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

The Apple Watch

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 863 posts

Re: The Apple Watch

#241

Post by Kurtz79 »

tolmasky wrote: post #170
lhnz wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether this will be useful all rests on the quality and differentiation of the haptic feedback. For example, imagine walking down the street towards your destination and feeling the right side of the watch vibrate to signal that you should turn right. If your watch can communicate contextual information related to your intention and local then it will be superior to (1) wearing a socially inappropriate device like t…

The overriding feeling I had during this keynote is that every feature that I found cool in the watch I would much prefer on my phone. Cool watch app? Wait, actually that would be cooler and more usable on a big screen... Haptic feedback? Agreed, awesome idea, but no reason it can't be on my phone and buzz my leg instead of my wrist.

I think interface wise Cook has the right of it when he says they didn't just strap a reduced iPhone on the wrist.

It's clear that they spent a large amount of time and effort with the haptic feedback and the crown.

But functionality wise... well I completely agree with you.

I can't see anything a smartphone cannot do, better and more efficiently, with the exception of the heart rate sensor.

Some functions in particular seem very awkward to me: I cannot see a reasonable way of using it as a phone or an audio player, in public, without bluetooth earphones.

With mobile phones, mp3 players and smartphones the value proposition was clear, but what is the killer application for smartwatches ?

That said, I would be far from surprised if they sell like hotcakes.

Re: The Apple Watch

#242

Post by alexqgb »

pan69 wrote: post #174
eevilspock wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is Apple's way: Release a product at a high price initially to capture extra dollars from early adopters with the extra money while also buying time for Apple to work out kinks in there production chain and also reduce costs as efficiency increases. Six to twelve months later cheaper Apple Watches will come out.

I don't think Apple needs that handful of extra dollars from early adaptors. The reason the initial price is high is because its easier to decrease a retail price than it is to increase it.

Apple tends not to lower their prices. Instead, they offer newer models will with more features at stable price points.

If prices do drop (e.g. the 5s) it's because an older product is still being sold alongside a newer one at the standard price.

Re: The Apple Watch

#243

Post by cstuder »

zimpenfish wrote: post #214
eli wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My wife runs long distances with an iPhone AND a watch. My impression is that Forerunners have fallen out of favor. The GPS doesn't work all that well compared to a phone (I'm guessing because it lacks the AGPS data a phone has access to). Plus if you're running a marathon you probably want some music to listen to, and it sure is nice to have a phone with you even though it's perhaps a bit heavy.

I've got 18 months of Moves data logged against corresponding tracks from my 910XT and the difference in consistency, accuracy, etc., is telling - the iPhone is frequently off by 10s (if not 100s) of metres and especially coming round the Millennium Dome is a joke - it has me jumping from the south to the north of the Thames every few hundred metres. Moves iPhone 5S - http://imgur.com/kjYf8Tj Garmin 910XT - http://im…

Did you disable WLAN on the iPhone during the run?

That's what RunKeeper recommends, because the AGPS using WLAN-SSIDs lowers the accuracy of the tracking.

Re: The Apple Watch

#244

Post by deong »

MrScruff wrote: post #234
fidotron wrote: post #207

This is an intriguing situation because while the "No wireless, less space than a Nomad. Lame." comment will always haunt those that criticise Apple product launches this is the first one in years where the product looks more like it's actually the Nomad being mentioned, and the iPod has yet to arrive. I'm going so far as to say that smartwatches and VR represent the desperate flailing of a tech industry that's run o…

In my opinion you're utterly wrong about VR, it's going to be a transformative technology and will precipitate a massive push for high end real-time graphics. People want new experiences without leaving their sofa and VR will bring that in spades. As far as the watch goes, I think it will make money but less than the iPad. It's clearly pitched as a fashion accessory and will find a market. Just not a big enough one t…

> People want new experiences without leaving their sofa and VR will bring that in spades.

It's far from clear that they're actually willing to do anything about it. Look at 3D TVs. No one wants to sit on their couch lazily watching whatever's on with special glasses.

If VR was a passive technology like HD -- by which I mean you buy a new TV and everything is better without any further action on your part -- I'd be more confident that you're correct. But it's not. I can't see headsets as a thing people are going to wear sitting on their sofa with the family. Game consoles seem like an obvious target with an audience that might be receptive, but otherwise, I just can't envision mass adoption.

Re: The Apple Watch

#245

Post by JonLim »

zimpenfish wrote: post #176
JonLim wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nevermind, my own question got answered by looking up the Garmin Forerunner 910XT: http://sites.garmin.com/forerunner910xt/ Run, swim, AND bike. Excellent.

The swim stroke tracker is hit-and-miss for me (sometimes guesses the wrong stroke and length points) but that probably says more about my swimming (which is awful) than the watch. But I can definitely vouch for the excellent battery life, resilience to water, and usefulness on a bike laden with sensors. The only gripe I have is that you can have multiple sets of bike sensors but not anything else. That and their app…

Good to know, thanks!

Sadly, it might be outside of my price range. It does look like it's the perfect thing for tracking my workouts, but damn is that one hell of an investment.

Re: The Apple Watch

#246

Post by digikata »

craigching wrote: post #160
digikata wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you notice, NFC of course isn't in the 5, 5c, 5s. So it makes me wonder if Apply Pay will work with a watch paired to an iPhone 5 series device. That might be a little nudge to get the Apple watch.

Oh, that's a good point. You're probably right, can't use Apple Pay with a watch paired with 5/5c/5s. I noted that the credit card information is available via passbook, but the 5's don't have the related hardware to support Pay, right? I mean the watch has the NFC, but the ability to generate the one-time numbers probably has to come from the phone?

I don't know if maybe the one-time number capability is tied to hardware, or tied to network connectivity - or maybe you need only one of the two paths. In which case, you might be able to do it with a 5/5c/5s with network connectivity and a Watch, but you can only Pay fully offline with a iPhone 6 or iPhone 6 / Watch.

Re: The Apple Watch

#247

Post by XorNot »

josho wrote: post #233
fidotron wrote: post #207

This is an intriguing situation because while the "No wireless, less space than a Nomad. Lame." comment will always haunt those that criticise Apple product launches this is the first one in years where the product looks more like it's actually the Nomad being mentioned, and the iPod has yet to arrive. I'm going so far as to say that smartwatches and VR represent the desperate flailing of a tech industry that's run o…

"connect with people" is exactly what the apple watch does. This strikes me as the first tech. product launch that the fashion aspect plays at the forefront. Personally, their watch is not for me. But, this strikes me as Apple's next transition from technology company to a consumer fashion brand (making the Beats acquisition somewhat more clear). Think about it, Apple's 3 watch models are differentiated by the aesthe…

Or its a very optimistic push to try and make a new market area which is fraught with difficulties work well?

When you get down to it the fundamental issues of smart watches haven't been fixed. We do not have batteries big enough to give the sort of runtime which would make it acceptable, and people are already burdened from device charging fatigue.

Smartwatches have runtimes measured in under-a-day, depending how they're used. That is nowhere near good enough.

Re: The Apple Watch

#248

Post by gallamine »

deong wrote: post #210
zimpenfish wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the battery life doesn't suck (which I fear it does given the total lack of reference to it) and the "iPhone required" isn't as onerous as it seems, I might well wear one just for the easy 24/7* heart rate tracking. Granted the optical ones aren't as good as the HRM straps (as best I remember the dcrainmaker reviews) but they're less onerous for long periods.

I think it's a general limitation of the optical heart rate trackers that they aren't quite "24/7". At least on all the Android Wear devices that feature one, you have to ask it to take a reading, and it's pretty unreliable if you're moving. I didn't see it mentioned in the Apple coverage, but I assume it's probably similarly limited there?

My Basis watch takes readings regularly (not sure the interval once a minute, maybe) of my heart rate. Battery lasts about 3-4 days.

Re: The Apple Watch

#249

Post by chipotle_coyote »

While someone else already made the reference to this quote, it's hard for me not to recall Commander Taco's (in)famous dismissal of the original iPod when I browse these comments.

Personally I don't know that there's any watch that would really get me to start wearing watches at all again -- I never liked them that much to begin with. But this knocks down an awful lot of the criticisms I've had of existing smartwatches. The smaller Apple Watch is 38mm, certainly not small but by no means an irrationally huge behemoth. (Even the larger is only 42mm, I believe.) When you consider the three lines, two sizes, and multiple bands, there's dozens of combinations available. You may personally not like the fashion sense, but other than the Moto 360 this is the first smartwatch that's had a fashion sense to criticize. (And guys, the Moto 360 is 46mm, so let's not pretend it's svelte, either.)

But what's really interesting to me is that Apple has clearly put a lot more thought into how interactions on a device like this should work than anybody else. Yes, I'm sure every single component has an antecedent you can point to, just like the iPhone's interaction model. Except that nobody put it all together like that before the iPhone. And nobody put it all together like this before the Apple Watch.

I'm not so glib as to say that catcalls when Apple introduces a new product are a sure sign of success (I remember the iPod Hifi, thanks). But again, it's hard not to see a few recurring patterns in the responses: oh, look, it doesn't do everything that it could (or that competitors already do!) and it's too expensive. If it sells well, it'll only because of the Apple faithful buying everything.

And, of course, if it sells well, than within a year all smartwatches will adapt its interaction model. Other manufacturers will come out with variants that Apple isn't making, and we can move onto the evergreen phase of dismissing Apple as a company that just copies everybody else.

Re: The Apple Watch

#250

Post by anmilo »

cowardlydragon wrote: post #201
edpichler wrote: post #165

This is just the first release of another killer product from Apple. To compare, the first iPhone did not have some basic features found in many cell phones, including stereo Bluetooth support and 3G compatibility. I really believe that Apple will earn a ton of money, like in the first years of iPod or iPhone era. And the watches market size, bigger than cell phones, computers and portable music. It's a pity to do no…

Seriously? A killer product from apple innovates on battery life, form factor, materials, and especially software. At least some or all of those come into play to make for a superior product. This is debatably better than the Moto 360. Oh, and it's VAPORWARE, not being released until next year after Christmas. I agree with others. This is a sign that Apple is no longer a leader in innovation. The glow of Jobs is fadi…

wait, you define vaporware as something that will be released within the next 6 months?
Post reply on HN