
(Thinking a smart watch of this caliber getting through a month without charging is outragesly naive, you're right with that.)
whatever77
Banned
I am very impressed by the wrist bands, the watch itself is a bust.
oh sure. I'm not expecting to read emails. But if I'm waiting to hear from someone and I get a notification, I can quickly tell if it is relevant or not from my watch and just leave my phone in my pocket. You're just screening things at that level.
and although bluetooth will use battery, I assume it is BT 4.0 low power, so display will still be the biggest battery hog.
It may not seem like a big deal right now, but mobile payment and authentication over NFC by waving your watch will at some point become ubiquitous. It might not seem like a big wow thing, but it would be very convenient if your credit card, work access card, transit pass, health card, driver's license, loyalty card, etc. was all stored securely in your phone or watch, and you could just wave your watch in front of an NFC reader to securely transmit whatever minimally required information is necessary from the secure storage to pay or be granted access or populate an electronic form. You wouldn't need to carry cards around anymore. People have been working on these problems for a while. Apple's clout might finally result in more widespread adoption happening, which is good for everybody.
I find it interesting that people assume that just because it's designed by Apple the design is the smartest and most thought through and that other designs are automatically less good.
EroticSushi
Member
Wasn't it said that at the time of his passing, he had his hand in helping up to the 4S? Think people need to drop the whole "Steve would have not allowed this." He's gone, let him rest already. Who knows what would have been different.
robertsan21
Member
I will definitely wait for next version of this watch. I have a feeling it will be slimmer and packed with more features, hopefully water resistant so I can go swimming with it.
I am however curious on how the watch will work if we forget the iphone at home when we go outside to do something... will apps work? will we get sms ? how does it stay connected to the network.
I am however curious on how the watch will work if we forget the iphone at home when we go outside to do something... will apps work? will we get sms ? how does it stay connected to the network.
zephervack
Member
Nothing, they havent said how it works but im guessing its the same as the Android ones, Bluetooth 4, once it goes out of range, all it can do is whatever doesnt need data.
Always-honest
Banned
So how does it compare to other smart-watches?
I like the general design a bit more now, by the way. It's a simple design because that will give you the most options to personalise it.
I hate, hate, hate the golden version though. Gold is such a disgusting colour.
And i think it's too thick/ cluncky
I like the general design a bit more now, by the way. It's a simple design because that will give you the most options to personalise it.
I hate, hate, hate the golden version though. Gold is such a disgusting colour.
And i think it's too thick/ cluncky
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
I'm pretty sure it completely relies on the iPhone. It's probably bluetooth. Probably just clock and other basic apps work.
I don't know if we'll ever get an Apple Watch you can swim in. I'm trying to think of another equally high tech device you can completely put in the water and all I can think of is a submarine.
generally from the front it looks ok, but it does look like a squat iphone 1 with the fat rounded edges. I think in profile it looks thicker due to the bottom part designed to be reading your pulse etc.
I also have skinny wrists so I'm concerned even the smaller one might be too big for me (although I'm guessing they've designed it for women so I might be ok)
Gah I've got access to three iPhone 4s (mine, my bro and my dad) and one iPhone 4 (my wife) and none of them can be used with Apple Watch. Apple how could you? iOS8 supports iPhone 4s too!
I really wanted to buy the bub an Apple Watch with the mickey mouse face, but I don't want to have to shell out another $1000 for the phone too. I wished it worked all on its own. I'm sure the next iteration will so I guess I'll just have to wait for that.
Would love to send the baby a heart and deliver it to her wrist while I'm at work.
I really wanted to buy the bub an Apple Watch with the mickey mouse face, but I don't want to have to shell out another $1000 for the phone too. I wished it worked all on its own. I'm sure the next iteration will so I guess I'll just have to wait for that.
Would love to send the baby a heart and deliver it to her wrist while I'm at work.
Always-honest
Banned
yeah. they need to be thinner for sure. But when i look at the photos on the apple site, i can appreciate the design a bit more.
But does it do more than other smart-watches (besides probably having a smooth user experience and working well with other apple products)? I have no idea.
I've read most of the previews, watched the videos, let the news sink in. Here were my thoughts from the March '14 Google unveils Android Wear: a version of Android for smartwatches thread:
Back then some prominent Fanboys were predicting that Apple wouldn't make a watch. Even up to the day before the announcement there was still that insistence that Apple would do something different:
*cough*
Apple has spent the past couple months trying to catch up to Android. iOS8 added actionable notifications, homekit. TheiWatch WATCH has a payments system (albeit tethered to an iPhone 6/+). However Apple still doesn't have an equivalent of Google Now; Apple hasnt even fixed their maps app yet. The WATCH is a typical Apple version 1 product but this time they haven't leapfrogged the market and there are strong competitors already available. I stand by my earlier prediction that Apple won't be dominating this market.
The WATCH itself is a curious product. Let's just get this out of the way first — it doesn't look that good. The renders make it look stunning but the real world pics show otherwise
plated gold is usually too tacky to be worn everyday in casual clothes. I don't agree with the idea of gendered smartwatches but, if it could argued that Moto360 and some other Android Wear devices are too 'masculine', the WATCH looks very feminine. I can't imagine any guy pairing that with formal wear. Angela Ahrendts and Dr Dre have a huge task on their hands marketing this as fashionable and cool imo...
The WATCH UI interface is even more perplexing. It does NOT have an always on watchface. You have to lift your arm to see the time! The 'digital crown' looks nice — I'm a big fan of physical scroll controls and would actually like this on the phone too — but it's not the only type or even the main form of interaction
Here's a demo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwv-3wZocK4
That's a lot of swiping. Not to mention how quickly the screen kept going off and the need to press the tiny crown to turn it on again. I wonder how all this will work out during the winter with bulky gloves on? It's doesn't bode well that the WATCH has such aggressive display management and Apple can't even give a battery estimate right now. Jony Ive has his work cut out for him.
I guess the unique killer feature was supposed to be that quick messaging feature? Tog actually predicted that back in Feb '13:
Bah. What Apple showed off looks like a gimmick and I can't believe they actually dedicated a whole button just for that (why not for notifications screen instead?)! I was reminded first and foremost of Ping. This 'killer communications feature' requires both parties to have a WATCH which in turn requires both parties to have an iPhone. Not an iPod Touch or an iPad or a Macbook; no the watch must be paired with an iPhone 5/5c/5s/6/6+. The potential userbase is not that large especially when considering the starting price. $350 is a bit high and you can bet the 'good' 'fashionable' versions will be much higher. The Moto360 with stainless steel band cost $300 and I guess the equivalent Apple version will be almost double that, despite not being showerproof, not having gps etc. I just don't see teenagers spending that amount of money for an unnecessary fashion gadget that will be obsolete in a year...
The smart move usually is to skip the first generation of Apple products. So far the WATCH seems to fall into that category. All that said though, I'm buying it Day 1
. I've been a smartwatch early adopter for the past few years for some halfbaked products (metawatch lol) so the WATCH is right up my alley.
Back then some prominent Fanboys were predicting that Apple wouldn't make a watch. Even up to the day before the announcement there was still that insistence that Apple would do something different:
*cough*
Apple has spent the past couple months trying to catch up to Android. iOS8 added actionable notifications, homekit. The
The WATCH itself is a curious product. Let's just get this out of the way first — it doesn't look that good. The renders make it look stunning but the real world pics show otherwise
plated gold is usually too tacky to be worn everyday in casual clothes. I don't agree with the idea of gendered smartwatches but, if it could argued that Moto360 and some other Android Wear devices are too 'masculine', the WATCH looks very feminine. I can't imagine any guy pairing that with formal wear. Angela Ahrendts and Dr Dre have a huge task on their hands marketing this as fashionable and cool imo...
The WATCH UI interface is even more perplexing. It does NOT have an always on watchface. You have to lift your arm to see the time! The 'digital crown' looks nice — I'm a big fan of physical scroll controls and would actually like this on the phone too — but it's not the only type or even the main form of interaction
Here's a demo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwv-3wZocK4
That's a lot of swiping. Not to mention how quickly the screen kept going off and the need to press the tiny crown to turn it on again. I wonder how all this will work out during the winter with bulky gloves on? It's doesn't bode well that the WATCH has such aggressive display management and Apple can't even give a battery estimate right now. Jony Ive has his work cut out for him.
I guess the unique killer feature was supposed to be that quick messaging feature? Tog actually predicted that back in Feb '13:
Bah. What Apple showed off looks like a gimmick and I can't believe they actually dedicated a whole button just for that (why not for notifications screen instead?)! I was reminded first and foremost of Ping. This 'killer communications feature' requires both parties to have a WATCH which in turn requires both parties to have an iPhone. Not an iPod Touch or an iPad or a Macbook; no the watch must be paired with an iPhone 5/5c/5s/6/6+. The potential userbase is not that large especially when considering the starting price. $350 is a bit high and you can bet the 'good' 'fashionable' versions will be much higher. The Moto360 with stainless steel band cost $300 and I guess the equivalent Apple version will be almost double that, despite not being showerproof, not having gps etc. I just don't see teenagers spending that amount of money for an unnecessary fashion gadget that will be obsolete in a year...
The smart move usually is to skip the first generation of Apple products. So far the WATCH seems to fall into that category. All that said though, I'm buying it Day 1
I'm saying Apple won't release a watch that needs to be charged more frequently than a normal person would be out of bed.
Obviously use time will vary. You could bump this thread once it's out and bemoan your inability to flick through your photos for a solid eighteen hours, but within normal use, it will last a day, because it has to.
My interpretation of his post was that he was alluding to multiple days of being absent, not how long a normal watch wearing single day arguably is.
A lack of battery life break down isn't in anyway proof that it's less than a day, they already said it can be worn all day.
They have months of work left to optimize battery usage, and when dealing with such a restrictive battery capacity, those optimizations could make notable differences, so to release exact figures now, which could be incorrect when it ships is illogical, it's not like they're taking preorders, they're not going to hide the final figures when they start selling them.
EDIT: Regarding the post above, just to note, Pay isn't limited to the iPhone 6/+, if you have the watch and a 5 you can do it.
Mysterious
Banned
Does anyone think the Apple Watch will become annualized? I don't see this device, being $349 (+ a lot more depending on the metal and band customizations), convincing consumers to upgrade every 2-3 years.
I feel this may be like Apple TV in both sales and upgrade-cycles.
I feel this may be like Apple TV in both sales and upgrade-cycles.
This is my only caveat about buying the first version of the Apple Watch:
If you're running or biking or whatever, you still need your iPhone on your person to track where you go. Not a surprise, considering they said you'd need an iPhone with the watch, but I just wondered how essential the iPhone was for all features.
A future version will likely have GPS and/or cellular connectivity built in. That's when it'll be indispensable. (When that happens, tons of parents will slap them on their kids' wrists.)
If you're running or biking or whatever, you still need your iPhone on your person to track where you go. Not a surprise, considering they said you'd need an iPhone with the watch, but I just wondered how essential the iPhone was for all features.
A future version will likely have GPS and/or cellular connectivity built in. That's when it'll be indispensable. (When that happens, tons of parents will slap them on their kids' wrists.)
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
I've read most of the previews, watched the videos, let the news sink in. Here were my thoughts from the March '14 Google unveils Android Wear: a version of Android for smartwatches thread:
Back then some prominent Fanboys were predicting that Apple wouldn't make a watch. Even up to the day before the announcement there was still that insistence that Apple would do something different:
*cough*
Apple has spent the past couple months trying to catch up to Android. iOS8 added actionable notifications, homekit. TheiWatchWATCH has a payments system (albeit tethered to an iPhone 6/+). However Apple still doesn't have an equivalent of Google Now; Apple hasnt even fixed their maps app yet. The WATCH is a typical Apple version 1 product but this time they haven't leapfrogged the market and there are strong competitors already available. I stand by my earlier prediction that Apple won't be dominating this market.
The WATCH itself is a curious product. Let's just get this out of the way first — it doesn't look that good. The renders make it look stunning but the real world pics show otherwise
plated gold is usually too tacky to be worn everyday in casual clothes. I don't agree with the idea of gendered smartwatches but, if it could argued that Moto360 and some other Android Wear devices are too 'masculine', the WATCH looks very feminine. I can't imagine any guy pairing that with formal wear. Angela Ahrendts and Dr Dre have a huge task on their hands marketing this as fashionable and cool imo...
The WATCH UI interface is even more perplexing. It does NOT have an always on watchface. You have to lift your arm to see the time! The 'digital crown' looks nice — I'm a big fan of physical scroll controls and would actually like this on the phone too — but it's not the only type or even the main form of interaction
Here's a demo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwv-3wZocK4
That's a lot of swiping. Not to mention how quickly the screen kept going off and the need to press the tiny crown to turn it on again. I wonder how all this will work out during the winter with bulky gloves on? It's doesn't bode well that the WATCH has such aggressive display management and Apple can't even give a battery estimate right now. Jony Ive has his work cut out for him.
I guess the unique killer feature was supposed to be that quick messaging feature? Tog actually predicted that back in Feb '13:
Bah. What Apple showed off looks like a gimmick and I can't believe they actually dedicated a whole button just for that (why not for notifications screen instead?)! I was reminded first and foremost of Ping. This 'killer communications feature' requires both parties to have a WATCH which in turn requires both parties to have an iPhone. Not an iPod Touch or an iPad or a Macbook; no the watch must be paired with an iPhone 5/5c/5s/6/6+. The potential userbase is not that large especially when considering the starting price. $350 is a bit high and you can bet the 'good' 'fashionable' versions will be much higher. The Moto360 with stainless steel band cost $300 and I guess the equivalent Apple version will be almost double that, despite not being showerproof, not having gps etc. I just don't see teenagers spending that amount of money for an unnecessary fashion gadget that will be obsolete in a year...
The smart move usually is to skip the first generation of Apple products. So far the WATCH seems to fall into that category. All that said though, I'm buying it Day 1. I've been a smartwatch early adopter for the past few years for some halfbaked products (metawatch lol) so the WATCH is right up my alley.
Very good points. Very very good points, actually. But one thing, Apple has a bunch of different designs: the silver, the gold, the gray, and the dark gray, different sizes, plus whatever band you want to pair with it. The gold might be feminine but I'm sure one of those combinations will be fine for men. I'm eying the sporty dark gray myself, but I need to see it in person.
I know the morse code feels like a gimmick, but honestly that is the feature I'm most excited about. Has there ever been a device that allowed you to touch someone from a distance? Besides some high tech X rated electronics and long sticks, I believe this is the first, and I think it is awesome. I just love the idea that when I'm bored at a party, I can subtlety tap my friend's wrist and quickly write "bored" or something. I know this is not a common occurrence, but just today my wife had her phone in her bag set to vibrate, and I tried to call her a couple times but she missed it. Sure, the obvious solution is don't set your phone to vibrate and put it in your bag, but the iWatch could solve that problem too. I could **tap tap tap** and she could check her phone.
I have a 4S. I don't know what the 5 could handle it that my 4S couldn't.
Bulbo Urethral Baggins
Banned
I don't think it sounds like a gimmick. That's very practical. She could *tap tap tap* while I *fap fap fap*. That way it will feel like she has a hand in it.
Probably the same reason you can't AirDrop or use HandOff/Continuity with a 4S.
P2P WiFi.
Having read through most of this thread, the most amusing thing by far I've read is how people seem to think that looking at one's watch, a gesture traditionally known to be the universal body language for "Oh God you're boring me," during a meeting/conversation is more acceptable than looking at your phone.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I think the concept is fantastic and I am chugging the kool-aid.
But I think we can all look at that design and instantly think "that is a first gen design we will look back on in a few years as quaint".
I'm sure successive generations of this watch will be thinner and more refined.. And I'm going to want one eventually.
But I think we can all look at that design and instantly think "that is a first gen design we will look back on in a few years as quaint".
I'm sure successive generations of this watch will be thinner and more refined.. And I'm going to want one eventually.
Hari Seldon
Member
I'm pretty sure I will never actually see anyone wear one of these things in real life haha.
layzie1989
Member
I agree with Greyface above that the UI is very perplexing. They went against their own reasoning for the Crown with the springboard. The device seems very reliant on touch. They're also using different design languages. Some things are flat and graphic, while others are completely 3d, like the emojis and fitness badges.
I'm disappointed because this is likely to be the UI they'll stick with for the device, and it just doesn't seem good.
I'm disappointed because this is likely to be the UI they'll stick with for the device, and it just doesn't seem good.
I imagine gen 2 will just be thinner, as the iPhone won't get a physical refresh for two years now, in which time hopefully Ive has brutalized those bezels, and we'll get an iPhone and Watch refresh that are somewhat uniformed.
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
Oh, I didn't know about that. That makes sense.
Both are bad. Pulling out your phone is certainly worse.
Snarfington
Member
Already been asked if my G Watch is "one of those iWatches from the paper" on the train today. Great. This again.
Coreda
Member
The WATCH itself is a curious product. Let's just get this out of the way first it doesn't look that good. The renders make it look stunning but the real world pics show otherwise
Ouch. I never thought I'd see Apple release something so unsightly. The middle combo looks like an artifact you'd find in a dusty pawn shop.
Opus Angelorum
Member
The more I look at it the more I hate it. It just...doesn't gel.
It's something smart trying to be a watch, when it should have been the opposite.
And sadly, it'll sell millions. Not that I hate Apple and I'd be considered an early adopter...but this product is a few years too early.
Battery tech isn't good enough for a product like this, specifically because they can't increase the size of the screen to accommodate a bigger one.
It's something smart trying to be a watch, when it should have been the opposite.
And sadly, it'll sell millions. Not that I hate Apple and I'd be considered an early adopter...but this product is a few years too early.
Battery tech isn't good enough for a product like this, specifically because they can't increase the size of the screen to accommodate a bigger one.
I am a little surprised they are requiring an iphone. You'd think most things except phone call screening would work well paired to a 3G/4G ipad
edit: Opus, I agree. There was a lot of what they showed that I liked, but a lot of that would work in a more standard watch form factor. Eg the 'taptic' (sigh) parts could work without even having a screen - set your navigation on your phone and then pop it back in your pocket and let the taps guide you. And basic notifications could be done on a smaller screen and with much less power. Do I really want to browse my entire photo collection with fancy zooming when I have a 5.5" phone in my pocket?
Both Apple and Android have tried to cram too much power into the form factor, making it too bulky and with a poor battery life.
edit: Opus, I agree. There was a lot of what they showed that I liked, but a lot of that would work in a more standard watch form factor. Eg the 'taptic' (sigh) parts could work without even having a screen - set your navigation on your phone and then pop it back in your pocket and let the taps guide you. And basic notifications could be done on a smaller screen and with much less power. Do I really want to browse my entire photo collection with fancy zooming when I have a 5.5" phone in my pocket?
Both Apple and Android have tried to cram too much power into the form factor, making it too bulky and with a poor battery life.
I like the idea of the watch, and $349 is not a bad price for a watch at all.
Can't give up my traditional watches though, especially when the real pictures of the object are not nearly as nice as the renders and there's no specific utility that is worth leaving my phone in my pocket.
Can't give up my traditional watches though, especially when the real pictures of the object are not nearly as nice as the renders and there's no specific utility that is worth leaving my phone in my pocket.
D
Deleted member 22576
Unconfirmed Member
Thought about the watch a bit more this morning. I think I'm into it. I'm surprised at how much of a blank slate it seems to be and am very pleased it will be open to developers from the get go. I honestly did not expect a device this robust. I was certain it'd be more of an inert sensor to compliment the phone.
I already wear a watch. I collect little Swatch brand sport watches that have 13inch arm bands that wrap around the wrist twice like a neuromancer bracelet. So my wrist is spoken for. I picture myself wearing the Apple watch more on my forarm facing inward. That way it may even be covered with rolled up sleeves. I don't really see myself ever wearing it on my wrist like a traditional watch. I'm curious to see how this will interact with the heartrate sensor. Is that like a skin based thing? can it sense your heartrate anywhere? If I press it to my buttcheek will it get a read?
So many questions. I'm also stuck on how they described the mechanism behind the digital crown. It seemed to imply the mechanism itself isn't connected to anything and that instead there are sensor around it that read it's movement not unlike how an optical mouse works. Thats very intriguing to me.
This device seems to be the ultimate expression of hardware/software being one in the same. I can't wait to see what the display looks like, it might truly look like an actual object. You can extrapolate feature creep from the watch into future generation iPhones as well.. I can't wait to try out the force touch gesture and haptic feedback.
The directional vibration is also interesting to me. Long ago I read about an experiment that was essentially a waistband full of vibrating motors that would consistently vibrate whereever North was oriented at that moment. Users would describe it as a sort of sixth sense and after weeks with the device they just had the innate ability to determine which way North was even without the vibrating waistband.
Stuff like is incredibly interesting to me. I'm actually surprised most of the wristbands seem to be inert. I feel like there are great oppurtunities to be had with feedback mechanism in the wristband itself. But I can see how thats impractical.
I'm curious. It seems to be incredibly versatile.
Also, It just seems too fat. that thing is thick as hell. I feel Apple will need to directly address the upgrade path for this thing. When the iPhone launched they advertised a 2 lifecycle for software upgrades. They need to guarantee a solid 4 at the very least for this thing.
Its a good direction for Apple, and extrapolating a lot of the material aspects of the watch out to future iPhones makes me incredibly excited about the future.
I already wear a watch. I collect little Swatch brand sport watches that have 13inch arm bands that wrap around the wrist twice like a neuromancer bracelet. So my wrist is spoken for. I picture myself wearing the Apple watch more on my forarm facing inward. That way it may even be covered with rolled up sleeves. I don't really see myself ever wearing it on my wrist like a traditional watch. I'm curious to see how this will interact with the heartrate sensor. Is that like a skin based thing? can it sense your heartrate anywhere? If I press it to my buttcheek will it get a read?
So many questions. I'm also stuck on how they described the mechanism behind the digital crown. It seemed to imply the mechanism itself isn't connected to anything and that instead there are sensor around it that read it's movement not unlike how an optical mouse works. Thats very intriguing to me.
This device seems to be the ultimate expression of hardware/software being one in the same. I can't wait to see what the display looks like, it might truly look like an actual object. You can extrapolate feature creep from the watch into future generation iPhones as well.. I can't wait to try out the force touch gesture and haptic feedback.
The directional vibration is also interesting to me. Long ago I read about an experiment that was essentially a waistband full of vibrating motors that would consistently vibrate whereever North was oriented at that moment. Users would describe it as a sort of sixth sense and after weeks with the device they just had the innate ability to determine which way North was even without the vibrating waistband.
Stuff like is incredibly interesting to me. I'm actually surprised most of the wristbands seem to be inert. I feel like there are great oppurtunities to be had with feedback mechanism in the wristband itself. But I can see how thats impractical.
I'm curious. It seems to be incredibly versatile.
Also, It just seems too fat. that thing is thick as hell. I feel Apple will need to directly address the upgrade path for this thing. When the iPhone launched they advertised a 2 lifecycle for software upgrades. They need to guarantee a solid 4 at the very least for this thing.
Its a good direction for Apple, and extrapolating a lot of the material aspects of the watch out to future iPhones makes me incredibly excited about the future.
This is my only caveat about buying the first version of the Apple Watch:
If you're running or biking or whatever, you still need your iPhone on your person to track where you go. Not a surprise, considering they said you'd need an iPhone with the watch, but I just wondered how essential the iPhone was for all features.
A future version will likely have GPS and/or cellular connectivity built in. That's when it'll be indispensable. (When that happens, tons of parents will slap them on their kids' wrists.)
I totally agree with the GPS part of this. If I'm going to go exercise for an hour or two I generally don't need my phone and could leave it behind. I don't need internet connectivity. Especially if I could still listen to a token amount of music on some wireless headphones while I'm working out (they said you would be able to store some music directly on the watch. The fitness aspect of the watch is really cool but when it requires a phone to tag along it loses most of that luster. Throw a GPS in there and it should be good to go until you get back to your phone. GPS, waterproofing, and a slightly smaller profile could go a long way in the second gen version of this thing.
When they began by bagging on touch and introducing the crown I was ready for some mind blowing announcement. The crown is really just a substitute for multi-touch, which the display is too small for. They should have said that instead of bagging on touch in general, because most of the device is still controlled by touch. It was a weird oversight in their presentation and really stood out because it was one of their opening statements.
Absolute deal-breaker. Reduces value proposition by a significant margin and defeats the entire purpose. Product should not be shipping like this.
It's a nice looking watch (the more I look at it), but it is seriously a huge waste of money. It's literally a mini-phone for your wrist. And since you are already required to have a REGULAR phone, it's not exactly a substitute for anything.
The only thing this device does differently is sit on your wrist, rather than in your pocket.
The only thing this device does differently is sit on your wrist, rather than in your pocket.
- Status