Live data from Hacker News

The Apple Watch

apple.com

281–290 of 863 posts

Re: The Apple Watch

#281

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 smartwatc…

it's hard for me not to recall Commander Taco's (in)famous dismissal of the original iPod when I browse these comments

You should also remember that he was hardly in the majority with those comments. Further he was technically correct, and the iPod succeeded because of a synergy with other parts of Apple's empire (notably iTunes).

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.

How so? Google put, it seems, enormous thought and effort into Android Wear. It is a whole interaction and ecosystem built specifically for smart watches. Because Tim Cook gives some trite speech about not using a smartphone OS on a watch (this was, it is worth noting, not long after celebrating how xcode now supports dynamic layouts...you know, the thing that Android did a half a decade ago, and was widely deridden as "running smartphone apps on a tablet")?

You've tried to cover every possible Apple defense, so you seem pretty committed, but you have to understand that a lot of people are derisive because we've been hearing the Apple faithful railing about these same attributes of competitor devices for months. Announcing before availability, large and bulky, needs to be tethered to a device, square, and so on...I have to imagine all of those once liabilities will suddenly turn into strengths.

I love my Apple products, but there is absolutely no doubt that there is a distortion field, and it really is hard to stomach.

Re: The Apple Watch

#282
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.

>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.

Yeah, it's for the sligltly LESS serious runners, of which there are millions...

Re: The Apple Watch

#283
post #50

The Apple fans [1] impress me with their non-fanaticism on this one. If this is a general trend across religions, I like where we are heading. Props! Apple watch certainly has qualities though. It's exciting to see how the market will develop now that all parties have opened their cards. [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/2fxe2t/its_hideous/?s...

"all parties" Cue poor Microsoft sobbing in a corner

Unlikely that Microsoft will do anything big in the hardware market; they're struggling enough with smartphones as it is, despite their best efforts (Windows Mobile is supposedly pretty awesome, and they bought Nokia).

Re: The Apple Watch

#284
Beautiful page, but kinda worthless IMHO.

When I look at it, I'm wondering: what's the UI like for a computer that isn't much bigger than my finger? (And if it's any good, why isn't it front & center?)

Re: The Apple Watch

#285
post #236
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…

In my experience, Google Glass turns you into a walking celebrity, and has been as far from "socially inappropriate" as it can get. I'm not in San Fran, which seems to be the only place that pours haterade.

Actually they have thrown out people even in Paris McDonalds for wearing a Google Glass.

And just try wearing it in some sensitive areas (e.g night-clubs, expensive restaurants etc) around the world and see what happens...

Re: The Apple Watch

#286
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.

I doubt "people into serious running" run into the 10s of millions that Apple are aiming the watch at though. (I agree with your point though - I have a 910XT for the battery life - the Apple Watch would be useless as an activity tracker for me since the iPhone 5S doesn't really cope with 5h+ activities.)

More significant than "people into serious running" is "people who want to be into serious running". Fitness products live and die based on their ability to hook the consumer with aspirational marketing. A well-placed fitness magazine "review" will impact sales far more than superior tech specs.

Re: The Apple Watch

#287

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 smartwatc…

it's hard for me not to recall Commander Taco's (in)famous dismissal of the original iPod when I browse these comments You should also remember that he was hardly in the majority with those comments. Further he was technically correct, and the iPod succeeded because of a synergy with other parts of Apple's empire (notably iTunes). But what's really interesting to me is that Apple has clearly put a lot more thought in…

>not long after celebrating how xcode now supports dynamic layouts...you know, the thing that Android did a half a decade ago, and was widely deridden as "running smartphone apps on a tablet"

The way Xcode (and iOS8) support dynamic layouts is nothing like Android.

Xcode 6 allows you to have multiple designs/constaints within the same UI file, for different screen sizes.

Dynamic layout a'la Android is "one size fits all", which is no way similar to what's Apple doing.

___

Since I'm getting heavily downvoted, I'd like at least a chance to clarify.

I'm perfectly aware that it is technically possible to create universal tablet/phone Android app, with separate layouts for each. However, that's not what's usually being done.

I believe reasons for this for two-fold:

1. Google's initial message after introducing tablets didn't push hard enough for separate UI (or didn't at all) 2. Developers mentality

@2: I think it's just a different way that the two ecosystem operates. When Apple tells developers to jump, devs ask how high. When Google tells developers to jump, they go "yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man".

Re: The Apple Watch

#288
post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's hard for me not to recall Commander Taco's (in)famous dismissal of the original iPod when I browse these comments You should also remember that he was hardly in the majority with those comments. Further he was technically correct, and the iPod succeeded because of a synergy with other parts of Apple's empire (notably iTunes). But what's really interesting to me is that Apple has clearly put a lot more thought in…

>not long after celebrating how xcode now supports dynamic layouts...you know, the thing that Android did a half a decade ago, and was widely deridden as "running smartphone apps on a tablet" The way Xcode (and iOS8) support dynamic layouts is nothing like Android. Xcode 6 allows you to have multiple designs/constaints within the same UI file, for different screen sizes. Dynamic layout a'la Android is "one size fits…

Dynamic layout a'la Android is "one size fits all", which is no way similar to what's Apple doing.

Aside from CSS-type "responsive" design, Android layouts have always had resource tags, which means that you can set different layouts for screen sizes, orientations, pixel densities, cultures, text direction, and so on.

Apps that didn't demonstrate this on tablets were as they were because the developers were lazy or simply didn't care, not because of a limitation of the platform.

Re: The Apple Watch

#289
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 don't argue that it would be an easier sell if it wasn't so anti-social to use. But it certainly can't be compared to 3D TVs or movies for that matter, which are an awful hack. This generation's VR is the real deal, and while the technology isn't quite there yet, it's within touching distance. People will be prepared to put up with the inconvenience because the experience will be significantly more compelling than…

I think that very much depends on perspective. The technology powering a current-gen headset might be brilliant, but the headset itself -- not the technology but the very idea that I need a headset is still very much an "awful hack". At least to me, and I suspect quite a few others. I could be wrong of course...just my predictions there, but that's my problem with the tech.
Post reply on HN