5 ms·
I would argue with you on this point. A smartwatch is absolutely not jewelry first. There is literally no compelling reason to wear a smart watch unless you i
by eitally 12y ago
I would argue with you on this point. A smartwatch is absolutely not jewelry first. There is literally no compelling reason to wear a smart watch unless you intend to use it for the "smart" purposes (information, navigation, communication, reminders, appointments, music, health). Otherwise, pick a "dumb" watch. Even I, who haven't worn a watch regularly since college (about 15 years ago), have grown accustomed to my Android Wear device. Not because it tells the time, which I frankly don't care much about, but because it replaces the need for me to carry a pad/paper for taking quick notes, let's me reply to Whatsapp & Hangouts messages via voice, shows me incoming email, alerts me to weather emergencies, gives me a way to easily fact check for my kids at the dinner table ("Ok Google... is buffalo mozzarella really made from buffalo milk?"), etc. You could certainly argue whether or not these things are valuable or important for the average person, but just like with so many other things, I think "smart" wearables will become ubiquitous in the next few years, just as cell phones (and no smartphones) have over the past decade.
The beauty of Android Wear is the absolute simplicity of enabling existing apps to have a Wear interface (http://developer.android.com/training/building-wearables.html http://developer.android.com/training/building-wearables.htm...). Perhaps it will be the same for iOS, but with the explosion of low end Androids in developing countries, my inclination is to think Apple is òn the path to slowly lose this battle.
- n09n 12y agoThat's only because smartwatches up until now have not been fashionable. That's also why they are so unpopular.
- eitally 12y agoWe'll have to agree to disagree, I think. I don't see how something so impractical (daily battery charging?!) that forces a specific user interface and user interaction could ever be considered jewelry, except in some abstract pedantic way.
- gfodor 12y agoDing ding ding. Apple is going to sell a shitload of these, because they are not only going to be something that does stuff you couldn't do before (since it's a smartwatch) but because they are going to look nice, be visible, and make a fashion statement. Apple is approaching this just as much as a piece of jewelry as they are a piece of technology. It should be pretty revealing when it comes out to see it spread through the consumer market. My guess is that once it is out there you can expect people to crave these things more than they did the original iPhone, not due to the technical abilities or feature set but because they want to be the envy of their friends. If the thing is ugly, then it will bomb, but if it takes on the perception of an expensive, luxury watch then expect to see them everywhere. If the thing looks good I can't even imagine how many of these things they are going to sell next christmas.
- berberous 12y agoSmartwatches are unpopular because they suck. Nobody wants to carry and charge an extra device, that adds very little to their life. The Apple Watch will live or die based upon its perceived utility, not based upon its design.
- n09n 12y agoTies suck. High heels suck. Ironing clothes sucks. Cuff links may not suck, but are at best, pointless. Sucking has never stopped people from wearing things that look good.
- gress 12y agoPeople do not wear ties because they look good. They wear them because of antiquated social convention.
- jiggy2011 12y agoI wonder if they will become fashionable in part because Apple has released a smart watch, thus proving that they are not a fad. I wonder if other non apple smart watches will now become more fashionable and see increased sales too.