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

roow110

macrumors regular
Jul 1, 2011
110
26
This needs to be a mix of Apple iWatch and Nike Fuelband.

Otherwise it has "niche" written all over it.

Why are you presuming the iWatch would not come with fitness features? I would think that would be one of it's primary functions... It's not just a watch. People need to stop being so narrow-minded about this product.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,909
1,496
Palookaville
It may be convenient to call Apple's forthcoming wearable tech the iWatch, even though it's almost certainly going to be called something else, and also to call it a watch, even though it's almost certainly going to be far more than that. Convenient, but quite misleading, and probably dead wrong. Reminds me of the prerelease rumors about the iPad when nearly everyone was sure it was going to be called the iSlate, run OSX, and cost at least $1,000.
 

chado53

macrumors member
Jun 5, 2008
33
0
all of you guys need to calm down just a tad and stop bickering if you need it don't need it. This quote in one of the d interviews with steve jobs and walt mossberg always stood out to me. Walt (just before the ipad was to be launched) was asked some people think that the ipad is useless and is just an oversized ipod touch. What do you think of these criticism? To which jobs replied, "if they buy it they buy it, if they don't, then they won't!"

seriously, i don't think apple cares what we think about their creative endeavors. They put things on the market and it's the consumers choice to buy their product or not. Calm down guys.
 

TC03

macrumors 65816
Aug 17, 2008
1,272
356
Apple will get this thing right.
Yep.

Most and foremost they will not make it a geek thing, hence Apple hiring all these YSL/Burberry/Nike people. It will be like jewelry with a pretty digital watch face and some extras. That'll be their starting point. People will say it's useless and too expensive, but it'll become a hit. Then they'll gradually add more features, whilst everyone will be saying that Galaxy Gear is much cheaper and has had those features for years. Nevertheless, celebrities will wear the iWatch in public thus reinforcing the idea to the haters that Apple is just for 'brainless Apple followers'. As the quarters pass on, Apple will sell more and more.

That's how it's going to be.
 

Binarymix

macrumors 65816
Nov 1, 2007
1,121
353
Obviously you can't see the forrest for the trees. You also have a rigid thought process. Just accept it. Anytime someone starts off with "...by definition," it's a clue their mind processes with inflexible rules.

So let me speak your language. Definitions by definition may change as society changes or even among different societies. Gay in 1930 meant something entirely different than it does in 2013. In London a subway is a tube; elevator:lift, and so on.

In 1910 bacon was a lunch or dinner food. In 1940 it was used for all meals. In 1940 orange juice was predominantly for breakfast. In 1980 it was for anytime. Public relations and societal acceptance changed all that.

So when you say a watch by definition is a timepiece you are basically saying it can't ever have another meaning which is false because words are created by humans. The truth is a watch is whatever meaning a society puts on it. A lot of people understand the more modern meaning that it's something worn on the wrist that provides information and other functionality.
So then, your thought process is just as riged as mine if you cannot accept that others don't find a use for the current incarnation of smart watches.

;)
 

carlgo

macrumors 68000
Dec 29, 2006
1,806
17
Monterey CA
In the next few weeks or so "Hearing aids for iPhone" will be released by I think three major hearing aid companies. These will of course help with hearing loss, but will also stream in music and phone calls without wires as well as having ways to control the devices in different environments, etc.

A watch could have controls to operate a phone that is in your pocket, and it could set the parameters of your hearing aids, devices that could then be popular with people that can hear just fine.
 

o0smoothies0o

macrumors regular
Aug 12, 2013
193
0
So then, your thought process is just as riged as mine if you cannot accept that others don't find a use for the current incarnation of smart watches.

;)

Here's the cool part: Apple's watch isn't going to be like the current smart watches. I mean seriously how many times can you people read bio sensors in every Macrumors update on the iWatch, and think it will be just another garbage smart watch?
 

qtx43

macrumors 6502a
Aug 4, 2007
659
16
If I were going to design a watch it would have an eink display. If you can't easily read it in bright daylight, or you can't get battery life up to a couple weeks, preferably a couple months, it's dead on arrival. It would have a bluetooth api that anybody can use and write an app for (iOS or Android), but would be able to operate independently (I don't think that part is really possible at this point). It would be as slim as most watches. It would only display a couple things, and you would cycle through the various things it is currently displaying by tapping the screen. No selecting tiny little things, just tap it to cycle through whatever is currently active. For example, one screen would have time, temperature and notification of harsh weather coming up. Another screen would have your gps and exercise stats. If you got an email it would beep, or maybe have a little notification number of emails.

I still can't see it happening at this time.
 

unplugme71

macrumors 68030
May 20, 2011
2,827
754
Earth
If the watch will have no inputs - and sync all data from the iPhone, then I would expect the watch to have 2-3 months battery life.
 

Binarymix

macrumors 65816
Nov 1, 2007
1,121
353
Apple hasn't said WHAT this device will be, or WHAT it will be called. Why are you adamant placing this device in a 'watch by definition timepiece category'?

I think everyone else is using watch to mean something on a person's wrist.

I'm not adamant about anything.

He was putting down people for saying a watch is just a timepiece, which by definition it is.


I cannot see a use for the current smart watches and bio sensors in MY life. Doesn't mean it won't be popular. Just means I won't use one.

To each their own.

----------

Here's the cool part: Apple's watch isn't going to be like the current smart watches. I mean seriously how many times can you people read bio sensors in every Macrumors update on the iWatch, and think it will be just another garbage smart watch?



Who is 'you people'?

I didn't say it would be garbage, I said I have no use for what is currently out there.

Jeez people.
 

Vodka

macrumors regular
Nov 9, 2008
185
1
so what's the point of those iwatches? hard to imagine something more complex than ipod nano in such size
 

o0smoothies0o

macrumors regular
Aug 12, 2013
193
0
I'm not adamant about anything.

He was putting down people for saying a watch is just a timepiece, which by definition it is.


I cannot see a use for the current smart watches and bio sensors in MY life. Doesn't mean it won't be popular. Just means I won't use one.

To each their own.

----------





Who is 'you people'?

I didn't say it would be garbage, I said I have no use for what is currently out there.

Jeez people.

You people is anyone who doesn't understand/acknowledge what bio sensors are. Because they aren't in any 'smart watches' currently available. I'll be the first to say that current smart watches are next to useless. The galaxy gear for example is just sad, especially at its price point. Message notifications and telling the time are missing the entire point of a wearable device.

Apple knows that a wearable device needs sensors to take advantage of the fact that it is something you are wearing almost constantly. The close-minded Macrumors forum posters aren't the people working at Apple luckily. Apple has open-minded inventive and highly imaginative smart people working for them, and that's just a fact.
 

Binarymix

macrumors 65816
Nov 1, 2007
1,121
353
so what's the point of those iwatches? hard to imagine something more complex than ipod nano in such size

I think a lot of people are hoping for an iPod touch wrapped around your wrist.

There are current limits to technology that currently can't allow for this to happen.

What has been put out thus far by pebble, samsung and Nike are what they can do currently without carrying around a battery pack with you at all times.

I don't see why people don't get this. May be different next year, but I can't see the situation being much different.
 

o0smoothies0o

macrumors regular
Aug 12, 2013
193
0
I think a lot of people are hoping for an iPod touch wrapped around your wrist.

There are current limits to technology that currently can't allow for this to happen.

What has been put out thus far by pebble, samsung and Nike are what they can do currently without carrying around a battery pack with you at all times.

I don't see why people don't get this. May be different next year, but I can't see the situation being much different.

Nope that would be pointless. Bio sensors on the other hand are exactly what the doctor ordered no puns intended.
 

Binarymix

macrumors 65816
Nov 1, 2007
1,121
353
You people is anyone who doesn't understand/acknowledge what bio sensors are. Because they aren't in any 'smart watches' currently available. I'll be the first to say that current smart watches are next to useless. The galaxy gear for example is just sad, especially at its price point. Message notifications and telling the time are missing the entire point of a wearable device.

Apple knows that a wearable device needs sensors to take advantage of the fact that it is something you are wearing almost constantly. The close-minded Macrumors forum posters aren't the people working at Apple luckily. Apple has open-minded inventive and highly imaginative smart people working for them, and that's just a fact.

Some people just don't care how many steps they've taken in a day, believe it or not.

For people with medical conditions, some aspects of bio sensors make sense.

Again I am not saying there won't be a market for this item, I just personally cannot see it fitting in with my lifestyle.

Why can people not have differing opinions? I'm not saying your wrong, nor should you be saying I am wrong stating what's fits in with my life, or in this case doesn't.
 

bbeagle

macrumors 68040
Oct 19, 2010
3,542
2,982
Buffalo, NY
I cannot see a use for the current smart watches and bio sensors in MY life. Doesn't mean it won't be popular. Just means I won't use one.

Given Apple's track record, I think it will be something unique.

I didn't want a MP3 player, wasn't all that great, but after the iPod, I NEED a small music device.

I didn't want a smart phone, too hard to use, too geeky, not a good web experience, after the iPhone, I NEED to have one.

I didn't want a netbook, tablet or small portable computer, after the iPad, I NEED Apple's version of a small portable computer.
 

yossi

macrumors 6502
Nov 26, 2004
317
1,085
If this is anything like the MacPro shocker, the iwatch will look nothing like what anyone is expecting. It will be out of left field and will amaze everyone and include features no one is even predicting.
 

brianvictor7

macrumors 65816
Oct 24, 2013
1,054
429
United States
Yep.

Most and foremost they will not make it a geek thing, hence Apple hiring all these YSL/Burberry/Nike people. It will be like jewelry with a pretty digital watch face and some extras. That'll be their starting point. People will say it's useless and too expensive, but it'll become a hit. Then they'll gradually add more features, whilst everyone will be saying that Galaxy Gear is much cheaper and has had those features for years. Nevertheless, celebrities will wear the iWatch in public thus reinforcing the idea to the haters that Apple is just for 'brainless Apple followers'. As the quarters pass on, Apple will sell more and more.

That's how it's going to be.

TC03 called it here first folks! I have a strong suspicion that he'll be very close to the mark! We'll see in 2014!
 

Binarymix

macrumors 65816
Nov 1, 2007
1,121
353
Given Apple's track record, I think it will be something unique.

I didn't want a MP3 player, wasn't all that great, but after the iPod, I NEED a small music device.

I didn't want a smart phone, too hard to use, too geeky, not a good web experience, after the iPhone, I NEED to have one.

I didn't want a netbook, tablet or small portable computer, after the iPad, I NEED Apple's version of a small portable computer.


And if I have a use for one once released, I will buy one.

I remember lusting over a sony mini disc device, then the iPods slaughtered them, and I loved all of my iPods :)

If anyone can do it Apple will do it. I'm just staying on the fence until an actual product is shown off.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.