7 ms·

Apple Watch Review: You’ll Want One, but You Don’t Need One

28 points by yawz 12y ago

borgia 12y ago
I've seen 5 Apple Watch related threads pop up on the front page of HN already today, including this one. What is going on?
- pacofvf 12y ago
  Probably Apple gave these journalist an Apple Watch for a pre-release review with the sole condition that they must wait until today to release their reviews.
  - calciphus 12y ago
    Fortunately, this kind of press embargo helps you see who is on Apple Marketing's take and who isn't. I can now happily write filters for all these "journalists" who are just republishing marketing materials.
    - untog 12y ago
      How do you figure? They were given an Apple Watch - a real, functioning one - to review a few days early. I'm not sure how that means they are "republishing marketing materials".
    - smackfu 12y ago
      On the contrary, people with a review unit tend to actually use it before the review. People who have to buy it on release date and then get a review out ASAP tend to do much more republishing of market materials.
    - billyhoffman 12y ago
      Journalists getting review units does mean they are on the "take" or shills. If the journalists don't have to send the review units back, then I would filter those. MEven John Gruber has written about how he sends the review units back to Apple.
meesterdude 12y ago
I think the demand is enough that it doesn't really matter how useful this is. people want it and will pay for it. It's very much a fashion piece, and priced as such. And really, nothing wrong with that. I have a phone, internet, camera, GPS, and music player on one device. That's a pretty big deal! What the watch adds is not nearly as exciting to me, in that light. Also, I don't like that it more or less needs an iPhone. While I don't see myself buying an android anytime soon, I can only eyeroll at yet another apple lock-in. That is probably what stops me from buying the apple watch more than anything.
- StavrosK 12y ago
  On the flip side, it doesn't need to be upgraded every six months, because it's pretty much a dumb display for an iPhone.
  - unprepare 12y ago
    I would be surprised if most people followed this line of thinking. People rush to the door to buy the newest model of iphone, why would the same not be true for the watch? Surely the next generation will offer improved battery life, improved design, improved feature set, refinements, and knowing apple may even have an entirely incompatible set of straps. Especially given that the watch is cheaper than a new iphone, i expect that we will see even more people upgrading from version to version.
    - aetherson 12y ago
      Because phones are actually useful. They aren't just fashion pieces. They may ALSO be fashion pieces, but they aren't JUST fashion pieces. People are willing to repeatedly pay for the latest model of something that they use constantly throughout the day as one of their chief tools for mediating the world. If (and that is a meaningful "if") it is indeed true that the aWatch is fundamentally a status symbol that has little functional value, we would expect many fewer people to rush to upgrade it.
- drzaiusapelord 12y ago
mholt 12y ago
No mention of battery life. Anyone know if this lives up to what Apple claims?
lnlyplnt 12y ago
On an unrelated note, what does everybody think about the design language Topolsky brought to Bloomberg? I'm torn, on the one hand it's "trendy" on the other hand, it looks like a 70's acid trip and not in a good way.
- what_ever 12y ago
  This is the first time I saw this redesign and it's awful. The article title is so hard on the eyes and so is the border.
- arrakeen 12y ago
  the trendy design language didn't come with topolsky, it began with creative director richard turley and continued with his successors
kaipakartik 12y ago
Nobody needed an iphone as well at the time it was launched.
ChuckMcM 12y ago
I find that I'm both hoping that Apple will find success with the watch and fail, but the emotions around those wishes are complex. I like my Pebble watch, I really appreciate as my hearing in high frequencies goes away, being able to reliably here an alarm/alert. And the Apple watch takes that to a new level. But beyond telling time, providing a display for my current step count, and letting me know when something is happening that I need to pay attention too, that's all I need. I'm really curious about how this plays out.
- r00fus 12y ago
  I imagine that maps, siri, apple pay support are all potential killer features. If any of those nails the functionality, Apple will be able to drive a lot of purchases. After reading Gruber's review [1], I'm worried about the first version being a big step backwards from my Pebble regarding constant time display (it's a watch!) and water resistance (I won't swim with it, but I will want to submerge it while bathing my kids). [1] http://daringfireball.net/2015/04/the_apple_watch http://daringfireball.net/2015/04/the_apple_watch
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    Eventually we won't have to have any conscious idea where we are or what we are doing. But we'll be doing it more and in more places.
- loupgarou21 12y ago
  I bought a Garmin Vivosmart a few months back now, and that's basically what it provides. It vibrates when I get calls, texts and other notifications on my phone, and tracks my steps for the day. It's also pretty thin/light, and is water resistant enough where I can take it swimming. The Garmin Connect apps are, well... crap really, but I spend almost no time in the apps. A couple of weeks ago, my boss asked me if I would wear an Apple watch if he bought me one, my answer was basically, yes, because he bought it for me, but I honestly have no real desire to have the Apple watch.
- melling 12y ago
  Well, if Apple succeeds, we get a brand new wearable market. Lots of money will be thrown at it. Either Pebble, Microsoft, or Google will gain the 85% market share that Apple tends to leave. It doesn't feel like it now, but wearables will probably revolutionize healthcare, for example. Throw in an optional tricorder: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-07-03/star-treks-tricorders-are-almost-here-5-devices http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-07-03/star-treks-t...
higherpurpose 12y ago
Then I don't want one :).
FreakyT 12y ago
I think the Apple watch will, ultimately, be a success, but only once Apple lowers the price. They're trying to price it as a luxury watch, but it's evident that, as a first-generation tech product, there are clear areas for improvement in future versions. Unlike the luxury watches that it is competing against, it will be obsolete in a year or two. For example, in the video linked here, the reviewer demonstrates how sometimes the watch won't turn on the display when raising the watch to look at it. The only real way to permanently fix this is an always-on display. However, that will almost certainly require a hardware revision, not a software one.
- aetherson 12y ago
  There are a lot of meanings for "success." I think that Apple Watch will sell comfortably well at launch. Apple has earned brand loyalty from its customers and is adept at gauging or generating demand and selling to it. And, having the watch, my sense is that the overwhelming majority of Watch-owners will, you know, where and use it. Nothing I'm getting from any of these reviews is "oh my god, this is a disaster," and the people I know who have Pebbles or Android Wear watches like them pretty well and continue to wear them. This suggests that once you've shelled out for a smartwatch, the watch has to be pretty bad for you to just not use it. Now: will people who bought the watch like it enough to want to upgrade it regularly? Will they evangelize it to their friends? Will they drive demand for apps that creates a robust app ecosystem and potentially clever new products that are uniquely suited to the watch form-factor? I don't think they will. Which has little to do with Apple per se and more to do with the inherent limitations of the form factor. But, if I'm right (and, hey, I'm predicting the future, I'm probably wrong), that's not good news for Apple, which more than Google really needs the watch to be successful.
brk 12y ago
I'm really torn on these smart watches. I really don't see the utility benefit vs. the tradeoff of a another gadget to care for. They seem more fragile than a traditional watch, and also quite fugly. I think watches have become a bit of fashion accessory or other outward statement over the last several decades. Seeing things converge on 2 or 3 dominant watch faces and some minor variations among bands just seems ...bad... to me. Like a tiny piece of individually has to be traded in for technological advancement. My current watch collection is almost all items that have emotional ties to people, life events, etc. Maybe I'm very much in the minority, but I don't think so, not to the extent required to truly make a "market" for smart watches.
- deelowe 12y ago
  I'm in the same boat. I received a smart watch as a gift and never use it. Pulling out my phone simply isn't enough of a hassle to warrant using the watch and the watch alone doesn't bring any new features to the table. My watch is a piece of jewelry for me and as a piece of jewelry, smart watches just aren't the same. I believe we are seeing the tipping point of technology as fashion. Others have predicted a resurgence of non-digital goods. Perhaps watches and glasses will be the first examples where tech fails hard?
  - brk 12y ago
    Yes, it's difficult to invest heavily in a tech fashion accessory that you know is going to be regarded as one step short of useless in a few years. All of my watches are either made of precious metals, or have diamonds (or both) (yes, in that regard I may skew more towards the non-geek spectrum). But in buying each of them I had little concern for them suddenly being eclipsed by an updated version in the near future. In fact, you can own a decent Rolex for almost $0. There is a big hit on resale value from initial purchase, much like the "driving a car off the lot decreases the value by 10%" thing. But I could sell the Rolex I'm currently wearing that I bought used for about what I paid for it. However if I buy a smart watch, I'll be lucky to get 10% of the cost of it back 5 years later.
skizm 12y ago
Do I need an iphone to use apple watch? I really just want it for the bluetooth music player, stopwatch, and heartbeat monitor for when I am running, but currently have an android phone. If not are there any good android watches that do this?
- mavrc 12y ago
  > Do I need an iphone to use apple watch? Yes. I'm under the impression that Android Wear devices will do most, if not all, of the things you want, though I don't actually own one. There are many of them at this point; I've personally only used the Moto 360, and quite liked it, but just could't justify the expense.
- yawz 12y ago
  I've a Pebble. You can use it as a remote for your music. I regularly use mine with RunKeeper that has a nice interface that shows me my pace, time, distance etc. when I'm running. I'm not sure about the stopwatch and heartbeat as they aren't there out-of-the-box, but I'm pretty sure there are that type of apps that have a Pebble interface.
- kaeawc 12y ago
  Moto 360 owner. I use it for exactly those things, works great.
  - skizm 12y ago
    So I can store music on the watch and not have my phone with me? Also how reliable would you say the heartrate monitor is, especially while sweating?
    - drzaiusapelord 12y ago
      Yes, a recent update to AW enabled a feature where you can copy music directly to the watch and pair up BT headphones so you can leave your phone at home. No idea if the Apple device can do this, but AW people have been doing it for a few months now.
    - 12y ago

28 points by yawz 12y ago

I've seen 5 Apple Watch related threads pop up on the front page of HN already today, including this one. What is going on?

pacofvf 12y ago
Probably Apple gave these journalist an Apple Watch for a pre-release review with the sole condition that they must wait until today to release their reviews.
- calciphus 12y ago
  Fortunately, this kind of press embargo helps you see who is on Apple Marketing's take and who isn't. I can now happily write filters for all these "journalists" who are just republishing marketing materials.
  - untog 12y ago
    How do you figure? They were given an Apple Watch - a real, functioning one - to review a few days early. I'm not sure how that means they are "republishing marketing materials".
  - smackfu 12y ago
    On the contrary, people with a review unit tend to actually use it before the review. People who have to buy it on release date and then get a review out ASAP tend to do much more republishing of market materials.
  - billyhoffman 12y ago
    Journalists getting review units does mean they are on the "take" or shills. If the journalists don't have to send the review units back, then I would filter those. MEven John Gruber has written about how he sends the review units back to Apple.

meesterdude 12y ago

I think the demand is enough that it doesn't really matter how useful this is. people want it and will pay for it. It's very much a fashion piece, and priced as such. And really, nothing wrong with that. I have a phone, internet, camera, GPS, and music player on one device. That's a pretty big deal! What the watch adds is not nearly as exciting to me, in that light. Also, I don't like that it more or less needs an iPhone. While I don't see myself buying an android anytime soon, I can only eyeroll at yet another apple lock-in. That is probably what stops me from buying the apple watch more than anything.

StavrosK 12y ago
On the flip side, it doesn't need to be upgraded every six months, because it's pretty much a dumb display for an iPhone.
- unprepare 12y ago
  I would be surprised if most people followed this line of thinking. People rush to the door to buy the newest model of iphone, why would the same not be true for the watch? Surely the next generation will offer improved battery life, improved design, improved feature set, refinements, and knowing apple may even have an entirely incompatible set of straps. Especially given that the watch is cheaper than a new iphone, i expect that we will see even more people upgrading from version to version.
  - aetherson 12y ago
    Because phones are actually useful. They aren't just fashion pieces. They may ALSO be fashion pieces, but they aren't JUST fashion pieces. People are willing to repeatedly pay for the latest model of something that they use constantly throughout the day as one of their chief tools for mediating the world. If (and that is a meaningful "if") it is indeed true that the aWatch is fundamentally a status symbol that has little functional value, we would expect many fewer people to rush to upgrade it.
drzaiusapelord 12y ago

mholt 12y ago

No mention of battery life. Anyone know if this lives up to what Apple claims?

lnlyplnt 12y ago

On an unrelated note, what does everybody think about the design language Topolsky brought to Bloomberg? I'm torn, on the one hand it's "trendy" on the other hand, it looks like a 70's acid trip and not in a good way.

what_ever 12y ago
This is the first time I saw this redesign and it's awful. The article title is so hard on the eyes and so is the border.
arrakeen 12y ago
the trendy design language didn't come with topolsky, it began with creative director richard turley and continued with his successors

kaipakartik 12y ago

Nobody needed an iphone as well at the time it was launched.

ChuckMcM 12y ago

I find that I'm both hoping that Apple will find success with the watch and fail, but the emotions around those wishes are complex. I like my Pebble watch, I really appreciate as my hearing in high frequencies goes away, being able to reliably here an alarm/alert. And the Apple watch takes that to a new level. But beyond telling time, providing a display for my current step count, and letting me know when something is happening that I need to pay attention too, that's all I need. I'm really curious about how this plays out.

r00fus 12y ago
I imagine that maps, siri, apple pay support are all potential killer features. If any of those nails the functionality, Apple will be able to drive a lot of purchases. After reading Gruber's review [1], I'm worried about the first version being a big step backwards from my Pebble regarding constant time display (it's a watch!) and water resistance (I won't swim with it, but I will want to submerge it while bathing my kids). [1] http://daringfireball.net/2015/04/the_apple_watch http://daringfireball.net/2015/04/the_apple_watch
- maxerickson 12y ago
  Eventually we won't have to have any conscious idea where we are or what we are doing. But we'll be doing it more and in more places.
loupgarou21 12y ago
I bought a Garmin Vivosmart a few months back now, and that's basically what it provides. It vibrates when I get calls, texts and other notifications on my phone, and tracks my steps for the day. It's also pretty thin/light, and is water resistant enough where I can take it swimming. The Garmin Connect apps are, well... crap really, but I spend almost no time in the apps. A couple of weeks ago, my boss asked me if I would wear an Apple watch if he bought me one, my answer was basically, yes, because he bought it for me, but I honestly have no real desire to have the Apple watch.
melling 12y ago
Well, if Apple succeeds, we get a brand new wearable market. Lots of money will be thrown at it. Either Pebble, Microsoft, or Google will gain the 85% market share that Apple tends to leave. It doesn't feel like it now, but wearables will probably revolutionize healthcare, for example. Throw in an optional tricorder: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-07-03/star-treks-tricorders-are-almost-here-5-devices http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-07-03/star-treks-t...

higherpurpose 12y ago

Then I don't want one :).

FreakyT 12y ago

I think the Apple watch will, ultimately, be a success, but only once Apple lowers the price. They're trying to price it as a luxury watch, but it's evident that, as a first-generation tech product, there are clear areas for improvement in future versions. Unlike the luxury watches that it is competing against, it will be obsolete in a year or two. For example, in the video linked here, the reviewer demonstrates how sometimes the watch won't turn on the display when raising the watch to look at it. The only real way to permanently fix this is an always-on display. However, that will almost certainly require a hardware revision, not a software one.

aetherson 12y ago
There are a lot of meanings for "success." I think that Apple Watch will sell comfortably well at launch. Apple has earned brand loyalty from its customers and is adept at gauging or generating demand and selling to it. And, having the watch, my sense is that the overwhelming majority of Watch-owners will, you know, where and use it. Nothing I'm getting from any of these reviews is "oh my god, this is a disaster," and the people I know who have Pebbles or Android Wear watches like them pretty well and continue to wear them. This suggests that once you've shelled out for a smartwatch, the watch has to be pretty bad for you to just not use it. Now: will people who bought the watch like it enough to want to upgrade it regularly? Will they evangelize it to their friends? Will they drive demand for apps that creates a robust app ecosystem and potentially clever new products that are uniquely suited to the watch form-factor? I don't think they will. Which has little to do with Apple per se and more to do with the inherent limitations of the form factor. But, if I'm right (and, hey, I'm predicting the future, I'm probably wrong), that's not good news for Apple, which more than Google really needs the watch to be successful.

brk 12y ago

I'm really torn on these smart watches. I really don't see the utility benefit vs. the tradeoff of a another gadget to care for. They seem more fragile than a traditional watch, and also quite fugly. I think watches have become a bit of fashion accessory or other outward statement over the last several decades. Seeing things converge on 2 or 3 dominant watch faces and some minor variations among bands just seems ...bad... to me. Like a tiny piece of individually has to be traded in for technological advancement. My current watch collection is almost all items that have emotional ties to people, life events, etc. Maybe I'm very much in the minority, but I don't think so, not to the extent required to truly make a "market" for smart watches.

deelowe 12y ago
I'm in the same boat. I received a smart watch as a gift and never use it. Pulling out my phone simply isn't enough of a hassle to warrant using the watch and the watch alone doesn't bring any new features to the table. My watch is a piece of jewelry for me and as a piece of jewelry, smart watches just aren't the same. I believe we are seeing the tipping point of technology as fashion. Others have predicted a resurgence of non-digital goods. Perhaps watches and glasses will be the first examples where tech fails hard?
- brk 12y ago
  Yes, it's difficult to invest heavily in a tech fashion accessory that you know is going to be regarded as one step short of useless in a few years. All of my watches are either made of precious metals, or have diamonds (or both) (yes, in that regard I may skew more towards the non-geek spectrum). But in buying each of them I had little concern for them suddenly being eclipsed by an updated version in the near future. In fact, you can own a decent Rolex for almost $0. There is a big hit on resale value from initial purchase, much like the "driving a car off the lot decreases the value by 10%" thing. But I could sell the Rolex I'm currently wearing that I bought used for about what I paid for it. However if I buy a smart watch, I'll be lucky to get 10% of the cost of it back 5 years later.

skizm 12y ago

Do I need an iphone to use apple watch? I really just want it for the bluetooth music player, stopwatch, and heartbeat monitor for when I am running, but currently have an android phone. If not are there any good android watches that do this?

mavrc 12y ago
> Do I need an iphone to use apple watch? Yes. I'm under the impression that Android Wear devices will do most, if not all, of the things you want, though I don't actually own one. There are many of them at this point; I've personally only used the Moto 360, and quite liked it, but just could't justify the expense.
yawz 12y ago
I've a Pebble. You can use it as a remote for your music. I regularly use mine with RunKeeper that has a nice interface that shows me my pace, time, distance etc. when I'm running. I'm not sure about the stopwatch and heartbeat as they aren't there out-of-the-box, but I'm pretty sure there are that type of apps that have a Pebble interface.
kaeawc 12y ago
Moto 360 owner. I use it for exactly those things, works great.
- skizm 12y ago
  So I can store music on the watch and not have my phone with me? Also how reliable would you say the heartrate monitor is, especially while sweating?
  - drzaiusapelord 12y ago
    Yes, a recent update to AW enabled a feature where you can copy music directly to the watch and pair up BT headphones so you can leave your phone at home. No idea if the Apple device can do this, but AW people have been doing it for a few months now.
  - 12y ago