Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So what I read from the article is;

A/

Quanta say they didn't earn as much as expected = "Hey Apple when we negotiate this next, we need to lift the price"

Apple says they are looking for other partners = "We hear you but think this could be a negotiating ploy, well here's ours. And all we expect is for you to give us a fair price."

or

B/

Quanta really didn't do so well. I recall they had assembly problems and component problems. So was this lesser profit self inflicted. The deal is, if you want to dance with Apple and make heaps, you look at their terms, you work out what you can do and make a profit and you sign the deal. Apple are not forcing you to sign. If you can't live with a deal then don't sign it. Foxconn can live with the deal and make a fortune doing just that.

And Apple are looking for a Foxconn who can improve the manufacturing and assembly process and deliver the product efficiently.

This is just basic business.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brandhouse
Apple Watch 2 needs integrated SIM (eSIM), GPS, more health features (i.e. for diabetics), work with hearing-aids w/o iPhone, needs to be thinner (but connect with current bands) and apps should run without the need for iPhone. I do not care about the camera but others do.

That's quite a wishlist but Apple is known to find solutions that don't necessarily take the expected route.

Cell coverage isn't the only way to get online and LTE is the least efficient for battery. GPS is also a battery hog that could be replaced with alternatives like known network triangulation. Apple could get creative. For example, Apple could enable a hidden open mesh network of iPhones. Given the hundreds of millions of iPhones in circulation, Apple Watches could recognize iPhones in the vicinity to determine location and to use them as mini cell towers accessible via WiFi instead of LTE. You would pay a small subscription to your cell provider to access the internet from your AppleWatch without your own iPhone present. It wouldn't affect the data usage of the anonymous iPhones that would be used. Like a torrent, many iPhones in the vicinity of the Apple Watch would spread the data use. Given the mostly text usage of AppleWatch, data use per iPhone would be negligible, somewhere in the sub 100kb range. First generation Apple Watches would be able to access this technology with their existing WiFi hardware or Apple could build next generation tech geared to optimize this type of mesh network or artificially limit it to Apple Watch 2 as a selling point.

Diabetics are a very large demographic which Apple should cater to but as Tim Cook has said in recent statements, building medical devices into the AppleWatch would slow down its updates and progress due to government bureaucracy. It's more likely that we'll see an existing glucose monitoring devices company build integration with AppleWatch or with HealthKit via iPhone. It's not yet possible to monitor blood glucose levels reliably without direct contact with blood but whenever a technique is perfected, I would expect that diabetics could wear a bracelet or a patch that would connect with AppleWatch via Bluetooth.

I like the idea of integrating hearing aids with Apple Watch. Bluetooth enabled hearing aids could be used as a "Siri in your head". This would be a technology useful with people other than the deaf. Blind people could use Siri and tapping as a very effective user interface. More advanced hearing aids could even measure other body analytics such as core body temperature and contribute to heart rate measurement accuracy. Again, Apple doesn't need to be the one to build the hearing aids, they'd only have to enable to connection with AppleWatch and invite 3rd parties that already service that niche market.

A camera is likely in an upcoming AppleWatch. If not in the next generation, sometime in the near future. There's room for a front facing camera that could be faced towards a scene by flipping your wrist. Orientation would always be right side up, even if the watch is upside down when you flip your wrist. This would allow for a single camera to serve for both FaceTime and for pictures, although the latter would be framed blindly and a suggested crop done in software based on face recognition. A high megapixel sensor and a very wide lens could make it that framing is something that you do in post production. Just point and shoot, then adjust the crop when you're done.

I expect that the next AppleWatch will indeed be thinner, include 3D touch for a more capable user interface with different levels of pressure allowing for a better navigation. Speed is a major issue that needs to be addressed in the next generation so that apps open instantly. Waiting for an app to open defeats the purpose of the micro interaction nature that the watch is servicing. The watch band slot looks to be made to fit watches of ever decreasing width without needing to replace the bands. This is a smart strategy as it'll encourage owners of an Apple Watch who've built up a collection of bands to upgrade their Apple Watch routinely while not having to re-start their band collection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Duane Martin
I hope Apple addresses several things:
1. Battery life. Yeah, in the beginning it might be okay, but Apple is encouraging usage of apps, so battery life must match the usage scenarios.
2. Corrosion concerns.
3. Round face.

You think a round face will be more popular and sell better? Personally, I don't think it will make much of a difference, but it's possible a round face will appeal more to women.
 
Your comparisons are not appropriate. Instead look at this - http://www.statisticbrain.com/wrist-watch-industry-statistics/. What you will find is that the entire smartwatch industry pumped out 6.8 million in 2014. If Apple is expected to hit 10 million in its first attempt, it has completely eclipsed the entire smartwatch market. Let's not compare the watch to the phone. Let's compare watches to watches. As a matter of fact, in that same report, it states that the entire swiss watchmaking industry pumped out 29 million watches. So Apple is selling about 33% of swiss industry. When I look at these numbers I would say that Apple has a runaway hit in the watch space and if I focus on the smartwatch space then Apple just killed it. The watch is not a phone -- it's a watch -- so please let's make sure we compare, um, apples to apples.

All these smartwatches are poor. That's why they're not selling very well, they suck. They might aswell have come out with an Apple Ring or an Apple Earing. Crap stuff.

And comparing Apples watches to swiss watchmaking is ridiculous they're not even in the same class. If you wanna make silly comparisons just compare the Apple Watch to the entire watch market like you would compare the iPhone to the entire phone market. That's a true Apples to Apples comparison.
 
All these smartwatches are poor. That's why they're not selling very well, they suck. They might aswell have come out with an Apple Ring or an Apple Earing. Crap stuff.

And comparing Apples watches to swiss watchmaking is ridiculous they're not even in the same class. If you wanna make silly comparisons just compare the Apple Watch to the entire watch market like you would compare the iPhone to the entire phone market. That's a true Apples to Apples comparison.
Well it's clear you did not follow the link to the reference document. It also seems clear that facts will not get in the way of your opinion, so we will just leave it here.
 
I'm not surprised that the watch has given suppliers a weaker than expected profit return. A quick search of local Best Buys (Atlanta) showed that nearly every store in the metro area had open box stock of the watch. They might not all be buyer's remorse purchases but I bet many of them are. Imagine how many watches are going unsold period. It would make no sense for Apple to keep having more manufactured.

ESPECIALLY with the New Greatest Apple Watch Ever coming out in what, 6 to 7 months?

I forsee gophers in the desert having more fun with some of them in the future...
 
Apple Watch 2 needs integrated SIM (eSIM), GPS, more health features (i.e. for diabetics), work with hearing-aids w/o iPhone, needs to be thinner (but connect with current bands) and apps should run without the need for iPhone. I do not care about the camera but others do.

Dang... And just think, this was considered neat-o at one time...

Connecting with current bands kills the nascent Apple Watch band market. YIKES...

 
I'm assuming like yourself, most folk posting here don't actually own a :apple: watch?

You're assuming wrong. I've had mine since day one.

Force Touch on Apple Watch is a useful way of making do with the limited screen real estate of the Apple Watch. 3D Touch, having multiple degrees of pressure, would allow for even more maneuverability throughout the UI using the same size screen. For example, pressing on the screen might show multiple options as it does now but continuing to press deeper could activate a function in one press similar to how slide to delete works in iOS.

Peek and pop is another very useful function that could be brought to AppleWatch. Press to preview an incoming message, press deeper to Pop it into the active layer so that you can answer it.

My input on improvements to the next AppleWatch is based on extensive use of the existing Watch. Get off your high horse in making unsubstantiated accusations.
 
Last edited:
You think a round face will be more popular and sell better? Personally, I don't think it will make much of a difference, but it's possible a round face will appeal more to women.

But isn't it obvious? They need a second supplier to supply the round watch parts. ;-)
 
That's quite a wishlist but Apple is known to find solutions that don't necessarily take the expected route.

Cell coverage isn't the only way to get online ... Apple Watch who've built up a collection of bands to upgrade their Apple Watch routinely while not having to re-start their band collection.

Some really interesting ideas here and solid insights. Perhaps a little too much logic for the forum but I, for one, appreciate the time you put into the posting. I kind of wished you worked on the Apple Watch team but if we are lucky Apple will run with your ideas where they can.

If you wanna make silly comparisons just compare the Apple Watch to the entire watch market like you would compare the iPhone to the entire phone market. That's a true Apples to Apples comparison.
I am confused. Are you saying that comparing the Apple Watch to the entire watch market is just as silly as comparing the iPhone to the entire phone market? I would agree with that, it would be silly to do such comparisons. But then you follow with "That's a true Apples to Apples comparison" which makes me think you are suggesting it would be reasonable to compare the Apple Watch to the entire watch market (um, it's not really a watch) and it would be reasonable to compare the iPhone to the entire phone market (um, the phone component might be the least used part of most people's iPhones).

Not that it matters, just found it a little confusing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ipedro
They haven't done that because they stated, before they launched the new product line, that they wouldn't. Compliance with their stated policy on the subject is hardly any cause for concern.



They are acting entirely consistently with how they said they would act.

Yeah, they played the safe card turn one face down and now revealed it.
The card is "don't worry, we sell enough, stop asking"

I doubt, granted I'm guessing, that they'd uphold this card too long if the Watch was exceeding conservative or optimistic expectations.

It's a typical "wait for gen 2 features" device and I believe many people still remember iPad 1 versus 2 very well.
You got so much more life out of the second generation device it's quite an imbalanced disparity.

Glassed Silver:mac
 
GPS is also a battery hog that could be replaced with alternatives like known network triangulation.

Garmin watches get 10 hours of GPS time, which is longer than the Apple Watch can do other things, like playing music (6.5 hours). Maybe Basis, Samsung, Garmin, FitBit, Polar, and probably others are miraculous aberrations?

I would buy if any two of the following were on the next version:

GPS (w/current battery life)
5-day battery life
Always on display (w/current battery life)
Improved Water resistance
 
Second point: with the prices of the watches and an estimated margin of 40-50% I am wondering what is going on at the manufacture that is causing them not to turn over a significant margin? either Apple has another one of those deals where the manufacture was never going to make money or the manufacturer is doing something wrong.

Got to be careful though. 40-50% is a rough component margin guessed by analysts. Then that is only Apple's slice. Take off the usual things (R&D, marketing, etc.). Then they will be negotiating with the suppliers (and everyone wants tobe an Apple supllier so it's cut throat). Then the fact it's gen 1, and it's manufatured to crazy fault tolerances etc. Not much is left.

I'm sure Gen 2 (or for the iPhones 'S' versions) will help as they have an amount of stability and know how for the design.

Just look at Android manufacturers. They race to the bottom. And then end up making losses.

Apple Watch 2 needs integrated SIM (eSIM), GPS, more health features (i.e. for diabetics), work with hearing-aids w/o iPhone, needs to be thinner (but connect with current bands) and apps should run without the need for iPhone. I do not care about the camera but others do.

You can apply that last sentence to everything.

I personally don't want SIM functionality in it (and if they did I hope it's like iPad - optional). My iPhone has a SIM plan and currently my Apple Watch, iPad and MacBook connect through it.

My Apple Watch is already about the same thickness as my analogue watches. This is very subjective, some people like slick thin watches, but I like watches with heft. Perhaps a few generations down the line we will see regular and Plus/Air models.

GPS, extra health monitoring why not, I'm sure/hope we'll see these things eventually. Although really want the superb battery life to remain where it is.
 
Apple Watch 2 needs integrated SIM (eSIM), GPS, more health features (i.e. for diabetics), work with hearing-aids w/o iPhone, needs to be thinner (but connect with current bands) and apps should run without the need for iPhone. I do not care about the camera but others do.

You are on target- glucose monitoring for diabetics (and pre-diabetics) is huge and a game changer. Something Steve Jobs shared privately in 2001 (before the Watch existed). Other predictive biomarkers that predict (even may diagnose) future potential of disease (cardiovascular, metabolic, oncologic, etc) will be next. An enormous market for wearables but more important, an immersing technology into the human experience that can very well change current disastrous health trends in the world.
 
Finally received mine in September after waiting to have the money. I'm hoping they don't release a new one next year. Rather they waited 2 years or so. I'm not looking to replace mine at all with a newer version (still using wOS1) and definitely DO NOT want it thinner. The design at the moment, is great. There was a mockup that made thinner and it looked terrible. Design is great, how else do people expect a decent battery? If they thin it down, that's the first to go. GPS should have been in there from day 1. That'd be the only reason I would upgrade, except I don't need to as I own a treadmill and don't need to go anywhere to run without my phone.
 
Garmin watches get 10 hours of GPS time, which is longer than the Apple Watch can do other things, like playing music (6.5 hours). Maybe Basis, Samsung, Garmin, FitBit, Polar, and probably others are miraculous aberrations?

I would buy if any two of the following were on the next version:

GPS (w/current battery life)
5-day battery life
Always on display (w/current battery life)
Improved Water resistance

Yes, and I want a unicorn to ride to work on.
Other than the lack of GPS, none of those are issues. I take my watch off at night to go to sleep. It charges then. If I somehow forgot, in under an hour, it's topped up. Battery isn't an issue.
Always on display? For what? The watch face turns on every time I look at it. It's almost eerie how well it recognizes that I've looked at it. Not having an always on display isn't an issue.
Improved water resistance? This Summer, I was in Turks & Caicos where I swam in the ocean with my Apple Watch every day and lounged in a pool every day. When I was in the pool, I used the Watch to control the music on a Bluetooth speaker at the pool side. It worked perfectly. Still does. Water resistance isn't an issue.

So you want GPS and an always on display, both known battery hogs and you want the battery to last three to four times longer? What other unreasonable requests do you have?
 
Last edited:
I don't think the watch needs to be refreshed every year - I think that's rather silly and I think Apple is already dealing with many issues due to pushing new and refreshed products out on a yearly schedule.
 
I don't think the watch needs to be refreshed every year - I think that's rather silly and I think Apple is already dealing with many issues due to pushing new and refreshed products out on a yearly schedule.

Technology moves fast. People need to stop looking at the Watch in the traditional sense of a watch. Of course old fashioned watches weren't replaced every year or two but so wasn't your home telephone. A smart watch is on a trajectory to becoming everyone's personal device. It'll become the device that you upgrade every couple of years like you do with your phone now to keep up with the latest technology.

The jewellery value will become increasingly focused on the bracelet which as built now can withstand many generations without having to change its slot mechanism.

There is room for improvement in the watch and the technology is there. Why should Apple hold back on adding things like a faster processor and 3D Touch for a more flexible and capable UI?
 
Yeah, they played the safe card turn one face down and now revealed it.
The card is "don't worry, we sell enough, stop asking"

I doubt, granted I'm guessing, that they'd uphold this card too long if the Watch was exceeding conservative or optimistic expectations.

It's a typical "wait for gen 2 features" device and I believe many people still remember iPad 1 versus 2 very well.
You got so much more life out of the second generation device it's quite an imbalanced disparity.

Glassed Silver:mac
I usually don't purchase Apple devices until Gen 3. The iPad 3 was the first iPad worth picking up, IMO. I do hope Apple can improve upon the Apple Watch significantly for v2, but I'll still probably wait until 2017.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glassed Silver
lololol Apples success is because it creates great products, provides great service, great warranties etc. They're exceptional and head and shoulders above the others. As an Apple user I love the reliability. The stuff just works.

I def agree on that point. I have dropped many, many thousands of dollars on Apple products over the last 10 years. Time will tell how they fare over the long arc of history. I know right now they are doing some things I really like but also some things that I find quite irritating.
 
I don't like that you embedded your response in my quote. even though you changed the color it make it look like I said something I did not.

please look at my response in post #13. I think you will see my more detailed response to the question you posed pretending to be me :)

Thanks for the feedback. I didn't mean to put words in your mouth/post.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.