Apple Watch iPhone Companion App Reveals New Details About Upcoming Wearable

[TallManNY]

$349 sport model
$399 large sport model

$499 Apple Watch
$549 large Apple watch

$1099 Apple watch edition
$1199 Large Apple Watch edition

all will have 4gb storage across the board. Edition will come with 8gb.

you heard it here first.

We've been through this before. The Edition Watch is made of solid gold. It is not going to sell for a $1,099. Solid gold watch sell at dramatic premiums over their stainless steal variant. Apple is going to position the Edition as a luxury item that normal folk (even in the U.S.) cannot afford. This is going to be a true luxury item and it will be marketed in that fashion.

I suspect the stainless steal watch prices you have are too low as well, unless that is the price without a band and you are assuming that to get one of the nice bands you have to drop another $150 or $200.

 

[Keirasplace]

I've been working as a developer on Apple Watch for the last few weeks for a major retailer. Frankly it's a piece of crap. Don't expect much from third party apps at launch.

Right now, with the available APIs, it's comically limited with what you can do. Layout of UI elements, despite the tiny screen, is like writing web pages in the mid-90s when browser technology sucked. While Android wearables are running full apps and even games like Flappy Bird, Apple Watch is basically just a tiny screen and nothing else. Nothing actually runs on the watch itself - it's just a small screen to display apps that have barely any more functionality than the stuff you find on the Today notifications screen on your phone.

You do realize that this for pre-launch apps. Offering any other options right now without the watch in your hand would be useless and would also tip-off people a bit too much into its exact capabilities.

Your assessment is incredibly overblown; and yes I've dealt with the kit.

This is not meant to replace a phone screen. It will offer several modes of interactions and that, as a whole, is what you have to focus on. If you think that way, using it for browsing massively dense info like a web page, (and seems you do), then maybe your better sticking with what you know)

 

[x5tuu]

Trust me, if you wander through Central Park, you're going to see plenty of people wearing watches that cost more than $5K.

People pay insane amounts of money on watches. I fly a lot for my job and see plenty of high end watches people wear casually.

In fact I was recently in London and as I left, the airport had a watch store selling watches that cost north of $60,000 and dozens that were well over $5K. And one has to assume that there are literally people out there waiting to catch a plane who have the money to just spend like a normal person buying a magazine.

I don't think anyone in New York is going to faint if they see someone wearing a $700 watch.

Precisely this, I would suggest the argument that actually, high end watch making are hand made devices from small companies where hand built precision is what its all about. I watched a program recently on the BBC about a small English watch making company just like this where they have an 8yr wait list for their watches, they make 5 per year and they retail from £260k upwards ... this is high end

Many lay-person recognised brands, are just that - brands, and while they may be expensive and some exquisitely crafted, they are what is the equivalent of high street retail, and its only a select handful of devices by these manufacturers that again could be deemed as high-end

I genuinely don't believe Apple want high end or even mid, they are disposable cheap devices for the masses, like iphones, ipads et al ... even the gold variety if £2k is disposable at that price point, similarly to their top computer lines.

 

[69Mustang]

I disagree.

I mean, sure, you can teach coding to many. But as with any skill only a small percentage will grasp some of the more highly complex nuance.

When you look at the video games of today such as Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto, it takes hundreds of people a couple of years to make one release. The math and physics involved in rendering a 3D environment as they can these days, not to mention the graphical talents of the artist is beyond the ability of one person.

Just like these days there are very few people left on the planet who could build a watch from scratch (especially one with advanced complications), there are maybe only a handful of people on the planet who could produce something to the standards of a modern high end video game by themselves, even if they had years to do so.

I would argue that even if you ignore some of the advanced engineering of the Apple Watch, just the code to make it work would take one talented programmer years to produce.

To my mind though Apple have also done something I've never seen before in any high end watch. Just look at how they have designed multiple bracelets that can slide on and off the watch with the press of a button.

Their stainless bracelet design also has links that can be removed with the press of a button, a design by the way that I believe they said takes 9 hours to build with over 100 parts.

With a well over 100 years of watch design, I've never seen any of the major players produce a design that elegant and user friendly. It's really pretty clever making their watch that customizable.

Bottom line here is that when you understand as I do the complexity of programming, with the incredible engineering I see in the demo videos, I believe that this watch has taken dozens of highly talented people more than three years to develop. They have every right to use terms like 'complications' without being disrespectful.

I'm not sure you understand what a horological complication is. For several posts you've talked about the complexity of programming as analogous to a complication. It's not. Sure, it's complicated, but that has nothing to do with a horological complication. Complication and a horological complication are not the same thing and their meanings can't be switched to suite the narrative you're building.

That simply isn't true.

If the iPhone had sucked, how would it have even made a dent in the market?

If the iPad had sucked, would tablets even exist today?

How about the MacBook Air? Did it not pretty much invent the ultra light laptop concept?

Obviously every new generation of product is likely to learn from the previous, but based on that logic, you'd never by anything. Just look at TVs as they evolved from plasma to LCD to LED to oLED and now they are talking quantum dot 4K UHD. If you seriously waited for the best, you'd never ever buy a TV.

How did you find it acceptable to completely corrupt littyboy's quote and substitute your own narrative? The poster said "Apple products haven't been exactly great 1st gen". You imply the poster said something sucked. Whaa...??? Did I lose something in translation? Not being great and sucked are nowhere near equivalent.

Bolded: There's no logic in what you said. The poster clearly stated: "Will wait for 2nd or even 3rd gen before consider buying." 2nd or 3rd purchase =/= never buying anything. There are tons of people who aren't first adopters. In fact, I wager most people aren't first adopters.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Just because you haven't heard a term used before doesn't make it any less correct or relevant.

Clearly you're not a watch aficionado, and that's fine, but every hobby/business/etc. has its own jargon. People didn't know what "download" meant, or an "app", etc.

But I guess if you want to dump your AAPL because they're using the correct terms for something rather than dumbing it down, be my guest.

1. I was being facetious about selling... don't have a hissy.

2. "download," "app," didn't have a secondary meaning when they were introduced to the general public. Look, jargon has it's place... I know, because I'm a lawyer and we use a lot of terms that on their face mean something different. For example when a judge dismisses a case "with prejudice," it doesn't mean he or she is biased, it means the case can't be refiled or retried. But I don't use the legal term talking to a client, I tell them in plain english so they clearly understand the result. That's what good communications is about; not trying to be pedantic with $10 words to prove one's smarts.

I get your point. But the use of the term "complications" by Apple is about associating the watch with the high end watch market. They don't want it to be categorised as a smart watch, rather they want the consumer to view it is the next evolution of the classical high end watch. I know this is all semantics, but the image the watch acquires will be key to its success. If it's seen as geeky, it'll flop. The battle here is all about getting the watch accepted by the public. While it might come over as pretentious of Apple to use such terms as "complications", I suspect it's actually very clever marketing.

I disagree 100%. Apple's efforts have been to appeal to the fashion market, not the high end market. Sometimes those worlds intersect, but Apple is not making fine time pieces for the ages. It's building disposable, planned obsolete iPhone accessories with quality materials to hopefully appeal to a larger demographic. But no one is going to confuse an Apple Edition Watch with a Jaeger-LeCoultre; especially fine watch aficionados.

The Apple Watch is unique and Apple should just come up with original words to clearly explain the functions rather than pretend its something its not and use obtuse and confusing jargon of a hobby that .01% of the world population participates in.

 

[cmChimera]

We've been through this before. The Edition Watch is made of solid gold. It is not going to sell for a $1,099. Solid gold watch sell at dramatic premiums over their stainless steal variant. Apple is going to position the Edition as a luxury item that normal folk (even in the U.S.) cannot afford. This is going to be a true luxury item and it will be marketed in that fashion.

I suspect the stainless steal watch prices you have are too low as well, unless that is the price without a band and you are assuming that to get one of the nice bands you have to drop another $150 or $200.

No one can really say what price Apple will sell the stainless steel or gold variants with any real confidence.

 

[DudeDad]

The Apple Watch is unique and Apple should just come up with original words to clearly explain the functions rather than pretend its something its not and use obtuse and confusing jargon of a hobby that .01% of the world population participates in.

I collect watches and think it's a nice nod to watches....if you prefer, we can just call it a "tick tock thingy"

Perhaps we should not call it a crown either...how about "turny thingy"?

 

[pjh]

I disagree 100%. Apple's efforts have been to appeal to the fashion market, not the high end market. Sometimes those worlds intersect, but Apple is not making fine time pieces for the ages. It's building disposable, planned obsolete iPhone accessories with quality materials to hopefully appeal to a larger demographic. But no one is going to confuse an Apple Edition Watch with a Jaeger-LeCoultre; especially fine watch aficionados.

Sorry, maybe I wasn't very clear. I don't believe the watch is a high end watch. At the price point it looks to be coming in at, it is a expensive high street watch (call it fashion if you wish). The point I was trying to make was that by adopting the high end watch terminology, Apple is attempting to push the narrative in the direction of a watch that does other cool stuff, as opposed to a smart device that also tells the time. Establishing this is key to the success of the watch. Smart watches are still viewed as sad and geeky.

I know it sounds odd, but in my opinion, perception is 90% of the battle with this device. If people see it as a smart watch that tells the time, I strongly believe it's success will be mediocre. If it's seen as a watch that does other cool stuff, it might take off. Even if in both cases the device is exactly the same. It's a clever marketing trick by Apple. Once the apple watch becomes established in it's own right, I suspect the marketing blurb will change. I don't see why people are so concerned with Apple borrowing the vocabulary of the high end watch industry, it's not theirs to own. And as I said in a post earlier, the high end watch makers are full of just as much marketing BS as Apple.

 

[MrXiro]

And why are you assuming that the aluminum material is a "pile of crap" compared to the POLISHED stainless steel (not chrome). The alloy used in the Sport Watch is a 7000 series aluminum alloy. A VERY high quality and very expensive aluminum. iPhones use a 6000 series alloy, which is also high quality, but the 7000 is even moreso. The most common aluminum alloy is 5052, so in both cases Apple picks an even higher priced alloy than the norm. The benefit of 7000 series aluminum over 316 Stainless Steel is weight. 7000 aluminum has some of the best strength/weight ratio. Which is obviously a beneficial choice for a sportswatch. The Ion-X glass as well is also lighter than sapphire. These aren't simply cost-cutting decisions, but clearly picked for the watches intended use case, which is a sportswatch where weight is a priority.

That being said, 316L Stainless Steel and Sapphire are both obviously more expensive. But not by much. I wouldn't be surprised to see the standard Apple Watch close in price. I'm guessing $400-$500 for the Apple Watch.

It's not a direct comparison. Only an analogy... jeez some of you people really need your sense of humor meters checked.

 

[Mackinjosh]

Just release this ugly bomb already so we don't have to watch the painful attempts to tie Apple to fashionistas anymore.

 

[Shade12]

Needs few years till apple gets it right.

 

[ZCT]

I'm not sure you understand what a horological complication is. For several posts you've talked about the complexity of programming as analogous to a complication. It's not. Sure, it's complicated, but that has nothing to do with a horological complication. Complication and a horological complication are not the same thing and their meanings can't be switched to suite the narrative you're building.

It is only your opinion that there is no comparison between a complication and highly advanced software.

I suspect you are not an elite software engineer nor a horologist. So I think it is just snobbery to write off the complexity and indeed beauty of code written by the world's elite programmers.

Also, I'm not the one building the narrative; Apple are. From what I can see they have spent many years working on this and if they want to use that term for what they have worked hard on, I will not be looking down my nose at them.

 

[iMcLovin]

Ill buy the iWatch....Don't really appeal to me though, its gonna be tiresome to charge it everyday, but Ill buy it.

 

[ZCT]

Precisely this, I would suggest the argument that actually, high end watch making are hand made devices from small companies where hand built precision is what its all about. I watched a program recently on the BBC about a small English watch making company just like this where they have an 8yr wait list for their watches, they make 5 per year and they retail from £260k upwards ... this is high end

I guess high end has different meanings for different people. From my perspective a Mercedes S Class is a high end car. Yet when Kim Kardashian buys a Rolls Royce, she feels the need to have someone spend another $100K pimping it out.


In any case, none of this is of any relevance at all.

You and I seem to agree on the obvious reality that Apple isn't attempting to take market share from Rolex and certainly isn't in the same ball park of a hand made watch that costs more than the average home.

It's an interesting disposable product, and I'll be intrigued to give it a try.

Personally though I don't see yellow or rose gold as an appearance that interests me, so even if it were priced at $500, I'd pass. I'm looking at stainless.

 

[TallManNY]

No one can really say what price Apple will sell the stainless steel or gold variants with any real confidence.

That is true. But when there are no solid gold watches on the market for $1,000, why and how would Apple introduce the cheapest one? And cheaper by 90% compared to even the cheaper luxury brand versions of their solid gold watches. Gold plated could be sold at the $1,000 price range. But I understand that the Edition is not just plated.

If you can find a solid gold watch being sold new for under $1,200 let me know. I just don't think that is remotely what the pricing is for that type of item.

 

[xgman]

I like a nice watch as much as the next guy, but do we really need any of these features? To me it seems like more of a bother to the user than a feature. Seriously? I need a watch to tell me to stand up every hour. Come on guys, isn't that kind of embarrassing? Imagine your on a date and your watch beeps and your date asks "what's that?", and you say, oh, it's just my watch reminding me to stand up because I'm a lazy ass..... Oh yeah, that's real attractive..

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I collect watches and think it's a nice nod to watches....if you prefer, we can just call it a "tick tock thingy"

Perhaps we should not call it a crown either...how about "turny thingy"?

You are being silly. Even a 5 year old knows what the word watch means based on the context it's used. I can guarantee you if you asked an Ivy League student what a "complication" was 99% would give you the common english meaning, not the horological definition.

I would guess most people don't know the control knob on a watch is called a "crown," but "crown" doesn't have negative connotations like "complication." Crown as a control knob also is an intuitive name because it looks like a crown. So there are distinctions to be made, all of which point to what is easy for the average consumer to understand.

The point I was trying to make was that by adopting the high end watch terminology, Apple is attempting to push the narrative in the direction of a watch that does other cool stuff, as opposed to a smart device that also tells the time. Establishing this is key to the success of the watch. Smart watches are still viewed as sad and geeky.

But it's not "high end" watch terminology. It's just watch jargon. Fine if you are a collector or watchmaker. When your average consumer goes in to even the best of jewelry stores for a watch they don't ask to see a Breitling with lots of complications. They ask for one with day/date and chronograph. In fact, that's how the catalogs read too.

And I don't know about smart watches being sad and geeky. Depends which one. But being a stuffy and snotty horologist is something I'd want to be associated with even less. Apple has worked hard to make its brand youthful, fresh and simple. Not sure why Apple would endeavor to change that to pretentious and unnecessary. In the past Apple has made its mark on its own terms, not others.

 

[opeter]

"In horology, the study of clocks and watches, a complication refers to any feature in a timepiece beyond the simple display of hours and minutes."

 

[doelcm82]

I like a nice watch as much as the next guy, but do we really need any of these features? To me it seems like more of a bother to the user than a feature. Seriously? I need a watch to tell me to stand up every hour. Come on guys, isn't that kind of embarrassing? Imagine your on a date and your watch beeps and your date asks "what's that?", and you say, oh, it's just my watch reminding me to stand up because I'm a lazy ass..... Oh yeah, that's real attractive..

If it's a bother to you, then don't enable the complication. The reminder to stand up and take a break will be an inaudible tap on your wrist. If you need to announce to the world (or your date) that you're standing up because your watch told you to, then it's your problem, not ours.

 

[69Mustang]

It is only your opinion that there is no comparison between a complication and highly advanced software.

I suspect you are not an elite software engineer nor a horologist. So I think it is just snobbery to write off the complexity and indeed beauty of code written by the world's elite programmers.

Also, I'm not the one building the narrative; Apple are. From what I can see they have spent many years working on this and if they want to use that term for what they have worked hard on, I will not be looking down my nose at them.

You're right. It is my opinion. It's also my opinion you don't have a good grasp on what a horological complication is. If you did, I doubt you would still be pushing your software analogy.

Whether or not I am a software engineer or horologist is immaterial to the subject at hand. I need to be neither to understand software coding has no correlation to a horological complication in the context of the watch.

But hey, I'm will to learn. Show me how they are analogous. Mind you, being complicated is not the same as a horological complication. So please don't go down that road again. I'm talking specifics, not abstracts. Your entire premise has only been abstracts. Nothing specific related to the topic.

And no, Apple is not building a narrative, you are. You are trying to convince someone that a complication (complexity) and complex software share similarities. In that, you are 100% correct. Unfortunately, you're trying to apply that same similarity to a complication in a horological sense which refers to any feature in a timepiece beyond the simple display of hours and minutes.That doesn't work.

Let me help you. The complications Apple refers to are the 4 little circles on the watch face. That it. Not any software; elite programming notwithstanding. Basically Apple is pulling a Forstall and skeuomorphically representing a horological complication.

I'm not being snob. I'm sharing an opinion. I stated that in my very first post on this subject. I don't think it's a good represntation of a complication. Others will differ. That's okay (which I also stated earlier). Here's another opinion. Getting a shaded circle to appear on the face of a digital watch face does not require elite level programming. I don't even need to be an elite level software engineer to know that.

 

[armandxp]

Some watches get their time from satellites. Are they therefore not watches? I don't think Apple are trying to be smug (no more than normal anyway). They are just trying to align the watch brand with the high end watch market in peoples minds. In terms of use, it doesn't matter really. But it will have a big impact on the watches market acceptance. At the moment, smart watches have a geeky, rather sad image. Apple is trying to realign that. If they succeed, this will be to the benefit of all smart watch manufacturers, as the market will explode.





They've spent years designing this thing. While they have no track record in the watch industry, can you hardly expect their marketing blurb, to say that? They're blowing their own trumpet, thats what companies do. And providing they deliver a product that people want (still to be proven), whats wrong with that?





Exacty and in doing so Apple have achieved their goal! People will look up the word (or have it explained to them), see its link to the watch industry and a connection will be made in their mind between it and the watch. Not for everyone sure, but it's a start of breaking the "smart watch" image mould.



It's marketing. Who cares? As long as they deliver a quality product I'm happy.



Time will tell. You might be right, or you might be very, very wrong. If this thing sells they will have busted open a new product class. Yes, I know it existed before, but quite frankly it was small niche and pretty much a joke (smart watches NOT Swiss Watches). To be fair to Apple, they've spent quite a while developing this product and a lot of that time seems to have been spent studying the existing watch industry and consumers expectations. I've no problem with Apple trying to become apart of that club.

EDIT. Having thought about it a bit more, I don't think Apple really intend to threaten or replace the exisitng high end watch makers. I suspect this marketiing strategy was all about directing the discussion towards a comparison between the apple watch vs. high end watches as opposed to the apple watch vs other smart watches. By cleverly shifting the arugment, they have managed to at least create a tenuous link between their product and the swiss ones. In the end we can all buy a watch that tells the time for about $2. We choose to spend more. A lot of those spending choices are about image. Apple knows this and so do all the high end watch manufacturers. They're playing the same game. This battle is about the "old boys club" vs " the young upstart". If you want to be brutally honest, both parties are full of BS.

I just think Apple wanted to get into another line of business that makes their product stand out more. As in, wearing a watch. People will see it, ask about it, its not hidden in your pocket most of the time. They'll all look different, and it will become a trend for 18-40 year old, to have this fashionable item. Thus, pushing more people into the Apple ecosystem. Now you have to use iPhone if you want to be part of this fashionable group.

 

[iSee]

if anyone actually buys this watch, are they going to be stupid enough to go running with it? As soon as a few people get bopped from behind in central park and their 700 buck watch jacked, that will be the end of that tune.

----------



news flash. Many still use their ipad 1g. I use mine everyday for mail and reading. It sits right next to the crapper.

tmi

 

[stewy]

I really wonder how it affects battery life if you turn off all that crap and use it as, you know, a watch. So no push notifications, no health tracking etc.

What would be the point of that? Just buy a regular watch for way less money. Or a really nice watch for the same amount.

 

[bbeagle]

I can guarantee you if you asked an Ivy League student what a "complication" was 99% would give you the common english meaning, not the horological definition.

It's just because the word in the watch context went out of style. I bet a year from now, a lot more people will understand what a 'complication' means within the context of a watch, and it will regain its old meaning. Hey.... is that Samsung using the term complication now? lol.

Should Bimbo cookies change it's name because of the negative connotation of the word 'Bimbo'?

 

[ZCT]

I like a nice watch as much as the next guy, but do we really need any of these features? To me it seems like more of a bother to the user than a feature. Seriously? I need a watch to tell me to stand up every hour. Come on guys, isn't that kind of embarrassing? Imagine your on a date and your watch beeps and your date asks "what's that?", and you say, oh, it's just my watch reminding me to stand up because I'm a lazy ass..... Oh yeah, that's real attractive..

I'm thinking that will make this product is that it will be different things to different people.

No one is forcing you to set up the watch to force you to stand up 50 times a day. You might choose not to use any health feature.

For me I love the accuracy of the time keeping, especially since I travel a lot and switch time zones. I'd thinks some of those 'glances' would be useful when I want to know something without pulling my phone out.

I'm a big fan of Apple Pay so that would be good too.

Just seems like there's a number of interesting possibilities for a minimal investment.