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

The Apple Watch

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 300 posts

Re: The Apple Watch

#131

Post by VLM »

gregpilling wrote: post #77
tw04 wrote: post #22

It actually kind of saddens me to read his summary of how touch will be "awesome". A teenager is afraid to talk to a girl he likes so he sends her what amounts to a text on his watch? It feels like humans keep building more and more barriers to ACTUAL communication. I can't help but think at some point it will have serious negative effects on the human race. Part of growing up and maturing is learning to deal with di…

I have had several employees in their early 20s that would only communicate with suppliers over email - I had to force them to use the phone. It was bizarre.

Phones are unprofessional and slow and impolite, and even if its legal, recording is just socially not done other than call center script readers.

On the other hand, supplier writes in an email that he's shipping the microcontroller PCBs tomorrow, no kidding this time, you have a written record you can call him out on maybe the day after tomorrow, and unlike verbal phone calls no one freaks out if you stockpile emails, in fact its pretty much accepted. And this is exactly why someone lying to you or stretching the truth or making stuff up will refuse to do business by email and insist on using the phone.

So your employees are in cognitive dissonance... you're trying to set them up to fail and they're either going to be annoyed or offended or even worse, apathetic about it.

Re: The Apple Watch

#132

Post by ThomPete »

brianpan wrote: post #120
ThomPete wrote: post #111

Just like the iPhone wasn't a smarter phone but a smaller computer, I guess Apple Watch isn't a smarter watch but a smaller iPhone.

The iPhone was a computing device in a form factor that the market was able to relate to as a phone. The Apple Watch is a computing device in a form factor that the market will be able to relate to as a watch. 'Phone' and 'watch' are just entry points. The form factor, UI, and controls will dictate what it actually is. I'm fairly certain, NOT a smaller iPhone.

Not sure I understand. A laptop is a computer device, an iphone is a computer device and now a watch is a computer device.

People wont buy Apple Watch because it's better watch just as they didn't buy the iPhone because it was a better phone.

That is the point I was trying to make.

Re: The Apple Watch

#133

Post by pcurve »

jonhester wrote: post #11
reubenmorais wrote: post #8

This is a very interesting article, and I like how it's written in the perspective of a functional watch user instead of being about fashion or watch collecting. I couldn't help but laugh at this part: > Also, though it sounds trivial, I enjoy the perfect 60 FPS smoothness of Apple Watch’s second hand — a smoothness no mechanical watch could ever match. Isn't a mechanical watch hand ∞ FPS by definition? Real life has…

Mechanical watches, think Rolexes, have smooth second hand movements but they are acutally still ticking, just about 6 times a second. The Apple Watch, on the other hand, has a second hand with 60 ticks per second so that the second hand is about 10 times smoother.

True as long as there are sufficient number of pixel density to movement of 60 ticks per seconds.

Re: The Apple Watch

#134

Post by qmr »

EGreg wrote: post #2

How does this guy always nail his articles? I think he's the only one I've ever heard of who gets paid so much to write blog articles.

He writes them for other Apple blowhards.

Re: The Apple Watch

#135

Post by [deleted] »

t0mbstone wrote: post #60
green7ea wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to take your ∞ FPS comment on go on a wild tangent because physics is fun :-D: Nothing can be infinity FPS because it would be limited by the frequency of the light that we use to see the watch hand. In the case of the visual spectrum, it caps out around 668 THz with blue light (red light is lowest at 400 THz). This would make it "only" ~4.7E12 times better than 144 Hz ;-).

Brilliant! With that said, though, I believe that the movement of the actual atoms making up the mechanical hands is still happening in an "infinitely smooth" sense, although the way we measure and observe that movement (via reflections of light or perhaps some other type of electromagnetic radiation) may be limited.

[deleted]

Re: The Apple Watch

#136

Post by 51Cards »

Article aside for a moment, I find it fascinating that with this release so many people are discussing smart watches and their interfaces as something completely new with no established precedents. I've had my Pebble for almost 2 years now and my LG G watch for about 8 months. From my perspective this seems like a late-comer to a market that is already well under-way? I would expect more existing market comparison conversation.

Edit: for the record I love both of them after being initially dubious about the usefulness of such a device.

Re: The Apple Watch

#137

Post by Cookingboy »

ctdonath wrote: post #103

"Apple seemingly tries to enter markets at, or just after, that tipping point — when Moore’s Law and Apple’s ever-increasing engineering and manufacturing prowess allow them to produce a gadget-y computer that the computer-y gadgets from the established market leaders cannot compete with." A recurring event in the advance of technology. I saw it hit hard when Smith Corona's computer-y typewriters couldn't keep up wit…

Your $500 Movado uses a cheap Quartz movement that costs about $5 anyway, so it's as reliable and accurate as any $5 POS :)

Only mechanical watches require maintenance and are less accurate.

Re: The Apple Watch

#138

Post by chadgeidel »

sz4kerto wrote: post #19
reubenmorais wrote: post #8

This is a very interesting article, and I like how it's written in the perspective of a functional watch user instead of being about fashion or watch collecting. I couldn't help but laugh at this part: > Also, though it sounds trivial, I enjoy the perfect 60 FPS smoothness of Apple Watch’s second hand — a smoothness no mechanical watch could ever match. Isn't a mechanical watch hand ∞ FPS by definition? Real life has…

The guy has probably never heard of the Seiko Spring Drive, where the hands are moved by a spring and regulated by a brake. Therefore they're completely smooth. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsBTXgksr4s

It's a bummer that video plays at 30fps. This is a case where 60 (does YouTube do higher framerates?) would pay off.

Re: The Apple Watch

#139

Post by SeanLuke »

ryandvm wrote: post #18
EGreg wrote: post #2

How does this guy always nail his articles? I think he's the only one I've ever heard of who gets paid so much to write blog articles.

Gruber has perfected the art of knowing your audience - and his audience is people who are neck deep in the Apple ecosystem. His writing is practically a prescription for managing post-purchase cognitive dissonance for Apple consumers. I think he's an excellent writer but let's be honest, he doesn't really "review" Apple products any more than their marketing department. Apple could re-introduce the Newton and Gruber…

> Apple could re-introduce the Newton and Gruber would be writing about it's "elegant simplicity" and "thoughtful processing".

Hmmm... that's a reasonably fair assessment of the Newton. Did you ever use one? Perhaps you could have picked a better sarcastic description.

Re: The Apple Watch

#140

Post by gaius »

EA wrote: post #13

“You’ll still be able to do with Apple Watch what you do with your current watch: tell the time (and if you want, the date) at a glance and trust that it’s accurate.” ...if you return your watch to a charging station daily. He goes on: That said, compared to a traditional watch, daily charging is terrible. Before entering into the smartphone market, I charged my cellphone less than 100 times per year. Now, I have to…

Doesn't it seem a little weird that you adapt your life around your gadgets rather than vice versa?
Post reply on HN