I'm hardly a luddite. I have a 24TB RAID server on a managed switch. There are seven computers in this house, one of which exists solely to tune my motorcycle. I use seven email addresses regularly and maintain a couple dozen more for special purposes. And I'm deeply entrenched in Apple's ecosystem: five of those computers are OEM Apple, one of them is a Hackintosh and one of them exists solely to tune my motorcycle. We've been on iPhones since 2008. My wife has an iPad. And up in the recesses where hard drives go, I have a Gen 1 iPod, Firewire port and all (but more on that in a minute).
And I like watches. Not a crazy amount - but when I was five I got one for my birthday (a date I share with the iPod, incidentally). That and the Swiss Army Knife i got at Christmas were my first two harbingers of adulthood. I haven't been without a watch since.
And the watches I like aren't exactly conventional.
I own two of these - an original World Watch and a Zulu in titanium and rose gold. They're fiddly. They have two batteries. I have to send them down to Bjorn, the company's sole proprietor, every year or so for tune-ups. And they're digital, which means real watch collectors look down their noses at them. But it tells me things I like to know and people often ask me about my watch. I once had a 15-minute conversation with Cee-Lo Green about watches, and he was wearing an Arctica.
So I kinda feel like I'm missing something on this Apple Watch.
But hey - I remember when the iPod came out. It was f'ing insane that anybody would pay double the price of an Archos Jukebox for half the storage. And "iTunes Music Store?" How clunky was that? Who the hell would pay for MP3s? My little Gen1 iPod was a gift from the same guy who gave me my Archos. He'd jettisoned the 10GB Jukebox for a 5GB iPod and then the 5GB iPod for a 10GB iPod and couldn't get enough of the stupid thing. I didn't really "get" the iPod until I'd used it for a day or so. And there are a whole bunch of people just going batshit over the Watch.
There are a whole bunch of people shitting all over it, too. Pando has been pointing out for several months now that the total market penetration of the wearables market is less than 3%, whatever that means. But then, Pando shits all over everything anyway. I think it's their mission statement. There were people who shit all over the iPod. There were people who shit all over the iPhone. There were people who shit all over the iPad.
So this isn't a "I want to shit all over the Watch" post. This isn't a "I want to jizz all over the Watch" post, either. This is a
Hey, we've got a lot of clever kids on here that are a lot hipper than me, maybe they can explain the allure of this device
post.
'cuz here's my perspective: I read about the Watch all day and it has me surfing eBay for vintage Omega Speedmasters. I read about Pay and it's got me realizing I need a new wallet (the leather kind). I look down at my wrist and feel naked 'cuz Bjorn has my Zulu and my dad has my Worldwatch and I'm waiting for it to get here so I can send 'em both in at once. And I realize that all that wonderful data that the Watch can give me... just isn't something I need.
And I run. Every day. And I've got seven email accounts on my phone. And I maintain 5 different Google calendars. But I just don't see why I need to spend $350 on a watch I have to charge every night just so I can send smudgy pictograms to my wife.
Do you?
That gesture thing might be damn handy if your native language is ideogrammatic. Maybe the Watch is for the Chinese. Getting a notification every time you get a friend request on Facebook might be awesome if you give a shit about Facebook. Maybe you really... want to browse your iPhoto library on your wrist?
See, I see all the solutions the Watch presents. I just don't see the problems they solve. But I wasn't into the iPod and I wasn't into the iPad (and still aren't). The iPhone? Oh fuck that one I was into. I'd been running Windows smartphones for 3 years at that point and knew exactly what bullshit they were. So I'm willing to recognize that:
- I'm probably an old fart
- that's set in his ways
- and am missing the obvious implications of this revolutionary device
- if only I'd put down the buggywhip for a minute.
So, gentle Hubskiers of less advanced age - what am I missing? 'cuz y'all are the future. This thing was created for you, not for me. Why do you want one? What's the killer app? 'cuz Apple hasn't really airballed in a major way since the iPod Hi Fi (and that thing is fuckin' dope - I've bought my mother-in-law two of them).
Everything has a place. Help me figure out where the Watch belongs.
It really does feel like the tech industry is trying to push wearable technology in the hopes that someone will come up with a killer problem that they can solve. ---Ignore attempt at humor below this line---Everything has a place. Help me figure out where the Watch belongs.
I don't think it's a coincidence that both Google and Apple are pushing wearable devices at the same time. There aren't any compelling consumer applications for wearable devices yet, but if there are going to be the devices need to be out there in the wild. Thus, the two companies who can make wearable devices happen if anyone can are pushing them.
Naw, dawg, that was a legitimate chortle. I ain't ignoring that, particularly if you're wearing rubber gloves. There's some pompous article I read - hang on a minute - Ah, yes. Here we go. Thanks, Arrington, you ass. Without needing to read it, the point is "watches are jewelry, not technology." That's accurate, that's legit. I mean, find the functionality on this page. One need only look at the crazy shit perpetrated in the name of "skeleton watches" to recognize that this ain't about utility. And yes - Swatches are cheap plastic, and they're still being sold, because they're hip. Bluetooth headsets? Those things make a lot of sense. They really do. But they're still douchetags, and they'll totally go with your phablet, and your $800 in technology will only serve ot make you more tragic. I've seen a Pebble once in my life. I haven't been particularly compelled to invite one into my microcosm. And I could buy two of them for the price of the iWatch. Goddamn. When is Apple going to use a statistically-relevant search term for a name?
I thought the iPad was going to flop and it didn't. Yet arrogance tells me that the watch will fail, too. Practically, it's a convenient interface to your phone... and a watch... and maybe a GPS... but there's not really room for interface, nor any benefit to adding computing power when you already have a phone. So that just leaves espionage
Oddjob here, planting proximity mines at your elevated head level throughout The Archives.
So - here's my opinion as someone who is really damned close to buying a Moto 360, and a not-so-old fart. The major selling points for me at least, are twofold: 1. Fashion statement. Even though I have a smartphone right in my pocket, I still have this Fossil hanging around my wrist often. It looks cool and fits my style, so I wear it. Same with the Moto360, or the iWatch (even though I think the latter is inferior). It also speaks to the geek inside me - isn't it cool to have a watch that can do all sorts of stuff? 2. Information at a glance. Not just the time. With the Moto 360, it uses Google Now and Android notifications - the two reasons I open my phone the most. Most of the screen time on my phone is doing those simple tasks of checking to see if I have mail, or a message, or ask something to Google, or play / pause / forward my music. If I can do most of the simple phone-related stuff on my wrist, it'll be less of a hassle. The time to get to the info I want is always less if you can just twist your wrist than if you have to get your (large) phone out of your pocket. That being said, the iWatch is shit as a sportswatch, has that weird knob that I don't like and it seems like it's been given all the apps Apple could think of because Apple doesn't really know how to justify the $350 price otherwise. No, it's not revolutionary and it doesn't solve big problems. There's no killer app you're missing. It seems to me more a result of Apple desperately trying to innovate and entice consumers in a market (the screens-in-your-face-market) that appears to be on a plateau. Or they're making it because everyone else is making one, and they don't want to miss the Next Big Sale Goldmine. Also, anything to make people forget this horrendous ad: 
Oh my god. dat ad. Let's talk about Point (1), because I think it's a really important point: So I live in the iDevice Capital of the World. Growing up I used to wonder why every computer you've ever seen in a movie or TV show is a Mac; I could count on one hand the number of people out in the world I knew with Macs. Here? I can count on one hand the number of people with PCs. Apple is probably 99% of the marketshare within Hollywood. As a consequence, every phone is an iPhone, or at least it used to be. There are a few Androids leaking in, but they're the "geek" phones. Most everybody else is using an iPhone of some sort, and the only personalization is in the case, and most people forego the case because they're bulky. So what you're left with is almost a uniform: are you A) a shattered-screen hipster B) an Otterbox/Lifeproof faux-adventurer C) a cosmetic-cased wannabe D) an Android nerd? Those are your choices. There's no real personalization beyond that. Not surprising. There's some work that goes into creating a phone and nowadays, the ecosystem around it. So you go to a Sprint store or an AT&T store or whatever and you'll probably have 30 choices of all phones. Now go to a Jeweler. Now go to a Sunglass Hut. Now go to anywhere watches are sold. They'll have more choices in one counter than you can buy in the entire Samsung arsenal. Movado has more collections than Apple has ever had phones, and Movado is a Mall brand. Some of the Tokyoflash brands are hand-made; Arbor used to sell watches but then they burned through their run of 50 (at $100 ea) and stopped. A watch is an intensely personal choice. It's jewelry. It's unique(ish). and an iWatch or a Moto360 is a mass-produced device with some customization tweaks. It's just another part of the uniform. Which doesn't invalidate Point (2). However, it does yank any smartwatch out of the realm of "jewelry" and into the realm of "utility" and I'm not sure the utility is there. Funny thing - my dad had a "smart watch" in 1992. It was a Timex Datalink. it'd transfer his calendar and appointments via IR. It was not particularly useful and, without a cell phone to tie it to, was severely underutilized as far as what was possible. But Timex has been making Datalinks for over 20 years now and I'll bet this is the first you've heard of it. And maybe that's part of it. Maybe another part of my reluctance is I'd rather give Seiko $1500 for an Astron than Apple $350 for an iWatch. The Seiko is something I want. The Apple? Is something Apple wants of me.It looks cool and fits my style, so I wear it.
I'm still not recovered from that ad. I agree - the iWatch is not very unique. Consider the following though: lots of people don't care that it's not that unique. Just like there are still people buying Beats by Dre for their image, there will be people who will buy the iWatch for the image. People who don't buy expensive watches, but might buy this iWatch, just like the people who'd never buy an Audio-Technica but who will get Beats. Your idea of what a watch means is one I agree with - it's supposed to reflect a very personal choice, and thus be unique. But consider the fact that it's your idea of a watch, not necessarily the same as the masses. A while ago there was this trend of changeable watches - I forgot the name, but the idea is that you could change the strap and the backdrop of the watch easily, and they sold more than 30 of each. So you could customize them and create a "personalized" watch. That shit sold like crazy. Point is, for a lot of people some customization is enough to make it personal. On top of that you live in the Apple Area of Doom, which is highly likely to adopt the watch. So no, the iWatch will probably never be unique enough - for you. For me though, I know that if I'd get a 360 that it'll be a year or so before I see another one. It's the advantage of living in non-hip areas. And thus it is unique / hipster enough for me. Edit: also, autch: A watch is an intensely personal choice. It's jewelry. It's unique(ish). and an iWatch or a Moto360 is a mass-produced device with some customization tweaks. It's just another part of the uniform.
Very good points. So in other words, the business model of the iWatch is to get those who would contemplate a $40 Fossil to stretch to a $400 iWatch. I can see that. It provides Apple with the advantage of making them buy an iWatch every 2 years or so also, and likely selling them AppleCare while they're at it. And if you look at it that way, the functionality doesn't even matter. Most people will use 10% of what it can do. I wonder how much of the actual use will be 2nd screen bullshit, kind of how the remote for the WiiU works. Saw that iPhone snark. It's en pointe. If I wanted a Samsung Galaxy Tab I'da bought a Samsung Galaxy Tab. Me? I'm starting to want a smaller phone, not a bigger one. I'm just not watching Youtube videos on it much, you know?
Hey, hey, $140 when I bought it, man. I'm no cheapo. Yeah, my Nexus 5 is really pushing it already - the Galaxy Nexus I had before was the perfect size for me. It's the reason I'm so disappointed in the new Moto X, which is even bigger than the Nexus. On the other hand, the iPhone 5 is too small for me. I'm so fond of the 1080p screen - I'm a pixel guy. I just wish they'd remake the Nexus 4 with up-to date specs.$40 Fossil
I'm starting to want a smaller phone, not a bigger one.
Wearable tech is in its infancy right now, but I think the idea is to bring digital reality of the screen and into your life. The watch doesn't really do too much to accomplish this, but it's more about normalizing a higher level of immersion. VR and augmented reality glasses are the next step, once people are used having a higher level of interaction with computers. (The watches won't be replaced, they'll remain part of the ecosystem.) Smartphones were the first real step in this direction. As insignificant as it seems, having to pull them out of your pocket is a pretty big barrier to total technological immersion. Those five seconds are enough time for some of your sort term memory to flush, and to make more trivial tasks less worth the effort. you might check the weather in the morning on your phone, or you might not. But if it's there on your wrist so readily accessible, you wouldn't be able to not check it.
This is a very good point and one which I forgot to make. I agree with you - they're trying to immerse you in data. My problem with this, and something I could have phrased better: is that immersion beneficial to us? I've made my own decision long since - "no, it's not." But I check Facebook once every other day or so, Twitter maybe once a month and the stock market maybe twice a year. I have the majority of my notifications turned off and often miss calls by leaving my phone several rooms away. I'm willing to acknowledge that many people prefer a greater level of immersion than myself, but am skeptical that enough people would use the level of immersion possible from an iWatch to bother developing the market. But I wouldn't have made this post if I weren't interested in being convinced. I'm looking for insight. I'm not the market for wearables. But I'm also not sure who is. But I'm also fairly certain that just because I don't understand it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Does that make sense?
I think the people who replaced their watches with their phones are fogeys like me. I was a late adopter of cell phones and I've had one for 12 years now. Extrapolate that to 18-25 year olds and you're talking about kids that pretty much got cell phones as soon as their parents would let them have them - they've never really been "watch" people. If they're looking at fogeys like me, they're dealing with people who have already lost their Fitbit, already let their Twitter feed die, and have already Friended their entire high school class on Facebook and whose wives are gonna get sick of having crudely-scrawled hearts "messaged" to them about half an hour into the adventure. Ergo, fogeys like me aren't their market. Or if they are, they've misjudged it worse than the two-key mouse.
This saddens me because watches have more aesthetic viability than phones ever will, tbh. That's 1/2 the reason I have that pocketwatch - it's cool looking, in a way that I don't think phones are. All those little parts moving together. And you can see them all! And it could last multiple generations, if I take good care of it. Can't say the same for the phone market. they've never really been "watch" people.
My wife tried to buy me a pocketwatch. She bought her first husband one. I appreciate them as fetish objects but they lack the utility I need in my life. That's something about the iWatch- I need to be able to tell time, with polarized sunglasses on, in broad daylight. "Hands" have an advantage there.
I'm pretty solidly into the Old Fart category, and I don't get it either. I mean, I carry my phone with me as it is...I just don't see wearing a watch to tell me the exact same things my phone tells me but on a smaller screen. So yeah. I'm not the target demographic. And that's ok. However, I've spent a lot of time in recent months looking for a wearable of the fitness variety, and so far nothing has all the features I want. If I could mix-and-match between brands, that'd be perfect. But I can't. So while these tech companies are busy thinking up things I don't need or want, they're completely missing the mark on the things I do. I CAN'T WIN!
*Accurate tracking *LCD/Backlit display *Vibrating alarm *Waterproof (wearable in the pool/shower/shallow ocean) *Some kind of visual or vibrating motivator to remind me to move if I've lost track of time on the computer (*ahem*) *Wireless sync, and the ability to sync with various fitness apps rather than the proprietary software from the manufacturer *Secure fit on the wrist and not a clip-on *Long enough battery life to not have to charge it every day/every couple of days *Not ugly (ok, that's totally subjective but still important!) I'd appreciate GPS abilities or heart rate monitoring, but those are big plusses rather than real needs. Same with it being fashionable rather than just not ugly.
I would destroy the Apple watch. I don't care how non-destructible they say it is. I tend to destroy things, especially things I wear, and very certainly watches (which I like to wear nurse-style, face on the inside of my wrist, because veins make me ucky and nothing I can articulately explain, but anyway, wearing a watch nurse-style ensures that I scratch the fuck out of the face, but because my watch-wearing preference is based in physical feeling and the lizard-part of my brain, this is unlikely to change). I'm rough on things I use a lot. That's not a bad thing - the things I have I use - but it does mean I'm not good with fragile things on the everyday, and especially not as jewelry. I haven't watched the ads or the show. Is it water-proof? One would certainly hope so, or at least water-resistant. I would destroy the Apple watch. As a result it strikes me as both uninteresting and impractical. Also, talk about forgetting that ish places.
Best buddy of mine got the watchband that allowed him to wear an iPod Nano on his wrist. That lasted about long enough for him to wash his hands at a restaurant. If they're selling a "sport" model it's gotta be waterproof. There's "you're holding it wrong" and then there's "sports trackers bloody well better be sweat-resistant." But then, I don't even take my Apple headphones out of the box. I can sweat through those fuckers in about a week.
Once I broke a phone by crying into it. That was a flip phone, though, not an Apple. That was before the days of iPhones. It's just like, "Dude, you wash your hands, right?" I think they should introduce a device on a lanyard next. Nerdy, but more useful.
You're missing nothing - yet. Like _refugee_ I break things. Mainly because I consider them part of my body and I'm used to my body healing itself - more slowly every year alas - but still, it's smart. Lumps of technology don't do this, yet, unless you're living in one of David Brin's universes. My Zulu is currently winging its way to Bjorn because I free-dived off the south coast of England in a heavy swell and the combination of depth, pressure, icy brine and forgetful joy forced water into the poor thing and fried its brain. Not completely, but enough for it to have a mini stroke now and again and make it unreliable. Information technology can enhance, extend and focus human faculties. I remember reading about the dislocation one might imagine was felt by those tilling the land when, previously accustomed to working from sunrise to when the sun lay straight overhead before they broke for lunch, they would now have to work until the clamour of the clock tower echoed a certain number of times, dividing the previously analog, vegetable day into discrete lumps, ones which became smaller and more accurate until we could carry them around on our wrists and localise events to milliseconds. A completely new view of the world evolving around this: accurate navigation, subtler engineering, microchips and quantised reality. We're at the point where there's pressure against such fine granularity, in order to reduce the stresses induced by modern life. I like the Yes offerings because they reconnect me with things I have become divorced from due to the way I live my life these days. What phase is the moon? What is the sense of how much day I have left before sunset? Natural rhythms that we relied upon for agriculture (or for science ) were innate and felt; from these a lot of the developed world is now detached. I, like you, am wary of immersion - not in information but in distraction. I don't want my flow disrupted by cascades of incoming blips vying for my attention and most particularly I don't want to have to plunge my head into a screen to assess it and respond to it, no matter how small it is. Whilst I can't concede the point made in TNG's post about The Shame Of Smart Phones what does strike me on public transport every time is that people's primary sense is directed away from their primary environment. The one thing that does pique my interest about the Apple device is the first tentative steps towards democratising haptic interfaces. The new paradigm in wearables I want? It has no display. It communicates entirely via vibration. Start simple with pulses for the time, when requested with a tap. Stick an EM sensor in it let it tell your wrist about invisible electrical fields. Let it give you a physical understanding of which way is magnetic north. Get smarter: the whole faceless face of the device is a multitouch pad which senses not just taps but pressure and caress. Let that be your own language for command and control of whatever you feel you want to use. Transmit a more subtle, more human haptic message to your buddy wearing the same if you wish. Ask me to charge it once a month, maybe, if it isn't trickle charging itself via solar power or leeching EM from nearby unshielded fields. Or, if I absolutely have to charge it, let it take 30 seconds And be silent, by God be silent. The measure of a well-mannered citizen in the 21st century will be how little his devices leak noise into the surrounding environment. But that's not really a watch, any more, it's something else. I'd be satisfied with that, in fact. I'll keep the Zulu on my wrist and the New Thing on the other. It feels underwhelming because it's little more than a bit of iPhone on your wrist. It feels underwhelming because people are talking about it being a fashion statement. It feels underwhelming because I think, deep down, we know we can do better.
The fact that they called it a watch is telling IMO. It's not even an iWatch. I was really hoping for a new device, a real wearable. This is what I was hoping to see: I have a watch. A watch is an accessory. It's a fashion statement. My guess is that Apple played around with wearables, and decided to hold off on them. Maybe they figure that the watch will better inform them on how to make a wearable. Apple created a watch that can do some appy things. My gut reaction is that it will fall flat. I really wanted to play with the first iPad to see how it felt. I'm not curious about this watch. It's clear what the experience is going to be. A watch is personal, and this one isn't. A wearable doesn't need to be personal, it just needs to function well. I want a wearable that can substitute for a phone. But, I suspect that I am in the minority, and that Apple is aware of that. UPDATE: I just stumbled upon this Hodinkee review of the watch.
It's fucking stupid and impractical. But I also bought this three years ago: So I guess I don't have any excuse about the "impracticality" bit. I kinda want a fitness band type thing, but that's because quantification makes me get all hot and heavy. Waiting for something affordable enough that I don't have to feel guilty about the purchase a week later.
Absolutely. It demonstrated that the way I was running, I was in anaerobic territory 90% of the time. When I got that fuckin' thing (before Bluetooth), it made me walk for like 3 weeks. I initially bought it because it was the best integrated with my ergometer. I later used it running, biking, walking, you name it. I quit because it started getting stinky quickly and got bossy... but I keep toying with the idea of getting another that just talks to the phone.
I got the Polar H7 heart rate sensor today, and just finished my first workout with Endomondo. Starting with Couch to 5k because I'm horribly out of shape: SO MUCH STATS, I love it. I can even get the GPS data and put it in ArcGIS if I'm really bored. But best of all is that it just tells me what to do. And there's a beautiful park right next door for me to run through. Thanks for the indirect tip, bro. eightbitsamurai what about you?
It was like $90? In part I bought it so that I kinda have to run - to reduce the price per run. Terrible strategy, I know. I like the sensor. It's very accurate and even though I had some setup / Bluetooth issues, once it works it just works. Goes around your chest, but it's not one of those bands that you feel the entire run. Since I always carry my phone around for music, I didn't go for one of those watches because my phone already has GPS, gyro and accelerometers.
I was just thinking you should chime in here, and maybe nowaypablo too. I'll ask my sister (your age) what she thinks of it too just to get her idea of it, she is significantly less serious and (I hazard) more trend-driven than I expect the users here may be.
UUuuuuuh I wouldn't pay a dime for that shit, there is nothing that will compare to a real, nice watch. I don't care if it can talk to me or make me sandwiches. Okay, when they start making me sandwiches, I'll reconsider. That said, I very simply believe that very few people genuinely love and would give "anything" for that iWatch, the iPad or the iPad mini. The moment Apple announces it though, it's no longer about the product, it's about the hype and the fact that everyone around you has one, because they're afraid to be seen without it by everyone else who they think has one as well. I spent $350 on a pair of Beats by dre. I hate myself to this day. The new, gorgeous Bang & Olufsen headphones came out and they're only $50 more-- for the kind of sound quality that will turn your libido to honey. Can't resell my barely used beats for more than $200 though, because they release a new version of it every goddamn year. This is all bullshit.
Yeah. Dude. No more beats. Fer real. Especially if you're gonna throw a Breitling in the mix like it ain't no thang. I spent $350 on a pair of MDR7509s that will shit on anything Beats will ever make. And those are for work, they aren't even "sound good headphones." BTW, can't wait for _wage to shit all over you for having nice things.
I don't own a Breitling my friend, and I saved up a lot for that shiny pair of shit, but I'm still grateful to be able to have something like that in the first place :) cowers from _wage
I'm probably beating a dead horse here but I think, as with most Apple products and especially here, a lot of the appeal is in the in the iCult-ish allure of their products. Ever since the iPod Apple has truly excelled at creating a great market image for their products. They got a lot of genuine practicality cred for the iPhone (smartphones really are a game-changer) even if they weren't really the first. Since then they've really been trying to replicate that with permutations of the same crap. I'm still not precisely sure what the appeal of an iPad is, but it's popular.
Beats the fuck out of me, and I'm not that old. (Ok, I'm old by internet standards at 32.) I don't really even get FitBits and the like. Why should I need data about my exercise. The weather forecast is good, because it tells you what might happen tomorrow, not what's happening right now. I have a window for that. If I want to know how well I'm doing at fitness, I'll look in the goddam mirror (although, to be fair, I really don't know what those thing do besides count steps; I assume something else since their just a bit more expensive than a free pedometer). Counting steps is as arbitrary as counting calories, but I suppose that point is lost on people who look at labels in the store, too, and that market ain't small. All that said, I was excited about the iWatch announcement, but only because there was an internet rumor floating around some time ago about a company called InvenSense who might be providing the chips for these gadgets. I bought some shares on a gamble. Apple is notoriously quiet about their suppliers, so the stock didn't really move, but time will tell.
For sure I'm not the target demographic. I'm really resistant to change. Especially the gimmicky stuff.
I'm addicted to technology and have my laptop with me all the time during the week but on the other hand I don't even have a smartphone. I don't even know anyone with a dumb phone anymore. But I don't see the need for one. Most of the time, either I have my computer or I don't really need internet this much. I only use my phone for texting and the occasional call. Also, i would break it in a week and can't imagine having yet another thing to charge. Fuck that, I'm already pissed I have to charge my phone 2-3 times a week. I like simplicity.
Technology is finally at the point where wearables—both watches and Google Glass—are feasible in terms of size and weight. Unfortunately, I suspect 'small and light' isn't enough. There was a time when a music player watch would have been enough. But now our iPods have been replaced by iPhones. Can an iWatch take bluetooth calls? In a few years. But my phone also plays games, and browses the web, and gives GPS maps and directions. For those, you simply need a +10cm screen. Phone input sucks; if the wearable offered that, that's another fulfillable need; but it doesn't. I'm predicting the iWatch will get fanboy attention, but not critical mass, and go the way of the Newton. Wearables will eventually achieve critical mass, in 5-10 years. When they're able to offer large fold-out screens, or Kinect-style motion-sensing typing. Combine the iWatch with this and this and one of these and you're on to something. 2024. I called it.
I suspect that the Watch is a result of Apple's attempt to dominate every market. They're no longer on top with smartphones (Android's winning, barely), but they've still got the tablet market cornered pretty well, and this is a bid at the "smartwatch" market, which unfortunately doesn't really exist. Yeah, I don't know exactly what that means either, but my interpretation is either a) only 3% of people have ever bought wearable tech, or even worse, b) only 3% of people report that they would be willing to buy wearable tech. Either way, I hope they didn't spend too much money developing this thing, because I don't think they'll see returns on their investment. Personally, I don't even wear a watch... I have an iPhone (jailbroken iPhone 4... why upgrade?!) in my pocket, and investing the 2 seconds it takes to retrieve the thing doesn't seem like too big a deal. The only piece of wearable tech that I might jump on is a Google Glass-like contact lens. And that isn't gonna be here for another couple decades. I could be wrong, but I think smartphones have effectively filled the niche of connectivity for the immediate future. I've gathered that I'm roughly a decade younger than you, 'bloo, so it could be that the youngsters will see the appeal, but I'm inclined to agree with mknod.Pando has been pointing out for several months now that the total market penetration of the wearables market is less than 3%
That video made my night. Re: contact lenses - I've done some weird shit for money. One weird thing I did was design command and control centers. I can point to the MIL STD for information display. I used to be a member of SID. I've designed 911 control centers. Another weird thing I did was design implantable devices. Shock/pace leads for atrial defibrillators. Synthetic skin. Ultrasonic catheters (granted, those aren't supposed to stay in). There's very little information in the world that I want to see all the time. There are very few activities for which I need a head-up display. And considering how contrary the body can be about close proximity to synthetic materials, I'd need a pretty compelling reason to invite electronics that close to my vision. I know fyoochur and shit, but... ...well, sometimes I am a Luddite.
Just got PRK, myself, so I don't exactly miss contacts, but I'd gladly put one (or two) back into my eyes for a few hours every day if it meant I could interface with the 'net seamlessly. And yeah, screw having an interface constantly in my field of view, I guess I'm hoping for something that I activate with a series of eye movements? Like... up-down-right-left-right-down-up, or whatever. Do you ever even sleep? Sometimes I think that you are actually a team of people that share access to one username. Thanks for that reddit comment link. Funny you mention LASIK... I'd still recommend PRK, it's changed my life. No lasting corneal flaps! Just 4 days of excruciating pain. Worth it!Re: contact lenses... ...There's very little information in the world that I want to see all the time
One weird thing I did was...
It's just there to compete with Samsung's "Galaxy Gear", I reckon.
I don't know much about either the Gear or the Apple Watch, but a mate of mine is a Samsung fanboy, and he loved his Gear when he got it - almost two years ago.
I'm guessing the Apple Watch does everything a FitBit does, too.
The problem with this line of thinking is the Gear's sales are pathetic. But hey - market penetration on the Diamond Rio and Archos Jukebox weren't particularly high, either. So either Apple has figured out some magical way to make the iWatch more awesomer than anything that has come before, or... I mean, "magic box the size of a cassette tape that holds all the music you own" kind of sells itself. "Display on your wrist that shows what's in your pocket" faces a more skeptical pathway.
David Berry argues they're still cribbing from PARC.
I am so sorry I gave up on getting one calendar to sync properly between my android and my wife's iphoneAnd I maintain 5 different Google calendars.
I don't like wearing accessories. I did look at a smart ring the other day, but realized I'd lose it immediately. Hell I lose my phone constantly. The last thing I need is something else uncomfortable on me that I'll take off and lose. I have like 4 or 5 watches that I never wear. I don't buy sunglasses anymore because I lose them so often. I can, however, see how an apple watch would be nifty for alerts. I would definitely setup a smart watch to let me know if I get alerts from servers at work, or if I received an email from a friend or client.
I'm old but... I think they're pretty sharp looking and given that some of the standard watches I find attractive are around the same price point, I see no barrier to entry for purchase. However, it doesn't do what I had hoped it would do, which is replace my phone and that is a bummer. But I wear a watch already and would be glad to replace it with something like this. I'm probably going to get one eventually.