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 Watch Has 8GB of Storage, Limited to 2GB for Music and 75MB for Photos
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The top of the line $373,000 Rolex has the same tech specs as a $32,000 model with the same screen size.
Because I listen to streaming radio stations while I exercise. Can't do that without cellular.
I wonder how the Watch would work without a computer/iPhone? How will we install apps, music, photos, etc.?
This:
1) Looks terrible
2) Doesn't have notifications
3) Can't take calls
4) Doesn't do messaging
Yes, a bike will get me from A to B, but I prefer to drive my SUV for its added features and convenience.
rtfa. the whole point was that the music and pix can be played/viewed untethered.
I don't understand the complaints that the watch doesn't have a headphone jack. Who would want to have a cord between your wrist and your ears? You'd be accidentally yanking the earbuds out of your ears about every 2 minutes.
Ever try running and change the song using the iPhone? It sucks, much better option.
Yes, it seems this watch is useless without the iPhone wich raises the question Why would I want to store music on the watch (which doesn't have a headphone jack) when I have my iPhone with me? Might as well listen from the iPhone instead.
I figured as much. Using the on-device music storage seems pretty useless to me if you can only play music via the watch as a speaker. This first-gen watch has "public obnoxiousness" written all over it between the music playback and the speakerphone.
Well, good for you! I just spoke my mind. I think that $350+ for such a narrow niche use case and limited capabilities is a stretch too far.
Why So Angry?
I've been amused by all the hostility the Apple Watch has generated on this forum. The first question anyone who would buy one should ask is: "do I want to buy a watch?" If the answer is no, then you're done. Second question, "what's my budget?" You can get perfectly good Bulovas for under $100, so if that's the answer then you're done. If you're willing to spend $300-$1000 for a high quality watch then the next question is "What do I want for this watch?" Only then should you weigh the Apple Watch against its competitors.
All the "Fail!" "Too expensive" "Silly gadget" complaints add nothing to the analysis. For me, I gave up wearing a watch a few years ago because the iPhone serves the same function. Recently I've been missing having a watch. Also, I like the idea of not pulling my phone out to check notifications because, really, it's a very rude social development. Checking the watch is much less intrusive into meals, conversations, etc.
But you know what Taylor Swift says about haters gonna hate hate hate hate hate ...
I've been amused by all the hostility the Apple Watch has generated on this forum. The first question anyone who would buy one should ask is: "do I want to buy a watch?" If the answer is no, then you're done. Second question, "what's my budget?" You can get perfectly good Bulovas for under $100, so if that's the answer then you're done. If you're willing to spend $300-$1000 for a high quality watch then the next question is "What do I want for this watch?" Only then should you weigh the Apple Watch against its competitors.
All the "Fail!" "Too expensive" "Silly gadget" complaints add nothing to the analysis. For me, I gave up wearing a watch a few years ago because the iPhone serves the same function. Recently I've been missing having a watch. Also, I like the idea of not pulling my phone out to check notifications because, really, it's a very rude social development. Checking the watch is much less intrusive into meals, conversations, etc.
But you know what Taylor Swift says about haters gonna hate hate hate hate hate ...
Because you might be in a situation where you do not want, or you can't use the iPhone. You can go running without the iPhone while being still able to listen to the music you want. You might be waiting for the iPhone to charge in your car while being able to check the time, see a few pics, and listen to music.
iPhone is necessary for 85% of the functionalities, but the Apple Watch can clearly function without it.
So we've pretty much ruled out many use cases for the Apple Watch to even support native Bluetooth music playback... none that couldn't be solved by using the watch to control your nearby phone's playback of music anyway.
So just buy the Stainless one and some bullion coins.
This crap is for a few rappers and arabs.
Exactly. And if I must use a cable, an armband is a far more convenient location to plug in to. And if I'm running, cycling, or otherwise working out, I'm running, cycling or otherwise working out. I don't need to see my notifications, meeting invites, text messages, etc. And I sure don't want those around me flying at 20 mph on a bike looking at their phone to see who posted the latest baby photo on Facebook. If the watch can play music utilizing wireless headphones, and give me some simple stats/feedback on my workout, that's good. GPS would be nice if I'm out on a run or bike ride, but this is gen 1. If that is a deal breaker for you, then wait.