How many are getting an Apple watch?

[Mopetar]

Just the fact that the form factor (square screen) already looks dated concerns me.

I think we'll start seeing more square screens, not because Apple did it and it's the way or anything like that, but because outside of displaying a clock, a circular screen isn't terribly useful for what we typically do with a computer.

You can flow text to fit the odd shape, which isn't a huge deal, but for a lot of things it flies in the face of most interface design and you end up treating most of the pixels as though they didn't exist in order to better frame most of the information. Inscribe a square in the circular screen and that's typically what you'll use for a lot of applications.

There are certainly some applications where it doesn't matter all that much such as maps where you can never display all of the information in the space available so who cares what shape you capture the representation in, and others where a circle wins out hands down such as displaying the time, but most of the smart features of a smart watch work better on a rectangular display as that's what developers collectively have a lot of experience working with.

Even the Moto 360 realized that the full circle wasn't worth that much and chopped off a bit of the bottom. That's how little those pixels were worth. They could have lopped off the top and sides as well and what would have really been lost?

Yeah, a square watch does looks a lot less elegant than a circle, but these aren't watches. They're smart watches. While Apple is trying to market them as luxury watches to some degree as well, the most important part is that they add value over a regular watch. I think that the battery limitations and other shortcomings make the whole product category a bit ahead of its time, but if these are going to be the future, or even going to try to be the future, they'll need to be able to be able to provide as much information as possible, which favors a rectangular screen.

 

[Crono]

A good number of you who voted "no" will be converting to "yes" when the watch is released, or soon thereafter.

This is like the first generation iPad where the majority of people either balked at the idea of the iPad ("it's just a giant iPhone!") or just said they didn't want one or it wasn't for them... but then when people started seeing them in the wild and got to play with and test out a friend's one, it became pretty popular.

That said, I'm not likely to buy one or any other smartwatch anytime soon because I feel this entire generation of smartwatches isn't exactly what I want. I would much prefer a band that has a thin, flexible screen to take up the width of the band. Not a square or round housing with a band. Something that could support a bunch of widgets and not just the space for a notification or a little mini app, and would have at least 18 hours of battery life. I did for a short amount of time consider getting a Microsoft Band for the fitness tracking applications, but ended up deciding I had higher priorities for the money.

The hardware isn't there yet for what I really want, or at least not at an affordable price - yet. What I want is probably 2 to 4 years down the road. I am sure I would be disappointed in anything available now, much as I was disappointed in the earliest affordable mp3 players.

The Apple Watch won't sell like the iPhone because of the price and lack of carrier subsidies that at least in the U..S. make it easier for consumers to buy expensive phones, but Apple is going to do well with the product. The Android Wear watches will offer a good amount of competition eventually, but I think right now it's Apple that will get the attention and drive smartwatch sales the most because of the size of their customer base, integration of devices throughout their ecosystem, and because the Apple Watch does have some notable features (like taptic feedback) and a decent UI that works well enough for that form factor. The Moto 360 may be equally as good or even better overall (I don't know from personal experience) but it certainly wasn't/isn't selling like an Apple product.

The existing and potential health and fitness applications alone for smartwatches will guarantee the success of this nascent category. Even if it is more niche and expensive right now than most people would like, it only needs to survive a generation or two before prices come down and the technology and sensors improve to make them invaluable for people looking to maintain or improve their healh. Apple is positioned well enough with their watch that I think they will be competitive for a while, if not dominant.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Yeah, a square watch does looks a lot less elegant than a circle, but these aren't watches. They're smart watches.

I kinda agree with you. I have a square watch partially because I anticipated ports of Apple Watch apps that are made for a square. Plus it was cheaper.

With that said, the round screen is superior. All that wasted space does serve a purpose- it allows you to see the background that gives the form factor some of it's charm. I have seen the 360 up close a lot, and all that wasted space on the edge is not wasted- it is filled with the face of the person you are messaging, or it is filled with the cute backgrounds Google has made. To get the same effect on my square watch I have to use a very small clock or all the watch face is filled with text which is kinda ugly.

The watch isn't its own device, how functional it is by itself is minimally important. The point is to be a second screen, and allow the important things and people in your life to rise above the din that is a smartphone's notification system in a way that brings some personality to your wrist.

The square screen just gets cluttered like a tablet or a smartphone screen with every mm demanding you touch or read it. Then it becomes more of a third device and less of a second screen which loses the appeal.

I want a round one one day, but I will wait and make sure I am not going to miss some killer ported app first.

 

[pcgeek11]

I would rather have a sundial made from a bucket of sand and a stick.

 

[Commodus]

I'm torn on whether circular or rectangular is best.

Circular looks cool, of course, and it's familiar. However, rectangular is really best at showing digital content -- it's a bit frustrating to only see a little piece of text and have to scroll down more often to see everything.

Part of the problem with a lot of square smartwatches is that... well, few of the attempts so far have made many attempts at being stylish. About the only exception on the market right now is the Zenwatch. I'm not sure that the Apple Watch has nailed it (I'd like to see one in person), but it's a definite step up. That and the interface is designed to take advantage of OLED's deep blacks so that the interface blends into the watch rather than standing out.

 

[Zaap]

This is like the first generation iPad where the majority of people either balked at the idea of the iPad ("it's just a giant iPhone!") or just said they didn't want one or it wasn't for them... but then when people started seeing them in the wild and got to play with and test out a friend's one, it became pretty popular.

No offense but I always read these "people did the same thing when the first x was released..." tales that IMO bear little resemblance to reality.

I don't recall any great number of people steadfastly against the iPad. People were already used to devices like the iPod Touch and the iPhone and wanting the same type of device bigger was a common desire of many that had them. (I remember one of my first thoughts when I got my first iPod Touch was "Man, I want this thing in a bigger size!")

I agree that nobody knew just how huge the iPad (and touch-screen tablets in general) were going to become, but I don't recall any 'majority' of people balking at the whole idea.

Meanwhile, watches are nothing new. Smart watches aren't even anything new. (Even me, at first a big poo-poo'er of the whole idea- wearing a Galaxy Gear Fit for half a year now). People have a pretty good gauge of wanting a watch on their wrist or not, and what seems outdated vs. futuristic.

I personally don't find Apple's watch all the appealing because it seems like such a "me too, me too!" thing at this point, and usually Apple doesn't do me-too, me-too.

Yeah sure, I know it's more than just an iPod Nano strapped to a wrist- but still I feel like I've seen it before. I can already see it feeling clunky and bulky with first gen owners going "ugh, I *REALLY* was wearing that around??!" when compared its next iterations.

That said, I think Apple will sell a lot of them.

 

[bigboxes]

I don't recall any great number of people steadfastly against the iPad.

No offense, but your memory is faulty. We all laughed when the iPad came out. Unless you were an Apple fanboy one was usually critical of gimmick devices that weren't really productive. Still aren't that much. Among techies we were all stuck on our massive desktops ans scoffed at why anyone would want such a crippled device. Years later and they still aren't that "productive", but niche they aren't as the masses have adopted them en mass. I bought my first tablet this last June, an Android and rooted it in a few days.

Long story short, we all made fun of Apple at the time for putting out such crap.

 

[Crono]

No offense but I always read these "people did the same thing when the first x was released..." tales that IMO bear little resemblance to reality.

I don't recall any great number of people steadfastly against the iPad. People were already used to devices like the iPod Touch and the iPhone and wanting the same type of device bigger was a common desire of many that had them. (I remember one of my first thoughts when I got my first iPod Touch was "Man, I want this thing in a bigger size!")

Enjoy

Not everyone thought it was silly at the time, but many people did. Enough that I distinctly remember a lot of friends, family members, coworkers, etc thinking I was dumb for being excited about it before launch, and for getting one the week it launched. Yes, the iPad was better later on with the 2 and later generations, but it also had no multitouch tablet competitors (at least no good ones) at the time, so to me it was worth it (and I sold mine a few months later for not much less than what I paid for it).

There's a strong case to be made for waiting on the second, third, or even fourth generation of any product from a large technology company, though. Anyone who argued that in that thread (or for other products, like the Surface Pro) time has proven to be the most sensible. But it's certainly fun to be an early adopter if you don't mind the potential pitfalls.

I might have considered getting an Apple Watch if it worked with Android or Windows Phone, because I don't have an iPhone (only Apple product I currently have is an iPad Mini 2). The LG and Motorola smartwatches are more tempting to me because of that, but I probably really will wait a year or two before getting a smartwatch.

 

[Young Grasshopper]

A good number of you who voted "no" will be converting to "yes" when the watch is released, or soon thereafter.

This is like the first generation iPad where the majority of people either balked at the idea of the iPad ("it's just a giant iPhone!") or just said they didn't want one or it wasn't for them... but then when people started seeing them in the wild and got to play with and test out a friend's one, it became pretty popular.

That said, I'm not likely to buy one or any other smartwatch anytime soon because I feel this entire generation of smartwatches isn't exactly what I want. I would much prefer a band that has a thin, flexible screen to take up the width of the band. Not a square or round housing with a band. Something that could support a bunch of widgets and not just the space for a notification or a little mini app, and would have at least 18 hours of battery life. I did for a short amount of time consider getting a Microsoft Band for the fitness tracking applications, but ended up deciding I had higher priorities for the money.

The hardware isn't there yet for what I really want, or at least not at an affordable price - yet. What I want is probably 2 to 4 years down the road. I am sure I would be disappointed in anything available now, much as I was disappointed in the earliest affordable mp3 players.

The Apple Watch won't sell like the iPhone because of the price and lack of carrier subsidies that at least in the U..S. make it easier for consumers to buy expensive phones, but Apple is going to do well with the product. The Android Wear watches will offer a good amount of competition eventually, but I think right now it's Apple that will get the attention and drive smartwatch sales the most because of the size of their customer base, integration of devices throughout their ecosystem, and because the Apple Watch does have some notable features (like taptic feedback) and a decent UI that works well enough for that form factor. The Moto 360 may be equally as good or even better overall (I don't know from personal experience) but it certainly wasn't/isn't selling like an Apple product.

The existing and potential health and fitness applications alone for smartwatches will guarantee the success of this nascent category. Even if it is more niche and expensive right now than most people would like, it only needs to survive a generation or two before prices come down and the technology and sensors improve to make them invaluable for people looking to maintain or improve their healh. Apple is positioned well enough with their watch that I think they will be competitive for a while, if not dominant.

The difference between the IPad and the watch is the IPad was/is a device that can replace a laptop or desktop for many people who just use either device for casual use(gaming, web browsing, social media, etc...).

What is exactly does the watch replace? Nothing at all, in fact you need to have your IPhone with you to use it.

Secondly I didn't see anything in that presentation that show'd something the watch can do that the IPhone can't. Actually there was one thing, sending your heartbeat to someone, how useful -_-

Then theres the gold watch, which comes with a strap made of rubber that shares the same internal components as a $350 watch, and its made in China, all for 10k -_-

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

No offense, but your memory is faulty. We all laughed when the iPad came out. Unless you were an Apple fanboy one was usually critical of gimmick devices that weren't really productive. Still aren't that much. Among techies we were all stuck on our massive desktops ans scoffed at why anyone would want such a crippled device. Years later and they still aren't that "productive", but niche they aren't as the masses have adopted them en mass. I bought my first tablet this last June, an Android and rooted it in a few days.

Long story short, we all made fun of Apple at the time for putting out such crap.

I had an iPod Touch and Motorola Droid when the iPad was announced. I laughed at it. By the time the Gen 2 iPad came out and I was playing around on Flipboard, I was convinced there's a use for tablets.

If money was no object, I probably would get an iPad Air 2 today. I definitely remember this image being circulated around:

 

[sbpromania]

I won't buy one, for the simple reason that I don't own an iPhone. Also, I don't like square faced watches.

As a personal note, I don't see how the iWatch could succeed, but I've heard that about Apple products before...

 

[Bunlee]

nope! i'd rather buy pebble or moto 360

 

[nace186]

I have every generation of the iPhone, and I won't buy the watch.

Also, I never bought an iPad and don't see the usage for it.

 

[ChronoReverse]

It seems to me that as a visible indicator of wealth, the Apple Watch should do amazingly well. I don't understand why "appreciate in value" and "pass down generations" is being brought up here when having the watch depreciate quickly only means that having the latest model is even greater prestige.

As for the technology of the watch itself, it will probably need a couple generations to reach full potential but it could be quite amazing if some app developer comes up with a killer app.

 

[dullard]

So no 'digital crown', 'force tapping', pinching or swiping then?

Why would you want to do any of that in situations like I mentioned? It isn't like you'll be opening up other applications and scrolling while you are working on your car / in a meeting / mountain climbing / etc. No, you'll have the watch set to whatever you need before hand you glance briefly at it as you choose.

You aren't going to suddenly need to switch from meeting reminder mode to cookbook recipe mode in the middle of the meeting. You aren't going to suddenly need to go from health tracker mode to office meeting mode at the gym. Etc.

Sure you have advanced controls available when you have the opportunity to use them. But the beauty of the wearable category is that you don't HAVE to use them when you CAN'T use them.

 

[WelshBloke]

It seems to me that as a visible indicator of wealth, the Apple Watch should do amazingly well. I don't understand why "appreciate in value" and "pass down generations" is being brought up here when having the watch depreciate quickly only means that having the latest model is even greater prestige.

Because those are the things that make premium watches premium. Premium watches are works of mechanical and aesthetic art, and those are what Apple keeps bringing up with regards its new offering. The gold Apple watch is exactly the same as the cheap Apple watch except covered in gold.

A Honda Civic doesnt suddenly become a Ferrari just because you add a few ounces of gold to it.

 

[WelshBloke]

Why would you want to do any of that in situations like I mentioned? It isn't like you'll be opening up other applications and scrolling while you are working on your car / in a meeting / mountain climbing / etc. No, you'll have the watch set to whatever you need before hand you glance briefly at it as you choose.

You aren't going to suddenly need to switch from meeting reminder mode to cookbook recipe mode in the middle of the meeting. You aren't going to suddenly need to go from health tracker mode to office meeting mode at the gym. Etc.

Sure you have advanced controls available when you have the opportunity to use them. But the beauty of the wearable category is that you don't HAVE to use them when you CAN'T use them.

So whats the point in wearing it if the only time you can really use it is in a situation where you could also use your phone?

 

[midwestfisherman]

Nope!

 

[Midwayman]

Because those are the things that make premium watches premium. Premium watches are works of mechanical and aesthetic art, and those are what Apple keeps bringing up with regards its new offering. The gold Apple watch is exactly the same as the cheap Apple watch except covered in gold.

A Honda Civic doesnt suddenly become a Ferrari just because you add a few ounces of gold to it.

Its pretty enough in a simplistic way, but its no Patek Phillipe for sure.

 

[ChronoReverse]

Because those are the things that make premium watches premium. Premium watches are works of mechanical and aesthetic art, and those are what Apple keeps bringing up with regards its new offering. The gold Apple watch is exactly the same as the cheap Apple watch except covered in gold.

A Honda Civic doesnt suddenly become a Ferrari just because you add a few ounces of gold to it.

It might have been the case thus far, but I suspect things are going to change in ways that is going to be surprising to a lot of people. I don't have an interest in the Apple Watch or any wearable for that matter but some things aren't built on the same reasons things work on before.

 

[dullard]

So whats the point in wearing it if the only time you can really use it is in a situation where you could also use your phone?

I don't understand your mental block. You set your wearable to the program you want to see when you can't or shouldn't hassle with a device. Then when you can't grab your phone, you glance at the wearable. How hard is that to understand?

Do you have trouble remembering to pull down your pants before using the toilet? I hope not. You should pull down your pants BEFORE you use the toilet, not during the actual toilet event. Same thing with wearables, you set it to the program you need BEFORE you can't fuss with things, not during.

If you are in a meeting and need to know your incoming emails, set it to display incoming emails and notifications. Don't set it to the heath display mode or map mode and then go to the meeting.

If you are surfing in the ocean and need to know when that hurricane will hit, put it to weather mode then surf. Don't try to put it to meeting reminder mode then surf hoping that you can fumble with your phone/wearable in time to track the weather.

It isn't that hard.

 

[Imported]

I would not be surfing with it. Only rated IPX7.

 

[Zaap]

Enjoy

Not everyone thought it was silly at the time, but many people did. Enough that I distinctly remember a lot of friends, family members, coworkers, etc thinking I was dumb for being excited about it before launch, and for getting one the week it launched. Yes, the iPad was better later on with the 2 and later generations, but it also had no multitouch tablet competitors (at least no good ones) at the time, so to me it was worth it (and I sold mine a few months later for not much less than what I paid for it).

There's a strong case to be made for waiting on the second, third, or even fourth generation of any product from a large technology company, though. Anyone who argued that in that thread (or for other products, like the Surface Pro) time has proven to be the most sensible. But it's certainly fun to be an early adopter if you don't mind the potential pitfalls.

I might have considered getting an Apple Watch if it worked with Android or Windows Phone, because I don't have an iPhone (only Apple product I currently have is an iPad Mini 2). The LG and Motorola smartwatches are more tempting to me because of that, but I probably really will wait a year or two before getting a smartwatch.

Heh, that thread is a funny read.

Okay, fine, my memory is faulty! I *personally* don't recall all that many people scoffing at the original iPad (talking non-tech geeks- tech geeks scoff at EVERYTHING and aren't usually the best indicator of consumer trends- as evidenced by those predicting doom for Apple by releasing the most popular devices in history -iPods, iPhones, iPad, etc).

On contrary, I saw a lot of people that were intrigued by it right from the start, wanted to know more about it, wanted one and had some small idea of what they'd do with one. (Reading, web, playing games they already played on an iPod/iPhone, etc.)

Point is: I don't see any of the same enthusiasm for an Apple watch, other than it's just the latest 'new' thing from Apple. Watches don't excite people, and it's nothing new. It's following the crowd at this point.

 

[quikah]

Because those are the things that make premium watches premium. Premium watches are works of mechanical and aesthetic art, and those are what Apple keeps bringing up with regards its new offering. The gold Apple watch is exactly the same as the cheap Apple watch except covered in gold.

A Honda Civic doesnt suddenly become a Ferrari just because you add a few ounces of gold to it.

A gold Rolex is the same as a Stainless Steel Rolex, it just adds a few ounces of gold, yet they charge 10-20k more for it. Will it work for Apple? I have no idea.

 

[Papagayo]

I'm reading that the fakes are already out. They are only $27 at CES2015. Anyone have a link to buy one?
http://www.phonearena.com/news/This-Apple-Watch-knockoff-was-being-sold-at-CES-2015-for-27_id64607