39 ms·
The Apple Watch
- anmonteiro90 12y agoMain drawback is you need an iPhone in order to have one. Couldn't there be a version that didn't?
- wvenable 12y agoGiven the level of interaction between the phone and watch you really need a deep integration with the phone OS. The Pebble is phone agnostic but the interaction is comparatively limited.
- Cthulhu_ 12y agoI was hoping for an iPod Nano evolution myself, i.e. a standalone device that gets extras like GPS and connectivity when near your iphone, but alas. Actually, was there anything on the ipod product line?
- anmonteiro90 12y agoNope, no announcements at least
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- agscala 12y agoThe watch looks very nice indeed but starting at $350 is ominously steep especially since it requires an iPhone
- kreutz 12y agoWatches aren't subsidized and there are thousands of dumb watches that people pay well over $350 for already.
- Zikes 12y agoThe top three right now are: * Samsung Gear - $199 [1] * LG G Watch - $179 [2] * Pebble Steel - $249 [3] [1] https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=samsung_gear_live_black https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=samsung_gea... [2] https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=lg_g_watch_black https://play.google.com/store/devices/details?id=lg_g_watch_... [3] https://getpebble.com/steel https://getpebble.com/steel
- Igglyboo 12y agoNone of those are dumb watches.
- Zikes 12y agoI'm not sure if I missed "dumb" or it was edited in shortly afterward, but either way that's comparing apples and oranges. Compared to the existing precedent of smart watch prices, Apple's watch is $100 more expensive than the next highest priced model. This is, of course, what Apple does with all of their hardware, but whether it's unsurprising or not it's still a factual and relevant point to make.
- kreutz 12y agoThe Pebble is $250. Adding another $100 to the Apple Watch is not that big of a stretch.
- Zikes 12y agoThe Pebble Steel is already priced for Apple's target demographic. Adding 70% more cost to that is a bit of a stretch.
- bryanlarsen 12y agoThe basic Pebble is $150. The premium Pebble Steel is $250. The Apple Watch starts at $350; you can bet that the premium models will be well north of that.
- 12y ago
- xienze 12y agoThis is why you don't buy v1 of Apple products. Guaranteed that the next version will be at least $50 cheaper... which still makes it too expensive.
- MBCook 12y agoWith the notable exception of the first iPhone not having a subsidy price for a month or two Apple products don't tend to drop in price much year to year. They've had the $199/$299/$399 price structure for the newest iPhones for more than 6 years.
- xienze 12y agoThat might've been true a long time ago but we've seen price drops for iPods, iMacs, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro, iPad 2 at its EOL, etc. over the years. I'm calling a $50 price drop for version 2 after this thing doesn't quite hit sales numbers.
- josefresco 12y agoiPad? First gen was awesome, and they kept the price the same even to this day. Price generally doesn't go down with Apple devices, but they'll gladly sell you an older gen device for a discount.
- stock_toaster 12y agoHave you seen the price of higher end (fashion) watches? Even relatively "plain" ones without gold/jewels are not cheap.
- TheOtherHobbes 12y agoBut this product isn't ostentatious enough or pretty enough for the fashion market, and it's way too expensive for the functional geek watch market. $199 might fly. $350 is too damn high.
- MrScruff 12y agoThis is true fashion oriented technology in the same vein as Beats headphones. If it becomes a fashion statement to wear it, people will buy one at $350. Probably not many HN readers though.
- rwhitman 12y agoIn the world of watches, $350 is dirt cheap
- Kequc 12y agoThey're different objects. You can buy $350 watches that are 10 years old in pawn shops, the v1 Apple watch is going to be obsolete in 2 years.
- doczoidberg 12y agoserious question: Does this watch anything do what my phone in my pocket doesn't? I can't see a benefit of using a smartwatch.
- guardian5x 12y agoYou can quickly see notifications. I also cannot see myself using Maps or looking at photos on the tiny screen. I would pull out my phone to do that, which i would have to wear with me anyway.
- 72deluxe 12y agoI think it complements your phone. So it is more convenient to glance at your wrist than rooting around in your pocket and getting your phone out, something some people find quite rude. If the trends reversed and they shrunk phones (like they did in the 90s) and put a strap on them, then they could easily replace the watch. But then battery life would be abysmal.
- gurkendoktor 12y agoNot for you and me, I guess, but most women have a large, crowded bag instead of pockets. Which also explains how anyone could ever carry a Note around.
- deanclatworthy 12y agoI was rather impressed but at 350USD and most likely 350e in Europe it's an expensive purchase. Still no word on battery life either.
- MBCook 12y agoIn the keynote they made mention that it's easy to charge each night, which probably means a day or two. That's better than the few hours some people are getting with the Moto 360, but it's not great. Let's hope it's at least one day consistently. I'm interested to see the reviews. I wonder if they've reached too far.
- JustinBlaird 12y agoBroken link
- anmonteiro90 12y agoUp now
- smackfu 12y agoJust CDN issues.
- ars 12y agoAre those actual photos on the home page or computer renderings? Because I hate how that thing looks - it looks sort of like a cartoon, like something from WALL-E.
- craigching 12y agoI agree on the looks in isolation, but the pictures of people wearing the watch makes them not look so bad IMO. I was surprised at the functionality, though, especially Apple Pay.
- bhartzer 12y agoYes, you can use Apple Pay with the Apple Watch. Great addition, no more digging in my pocket for my iPhone Plus (if I can actually get it out of my pocket).
- robmcm 12y agoThis is very usefull for those people that keep our phones in bags rather than pockets. The more I think about it it more I think this watch isn't aimed at me...
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- sremani 12y agoDoes it come with a kill-switch ?
- LukeWalsh 12y agoGlad they finally got rid of that hideous header on the homepage
- julianpye 12y agoThe main innovation I like is NFC in the Watch. This makes so much sense. What is the big advantage of pulling a phone from your bag instead of a wallet? Paying with a wrist, opening doors with your wrist, entering the metro with your wrist. Can't wait for the next Wear releases from Samsung to have it integrated :)
- tomelders 12y agoNo touch ID though, that's still on the phone so.... I'm guessing payments won't be as useful on the watch, if present at all.
- nardi 12y agoYeah, I was wondering about this. My guess is that security will be based on the fact that you wear a watch, so it's much harder to lose it or steal it. Maybe they will have a passcode that applies until you take the watch off (which they have the sensors to detect). Maybe it will confirm proximity to your phone. There are possibilities.
- crwll 12y agoSony Smartwatch 3 has NFC (and GPS). Too bad it's rather ugly. AFAIK, it only currently uses NFC for pairing to a phone, but the hardware is there and Android Wear will hopefully soon include complete support for it, like they recently did with watch GPS support.
- julianpye 12y agoUnfortunately it is only a passive tag for pairing. You can't to do anything else with it, so it cannot read other tags itself.
- kumarm 12y agoIt is cheaper to tie iPad Mini to wrist than buy an iWatch :).
- gpmcadam 12y agoAnd that's basically the same thing, too! /s
- T-zex 12y agoDoes it have an SDK for the third party apps?
- jaredtking 12y agoYes, it's called WatchKit. Supposedly you can create third-party apps, glances, and notifications.
- ChuckMcM 12y agoInteresting, a payments system that works only if you have the latest iPhone, and a watch that only works if you have (possibly latest) iPhone. I love the display, and I think they have some great ideas here but I was hoping more for the 'ipod' replacement that would work with any iOS 8 device (like iPads too) instead of a remote for your phone.
- craigching 12y agoApple Watch works with 5, 5c, and 5s. And of course 6 and 6+
- digikata 12y agoAnd if you notice, NFC of course isn't in the 5, 5c, 5s. So it makes me wonder if Apply Pay will work with a watch paired to an iPhone 5 series device. That might be a little nudge to get the Apple watch.
- craigching 12y agoOh, that's a good point. You're probably right, can't use Apple Pay with a watch paired with 5/5c/5s. I noted that the credit card information is available via passbook, but the 5's don't have the related hardware to support Pay, right? I mean the watch has the NFC, but the ability to generate the one-time numbers probably has to come from the phone?
- ChuckMcM 12y agoIt all seems a bit tangled together doesn't it? I get that when it makes sense but not when it crimps the addressable market fairly severely.
- digikata 12y agoI don't know if maybe the one-time number capability is tied to hardware, or tied to network connectivity - or maybe you need only one of the two paths. In which case, you might be able to do it with a 5/5c/5s with network connectivity and a Watch, but you can only Pay fully offline with a iPhone 6 or iPhone 6 / Watch.
- psbp 12y agoIt may be that Google did a pretty good job of preemptively responding to the Apple Watch, but I don't find this that much more interesting than the already not very interesting Android Wear devices.
- kayone 12y ago> preemptively responding to the Apple Watch That's really interesting way to phrase it. if tables were turned would you say the same thing or would it be Google responding to apple or worst, Google copying apple?
- NathanCH 12y agoEvery company copies Apple, even when Apple makes it afterwards. Didn't you know that?
- nevi-me 12y agoAssuming that Google hasn't spent "years" working on the Android Wear platform compared to Apple's "years", does it mean that based on what we've seen tonight vs. Wear, that Google has done better? I'm certainly of that opinion. There were a lot of speculators who should be humbled by putting the "iWatch" on a pedestal before it was even released. I personally don't like the way it looks, though Apple considered something interesting, that not everyone's wrist is huge, and made 2 versions (Android Wear OEMs can of course counter this by flooding the market with 'choice')
- kayone 12y agoI totally agree with you and think that google's wear is a better offering. My original reply was referring to the fact that even though Google came to market with its wear device first (years ago with glass and months ago with on the watch) it's still being called a response to apple's non existent (at the time) product. however if tables were turned and google were to release its first wear product months from now, after apple, NO ONE would call apple's watch a preemptive response to Google's wear. It would either be reported as Google copying apple or best case scenario Google's response to apple's innovation. eg. No one called the original iPhone a preemptive strike on Android.
- thomasahle 12y agoThe Apple fans [1] impress me with their non-fanaticism on this one. If this is a general trend across religions, I like where we are heading. Props! Apple watch certainly has qualities though. It's exciting to see how the market will develop now that all parties have opened their cards. [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/2fxe2t/its_hideous/?sort=top http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/2fxe2t/its_hideous/?s...
- mg74 12y ago"all parties" Cue poor Microsoft sobbing in a corner
- thomasahle 12y agoI don't think there are any rumors of Microsoft going into this market, is there? I don't know if they have anything to bring to the table.
- 72deluxe 12y agoBring to the table? If they actually made the table computer (the ORIGINAL Microsoft Surface), that'd be great. A computer that doesn't get in the way.
- Cthulhu_ 12y agoUnlikely that Microsoft will do anything big in the hardware market; they're struggling enough with smartphones as it is, despite their best efforts (Windows Mobile is supposedly pretty awesome, and they bought Nokia).
- Shivetya 12y agoit is just so, square. I guess my problem is that they kept it like a watch instead of a new device and it likely constrained their innovation. I had seen some band designs, even the MOTO 360 did "if it has to look like a watch" better. Don't get me started on Apple's bling look that started with that Gold iPhone. Its as bad as gold emblems on low end cars, all we need now is gothic/roman lettering
- r0fl 12y agoCurious to see how much the solid gold model costs.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- freeasinfree 12y agoI expect muggings for jewelery to be making a comeback.
- photojosh 12y agoThis will probably use Activation Lock as well. http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/06/20/police-say-ios-7-activation-lock-is-significantly-reducing-thefts-of-apple-products http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/06/20/police-say-ios-7-a...
- paradite 12y agoAny official site for WatchKit? I can't seem to find any.
- k-mcgrady 12y agoI'm assuming it's part of the iOS SDK like GameKit, MapKit etc. So developer.apple.com/ios
- jroseattle 12y agoI haven't worn a watch in at least 15 years. A good chunk of my friends and colleagues as well. I'm sure there are interesting use cases, but my summary view is this seems like a current-generation iPod with a wristband. No prediction of how successful it will be, but I kind of think this will be more niche than mainstream.
- Cthulhu_ 12y agoSame; for me it was mostly a practical reason though, my wrists started to hurt from computer work and the strap (metal one) was annoying against the edge of my laptop, so I had it off most of the time. Of course, if this thing proves to have added value (and just notifications isn't added value for me, I don't get them that often and if I do they're not important enough to warrant having to check them at all times), I'd consider going back to watches - pulling out your phone to check the time isn't the most convenient of actions.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- nardi 12y agoThis is an "iPod with a wristband" in the same way an iPad is a "really big iPod touch": not very much.
- jroseattle 12y agoActually, wouldn't the iPad be a really big iPhone without a phone app?
- jstanek 12y agoWell, the iPod touch is basically an iPhone without the phone app, so the analogy still works :)
- brian_cloutier 12y agoMiniaturization has come a long way, but there's no way this costs just $350 to make. Has Apple's strategy changed? They've always sold hardware at a healthy margin and made trivial amounts off software and music. There are some really nice features here, I would probably buy one if I didn't prefer android so much. But is it so nice that it will drive iPhone sales?
- taude 12y agoThere's gotta be some expensive parts in there, like that sapphire screen.
- asadotzler 12y agoSapphire screens that size are commonplace in real watches. I'm guessing that only added a few dollars to the BOM.
- boyaka 12y agoHow about paying thousands of engineers/designers $100k+ salaries to work on it for the past year?
- georgemcbay 12y agoWho would have thunk that of all the end-of-2014 smartwatches, the one that would make you look the least like a dork would be the one from Motorola? Shame about the battery life, though. Please fix that Motorola, I want to give you my money so bad, but cannot do it until you fix the battery life.
- skc 12y agoI haven't seen anything on battery life actually. You have some estimates?
- amitdeshwar 12y agoThe Ars review talks about the poor battery life: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/09/moto-360-review-beautiful-outside-ugly-inside/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/09/moto-360-review-beaut...
- georgemcbay 12y agoVerge too: http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/5/6108947/moto-360-review http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/5/6108947/moto-360-review OTOH, gizmodo says the battery life isn't quite that bad: http://gizmodo.com/moto-360-battery-life-test-so-far-not-as-bad-as-you-h-1631839974 http://gizmodo.com/moto-360-battery-life-test-so-far-not-as-... ... but every other review I've read (about 6 including these) has really hammered it on the battery being dead well before the day is over. I'm sure there is some YMMV depending upon usage and a moto 360 might last me a full day personally (since I'm not a reviewer and wouldn't be doing... reviewer things with it all day), but I'm not willing to slap down $250 to find out when even the positive reviews say it has the weakest battery life of all the current crop of watches. I can wait until revision 2 hits to be sure that I only have to take the thing off once per day.
- acjohnson55 12y agoI feel like the next gen Moto watch will have the better SoC, much better battery life (as many Android watches already have) and higher resolution. And maybe more sensors. And hopefully match some of Apple's innovations. I think I'm about a year from being able to join the bandwagon.
- rebel 12y agoAm I the only one who thinks the available/previewed watch faces don't match the intended goal of the device? This event was all about fashion, inviting all of the fashion journalists and talking about personalization. Not a single one of those watch faces look appealing, and worst off they do nothing to shake off the "geeky" stigma attached to smart watches. I think the design has potential when it gets a little bit thinner (v2?), but the previewed watch faces look absolutely awful to me. You'd think that would be the easiest part of building a super computer that fit on your wrist.
- pat2man 12y agoOne would assume that third party apps could provide a watch face.
- thinkling 12y agoYes, I was thinking that screen savers are back! (AfterDark, anyone?)
- TeMPOraL 12y ago> and worst off they do nothing to shake off the "geeky" stigma attached to smart watches. I disagree with you on this. For me, this smartwatch, like all the other recent ones, is everything but geeky. They look like they're designed for everyone except the techies (they probably are). I for one would love a smartwatch that gives the vibe of advanced, "hackery" technology.
- silentscope 12y ago> is everything but geeky I'm a nerd, and I'm sorry to be crude but NERD ALERT. A smart watch today starts at Geeky and works, laboring and awkwardly, towards generally acceptable. If you think a smart watch by any manufacturer, at this early point, is everything but geeky you gotta get out of the office.
- k-mcgrady 12y agoI was surprised at how bad the watch faces were. Motorola are the only ones to have done well in that area. Remember though that this device is still 4-6 months away so that's probably not the final software.
- personZ 12y agoAs much ink was spilled about competitors' failures, it's interesting that this won't be available some until vague window next year, and needs to be tethered to an iPhone. The interface looks interesting. The ridiculous draw pictures to each other bit, though -- what a gimmick.
- unclebunkers 12y agoIt will be the most used feature by young lovers everywhere...
- xgbi 12y ago> It will be the most used feature by _rich_ young lovers everywhere... FIFY. At $349 a pop, I doubt you want to cruise in college with this on the wrist.
- unclebunkers 12y agoA $350 watch is a too expensive, but $325 beats headphones are chill? When I walk through the seedier parts of town where most of the rent is paid in food stamps and wishes, I still see beats headphones.
- makomk 12y agoBeats headphones are really heavily counterfeited at a tenth the price or less. I expect a lot of the ones you saw were fake.
- 72deluxe 12y agoDo they also counterfeit the ridiculous bass response in them? Or do they put decent drivers in them, like Beyerdynamic DT 770s with Beats logos on them? That'd be funny.
- __david__ 12y agoWatches are a fashion accessory and have a very wide price range. I consider watches under $150 to be low end, under $400 to be middle end and above that to be high end. Headphones are different because (until Beats) they were mostly about function and not form. You can get very good sounding headphones for under $100, which is why people whine about Beats being so expensive. Beats's innovation wasn't making good headphones, it was making headphones into a fashion (so they could charge a lot).
- aikah 12y agometa : I'm glad the product pages dont involve using JS to fuck up scrolling,for once. This fad needs to go.
- oldmanjay 12y agoi can't imagine this selling well, but i also couldn't imagine the ipad selling well and history showed i don't know what i'm talking about, so it'll probably be a huge hit.
- tdicola 12y agoI'm with you--I thought the iPad was dumb and happily ate crow after using one. Looking at the Apple Watch today I'm scratching my head wondering what's the point and who really wants to be even more distracted by their devices.
- themoonbus 12y agoI had the same reaction to the iPad as you, and now am a very happy owner. Because of this, I now withhold my opinions until I can try out products in person, although I personally could never see myself owning a smart watch.
- Igglyboo 12y agoreally hate the curved look, bringing back memories of the 3GS. I thought we moved on to sharp corners.
- laichzeit0 12y agoI'm so glad I'm not the only one on this. Really dislike the curved / beveled designs.
- TheCoreh 12y agoRemember this is supposed to be worn. Sharp corners would hurt your wrist.
- ebbv 12y agoThe fact that this requires me to bring my iPhone on a run kills it as a sport watch. I can get a high quality GPS watch for $150 that doesn't require me to bring my iPhone. Or if I am OK with bringing my iPhone I can just use it. Dumb, dumb move on Apple's part.
- greedo 12y agoHopefully it won't require the iPhone to be present all the time. Perhaps there's a sync function to send the running/sports metrics to the iPhone. Today's presentation left a lot to speculation.
- ebbv 12y agoIt doesn't have its own GPS, so it cannot be a functional running watch without your phone. It's really dumb.
- k-mcgrady 12y agoSure it might not be for serious runners but about half the people I see running have a phone strapped to their arm. If they also have the watch it means they can see the display while running and get more accurate data. For those people it's not a big deal. If you're the sort of person who buys a GPS watch of course it won't be for you. When has Apple ever catered to niche markets?
- MatthiasP 12y ago"When has Apple ever catered to niche markets?" -Today, with the presentation of the Apple Watch.
- ebbv 12y agoYeah, that's exactly my point. I used my iPhone 3G for 2 years of running when I first started. Why would I blow $350 on an Apple Watch to get marginal gains that a $150 GPS watch can also give AND let me ditch carrying the phone. Which, arm strap or no, is bulky and at risk of destruction.
- 12y ago
- 3pt14159 12y agoSuper disappointed with this. I was hoping for a bunch of sensors that fed my iPhone. Not something to discretely take meetings during a meeting. Here is what is missing for me: 1. Sweat sensor. 2. Insulin sensor. 3. Smarter/more accelerometers to intelligently automatically detect what I'm doing. For example, if I start lifting 50 lbs in a dumbell bench press it should know that! My iPhone should auto update a fitness tracking app. If I start biking my normal "track" here in Toronto, it should automatically know that! So underwhelmed here. 4. No mention of emergency assistance "stuff", (like detection of heart attacks, or spiking insulin levels). 5. Some really stupid / weird features, although I do kinda like the shared heartbeat one. Would be fun on exercises / first date makeouts :)
- acjohnson55 12y agoI agree that any real fitness tracking solution should be able to capture a gym workout accurately, but how would you propose the dumbell thing would work? With NFC or something?
- 3pt14159 12y agoWith the right accelerometers and gyros you can actually do this very easily. I've actually done something similar during a basic engineering course (we were detecting earthquakes, but the math is the same). Edit: Downvote me all you want, but this is not that complicated to calculate.
- drh 12y agoHow would this work for a 2x as strong person lifting twice as much mass as a normal person? Wouldn't that data look essentially the same?
- 3pt14159 12y agoA number of ways. First, it isn't just F = MA, the different joints and ligaments apply a different ratio of force depending on how strong you are. For example, biceps and hamstrings can get a lot stronger as a ratio of their typical strength than tendons in the wrist. By analysing known biometric data of the athlete (their weight, resting heart rate (athletes have a much lower rate), how fast they can cycle, perspiration patterns) and combining it with the gyros and accelerometers in both the phone and watch you should be able to accurately reverse calculate the weight and the exercise.
- marknutter 12y agoI always measure the future success of a new Apple product by both the number and volume of negative comments related to. The greater the volume, the more likely it is to be successful. By all accounts, Apple Watch is going to be a smash hit.
- wfjackson 12y agoHow did that work out for Ping ? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1659306 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1659306
- marknutter 12y agoHardware
- Crito 12y agoDo positive comments signify that the product will be a failure? Or do both positive and negative comments suggest to you that a product will be a success? If that is the case, are you actually factoring in whether comments or positive/negative, or are you merely basing your predictions off of the volume of comments?
- pasiaj 12y agoDoes anyone know what the lower button does?
- anant 12y agoIt brings up a list of contacts that you can customize, to call, message or use the drawing thing with.
- thomasahle 12y agoThey said it 'opens a view of friends that you can click on'. They only showed it briefly.
- antr 12y agoMy two cents: I don't know any person who is into serious running (I'm into triathlon, so add cycling and swimming) who would spend $350 on the Apple Watch and additionally you are required to have your iPhone with you to use the GPS. A sports watch without GPS, IMHO is a no go at $350. For <$300 I can get GPS, HR, ANT+, waterproof* and +20h battery life. e.g. Garmin Forerunner 910xt. (I won't comment on the lack of info on battery life and water resistance). *Edit: changed from water resistant to waterproof.
- zimpenfish 12y agoI doubt "people into serious running" run into the 10s of millions that Apple are aiming the watch at though. (I agree with your point though - I have a 910XT for the battery life - the Apple Watch would be useless as an activity tracker for me since the iPhone 5S doesn't really cope with 5h+ activities.)
- oftenwrong 12y agoMore significant than "people into serious running" is "people who want to be into serious running". Fitness products live and die based on their ability to hook the consumer with aspirational marketing. A well-placed fitness magazine "review" will impact sales far more than superior tech specs.
- antr 12y agoI agree with you too. The Apple Watch is a mass market product, not for heavy users. However, I can imagine many people wearing this watch at gyms, where people tend to look after themselves (healthkit, etc)... but I don't see professionals using it (unless endorsed).
- zimpenfish 12y agoIf the battery life doesn't suck (which I fear it does given the total lack of reference to it) and the "iPhone required" isn't as onerous as it seems, I might well wear one just for the easy 24/7* heart rate tracking. Granted the optical ones aren't as good as the HRM straps (as best I remember the dcrainmaker reviews) but they're less onerous for long periods.
- LiweiZ 12y agoAs the first step in watch market, Apple is in the right direction. Is this watch the ideal one we expect? Maybe not. Unlike others, they have found a path in design, but the logistics weighs more currently. So they are not able to go far at this moment. And the segment has attracted more and more competitors. It is not difficult to see they are struggling to balance the time to enter and their ability to offer an ideal product now. It's just the beginning.
- wlesieutre 12y ago"Maybe if we don't mention lefties, everyone will forget they exist" Righty watches aren't a big deal for us to use because you only use the crown to set them, and you only set them twice a year. On the Apple Watch, you're going to use it all the time. It's not even that I couldn't use my right hand, it's that I don't want a bulky $350 gadget permanently strapped to my left hand, which I frequently use for doing things. Great recipe for (best case) being irritating, or (worst case) getting smashed into stuff. Maybe it can be rotated 180° to go on a right arm? It'd mean the button and crown positions are backward, but it'd be better than nothing. I see no mention of that option anywhere, so for now I assume you can't. Either way, doesn't support the 4S, costs more than I'm willing to spend, and will hopefully get thinner in future releases. I'll jump on the smartwatch train eventually, but not with this one.
- grumblestumble 12y agoI don't see why the face wouldn't be reversible - it detaches completely from the strap, and it's not like the software UI is going to be upside down - your phone can already handle that. The only difference will be that the crown is below the button.
- fudged71 12y agoNFC might also be tricky. It looked like you use the top/front of the watch to pay. I'm not sure if this would work in reverse.
- nchlswu 12y agodon't most nfc implementations use a coil of wires that are some minimum physical size? I imagine the coil is the size of the watch (horizontally)
- wlesieutre 12y agoAgreed, it just seems like something that Apple ought to mention. Can't find it anywhere on their website. And orientation changing makes sense for a phone feature because people switch between portrait and landscape, while this is a permanent setting that 90% of people would never touch. It'd be a giant oversight for Apple though, and I'd be surprised if nobody on their design team is left handed.
- paul_f 12y agoThe iPhone only seems affordable because it is tied to a 2-year contract. Otherwise it would be $800 and Apple wouldn't sell anywhere near as many as they do. At $350, I don't see how Apple Watch is going to crack the volume markets. Think 15yo girls.
- gurkendoktor 12y agoI am pretty sure that many contracts will throw in a watch for a few $/month.
- paul_f 12y agoThe iPhone only seems affordable because it is tied to a 2-year contract. Otherwise it would be $800 and Apple wouldn't sell anywhere near as many as they do. At $350, I don't see how Apple Watch is going to crack the volume markets. Think 15yo girls.
- thomasahle 12y agoSnapchat seems like the best suited form of communication for a device like this. I wonder why Apple didn't fit a camera into that huge black bevel..
- gurkendoktor 12y agoEither Apple has left that for v2 just as with the original iPad, or people do actually find all these semi-hidden cameras creepy. I know I do (not a fan of Glass, either).
- LeicaLatte 12y agoTrue that. I find them creepy as fuck!
- na85 12y agoFor me it's now official: Apple has ceded its position as an industry leader/innovator, and become a follower. This is a really, really lame product.
- terhechte 12y ago"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." http://beta.slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ipod http://beta.slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releas...
- lifeformed 12y agoYes, all Apple products are infallible now.
- leoc 12y agoI think the analogy probably doesn't stand up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8293961 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8293961 A better analogy may be what things would have been like if Apple had kept slogging it out in the handheld-computer market between '98 and '07.
- scj 12y agoI wear a watch, but I think about it as jewelry, and incidentally as a time piece. And until there is a killer app for a watch, I will continue to do so. Originally, I posed myself the question _if_ I would wear a smartwatch if there is no such thing as a killer app. The answer is yes, but _when_ is a better question. And the partial answer isn't about it being a smartwatch or dumbwatch, but about being an uglywatch or not. I think this watch fails the uglywatch criteria. Which is an odd thought to combine with Apple.
- ryanmarsh 12y agoThis. It's a piece of jewelry first and a timepiece second. Until it appeals to the Breitling/Tag/Rolex crowd I'm not the target market.
- chrissnell 12y agoThis Apple watch is clearly not intended for people like you and me. You won't see James Bond wearing an Apple Watch and you won't see NASA strapping them around the sleeves of space suits like an Omega Speedmaster. This is another piece of electronics that will look as dated as a CueCat or dot-matrix printer fifteen years from now. A classic timepiece, on the other hand, will retain or gain value over time. I bought my Rolex Submariner for about $6000 in 2009. Just five years later, a new Sub costs close to $9000. The value of used Rolexes is even higher. I wouldn't be surprised if my watch has doubled in value. The Apple Watch has its place: it's an alternative to a Suunto or Garmin training watch, or an everyday watch for people who wouldn't spend more than $500 on a timepiece. It's a fashion item but it's not jewelry. Like the original iPhone, its scarcity may create an initial aura of exclusivity but things will die down once you see a 14 year-old on the bus wearing one.
- jawngee 12y agoRolex's are the worst investments in watch collecting. Rolex is highly susceptible to overshadowing, so even though a new one is more expensive than when you bought it, it doesn't mean your watch is worth that. It's worth even less if you didn't service it in 2013 and didn't keep the paperwork (Rolex's must be serviced every 3-4 years to maintain value). Of course, that doesn't mean you can't find someone dumb enough to unload it on for more than you paid it, but a collector isn't going to give you that value for it. The Rolex Daytona is the exception to this rule though, but Submariners are mass-produced and common for luxury watches. Source: I collect watches.
- taude 12y agoIt's really a deal breaker that the watch needs a phone to be tethered. If I'm going to look at a map, I'm just going to use the phone that's in my pocket. Similarly, I don't really need a buzz notification into my wrist to know text messages are coming in. Not to mention, even though it's an Apple design, it still looks like a nerd-toy.
- EGreg 12y agoThe Apple watch looks hot, but will it use a different store than the iOS store? Where is the info on registering apps for it etc?
- robmcm 12y agoI expect there will be no stand alone apps, they will be extension to iPhone apps. Therefore you need an iPhone app with a watchKit module in it to use it on the phone.
- fvdessen 12y agoI would have been nice to have real photographs.
- buro9 12y agoI haven't bought into Apple stuff too much, just an iPad and an Air. No iPhone, I have Android instead and my desktop is Linux. Question: Is the phone a mere accessory to the iPhone, or can it stand alone or with any phone (inc' Android and Windows Phone)?
- mladenkovacevic 12y agoIt's a little thick isn't it? But it's got a design that I can see evolving over time. Not bad for a square-ish watch. Except I don't see any features that I need to plop over $350 for. In terms of health-related metrics the Basis watch is more feature-complete, and over half the price http://www.mybasis.com/ http://www.mybasis.com/ In terms of personal assistant features, Google Now takes the lead along with any smart-watch that takes advantage of it and Android-wear. When the iPhone released, I believe the market was primed for a next-generation smartphone. I don't think this is true for wearables now. The Apple Watch will have a much touger climb than the iPhone ever did.
- snowwrestler 12y agoI think the value proposition for the watch will build as the sum of many parts: style + health sensor + payment token + presence token + wrist comms + apps(?). Think of it as sort of a persistent "me key" in a smart-connected world. But that world is still in its infancy, so the watch doesn't seem very valuable yet. I think it's similar to the iPad in that there is not really a built-in value proposition. The iPad's value is 100% in its apps...but when it launched, there were not a ton of iPad apps. In contrast, the iPhone was bringing a clear value prop from day one: phone calls, email, and iPod. But even then the real value prop took a long time to develop. Remember the keynote, when Jobs said "a phone... an iPod... an Internet communicator"? The first two got huge applause, the last one not so much. That term clearly confused a lot of people. But if you look at how people use their smartphones now, it is by far the biggest portion of the value of an iPhone. Both phone and iPod functionality is being eaten by Internet services (VoIP and Spotify/Pandora).
- edpichler 12y agoThis is just the first release of another killer product from Apple. To compare, the first iPhone did not have some basic features found in many cell phones, including stereo Bluetooth support and 3G compatibility. I really believe that Apple will earn a ton of money, like in the first years of iPod or iPhone era. And the watches market size, bigger than cell phones, computers and portable music. It's a pity to do not have this company listed here, on stock market of Brazil.
- cowardlydragon 12y agoSeriously? A killer product from apple innovates on battery life, form factor, materials, and especially software. At least some or all of those come into play to make for a superior product. This is debatably better than the Moto 360. Oh, and it's VAPORWARE, not being released until next year after Christmas. I agree with others. This is a sign that Apple is no longer a leader in innovation. The glow of Jobs is fading from the company, despite how much I hate his beatification.
- anmilo 12y agowait, you define vaporware as something that will be released within the next 6 months?
- danabramov 12y agoI'm not sure you understand what vaporware means.
- edpichler 12y agoI'm sorry, it was just my opinion. Could you please define innovation to us? I also don't like beatification, but I know when something is good. The numbers of Apple talk by themselves.
- paul 12y agoIt's surprisingly unattractive, but I think people here may be underestimating the quality of the interaction design. Of course it's impossible to know without trying one, but they've clearly put some thought into it. The video is worth watching: http://www.apple.com/watch/films/#film-design http://www.apple.com/watch/films/#film-design
- Shivetya 12y agoMy biggest disappointment, they announced a product they cannot ship. I remember the good old days, ITS AVAILABLE TODAY. Now Apple is nothing than just what they used to lampoon, a creator of announcements; not products. Perhaps we can hope they use the time to take the obvious feedback flowing in and make it right by launch
- guywithabike 12y agoYou have an impossibly selective memory. The iPhone was announced 6 months before it shipped, for example.
- RyJones 12y agoThis stymies people considering buying competitor watches for this Christmas season, which is the big reason to pre-announce.
- __david__ 12y ago> I remember the good old days, ITS AVAILABLE TODAY. You mean like the iPhone, which was announced at Macworld in January, 2007 and went on sale only 7 months later?
- xienze 12y agoEh, for the most part they're pretty good about releasing quickly after announcing, but that's because they've been producing the product in question for months overseas. In the case of the watch, clearly they didn't want any leaks and therefore they haven't started production yet.
- nardi 12y agoOthers noted that the iPhone shipped 6 months after the announcement. The iPad shipped 3 months later. Your entire comment is premised on a falsehood.
- josefresco 12y agoAs others have pointed out, similar lag times were seen with the original iPhone and iPad launches. Despite this, the small lag time for each iteration since has other people complaining: http://bgr.com/2014/09/10/apple-watch-release-date-analysis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed http://bgr.com/2014/09/10/apple-watch-release-date-analysis/...:
- cowardlydragon 12y agoTo all of you criticizing the features, just remember: It's vaporware.
- __david__ 12y agoVaporware does not merely mean "announced but not released".
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- apple_suxor 12y agoWow. Fugly. Samsung reigns supreme - their new watch is something I could actually wear.
- drinchev 12y agoYeah okay, blah blah. I was at IFA Berlin 2014 and asked the SONY lady: "Hey what's the killer feature of your watch?". She said "It shows the time and tracks your steps!". IMHO Apple Watch did a great job. I couldn't find any smart watch that have navigation ( although with a paired smartphone ) and a possible ecosystem of apps that can use it. The whole IFA ... nobody could offer this. Althought, Of course it might be better, but Apple did a good job agains other tech companies in this field. Period. disclaimer: I'm not that big apple fan boy.
- cowardlydragon 12y agoMoto 360 is supposed to do navigation.
- 72deluxe 12y agoI notice in all of the pictures and videos that the "crown" (nub on the side) is a render....? Kind of like all of Behringer's new product announcements: you see them on their website and they may or may not ever actually exist or get released. Does this mean they haven't finished it, or have rushed to get to appear to be in the market before it is swallowed up by Android watches?
- mbca 12y agoEver since the days of the original Firewire-only iPod, they've done 3D renders for extreme closeups like that. They are usually very accurate but still, it seems like it would be just a bit more honest to use a photo.
- 72deluxe 12y agoI didn't know that - thanks. I suppose it would be difficult to show that rotating nub without animation.
- prawn 12y agoMany of IKEA's catalogue images are renders now too.
- 72deluxe 12y agoDoes anyone else really like the subtle ways to share sketches / heartbeats? It kind of makes it more personal than just a Google Now / cards interface. Nice touch (literally).
- fidotron 12y agoThis is an intriguing situation because while the "No wireless, less space than a Nomad. Lame." comment will always haunt those that criticise Apple product launches this is the first one in years where the product looks more like it's actually the Nomad being mentioned, and the iPod has yet to arrive. I'm going so far as to say that smartwatches and VR represent the desperate flailing of a tech industry that's run out of ideas that will connect with people. We had a good boom post iPhone, but this kind of thing just doesn't look like there's any point to it.
- TillE 12y agoIt's amazing how similar it is to all the other clunky smartwatches. More polish, sure, but essentially the same thing. I think they really missed an opportunity here. Should have been two things only: sensors and notifications. Fitbit + Pebble in a slim, beautiful package. It's already an iPhone accessory, not a standalone device. They could have gone all the way with that, but no, instead it's yet another touchscreen gadget to fiddle with.
- ssmoot 12y agoI went in thinking there's no way it could interest me. But the payments, the "crown", the haptic feedback, and the gamification of health... I'll probably pick one up.
- josho 12y ago"connect with people" is exactly what the apple watch does. This strikes me as the first tech. product launch that the fashion aspect plays at the forefront. Personally, their watch is not for me. But, this strikes me as Apple's next transition from technology company to a consumer fashion brand (making the Beats acquisition somewhat more clear). Think about it, Apple's 3 watch models are differentiated by the aesthetic desires of the consumer, not the technology differences. This is the next stage of technology fading into the background and our vanity/fashion consciousness driving ahead. -- I suspect that very reason is why you and I as techies are not excited about the device.
- 12y ago
- nodesocket 12y agoThere is even an 18 karat gold edition. Sapphire crystal, waterproof, imported leather from the Netherlands. It goes behind the technology, to also embrace some of the finer things that make a quality watch... Quality.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- vermooten 12y agoI don't want my heart rate and other health data getting uploaded to Apple and anyone else. Big blocker for me.
- vermooten 12y agoAlso: why the hell do I need to see what the moon's gonna look like 6 days from now?
- tdicola 12y agoVery useful feature for werewolves. This watch will be a hit in the Twilight universe.
- bg0 12y agoI just wanted to swim with it... :(
- chipotle_coyote 12y agoWhile someone else already made the reference to this quote, it's hard for me not to recall Commander Taco's (in)famous dismissal of the original iPod when I browse these comments. Personally I don't know that there's any watch that would really get me to start wearing watches at all again -- I never liked them that much to begin with. But this knocks down an awful lot of the criticisms I've had of existing smartwatches. The smaller Apple Watch is 38mm, certainly not small but by no means an irrationally huge behemoth. (Even the larger is only 42mm, I believe.) When you consider the three lines, two sizes, and multiple bands, there's dozens of combinations available. You may personally not like the fashion sense, but other than the Moto 360 this is the first smartwatch that's had a fashion sense to criticize. (And guys, the Moto 360 is 46mm, so let's not pretend it's svelte, either.) But what's really interesting to me is that Apple has clearly put a lot more thought into how interactions on a device like this should work than anybody else. Yes, I'm sure every single component has an antecedent you can point to, just like the iPhone's interaction model. Except that nobody put it all together like that before the iPhone. And nobody put it all together like this before the Apple Watch. I'm not so glib as to say that catcalls when Apple introduces a new product are a sure sign of success (I remember the iPod Hifi, thanks). But again, it's hard not to see a few recurring patterns in the responses: oh, look, it doesn't do everything that it could (or that competitors already do!) and it's too expensive. If it sells well, it'll only because of the Apple faithful buying everything. And, of course, if it sells well, than within a year all smartwatches will adapt its interaction model. Other manufacturers will come out with variants that Apple isn't making, and we can move onto the evergreen phase of dismissing Apple as a company that just copies everybody else.
- personZ 12y agoit's hard for me not to recall Commander Taco's (in)famous dismissal of the original iPod when I browse these comments You should also remember that he was hardly in the majority with those comments. Further he was technically correct, and the iPod succeeded because of a synergy with other parts of Apple's empire (notably iTunes). But what's really interesting to me is that Apple has clearly put a lot more thought into how interactions on a device like this should work than anybody else. How so? Google put, it seems, enormous thought and effort into Android Wear. It is a whole interaction and ecosystem built specifically for smart watches. Because Tim Cook gives some trite speech about not using a smartphone OS on a watch (this was, it is worth noting, not long after celebrating how xcode now supports dynamic layouts...you know, the thing that Android did a half a decade ago, and was widely deridden as "running smartphone apps on a tablet")? You've tried to cover every possible Apple defense, so you seem pretty committed, but you have to understand that a lot of people are derisive because we've been hearing the Apple faithful railing about these same attributes of competitor devices for months. Announcing before availability, large and bulky, needs to be tethered to a device, square, and so on...I have to imagine all of those once liabilities will suddenly turn into strengths. I love my Apple products, but there is absolutely no doubt that there is a distortion field, and it really is hard to stomach.
- tdicola 12y agoI worry this will be a massive target for theft. If someone sees you wearing an Apple Watch they know you have at least a $350 watch and $400+ phone on your person.
- Cthulhu_ 12y agoNot really a valid argument; a lot of people have their phone out at all times (or even just to check the time), which isn't even attached to their wrists like this one is. Second, at $350, the resale value on the black market is what, $50? $100 if you're lucky? Not sure if a robbery is worth that. Besides, how do people with expensive watches (Rolexes and whatnot) manage?
- gone35 12y agoI think tdicola's point is that, unlike any other watch, having an iWatch in your wrist immediately signals you also have an iPhone 5 or higher tucked somewhere in that moment --since the watch, stupidly, only works tethered to an iPhone apparently. As it happens, this kind of wealth signaling is a legitimate personal safety risk in many countries today, esp lower- to middle-income ones. In those countries, very few people can afford to wear expensive watches; and when they do, they just don't wear them around everyday in every public setting --more like for special occasions, private parties, meetings, etc. Note the risk is not just 'merely' mugging: it can also be kidnapping (you or your loved ones), 'doxxing' you and your family and emptying your bank accounts and so forth, or even extreme forms of assault --beatings, rape or death. So it's kind of a big deal. iPhones, on the other hand, can be carried and used discreetly at all times, in non-conspicuous cases and using hands-free earphones --that is, until now, if you happen to be wearing a beaming iWatch right on your wrist, thus defeating the whole point.
- yaeger 12y agoTo be honest, I thought the same thing about the earbuds of the iPod or the iPhone. You know, the signature, white earbuds. I thought to myself, "if I have these on, everybody will know I have an iPhone"... this was back when iPhones still were a kind of status symbol because of carrier lock-in and still costing a lot etc. At least with the watches, if you wear long sleeved shirts, nobody will see it. Only while wearing tshirts it would be visible. As far as mugging potential goes, I think nowadays you could attempt to mug any person on the street and chances are pretty high that they carry a smartphone which has at least a value of 350 dollars. Android or iOS. So, I don't really think that theft would be a bigger problem than it already is with smartphones.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- ggchappell 12y agoBeautiful page, but kinda worthless IMHO. When I look at it, I'm wondering: what's the UI like for a computer that isn't much bigger than my finger? (And if it's any good, why isn't it front & center?)
- cpursley 12y agoThis makes me want.... a regular watch with good battery life.
- neil_s 12y agoThe linked to page made me wonder whether Apple had released a watch that was literally just a watch, just a fancy time-keeping device. Its not until you go one level up and go to features that it shows what the watch can actually do.
- computerjunkie 12y agoMy Two Cents : I love watches, but a smart watch is just not for me. I prefer the craftsmanship it takes to create a watch that is delicately engineered to give you the exact time and makes sure the timekeeping is always accurate. This is what a watch is supposed to do, keep time. I feel smart watches are somewhat a novelty at the moment. There is simply too much functionality involved in smart watches, although they say its been dumbed own. When I look at my wrist, I want a quick glance of the time and a small moment to appreciate what is sitting on my wrist. The idea around of smart watches brings so many possibilities.But I don't feel they are solving actual problems. Design - Motorola is a company that is so underrated in the industry, the [0] Moto 360 was something I expected apple to release.Its actually a nice looking smart watch which seems to complement your lifestyle. Trust LG to follow suit. Square dials are just unpleasant to look at, but that's just my personal taste. Battery life is another no go for smart watches right now - What if I'm on getaway hike for the weekend where I need to check the time and a watch compass regularly? I can get a Casio G Shock for hiking trip that is solar powered for half the price. Its still early days to judge from afar. A couple of years, a couple of generations, and the prices falls down as always then maybe I'll check it out. [0] https://moto360.motorola.com/ https://moto360.motorola.com/
- jlangenauer 12y agoI'm with you. I love my iPhone, but it will be a cold day in hell before my wrist sports one of these. That said, I'm certainly interested to see where it will go - especially, as someone else said - once watchmakers start dealing in tech rather than tech-makers dealing in watches.
- computerjunkie 12y agoonce watchmakers start dealing in tech rather than tech-makers dealing in watches. This couldn't have been said any better.
- joesmo 12y agoIt seems that the Apple Watch needs an iPhone nearby to do anything useful. This is extremely disappointing and a complete failure from the get-go. Essentially, Apple Watch just becomes a tool for those too lazy to take their iPhone out of their pocket. It's absolutely useless for exercising or other activities where one wouldn't typically carry a phone. That was supposed to be one of the main selling points and one of the main target audiences. As a runner myself, I can't see wasting any money on this unless it gets its own Wifi/LTE/Bluetooth/Storage capabilities and I can leave my phone behind. It seems Apple missed this quintessential requirement.
- mgarfias 12y agoThe thought of the thing buzzing when one of serveral very talkative/verbose friends starts spamming me with SMSes drives me into a rage. And thats just thinking about it.
- teyc 12y agoI'm surprised they haven't done a chunky smartwatch. That would provide plenty of battery life, and more room for electronics, while at the same time fill a bigger unmet niche.
- 72deluxe 12y agoWhich niche would that be? People with bionic arms? Or weight-lifters? :-)
- supernova87a 12y agoSamsung's watch also needed a phone to work, and was just slightly clunkier. Why does Apple get such adulation in comparison?
- DominikR 12y agoEven though I am an Android developer, I played with the thought of buying the iPhone 6 (the big one) and an Apple Watch, because Swift is kind of a reset for developers and I am very happy with my MacBook. But now that I've seen the keynote, I've got some issues with the watch: First of all, I feel it's too expensive, because those smartwatches are basically obsolete after a year. (at least to me) It would have been good if Apple would allow those watches to be sent in and upgraded, especially for the version that uses a gold casing, which I suspect will be extremely expensive. (probably > $1000) The design of the watch is not bad, but not good either. I would have no problem wearing it, but I don't like that rectangle look. (the Moto 360 looks better to me) But on the other hand I like the navigation wheel a lot. I'm pretty sure that this alone will allow for more complex apps than what we see on Android Wear at the moment. The new types of messages that Apple presented isn't interesting to me, but I can see the younger audience using it a lot.
- robmcm 12y agoApple has a trade in option for iPhones, perhaps this will extend to watches, or perhaps the second hand market will be strong. If not you can send it to cash4gold.com ;)
- wil421 12y ago>First of all, I feel it's too expensive, because those smart watches are basically obsolete after a year. I felt the same way when introduced rMBP but the prices are going down. Hopefully, they will go down in the next couple years. Personally $200 would be perfect but $350 is too much especially when I can get a new iphone for less (with a subsidy from my carrier).
- freekh 12y agoWas expecting something more than this from Apple - the vision seems to be the same as what google had for google wear. Hardware wise it is not much of an increment either (my opinion only of course). Then again, I didn't really get excited over the iPad either and that was a huge success. Setting that expectation aside, I would be fine with something simpler if it: - it was classy looking: thin and round, steel and real/sapphire glass - ideally something that looks like one of those simple swiss clocks from the 1960s - had an e-ink screen - had a gps, which I can turn on and off - had bluetooth notifications in case my phone is near - had bluetooth audio support; and - had spotify support. And here I mean that I want to be able to play music which has been synced to my watch over bluetooth, a cable or while docked. - had heart-rate monitor would also be a plus of course. - has enough battery for at least about a week, unless I am using the gps (for 2-3 hours), in which case it is fine if I have to charge it afterwards. Want to use it as a regular watch (with the occasional message/calendar notification and perhaps even daily weather updates), and as a music player and as a gps for when I am running/biking. Pebble almost have it, but their watches are way too ugly (my view only of course), too large for my wrists (so says my partner at least) and they don't have the extras that would make me really want one. I guess Spotify would have to be a partner as well, but I have Spotify on my radio so I guess it is only a small step to something like this as well. Should be possible with todays technology though I am not really into HW. In terms of processor-power it really only needs to keep track of time, draw the watch face every second, draw the notifications/menu/..., handle user input (could be buttons not capacitive) and play music (which probably is the most resource intensive thing, but an easy match for any modern SOC). So for processing, battery shouldn't be a problem. An e-ink screen is thin and does not require much power either. Bluetooth 4 LE chipsets are very power friendly I think, so I would imagine that should be fine as well. They are also fast enough (1 mbp/s) for syncing notifications and even for the occasional sound track sync (I don't mind waiting 5-10 minutes for an album). The gps doesn't really have to give me directions, only log my position and would be used only when I am running/biking, and as I said, should be possible to switch it completely off. The battery could be in the (detachable) wristband - I think I have seen quite thin and flexible polymer batteries around on the internet (though I am not sure if they are thin/flexible enough). Could also have different looks on the wristbands so you get one leathery-looking (for normal usage) and one plastic looking (for sports) like apple did (liked that part though it is hardly innovative).
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- adamjs 12y agoTwo words: Universal Identity. That's the killer use-case that everyone is missing. The Apple Watch has an NFC-chip, internet connection, and an API-- this is going to happen. (They've already announced a partnership with W Hotels for the Watch to replace keycards in rooms.) I think this would be super-convenient in the short-term but seems very worrisome in the long-term. My watch/phone/drivers-license is NOT me, and the more we rely on a single-point for authentication, the greater the potential for abuse and theft. More solutions need to be created.
- zmmmmm 12y agoMy biggest take away is that Apple has failed to advance the state of the art in any meaningful way here. I guess hype is always hype, but people really expected that Apple would do something that would knock this out of the park - a week long battery life, a flexible watch face, or a bracelet style 360 degree screen or something else that would just reset the whole space. It didn't happen. This device may sell well (or not) but it's basically a peer to the current entrants in this space, not a generation ahead like many people expected.
- jamesrom 12y agoIt's exactly one generation ahead.
- markild 12y agoHow so? Genuine answer. I fail to see what this offers that the other products in this space doesn't have. At least hardware-wise.
- idlewords 12y agoA set of new UI primitives and the hardware to support them (crown thingy, tactile feedback chip).
- vadman 12y agoI have doubts about the crown thingy -- turning a watch crown while the thing is on your wrist is quite uncomfortable. I understand it's a big crown, but still doesn't seem ergonomic to me.
- josefresco 12y agoMore like half a generation (if that). And by the time it ships, the lead in tech will be all but gone.
- Kequc 12y agoI think you're overestimating the technology which is available today. These watches, while not my taste, are an incredible feat of engineering.
- wooyi 12y agoI run and occasionally do sprint tris. I carry a phone for both riding and running as I use Strava to track and compete with others. The thing I'm excited about is that this watch has a HR monitor, which is what I would need as you train based on intensity. Not to mention when you're stranded 50 miles due to a flat tire, you'll need that phone to call for a pickup. Others have mentioned listening to music,..etc. (I don't) Look - you're going to carry a phone everywhere you go on land.
- blinkingled 12y agoTim Cook tried to make the Apple Watch his iPhone moment but it came across as off - the Watch really is nothing as revolutionary in any way shape or form as the iPhone was. It is thick. They had to resort to gimmicks - communicating heart rates, drawing fish, three dots to ask for lunch(!) - to make it sound useful. The price is off by at least $100. They specifically danced around mentioning battery life - with these many features it might not actually be all that better than the competition - an area where Apple habitually shines. The UI also looked complicated to me - two ways to control it - touch and the unimaginatively named crown thing. Which is again very un-Apple. (When the watch is on your wrist I kept thinking how easily am I going to find the crown. For a normal watch that thing is very rarely used and that too when it is not on the wrist.) Not that I think SmartWatches are here to stay as a mainstream product but the little hope we had that Apple will knock it out the park with some must have feature - that hasn't panned out with the iWatch for sure.
- lukeholder 12y agoThe original iPhone was thick also when it came out. Wait till the 2nd revision. I agree the price for the low end version is off but the high end versions I expect to be in the 1k-2k range.
- blinkingled 12y agoOf course the next iteration will be better - but I am not sure about the OG iPhone comparison - the market for SmartWatches seems to be entirely different. Feels like a niche fashion or fitness accessory at that price point. People badly wanted a great SmartPhone. Watches they can live without I think until there is a compelling use case for average consumer. Those things are all OK compared to what's happening with the overall market but what bugged me is how very un-Apple like this was.
- _pmf_ 12y ago> the Watch really is nothing as revolutionary in any way shape or form as the iPhone was. The iPod brought portable digital music collections to the masses. The iPhone revolutionalized personal computing. The Watch has exchangeable wrist straps.
- nilsimsa 12y agoThe one thing I like about my current watch is that is is solar charged. I haven't had any issues with replacing batteries for nearly 7 years. I'm not sure if I'm ready to charge yet another device on a regular basis.
- callesgg 12y agoI want a smart clock that looks like a clock not like a small wrist calculator. Is that so hard?
- capkutay 12y agoThe only reason I want this watch is the exact features they were demo'ing: Quickly respond to texts without having to pull out and unlock my phone See who's calling me Using the map to track where I am in a route It seems like they nailed the low-hanging fruit and designed a pretty nice looking watch. Apple watch and the moto 360 both deserve credit for making smartwatches that don't look like total nerd gadgets
- n72 12y agoFor many watches are used as a signaling device. That is, an expensive watch indicates to people that you have money. I assume these people aren't going to downgrade to an apple watch. I don't know what percentage of watch owners this is or whether it could affect uptake, but it could be factor.
- nilkn 12y agoWhile this might be true on one level, once you get into the realm of $350+ watches it can be very hard (if not impossible) for the casual and uninformed observer to guess whether a watch cost $500 or $5,000. $350 is already more than most people spend on any watch, and that's only the entry-level price -- I imagine some of the more premium versions of the watch are going to be $500+, though that's just speculation. That's quite expensive for a watch for the vast majority of people I think.
- orbifold 12y agoI'm fairly sure chronometers start at >1000$ dollars and truly expensive watches use either expensive metals or gems to signal their value. Also there are no Rolex, Patek Phillipe etc. that have that price. Quartz watches are uninteresting as a status symbol.
- prawn 12y agoI think their premium watches may be more like $1k+ even.
- leoc 12y agoTwo small things: * The product pages for the individual Watch lines, especially http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-sport/ http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-sport/ , are the first time I can recall Apple using sex or (literal) sexiness in its advertising. (We'll pass over the "Rip. Mix. Burn." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ECN4ZE9-Mo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ECN4ZE9-Mo cringefest ...) * I await Gruber's reaction with considerable interest...
- state 12y agoI found this really surprising too. Seemed quite out of character, really.
- eslaught 12y agoRegarding your first point, see: http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2011/08/advertising-and-future-of-apple.html http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2011/08/advertising-and-fut...
- leonroy 12y agoDon’t necessarily agree with everything in that article but it's remarkably prescient.
- phirschybar 12y agoTo those who are concerned about mainstream adoption of a watch like this, I remind you of the Pebble Kickstarter which was one of the most successful in Kickstarter history. And all those contributors had no guarantee that the Pebble would see the light of day. There is serious demand for a watch that does even what the Pebble originally promised, which is still far far less than what the Apple Watch has now proposed to do. I have been a Pebble watch owner for over a year, after having given up wearing watches around the time I owned my first cellphone. I have come to feel the same NEED of having my Pebble on as I, and everybody else, has with their phone in their pocket. All of the quirks of the Pebble and everything that I have come to realize is missing with the Pebble, is addressed elegantly with the Apple Watch. 'Canned' and voice responses to messages... Huge. A non-obvious alternative to the classic vibration (which is obvious to people nearby when using the Pebble) in the 'tap' technology... also clever and smart.
- shrikant 12y agoJust fyi (happy Pebble owner since the Kickstarter), Pebble Glance now gives you the ability for canned responses to texts straight from the watch.
- malbs 12y agoAt first I was thinking I had to have one of these. Then I read feature page where it subtly tells you that most of the functionality is based on being tethered to an iphone. What a pity.
- foobarbecue 12y agoSo, it's basically a tiny external screen for your iPhone right? Snore. Wake me up when they put cellular capabilities in there.
- 72deluxe 12y agoWon't it feel like you're in Knight Rider if you're talking to your wrist all of the time? "Hey Kit! Prepare to meet me round the back of the house!" "MICHAEL. MICHAEL."
- antidamage 12y agoI've taken a hard look at every single smartwatch that's come out to date and found them wanting. I couldn't at any point bring myself to wear a device that needs to be charged every night and isn't "always on" yet doesn't have all the features I wanted. Little by little they got closer, but nobody had nailed it until Apple did. I think it'll initially be seen as a superficial luxury, much like a smartphone. Then without much effort and without anyone noticing it'll become a device that's at first convenient to have and then inconvenient not to have. I'm definitely getting an Apple watch and it'll take some amazing competition to steer me in another direction. I guess this means I'll have to get a Mac some time too.
- arihant 12y agoHere are my first thoughts (I kind of won't be doing device specific nitpicking as this is the first iteration. We are sure the concept will evolve with time): Good things: 1.) The Tap-talk feature is an absolute genius for me. This, exactly this, is the perfect non-intrusive yet hyper connected way to intimately stay in touch with someone. Just tap on their wrist, so simple. Make a little scribble to show emotion, so beautiful. 2.) The digital crown seems very interesting. I know the concerns on this thread, but if you see the demo again, the nob is bigger and is fluid enough to rotate by rolling just one finger on it. We hate crowns on our watches not because we have to rotate them, but because they are hard to rotate. This one might be different. 3.) The built. It starts at $349, while Android Wear is at $250-300 range. But then this is sapphire glass with at least steel body. And their is mention of actually how a watch is accurate with time, something 3 other companies didn't do. 4.) Multiple sizes is a good thing. Small people, petite ladies don't like to wear big sizes. I like how adaptive this watch is with the sizes, materials, straps. Now on to the awkward parts: 1.) They gave developers at least 4-5 months time to implement the tap-talk on Android Wear. By the time this watch actually comes to stores, it would be beaten down concept. 2.) They gave Android Wear manufacturers all the time to step up their game. 3.) The killer app, even in on-stage demos, seems to be the maps app. The Apple maps, unfortunately. That makes it profoundly useless wrist weight for anybody living outside of handful countries it actually works in. That gives Android Wear a terrible advantage. 4.) No GPS on watch. So basically I have to carry my phone in pocket during runs. There is already GPS apps which do that. So that makes this watch essentially a display. 5.) No word on battery. 6.) Apple launched a watch today. A week earlier Moto launched a better looking watch. This is a sentence I never thought I'd say. Would I have bought it today if Apple launched it? Yes. Will I now that Apple has given me months to think it over? No.
- prawn 12y agoI'm surprised that the Apple Watch looks so much like a watch. I was keen to see how they might break that concept apart and create something really novel.
- arihant 12y agoI actually felt better about this design. I, too, was anticipating something radical. But we have seen what happened with Google Glass. I think the way to innovate in wearables is to start with something that doesn't stand out and then steer people into more innovative directions? But if anybody could pull off a radical design without making it the status quo for creepy geeky young men, it is Apple.
- cdnsteve 12y agoMy perspective is that the majority of the market already owns a smartphone. Companies are trying to get new gadgets out there in peoples hands to increase sales and keep the corporate machine rolling. The problem is, people are happy with just their phones. I think wearables will have a very very slow uptake, especially since they require you to have a smartphone in your pocket. Someone call me when they get holograms to mass market, then I'll be interested.
- pinaceae 12y agoths is using a system on a chip designed by Apple themselves - what the hell. they're going all in on chips. intel quo vadis?
- LeicaLatte 12y agoAs someone with 5 watches, I can't wait for this to release.
- 72deluxe 12y agoDo you have that many arms too?
- LeicaLatte 12y agoAre you saying you don't wish you had 5 arms? You must be a fool. But the answer to your question is, I was gifted 4 of them once people saw that I wear a watch. Watches work like that.
- 72deluxe 12y agoI would be happier with 4 arms, as a fifth arm would make balancing awkward. Let's hope that if you get a "smartwatch", people will start buying you plenty of them!
- LeicaLatte 12y agoI am not getting a "smart watch". Its called Apple Watch.
- brianmcdonough 12y agoIt's amazing, the variety of attitudes and opinions on this thread. People don't spend this much energy arguing the fine points of war and yet, it really is just a watch. The promotion is genius. Not sure about the watch, but if the chatter is any sign, it's already a success.
- dheer01 12y agoSteve jobs would have kept the configurations to only one.
- darkstar999 12y agoSteve Jobs is dead.
- rwhitman 12y agoI started wearing watches on a regular basis about a year ago and it has become an addictive new hobby, I'm up to 4 now and feel naked without one. The primary use-case for a wristwatch - being able to glance at your wrist to tell the time - is actually very underrated in it's usefulness. We forget that watches started out as a pocket device until the military started strapping them onto the wrist for practical purposes. When the cellphone came around we abandoned 100+ years of natural design evolution in favor of the more powerful new technology, but when that tech starts to fit comfortably in the same place that was so natural for the last century it will be a sea-change in the way we look at wireless tech...
- Rapzid 12y agoMy take away from the page is that it is entirely focused on cosmetics and construction. It seems loud and clear they are positioning this as a piece of designer apparel... I think Apple understands the most important thing most people in the market for a watch are interested in; How desirable it is to others. The whole page just talks about how hawt it is. As others have mentioned, I believe Google has put massive thought into smart-watch interaction and how it integrates within your life as a utility. I'm not saying Apple hasn't. But I am saying Apple's watch sales are going to be crazy nuts. People have room for one watch as a fashion statement. If it's not going to be an Armani who do you think they'll go with?
- ForFreedom 12y agoWhy do I have to buy a watch for my fitness, I can arm-band my iphone and have all the details.
- AshFurrow 12y agoPretty sure the title of this should just be "Apple Watch", which is the title in the browser. Apple considers their products proper nouns.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- wiremine 12y agoI spent about 20 minutes reading through some of the now 650+ comments, and I'm a bit surprised how common the arguments are on both sides. It feels like the entire tech community has the same basic argument every time a new 1.0 apple product is released: Those who don't like the product: - it is feature incomplete - the hype doesn't match the actual product - it doesn't actually look that great - there are other, better products already on the market - it is overpriced - one or two interesting feature doesn't equate to "innovation" And those who like the product (or love Apple) tend to have counter-points for each argument. I'm curious if anyone has compiled a list of day zero critiques over the years for Apple successes (Mac, iPod, iPhone) or failures (Mac toaster, hifi, etc.)? It would be fun (and maybe a bit informative) for the community to review. Edit: fixed spacing and wording.
- gaoshan 12y agoI think you are spot on with this comment. The reaction to this watch is not substantially different from every other reaction to a major Apple product (or OS version or whatever else they announce). It can be entertaining to read (got me interested in the Garmin Forerunner that was mentioned) but it's just people at a bar chatting about the topic of the day.
- saturdaysaint 12y ago"I'm curious if anyone has compiled a list of day zero critiques over the years for Apple successes (Mac, iPod, iPhone) or failures (Mac toaster, hifi, etc.)? It would be fun (and maybe a bit informative) for the community to review." As someone that's followed HN and gadget-news blog comments far too closely since the late 90's, I promise you won't find a single thread too unlike this one. The only exceptions, oddly, might be the iPod nano and the iPod touch, which caught the competition completely flat-footed. The iPhone announcement brought out everyone that owned a Nokia N95 to tell us how backward we were for being mildly impressed. The iPad brought out yawns. Every iPod model was an overpriced Archos or iRiver.
- presumeaway 12y agoYou read 32.5 comments/minute? That's a skill I'd like to have...
- thearn4 12y agoI can't help but think that there really is a hard limit on the number of powered electronics that a person is willing to routinely carry on their person, and that number is one. Am I alone in feeling this way?
- notastartup 12y agoIt would be nice if there was a watch which could do everything a smartphone can do. make calls, take photos and videos, instantly teach me how to fight like Jason Bourne on demand etc.
- exodust 12y agoBut we already know the time, it's on our phones? I don't get why anyone would buy this watch apart from trendy reasons. I bet sales will be low. Body monitoring sensors are better off hidden I rekon, then you can wear any watch, or no watch, and your phone does all the interfacing with the hidden sensors. All this should be open technology too, compatible with any phone rather than tied down to one system. It's your body after all, our data's fate shouldn't be a corporation's monopoly money.