Samsung to Beat Apple to Market with 'iWatch' Competitor?

[Carniphage]

Because...?

1) Because having security features on a phone makes those features available to people who have a phone. Pushing the feature onto a peripheral requires people to buy two items.

2) Because a phone thumb scanner can be used with one hand (and a wristwatch scanner could not)

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.

If someone were to describe a problem that a smart watch could address, that would be a start!

So far, no one has described the problem that the smart watch solves.

 

[BaldiMac]

1) Because having security features on a phone makes those features available to people who have a phone. Pushing the feature onto a peripheral requires people to buy two items.

2) Because a phone thumb scanner can be used with one hand (and a wristwatch scanner could not)

That's just a lack of imagination. Or reading the article I posted. One possible solution that considers both of these issues would be to have the identity confirmation (thumb scanner, etc.) on the phone. However, pairing it with the smart watch could maintain that identity as long as the watch is on your wrist. That way, you don't have to reconfirm your identity every time you pick up your phone or tablet or even your PC.

If someone were to describe a problem that a smart watch could address, that would be a start!

So far, no one has described the problem that the smart watch solves.

There have been a several different problems that a smart watch could solve presented in reply to you, including the one we are discussing. And several more in the article I linked to. Not sure why you are pretending they don't exist.

 

[Candlelight]

As long as it tells the time, has an alarm, a stop watch feature and internal storage I don't care who releases their watch first.

I don't want to charge my watch every night either.

 

[Carniphage]

There have been a several different problems that a smart watch could solve presented in reply to you, including the one we are discussing. And several more in the article I linked to. Not sure why you are pretending they don't exist.

No.

They describe silly applications which are already better served by existing solutions.

For the smart watch idea to have commercial traction, it has to solve a real problem that real people have.

If all it does is meet the need to play at Dick Tracy, then the device is merely a toy.

 

[BaldiMac]

No.

They describe silly applications which are already better served by existing solutions.

For the smart watch idea to have commercial traction, it has to solve a real problem that real people have.

If all it does is meet the need to play at Dick Tracy, then the device is merely a toy.

Hey, look! You ignored another argument.

 

[Carniphage]

Hey, look! You ignored another argument.

Do you mean the article which describes a killer app as
"Wireless charging"

That isn't a solution to a problem.

"Security" - nope - less useful that on device security.

Just one problem. Go on, I dare you. I double dare you!

 

[BaldiMac]

Do you mean the article which describes a killer app as
"Wireless charging"

Nope. Do you need me to quote it here?

The Killer Applications

• Your iWatch vouches for you, so you’ll never have to type another passcode or password again.
• Walk away from your iPhone and your iWatch will warn you.
• Your NFC chip for making payments is in your watch, instead of in an easily-grabbed $800 phone. Just wave your hand over the sensor and you’re good to go.

That isn't a solution to a problem.

Nor was it presented as one. It was presented as a solution to current problem with smart watches.

"Security" - nope - less useful that on device security.

And you'll ignore the argument I already made to the contrary.

Just one problem. Go on, I dare you. I double dare you!

Hey, look! You still ignored the specific solution that I described.

This isn't hard. See the "killer apps" from AskTog earlier. And the other apps that he describes. Here's a few more.

-I'm in a meeting with my phone on vibrate in my pocket. Is that last message or incoming call important?
-Going swimming in the pool out back, but expecting an important call or message. A lot more convenient to wear a watch in the pool than get out every time the phone beeps.
-Jogging. Biometric sensors in addition to the obvious notification convenience.

How are any of those situations better addressed by current solutions?

 

[Renzatic]

Just one problem. Go on, I dare you. I double dare you!

Watch out, BaldiMac. He's got you set up for a triple dog dare. You know you can't turn those down when they're thrown your way.

 

[BaldiMac]

watch out, baldimac. He's got you set up for a triple dog dare. You know you can't turn those down when they're thrown your way.

 

[Carniphage]

-I'm in a meeting with my phone on vibrate in my pocket. Is that last message or incoming call important?

If the meeting is critical, then all incoming messages are ignored.
If the meeting is non-critical everyone looks at their phones. Looking at your watch is as rude as looking at your phone.

-Jogging. Biometric sensors in addition to the obvious notification convenience.

Every jogger in the world jogs with white earbuds in. Phone has accelerometer, GPS - so benefit becomes pulse measurement. Pulse measuring *is* a problem, but not one that warrants a mass market response from Apple.

-Going swimming in the pool out back, but expecting an important call or message. A lot more convenient to wear a watch in the pool than get out every time the phone beeps.

So your market is pool-owning workaholics? Don't see it busting open that Indian market.

For a company like Apple, any product that is not a significant seller looks like a flop. So a cool little gadget that appeals to a small demographic actually ends up making them look bad.

Unless they launch a product that can sell 20-30-100 million units, it's not worth it. And for that to happen it has to offer a solution to a universal human problem.

The security issue is one such problem. But I think they will put that solution into the product where it will reap the most benefit.

 

[BaldiMac]

If the meeting is critical, then all incoming messages are ignored.

Maybe for you.

If the meeting is non-critical everyone looks at their phones. Looking at your watch is as rude as looking at your phone.

Who said anything about "rude"? What's easier? Look at your wrist or pull out your phone?

Every jogger in the world jogs with white earbuds in. Phone has accelerometer, GPS - so benefit becomes pulse measurement. Pulse measuring *is* a problem, but not one that warrants a mass market response from Apple.

Which ignores half of what I said and lacks the imagination to see beyond one possible sensor.

So your market is pool-owning workaholics? Don't see it busting open that Indian market.

Only if you ignore all the other situations that have been mentioned.

Hey, look! Again! You ignored the "killer apps" in favor of the smaller conveniences that you can just dismiss out of hand.

For a company like Apple, any product that is not a significant seller looks like a flop. So a cool little gadget that appeals to a small demographic actually ends up making them look bad.

Unless they launch a product that can sell 20-30-100 million units, it's not worth it. And for that to happen it has to offer a solution to a universal human problem.

And now you shift the argument. I could see Apple marketing an "iWatch" as an accessory to iOS devices in the $129 range.

 

[scho52386]

So since Pebble came out with the smart watch first...does this mean Apple and Samsung are copying Pebble? Or does it mean that if Apple comes out with a watch, Samsung is copying Apple?

Can't Pebble sue them both for the form factor since the devices will be watch-shaped and goes on the wrist? I heard I'm Watch is actually the first smart watch device.

So I think Sammy/Apple will copy Pebble who copied I'm Watch who copied the form factor of the first wrist watch who copied the hr/min/sec hands from the pocket watch who copied pocketable products from __________.

I hope this brings a lot of lawsuits to keep me entertained. Just kidding by the way. Just having fun.

 

[scho52386]

I don't know....Carniphage makes some good points. Some of the situations mentioned are...well...weird.

-I am not sure how many people swim while waiting for important phone calls, but i am sure they do.
-Jogging/Working Out: I really don't want another device/accessory while I am working out...Carrying a phone is enough, even with the arm strap to hold it onto your arm is annoying. Also...wearing a watch while working out isn't necessarily the best idea...I have hit my wrist against some stuff that would surely have cracked the face of a watch.
-In MY opinion, checking your watch is EXTREMELY rude in a meeting (depending on the meeting). It says "when is this going to be over" to the person(s) speaking. Checking your phone at least gives the thought that you are checking an important email or checking your calendar etc.

Yes, it can help with small inconveniences (if pulling your phone out of your pocket is really an inconvenience...) such as checking texts, calls, etc...but I don't know many watch wearers that will replace their Rolex or Seiko with a smart watch. IF Rolex or Seiko make one, I will probably buy it. Or if Apple comes out with one that will display social status like a Rolex or Seiko, I will probably buy it (even if it is hundreds more).

How good of an experience do you think users can get from being able to view emails on a watch (this was mentioned i think in a diff thread)? I know some of my emails contain paragraphs, graphs/charts, MS Office files, etc. Shoot...even some of my texts are long. Scrolling through a watch screen to see segments of my messages sound more of a hassle than pulling out my phone from my zipped, locked, thumbprinted pant pockets and just checking it on a larger screen.

 

[Carniphage]

And now you shift the argument. I could see Apple marketing an "iWatch" as an accessory to iOS devices in the $129 range.

No. Been saying the same thing from the get go.

Apple is really big. If they launch a product that sells "only 5 million" it looks like a flop. While those same numbers to another company look like a massive hit.

Which is why Apple must focus on products which have the potential to sell much more than that.

The trivial extended phone satellite screen is not that product. It isn't a real problem which needs a solution. It's a gimmick.

A real problem is one that a significant proportion of consumers need a solution to. I don't think pulse measurement is it. I don't think remote screen counts either.

I do think identification is it. But the watch form factor is not a solution to that problem.

Gotta work now.

 

[BaldiMac]

I don't know....Carniphage makes some good points. Some of the situations mentioned are...well...weird.

-I am not sure how many people swim while waiting for important phone calls, but i am sure they do.
-Jogging/Working Out: I really don't want another device/accessory while I am working out...Carrying a phone is enough, even with the arm strap to hold it onto your arm is annoying. Also...wearing a watch while working out isn't necessarily the best idea...I have hit my wrist against some stuff that would surely have cracked the face of a watch.
-In MY opinion, checking your watch is EXTREMELY rude in a meeting (depending on the meeting). It says "when is this going to be over" to the person(s) speaking. Checking your phone at least gives the thought that you are checking an important email or checking your calendar etc.

Yes, it can help with small inconveniences (if pulling your phone out of your pocket is really an inconvenience...) such as checking texts, calls, etc...but I don't know many watch wearers that will replace their Rolex or Seiko with a smart watch. IF Rolex or Seiko make one, I will probably buy it. Or if Apple comes out with one that will display social status like a Rolex or Seiko, I will probably buy it (even if it is hundreds more).

How good of an experience do you think users can get from being able to view emails on a watch (this was mentioned i think in a diff thread)? I know some of my emails contain paragraphs, graphs/charts, MS Office files, etc. Shoot...even some of my texts are long. Scrolling through a watch screen to see segments of my messages sound more of a hassle than pulling out my phone from my zipped, locked, thumbprinted pant pockets and just checking it on a larger screen.

Again, those were just three situations when a smart watch would be a convenience to some people. Off the cuff. I'm sure you can come up with your own situations when it would be more convenient to check a watch for notifications than pull out your phone.

The "killer apps" for an iWatch that were proposed in the article that I linked to earlier were:

Identity confirmation- so you don't have to enter a passcode/password
Lost iPhone prevention- notification when you walk away from your iPhone
NFC- Swipe your wrist instead of pulling out your $650+ phone

And many more possibilities.

 

[BaldiMac]

No. Been saying the same thing from the get go.

Apple is really big. If they launch a product that sells "only 5 million" it looks like a flop. While those same numbers to another company look like a massive hit.

Which is why Apple must focus on products which have the potential to sell much more than that.

Okay? Again, completely circular argument.

The trivial extended phone satellite screen is not that product. It isn't a real problem which needs a solution. It's a gimmick.

I assume you are referring to notification on the watch screen? You call it a gimmick. I'd call it a convenience. Not something I would buy a smart watch for on it's own, but a nice thing to have available if I had one.

A real problem is one that a significant proportion of consumers need a solution to. I don't think pulse measurement is it. I don't think remote screen counts either.

Your ability to ignore everything that doesn't fit your argument is dazzling!

I do think identification is it. But the watch form factor is not a solution to that problem.

Even though you were presented with a straightforward way that it could be a solution.

 

[phillipduran]

I am wondering how accepted an iWatch would be?

I think it will join the Bluetooth earpiece in its level of dorkiness. Useful yes, but quite awkward.

 

[Carniphage]

Even though you were presented with a straightforward way that it could be a solution.

Presented with a non-argument. Sorry but it does not hold up to scrutiny.

Security on a phone makes complete sense. Every user benefits.

Identity verification through a terminal to a phone restricts the utility of the function to only those consumers who buy both devices. That's insane.

Apple are not stupid - they want essential features to reach the highest number of consumers.

Nor are Apple willing to make the argument that "your phone is way too stealable to consider pulling out of your pocket!" Can you imagine how that would be depicted if they made it.

Such an argument makes owning a phone sound like a dangerous liability.

I buy a coffee every day with my phone and Passbook. Not once do I think "If I had a tiresomely rechargable watch, this process would be sooo much better."

 

[BaldiMac]

Presented with a non-argument. Sorry but it does not hold up to scrutiny.

Especially if you dismiss it out of hand and ignore the actual solution presented.

Security on a phone makes complete sense. Every user benefits.

Absolutely.

Identity verification through a terminal to a phone restricts the utility of the function to only those consumers who buy both devices. That's insane.

No, it doesn't. It adds additional convenience and security to people who purchase the second device.

Apple are not stupid - they want essential features to reach the highest number of consumers.

Yep. Maybe you, once again, ignored how the proposed feature would be implemented.

Nor are Apple willing to make the argument that "your phone is way too stealable to consider pulling out of your pocket!" Can you imagine how that would be depicted if they made it.

Such an argument makes owning a phone sound like a dangerous liability.

I'm sure they wouldn't put it that way. But highlighting the convenience of swiping your wrist over the NFC device, say... when you enter a crowded subway terminal with a bag in each hand, would be a good strategy.

I buy a coffee every day with my phone and Passbook. Not once do I think "If I had a tiresomely rechargable watch, this process would be sooo much better."

Good for you! But don't you ever think... I wish I didn't have to enter my passcode every time I want to use my phone? Or wouldn't it be better if I had a longer passcode, so my data was more secure... especially if I only needed to enter it very rarely? Or you could consider someone else that might think "I hope I don't need to dump out my entire purse to find my phone."

 

[Carniphage]

I'm sure they wouldn't put it that way. But highlighting the convenience of swiping your wrist over the NFC device, say... when you enter a crowded subway terminal with a bag in each hand, would be a good strategy.

I'm pretty sure that if done properly, even swiping is unnecessary.

...


Listen, I think there are these valid usage cases you describe.

If we were discussing Sony, they operate on a different basis. They let engineers build anything, turn them into products and see what sells. They'd have a smartwatch built and pushed out the door in weeks.

In fact, they have.

But since Jobs rejoined the company, Apple just isn't like that. They curate every product. Nothing goes out of the door unless they believe there is a compelling case for it on a global scale.

Even "a high power desktop computer" seems to be too niche for Apple.

So unless there is a hidden 90% to this technology, I am going to stick with a prediction that there will be no smart-watch technology from Apple in the next 3 years.

But I do think we are going to see a new product category in that period. I think it will be something to do with television distribution.

Because that *is* a problem.

 

[feflower]

For next two years, Samesung will have a lot of products like Apple, because Apple must tell Samesung certain new projects to see if they are able to produce. Just like Eric Schmidt sat on Apple board and knew all about it then secretly told their engineers to develop it.

That's how Samsung won over television. Sony trusted a tiny company in S Korea called "Gold Star" to manufacture it's TV, but Sony didn't know one day that tiny company would steal its technology then turn around called itself Samesung and made the same tv but without all the R&D and cut the price in half to kill Sony.

Can't verify if your claim that Sony contracted Goldstar to produce their TVs, (and steal their technology) but what I do know is that the "G" in LG stands for Goldstar (the "L" stands for "Lucky"). So Goldstar, as far as I know, has nothing to do with Samsung.

 

[turtlez]

Companies don't have morals, they just want to make profit. All companies copy. Including Apple.

Samsung's profits and marketshare would suggest that what they're doing is working.

Just choose the product you like the most and enjoy it, let the lawyers worry about copyright and patent infringement.

Don't get me wrong, it doesn't affect me financially or socially whether Samsung copies Apple but being a designer/artist myself I can't stand hearing about other artists getting their work ripped off.

 

[Bocaj]

Call it the iWatch !!!

Be the first Samsung!

----------

Steve walks out.

Says it couldn't be done.

But we did it guys.

We put in a curves glass in a watch.

We call it the iWatch.

And it's our best iWatch yet!

well, iPhone was first coined by linksys....(in 2000)

 

[BaldiMac]

I'm pretty sure that if done properly, even swiping is unnecessary.

...


Listen, I think there are these valid usage cases you describe.

If we were discussing Sony, they operate on a different basis. They let engineers build anything, turn them into products and see what sells. They'd have a smartwatch built and pushed out the door in weeks.

In fact, they have.

But since Jobs rejoined the company, Apple just isn't like that. They curate every product. Nothing goes out of the door unless they believe there is a compelling case for it on a global scale.

Even "a high power desktop computer" seems to be too niche for Apple.

So unless there is a hidden 90% to this technology, I am going to stick with a prediction that there will be no smart-watch technology from Apple in the next 3 years.

But I do think we are going to see a new product category in that period. I think it will be something to do with television distribution.

Because that *is* a problem.

And, again, you are now trying to shift the argument to whether Apple will produce a smart watch and if it will be successful. That's not what we were discussing.

You asked for a potential problem that a smart watch could solve. I provided an article with several well thought out use cases. You didn't read the article and/or pretended that the key problems were never mentioned. Even though you called one of the areas discussed an "essential technology".

 

[Carniphage]

And, again, you are now trying to shift the argument to whether Apple will produce a smart watch and if it will be successful. That's not what we were discussing.

That's what I was discussing.

These trivial usage cases are not sufficiently important or valuable to justify the introduction of a new product category.

Apple does not do this sort of stuff.