Apple announces Apple Watch

Status
Not open for further replies.
Is that all it serves as though? What can it do that simply isn't possible in other ways with the connected phone? If we use Kinect and Wii for example, I'd say the software that just replaced button commands with motion commands were a letdown.
If you're going to use an example, try not to use one that sold nearly 100 million units with software as you described selling (like Mario Kart) selling in the range of 40 million or more. It just serves to prove that perhaps you're out of step with the general market.

To answer your question: it's not about the features themselves but how they translate to a use case scenario. Just like every other Apple product (or every product in general). No-noise notifications are one thing that a phone can't offer though, so since you asked, there's your answer.
 
It's kind of weird to think having your entire social/business/school life and the Internet in your pocket ready to be accessed is annoying because of effort. It makes it sound like one of those paid programming ads where opening a carton of milk is basically impossible.

The WatchKit stuff could prove to be promising, and I really think devs are going to need to embrace it to make the Apple Watch a success in terms of what is a success for Apple.

You're reaching. If it was such a dead lame idea, it wouldn't be a growing market having billions spent on it. Checking my watch is far more efficient than pulling out a phone, especially if I have something in my hands or am in a conversation. I appreciate the function of a watch, and a smart watch increases the number of functions dramatically. It's an obvious convenience and subtlety that is brought by a smart watch. You can be one of those people who claims you don't need a watch since you have a phone, but that doesn't do anything for me who doesn't care to see someone with their phone out on the table while we are talking in a meeting or having to reach in my pocket which is a bigger motion and maneuver than checking your wrist, no matter how much you downplay the convenience.
 
You're reaching. If it was such a dead lame idea, it wouldn't be a growing market having billions spent on it. Checking my watch is far more efficient than pulling out a phone, especially if I have something in my hands or am in a conversation. I appreciate the function of a watch, and a smart watch increases the number of functions dramatically. It's an obvious convenience and subtlety that is brought by a smart watch. You can be one of those people who claims you don't need a watch since you have a phone, but that doesn't do anything for me who doesn't care to see someone with their phone out on the table while we are talking in a meeting or having to reach in my pocket which is a bigger motion and maneuver than checking your wrist, no matter how much you downplay the convenience.
I'm not downplaying the convenience. I'm downplaying the supposed problem. We can't agree that without smart watches, smart phones are a highly efficient way to stay connected and get info? I just find it odd how the pitches for these smart watches try and make smartphones sound cumbersome all of a sudden.
 
I'm not downplaying the convenience. I'm downplaying the supposed problem. We can't agree that without smart watches, smart phones are a highly efficient way to stay connected and get info? I just find it odd how the pitches for these smart watches try and make smartphones sound cumbersome all of a sudden.

The experience of getting your notifications, paying at the register, opening your hotel room, etc., can all be made better by your smart watch. That's the point. It isn't just about doing something that can't happen otherwise, but doing it in a way that is significant to a sustainable portion of the smartphone customer base.

The iPod didn't invent digital music players, but improved the experience enough to be a hit. Smart watches are a (not as big, imo) development in that nature. iPad doesn't do anything you can't do on your phone/computer, but it does it better for enough of the market that it sells hundreds of millions.
 
The experience of getting your notifications, paying at the register, opening your hotel room, etc., can all be made better by your smart watch. That's the point. It isn't just about doing something that can't happen otherwise, but doing it in a way that is significant to a sustainable portion of the smartphone customer base.

The iPod didn't invent digital music players, but improved the experience enough to be a hit. Smart watches are a (not as big, imo) development in that nature. iPad doesn't do anything you can't do on your phone/computer, but it does it better for enough of the market that it sells hundreds of millions.
The iPad feels like the opposite. It's a more cumbersome device that does more and does it better. The Apple watch does less and not as well, but it's size makes it more convenient. i wonder if they'll ever be able to make a watch that can fully operate independently. Maybe these smart watch concepts are ahead of their time when it comes to hardware and battery technology. It will be interesting to see how much better they can be in 10 years.
 
The iPad feels like the opposite. It's a more cumbersome device that does more and does it better. The Apple watch does less and not as well, but it's size makes it more convenient. i wonder if they'll ever be able to make a watch that can fully operate independently. Maybe these smart watch concepts are ahead of their time when it comes to hardware and battery technology. It will be interesting to see how much better they can be in 10 years.
I think you're off, likely projecting your own ideas onto the actual market unrealistically. The complaints with iPad have always been that it's a "big iPhone without the phone," and "not as capable as laptops." The watch is doing its tasks well AND more conveniently. And why would you want an independent watch? How would that be better than one synced to a phone? That would take separate LTE radio (at the cost of battery), data plans, and would mean it would have to manage for email and such. There's a lot of reasons why independent smart watches are a rare item in Asia only, and the paired smart watch is taking front and center.
 
Apple Watch has a diagnostic port:

The reason I ask is that the Apple Watch has a port that the company has yet to show off. It’s being used for diagnostics and direct access to the Watch operating system, but it’s feasible that could be used to connect accessories in the future.

The port has a 6-dot brass contact array inside the groove for the ‘bottom’ strap connector slot. Several sources have confirmed its existence and placement to me. It is very similar to the connector for the Lightning connector in iPhones, as that connector currently only uses 6 of its 8 available pins. Apple recently began opening up the Lightning port for use by third parties. A source says that this port is currently for diagnostic purposes only — but that there is nothing preventing it from being a connection port for future accessories.

Let’s get this out of the way: As far as I know, smart bands will not be a part of the first Apple Watch version.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/05/would-you-buy-a-smart-band-for-an-apple-watch/
 
I think you're off, likely projecting your own ideas onto the actual market unrealistically. The complaints with iPad have always been that it's a "big iPhone without the phone," and "not as capable as laptops." The watch is doing its tasks well AND more conveniently. And why would you want an independent watch? How would that be better than one synced to a phone? That would take separate LTE radio (at the cost of battery), data plans, and would mean it would have to manage for email and such. There's a lot of reasons why independent smart watches are a rare item in Asia only, and the paired smart watch is taking front and center.

I don't mean for it to do literally everything independently as far as needing. I mean more on the app side. GPS is definitely something that would be nice if it could do independently, for example.

And I don't know how you can say the Apple Watch will do as good or better of a job than the iPhone as far as tasks actually go. Writing messages is better on a phone. Reading is better on a phone. These things are simply better on the phone. But having it on your wrist ready right away is a convenience that can trump the superior large screen. The same logic can work with an iPad in reverse. And the iPad has been a wild success, so I think it makes sense that a lot of people are willing to eat the more cumbersome size compared to a phone to do more and do it better.
 
The man behind the Apple Watch | Financial Times
"One of the things that struck me,” says Ive, “was how often I’d look at my watch and have to look again quite soon afterwards, because I hadn’t actually comprehended what the time was. If I had looked at something on my phone, because of the investment involved in taking it out of my pocket or my bag, I would certainly pay attention. I quite like this sense of almost being careless and just glancing. I think for certain things the wrist is the perfect place for this technology.”

...

“We didn’t want the packaging to be a sort of shorthand for value, where the box needs to be big and we have to include expensive materials. We’ve always liked the idea that if we are heavy in our thinking, we can be much lighter in the implementation. So there’s huge virtue, I think, in keeping the packaging small: at least, it is the right choice environmentally, it’s easier to move things around and you don’t end up with your wardrobes full of large watch boxes that you don’t use.” Thus, the box of the top-of-the‑range watch is aniline-dyed leather on the outside and a “sort of ultra- suede on the inside” – so far, so conventional, but there is a connector at the back that turns it into a charging dock when the watch snaps into place thanks to magnetic technology. “I like the idea that it’s all part of one experience, it’s all part of how we feel about something, and that each of these elements can play a positive and interesting role.”

Nothing escapes this forensic level of thinking. Nothing is left to chance. Nothing goes uncalculated and untested. Before I leave, Ive holds up the watch’s white outer box. Almost imperceptibly, the bottom begins to move, obeying the law of gravity that pulls it away from its other half. It is graceful, calming… and far from accidental. “We work out what we feel is the optimum time for it to drop and then we back off that and work on the tolerances, and even work on the friction of the materials we use. I mean, that’s fanaticism,” he says, with a little smile.
 
I wonder if the non-Edition boxes will double as charging docks. I'm guessing no since they'll likely be made of paper/board.
 
I still don't understand the difference between Watch, Watch Sport and Watch Edition. Can someone please explain that to me? Is it just the material difference? Or technical difference as well? And what are the price points of each?

So confused. X_X
 
I'm getting this for my mum. She keeps her phone in her purse and always misses calls and texts.

She will be a great guinea pig.

people in here yelling "watches are dead, we got cellphones anyways" often forget that there's people (mostly girls) who put their phones in their bags. If my girlfriend wants to know the time, she might just check the microwave before she even figures out where she put her phone. "phone-in-pocket" isn't as common of a default as some think it is.

I still don't understand the difference between Watch, Watch Sport and Watch Edition. Can someone please explain that to me? Is it just the material difference? Or technical difference as well? And what are the price points of each?

So confused. X_X

i do believe it's entirely material difference. The sports watch is supposedly the cheapest and seems to use ever so slightly weaker glass?
functionally, they all should be the same.

price points are rumored to be at ~300-350 for the sport, ~500-600 for the regular and ~1000+ for the gold edition.
since there's no differences in capacity or connectivity, the only other part that factors into pricing would be the band you choose.
 
I still don't understand the difference between Watch, Watch Sport and Watch Edition. Can someone please explain that to me? Is it just the material difference? Or technical difference as well? And what are the price points of each?

So confused. X_X

I think it's just material difference.

We don't know the price points beyond the base of $350 USD.
 
I still don't understand the difference between Watch, Watch Sport and Watch Edition. Can someone please explain that to me? Is it just the material difference? Or technical difference as well? And what are the price points of each?

So confused. X_X

The performance of all three is identical, the difference is only in the materials used. The Sport's body is made from Aluminium, the regular uses Stainless Steel with a Sapphire display, and the Edition is Gold. We only know the starting price of the Sport line, $349.

Wow $349 for the sapphire display steel edition too! And confirmed with apple by macrumors.

Confirmed to be incorrect? :P

MacRumors said:
Update: Apple has confirmed to MacRumors that FT's statement regarding both aluminum and stainless steel versions starting at $349 is incorrect.
 
I still don't understand the difference between Watch, Watch Sport and Watch Edition. Can someone please explain that to me? Is it just the material difference? Or technical difference as well? And what are the price points of each?

So confused. X_X

The only price we know is the base price of $349 and that is likely for the 38mm Sport version with rubber strap. There is also a larger 42mm size.

Watch - made of stainless steel either polished or black coated
Sport - made of aluminium
Edition - made of gold, rose or yellow

It's purely aesthetics.
 
So do the watches came with a band, or are they purchased separately?

since it would be pointless to buy them without a band, i do believe each comes with the basic, yet fitting band included.

e.g. rubber band in color of choice with your sports watch
a choice of either basic leather or steel band with polished steel watch
no idea what kind of band with the gold one. Most likely a leather band in the color of choice with golden clasps?
 
Nothing escapes this forensic level of thinking. Nothing is left to chance. Nothing goes uncalculated and untested. Before I leave, Ive holds up the watch’s white outer box. Almost imperceptibly, the bottom begins to move, obeying the law of gravity that pulls it away from its other half. It is graceful, calming… and far from accidental. “We work out what we feel is the optimum time for it to drop and then we back off that and work on the tolerances, and even work on the friction of the materials we use. I mean, that’s fanaticism,” he says, with a little smile.

Well now I know why I kept playing with my iPhone box.
 
The regular watch won't be 350. Apple confirmed that to be incorrect.

It's not all aesthetics. The sport doesn't have a sapphire crystal.

Or a ceramic back.

Oh ok, you can add that to the differences then, but those are still mainly aesthetic to me.

At least they are with regular watches, sometimes I want a sapphire crystal, sometimes I want ceramic. They provide different looks. I realize though they have their own pro/cons as far as durability.
 
since it would be pointless to buy them without a band, i do believe each comes with the basic, yet fitting band included.

e.g. rubber band in color of choice with your sports watch
a choice of either basic leather or steel band with polished steel watch
no idea what kind of band with the gold one. Most likely a leather band in the color of choice with golden clasps?

It seems like the Body/Band combinations will be the ones laid out on the Apple Watch site here: http://www.apple.com/watch/gallery/
 
It's the regular for me if that's the case.

I don't understand why that would be the case though.

Financial Times said:
"He runs through the three ranges of Apple Watch with their different materials – the stainless-steel Apple Watch, the anodised-aluminium Apple Watch Sport (both from $349) and the Apple Watch Edition in 18ct yellow or rose gold (with an as yet unconfirmed price of around $4,500)."

Right?
 
since it would be pointless to buy them without a band, i do believe each comes with the basic, yet fitting band included.

e.g. rubber band in color of choice with your sports watch
a choice of either basic leather or steel band with polished steel watch
no idea what kind of band with the gold one. Most likely a leather band in the color of choice with golden clasps?

http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-edition/

Check it. The collections, i.e. which combos you can choose to buy, are actually already shown on the website (although of course subject to the changes). 10 for the Sport, 18 for the stainless steel, and 6 for the gold ones.

One of the configurations for the gold one is actually with a sport band... and it doesn't look half bad!

Wonder if they'll have a BTO option besides this though.
 
It seems like the Body/Band combinations will be the ones laid out on the Apple Watch site here: http://www.apple.com/watch/gallery/

yes and no.

Obviously you can mix and match as you please, but i don't think they'll be using the rubber band as a baseline for the steel edition watch, only to make you pay more for a "proper watchband"

i would believe the steel comes pre-configured with either of these bands, with no added price.
watch_stone_leather_large_2x.jpg

watch_black_classic_large_2x.jpg

and you can configure it to come with the milanese chain link band or some fancier leather band for an extra.


http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-edition/

Check it. The collections, i.e. which combos you can choose to buy, are actually already shown on the website (although of course subject to the changes). 10 for the Sport, 18 for the stainless steel, and 6 for the gold ones.

One of the configurations for the gold one is actually with a sport band... and it doesn't look half bad!

Wonder if they'll have a BTO option besides this though.


these are clearly just possible combinations. there's no pre-made "steel watch+rubberband+mickeymouse watchface by default" edition. These are just inspirations.
I am entirely sure you can configure it to come BTO with the band of your choice, and there'll be a matching default band for each watch price tier.
no way they're gonna bundle the steel edition with the rubber band. those don't go well together, at all.
or even worse:

that's no pre-made configuration, that's just a "see, you can even mix and match the crazy gold version with the cheapo plastic strap."
 
Ah damns.

Well, sticking with Sport then.

i find the matte body the most visually pleasing anyways. The other one's are just too "loud" visually and i'd be afraid of scuffing them.

the matte version looks very ... forgiving.
black sports watch + black band would be most low-key and yet most attractive to me.
 
There's zero chance the regular (metal) is the same price as the Sport. The Sport is confirmed to be $350, and I imagine the regular will be $500+. Even Pebble charges a $100 markup for the Steel version.
 
yes and no.

Obviously you can mix and match as you please, but i don't think they'll be using the rubber band as a baseline for the steel edition watch, only to make you pay more for a "proper watchband"

i would believe the steel comes pre-configured with either of these bands, with no added price.


and you can configure it to come with the milanese chain link band or some fancier leather band for an extra.





these are clearly just possible combinations. there's no pre-made "steel watch+rubberband+mickeymouse watchface by default" edition. These are just inspirations.
I am entirely sure you can configure it to come BTO with the band of your choice, and there'll be a matching default band for each watch price tier.
no way they're gonna bundle the steel edition with the rubber band. those don't go well together, at all.
or even worse:


that's no pre-made configuration, that's just a "see, you can even mix and match the crazy gold version with the cheapo plastic strap."
I believe you are wrong.

There would be no reason not to show the Sport model with any other strap rather than the sport one then.

Or the black aluminum with any strap other than with the black sport, or the black stainless steel other than with the black link bracelet.

And if you pay attention, the gold one with the black sport strap has the strap customised to match the gold of the body.

These things are never accidental with Apple.

And with wordings such as "View all 18 models in the collection." it doesn't leave much room for imagination either. It's not the same as saying "view some of the possible combinations".

At best we can expect some of the collections to change, or for them to have a BTO online programme in some markets. Not more than that if I'm honest.
 
I believe you are wrong.

There would be no reason not to show the Sport model with any other strap rather than the sport one then.

Or the black aluminum with any strap other than with the black sport, or the black stainless steel other than with the black link bracelet.

And if you pay attention, the gold one with the black sport strap has the strap customised to match the gold of the body.

These things are never accidental with Apple.

And with wordings such as "View all 18 models in the collection." it doesn't leave much room for imagination either. It's not the same as saying "view some of the possible combinations".

At best we can expect some of the collections to change, or for them to have a BTO online programme in some markets. Not more than that if I'm honest.

How many skus do you expect there to realistically be with all the potential watch/strap combinations?

To be honest though, my theory for the amount skus isn't too far off from 18. I was thinking four skus for each edition. Two strap types split amount the sizes for each model. So four sport skus with two for the 38mm and two for the 42mm. That would make 12 skus altogether.

The again, the Edition version may not even come with a strap since, at that point, the people paying for it are going to insist on paying extra for the strap of their choice.

I am talking out of my ass on this. I really don't have a clue.
 
I would argue that stainless steel is not purely cosmetic. It's more durable and impact resistant compared to aluminum, as far as I know. But the trade off is weight. Aluminum has a very good weight to strength ratio.
 
How many skus do you expect there to realistically be with all the potential watch/strap combinations?

To be honest though, my theory for the amount skus isn't too far off from 18. I was thinking four skus for each edition. Two strap types split amount the sizes for each model. So four sport skus with two for the 38mm and two for the 42mm. That would make 12 skus altogether.

The again, the Edition version may not even come with a strap since, at that point, the people paying for it are going to insist on paying extra for the strap of their choice.

I am talking out of my ass on this. I really don't have a clue.

I think it's safe to say the Edition will come with a strap since, if you look closely, the color of the digital crown on the Edition models actually matches the straps. That also lends credence to the idea that the combinations in the gallery are the ones they'll be shipping.
 
people in here yelling "watches are dead, we got cellphones anyways" often forget that there's people (mostly girls) who put their phones in their bags. If my girlfriend wants to know the time, she might just check the microwave before she even figures out where she put her phone. "phone-in-pocket" isn't as common of a default as some think it is.

Also if I have a watch handling notifications, call screening and even basic replies/reminders via siri/ok google, then I'm more likely to buy a larger smartphone which might need to go in my jacket pocket or backpack, because I no longer need to keep it somewhere instantly accessible, and I can benefit from the larger screen for active use
 
How many skus do you expect there to realistically be with all the potential watch/strap combinations?

To be honest though, my theory for the amount skus isn't too far off from 18. I was thinking four skus for each edition. Two strap types split amount the sizes for each model. So four sport skus with two for the 38mm and two for the 42mm. That would make 12 skus altogether.

The again, the Edition version may not even come with a strap since, at that point, the people paying for it are going to insist on paying extra for the strap of their choice.

I am talking out of my ass on this. I really don't have a clue.
I'm gonna go with I'm what I'm feeling from Apple's website:

10 Watch Sport SKUs

18 Watch SKUs

6 Edition SKUs

Total of 34 SKUs, which seems a lot, but there are 12 body types alone. 3 materials x 2 sizes x 2 colours.

And not all SKUs will be shipped to all stores. The Edition will never see the insides of most retailers.

And I think that even an Edition has to be able to, say, be a nice gift. It has to be ready to but put on your wrist. I don't think Apple will cheap out on that. The strap will be paid over and over again to hell and back with the markup on those babies anyway, and the whole experience thing can't be compromised.
 
You're reaching. If it was such a dead lame idea, it wouldn't be a growing market having billions spent on it. Checking my watch is far more efficient than pulling out a phone, especially if I have something in my hands or am in a conversation. I appreciate the function of a watch, and a smart watch increases the number of functions dramatically. It's an obvious convenience and subtlety that is brought by a smart watch. You can be one of those people who claims you don't need a watch since you have a phone, but that doesn't do anything for me who doesn't care to see someone with their phone out on the table while we are talking in a meeting or having to reach in my pocket which is a bigger motion and maneuver than checking your wrist, no matter how much you downplay the convenience.

He's not the one reaching here... You talking about being "more efficient" as if this watch relieves people of some great burden. It saves, what, 4 seconds? 7? And does that increase in efficiency make up for having to wear something that looks significantly worse than a "real" watch? Of course that's subjective.

I hope it does well and satisfies a real need for some folks. Seems to me a gimmick mostly at this point.
 
The Edition still makes no sense to me value-wise.
I understand 4 figure traditional watches, I own a couple. But don't understand how it can be worthwhile for a small electronic device. It's not something you'd own for a generation or longer. I guess in this case it really is a status symbol in the truest definition of the world, but one I'd respect a lot less than others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom