Apple Watch Series 4 Expected to Gain Second Manufacturer Following 'Much Better Than Expected' Demand

[FFR]

Apple have excellent security, are big enough to handle this. Its not as if Apple is at the end of many attacks is it.
[doublepost=1538089594][/doublepost]

With logic like that, why would I even want to read in detail or reply to your rather long post.

Bigger market = bigger sales

no point in replying to you any more.

Because of supply and demand......
So to you there is no logic in economics.

You don’t want to reply because you simply can’t, reiterating what you previously posted with little to no understanding of market dynamics or market saturation.

So no, in this case bigger market does not equal bigger sales.

 

[Abazigal]

I think the rounded corner design of the Series 4 is a strong indication that Apple is planning to introduce a round option in the next generation or two. It makes it very easy for the current display area to drop into a round screen without changing a thing, making all of The available apps instantly compatible until developers update them to take advantage of the larger native display area.

The shape of the watch is purely a personal preference which has some trade offs over a rectangular watch and vice versa. Eventually Apple is likely to provide this option to attract more customers and encourage more upgrades, and even multiple watch purchases, especially to those who prize fashion over optimal text presentation — choosing information organized for brief glances, rather than in depth details.

We have as much chance of seeing a round Apple Watch as we have of seeing the iPhone released with a hardware keyboard.

It’s one of those classic Apple bets - they push all their chips onto what they decide is right and they have no intention of walking back on this. And once again, it turned out to be maligned early on, only to later become the obvious right choice.

The more images I see of the Galaxy Wear, the happier I am that Apple Watch is square instead of round. I do not want to deal with texts and emails on a round screen. It reminds me of the triangular tablet on The Office.

 

[OllyW]

We have as much chance of seeing a round Apple Watch as we have of seeing the iPhone released with a hardware keyboard.

It’s one of those classic Apple bets - they push all their chips onto what they decide is right and they have no intention of walking back on this. And once again, it turned out to be maligned early on, only to later become the obvious right choice.

The more images I see of the Galaxy Wear, the happier I am that Apple Watch is square instead of round. I do not want to deal with texts and emails on a round screen. It reminds me of the triangular tablet on The Office.

If they offered a round option, you wouldn't have to deal with texts and emails on a round screen.

 

[dilbert99]

Because of supply and demand......
So to you there is no logic in economics.

You don’t want to reply because you simply can’t, reiterating what you previously posted with little to no understanding of market dynamics or market saturation.

So no, in this case bigger market does not equal bigger sales.

No to me there is no logic in your premise that a bigger market does not equal bigger sales. Which is just plain wrong for a new segment of the market. That is why I shan't be replying. I'm just giving you the courtesy of responding with me giving a response. Not that I have no argument to put forward, just the you have put forward one that is not logical.

 

[FFR]

No to me there is no logic in your premise that a bigger market does not equal bigger sales. Which is just plain wrong for a new segment of the market. That is why I shan't be replying. I'm just giving you the courtesy of responding with me giving a response. Not that I have no argument to put forward, just the you have put forward one that is not logical.

It’s not my premise it’s simple economics.

Apple reached manufacturing capacity, entering a new market means nothing at this point.
You realize the topic of the thread is apple is adding a second manufacturer.....to increase capacity.

Apple is selling apple watches faster than they can manufacture them, or is it simply to hard of a concept to grasp?


What’s the point of entering a new market if they don’t have any inventory to sell in it?

That’s point I’m making you don’t have an argument against reaching capacity.

 

[dilbert99]

It’s not my premise it’s simple economics.

Apple reached manufacturing capacity, entering a new market means nothing at this point.
You realize the topic of the thread is apple is adding a second manufacturer.....to increase capacity.

Apple is selling apple watches faster than they can manufacture them, or is it simply to hard of a concept to grasp?


What’s the point of entering a new market if they don’t have any inventory to sell in it?

That’s point I’m making you don’t have an argument against reaching capacity.

Well it looks like we are making different points.

I am saying that Apple would sell more if it were available on Android phones. That is a fact.
You are saying that they are not in a position to sell more because they don't have the capacity. That is always a short term issue assuming that is the reason they are adding a second supplier. After all Apple really likes its profits.

 

[FFR]

Well it looks like we are making different points.

I am saying that Apple would sell more if it were available on Android phones. That is a fact.
You are saying that they are not in a position to sell more because they don't have the capacity.

You can go back and check every post, you will find a “at this time” regarding capacity.....but the point remains the subject of this thread.

By all means if you want to debate your topic you can start a new thread.

That is always a short term issue assuming that is the reason they are adding a second supplier. After all Apple really likes its profits.

Calling it myopic is certainly relative at this point.

iOS user demand for the Apple Watch is growing at an exponential rate. Only being hampered by supply.

Focusing on android at this point is frivolous for apple.

iPhone sales have crossed the billion unit metric a while ago and apple will focus on it users first. It’s not a question of greed or profit at this point only capacity and demand.

Again that is simple economics.

 

[chino-rican]

Thats a strawman argument. Apple gets iTunes and Safari to work on multiple OSs.
Look at netflix and every other large company out there, they all get their software to work with every OS and every device. If a small company like netflix (compared to the resources of Apple) can do it Apple can do it too.

I'm also a developer and there is no technical reason for Apple not to allow the Watch to be connected to from multiple devices or OSs, its just an API. It doesn't have to play nice with multiple version of android. The watch is self sufficient and doesn't need a companion device. Or are you saying the Apple watch relies on the iPhone for all its features to work.

TLDR: No technical reason. Just a monetary one.
===
Good points, but I'm not implying that. Technically, the watch shouldn't need an iPhone as long as it has access to the Internet. But as of the current (cellular) Apple Watch, running it without an iPhone or wi-fi kills the battery way too quickly to make it usable by the average person.

Your original comment was "There is no technical reason as to why the Apple watch could not work with other OSs".
Again, I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm just saying the juice would not be worth the squeeze because it would be extremely complex. Apple might sell more watches, but we all know they really want to sell more phones which have a much higher scale and profit margin. Why spend the resources to make the watch independent/agnostic when it might actually hurt their bottom line? (Making some assumptions here, I don't have evidence or numbers to back it up). Tim says he loves his customers, but he loves their wallets more.

 

[Mac 128]

If they offered a round option, you wouldn't have to deal with texts and emails on a round screen.

Exactly.

Those arguing against a round option almost always present it as the sole option. Next they have to rely on false equivalency. A watch is NOT a Blackberry, or an iPhone, or a tablet, or a TV or a computer monitor; and a round watch is not a triangle. And where that fails, they move on to the suggestion that Apple would not implement a round watch any differently than Android -- as if that's ever been true ...

...and these kinds of arguments are being made by self-proclaimed educators! It boggles the mind ...

That said, by rounding the corners so dramatically, Apple has already created a situation where texts and e-mails suffer from the same issue as on a round display:

And while these types of text display screens look more and more alike, other screens look much better round, at least for some.

Offering such an option is a matter of taste and judgment. Its more like offering a white iPhone, than offering a triangular tablet, or physical keyboard. Jony Ive stated clearly that when a customer wears a device they have the expectation of choice. Who am I to suggest he doesn't see round as an obvious future choice? Rounding the corners of the active display area make that more possible than ever before.

Here's the ACTUAL Huawei 42mm watch bezel I'm using -- edge to edge; with comparison to the Apple Watch below. Huawei has always had edge to edge with a thinner bezel than the Apple Watch.

 

[PickUrPoison]

You aren’t showing the proper bezel with your round mock-ups, you’re using a zero bezel. I’m sure you can improve on my crude versions; maybe you could post correct versions? If the rectangular watch had zero bezels, the display would be much larger, and show even more information that the circular display could not.

 

[FFR]

Exactly.

Those arguing against a round option almost always present it as the sole option. Next they have to rely on false equivalency. A watch is NOT a Blackberry, or an iPhone, or a tablet, or a TV or a computer monitor; and a round watch is not a triangle. And where that fails, they move on to the suggestion that Apple would not implement a round watch any differently than Android -- as if that's ever been true ...

...and these kinds of arguments are being made by self-proclaimed educators! It boggles the mind ...

That said, by rounding the corners so dramatically, Apple has already created a situation where texts and e-mails suffer from the same issue as on a round display:

And while these types of text display screens look more and more alike, other screens look much better round, at least for some.

Offering such an option is a matter of taste and judgment. Its more like offering a white iPhone, than offering a triangular tablet, or physical keyboard. Jony Ive stated clearly that when a customer wears a device they have the expectation of choice. Who am I to suggest he doesn't see round as an obvious future choice? Rounding the corners of the active display area make that more possible than ever before.

You make some interesting points but it’s probably the same reason you can’t get a circular monitor. And I miss my Motorola flip phone with a circular display.

 

[Mac 128]

You make some interesting points but it’s probably the same reason you can’t get a circular monitor. And I miss my Motorola flip phone with a circular display.

A watch is not a monitor. Nobody wears a TV or computer display on their body, much less their arm. People are not reading and writing documents and working on spreadsheets and databases on their wrists.

That said, I think Apple did exactly the right thing to get developers on board. They went square to make it easier for developers and themselves, despite so many of their graphics being circular in nature. Now that they've established the watch they can focus more on fashion as a choice. Rounding those corners sets it up perfectly to fit into a round format -- offered solely as a fashion choice in addition to the square for those who use the watch more aggressively. For most things round is perfectly adequate shape to present notifications, and brief text messages. Some people would rather not read a lengthy email on a 42mm screen on their wrist anyway.

Here's a few examples that show that there's really not much difference between presenting the same information in a round form. As I pointed out above, the graphic I use for example purposes is an actual 42mm Huawei Watch, using the same scale as the 40mm AW S4, which has actually had an edge-to-edge display with a smaller bezel since the AW S0, as the comparison below demonstrates. Apple even enlarged the display area from the 38/42mm (brown) to the 40/44mm (orange), but did not shrink the bezel as much as the Huawei has had for 4 years (rust).

First I've included a straight up match, the 40mm displays scaled to the 42mm Huawei. Then I present an "optimized" version to better fit the round design, along with the larger display area.

Note also, that even the screenshots have the same rounded corners, even the iPhone X doesn't do that. It's not a lot to go from there to round.

Apple even introduced guidelines for designing within rounded corners:

https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guidelines/watchos/visual-design/layout/

Once they go down that path, it's really not a problem to go all the way round. Again, this was NOT something the original Apple Watch developers had to contend with. Now there's a thriving user base that makes dealing with these headaches worth it.

 

[ericwn]

I just wish people would stop bitching about the red dot and the lack of a 4” iPhone.

Ya, it’s hard to read over a differing opinion.

 

[Mansu944]

Ya, it’s hard to read over a differing opinion.

No it’s just boring to hear the constant droning and bitching.

 

[Abazigal]

A watch is not a monitor. Nobody wears a TV or computer display on their body, much less their arm. People are not reading and writing documents and working on spreadsheets and databases on their wrists.

That said, I think Apple did exactly the right thing to get developers on board. They went square to make it easier for developers and themselves, despite so many of their graphics being circular in nature. Now that they've established the watch they can focus more on fashion as a choice. Rounding those corners sets it up perfectly to fit into a round format -- offered solely as a fashion choice in addition to the square for those who use the watch more aggressively. For most things round is perfectly adequate shape to present notifications, and brief text messages. Some people would rather not read a lengthy email on a 42mm screen on their wrist anyway.

Here's a few examples that show that there's really not much difference between presenting the same information in a round form. As I pointed out above, the graphic I use for example purposes is an actual 42mm Huawei Watch, using the same scale as the 40mm AW S4, which has actually had an edge-to-edge display with a smaller bezel since the AW S0, as the comparison below demonstrates. Apple even enlarged the display area from the 38/42mm (brown) to the 40/44mm (orange), but did not shrink the bezel as much as the Huawei has had for 4 years (rust).

First I've included a straight up match, the 40mm displays scaled to the 42mm Huawei. Then I present an "optimized" version to better fit the round design, along with the larger display area.

Note also, that even the screenshots have the same rounded corners, even the iPhone X doesn't do that. It's not a lot to go from there to round.

Apple even introduced guidelines for designing within rounded corners:

https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guidelines/watchos/visual-design/layout/

Once they go down that path, it's really not a problem to go all the way round. Again, this was NOT something the original Apple Watch developers had to contend with. Now there's a thriving user base that makes dealing with these headaches worth it.

Those round mockups frankly look horrendous. Even the rounded corners of the Series 4 is starting to rub me the wrong way round a little with the way it cuts off the edges of the text a little.
[doublepost=1538188672][/doublepost]

Those arguing against a round option almost always present it as the sole option. Next they have to rely on false equivalency. A watch is NOT a Blackberry, or an iPhone, or a tablet, or a TV or a computer monitor; and a round watch is not a triangle. And where that fails, they move on to the suggestion that Apple would not implement a round watch any differently than Android -- as if that's ever been true ...

...and these kinds of arguments are being made by self-proclaimed educators! It boggles the mind ...

The same argument can be used for anything.

Why doesn't Apple make a 17" rMBP? You can always choose not to buy it if you don't need one.
Why not bring the headphone jack? You can always not use it if you prefer wireless headphones.
Why not a surface studio iMac? Again, don't buy it if you haven't a use for it.
Why not this? Why not that? Why stand in the way of users who might see a legitimate use for such a product even though you might not see a use for it?

All these arguments seem to assume that there is essentially no opportunity cost to Apple adding an additional layer of options to their products, that they can simply snap their fingers and will these products into existence without needing to devote additional design, engineering and production resources to make them possible.

This is Apple we are talking about. Past a certain point, the thread has to move beyond simply being just a wishlist of what we want from Apple, and move on a legitimate discussion of whether we see Apple making such a move (and if so, why, or why not if otherwise). Because Apple, for its size and relative wealth, is still a company facing constraints (talent being one of them, so they have to be very prudent about how they devote them to product design).

You are absolutely right, I don't have to buy a round Apple Watch if I don't want one. And that's really besides the point. It's not about what I want, but whether it makes sense for Apple to release a round watch, and from what I have seen and understood thus far, it doesn't.

 

[ericwn]

No it’s just boring to hear the constant droning and bitching.

Opinions about these fashion items can easily differ and to a degree it’s up to the individual to decide how we deal with this.
And yes, introducing an additional red colour on a device that already has a black screen plus a potential different body colour plus strap colour will look off to some.
Add to that that it’s an international forum where hyperbole is not uncommon and you have to expect some heat.

 

[BoulderAdonis]

I highly doubt it. Apple only gives a glass of ice water to people in hell when they are absolutely forced to.

They are the incumbents now and don’t need to do that. There are so many more iPhones out there now then Macs back in the day.

Also the App Store completely changes things as well. People thinking Apple will license their systems or open them these days are misguided.

I don’t think they will license their systems or open them. I *do* think glasses, earbuds, and a watch are the future of computing (or at least an intermediate step along the way) ...

My watch is already separated from my phone: Cellular.

 

[ryanwarsaw]

I don’t think they will license their systems or open them. I *do* think glasses, earbuds, and a watch are the future of computing (or at least an intermediate step along the way) ...

My watch is already separated from my phone: Cellular.

Yes we agree. I just said Apple only opens things if they have no choice. My example was itunes.