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

761–770 of 863 posts

Re: The Apple Watch

#761

Post by syncsynchalt »

mikestew wrote: post #529
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.

"$350!? And it can't even do the things my highly specialized device can do." It's funny you should mention the Forerunner 910, because you know what the 910 can't do? Be a watch. But that's okay because you didn't buy it to be a watch. Besides, I'm the only runner I know that doesn't bring a phone with me when I run.

It's ironic if the 910 can't tell you the time, since one of the necessary components of a GPS device is a ridiculously accurate clock.

Re: The Apple Watch

#762

Post by Bostwick »

gnarbarian wrote: post #327
_red wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Imagine a typical scenario. You are walking down the street and suddenly need to navigate somewhere. How many minutes are you going to waste playing with that little nub and resizing things on the screen before finally pulling out your phone and just using that. Reminds me of a joke I heard: A local school board was trying to find ways to increase the efficiency of their schools. A local computer programmer had come…

I like the watch idea personally. Say you're riding your bike and you receive a text message. in order to see what's going on you will probably have to stop and take the phone out of your pocket. with a watch you can simply look at your wrist quickly.

As a daily bike commuter around Boston, this idea terrifies me. Multitasking is extremely dangerous while biking. There are already enough bikers out there who choose to distract themselves with earphones and music while biking. Reading a text message while weaving in traffic is a recipe for disaster. When you're on a bike, be on the bike.

Re: The Apple Watch

#763

Post by jlebar »

kenrikm wrote: post #755
hayleyanthony wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=female From Wikipedia: "It is not etymologically related to the word male, but in the late 14th century the spelling was altered in English to parallel the spelling of male." I honestly don't understand how "female" is any worse then "woman" honest question I'm easily the least sexist person you could run into (ask my wife) but sometimes it seems like no mater what you're stil…

I think the issue is that "female" can refer to any species, whereas "woman" refers only to humans. So when someone obliquely refers to women and someone responds "oh, you're talking about females!", the subtext is that they have now realized that we're talking about women, but haven't quite realized that women are people too.

It would be the same as calling someone a "human" rather than a "person". Like aliens do in the movies. Maybe you don't feel that's dehumanizing, but I think a lot of people would.

(Classicist pet peeve: A word's etymology has nothing to do with its modern denotation and connotation.)

Re: The Apple Watch

#764

Post by josefresco »

leoc wrote: post #369
ajju wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment reminded me of CmdrTaco's slashdot comment after the iPod launch: http://t.co/RPAX2r93kx I think Garmin forerunner will be to the future of wearables what Nomad was to the future of music in 2002.

Do you remember what a Creative Nomad Jukebox actually looked like around 2001? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQaplenaBl4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PR5hPd_inno Existing MP3 players offered a pretty rough user experience; the iPod was a pleasure to use in comparison. Largely the same was true of iPhone as compared to existing smartphones. The first generations of iPod and iPhone also had hardware that was stri…

"Existing MP3 players offered a pretty rough user experience; the iPod was a pleasure to use in comparison."

You clearly didn't own one of the first gen of iPod. Amazing as it was, crashes, reformatting and general bugginess were daily occurrences.

What the iPod brought to the table was a (buggy) new interface and click wheel which allowed you to browse your massive collection of pirated MP3's and ripped CD's much easier than other methods. Also form factor/hardware design was more pleasing to the eye to many.

Re: The Apple Watch

#765

Post by [deleted] »

jlebar wrote: post #763
kenrikm wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=female From Wikipedia: "It is not etymologically related to the word male, but in the late 14th century the spelling was altered in English to parallel the spelling of male." I honestly don't understand how "female" is any worse then "woman" honest question I'm easily the least sexist person you could run into (ask my wife) but sometimes it seems like no mater what you're stil…

I think the issue is that "female" can refer to any species, whereas "woman" refers only to humans. So when someone obliquely refers to women and someone responds "oh, you're talking about females!", the subtext is that they have now realized that we're talking about women, but haven't quite realized that women are people too. It would be the same as calling someone a "human" rather than a "person". Like aliens do in…

[deleted]

Re: The Apple Watch

#766

Post by josefresco »

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

As others have pointed out, similar lag times were seen with the original iPhone and iPad launches. Despite this, the small lag time for each iteration since has other people complaining: http://bgr.com/2014/09/10/apple-watch-release-date-analysis/...:

Re: The Apple Watch

#767

Post by LeicaLatte »

72deluxe wrote: post #701
LeicaLatte wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying you don't wish you had 5 arms? You must be a fool. But the answer to your question is, I was gifted 4 of them once people saw that I wear a watch. Watches work like that.

I would be happier with 4 arms, as a fifth arm would make balancing awkward. Let's hope that if you get a "smartwatch", people will start buying you plenty of them!

I am not getting a "smart watch". Its called Apple Watch.

Re: The Apple Watch

#768

Post by josefresco »

jamesrom wrote: post #400
zmmmmm wrote: post #381

My biggest take away is that Apple has failed to advance the state of the art in any meaningful way here. I guess hype is always hype, but people really expected that Apple would do something that would knock this out of the park - a week long battery life, a flexible watch face, or a bracelet style 360 degree screen or something else that would just reset the whole space. It didn't happen. This device may sell well…

It's exactly one generation ahead.

More like half a generation (if that). And by the time it ships, the lead in tech will be all but gone.

Re: The Apple Watch

#769

Post by rmrfrmrf »

rmc wrote: post #739
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.

The fact that it got to a 3rd generation implies it wasn't a "failure"

Sort of related to your comment: IMO the common thread in all (recent-ish?) Apple products is that the first iteration is usually rough around the edges and met with the most amount of criticism, then what always seems to happen is that Apple takes the feedback to heart and massively improves on subsequent iterations. Some examples I can think of:

* While the first MacBook Air was crazy expensive and nearly universally panned for lack of a DVD-ROM drive, the MBA was repositioned in 2011 as the ultraportable replacement for the MacBook and is now the best-selling Mac.

* The first iPhone was blasted for its absurd price (due in part to lack of carrier subsidization), lack of 3G, lack of copy and paste (remember how upset people got about this? lol) and no third party apps. By the time the 3G rolled around, most of the software concerns were addressed and the price drop made sales jump $10m from 2007 to 2008.

* The first iPad (also known as the iTampon if you were following Twitter on the day it was announced) was criticized as being a giant iPhone, having a low pixel density (merely 1024x768), and lacking any ability to get "real work" done on it. Each iteration of the iPad has gotten more and more positive reviews due to the incremental changes (mostly in processor and pixel density) made over the years.

It more or less goes without saying, then, that I'm not really surprised that people expected more from the Apple Watch. Apple's really fortunate to have such a great community of rabid early adopters who are more than happy to put its products through the ringer and hold Apple to a higher standard.

Re: The Apple Watch

#770

Post by gfodor »

adam wrote: post #757
moogleii wrote: post #746

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious what your defense is to their success with the non-Apple faithful, though. That always seems to be left unsaid. The good ol' common "marketing" play from the Android diehards may have accounted for some of its success, but I think it's immensely dense to attribute a large proportion of Apple's current (and recent past) success to it (you might get to fortune 500 with that, but getting to #1 wealthiest com…

All you need to do is go to Apple's claim they have a design driven methodology. It's fairly predictable then when they roll out something like Apple Pay that they're going to not do it until they have the requisite business deals in place to make it a good experience for the users. How successful they are at the friction point of tech and design varies (iTunes sucks :) but that's always their goal and worldview of h…

You have to admit it's kind of ridiculous that a "design driven methodology" is even a thing. Consider the alternative.
Post reply on HN