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.
The low battery life, a requirement to have an iphone, and the ipx7 rating all kill it for me. If I can't swim or get messy with my watch what's the point?
Well tablets took a nose dive in 2014 and looks like it's on its way to do the same in 2015.
1) If the particular wearable can do multiple things at once, then why are you complaining that you have to use buttons, touch, and dials to get it to do different things?I'd hope that any smartwatch today cant just do one thing at a time. This "setting it to display emails" thing to the exclusion of everything else. I'm pretty sure thats not how it works.
what sort of case are you going to put it in for surfing?
1) If the particular wearable can do multiple things at once, then why are you complaining that you have to use buttons, touch, and dials to get it to do different things?
2) I'll wait for a true waterproof smartwatch. I don't use cases for anything. (None of these comments were related to just the iWatch).
Quite the opposite. I certainly can see some uses. But I don't see the uses worth the $350+ cost of entry, the need to have another device stuck on me, another battery to charge daily, and just another gadget to fidget with and worry about and be obsolete in a year or two.
That's my hangup.
Ok, that's a bit different from how I read your message, which was a rebuttal to a long list of use cases that dullard posited.
I want to get some type of wearable but the current generation isn't mature enough yet. Some type of flexible display would be awesome.
The Apple display is flexible.
At least according to GSM Arena.
Actually, somebody needs to create one specific app then I'll buy it in a heartbeat. They need to create an app where I can use the iWatch to find where my wife left her damn iPhone. I can't just call it and listen for the ring as she likes to leave it muted. So I figure they can have the iWatch app tell me "hotter...hotter..." as I get closer to it.
As many times a week I have to help search the house with her, $350 is a bargain.
Isnt there something like the Android device manager for Apple? You can use it to activate the ringer even if the phone is on mute.
Interesting read on why the high end Apple Watch Edition could have been priced even higher. The Apple Watch Edition is a classic Veblen product per the report which makes a lot of sense if you consider what the target market is for a $10k+ watch.
http://www.cultofmac.com/315099/17000-gold-apple-watch-might-be-too-cheap/
The key thing to remember is that 18-karat gold is not 100 percent gold. It's an alloy, or mixture. Three-quarters of its mass must be made up of gold. The last quarter is typically made up of another metallic element. But, as Dr. Drang wrote, "Apples gold is a metal matrix composite, not a standard alloy. Instead of mixing the gold with silver, copper, or other metals to make it harder, Apple is mixing it with low-density ceramic particles."
To put it another way, Apple is combining gold with durable materials that don't have much mass, but take up lots of space.
I guess I'm in the minority in this thread, but I've gone pretty rapidly from dismissing the Apple Watch, to considering it, to thinking I'll probably buy one, to now thinking I might order one as soon as they're available.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox..._trick_to_use_as_little_gold_as_possible.html
Looks like Apple is finding new ways to screw their *ahem* 'fans' again.
For my interests, the Microsoft band is the closest to what I want out of a wearable. It just needs another 2-3 revisions to polish and improve upon what is essentially a production prototype right now. It's wedged between a dumb fitness monitor band a fully functional smart watch. Plus it actually does... stuff.... without needing to be tied to your phone and is cross OS compatible.
Well tablets took a nose dive in 2014 and looks like it's on its way to do the same in 2015.