The Apple Watch works well for my (N=1?) use case: I have an iPhone 6 plus, and no, I don't want to pull it out of my pocket or bag dozens of times a day. I ha

The Apple Watch works well for my (N=1?) use case: I have an iPhone 6 plus, and no, I don't want to pull it out of my pocket or bag dozens of times a day. I had an iPhone 5, and loved the form factor, but not the battery life. The 6+ can handle a couple of days of use as a smartphone and mobile internet access point. The larger screen is irrelevant to me, but the larger battery matters. I like that when the phone rings, I see who's calling on the watch. Same for personal messages from my daughter, son, or +1. I like paying for coffee with a bar code on my wrist. I care about the weather and appointments on my wrist, and yes I have used it to call an Uber. The watch needs a better battery life, and it will be a game changer when it becomes untethered. But for now, it is fine just the way it is. I think the Apple Watch is a successful product. As for the post, the title speaks to the watch being a failed platform. It may well be that, Apple has commoditized iOS apps, the opportunity for people to get stinking rich from watch apps is going to be smaller. But if it can be a successful product, I think that is enough. IMO, Apple is playing defense, not offense. Apple wins if people keep buying iPhones. The danger with wearables is that by the time you can make a watch that replaces a smartphone for a lot of use cases, Apple might get disrupted. Likewise if watches tethered to smartphones were to become essential, Apple could get disrupted if it had a poor experience. The last thing Tim Cook wants is to wake up one day and find people walking into stores, buying a Pebble Gizmo2016, and asking the clerk, "What's the cheapest phone that works with my new Pebble?" I have a feeling that the Apple Watch 1.0 is doing enough to hedge against watches disrupting smartphones. As the leader in smartphones, that's its first concern.