Apple's 'iWatch' Said to Arrive in October 2014 with Wireless Charging

[JayMBP]

As far as wearable techs go, the only thing that seems reasonable to me is Google Glass as it integrates into our senses seamlessly. As a "wearable" piece, any other form on interaction would feel unnatural. And I say this because I don't remember the last time a cloth I'm wearing made me feel much less natural than when I am naked.

Unless Apple has some black magic under its sleeve, I just don't see how a device that requires me to actually switch my full attention from everything else would make much sense. I already have my phone for that.

Apple should take a note from Pebble, Samsung or any other "smartwatch" makers... the only thing they have in common is that none of them achieved mass adoption rate no matter what they put into.

By mass adoption I mean something like smartphone is massively adopted. Everyone including my mom has a smartphone. Smartwatch? Only 2 persons I know have them and I'm in a field filled with tech-loving people.

 

[imageWIS]

If Apple is wise, they will take a page from the Japanese + Ulysse Nardin's Chairman and have a rotor that powers the watch.

 

[BvizioN]

Would anyone need a watch with more features than a Pebble, if so, why?

Yes, reminds me the time when the first iPhone was rumored to be announced, when people used to say "My blackberry/Nokia phone does everything need to be done in a phone"

Funny how people never learn!

 

[dilbert99]

Would anyone need a watch with more features than a Pebble, if so, why?

I want a watch that is nicer looking than the pebble,
touch screen to make it easier to control my podcasts
colour screen - everything is better in colour ;-)
microphone/other sensors - opens up a world of possibilities
ir sensor to control my tv

Having said that its better to have a pebble than no smart watch - mine is in the post

 

[Tar Sniffer]

An October release means the first leak will arrive in 5-6 months

 

[Tech198]

ok, but i hope its better in features than what the Galaxy Gear is capable off. where by the Gear is useless without a phone...

Storage on the watch is the game,,,, not just used as a sync notification, since you need an mobile to set this up.....

that's not convenient. However reading the tiny display, i can see why they'd do that..

Go fugue !!

My only hope is the iOS watch wireless charging would interfere with any other stuff.. including your iOS device...

It may be good that you can charge it without wires ,,, but then your blocked from making calls..... lol


"holy brain-seizure Batman, back to the cave batman...."

 

[Urban Joe]

One to rule them all

I'm not particularly fond of where this is headed but this will be big. This iWatch will be a huge trendsetting device and officially debut the so called "internet of things."
Before long nearly all electric devices will be connected to to internet. The iWatch will be mainly the "master remote" to control the upcoming massive tsunami of web connected devices. I'm still fairly young but this is way to Orwellian to suit me....no doubt masses of people will flock to buy these sleek, expensive devices that are basically electronic shackles.

As far as style goes, I still believe Apple might go with a round device and a circular interface...we'll see.

 

[Urban Joe]

Internet of Things

Seriously, why do I NEED one of these? A smart phone made a lot of sense: its a phone, I can surf the web, messaging, great applications, oh, and it serves as a clock, etc. But, again, why would I need such a device? To avoid the inconvenience of pulling my phone out of my pocket to see who is calling, who IM'd me, or sent me an email? Or some biometric-centric reason?

Sorry, I just don't 'get' it. Plus I HATE wearing a watch so, I just won't get it.

The iWatch will be more like a master remote that will control the coming onslaught of web connected devices instead of a smart phone replacement. This is why they are in no hurry to release it...the whole ecosystem is in its infancy. Also why most people don't rightly see the need for it yet. Before long this thing will unlock your front door, crank your car, dim your lights and God knows what else. Brace yourself for a world saturated with these nefarious conveniences.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Mine cost around $300.00, by far the most I'd ever spent on a watch (or ever hope to spend). That's a lot considering you can buy a watch that tells perfect time for $20.00, and when the battery goes you can replace the battery for maybe $10.00, or just throw it out and buy another. You could do that a lot of times and still not come close to spending $300.00. People who buy a Rolex do it to impress other people. Cost is no object when that is your goal.

I refuse to even call Apple's forthcoming product the "iWatch." I doubt very much it will be called that, and even if it is, it won't be a just a watch any more than the iPhone is just a phone. I expect the unexpected from Apple. For as long as it has taken for this product to come to market, it sure better be a hell of a lot more than just a watch.

You're absolutely right, you can get a watch that tells time for very little money. $300 is a decent watch, and for the vast majority, it probably is considered expensive. I think that there are people who buy certain brands for the show off factor, but I certainly wouldn't say that about most Rolex or other high end watch owners. Many people just enjoy owning and wearing a nice watch. For many men, it is the only piece of jewelry that they wear. And as far as the wow factor, there are so many fake Rolex's out there, you'd have to do a close inspection to see if it was real or not, so I don't think most people are wearing them for recognition. I think that Rolex has that perception is due to the fact that it is the only higher end watch that the masses have actually heard of. There are other brands that are much more highly regarded than Rolex, and most people have never heard of them.

I don't see Apple selling it's watch for $199, and IMO, the price point is going to be critical. Personally, I'd like to see it water resistant at the minimum, but better yet, waterproof. And of course shock resistant, assuming that they are going to make it a sport watch. Whatever it is, they will be expecting to sell tens of millions of them, and I don't see it happening at $500 a pop, but who knows what the price will be.

----------

My kid dropped my Rolex on the ceramic tile and it instantly became a baby rattle. It cost about 250$ to fix it. That one hurt, but it did include a complete interior rebuild.

Side note, I bought my Movado years earlier and that thing is a tank. I have never had a single problem with it, besides replacing the battery.

But the nice thing was, you could actually get it fixed and it was cost effective to do so. If it was a $250 watch, you would probably have to throw it away. A Rolex or other high end watch can last a lifetime with proper care.

 

[IJ Reilly]

He's just being realistic, not pretentious. Clothes do make the man, and many people do choose expensive watches to complete that impression.

Thats probably why you won't see many women wearing the pebble watch either.

When people do things just to impress others, then that's the dictionary definition of pretentiousness. Another pretentious remark I was responding to was the claim to know what other people value, just by virtue of where they live. Finally, predicting that a product won't be a success on account of nothing more than the first two pretentious ideas, seems to me to be about as pretentious as a person can be. In fact, it comes off as snobbery. You are really just saying that pretentiousness is fine with you. Of course you are entitled to that opinion, but that doesn't change what it is.

 

[IJ Reilly]

You're absolutely right, you can get a watch that tells time for very little money. $300 is a decent watch, and for the vast majority, it probably is considered expensive. I think that there are people who buy certain brands for the show off factor, but I certainly wouldn't say that about most Rolex or other high end watch owners. Many people just enjoy owning and wearing a nice watch. For many men, it is the only piece of jewelry that they wear. And as far as the wow factor, there are so many fake Rolex's out there, you'd have to do a close inspection to see if it was real or not, so I don't think most people are wearing them for recognition. I think that Rolex has that perception is due to the fact that it is the only higher end watch that the masses have actually heard of. There are other brands that are much more highly regarded than Rolex, and most people have never heard of them.

I don't see Apple selling it's watch for $199, and IMO, the price point is going to be critical. Personally, I'd like to see it water resistant at the minimum, but better yet, waterproof. And of course shock resistant, assuming that they are going to make it a sport watch. Whatever it is, they will be expecting to sell tens of millions of them, and I don't see it happening at $500 a pop, but who knows what the price will be.

I'm aware of quite a few other expensive watches, such as Breitling and Patek. The former chronograph watches are quite popular among pilots, so I see then fairly often. But the reality is, nobody has to spend anywhere close to $10k for a watch, or even $500, even if they want one to last a lifetime. My $300 Citizen is probably good for a lifetime, if I just replaced the battery every 5-10 years. Anyway, nothing against jewelry, so long as we call it what is is: decoration.

The critical factor for Apple is what the device does, more than how much it costs. Nobody expects consumer tech to last a lifetime, or anywhere close. What they do expect is for it to wow them with what it can do, and because we're talking about Apple, it has to do it better than anyone thought possible. It's a heavy lift, but the kind of lift that Apple has been accomplishing.

 

[lyricthejoe]

We're so glad you told us. We really care about your personal preferences.

Now, don't you feel better?! People like you are the reason I stopped logging in or posting, and your lovely example today just reinforced that. Get over yourself.

 

[osx11]

Now, don't you feel better?! People like you are the reason I stopped logging in or posting, and your lovely example today just reinforced that. Get over yourself.

The original comment was someone stating his worthless preference! I don't care about his opinion and don't want every article full of with people's' worthless preferences. If you want that on this site, then have fun. I don't and a lot of people agree with me! I don't know why my comment is supposed to make me feel better! I don't think you even know what you're trying to say!

 

[coolspot18]

If I go out camping for a weekend, I don't want a dead weight on my wrist."

If you go camping, would you rely on an iWatch? I would wear a more rugged, reliable watch ...

Well, in So Cal, it's a status symbol, which is really the only reason I'm not sure the iWatch will really catch on. I wear my Pebble when I running around and DJing because it's convenient, but when I go out or have a real business meeting, I throw the Rolex or Movado on.

As good as the pebble is, it still screams Casio G-Shock.

True, I probably won't wear the iWatch to an evening function, but for daily wear, might be passable. Have to see the final design.

 

[MacMulti]

would anyone need a phone with more features than a nokia, if so, why?

7 days battery life, color display. Not sure why you would want something flashier than that.

image

[deleted]

 

[knewsom]

LMAO. I can get more than a week from my iPhone 5S if I don't use it (disable push email etc). Kinda pointless having one, I have to be happy with 2 days to a full charge.


Of course, it could be could be worse, I could own a Windows Phone, normal usage? why even pick it up. PMSL.

Haters gonna hate. I had an iPhone for ages. Love my Nokia, it's excellent, beautiful, intuitive, and it doesn't even need a case. Until you've used a Windows Phone for more than 5 minutes, you really have nothing remotely useful to say about them.

 

[Why??????]

If you go camping, would you rely on an iWatch? I would wear a more rugged, reliable watch ...



True, I probably won't wear the iWatch to an evening function, but for daily wear, might be passable. Have to see the final design.

Battery life is part of reliability, just so you know.

 

[dannys1]

I really hope it makes used of Bluetooth 4.0 LE and iBeacons. I mean if I'm wearing something all the time, surely the best use of it is to turn things on/off as I enter rooms/car. Put settings on different devices etc.

 

[SockRolid]

In contrast, a report last month from Digitimes stated that the iWatch would be released in Q2 2014...

Interesting. If there are no 3rd party apps, then Q2 2014 makes sense. Apple would put in their own apps and features and release it whenever is most opportune. (Probably at least a month before the new iPhone / iPad event, for maximum exposure.)

But if the iWatch will allow 3rd party apps (don't hold your breath), Apple would need to release it a few months after WWDC as the article's title suggests. Because there would have to be some iWatch API programming sessions at WWDC so developers could prepare apps for the iWatch launch, and that might take a few months.

And there's also another scenario: 3rd party apps from a few selected developers. The way Apple TV is now.

 

[macduke]

you would be a fool to buy first generation iWatch.

Just look at iPad 1, original iPhone, retina macbook pro ..

Ok, you have fun not using the iWatch. I stood in line for the original iPhone and it was incredibly amazing at the time blowing everything away. I would pay twice as much to have that experience again. It was the year 2007 for crying out loud! As for the original iPad, I stood in line for that too and that was an amazing tool for me while finishing up college. My parents still have it and it works fine for basic tasks, mainly streaming movies and checking mail. Though it's a supplement to their iPad 4. All anyone could say in 2010 was how smooth it felt and how inexpensive it was. There was the whole big iPod Touch argument, but that died out quickly. The rMBP was an amazing feat of technology, I'm still using mine and it's really great. I don't see much of a difference between the first and second gen so I'm not sure what you mean.

I feel like there wasn't a big upgrade to the iPad until it got retina, and the iPhone 3g wasn't much of an improvement over the original, especially since 3G wasn't that fast then and AT&T sucked. The 3GS finally had good features with faster processor, better camera and the iPhone 4 with the retina screen really got things going.

My point being you can make that argument about anything and the second gen is rarely a substantial amount better. I'm going to have fun using my iWatch all through 2015 and you can have fun with your Timex until 2016.

 

[irnchriz]

Haters gonna hate. I had an iPhone for ages. Love my Nokia, it's excellent, beautiful, intuitive, and it doesn't even need a case. Until you've used a Windows Phone for more than 5 minutes, you really have nothing remotely useful to say about them.

I have used them for more than 5 minutes. It's better than an android phone no doubt and the hardware is great but the os lets it down.

 

[harley3k]

The iWatch screen will not be square - think more ROUND and also slightly Curved.

Mark my words...

 

[dazz87]

iwatch failed....

 

[MacMulti]

I wouldn't ever trust Nokia again after their symbian device. Simple phone call answer is fine, nothing further. For the rest of the functions, it is a complete disaster. Their long battery life is as good and as lasting when the device is not used at all. In actual usage, battery is exhausted in no time by the inefficient software and doing the 99% configuration task just to make it work, each time and every time. Nokia No More.

 

[sulpfiction]

Seems like a kid's toy to me. I definitely would not be flashing it around at work. Would just look unprofessional.

I think it's gonna be a brillant. I read so many of these types of negative posts before the iPad launched. And look what happened there. I have a feeling that Apples watch is gonna be a game changer similar to the way the iphone changed the smartphone world. Maybe not quite as extreme, but similar.