Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Thousands of developers are not happy to support yet another device with a lot of OS limitations.

That shouldn't be too bad. As Apple has mentioned in the past, they have 5-6 million developers. A few thousand that don't code for the watch won't bother them. Then again, there's only a couple thousand apps for the watch, so apparently the vast majority of Apple developers don't seem to see the value.
 
What's with that ugly black area in the lower portion of the face of the moto?

I was thinking the same thing when I had seen an iwatch in person (only one so far). It was a black screen with nothing on it. It looked like the person was wearing small iPod on their wrist with the screen off. Didn't seem interesting at all. Can't see how they are marketing a blank screen as fashion.
 
I was thinking the same thing when I had seen an iwatch in person (only one so far). It was a black screen with nothing on it. It looked like the person was wearing small iPod on their wrist with the screen off. Didn't seem interesting at all. Can't see how they are marketing a blank screen as fashion.
Why should it be interesting when you don't look at it? Why should it convey information to others when it functions as a fashion accessory? Are diamonds "interesting"? Do other gemstones convey information to onlookers?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy Bubbles
That shouldn't be too bad. As Apple has mentioned in the past, they have 5-6 million developers. A few thousand that don't code for the watch won't bother them. Then again, there's only a couple thousand apps for the watch, so apparently the vast majority of Apple developers don't seem to see the value.
You don't need millions of Mediocre apps. A few thousand killer apps would seem like a "great showing" to me. Obviously I haven't seen all apps, the point is quality trumps quantity; and nether you or I are in a position to really know.
 
You have to consider these watches have the same lifespan of a flat panel TV. My Samsung TV that I bought 1.5 years ago is outdated, just like my iPhone 5s. Not to say it's not functional, but a lot of tech gear including phones gets obsoleted very fast.

But I'm still struggling what to do with my surge and if I should augment it with an apple watch.

Let's talk cars and antiques. Do you think anyone will care about a garden variety electric car of today in a few decades? Oh but that older Porsche....

Actually, not entirely true. There are more and more hybrid electric cars that will be talked about. Look at BMW, Acura, etc.. these companies are making some amazing vehicles. Sure, no one will care about a Prius, but the higher-end and performance market, I could totally see our generation talking about it 30-50 years from now.
 
Actually, not entirely true. There are more and more hybrid electric cars that will be talked about. Look at BMW, Acura, etc.. these companies are making some amazing vehicles. Sure, no one will care about a Prius, but the higher-end and performance market, I could totally see our generation talking about it 30-50 years from now.
I was talking about electric cars. Maybe a tesla, but not a Nissan Leaf.
The point being tech is outmoded fast these days. Your shiny new 6s will be obsolete in 6 months.
 
I wouldn't call it an infant market. Fledgling perhaps, but we've now seen several companies try to convince consumers that the "smart watch" is the next big thing...and the reality is, (most) consumers aren't interested.
While Casio Databank watches have existed for decades, wearable, internet-connected technology has existed in even the most vague form for at best 15 years, anything resembling a practical product in that area has existed for at best 5 years, much more realistically 2 years, technologically speaking there are zero wearable computing platforms that have any depth, stability, or maturity to them, and there is a total of one product on the market, period, that's sold more than a handful of units, and that one's only been available for three months.

Further, the products that are available are evolving and changing at an extremely rapid pace. Unlike Desktop computing, or cars, or televisions, the SDKs are in rapid flux, native apps aren't even available for the most successful platform yet, competitors are entering and exiting the market all over the place, and making a prediction about what things are going to look like even a year down the road, let alone ten, is nearly impossible.

I think that's the exact definition of an infant market.

It might never grow--maybe Apple Watch sales will peak and peter out in a few years and nobody else will produce a compelling wrist-wearable, or maybe the actual wearable market will end up focused entirely on something other than the wrist--glasses, clothing-integrated computing, a neural-linked earpiece. But whatever happens, making any predictions about it at this point are ridiculous, since the market is so new, and in such rapid flux. It's like trying to prognosticate about the smartphone market when the first Blackberry had been out for three months, or even if you want to be generous when the first iPhone had been out for three months. It's meaningless. The first iPhone, in objective modern terms, sucked, but fast forward 8 years and the computing world as a whole--how and where people do their computing--looks nothing like it did prior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Night Spring
While Casio Databank watches have existed for decades, wearable, internet-connected technology has existed in even the most vague form for at best 15 years, anything resembling a practical product in that area has existed for at best 5 years, much more realistically 2 years, technologically speaking there are zero wearable computing platforms that have any depth, stability, or maturity to them, and there is a total of one product on the market, period, that's sold more than a handful of units, and that one's only been available for three months.

Further, the products that are available are evolving and changing at an extremely rapid pace. Unlike Desktop computing, or cars, or televisions, the SDKs are in rapid flux, native apps aren't even available for the most successful platform yet, competitors are entering and exiting the market all over the place, and making a prediction about what things are going to look like even a year down the road, let alone ten, is nearly impossible.

I think that's the exact definition of an infant market.

It might never grow--maybe Apple Watch sales will peak and peter out in a few years and nobody else will produce a compelling wrist-wearable, or maybe the actual wearable market will end up focused entirely on something other than the wrist--glasses, clothing-integrated computing, a neural-linked earpiece. But whatever happens, making any predictions about it at this point are ridiculous, since the market is so new, and in such rapid flux. It's like trying to prognosticate about the smartphone market when the first Blackberry had been out for three months, or even if you want to be generous when the first iPhone had been out for three months. It's meaningless. The first iPhone, in objective modern terms, sucked, but fast forward 8 years and the computing world as a whole--how and where people do their computing--looks nothing like it did prior.

I disagree.

Wearable computing technology has been out for years. It all sucks and will for a very long time. If it catches on, it won't for the foreseeable future.

That's my humble opinion.
 
I disagree.

Wearable computing technology has been out for years. It all sucks and will for a very long time. If it catches on, it won't for the foreseeable future.

That's my humble opinion.

I believe that its strictly related to battery technology. Until we have brand new tech that can make those things last a few weeks, they will remain gimmicky.

That should also allow them to be a standalone device, not a mare accessory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
I believe that its strictly related to battery technology. Until we have brand new tech that can make those things last a few weeks, they will remain gimmicky.

That should also allow them to be a standalone device, not a mare accessory.
Some people may want a standalone device I don't. Don't want to pay for another voice or data plan; and why the. Include the hardware. A gps will run down the watch(any watch) even more.
 
Why do you say that? I bought mine 3 weeks ago and I really like it. It's not perfect but the combination of notifactions and activity/workout tracking has been great for me. Honestly I don't really care about any 3rd party apps at the moment since Apple's core apps do everything I need. If you're not using it for fitness purposes on top of notifications I can see why people wouldn't find it that useful.

Seems you answered your own question and besides a handful of people, this seems to be the attitude of the majority of reviewers or owners. It's nice, some people will like it, but it's not really necessary or even useful to most.
 
Seems you answered your own question and besides a handful of people, this seems to be the attitude of the majority of reviewers or owners. It's nice, some people will like it, but it's not really necessary or even useful to most.
I don't know about "most", clearly some. But the same thing could be said about cars: their nice some people will like them, but they are not necessary for most. I lived in the city for a number of years without a car.
 
I don't know what the general population thinks, how could you? Of course it could be an opinion just like every single post in this thread.

Indeed, perhaps just my opinion. However next time you are out and about try to notice how many people are wearing watches? Any brand what so ever.
 
Indeed, perhaps just my opinion. However next time you are out and about try to notice how many people are wearing watches? Any brand what so ever.
Watches are not in fashion in recent years, although I alternate between my surge and Vacheron. But still thinking there is a comeback afoot.
 
Well yeah, it's a first gen product. People criticized the original iPhone for not having 3G and the original iPad for not having multitasking. I'm sure the 2nd and 3rd generation watches will have improvements that skeptics have been asking for.

I think most people are actually talking about the ACTUAL product that's available now. I'm at a loss when people criticize the current product, defenders actually agree, but then defend the product by ASSUMING a future product that doesn't exist will fix all the issues. Then proudly proclaim their watch is awesome because the future versions will correct all the shortcomings.

Sometimes I wonder if people actually read what they are typing... If you just read that last paragraph and got even slightly offended, then yes you probably did that and probably more than once. I wasn't trying to offend, just pointing out a large portion of the 'pro watch' posts I read.
 
That's supposed to be Tim's job to act as a sounding board for Jony, but for some reason he, I suspect, does not possess the vocabulary of design-speak to really critique his work. He's afraid to insult him, so out of that behavior he gives Jony the Chief Creative Officer position to do what he wants without the 'head butting'. That's my feeling even though there's a lot more going on in this story than what's reported in the media on that promotion.

You could be right about more going on in the background. It's usually the case.

A lot depends on whether it was Cook or Ive who brought in Newson to help with the Apple Watch. If it was Cook, then he didn't trust Ive to do it alone.

(It's easy to tell that Ive repeated his usual shiny rounded rectangle shape, while Newson did the bands and likely heavily influenced the back and the crown design.)

Do you really really think Steve Jobs could have executed the production, distribution, sales, and support of at least 250 MILLION iPhones this last year?? Are you serious? Yea that's a TREMENDOUS feat by ANY measure or metric for a company that used to be thrilled selling 10 million iPods a year.

Cook hasn't been COO in years.

The person you should be praising for supply chain management, since Cook became CEO, is the VP of Operations, Jeff Williams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
You could be right about more going on in the background. It's usually the case.

A lot depends on whether it was Cook or Ive who brought in Newson to help with the Apple Watch. If it was Cook, then he didn't trust Ive to do it alone.

(It's easy to tell that Ive repeated his usual shiny rounded rectangle shape, while Newson did the bands and likely heavily influenced the back and the crown design.)
.

I think you're spot on about the hardware design as two halves from both of those designers. I suspect this was Ive's idea because the guy happens to be a long time friend of his and he needed his expertise on that end. Cook probably gave Jony the OK to being the guy on board.

And to think they spent almost FOUR years on that thing alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
Why should it be interesting when you don't look at it? Why should it convey information to others when it functions as a fashion accessory? Are diamonds "interesting"? Do other gemstones convey information to onlookers?

I'm pretty sure any "fashion" item's original purpose is to convey information to others. Especially true for gemstone jewelry. With gemstones it's usually selfish status information.
 
I disagree.

Wearable computing technology has been out for years. It all sucks and will for a very long time. If it catches on, it won't for the foreseeable future.
That actually sounds pretty much like you're agreeing with exactly what I said, apart from "wearable computing technology", depending on the definition, existing for a long time.

I agree that stuff you can wear that is in some basic sense a computer--like Casio Databank watches, for example--has existed for decades. But like you said, it all pretty much sucked, and in any case was never even remotely popular in a broad sense. And regardless, comparing a Casio Databank to an Apple Watch, in terms of functionality and internal processing capability, is like comparing a pocket calculator to a 2nd- or 3rd-gen laptop.

Wearable technology currently may or may not "suck", depending on definition, but in any case, as you say, it's going to be impossible to say anything meaningful about its place in society for the foreseeable future. Reason being, which was my point, it's in a state of extreme flux, and probably won't be a "mature" technology of any sort for the foreseeable future.

Apple Watch, from a software perspective, probably won't be anything like the Apple Watch of today even three years from now, and all bets are off if you go ten or twenty years into the future.

Whether it sucks at that point, and whether people will be broadly interested in it even if it doesn't suck, is an open question, and one that it's impossible to extrapolate enough to say anything about.
 
His comment read "I've said it before and I'll reiterate..." You want factual evidence of him saying this?

What do you want - a recording of him actually saying the words "The entire market for an Apple watch has theirs already"?
Did you eat paint chips as a kid? I want some evidence that the entire market for an Apple Watch has theirs already.
 
Anyone remember the game watches from the early and mid 1980's? You could play a crappy version of Pac-Man or Space Invaders?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.