Could a future watch replace iPhone?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Retired Cat, Sep 27, 2014.

  1. Retired Cat macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    #1
    The Apple Watch lacks a cellular baseband radio, and it's battery life is a big question mark.

    What if it gained cell phone capabilities and had a battery large enough to last more than a day under heavy usage? This would require significant advances in miniaturization and battery capacity.

    The watch could be used as the phone, and iPod touch could rise again as a device that tethers to the watch for situations where one needs a larger screen. Could Apple Watch kill iPhone and resurrect iPod?
     
  2. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #2
    Yes.

    The only issue that's hard to image a work around unless some amazing new technology comes around is the Screen size, and I guess data input.

    Data input COULD be gotten around somehow I'm sure, voice or some clever way. Screen size is tricky.

    Unless you go to something like Google Glass route for the image.
     
  3. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
  4. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #4
    That's actually not a bad idea. You have the option of leaving the iPod Touch at home (when you go running, etc.), but when it's on your person, it wirelessly keeps your :apple: Watch charged. That's your answer to battery life.

    Pull out the iPod Touch whenever you need to compose an email, carry on a long conversation, etc.
     
  5. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #5
    Easy, just the same as you do now.

    With a phone, you hold the phone and lift your hand up to your ear, there is no reason why it could not be worked out for a watch to work in the same manner with a speaker.

    Speaking would be fine as you can get sensitive mics anyway.
     
  6. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #6
    You can use the aWatch now as a phone (or when released). You just have to have your iPhone within 30' (BT range).

    "Phone. Use the built-in speaker and microphone for quick chats, or seamlessly transfer calls to your iPhone for longer conversations. You can also transfer calls from Apple Watch to your car’s speakerphone or your Bluetooth headset. And silence incoming calls by covering Apple Watch with your hand."
     
  7. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #7
    And in the OP's case, it's the flip side. The iPod Touch would have to be within 30' of the :apple: Watch for you to use the iPod as a phone.
     
  8. APlotdevice, Sep 27, 2014
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2014

    APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #9
    Perhaps in the future, when we have flexible devices that can wrap around the wrist, yet also flatten out to a large display.
     
  9. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #10
    So, you are telling me I replace my nice, large, retina display that has a much more power and is better in every single use case to the watch with a flip phone and the watch? Really?

    **EDIT** Wait. Please tell me you aren't saying I should hold my watch up to my ear.

    The OP said replace the iPhone.

    You guys need to get a grip on reality. Look, the watch may make an excellent accessory, but not a whole lot more. I think Apple is targeting this as niche. I think it's the next Apple TV, and I bet Apple does as well.
     
  10. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #11
    No, read the OP again. As it stands right now, the :apple: Watch can't replace the iPhone but is a companion. What the OP is suggesting is the flip side of this, the iPod Touch is a companion for the :apple: Watch and you take it out when you want to carry on a long conversation, reply to an email at length, need a bigger screen than the watch, etc.
     
  11. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #12
    You seem shocked at this concept.

    Please explain how holding your hand to the side of your head whilst holding a mobile phone and speaking into it, differs in any reasonable way from holding your hand to the side of your head and speaking into the watch.

    The only difference being in reality you are having to physically grasp you phone to keep it in your hand, but your watch it attached to you, so no need to hold anything.

    Think about it. :D
     
  12. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #13
    The difference is that what you are talking about would require a speakerphone approach. Try what you're saying. Your wrist faces the wrong way. Unless the speaker is in the bottom of the band, everything else on the watch will be facing out.

    And why move the cell radio to the device that has no room for battery? Oh btw, also a GPS radio and WiFi radio. Yeah that'll work.

    Again, I think you guys aren't thinking realistically.
     
  13. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #14
    I'm not talking about NOW, but a possible future, when the Apple Watch can be a device on it's own, to use on it's own, when you don't wish to carry your phone, and not just an iPhone accessory as it will be when launched next year.

    Regards the speaker placement, in reality, and I'm not suggesting of course your watch become your main phone.

    At the moment, you hold a phone to your ear, palm facing towards your ear.
    Just rotate your palm 90 degrees clockwise with your hand in the same location and you will find a speaker on the top edge of the watch would be directly inline with your ear.

    I'm just saying there is no reason why it can't be done in the near future.
    I'm not saying they will do it.
     
  14. laudern macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2011
    #15
    How could you ever have a discrete phone call without everyone around you hearing what is coming out of the speaker??? Unless there is a speaker on the bottom of the wrist band...But still, very awkward to use....
     
  15. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #16
    There was a smart watch them out at CES this year, called the "Hot Watch", which bounces sound off of your cupped hand into your ear. And there's currently research being done into speakers which can only be heard from a specific direction.
     
  16. miketheappleguy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 18, 2014
    #17
    People are annoying enough when out and public and they have their phones are speaker
     
  17. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #18
    Could use bone conduction like the original Google Glass did. Place your watch against your head.

    Or you could get a Bluetooth earpiece.

    Or buy a set of "Talk to the Hand" gloves (yes, they're real) with Bluetooth microphone and speaker built into the fingertips :eek:

    2013_talk_to_the_hand.jpg

    Then there was the Digital Jewelry concept smartwatch that IBM showed off back at the turn of the century. It had a wrist phone and display, with remote earring speakers, microphone necklace and an LED ring that lit up as a message indicator:

    2000_ibm_digital_jewelry.png
     
  18. betabeta macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2013
    #19
    What if you could focus the sound into the palm while holding your hand cupped over your ear? But yeah a bluetooth earpiece or even earring could work.

    The real issue is power for the added wireless chipset, and possible heat on your wrist.
     
  19. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #20
    Bluetooth earpieces have already failed. I don't think the idea of the watch replacing the phone is the right path to take. It's another example of solving a problem that doesn't exist. Why would I switch to the device that is worse in every category than the one it is replacing?
     
  20. Piggie, Oct 4, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2014

    Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #21
    Well, you could say that about using the Watch for Apps in the 1st place as you have your mobile phone 2 seconds away in your pocket most of the time.

    And why some wonder if this is the right path for Apple to take.
    Over complicating what could have been a slimmer and more sensible approach.

    Just use a watch to tell the time, do body monitoring, send you alerts/notifications, and leave it at that.

    If you wanted to do more, then use the phone that you have to carry anyway.

    Keep the watch, clean, simple and functional, and Not do what they have done and try and make a mini iPodTouch with a silly screen to use apps, on your wrist.

    Perhaps there is no need to make a watch this complicated.

    The market could go two ways, both ways might be right, or only one of them.

    Honestly I can easily see, many getting the watch, playing with it initially before realizing it's soooo much easier to just use the iPhone they have on them, and just in time ending up using the watch for the very basics as I said, time, monitoring, and alerts.

    Time will tell if people want to sit there any navigate and use apps on a tiny screen when they have their phone on them already,
     
  21. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #22
    Totally agree with this. What I wanted from the :apple:Watch was something along the lines of what has been introduced by Garmin, Suunto, Polar, etc. All of those watches tell time, track activity/fitness, and have notifications, but with a crap interface. I was hoping Apple could do that stuff with a great interface and then add that feature that no one has thought about like they have with their past successes.
     
  22. lotusindigo macrumors regular

    lotusindigo

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #23
    Interesting idea, I like it. A watch is much easier to keep on your person than a phone, and all you have to do is look down at your wrist to make sure you still have it. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has this idea as a future possibility.
     
  23. kdarling, Oct 4, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2014

    kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #24
    You can buy a watch phone now, of course.

    2014-samsung-gear-s.jpg

    ZDNet even noticed that a lot of its specs were similar to, or better, than the original iPhone:

    The Samsung Galaxy Gear S is like having an iPhone on your wrist

    iPhone Gear S
    ===== =====
    1GHz ... 1GHz
    128MB... 512MB
    320x ... 360x480 display
    2G ... ... 3G
    802.11... 802.11n
    BT ... ... BT 4.0
    1 day ... 2 day battery (moderate usage)
     
  24. lotusindigo macrumors regular

    lotusindigo

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #25
    But... I'm guessing this phone watch is a pretty recent release right? Why is it a selling point that its specs surpass old tech like the original iPhone? I understand that it's in a smaller form factor, but that's like bragging that the iPad has better specs than dinosaur PCs that connected via dialup.
     

Share This Page