51–60 of 300 posts
This is a very interesting article, and I like how it's written in the perspective of a functional watch user instead of being about fashion or watch collecting. I couldn't help but laugh at this part: > Also, though it sounds trivial, I enjoy the perfect 60 FPS smoothness of Apple Watch’s second hand — a smoothness no mechanical watch could ever match. Isn't a mechanical watch hand ∞ FPS by definition? Real life has…
This is a very interesting article, and I like how it's written in the perspective of a functional watch user instead of being about fashion or watch collecting. I couldn't help but laugh at this part: > Also, though it sounds trivial, I enjoy the perfect 60 FPS smoothness of Apple Watch’s second hand — a smoothness no mechanical watch could ever match. Isn't a mechanical watch hand ∞ FPS by definition? Real life has…
Nothing can be infinity FPS because it would be limited by the frequency of the light that we use to see the watch hand. In the case of the visual spectrum, it caps out around 668 THz with blue light (red light is lowest at 400 THz). This would make it "only" ~4.7E12 times better than 144 Hz ;-).
Gruber's scenario with the two high school kids sending each other love taps, scribbles, and heartbeats was poignant. While the Apple Watch isn't for me, I can't begrudge those who decide to buy one. I think back to the late 90s and how I wouldn't have met my wife if not for IMing a screenname a mutual friend of ours passed along to me. The internet, a crappy eMachines desktop, and AIM made this possible. Technically…
Two high school kids each with a $400 watch. It may be poignant[1], but it won't be common. [1]It could also be eye-roll-worthy bourgeois douchebaggery depending on your socio-economic perspective.
Now if that happens, it might be a sad commentary on the allocation of resources in our society - globally. But if the Apple Watch is successful, I would be surprised if it isn't common (>20% adoption) in thousands of USA high schools and lots of other high schools around the globe.
I would imagine high school ownership rate could well be higher than overall society ownership rate. Though I'll admit that is just a wild guess by a uniformed individual on this matter.
Gruber's scenario with the two high school kids sending each other love taps, scribbles, and heartbeats was poignant. While the Apple Watch isn't for me, I can't begrudge those who decide to buy one. I think back to the late 90s and how I wouldn't have met my wife if not for IMing a screenname a mutual friend of ours passed along to me. The internet, a crappy eMachines desktop, and AIM made this possible. Technically…
Two high school kids each with a $400 watch. It may be poignant[1], but it won't be common. [1]It could also be eye-roll-worthy bourgeois douchebaggery depending on your socio-economic perspective.
There is a huge group of users that put a high value on continuous connectivity.
For the high school kid, a limiting factor may be that schools will forbid them from wearing a watch in class.
“You’ll still be able to do with Apple Watch what you do with your current watch: tell the time (and if you want, the date) at a glance and trust that it’s accurate.” ...if you return your watch to a charging station daily. He goes on: That said, compared to a traditional watch, daily charging is terrible. Before entering into the smartphone market, I charged my cellphone less than 100 times per year. Now, I have to…
I never quite understood the complaints about smartphones not having a multi-day battery life. As long as it makes it from morning to bedtime and charges to 100% overnight, what's the problem? Obviously if it can't make it to bedtime on one charge, that's a problem, but nightly charging makes no real difference. I imagine the watch will be similar. A one-day battery life for a watch is kind of absurd, but it doesn't…
How does this guy always nail his articles? I think he's the only one I've ever heard of who gets paid so much to write blog articles.
Gruber has perfected the art of knowing your audience - and his audience is people who are neck deep in the Apple ecosystem. His writing is practically a prescription for managing post-purchase cognitive dissonance for Apple consumers. I think he's an excellent writer but let's be honest, he doesn't really "review" Apple products any more than their marketing department. Apple could re-introduce the Newton and Gruber…
While they have not re-introduced the Newton, his latest podcast mentions the Newton and very similar in tone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never quite understood the complaints about smartphones not having a multi-day battery life. As long as it makes it from morning to bedtime and charges to 100% overnight, what's the problem? Obviously if it can't make it to bedtime on one charge, that's a problem, but nightly charging makes no real difference. I imagine the watch will be similar. A one-day battery life for a watch is kind of absurd, but it doesn't…
If you travel, it's one more thing to carry. Plus, I occasionally forget to plug the phone in to charge at night. My current smartphone makes it through two days without charging, though.
This is a very interesting article, and I like how it's written in the perspective of a functional watch user instead of being about fashion or watch collecting. I couldn't help but laugh at this part: > Also, though it sounds trivial, I enjoy the perfect 60 FPS smoothness of Apple Watch’s second hand — a smoothness no mechanical watch could ever match. Isn't a mechanical watch hand ∞ FPS by definition? Real life has…
I'm going to take your ∞ FPS comment on go on a wild tangent because physics is fun :-D: Nothing can be infinity FPS because it would be limited by the frequency of the light that we use to see the watch hand. In the case of the visual spectrum, it caps out around 668 THz with blue light (red light is lowest at 400 THz). This would make it "only" ~4.7E12 times better than 144 Hz ;-).
With that said, though, I believe that the movement of the actual atoms making up the mechanical hands is still happening in an "infinitely smooth" sense, although the way we measure and observe that movement (via reflections of light or perhaps some other type of electromagnetic radiation) may be limited.