Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Watch 3

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 349 posts

Re: Apple Watch 3

#201

Post by pavlov »

djrogers wrote: post #157
pavlov wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Apple keynote made a pretty big deal about innovations that enabled the LTE features. They didn't explicitly say that those were Apple innovations, though.

Compare the size of either Apple Watch to a Samsung LTE watch - even the larger 42mm Apple Watch is comfortably smaller than the Gear, and the 38 makes the Gear look like you're wearing a yo-yo on your wrist. That size/battery life stuff is what took all the work, and why Apple waited until it was able to ship without the compromises.

The 3G model of the Gear S2 is roughly the same size as the Apple Watch Series 2/3 42mm model.

The size increase in Gear S3 was more dictated by fashion than necessity -- after the Gear S2, Samsung had market data that their primary buyer group favors larger watches in general, so they decided to bulk it up and increase battery life. (A lot of men actually like that "yo-yo on the wrist" look, for reasons I don't entirely fathom. I guess it's sporty.)

Re: Apple Watch 3

#202

Post by Nition »

blunte wrote: post #168

I am probably out of touch, but the idea of wearing a watch that cannot go a full day without a recharge seems... well, like having a car that can get you to work and halfway home before going dead. Incomplete. I wear a Garmin vivoactive HR watch that does a lot, but certainly not all that an Apple watch does; but it goes about a week on a charge. One feature I like of smartwatches is the sleep tracking. But with the…

We need a phone watch like the Pebble with an ePaper screen.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#203

Post by madeofpalk »

skrause wrote: post #77

> Q: Can I use my Apple Watch Series 3 (GPS + Cellular) internationally? > A: Apple Watch Series 3 (GPS + Cellular) does not support international roaming. From the FAQ section of the Apple Watch page in the Store. I'm wondering why the device has to support roaming, isn't that just a feature of the cellular provider?

I suspect it has to do with the 'magic' of the watch not having it's own phone number and piggybacking off the iPhone's.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#204

Post by madeofpalk »

blunte wrote: post #168

I am probably out of touch, but the idea of wearing a watch that cannot go a full day without a recharge seems... well, like having a car that can get you to work and halfway home before going dead. Incomplete. I wear a Garmin vivoactive HR watch that does a lot, but certainly not all that an Apple watch does; but it goes about a week on a charge. One feature I like of smartwatches is the sleep tracking. But with the…

> like having a car that can get you to work and halfway home before going dead. Incomplete.

You mean a Tesla?

Re: Apple Watch 3

#205

Post by madeofpalk »

pavlov wrote: post #136
saagarjha wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody here is saying that Apple was the first to add cellular capability to their watches. They're just glad to see it as a new feature.

The Apple keynote made a pretty big deal about innovations that enabled the LTE features. They didn't explicitly say that those were Apple innovations, though.

Yes. Apple is excited about the features they added to their products.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#206

Post by KGIII »

coldtea wrote: post #199
KGIII wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did mention they weren't common, but I'm not a nobody and I really used them. They had a whole Tablet Edition, for XP. They were used in quite a few industries, by real people who were doing real work. So, no, not common - but not nobody, either.

> but I'm not a nobody and I really used them Yeah, "nobody used them" in casual speech just means very few people. Obviously since they were made some people bought and used them. But the numbers were not worth writing home about -- and one would be hard-pressed to see random people using them in the wild (exceptions by field workers, some kinds of researchers, etc, mostly professional/factory/etc uses).

And my response only pertained to them having only seen them in one place and how that might be selection bias. While not common, they were certainly in use outside of research labs.

Motion did pretty well with them and made great hardware.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#207

Post by madeofpalk »

uniclaude wrote: post #17

Cellular coming to Apple Watch finally makes it a usable product for me, Apple Music being the killer app. Question is then, will Spotify and Google Music ever come to Apple Watch?

My understanding is that the audio/music playing APIs are extremely limited and would be problematic for implementing a music player, let alone a streaming app.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#208

Post by blunte »

madeofpalk wrote: post #204
blunte wrote: post #168

I am probably out of touch, but the idea of wearing a watch that cannot go a full day without a recharge seems... well, like having a car that can get you to work and halfway home before going dead. Incomplete. I wear a Garmin vivoactive HR watch that does a lot, but certainly not all that an Apple watch does; but it goes about a week on a charge. One feature I like of smartwatches is the sleep tracking. But with the…

> like having a car that can get you to work and halfway home before going dead. Incomplete. You mean a Tesla?

Nope. If you can get at least half of the stated range out of a Tesla, that certainly should be enough to get to work and back each day. I would not compare the Apple Watch to a Tesla.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#209

Post by kingnothing »

protomyth wrote: post #93

From the bottom of the page: Apple Watch Series 3 (GPS + Cellular) requires an iPhone 6 or later with iOS 11 or later. Apple Watch and iPhone service provider must be the same. Not available with all service providers. Roaming is not available outside your carrier network coverage area. Wireless service plan required for cellular service. Contact your service provider for more details. Check apple.com/watch/cellular…

Get a Samsung S3 with LTE. It doesn't sound like you need a standalone phone to use the watch as a phone.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#210

Post by aetherson »

gehsty wrote: post #132
jessewmc wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if there is a technical reason for that or if they aren't ready for possible cannibalisation yet. I was really hoping it wouldn't require a phone at all.

I think it's technical. Apple are fairly comfortable with their own products taking over their own products (iPod -> iphone, and pushing people from mac to iPad). If they thought that the smart watch would cannibalise the phone market I'm fairly sure that they would make sure you didn't need to own an iPhone to use the watch.

iPhone was and is more expensive than an iPod. That's not cannibalization, it's upselling.

As to iPads, to the extent that buying a tablet instead of a computer was appealing, it was always going to overwhelmingly bring people from PCs to iPads more than from Macs to iPads. They did deal with a certain amount of cannibalization there, but their tolerance of that was far from a general comfort with any cannibalization possible.

I think that Apple would be uncomfortable with the idea of a $400 watch cannibalizing a $700+ phone. That said, I think that the idea that the watch would significantly cannibalize the phone is silly. Whenever we discuss the watch, it's like everyone suddenly forgets that people fucking love their phones and have consistently demanded larger and larger screens. The idea that suddenly people are going to be all, "No, it's cool, I don't want a screen larger than 1" diagonal" in any substantial quantity is silly.

Post reply on HN