Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

PracticalMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 22, 2009
2,857
5,242
Houston, TX
What problem do they solve?

(cause I'm pretty sure I don't have that problem)

I venture to guess it is the first step to a new "iPhone".

That is something that is much more like a basic phone with limited app support.

The 1930's comic Dick Tracy has his TV watch, and we are tantalizing close to reality.
 

craftytony

macrumors regular
Oct 3, 2012
226
0
Sycamore, IL
Some very ill informed users in this thread. I also fail to understand why some people cant have a decent discussion without have to resort to childish name calling such as "Samesung" "ShameSung" etc etc. Very boring :rolleyes:

Samsung released the first WatchPhone back in 1999 called the SPH-WP10

Image

Samsung also released a WatchPhone in France during 2009, called the S9110

Image



Bet lets not let facts get in the way eh?! :rolleyes:

And.......where are they now? ;)

Apple doesn't rush to be first to market, they just turn the above mentioned Shamesung failures into products people will actually love to use.
 

Lex Yu

macrumors member
Nov 27, 2009
32
0
Competition is always good for consumer even if most (maybe just the most vocal shall I say) of you wish there was only apple in the world.

Competition ≠ Plagiarism

Plagiarism is always bad for humanity even if some people in far east must have found an easy way for living in the world.


Bonus: Here are just a few of examples.

http://obamapacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Samsung-Tablet-copied-Apple-iPad.jpg

http://cdn.mactrast.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Samsung-Apple-Cable-Copy.jpg

http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/844649/2011-04-19applesam7.jpg

http://obamapacman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Samsung-copied-Apple-iPod-touch.jpg
 
Last edited:

nick_elt

macrumors 68000
Oct 28, 2011
1,578
0

Competition doesn't equal plagiarism and how do you know that Samsung watch will be just like apples? Because it tells the time and connects to you phone? Please give me a break.
 

BaldiMac

macrumors G3
Jan 24, 2008
8,745
10,845
I think Tog needs to figure out what a killer application really is.

Whatever this smartphone idea is, it is not a killer application.

Seems he has a different opinion that you. And significant experience to back it up.
 

craftytony

macrumors regular
Oct 3, 2012
226
0
Sycamore, IL
Competition doesn't equal plagiarism and how do you know that Samsung watch will be just like apples? Because it tells the time and connects to you phone? Please give me a break.

It will probably be like apple's because they like to copy apple, as history has proven. But maybe that 1+ Billion dollar lawsuit loss, will keep them from copying this time around :)
 

Carniphage

macrumors 68000
Oct 29, 2006
1,880
1
Sheffield, England
Seems he has a different opinion that you. And significant experience to back it up.

Which is why he is now in charge of Apple!

My view is this is currently a non product. A froth whipped up by the press, on the back of some lame Kickstarted projects.

The typical consumer does not have a problem that a smart watch would solve. A device that can be held in the hand does not need a remote control or a terminal.

We don't want yet another device to charge up every day.
It would be useless as an input device. And with a 1" screen, useless as a complementary display.

My prediction is that no device resembling this will be released by Apple.

Why?
Because Apple are meticulous about creating products that have a genuine consumer benefit. They build things, try them out, and if they are not insanely useful, they get dumped.

Apple let others make gimmicky crap. And when the press scream "Oh! Apple, why oh why don't you wake up and release a XXXX"? Apple just smile quietly to themselves.

And then release something worthwhile.
 

BaldiMac

macrumors G3
Jan 24, 2008
8,745
10,845
Which is why he is now in charge of Apple!

My view is this is currently a non product. A froth whipped up by the press, on the back of some lame Kickstarted projects.

The typical consumer does not have a problem that a smart watch would solve. A device that can be held in the hand does not need a remote control or a terminal.

We don't want yet another device to charge up every day.
It would be useless as an input device. And with a 1" screen, useless as a complementary display.

My prediction is that no device resembling this will be released by Apple.

Why?
Because Apple are meticulous about creating products that have a genuine consumer benefit. They build things, try them out, and if they are not insanely useful, they get dumped.

Apple let others make gimmicky crap. And when the press scream "Oh! Apple, why oh why don't you wake up and release a XXXX"? Apple just smile quietly to themselves.

And then release something worthwhile.

Strange that you ignored all of the key points in the post that I linked to while dismissing it.

Security and identity confirmation for your connected devices can be a "killer app" of an "iWatch" type product.
 

Carniphage

macrumors 68000
Oct 29, 2006
1,880
1
Sheffield, England
Strange that you ignored all of the key points in the post that I linked to.

Security and identity confirmation for your connected devices can be a "killer app" of an "iWatch" type product.

I think identity confirmation is an essential technology. It's going to be huge, because it could solve the password problem AND the credit card fraud problem.

But the way to deliver that is putting biometric identity verification into the phone. Which is, of course, why Apple acquired a sub-dermal fingerprint recognition company.

This technology will obviously go into the phone itself and not into a lame peripheral that only geeks** would wear.

People who would not wear a smart watch:
1) People who don't like watches.
2) People who do like watches. (and own Rolexes etc)
3) Women.

Disclaimer. I am a geek. But I wouldn't wear a smart watch.
 
Last edited:

BaldiMac

macrumors G3
Jan 24, 2008
8,745
10,845
I think identity confirmation is an essential technology. It's going to be huge, because it could solve the password problem AND the credit card fraud problem.

Exactly my point. You asked for a problem that a smart watch type product could solve. There's your answer.

Assuming that Apple would implement it in a way that most people won't use is just begging the question.
 

craftytony

macrumors regular
Oct 3, 2012
226
0
Sycamore, IL
I think identity confirmation is an essential technology. It's going to be huge, because it could solve the password problem AND the credit card fraud problem.

But the way to deliver that is putting biometric identity verification into the phone. Which is, of course, why Apple acquired a sub-dermal fingerprint recognition company.

This technology will obviously go into the phone itself and not into a lame peripheral that only geeks** would wear.

People who would not wear a smart watch:
1) People who don't like watches.
2) People who who do like watches. (and own Rolexes etc)
3) Women.

Disclaimer. I am a geek. But I wouldn't wear a smart watch.

I for one think this could definitely be a new market. I have read articles recently stating how the wristwatch market is in decline. I for one no longer wear watches unless it's a formal event. But I think the things a smartwatch could do, could change all that.

Examples I personally would love to see:
While using runkeeper I would be able to see what song is playing, check my distance/pace, all at a glance.

When sitting in meetings, playing video games, or at work, see who is calling/texting me at a glance, and even give quick responses from the watch without having to pull my phone out.

Misplaced phone? Simply use an app built into the watch to find it or play a sound (vice versa).

Driving? Don't have bluetooth in your vehicle? Use speakerphone on the watch and drive safely.

I 100% agree, there are definitely hurdles that will need to be overcome.

It will have to look amazing, give us the above abilities and more, and have great battery life.

But I guess arguing over this, really doesn't matter. We'll all see what happens sooner or later...better or worse :)
 

alent1234

macrumors 603
Jun 19, 2009
5,688
170
Check out pebble smartwatch

Iwatch would be a bike computer, keep track of running routes, Nike fuelband, biometric readings, etc


Which is why he is now in charge of Apple!

My view is this is currently a non product. A froth whipped up by the press, on the back of some lame Kickstarted projects.

The typical consumer does not have a problem that a smart watch would solve. A device that can be held in the hand does not need a remote control or a terminal.

We don't want yet another device to charge up every day.
It would be useless as an input device. And with a 1" screen, useless as a complementary display.

My prediction is that no device resembling this will be released by Apple.

Why?
Because Apple are meticulous about creating products that have a genuine consumer benefit. They build things, try them out, and if they are not insanely useful, they get dumped.

Apple let others make gimmicky crap. And when the press scream "Oh! Apple, why oh why don't you wake up and release a XXXX"? Apple just smile quietly to themselves.

And then release something worthwhile.
 

PracticalMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 22, 2009
2,857
5,242
Houston, TX
The 1930's comic Dick Tracy has his TV watch, and we are tantalizing close to reality.

That is a gimmick. Not a solution to an actual human problem.

As far as I can see, having to charge my wristwatch is a much bigger problem than solving the "not having to pull a phone out of my pocket" problem.

People LOVE gimmicks, that's why we have fads, but while it may not solve anything, it will make certain things easier.

After all, the ability to see video on a cellphone was once considered a gimmick.
 

Carniphage

macrumors 68000
Oct 29, 2006
1,880
1
Sheffield, England
People LOVE gimmicks, that's why we have fads, but while it may not solve anything, it will make certain things easier.

After all, the ability to see video on a cellphone was once considered a gimmick.

Apple don't tend to address the gimmick market. They leave that to others.

They may occasionally sport gimmicky features. But the existence of each Apple product is based on a core need.
 

PracticalMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 22, 2009
2,857
5,242
Houston, TX
My view is this is currently a non product. A froth whipped up by the press, on the back of some lame Kickstarted projects.

The typical consumer does not have a problem that a smart watch would solve. A device that can be held in the hand does not need a remote control or a terminal.

We don't want yet another device to charge up every day.
It would be useless as an input device. And with a 1" screen, useless as a complementary display.

My prediction is that no device resembling this will be released by Apple.

Why?
Because Apple are meticulous about creating products that have a genuine consumer benefit. They build things, try them out, and if they are not insanely useful, they get dumped.

Apple let others make gimmicky crap. And when the press scream "Oh! Apple, why oh why don't you wake up and release a XXXX"? Apple just smile quietly to themselves.

And then release something worthwhile.

One thing Jobs had that most of us have limited is imagination. He was able to envision a finished mostly product in his head, and make something pretty close to that in reality.

All because you do not see the need, does not mean their is not one.

I do completely agree with the limited INPUT aspect of an iWatch, however it is more then able to act as a CONTROL device.

Think of a screen less iPhone, just a tiny box, connected by BT to the iWatch for control, and an iBud for audio. Siri is the input method, talk everything via dictation.

Yes, that will not work for you or me, but I know people who are just like that, it will be perfect for them.
 

Carniphage

macrumors 68000
Oct 29, 2006
1,880
1
Sheffield, England
All because you do not see the need, does not mean their is not one.

I like to think I am pretty good at visualising stuff. I do it for a living.
I might be wrong, but my view of products is that they should address a problem.

Sometimes new products address problems we didn't know we had. Jobs was supremely good at identifying these needs and tuning products to meet them.

I do completely agree with the limited INPUT aspect of an iWatch, however it is more then able to act as a CONTROL device.

Think of a screen less iPhone, just a tiny box, connected by BT to the iWatch for control, and an iBud for audio. Siri is the input method, talk everything via dictation.

Yes, that will not work for you or me, but I know people who are just like that, it will be perfect for them.

And yet we already have earbuds that do just that. We can talk to them, get data out of them. Listen to high quality music on them. Have texts read back to us.

I am pretty sure that the iPhone could even speak called ID if someone took the time to write the software. So I am confused as to what value a 1" screen brings to this.

My skepticism is based on one fact. Every commentator has said that a smart watch could do this, or that. But no one has explained how this solves a prior need, or why this solution is better than pre-existing implementations.

Apple have consistently built and then rejected products that didn't meet this test. Their success is based on that curation of product.

Until someone explains what the core problem is, I will continue to doubt that Apple will create such a grossly gimmicky product.
 

JAT

macrumors 603
Dec 31, 2001
6,473
124
Mpls, MN
Did you know that the decimal system was invented in India and China?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decimal

And the use of Zero:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero

I think you mean discovered. Numbers are inherent in nature.

----------

I am pretty sure that the iPhone could even speak called ID if someone took the time to write the software. So I am confused as to what value a 1" screen brings to this.
Caller ID is often ambiguous or only numerical. My wife's phone has spoken ID, so have some of our home phone systems. They are of questionable use, unfortunately.

But it definitely could, if a $30 Panasonic land-line cordless phone can.
 

BaldiMac

macrumors G3
Jan 24, 2008
8,745
10,845
Having identity verification on a phone solves a ton of problems.
Having it on a watch does not. It weakens its value.

Because...?

Until someone explains what the core problem is, I will continue to doubt that Apple will create such a grossly gimmicky product.

And if someone proposes a problem that a smart watch could address, you'll just say "a lot of people don't wear watches." It's a wonderfully circular argument.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.