Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand high-end wrist watches have been using sapphire crystal faces for over 30 years, so there's probably something in it. I have one - my watch still looks perfect 8 years since I got it.
Sapphire is nicer on really high end stuff just for protection purposes. It's abrasion resistance is much much higher. If i was buying a smartwatch for 10 years, i'd agree it'd be a great feature. But i don't, i buy them for 3 years. High end watches have it for the same reason - people expect them to last forever. If people are expecting a smartwatch (apple's or anyones) to last them 10 years, sapphire is going to b…
The Apple Watch
731–740 of 863 posts
Re: The Apple Watch
#732While 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…
Re: The Apple Watch
#733Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your statistic confused me until I realized you were [assumedly] referencing females who keep their phones in their purses/bags.
Please try to say women, not "females." I don't think you meant anything by it but when you always see that usage, (common in tech spaces) it starts to feel a little dehumanizing.
Re: The Apple Watch
#734Earlier 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…
Somehow this has taken off as a talking point, yet all NFC secure element payment solutions qualify as "card present". Google Wallet, for example, is card present. The NFC on my card is card present.
It isn't about negotiations, but indicates the security of the presentation. NFC secure elements are considered card equivalent.
Re: The Apple Watch
#735Earlier 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…
I don't know that it felt Samsung. When I heard about the feature I immediately thought of how I might use it with my wife and family. It basically takes the trivial communication you have with people close to you throughout the day and makes it more physical and less complex. I don't think I've gotten that feeling from Samsung features — that said, I don't really have any desire to wear this (or any) watch at all.
> 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 big difference between "force press" and "long press".
Yeah, I'd like to know more about this. It felt like one of the more clever features if it is actually distinct from long press. That is, if it can feel easily distinguishable from a press or swipe while still feeling intuitive, I think they will really have something.
> Is the "Taptic" feedback significantly different that the vibrating motor present on every other watch? I can't really tell, but I think functionally, vibration can already serve the purpose well enough, although the Apple implementation might be a bit more elegant -- I can't find enough information to say for sure.
Well according to the keynote the "Taptic" feedback unit can actually mark out directions on your wrist. That is, telling you to turn left or right when you come to an intersection purely through touch. So unless it's something stupid like "two vibrates for left, one for right" it might actually be something interesting.
> the idea of needing to zoom around to launch apps seems less like a good idea, but overall the novel input method is an innovation I'd say.
It sounds like you can do either. They mention tapping to zoom in on an "app neighbourhood" and tapping once again to launch an app. I also think the digital crown is quite clever — and it will be a very Apple-thing to pull off if they can make it feel truly one-to-one with the UI animations.
> I assume they must have NFC in the watch to handle the payments system.
I've read that the NFC payments through the watch will be tied to skin contact. So they will only work while the device is touching your skin. If you lose skin contact you'll have to re-enter your pin code next time you wear the watch to enable payments. Seems like a well thought out use case.
> Mostly though, I think that the people who complained that Android Wear was just a mini cell phone on your wrist should be disappointed with the Apple Watch as well. I'm not one of them for the record, I'm wearing the Gear Live right now, and I quite like it. But I don't think Apple has revolutionized the smart watch. They've just made what looks to be a solid entry into the market.
I agree. Though I'm a little disappointed that the Apple Watch attempts to be so many things.
Re: The Apple Watch
#736While 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…
Re: The Apple Watch
#737Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the one that would make you look the least like a dork would be the one from Motorola? The band connection to the very bottom is really too bad, it makes the watch look extremely thick.
Thanks! I was trying to figure out why the Watch looks thick from the side, but seemed not too thick in photos on peoples' wrists. That explains it.
Re: The Apple Watch
#738Earlier quoted context omitted.
What casual runner goes running without their phone? That's how we get GPS, work with Nike+ gear, and can be reached if someone needs us or make a call if we need to. How many leave their phone on the house and go out jogging?
> What casual runner goes running without their phone? Judging by the answers you got, ones who have oversized phones and think that shaving a little weight is worth not being able to call emergencies (who cares, they can use a strangers phone if that happens, just like the guys who cycle and skip tools, patches and pumps and then end up asking people passing them by, and anyway emergencies happen to other people). O…
1) I like being able to know time and date at a quick glance -- the ease of this is light years ahead of any smartphone. 2) It never runs out of juice since it doesn't have a battery. 3) It looks good (IMO). 4) I irrationally like the fact that my moving about gives life to a tiny beating mechanism. For that reason my watch has a power reserve meter.
Have zero interest in smartwatches though. I have enough crap to keep charged as is.
Re: The Apple Watch
#739Earlier quoted context omitted.
It absolutely did. You may have forgotten, but the early success of iTunes/iPod was in being able to organize your music and get it on your device. iTunes/iPod was the first to really get this right on any kind of scale. And, compared to the competition of the time, they really nailed it. So, a phone that had that integrated was a really big deal, even if it couldn't run any apps (as the first iPhone did and couldn't…
There was no "early success" for the iPod. It was a failure until the third generation, when it finally got PC support.
Re: The Apple Watch
#740Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm old enough to remember to spell, and remember when the first Mac came out. The response has always been the same; one segment pointing out problems, another pointing out how "visionary" the new thing is. If you are as old as you claim to be, and still fall foul of corporate machinations - then "sucks to be you". Next you'll tell us what your current corporate master told you to say. There a many things wrong with…
> There a many things wrong with what you wrote; the most glaring is: "haven't seen anything innovative from Google since 2001". Later you go on to say, "unless you count gmail". 1. gmail wasn't released until 2004 2. the whole thing called "ads" wasn't available until 2001. 3. Android copied iOS. Which copied Windows. Which copied MacOS. Which copied GEM. Which copied x/PARC. Someone once said "good artists copy, gr…
Windows didn't have a mobile operating system at the time
I can only assume you're referring to Windows Phone, which was released after iOS. But you've omitted Windows Mobile, which was released in 2000.