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

271–280 of 863 posts

Re: The Apple Watch

#271

Post by abvdasker »

deong wrote: post #244
MrScruff wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 m…

I think it depends on exactly how good this generation of VR technology turns out to be. 3D was really pretty underwhelming and hard to watch for a lot of people. And at the end of the day it didn't look terribly real.

The cumbersome nature of VR goggles could potentially be outweighed by the sheer novelty and intensity of the experience.

Re: The Apple Watch

#272

Post by _red »

bobochan wrote: post #107
antr wrote: post #68

My two cents: I don't know any person who is into serious running (I'm into triathlon, so add cycling and swimming) who would spend $350 on the Apple Watch and additionally you are required to have your iPhone with you to use the GPS. A sports watch without GPS, IMHO is a no go at $350. For (I won't comment on the lack of info on battery life and water resistance). *Edit: changed from water resistant to waterproof.

Exactly. I put off buying a GPS watch because I wanted to see what Apple was going to offer. Answer: Nothing. I really cannot imagine a more useless product than this watch. It requires an iPhone and seems to essentially serve as a small, remote interface for your phone. And how do I navigate that small interface? With an even smaller "digital crown." I hate trying to set the time on my watch, and now they expect me…

>Imagine a typical scenario. You are walking down the street and suddenly need to navigate somewhere. How many minutes are you going to waste playing with that little nub and resizing things on the screen before finally pulling out your phone and just using that.

Reminds me of a joke I heard:

A local school board was trying to find ways to increase the efficiency of their schools. A local computer programmer had come to the board meeting with a proposal.

He suggested that each desk be equipped with a small button, that via wireless technology would light up a small panel on the teachers desk.

That way if a student wanted to ask a question, they could simply press the button which would light up say spot A17 on the panel. Then using a quick lookup sheet the teacher could then see that desk A17 is where John was sitting.

The teacher could then look up quickly and say, "John...you have a question?"

Re: The Apple Watch

#273

Post by deong »

potatolicious wrote: post #254
deong wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't seem to match my offhand recollections. Apple tends to keep price points the same and just update specs occasionally. The first iPhone famously had a price drop quite soon, but has that been true for their other product lines?

The MacBook Air went from being their most insanely expensive product to their entry-level without changing all too much (besides the requisite performance upgrades).

Good point. I'm still skeptical that's the plan for the watch, but I guess it's plausible at least.

Re: The Apple Watch

#274

Post by Cthulhu_ »

tdicola wrote: post #251

I worry this will be a massive target for theft. If someone sees you wearing an Apple Watch they know you have at least a $350 watch and $400+ phone on your person.

Not really a valid argument; a lot of people have their phone out at all times (or even just to check the time), which isn't even attached to their wrists like this one is. Second, at $350, the resale value on the black market is what, $50? $100 if you're lucky? Not sure if a robbery is worth that.

Besides, how do people with expensive watches (Rolexes and whatnot) manage?

Re: The Apple Watch

#275

Post by ionforce »

72deluxe wrote: post #183
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…

Is your wrist sensitive enough to determine whether the right or left of your phone has buzzed if you're walking?

Might be one if by land, two if by sea.

Re: The Apple Watch

#276

Post by Crito »

marknutter wrote: post #60

I always measure the future success of a new Apple product by both the number and volume of negative comments related to. The greater the volume, the more likely it is to be successful. By all accounts, Apple Watch is going to be a smash hit.

Do positive comments signify that the product will be a failure?

Or do both positive and negative comments suggest to you that a product will be a success? If that is the case, are you actually factoring in whether comments or positive/negative, or are you merely basing your predictions off of the volume of comments?

Re: The Apple Watch

#278

Post by Cthulhu_ »

jroseattle wrote: post #26

I haven't worn a watch in at least 15 years. A good chunk of my friends and colleagues as well. I'm sure there are interesting use cases, but my summary view is this seems like a current-generation iPod with a wristband. No prediction of how successful it will be, but I kind of think this will be more niche than mainstream.

Same; for me it was mostly a practical reason though, my wrists started to hurt from computer work and the strap (metal one) was annoying against the edge of my laptop, so I had it off most of the time. Of course, if this thing proves to have added value (and just notifications isn't added value for me, I don't get them that often and if I do they're not important enough to warrant having to check them at all times), I'd consider going back to watches - pulling out your phone to check the time isn't the most convenient of actions.

Re: The Apple Watch

#279

Post by Cthulhu_ »

anmonteiro90 wrote: post #9

Main drawback is you need an iPhone in order to have one. Couldn't there be a version that didn't?

I was hoping for an iPod Nano evolution myself, i.e. a standalone device that gets extras like GPS and connectivity when near your iphone, but alas.

Actually, was there anything on the ipod product line?

Re: The Apple Watch

#280

Post by patrickk »

AJ007 wrote: post #222
ajju wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment reminded me of CmdrTaco's slashdot comment after the iPod launch: http://t.co/RPAX2r93kx I think Garmin forerunner will be to the future of wearables what Nomad was to the future of music in 2002.

Or consider the first iPhone which had no 3G. Building your first iteration specifically not to go up against a particular competitor can be intentional, in hardware and software. Two or three generations down the road this watch could prove interesting (or may be not, like the iPad.)

No 3G, no app store(!!), no copy and paste, no GPS, worse call reception than the phones it replaced, the list goes on. It was still a massive success.
Post reply on HN