Apple Watch - I'm unimpressed

[stlcardinals]

I just noticed it, but the "Sport" models don't have Sapphire glass. Just the normal "ionized glass" that the phones use.

Not sure that anyone really cares about that...but something I found interesting.

On the Apple Watch - Sports page:

For Apple Watch, we created a new alloy — 7000 Series aluminum — that’s 60 percent stronger than standard alloys. Yet it’s very light. Together with the Ion-X glass covering the display, it makes the Sport collection watches up to 30 percent lighter than our stainless steel models.

 

[vi edit]

Yeah, and of that 30% weight reduction, 95% of that comes from going aluminum over stainless.

 

[Eug]

we created a new alloy — 7000 Series aluminum

7000 series aluminum alloys have been around for just about forever. What, did they change the zinc proportion by 0.1% or something? Geez.

 

[GWestphal]

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

watch the film where Ive talks about it. Sounds so pretentious and full of his own crap that I want to puke, and I own all apple products! It has become apparent that Jobs was the key to that duo and Ive is a no talent hanger on.

Apple went from a winning system, a few products with flawless design to a losing proposition with a bad design with many different skus of the same thing with superficial differences, they are basically android fragmenting themselves.

Jobs would never have let this thing see the light of day, that much I can assure you. Apple needs to get back on track or the empire will fall.

 

[finbarqs]

I just hate the fact that you need your iphone with this watch. Why am I going to run with this watch and iphone? That's a pain in the ass. If this thing can record your data without your phone, and be water proof (up to 30m) then we have something to go by here. I swim, I run, and I hate doing this with a phone in my pocket. Let alone, not being able to use my watch at all!

 

[dlock13]

I just hate the fact that you need your iphone with this watch. Why am I going to run with this watch and iphone? That's a pain in the ass. If this thing can record your data without your phone, and be water proof (up to 30m) then we have something to go by here. I swim, I run, and I hate doing this with a phone in my pocket. Let alone, not being able to use my watch at all!

Here's where I don't understand that:

Music. Control the music on your iPhone without taking it out of your pocket. And when you leave iPhone at home to go for a jog, listen to music directly on Apple Watch.

That makes it sound like the Watch will track your movements and allows you to store some music to stream to your BT headphones. Yes or no?

 

[GWestphal]

I think it means it has a speaker, but who knows judging buy how the share price tanked after they showed the watch, I hope they'd realize they have a newton on their hands if they don't make some serious changes.

 

[ControlD]

I just hate the fact that you need your iphone with this watch. Why am I going to run with this watch and iphone? That's a pain in the ass. If this thing can record your data without your phone, and be water proof (up to 30m) then we have something to go by here. I swim, I run, and I hate doing this with a phone in my pocket. Let alone, not being able to use my watch at all!

The thing is, you can already have a device that does exactly that for a lot less than $350. Fitness watches have been around for some time now. Again, the whole smart watch thing seems to be waiting on something to make it necessary.

 

[Red Storm]

The thing is, you can already have a device that does exactly that for a lot less than $350. Fitness watches have been around for some time now. Again, the whole smart watch thing seems to be waiting on something to make it necessary.

Smart watches are useful today, no waiting needed. If you get a large number of notifications every day (especially communication related such as email/text/chat) then a smart watch is very nice to have. Seems the only people I've seen knocking smart watches are those who don't actually have one (though some of them indeed don't need one at all).

 

[Eug]

Not that this really means anything, but I'm comparing my friend, family, and colleague reactions to the iPad and Apple Watch.

When the iPad came out, a lot of people were interested in it, but some weren't sure whether to jump in or not. The uber geeks weren't impressed, but a lot of the non-geeks were.

After the Apple Watch was announced, only a single real-world person I know has shown any interest in it, but he's a guy that buys basically every new device Apple releases (and gets a new iPhone every year). Everyone else (geek or non-geek) seems completely uninterested. Even my fashionista Apple fan sister is uninterested.

This is not scientific at all, but reinforces my belief that the Apple Watch will not be a major contributor to Apple's bottom line going forward.

 

[ControlD]

Smart watches are useful today, no waiting needed. If you get a large number of notifications every day (especially communication related such as email/text/chat) then a smart watch is very nice to have. Seems the only people I've seen knocking smart watches are those who don't actually have one (though some of them indeed don't need one at all).

Honestly I don't see that being even remotely useful, but that's just me I suppose. My phone is never more than a foot away from me. If I need to read some notifications they are already at my fingers.

 

[GWestphal]

They need to cut the thickness to 5-8mm or it's dead in the water. Which means they will probably need to develop an energy generating/harvesting system of some type. So, we're years off from a proper Apple Watch.

 

[Red Storm]

Honestly I don't see that being even remotely useful, but that's just me I suppose. My phone is never more than a foot away from me. If I need to read some notifications they are already at my fingers.

Unless you walk around all day with your phone literally in your hands, it's not already at your fingers. When I'm out walking and I get a notification, I just glance at my wrist. If I'm typing on a laptop I just glance down. If I'm driving I just turn my wrist and take a quick glance, rather than having to fetch my phone from my pocket (or cup holder or whatever). If my hands are full, again it's just a quick glance at my wrist, compared to juggling things trying to fish the phone out of my pocket. A smart watch is a lot more convenient, faster and efficient (and safer when driving). I didn't really get it until I actually used a Moto 360 for a day.

 

[ControlD]

Unless you walk around all day with your phone literally in your hands, it's not already at your fingers. When I'm out walking and I get a notification, I just glance at my wrist. If I'm typing on a laptop I just glance down. If I'm driving I just turn my wrist and take a quick glance, rather than having to fetch my phone from my pocket (or cup holder or whatever). If my hands are full, again it's just a quick glance at my wrist, compared to juggling things trying to fish the phone out of my pocket. A smart watch is a lot more convenient, faster and efficient (and safer when driving). I didn't really get it until I actually used a Moto 360 for a day.

I see your point. I can't imagine needing instant access to notifications, but if that is a requirement for someone then yes I can see the device being useful. Obviously I am not the target demographic for such a device (thank goodness).

 

[TheStu]

I think that Apple Watch + Apple Pay are a killer combination, that's genuinely better than a credit card, since it's already right there and I don't have to fish out my wallet or card.

BUT, at $350 it's too expensive, and I think it's too thick in its current iteration. If I could manage to get it for about half price, then I'd look into it, and I would consider a thinner one if it was $200.

The big feature that it would need is sleep tracking like my Jawbone has, but that may just be an app away.

 

[vi edit]

The big feature that it would need is sleep tracking like my Jawbone has, but that may just be an app away.

How would that work? I highly doubt these things can get more than 12-18 hours of battery life. So you wear it through the day and it's down on battery. Have to charge it when you get home. THen put it on through the night and it's down on battery again. Now you can't use it the next day.

Compared to a Jawbone band that goes almost 2 weeks between charges. Plus the fact that you've got a big lump on wrist at night.

Not feeling it.

 

[ControlD]

I think that Apple Watch + Apple Pay are a killer combination, that's genuinely better than a credit card, since it's already right there and I don't have to fish out my wallet or card.

BUT, at $350 it's too expensive, and I think it's too thick in its current iteration. If I could manage to get it for about half price, then I'd look into it, and I would consider a thinner one if it was $200.

The big feature that it would need is sleep tracking like my Jawbone has, but that may just be an app away.

Can't you use Apple Pay with your iPhone? Don't you already need to have your phone with you for the watch to work? How much harder is it to bump your phone on the reader than bumping a watch?

 

[Red Storm]

I see your point. I can't imagine needing instant access to notifications, but if that is a requirement for someone then yes I can see the device being useful. Obviously I am not the target demographic for such a device (thank goodness).

Oddly enough, by being more "connected" with the watch and having instant access to notifications, I was actually more disconnected from the physical phone, and it was nice. I was at my uncle's house the day I had the Moto 360 and we were all outside hanging out, playing badminton, soccer, tossing a football around, etc. The Moto 360 allowed me to be up to date with notifications, but also not be one of those "standing there staring at my phone" types. The watch decreased the amount of time spent staring into the digital world and kept me in the real world longer. So you get the benefits of constantly checking your phone (being up to date on notifications), without the negatives (constantly bringing your phone out, stuck staring down at a screen repeatedly, alienating yourself from social interaction by pulling out the phone, etc.).

Can't you use Apple Pay with your iPhone? Don't you already need to have your phone with you for the watch to work? How much harder is it to bump your phone on the reader than bumping a watch?

Taking your phone out and tapping it is really not very different than just pulling out your wallet and using the card. Your watch is already out and ready, just tapping your wrist on the terminal is much faster and more efficient. This is something Android Wear needs, it's the one and only compelling thing I saw from the Apple watch.

This smart watch period feels like when smartphones were gaining popularity and you had people asking why we needed smartphones. Do I have to have a smartphone? No, but it sure is more convenient and efficient compared to having a flip phone and a GPS, and only checking my email on the PC when I get home. For many people, they say they don't need technology until they actually try it out and realize the convenience it offers.

 

[ControlD]

Oddly enough, by being more "connected" with the watch and having instant access to notifications, I was actually more disconnected from the physical phone, and it was nice. I was at my uncle's house the day I had the Moto 360 and we were all outside hanging out, playing badminton, soccer, tossing a football around, etc. The Moto 360 allowed me to be up to date with notifications, but also not be one of those "standing there staring at my phone" types. The watch decreased the amount of time spent staring into the digital world and kept me in the real world longer. So you get the benefits of constantly checking your phone (being up to date on notifications), without the negatives (constantly bringing your phone out, stuck staring down at a screen repeatedly, alienating yourself from social interaction by pulling out the phone, etc.).

That is an interesting perspective on it. It would be cool to use one for a day to see what it's like.

I better stop reading now before I talk myself into wanting one.

 

[JavaMomma]

No overly impressed as well. I wonder how much of this soft-release was pressure from shareholders, board of directors on Tim Cook to get a new product out. What Steve Jobs would have done different than Tim Cook ... he'd have told investors to fvk off and he'll release what he's going to release when it's ready.

I watched the demo and there were a few that's cool moments. However, the product isn't what I expect from Apple, this is what I'd expect from Samsung or an Android provider. It's unpolished looking, big, chunky, the UI looks like a mess in some places and is essentially what I'd expect it to look like 1-2 years before the public should be seeing it.

I think it's hard for Apple to screw up the iPhone at this point, overall I was impressed with the evolutionary steps forward the iPhone 6 has taken. I think Apple Pay could be huge.

 

[TheStu]

Can't you use Apple Pay with your iPhone? Don't you already need to have your phone with you for the watch to work? How much harder is it to bump your phone on the reader than bumping a watch?

Taking your phone out and tapping it is really not very different than just pulling out your wallet and using the card. Your watch is already out and ready, just tapping your wrist on the terminal is much faster and more efficient. This is something Android Wear needs, it's the one and only compelling thing I saw from the Apple watch.

That was my point. If I am reaching into my pocket, then my phone is not significantly more convenient (only more secure) than just getting out my wallet and pulling out my card.

However, just reaching out my arm and tapping my watch on the scanner IS more convenient AND more secure.

 

[sm625]

They really need a way to switch off the display when you're not using it. But not totally off, just kind of dim it or whatnot. Ideally, it would be a amoled / e-ink hybrid. If you never touch your watch, it has to be able to last at least a few days. I can see it having less battery life if you interact with it a lot, or are using the biometric crap alot. But if you got that crap turned off and you're just looking at it a couple times an hour, then it has to be able to go into a super low power mode. Same with the cpu. It has to be a super low idle state where it only wakes up every 5-10 seconds to sync. And after a dozen or so uneventful syncs, it needs to go into an even deeper sleep where it only syncs every 30 seconds or something like that. There is a LOT of refinement that needs to be done. And by the time its all said and done there is no guarantee that apple will have an exclusive enough feature set to justify such a high price. This is a $50 market. The cpu needs to be low power. The screen needs to be low power. It is tethered to a smartphone anyway. There is just no way to carve out a $300 premium over the cost of the hardware required. Maybe if the screen was a $200 super high tech hybrid e-ink / amoled. But who actually thinks Apple spent more than $42 on this screen?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

They really need a way to switch off the display when you're not using it. But not totally off, just kind of dim it or whatnot. Ideally, it would be a amoled / e-ink hybrid. If you never touch your watch, it has to be able to last at least a few days. I can see it having less battery life if you interact with it a lot, or are using the biometric crap alot. But if you got that crap turned off and you're just looking at it a couple times an hour, then it has to be able to go into a super low power mode. Same with the cpu. It has to be a super low idle state where it only wakes up every 5-10 seconds to sync. And after a dozen or so uneventful syncs, it needs to go into an even deeper sleep where it only syncs every 30 seconds or something like that. There is a LOT of refinement that needs to be done. And by the time its all said and done there is no guarantee that apple will have an exclusive enough feature set to justify such a high price. This is a $50 market. The cpu needs to be low power. The screen needs to be low power. It is tethered to a smartphone anyway. There is just no way to carve out a $300 premium over the cost of the hardware required. Maybe if the screen was a $200 super high tech hybrid e-ink / amoled. But who actually thinks Apple spent more than $42 on this screen?

I gather that the screen does turn off after a period of inactivity, because at some point in the video they say that it wakes up when the wrist is lifted up to be viewed. I would expect the CPU does something similar. I don't know why you're presuming that they haven't worked through these issues.

 

[purbeast0]

definitely unimpressed with the watch. not just this one, but any smartwatch. i still do not get who the market is for these items. especially the fact that you need to have a phone with you for the smartwatch to even work.

 

[Michael]

http://www.ablogtowatch.com/how-screwed-watch-industry-thanks-apple-watch/

That is an article from a notable watch journalist. I have been reading that site for years. He likes the Apple Watch and some of his reasoning is pretty solid.

Michael