Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Expected to Unveil iWatch in September as Suppliers Deliver Circuit Board Samples
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Completely ridiculous: they're going to make enough to sell 20 million a month right off the bat? Not going to happen unless it's really awesome (certainly possible) and less than $50 (certainly not).
No, no one said the same thing about iPhones.
Therefore, everything else you stated can be ignored.
If those flexible PCBs have only now been delivered to Apple as samples for validation, that seems like an awfully short lead time to get this device unveiled in September, or am I misreading that?
Are you an idiot or to young to remember? When there was rumors about Apple getting into the phone business before the first iPhone many were bashing them or calling it foolish that they were pursuing that market. Even after it came out people laughed at it and felt it was a toy and nobody would want to type on a screen. Please do not play stupid!
example 1: http://gizmodo.com/5416781/top-5-assclown-iphone-quotes-in-2007
Example 2: http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/06/29/iphone-turns-5-here-are-the-naysayers/
No, no one did anything you said, therefore, you can be safely ignored.
No sure why you need to say things?
You said you doubted this was a good move for Apple. Many sad the same thing about the original iPhone..
example 1: http://gizmodo.com/5416781/top-5-ass...quotes-in-2007
Example 2: http://www.loopinsight.com/2012/06/2...the-naysayers/
__________________
----------
Critic: Dan Gillmor, director of the Knight Center for Digital Media Entrepreneurship at Arizona State University's Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication. Gillmor is also director of the Center for Citizen Media. He has previously been a columnist for the San José Mercury News, a fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet & Society, and a pioneering blogger at SiliconValley.com.
What Gillmor said about the iPhone: Writing on his Center for Citizen Media blog at the time of the iPhone launch, he called the original iPhone a "beta product" that wasn't ready for prime time. "Id advise anyone considering one of these devices in the U.S. to wait for the next version," he explained. "The initial product doesnt come close to living up to the hype."
***
Critic: Tim Wu, a Columbia Law School professor specializing in copyright and telecommunications issues. Wu is also a commentator for Slate magazine.
What Wu said about the iPhone: In a column on Slate entitled "iPhony: Why Apple's new cell phone isn't really revolutionary," Wu wrote, "The iPhone's style and user interface are pathbreaking, and (as the iPod proved) aesthetics do matter. But the iPhone is -- so far -- not a product that will turn any industry inside out . . . Saying the iPhone is a pointless gadget is a bit too strong. But it isn't yet a revolutionary device."
***
Critic: Lucas Mearian, storage channel editor at Computerworld.
What Mearian said about the iPhone: In a blog post entitled "Why the iPhone is a rip-off," Mearian wrote, "The iPhone is cool technology -- you can't help but ogle the interface -- but like [the] PS3, you'd have to be out of your gourd to pay that kind of money for something that's basically whiz-bang with no more substance than other cheaper, comparable products."
***
Critic: Geoff Long, columnist for the telecommunications industry newsletter CommsDay, serving Australia and the Asia-Pacific region.
What Long said about the iPhone: In a column entitled "Why the iPhone will fail," Long wrote, "In a week or two the fuss will fade and people will start to realise an important point: its just a phone, and not a particularly 'smart' one at that. And then people will start to find flaws in it, because lets face it, version 1.0 of anything is going to have flaws. . . . iPhone version 1.0, in my opinion, will be a flop."
***
Critic: Rob Enderle, president and principal analyst of the Enderle Group, an emerging-technology advisory firm.
What Enderle said about the iPhone: Interviewed for a June 2007 article on ABCNews.com entitled "iPhone Fever: Not Everyone Buys the Hype," Enderle pointed out several potential flaws. "The data experience is going to be very slow" and the device will not "match the experience shown on TV," Enderle said. He went on to criticize the glass and metal body of the iPhone, saying that dropping the device would ruin it. Enderle also worried that without a physical keyboard, teenagers who tried to drive and text on the touch screen might "end up in someone's trunk."
***
Critic: Steve Ballmer, Microsoft CEO
What Ballmer said about the iPhone: Ballmer scoffed at the iPhone in a January 2007 interview televised on CNBC. "Five hundred dollars? Fully subsidized, with a plan?" Ballmer said. "That is the most expensive phone in the world. And it doesn't appeal to business because it doesn't have a keyboard."
What Ballmer says now: Microsoft's PR firm declined to pass our questions to Ballmer. "Unfortunately, Steve is unable to participate in this interview request due to his busy calendar," a representative from Waggener Edstrom said.
***
Critic: John C. Dvorak, technology columnist for Dow-Jones Marketwatch.com and PC Magazine. Dvorak is also a panelist on the weekly podcast This Week in Tech.
What Dvorak said about the iPhone: Writing on Marketwatch.com in March 2007, Dvorak predicted failure. "There is no likelihood that Apple can be successful in a business this competitive," he said. "If it's smart it will call the iPhone a 'reference design' and pass it to some suckers to build with someone else's marketing budget. Then it can wash its hands of any marketplace failures."
What Dvorak says now: Did not reply to multiple e-mails.
***
Critic: Bill Ray, writer for the U.K. technology site The Register.
What Ray said about the iPhone: In 2006 article titled "Why the Apple phone will fail, and fail badly," Ray questioned Apple's feature set and price plan. "As customers start to realise that the competition offers better functionality at a lower price...sales will stagnate. After a year a new version will be launched, but it will lack the innovation of the first and quickly vanish," Ray said. "The only question remaining is if, when the iPod phone fails, it will take the iPod with it."
What Ray says now: Ray told the Standard that he was unable to reply, owing to the terms of his employment with the Register.
None of these are actual designers.
The only people's opinions that matter are designers, and especially not competitors.
Kudos for that lengthy post. Of course as you've pointed out, they were all spectacularly wrong, and I suspect there'll be a lot of naysayers on here, who'll be lured and seduced, and who'll be lined up to buy that new gadget I'd like to refer to as the 'iPal', formerly codenamed 'iWatch'.
Please explain, I'm barely awake.
Hey, give me some credit for that suggestion, just on the outside chance I'm right, lol
It's going to be pretty funny to see the Samsung Galaxy Gear 2nd gen, compared to the iWatch when it is released as an example of what happens when Samsung tries to develop their own tech instead of copying Apple.
It really all depends on which direction they take. If it was something like the Galaxy Gear, then I'd have no interest.
But I have been using Fitbit recently, and was looking to get one of their new Force bands - but they didn't make it to the UK yet, and presumably won't for a while now that they have been recalled in the US.
So if Apple go down that route, where fitness and tracking is some of the main functionality, rather than merely being a largely pointless extension to the phone I might well be interested. It will be interesting to see what it looks like too - getting the form right is probably quite tricky - you need some space to make it as functional as possible, but make it too big and its the sort of thing that can potentially look quite ugly quite quickly. e.g. the Gear.
But I have been using Fitbit recently, and was looking to get one of their new Force bands - but they didn't make it to the UK yet, and presumably won't for a while now that they have been recalled in the US.
So if Apple go down that route, where fitness and tracking is some of the main functionality, rather than merely being a largely pointless extension to the phone I might well be interested. It will be interesting to see what it looks like too - getting the form right is probably quite tricky - you need some space to make it as functional as possible, but make it too big and its the sort of thing that can potentially look quite ugly quite quickly. e.g. the Gear.
I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't even have a display but was just a kind of remote sensor wearable connected to iphone or ipad. That would make it rather affordable, and bundled it would explain that huge planned amount produced.
I am certainly interested in an iWatch - depends on how it looks (this mock up is terrible, the more classic one looks great). The Health apps focus is a smart idea as there is a big market for sports watches with heart rate monitors etc plus I have a sports watch with compass, altmiter etc . It's not hard to imagine the watch the with built in GPS and navigation software plus sports appls like Endomondo/Strava. The fact that an iWatch could easily have different themes or skins will mean you can change the look and feel depending on here you where wearing it, something smart and discrete for an evening out or more functional for a run/bike ride. I see the watch as complimentary to the iPhone in the same way as is the iPad - there are common apps but there are somethings better and more easily done on one device versus the other.
You will always find naysayers but back then rumors of Apple getting into the phone business generated incredible anticipation and before Jobs' presentation in 2007 many were absolutely thrilled about the idea of an iPhone. This anticipation in the case of the iWatch is simply not there. This doesn't mean it will bomb, we'll see about that, but I doubt it will be revolutionary.
Totally agree I don't think Apple is working on a watch in the conventional sense. I think its going to be more of a wrist band type device that is simply a vehicle to attach electronics and sensors to the wearer. It's probably going to be able to act as a watch if you really need it to but not replace a more traditional time piece which is as much a piece of jewellery as simple time piece and an expression of taste and individuality. I still think no one has any idea what the concept will be but a traditional watch is almost certainly way off.
I'm suggesting the name iPal, rather than iWatch, which is too narrow of a definition for the many rumored functions it could have. It goes where you go, and augments the iPhone. It also sounds catchy, and such a name is short, easy to remember, and in the same vein as iPod and iPad. You're welcome, Apple.
What about the existing iPal?
Attachments
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.