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

181–190 of 349 posts

Re: Apple Watch 3

#181

Post by conception »

mikestew wrote: post #49
mrsmee89 wrote: post #35

I don't want an iPhone (or any phone for that matter). I want this. Being reachable, listening to music and gps is all I want from a "phone". Anyone know if carriers will charge extra for the watch. Cook said something about "great introductory rates" from carriers but I'm not if that refers to the watch or the service.

I looked at T-Mobile's site after the announcement, and they list $10/month for "wearables". Until more details come out, I'm going to assume that's directed at the Apple Watch (can't think of any other wearables that have a SIM. EDIT: apparently Samsung: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15229591 ). No word on what a standalone watch would cost, but I think it a safe assumption that it would be what a single mobi…

It's the same for ATT and Verizon.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#182

Post by KGIII »

wlesieutre wrote: post #144
pm90 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just not right. Apple didn't cannibalize iPod with iPhone: it recognized that people wanted it to build a phone and did just that. Apple didn't cannibalize Mac for iPad: it recognized that people were buying tablets in lieu of PC's and thus invested heavily in making iPad's more user friendly. Having spoken to many Apple engineers, the company is now as corporat-ey as any other BigCo and will NOT actively can…

>it recognized that people were buying tablets in lieu of PC's and thus invested heavily in making iPad's more user friendly. Who was doing that? Before the iPad came out I saw tablets used in exactly one place, and it was a university research project on construction management and coordination between building trades. Even after the iPad came out, the people using them as PC replacements were using them mostly for…

Maybe some selection bias? Tablets have been in use since at least early Windows XP days. I'm not sure I'd call them common, back then, but they were hardly unique. We used them in the field when collecting data.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#183

Post by hbosch »

mrsmee89 wrote: post #35

I don't want an iPhone (or any phone for that matter). I want this. Being reachable, listening to music and gps is all I want from a "phone". Anyone know if carriers will charge extra for the watch. Cook said something about "great introductory rates" from carriers but I'm not if that refers to the watch or the service.

I still use my phone to take photos. I wonder if the LTE watch (in stainless steel, say) + a digital point-and-shoot camera is still cheaper than an iPhone?

Re: Apple Watch 3

#184

Post by sliverstorm »

yequalsx wrote: post #170
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…

30 years ago some would have said the idea of not being able to years without a battery recharge seems....

There's definitely a threshold of intolerability though. Somewhere between the points of:

- charge when you notice you're low (weekly or more)

- charge as a matter of routine (daily-ish)

- obsessively hunt your tiny overlord's next power fix, living life as a series of trips from outlet to outlet (multiple times daily)

Re: Apple Watch 3

#185

Post by tspike »

mtw wrote: post #142

This is a life saver for those who spend time outdoors and can't or don't like to carry phones. I run for example for hours in the Canadian winter and the idea of having an emergency phone is attractive, in case I fall, or maybe there's a big issue at home. Another alternative would be an iPhone SE but sadly we are in the era of oversized phones. I would also love it to have more Bluetooth integration (continuous glu…

I was relieved to see they are still selling the SE. It's really a fantastic little device and I much prefer the form factor. I don't see a compelling reason to upgrade.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#186

Post by mleo »

sinatra wrote: post #3

I have thought about buying an Apple Watch multiple times. But, then, I see comments from a lot of Apple Watch users who say that they completely stop using it after few months. For many of them, the utility is not strong enough. Have things improved in that regard? What do you Apple Watch users think about it now?

I had a Series 0 and Series 2. The first 8 months with Series 0 was more about having the new tech than the watch really being all that useful. Then at the start of last year I made changes to lifestyle and have lost 90 lbs of weight over 16 months. The watch's functionality is not a daily motivator to keep things up and improve fitness, but it is certainly helpful. I can decide based on activity levels and food consumption to do some more exercise or watch some Netflix.

The addition of GPS in Series 2 improved accuracy of walking and running distance when I go without a phone. Strangely, the calorie counts of walking multiple miles are generally 20% higher when I just have the watch vs watch and phone, even though the distance, time, bpm are the same with or without the phone. So while I expected to ditch the phone more this has me keeping the phone with me. There isn't as much variety in music or podcasts with just the watch. Finally, if I need to make a call for emergency having the phone present is security.

So, the Series 3 provides another set of features that makes sense for my situation. More music, can make/receive calls if required, maybe more accurate tracking with faster CPU. And with faster, more reliable data connection, maybe some 3rd party apps will become useful as well.

I have rarely had battery issues during the day. Usually, I just take it off and charge it when I sleep and put it on again in the morning. Don't think it something i would want to sleep with it on anyway, so multi day battery life isn't a concern.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#187

Post by coldtea »

pm90 wrote: post #137
gehsty wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This is just not right. Apple didn't cannibalize iPod with iPhone: it recognized that people wanted it to build a phone and did just that. Apple didn't cannibalize Mac for iPad: it recognized that people were buying tablets in lieu of PC's and thus invested heavily in making iPad's more user friendly. Having spoken to many Apple engineers, the company is now as corporat-ey as any other BigCo and will NOT actively can…

>Apple didn't cannibalize Mac for iPad: it recognized that people were buying tablets in lieu of PC's and thus invested heavily in making iPad's more user friendly.

Nobody was "buying tablets in lieu of PCs" before the iPad.

And by nobody I obviously mean "so few the market didn't matter at all".

Re: Apple Watch 3

#188

Post by Q6T46nT668w6i3m »

jordansmithnz wrote: post #175
LeicaLatte wrote: post #124

LTE is a great addition but disappointed Apple Watch 3 has no new sensors. See you next year Apple Watch!

Actually, I believe it has a barometric altimeter, for measuring height - e.g. flights of stairs climbed.

It’s also useful for climbing situations. Unfortunately, I don’t think it’d survive alpine conditions.

Re: Apple Watch 3

#189

Post by kobeya »

jedberg wrote: post #163
badwolf wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second this. It seems much less rude to discretely glance at your wrist briefly.

You think that, but it's super noticeable. Muliple times I've been in a situation where I'm in a conversation with someone who is constantly glancing at their watch. Depending on how well I know them, I either say, "You you like to just look at your phone?" or "Is time moving faster on your side of the table, because you seem to be very concerned with your watch." Or I say nothing and just think about how rude that p…

Not everyone is in a position to ignore their notifications. Would you rather they pull out their phone?

Re: Apple Watch 3

#190

Post by coldtea »

KGIII wrote: post #182
wlesieutre wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it recognized that people were buying tablets in lieu of PC's and thus invested heavily in making iPad's more user friendly. Who was doing that? Before the iPad came out I saw tablets used in exactly one place, and it was a university research project on construction management and coordination between building trades. Even after the iPad came out, the people using them as PC replacements were using them mostly for…

Maybe some selection bias? Tablets have been in use since at least early Windows XP days. I'm not sure I'd call them common, back then, but they were hardly unique. We used them in the field when collecting data.

>Tablets have been in use since at least early Windows XP days. I'm not sure I'd call them common, back then, but they were hardly unique. We used them in the field when collecting data.

People collecting "data in the field" is not the hundreds million unit market it is post iPad.

Tablets existed for 10+ years before the iPad, Microsoft especially pushed various monstrosities -- nobody really used them though.

Post reply on HN