Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#61

Post by blinkingled » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:47 AM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #52

rtpg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't see how the overall point doesn't equally apply to the Apple Watch. This is something that nobody seems to want to acknowledge in (for lack of a better word) the Apple fanclub. If you look at the features of the Apple watch, they are basically the same as every other smartwatch released by Samsung and motorola (except for the NFC/Apple Pay stuff, which I am genuinly excited for). People are trying really hard…

Ars Technica recently did a comparison of (what we know of) the Watch software, and the Android Wear software: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/09/smartwatch-wars-the-app... Android Wear looks very primitive in comparison.

> primitive

In the same sense that 2010 era iPhone was primitive? It's a different design strategy on part of Google - given the limited screen real estate they want to keep the information density minimal. That's actually a Apple-esq stance whereas Apple is taking Android-esq stance of adding ton of involved stuff which frankly doesn't sound too right for a smart watch.

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#62

Post by rtpg » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:47 AM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #52

rtpg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't see how the overall point doesn't equally apply to the Apple Watch. This is something that nobody seems to want to acknowledge in (for lack of a better word) the Apple fanclub. If you look at the features of the Apple watch, they are basically the same as every other smartwatch released by Samsung and motorola (except for the NFC/Apple Pay stuff, which I am genuinly excited for). People are trying really hard…

Ars Technica recently did a comparison of (what we know of) the Watch software, and the Android Wear software: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/09/smartwatch-wars-the-app... Android Wear looks very primitive in comparison.

Kind of interesting to see Apple on the more information-dense side of the UI, I actually think that most of the Android Wear shots look cleaner (though maybe there's too little information), but I digress.

I'm still a bit confused on the ease of use of Apple's UI ,namely the Zoom UI. I'll have to try it to understand.

The fact that this comparison even exists shows that Apple's attempt is not "revolutionary" in any sense of the word: Every Wear screen was duplicated on the Watch. The functionality is the same.

But the main issues with smartwatches are still battery life, size, and general uselessness without the phone. These points were not tackled. So Apple Watch could be a local maximum for this style of watch, but it's not the second coming unfortunately.

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#63

Post by dilap » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:49 AM UTC

Here's a fun sport for Apple watchers, aficionados and detractors alike: has Apple jumped the shark yet in the post-Steve era?

(The game's a bit Candyland-esque; we always arrive at "yes": if Apple's strategy is inflexible post-Steve, they're doomed, if they make any changes, they are also doomed.)

Let's play anyway.

The big, flashing, worrying sign of changed-for-the-worse Apple isn't any hullaboloo about Warhol and luxury, it's that Apple didn't show us a product!

All they have is a fancy looking piece of hardware and a bunch of tech demos with a UI that clearly isn't cohesive or thought out enough to work in the real world.

And then, on top of that, they bragged a bit about how many features the Watch was going to have.

This is real "danger Will Robinson" territory for Apple, in the traditional Gruber understanding of what makes Apple great: focussing on actual products with a a well-thought out core rather than a lard of features or pie-in-the-sky tech demos.

Gruber buries the lead a bit on this dramatic change. He doesn't get around to mentioning it until deep into the article, and then rather wavily dismisses the change with this bizarre explanation:

He suggests that Apple decided to demo a non-product because they couldn't keep the hardware secret long enough for the software to catch up.

If that's true, that means, what, Apple views secret-unveilings as its core principle?

But I think more likely is that Gruber mind is just going through reflexive contortions of justification here, and the truth is simpler: Apple is slowly losing the focus that for a brief few years really did make it unique among tech companies.

Certainly hope to end up eating crow on this, though. :)

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#64

Post by peteretep » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:49 AM UTC

rtpg wrote: post #44

Kylekramer wrote: post #28

My impression of Android Wear is that it’s best thought of as a wrist-worn terminal for your Android phone and for Google’s cloud-based services. An extension for your phone, not a sibling device. Android Wear devices are almost useless other than for telling time when out of Bluetooth range from your phone. I don’t think that’s a device that many people want; it’s a solution in search of a problem. I don't see how t…

> don't see how the overall point doesn't equally apply to the Apple Watch. This is something that nobody seems to want to acknowledge in (for lack of a better word) the Apple fanclub. If you look at the features of the Apple watch, they are basically the same as every other smartwatch released by Samsung and motorola (except for the NFC/Apple Pay stuff, which I am genuinly excited for). People are trying really hard…

Apple fan-boy here. I agree with the grandparent that Gruber didn't really make this point well. But:

    > If you look at the features of the Apple watch, they are
    > basically the same as every other smartwatch released by
    > Samsung and motorola

This is basically true of almost every Apple product ever, except perhaps the iPhone at launch. I'll go a step further, and agree that Apple generally lags on features comparisons.

Which leads to one of two conclusions: Apple fans are all idiots caught up in marketing bluster, OR, there's something qualitatively different about Apple's take on their products, enough to stump up the extra cash. And you're welcome to the former of those opinions, but I think it's the second.

Fundamentally, I buy Apple for the same reason I shop with Amazon. There is - to me - enough implicit guarantee of quality (for Amazon, of the logistics, returns, etc) that anything else seems needlessly risky.

I'd probably enjoy and find value in a Moto '360. But I might not. I think I'd want to use one for a few weeks before committing to the cash. But my experience of Apple products to date suggests to me I'm going to love my Apple Watch, enough that I'll stump up the cash sight unseen.

    > there's nothing revolutionary about this, and its
    > functionally the same as the 6 watches that Samsung has
    > released, and will probably be almost as underwhelming

History is not on your side with this one.

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#65

Post by msabalau » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:49 AM UTC

LeoPanthera wrote: post #52

rtpg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't see how the overall point doesn't equally apply to the Apple Watch. This is something that nobody seems to want to acknowledge in (for lack of a better word) the Apple fanclub. If you look at the features of the Apple watch, they are basically the same as every other smartwatch released by Samsung and motorola (except for the NFC/Apple Pay stuff, which I am genuinly excited for). People are trying really hard…

Ars Technica recently did a comparison of (what we know of) the Watch software, and the Android Wear software: http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/09/smartwatch-wars-the-app... Android Wear looks very primitive in comparison.

To be clear, for people, who haven't read the article, it's making case that Apple and Google are taking "vastly different routes to getting a computer on your wrist" and that "we'll see who has the better approach in 2015".

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#66

Post by Watabou » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:50 AM UTC

elblanco wrote: post #50

rtpg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't see how the overall point doesn't equally apply to the Apple Watch. This is something that nobody seems to want to acknowledge in (for lack of a better word) the Apple fanclub. If you look at the features of the Apple watch, they are basically the same as every other smartwatch released by Samsung and motorola (except for the NFC/Apple Pay stuff, which I am genuinly excited for). People are trying really hard…

> And we know that Android Wear kind of sucks. So if they're not that different, Apple Watch will probably not be that great. that's really the salient point isn't it? Apple's playing catchup, but shooting for targets that probably aren't all that great to begin with.

What part is Apple playing catch up with exactly?

Based on what I saw, Apple Watch seems to me, a lot more than just a notification device that Android Wear is.

Additionally, there's nothing in Android Wear that I've seen that focuses on the watch being, well, a watch. All the straps sucked, we don't know if the time is precise (this is the first thing Apple said about the Apple Watch), and most importantly, none of the watches out focus on user experience at all. They just wanted to be first out.

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#67

Post by jnevill » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:51 AM UTC

bane wrote: post #42

swang wrote: post #38

"The iPad/iPhone is soooo egalitarian!" "Is Apple losing the egalitarianism it never had? No, it had Macs, it was never egalitarian!" Why was this in the article at all then? Using an analogy that in the end the author itself destroys is bad writing, or at worst extra reading for the reader for no gain. In his own article he never considers Apple egalitarian, yet he is asking a hypothetical question as though Apple w…

Gruber deserves a prize of some sort of most concentrated example of cognitive dissonance ever put into writing for this post. It's really one of the worst of the worst I've seen.

I am no Gruber fan and I am no Apple fanboi, but I think his points are dead on in this post. He is hedging his bets, repeatedly, but given that we know so little about the Apple Watch, that seems reasonable. At any rate, the main point of the article being that the iWatch is not a play into the Wearables market, but rather a move into the much more lucrative luxury watch market. Given how bloated that market is and the value that the Apple name bestows on its products, I think that it's a reasonable assumption. That being said, his "Apple is not a technology company" line is weak. That's like trying to argue that WalMart isn't in the retail business, but rather distribution. You see... they do distribution better than any other company in their space (which is retail) therefore they are in distribution.

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#68

Post by savoytruffle » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:52 AM UTC

elblanco wrote: post #53

craigching wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't see how the overall point doesn't equally apply to the Apple Watch. Playing music via Bluetooth only But Gruber says this: > It has internal storage and Bluetooth, so you’ll be able to use it for music playback without taking your iPhone with you. Is Gruber wrong about that? I admittedly don't know, but he sounds authoritative here that the Apple Watch has storage for tunes. That's pretty cool to me.

Pretty much all the smartwatches have sufficient internal storage for some music. They're probably all just an app away from supporting this kind of use-case. In other words Gruber's case on this is irrelevant.

The AppleTV, which is not marketed as having any internal storage at all, has the same (meager) 8GB of storage as the now free-with-contract iPhone 5C.

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#69

Post by IBM » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:52 AM UTC

dilap wrote: post #63

Here's a fun sport for Apple watchers, aficionados and detractors alike: has Apple jumped the shark yet in the post-Steve era? (The game's a bit Candyland-esque; we always arrive at "yes": if Apple's strategy is inflexible post-Steve, they're doomed, if they make any changes, they are also doomed.) Let's play anyway. The big, flashing, worrying sign of changed-for-the-worse Apple isn't any hullaboloo about Warhol and…

Much like the iPhone announcement then.

Re: Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations

#70

Post by blinkingled » Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 2:58 AM UTC

bane wrote: post #42

swang wrote: post #38

"The iPad/iPhone is soooo egalitarian!" "Is Apple losing the egalitarianism it never had? No, it had Macs, it was never egalitarian!" Why was this in the article at all then? Using an analogy that in the end the author itself destroys is bad writing, or at worst extra reading for the reader for no gain. In his own article he never considers Apple egalitarian, yet he is asking a hypothetical question as though Apple w…

Gruber deserves a prize of some sort of most concentrated example of cognitive dissonance ever put into writing for this post. It's really one of the worst of the worst I've seen.

I have to agree with you that he really did outdo himself on this one. His posts generally have one of his many hallmarks but this one seems to have quite a tangle of all of those.