Correct. You won't have to glance at your phone. You can now glance at a one inch display whilst removing a hand from the wheel.
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.
Basically this is just a iPhone wrist mirror
- Thread starter Mabus51
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Correct. You won't have to glance at your phone. You can now glance at a one inch display whilst removing a hand from the wheel.
I think, and clearly this is speculation, that if not right away the haptic feedback could be improved to the point where you don't actually need to look at the display at all beyond the initial route set up.
Same as you glance (and switch) at the controls to change the radio/AC/whatever else) on the car. The phone will be in my pocket
Eventually people will become desensitized and ignore some of the notifications.
Same as you glance (and switch) at the controls to change the radio/AC/whatever else) on the car. The phone will be in my pocket
Well. I don't have to LOOK to do any of this. Most switches are on the steering wheel. No removing the hand. Nothing to read. The air con switch in my car...a single rotary dial. Nothing to read. Yep the hand would have to come off the wheel to adjust. Except I drive with it on and set to 21 degrees Celsius all the time. So, no playing with that for me. Next...
It is funny that people feel the need to justify the need of personal tech purchases as a need vs. a want. Most things we own are wants rather than needs with the exception of food and shelter. If I needed to, I could live a very Spartan yet healthy existence without a computer or an iPhone or a car, or pretty much anything most people think they "need".
I am buying one simply because I want to, because I think it is going to make my day to day life a little more convenient and fun. And that is enough.
I am buying one simply because I want to, because I think it is going to make my day to day life a little more convenient and fun. And that is enough.
This is going to be earth shattering to you, I know, but some of us aren't under Apple's spell and are able to look at the things they do on a case by case basis. Some things (iPhone) are great and wonderful. Others (Apple Watch) don't seem to serve a purpose, or have a need to exist.
Now, and stay with me if you can, if only there were a place online, where people who feel all sorts of different ways about things, after they'e been announced, after they've seen in them person, after they've actually bought them, whatever, could get together and discuss these feelings and reactions. What would we call such a place?
We wouldn't call it whatever this is, because apparently around here you either all feel the same way in loving it, or you're seeking attention, or a troll, or an idiot, because because Apple hath given us this, and it is AMAZING!
Get over yourself, dude.
Now, and stay with me if you can, if only there were a place online, where people who feel all sorts of different ways about things, after they'e been announced, after they've seen in them person, after they've actually bought them, whatever, could get together and discuss these feelings and reactions. What would we call such a place?
We wouldn't call it whatever this is, because apparently around here you either all feel the same way in loving it, or you're seeking attention, or a troll, or an idiot, because because Apple hath given us this, and it is AMAZING!
Get over yourself, dude.
You're missing a important distinction: An iPad doesn't need an iPhone. That, alone, drew in many non-Apple users. I know several folks whose only Apple product is an iPad.
A better comparison would be the Apple Bluetooth headset (anyone remember that accessory?). Even that's an imperfect comparison, because the headset could work with ANY phone, whereas the watch requires an new-ish iPhone.
So the Apple Watch is limited to some 200M iPhone 5 (or better) owners; don't you think that's enough to get started? And for people who do own an iPhone, how does requiring one make it a less desirable product?
Time will tell in both cases. None of us know how many new-ish iPhone users will actually want one. I've seen a lot of pushback here, of all places.
I was pointing out the absurdity of the iPad/watch comparison.
This is going to be earth shattering to you, but someone with a different opinion from you MAY be capable of critical thinking skills and not simply "under a spell". Nothing makes me stop taking someone seriously (on any side of any debate) than when they reach for the fanboy/sheeple labels. Find a less facile way to make your point.
- That seems like a rather arbitrary distinction, seeing as how there are several non-smartwatches that correct themselves based on an external signal.
- Mechanical watches are generally not very accurate.
- We don't know how accurate the Apple watch is when it's not connected to an external signal, but I can almost gaurantee it is more accurate than a mechanical watch.
If you're saying that the Apple Watch does too much to be considered just a timepiece then I can kind of see where you're coming from (although I disagree).
Yeah, a lot of them have now bought giant iPhones and stopped buying iPads.
(sorry, couldn't resist such a straight opening)
My reason for not buying a new iPad is the fact that the one I have (the first retina version) is just as good as it was when I bought it. I almost hoped that software updates would slow it down to a point where I had an excuse to get a new one, as they are so much thinner now, also the battery life after those years is still more than I actually need. That means however, that the money saved from not buying a new iPad, just yet, goes towards a shiny Apple Watch.
You are entitled to your reality as long as you realize that others have a very different reality. If you don't see the unique functionality of the watch, then certainly don't get it. I do. There is really nothing more to say.
Keep in mind as well that every iPhone sold going forward will support the watch, so as more iPhone 4 and 4S owners finally upgrade, and new customers switch to iPhone, the Watch's market will just keep expanding.
For argument's sake, think about when and where iPhone owners use their iPads; assuming it is their personal iPad and they aren't sharing it with family members, how often is that iPad going to be in use while their iPhone isn't simultaneously on the same wifi network or - outside of that - disconnected from wifi but more than 50ft apart from one another?
Point being, the iPad would lose almost no functionality if it required an iPhone, because realistically unless you keep your phone stored at your neighbor's house 3 doors down, they're never out of range of one another. So I definitely see little to no reason why the Watch of all things requiring an iPhone should be a knock against it for iPhone owners.
I've always viewed the phone requirement as more a problem for Apple than a problem for people who meet the requirement and actually buy the watch. Not having the phone requirement would drastically increase the market size for Apple. However, for someone who has a compatible phone already, I don't see the requirement as a problem outside of a very small set of specific use cases.
That being said, I definitely understand the technical reasons for requiring an iPhone - without that requirement there's no way Apple would have been able to produce the product that they did.
Agreed. However, it would seem Apple sees the Watch as a way to sell more iPhones, or at the very least a way to keep iPhone owners in the ecosystem. Besides, without the tight integration with iOS the watch would lose much of its elegance and functionality.
That's an interesting argument.
But when a customer is making the crucial buy/don't buy decision, an iPad's complete independence from an iPhone is a huge plus and no doubt contributed to the iPad's widespread acceptance by "Apple virgins". iPad really is for everyone.
OTOH, the watch buyer MUST have an iPhone.
It's true that the watch isn't in the same category as the iPhone, although I'm not sure that's a realistic comparison. Smartphones are among the most versatile products ever made. The comparison to the iPad is apt, because a lot of people didn't see the point of that product originally. And now people are (in essence) saying that the Apple Watch is just a smaller iPhone that you strap to your wrist. I feel that the iPad didn't really come into its own until it started getting apps that really took advantage of its benefits over the iPhone (a much larger screen). This is one big reason that Android tablets have struggled -- they tend to just be smartphone apps blown up to a larger size, rather than really taking advantage of the larger screen. Similarly, the watch probably won't really click for a lot of people until we start getting real (native!) apps that really take advantage of its benefits.
What's wrong with the customer base being limited to 200 Million iPhone owners when they can't seem to build more than a few million Watches?
I think it's fine to consider the current iPhone owner base (if that's what you mean by "customer base") when making assumptions about whether those customers will buy another iPhone. It's probably a safe assumption to say they'd buy another another iPhone.
It's quite a different question asking if those same owners will buy an unproven accessory that, for many, will mean a much larger up-front cash payment than their (subsidized) iPhone.