Apple Watch Tidbits: Charging Retail Box, Water Resistance, Calls, Offline and More

[Rogifan]

Not at all. The limitations of the form factor of a watch, combined with the technology currently available make the Apple Watch–at least for now–nothing more than an interesting curiosity. FWIW, Apple would have been better to come up with an Ive-designed activity monitor, combining the best features of Withings, FitBit, Fuelband, MIO in a simple, beautiful package:

1. Sleep monitoring.
2. Meaningful, accurate activity tracking.
3. Smart, vibrating alerts.
4. Decent battery life.
5. High-end materials.
6. Tight IOS integration.
7. Bluetooth 4.0 syncing.
8. Heart-rate monitor.
9. GPS.

All of the above are currently available in other devices, but not together. That was Apple's for the taking, and that's why I am disappointed in Apple Watch I guess.

And yet when some or the rumors pointed to a more fitness oriented device lots of people here mocked it saying it would be too niche and most people don't care about fitness. In the watch video Ive used the word beginning. That's how I look at this, a V1 device. And considering Apple has hired a lot of people from the medical device field my guess is there are other things they're working on and Apple Watch is just the beginning of their wearables adventure.

----------

When i saw the first iPhone, it looked like something from the future... when i saw the apple watch today, it looked like something from last year.

What did you think when you saw the iPad. I remember people calling it nothing more than a big iPod touch.

 

[ClayMac]

Doubt the watch will ever work with anything outside the iOS/OSX ecosystem. No other Apple products do except for iTunes. At best the Watch will get standalone function and apps with the ability to offload data onto non-Apple devices.

Now I remember why I went Android.

 

[handsome pete]

This is a common misconception about water resistance. It's a pressure rating, and a watch needs to be 100m water resistant to actually be suitable for swimming. Granted, most watches are conservative in their ratings, so you may get a way with less, but it's a risk.

See here for the long, technical explanation: http://forums.watchuseek.com/f281/water-resistance-myth-vs-reality-239664.html#post1725668

Never knew that. Seems like the rating system is a mix of technical misdirection and slick marketing. I'm sure the average Joe reads 10 meters and assumes that to be purely a depth reading.

 

[fullauto]

Not water proof? Sorry! What is the point of making this a fitness watch if it can't be used for one of the most popular sports on this planet?

Sex in the shower?

 

[eltaurus]

ugly

 

[TTile]

When i saw the first iPhone, it looked like something from the future... when i saw the apple watch today, it looked like something from last year.

In terms of the style probably the worst thing you could say about it is it's thick (which I don't really agree with). But its a miracle that they could fit all that tech + battery in a small package that sits on your wrist. It truly is extraordinary and is the reason why they have so many high level features on it. And before someone says that the 360 does that same thing, it doesn't. Go look at its features.

 

[douglasf13]

Now I remember why I went Android.

It's the classic decision of choice and fragmentation vs. less choice and integration.

 

[TTile]

Now I remember why I went Android.

And you miss out on all the benefits of that OS X/iOS ecosystem now.

 

[douglasf13]

Sex in the shower?

I don't think anyone wearing a smart watch is having sex anytime soon. Zing!

 

[TheBuffather]

Unless I am completely missing it, I am shocked that the Apple Watch does not have a camera.

 

[ClayMac]

It's the classic decision of choice and fragmentation vs. less choice and integration.

It would have been wonderful if it kept changing (the UI) but it stood still and everyone else just stood on its shoulders/out innovated IMO

 

[Haifisch]

Mike. I am not wrong. Please read post 56. I am replying to a couple of other posts with a more detailed wiki about water resistance and waterproof watches.

You and douglasf13 are the only people here that actually understands watch water resistance. Everyone else thinks they can take a watch rated for 30M to 30 meters.

 

[TheBuffather]

Couldn't it charge from wrist movements? Some watches wind like that.

Yes, analog watches. Not little computers in the form of a watch.

 

[ClayMac]

And you miss out on all the benefits of that OS X/iOS ecosystem now.

Ive got my Mac. I was soo bored with iPhone.

 

[APlotdevice]

Not even waterproof? Come on...

At least the iPhone 6 is awesome.

There is no such thing as water"proof". A device can only be resistant to a certain amount of water pressure. The three common resistance levels are 3ATM (can withstand rain and washing hands), 5ATM (can be swam with in shallow water) and 10 ATM (can be swam with at snorkel depth). There are also 20ATM watches made specifically for divers.

Based on the information we have been given, the Apple Watch appears to be rated for 3 ATM. Likely the opening for the speaker and microphone are the weak link here.

 

[TTile]

Not at all. The limitations of the form factor of a watch, combined with the technology currently available make the Apple Watch–at least for now–nothing more than an interesting curiosity. FWIW, Apple would have been better to come up with an Ive-designed activity monitor, combining the best features of Withings, FitBit, Fuelband, MIO in a simple, beautiful package:

1. Sleep monitoring.
2. Meaningful, accurate activity tracking.
3. Smart, vibrating alerts.
4. Decent battery life.
5. High-end materials.
6. Tight IOS integration.
7. Bluetooth 4.0 syncing.
8. Heart-rate monitor.
9. GPS.

All of the above are currently available in other devices, but not together. That was Apple's for the taking, and that's why I am disappointed in Apple Watch I guess.

Battery life hasn't been revealed and it doesn't look like it will have GPS but everything else should be on the device (based on the keynote). Why are you disappointed again?

 

[gugy]

There is no such thing as water"proof". A device can only be resistant to a certain amount of water pressure. The three common resistance levels are 3ATM (can withstand rain and washing hands), 5ATM (can be swam with in shallow water) and 10 ATM (can be swam with at snorkel depth). There are also 20ATM watches made specifically for divers.

Based on the information we have been given, the Apple Watch appears to be rated for 3 ATM. Likely the opening for the speaker and microphone are the weak link here.

if the watch was at 5ATM to 10 ATM that would be huge for water sports. Unfortunately not at this time seems like.

 

[coolfactor]

they could have made it waterproof if they ditched that stupid dial ... steve would not have allowed a stupid dial to be placed onto this product

I think the Digital Crown (what you called the dial) is a brilliant interface because it's natural and easy to use. From what I saw in the breakaway shots, it is a self-contained control, probably with a magnetic or optical interface so that it can be sealed off from the rest of the internals. There's a reason they called it "Digital" after all.

It's brilliant because it helps the Watch retain a more conventional watch design, which will make it more attractive to a larger (and a more lucrative) market that is used to purchasing higher-end watches. Apple's market.

 

[douglasf13]

Rolex and other high end watches have that dial (crown) too and they are water resistant.

Yes, but the crowns of those watches screw down, which wouldn't work in this case, if you're supposed to use the crown to adjust parameters frequently.

 

[69Mustang]

This is a common misconception about water resistance. It's a pressure rating, and a watch needs to be 100m water resistant to actually be suitable for swimming. Granted, most watches are conservative in their ratings, so you may get a way with less, but it's a risk.

See here for the long, technical explanation: http://forums.watchuseek.com/f281/water-resistance-myth-vs-reality-239664.html#post1725668

Sweet lord thank you douglas for your post. I felt like I was going nuts with people not understanding what i was saying.

 

[fullauto]

I don't think anyone wearing a smart watch is having sex anytime soon. Zing!

lol'ed

 

[coolfactor]

Unless I am completely missing it, I am shocked that the Apple Watch does not have a camera.

Version one... baby steps. You have your phone, right? It's not being replaced.

 

[gagaliya]

Was honestly thinking the watch would look a lot nicer... The moto 360 looks way better. Now we just have to wait for further details.

It looks fine, you like round watch becaus you are used to it, but it doesn't function well as a screen for smart watches. Think how your text will look, and how bad and difficulty it is to design apps for a round screen that's actually usable.

Moto 360 is a watch with a few basic apps tailored for it. Apple is building a platform that will hundreds of apps developed by third party vendors.

None of the smart watch out there is actually usable or useful as oppose to just a hassle,just look at the crap software that's running inside.

Apple watch is the first device that may actually work. Biggest question mark right now is battery, if it's only a day then it will also suck no matter how good software hardware is. Need at least a week.

 

[Haifisch]

And no, it isn't thick. Men's dive watches probably average 14mm thick. From what it looks like in the pics, Apple Watch is on par with that.

 

[skinnylegs]

Was honestly thinking the watch would look a lot nicer... The moto 360 looks way better. Now we just have to wait for further details.

*Yawn* You obviously haven't been up front and personal with both watches.