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

401–410 of 863 posts

Re: The Apple Watch

#401

Post by blinkingled »

deong wrote: post #235
Cookingboy wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watch to watch direct communication, haptic feedback, force sensitive screen on a sapphire display, just to name a few?

The watch-to-watch communication with all the sharing your heart rate and sending little pictures was the most Samsung thing I've ever seen anyone but Samsung do. Seriously, is there a real problem lurking around somewhere for which this is a solution? The force sensitive display might be useful, I couldn't really tell from the coverage. At least one person there commented that they were having a hard time seeing the…

> The watch-to-watch communication with all the sharing your heart rate and sending little pictures was the most Samsung thing I've ever seen anyone but Samsung do.

Haha, yes I thought the same thing too - communicating heart rates, hand drawn fish for sushi, 3 dots for asking lunch - that was _very_ un-Apple-y.

Re: The Apple Watch

#402

Post by girvo »

DannyBee wrote: post #370
coldtea wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If $300 sounds to much for a fashion item, it's probably not for you. Heck, I don't think I'll buy one either. But then again, consider that people buy $300+ headphones (Dre's) because of how they look, fashion etc. And they are not even the best headphones out there, whereas this is probably the best smartwatch. Or that people bought iPods for $300 or more just 6 years ago. Without video or phone or camera. Heck, I…

"If $300 sounds to much for a fashion item, it's probably not for you." Fair enough, but i have to say, I feel like i'm taking crazy pills here. So apple releases it and suddenly it's a fashion item to have a clunky, square watch. Just a few short months ago, i was reading nytimes articles about the current crop of smartwatches saying "'They’re just not that attractive,' said Mr. Dawson, 'they are all clunky and squa…

Agreed. Apple make beautiful devices that are fashion accessories... but this isn't one of them, in my opinion.

Re: The Apple Watch

#403

Post by andor »

alwaysdoit wrote: post #204
masklinn wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The antenna is not the problem, the radio chips (and power) are.

Specifically, you need enough power to regularly transmit an electromagnetic signal on the order of miles that scales with the inverse square law. Considering that they can't even get the battery life up without that requirement, it might be a while unless we make significant scientific breakthroughs in battery or wireless technology.

Considering that they can't even get the battery life up without that requirement, it might be a while unless we make significant scientific breakthroughs in battery or wireless technology.

"Both the Samsung Gear S and the Gear Circle will be available in global markets in phases through Samsung’s retail channels, e-commerce websites and via carriers beginning October."

Re: The Apple Watch

#404

Post by threeseed »

MCRed wrote: post #311
chipotle_coyote wrote: post #249

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…

I believe the iPod HiFi was a success. The purpose of that product was to create a market for iPod docks. At the time there wash't much of one, and likely Apple had trouble convincing companies like Sony et. al. that they should make them. I bet Apple has made more money from "Made for iPod" licensing as a result of the iPod HiFi (which kickstarted that industry) than their gross revenues from the iPod HiFi. So, mayb…

Exactly. The iPod HiFi did its job perfectly. It was designed to stick a rocket up the likes of Bose, Pioneer etc to show that Apple could easily and successfully move into their markets.

Re: The Apple Watch

#405

Post by nardi »

Shivetya wrote: post #173

My biggest disappointment, they announced a product they cannot ship. I remember the good old days, ITS AVAILABLE TODAY. Now Apple is nothing than just what they used to lampoon, a creator of announcements; not products. Perhaps we can hope they use the time to take the obvious feedback flowing in and make it right by launch

Others noted that the iPhone shipped 6 months after the announcement. The iPad shipped 3 months later.

Your entire comment is premised on a falsehood.

Re: The Apple Watch

#406

Post by blinkingled »

Tim Cook tried to make the Apple Watch his iPhone moment but it came across as off - the Watch really is nothing as revolutionary in any way shape or form as the iPhone was.

It is thick. They had to resort to gimmicks - communicating heart rates, drawing fish, three dots to ask for lunch(!) - to make it sound useful. The price is off by at least $100. They specifically danced around mentioning battery life - with these many features it might not actually be all that better than the competition - an area where Apple habitually shines.

The UI also looked complicated to me - two ways to control it - touch and the unimaginatively named crown thing. Which is again very un-Apple. (When the watch is on your wrist I kept thinking how easily am I going to find the crown. For a normal watch that thing is very rarely used and that too when it is not on the wrist.)

Not that I think SmartWatches are here to stay as a mainstream product but the little hope we had that Apple will knock it out the park with some must have feature - that hasn't panned out with the iWatch for sure.

Re: The Apple Watch

#407

Post by tptacek »

DannyBee wrote: post #347
DAddYE wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which is the not completed thing again? Apple Watch is not available yet, so I don't see the point. I rather prefer to buy something within few months than a "prototype" at retail price. Can I ask you what is the android "wear", the only one I read some good things is the 360 (also announced 3/4 months before selling it) but it's not 6 months old.

"Apple Watch is not available yet, so I don't see the point. I rather prefer to buy something within few months than a "prototype" at retail price." Uh, what makes you think it also won't be essentially a prototype, like the iphone's first software basically was (web apps only), etc? "Can I ask you what is the android "wear", the only one I read some good things is the 360 (also announced 3/4 months before selling it…

Apple's execution on what came to be core "built-in" smartphone features with the iPhone 1 was arguably better than any other implementation that had ever been on the market. It's not reasonable to refer to it as a "prototype".

It's germane to this discussion, because even though I'm as baffled as you are by the thought of the Apple Watch as a fashion accessory, there's some evidence that if Apple can nail the basics of the device and has the market targeted right, this will be looked at years from now as a successful product iteration. Not the Apple Watch in general as a product line, but this particular version of it.

Re: The Apple Watch

#408

Post by nardi »

tomelders wrote: post #378
julianpye wrote: post #8

The main innovation I like is NFC in the Watch. This makes so much sense. What is the big advantage of pulling a phone from your bag instead of a wallet? Paying with a wrist, opening doors with your wrist, entering the metro with your wrist. Can't wait for the next Wear releases from Samsung to have it integrated :)

No touch ID though, that's still on the phone so.... I'm guessing payments won't be as useful on the watch, if present at all.

Yeah, I was wondering about this. My guess is that security will be based on the fact that you wear a watch, so it's much harder to lose it or steal it. Maybe they will have a passcode that applies until you take the watch off (which they have the sensors to detect). Maybe it will confirm proximity to your phone. There are possibilities.

Re: The Apple Watch

#409

Post by nardi »

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.

This is an "iPod with a wristband" in the same way an iPad is a "really big iPod touch": not very much.

Re: The Apple Watch

#410

Post by personZ »

threeseed wrote: post #383
personZ wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but I'd argue it's with notions like "Apple has never announced a major product months before availability" and "nobody has ever made a large square watch." You've soundly beaten down notions that I certainly didn't state. Nor have I seen everyone else. However the narrative among the Apple camp was that competitors were desperately rushing to deliver vapour, and that their stodgy square mega watches were non-starter…

Sorry but you keep bringing up dynamic layouts without having a clue why they were introduced. It wasn't to create a "one app, run many" type system that Android has. It was merely to help developers support the different screen sizes within each category (iPhone, iPad). Apple still encourages developers to have UIs that are specifically tailored to the iPhone or iPad experience.

Apple still encourages developers to have UIs that are specifically tailored to the iPhone or iPad experience.

You mean exactly like Android.

Pretty remarkable having clueless people telling me that I don't know what I'm talking about: I develop in both Android and iOS. But please, inform me.

Post reply on HN