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 vs the industry
- Thread starter FlatCable
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Seems to me whomever made that comparison (you?) adjusted the list to ensurebut nobody seems to be comparing the features...
Watch got the most amount of green boxes. Pulse meter with lenses?
Scroll wheel as a feature? Why not mention standard watch band compatibility instead (red box for the Watch on that one, without 3rd party lugs to enable it.)Also, the weight might be off. Don't those other watches include the band? The stated figures for the Watch is for just the body. Elastomer band is as much as an additional 51g.
Also, it does not really have wifi either, as wifi capability is just to peer-to-peer with your iphone when bluetooth range is insufficient, not connect to a regular wifi network via an access point.
Exactly. Reminds me of this photo:Seems to me whomever made that comparison (you?) adjusted the list to ensure
Seems to me whomever made that comparison (you?) adjusted the list to ensure
Then name the features missing?
I tried to put all the possible features, like GPS and (which only the Sony has), or LTE (which currently only the Samsung has)
Pulse meter with lenses?
Yes, pulse meter with lenses, without lenses, not having the LED's in full contact, will make erroneous readings, many users report bad readings with sweaty skin or hairy skin. All others are missing, is that the problem?
Yes, all others are missing it. Sorry
Why not mentioning Apple's quick release straps? Which you can, as you said, put and adapter for standard 20/22/watever millimeter straps?
Win-Win.
All watches without the band
Or you can switch to whatever you like. Don't you? Just like any watch.
WRONG.
You can walk around in your house and don't lose connection because it uses Wifi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kbh9EFuFf0M
1:13:50
----------
I did not hide anything.
I'm not a liar.
Easy. Nobody called you a liar - It's just that a graphic can appear skewed based on the criteria. It's an interesting comparison chart.
Added.
Didn't include battery life, because there's no standard and independent benchmark.
----------
1 - Software feature
2 - Software feature
3 - See picture, there are many kinds of leather, many kinds of rubber, not directly comparable
4 - Wich one is?
----------
No, it's not very convinent.
The Fenix 3 is application specific, it lacks many things like a regular smart watch does, like NFC, or Apps, or an high resolution screen, or a thin profile. But has many many features that are important for what it is designed.
No. Makes no sense, you can make a table if you want.
Well, the biggest features aren't what it can do on its own, but how it interfaces with the phone. The stuff I'm looking forward to the most are those ... not the size of the screen or any of the other checkpoints. So, in reality, it doesn't matter how many other checkpoints the 'other guys' have, they're not going to, for example, let me use Apple Pay through the watch.
All you've done is list what is important to you in a smart watch. Things like touchscreen, NFC etc don't define a smart watch. A smart watch is technically a watch that has connectivity.
Also, the Garmin Fenix 3 is as thin as the Apple watch. It has less dependency on the phone too (and works with both Android and IOS). A smart watch it certainly is.
This is the thing, people like to portray things on an extremly silly way.
For example..... video call was rubish on most phones and on the top of that carriers were charging up to £2 a minute. Apple changed all that.
Surely Samsung must be heading to a stone age with it's brand new Galaxy S6 which lacks removable memory cards
MMS was very expensive therough carries also, and thanks to that stone age comparable fisrt iPhone, now we have countless apps you can use to send and receive multimedia files.
Seems to me whomever made that comparison (you?) adjusted the list to ensure
Pulse meter with lenses?
Also, the weight might be off. Don't those other watches include the band? The stated figures for the Watch is for just the body. Elastomer band is as much as an additional 51g.
Also, it does not really have wifi either, as wifi capability is just to peer-to-peer with your iphone when bluetooth range is insufficient, not connect to a regular wifi network via an access point.
Ars technica confirmed the wifi on the watch can join your home network.
Wireless charging? Uh, sure. If you mean that you have to take the 'wireless' charging device everywhere you go AND since it uses inductive charging, it might as well be wired, then sure, go ahead and call it wireless. If it had used a wireless standard like Qi, then I'd give you credit.
Body weight? I see you used the aluminum version for the lightest you could get. Why not show all weights? Maybe because the gold version is going to weigh half a pound?
Scroll wheel? LOL. You are trying to hard to find something to make the Apple Watch look better and it shows with this category. Might as well make a category saying "Round Watch Face". Then give Apple a red box. See how stupid that looks.
NFC? Should be red. Just like the iPhone. It isn't fully capable. I think you should change the category name to wireless payments.
Body weight? I see you used the aluminum version for the lightest you could get. Why not show all weights? Maybe because the gold version is going to weigh half a pound?
Scroll wheel? LOL. You are trying to hard to find something to make the Apple Watch look better and it shows with this category. Might as well make a category saying "Round Watch Face". Then give Apple a red box. See how stupid that looks.
NFC? Should be red. Just like the iPhone. It isn't fully capable. I think you should change the category name to wireless payments.
That's true but how often does this happen against Apple?
With everyone competing on processor cores, screen density and size, most smartphone comparison charts make iPhone look terrible!
To be fair, even magnetic resonance tech is only effective inside a constrained volume of space/at a short distance, so you're always going to be chained to a charger, attached by a wire. Wireless is basically ******** anyway, you still need the wall wart, the power cable, and a charger, and on top it wastes power and costs more money compared to a simple cable and connector.
Apple wireless payments only works if you live in the united states though. That's a bit of a bummer.
The
Yes, it is wireless inductive charging. There are no wires connection it. Apple chose to use MageSafe to affix the charger to the back for convince and a faster charge. However you could still charge the
Watch with the charging puck an inch away. It would just be a slower charge.1-Continuous HR monitoring and 2-Continuous Display On are features that are possible for smart watches with higher capacity batteries; my Surge has both features with a battery life of over four days.
3-Leather or Metal Band Standard; point being a number of smart watches come with higher quality bands without the need to pay a premium to upgrade.
4-My Surge can receive notifications from an iPhone, plus the fitness app for the Surge is compatible with the iPhone. I don't believe the Apple Watch will receive notifications from any Android or Windows phones nor will Apple be releasing a compatible Android or Windows fitness app.
Last edited:
So much is said about Apple Watch's price... but nobody seems to be comparing the features...
Image
I think that for $350/$399, the price is right...
I had sociology classes also, and I know how to make info reflect what I want it to. your chart really has no valid meaning. most of these watches or earlier versions are in use by the public now. where did you confirm the apple watch features, and how they function. I will be buying one, but I will confirm for myself, and though Apple products are usually dependable I never give a good review of anything until I try it myself.
I'm a fairly voracious Ars reader and I haven't seen this. Please post the link.
Edit - if you mean this link, it doesn't confirm that the watch connects to a wifi network.