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

681–690 of 863 posts

Re: The Apple Watch

#681

Post by crazychrome »

Kurtz79 wrote: post #241
tolmasky wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The overriding feeling I had during this keynote is that every feature that I found cool in the watch I would much prefer on my phone. Cool watch app? Wait, actually that would be cooler and more usable on a big screen... Haptic feedback? Agreed, awesome idea, but no reason it can't be on my phone and buzz my leg instead of my wrist.

I think interface wise Cook has the right of it when he says they didn't just strap a reduced iPhone on the wrist. It's clear that they spent a large amount of time and effort with the haptic feedback and the crown. But functionality wise... well I completely agree with you. I can't see anything a smartphone cannot do, better and more efficiently, with the exception of the heart rate sensor. Some functions in particu…

agree. What's the killer App for it? Maybe it's the HealthKit related things, but they hardly appeal to core Apple buyers: young people! It'll be a historical change if Apple starts to add oldlies into its base.

Re: The Apple Watch

#682

Post by personlurking »

72deluxe wrote: post #604
n09n wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reality distortion field and the ability to spin those negatives as positives are features, though. A watch is primarily a piece of jewelry. How well it tells the time or does other things is much less important than how fashionable it is. Branding is one of Apple's strong suits, and you can't take that away by adding features as if consumer purchasing decisions are based on some kind of checklist-like RFPs like…

The wording in the video for the watch (narrated by Jony Ive) is full of strange phrases (I paraphrase): "the controls are vital"; "the watch is essentially..... (pause)...... a mini computer" (just like SIM cards then!) "The strap is infinitely adjustable" - that one made me chuckle, as it was referring to a strap that folds back on itself with a magnetic clasp. Of course, it isn't infinitely adjustable, as the stra…

There was another: "The simple leather classic buckle references traditional watch vocabulary".

Re: The Apple Watch

#683

Post by wiremine »

I spent about 20 minutes reading through some of the now 650+ comments, and I'm a bit surprised how common the arguments are on both sides. It feels like the entire tech community has the same basic argument every time a new 1.0 apple product is released:

Those who don't like the product:

- it is feature incomplete

- the hype doesn't match the actual product

- it doesn't actually look that great

- there are other, better products already on the market

- it is overpriced

- one or two interesting feature doesn't equate to "innovation"

And those who like the product (or love Apple) tend to have counter-points for each argument.

I'm curious if anyone has compiled a list of day zero critiques over the years for Apple successes (Mac, iPod, iPhone) or failures (Mac toaster, hifi, etc.)? It would be fun (and maybe a bit informative) for the community to review.

Edit: fixed spacing and wording.

Re: The Apple Watch

#684

Post by deong »

krrrh wrote: post #663
deong wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good thing is that we all should benefit. I've had NFC on at least my last two phones (maybe 3?), but the hardware is not ubiquitous enough to matter. I'm assuming that there's nothing locking the POS hardware into Apple Pay, and so NFC payments become a thing everyone can use.

Exceptions that Apple has negotiated "card-present" rates from banks for apple pay, because they believe touch-id, tokenized cc numbers, and the secure enclave are such an effective fraud prevention mechanism that they have shouldered extra fraud risk for the banks. I'd argue that no one in the android space can match this at scale. With the lower rates apple can either make bank or pass through better rates to merch…

I guess what I'm asking though is can the reader differentiate between the two? My understanding is that Apple sends a one-time use card number to the reader, so maybe it's possible for the software could run some variation of a Luhn check or whatever to figure out if it's an Apple generated number, but failing that, isn't the communication protocol between the phone and the payment terminal standardized?

In other words, can a merchant reasonably accept Apple Pay without accepting Google Wallet? I'd be surprised if they could, but I don't really know -- I'm legitimately asking.

A quick bit of Google indicates ISO14443 and EMV as the relevant protocols, but I'm not 100% sure there's not some incompatible extension thing going on that would preclude treating different companies' implementations the same.

Re: The Apple Watch

#685

Post by stef25 »

72deluxe wrote: post #600
beedogs wrote: post #576

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was no "early success" for the iPod. It was a failure until the third generation, when it finally got PC support.

Even then, as I recall iTunes was widely bashed? Its UI was obviously Apple UI on Windows, ignoring all Windows UI guidelines.

It's a trainwreck on Mac too. I use my iPod only when I go on holidays, say 3 - 4 times per year. I dread the moment I have to use iTunes to fill my iPod with songs. It causes me nothing but stress, which is exactly the opposite of what Apple is about.

Re: The Apple Watch

#686

Post by stef25 »

ozim wrote: post #646
kamaal wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>A watch is primarily a piece of jewelry. Not actually though. A watch is still a watch. There are so many places where you can't carry or even have the opportunity to use your smart phone to check time. Students can't carry it to exam halls, people who are driving cars, workers, there many professions and use cases where a simple device strapped to your hand is indispensable when it comes to keeping track of time.

Your examples are not really strong. Most cars have digital clocks, exam halls usually have wall clocks also cannot imagine plane without clock. I would say scubadivers, parashuters would need it but how many are there? There are also workplaces where you cannot wear jewelery and watches (working with food, machinery) but company phone is permitted or must. I would say that in places where keeping track of time is ne…

> I would say that it is primarily a piece of jewelery.

Disagree. I've been too lazy to replace the battery of my 12EUR retro Casio watch for a couple weeks now and my girlfriend's getting sick of me asking all the time "what time is it". When I'm walking around outside or when on my bicycle, pulling my phone out of my pocket to check the time is a pain. When I'm in the shower I really want to know the time to the minute cause I know I have to leave the house at exactly 7:30.

Re: The Apple Watch

#687

Post by akfanta »

jamesrom wrote: post #471
akfanta wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is pretty ridiculous comparison. The Apple watch is clearly not targeted to any serious runners/triathletes. I don't recall anyone claim it's a "sports watch".

Apple Watch Sport http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-sport/

There is a huge difference between a sports watch and a sports edition of a watch.

Re: The Apple Watch

#688

Post by aioprisan »

sz4kerto wrote: post #615
aioprisan wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a serious runner, there is no way that I would run for an extended distance without my phone on me. First of all because I would rather not have to drag my injured self out somewhere to ask for help, rather than being able to call for it from my phone. Whenever I do triathlon training, I would also not think of leaving without my phone, as I tend to go for 30-40 mile bike rides into remote areas, and having a way…

Many Garmin watches last much more than 7 hours. My old 310XT lasts around 12.

I've had both the 310XT and the 910XT, and neither lasts more than 6 hours now. Using the heart rate monitor strap greatly impacts my battery life, for some reason. I wish there was a way to tell how many cycles my batteries have left in them. I think it's time for an upgrade :)

Re: The Apple Watch

#689

Post by bnjs »

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.

I run and this is fine with me. I don't go anywhere without my phone anyway, and I imagine GPS on the Watch would mean shorter battery life or bigger battery/watch.

Re: The Apple Watch

#690

Post by asmosoinio »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #605
chipotle_coyote wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The LG Prada was an impressive piece of hardware and certainly pointed in the same direction, sure, but it was essentially a feature phone -- a smaller, lower-resolution, grayscale display with no Internet capability to speak of. You had to use a virtual phone keyboard for text messaging, even. There was certainly nothing like Safari, for instance, or any of Apple's messaging applications. Actually, I'd say that the…

The standard definition of "featurephone" is not having the ability to install apps. Like the original iPhone, which intended you to use web apps apart from those built in. As you say, others had app stores first. If Android had launched without the ability to install apps then some Apple blogs would still be talking about how it was fundemantally not designed for the current smartphone era and would never be as good…

> The standard definition of "featurephone" is not having the ability to install apps.

I disagree with that definition: For example all cheapest Nokia phones since a long time ago supported (roughly when they got color screens, some even before that) installing J2ME applications. Same for cheap Samsungs and LGs of the same time.

And these are definitely not smart phones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_3410 ""Downloadable personal applications via Java technology""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_Platform,_Micro_Edition

Post reply on HN