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.
I Apple, but not my Apple Watch
- Thread starter videoadvert.tv
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yes. It's amazing how people replace history in their minds with images of Steve Jobs skipping and jumping across flowery meadows, shrouded in a cloud of fairy dust, shaking magical toys out of his sleeves.
Apple released plenty of turds under Steve's (second) watch. Before that, Steve had only come up with one real commercial success (the Apple II).
You were living in a different 2007 from me then because my Treo PalmPhone was 3G and every competing smartphone had 3G too. 3G was the "norm" in 2007, not the exception.
I agree with your decision, and I'm considering the Fenix 3 over the Apple Watch. For those who are fitness enthusiasts or athletes, the Apple Watch is not up to par - yet. If Apple includes GPS and an altimeter/barometer/compass in the future, then Apple will definitely steal away a larger share of the fitness enthusiast market.
The one thing Apple Watch doesn't have is ANT+ support. There is a huge market of ANT+ devices out there, but I don't think Apple will ever support ANT+.
As for the Fenix 3, the downsides as I see them are:
- Buggy software implementation, including GPS tracking (although this looks mostly resolvable via software updates)
- Poor sleep tracking functionality (again, could be improved with enhanced software functionality)
- No integrated heart rate monitor (AFAIK this would improve sleep tracking and daily calorie tracking; during exercise many would use a chest strap anyway).
Some other nice things about the Fenix: the watch screen is always on, it has multi-day battery life, and you can receive notifications from your smartphone.
I totally agree. I think Jobs might have tightened up a few things here and there with the watch software and hardware, but what I miss the most is his ability to present a product in the best light. A keynote where Jobs introduced the watch would have been an awesome thing. Tim Cook et al did the best they could but they are not anywhere as masterful as Jobs at pitching products.
I remember that the iPhone came out right when my contract was up and I was looking for a new phone. I liked the idea of the iPhone, mainly the large screen without wasting space on an external keyboard, but got a new Treo instead. The main reason was the lack of third party apps that I was accustomed to using. I didn't see the iPhone as a loser at the time because I knew that it would eventually get better because it was based on great hardware design.
I feel the same way about the watch. It will get a lot better with version 2 and 3 ( Just like every other Apple product. The iPad is the best example of this). I am going to wait it out until at least the next version, but I can understand why many jumped in on the first version. It still does many things that people want it to do and it looks good in the process. Personally, I think the remote apps right on the wrist will be amazingly convenient and it is why I am pretty sure version 2 will be on my wrist and I rarely wear a watch.
The one thing I think that has been the most anti-Jobs change in Apple software was the turn away from the skeunomorphic GUI. I think that would've been a tough sell for him because he seemed to gravitate toward the appearance of objects in the natural world.
I absolutely think it would've been great to see him keynote the Watch and spin the production issues.
People really loved him or really hated him. He was very charismatic.
Strong change of text
Like I said, most phones didn't have 3G back then and most people didn't have smartphones.
For example in 2007 most people were still rocking flip phones with GPRS. Some of the more trendy people had phones such as the T-Mobile sidekick which was only EDGE (http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Danger-Sidekick-3_id1590). Moto just announced at the end of 2006 the razr would be upgraded to 3G (HSPA). So although 3G was available it most certainly wasn't widespread with special emphasis on 3G cellular coverage.
----------
The Palm Centro says otherwise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_Centro
Not really.
The target audience when the original iPhone launched WAS PEOPLE WHO ALREADY HAD SMARTPHONES.
I was carrying a Samsung Blackjack when I bought my iPhone. It most definitely had 3G.
You're just nitpicking. Honestly. Admit that this is a first gen product and it's not perfect, but neither was the iPod, the iPhone, or the iPad and they ALL have done very well with the general public once they were firmly established products.
Perfect tech doesn't spring out of thin air.
Definitely not arguing with you but the Apple Watch could have all those feature if it was as big as the Fenix. Holy crap that is huge!
Yeah, you are just grasping at straws. From the very link you cited me in the ATT section:
"Even though the Sprint and Verizon versions of the Centro supports 3G (EV-DO), the AT&T version does not."
See, there is a difference between hardware supporting 3G and a carrier supporting it. The Centro was a 3G phone, ATT chose not to enable it.
Give up, already. 3G was the de facto standard in 2007. It was a years old when the iPhone was announced.
By no means is an Apple Watch a necessity, but I do disagree with those who say there are no killer apps. Messages, phone, and the watch apps are all killer in my opinion. These three apps alone are worth buying one (along with its aesthetics).
I personally think it's incredible that a text goes to my watch and I can ignore it or respond with a quick tap or Siri without using my phone or taking more than a couple of seconds. It's convenient and, frankly, a lot of fun.
I may be in the minority, but having a call go to your watch is incredible. You have the option of ignoring it, hanging up, or taking the call and talking - all without needing your phone. It's awesome, it really is.
Finally, the modular watch face gives you time, activity tracking, battery life, weather, and your next appointment all in one screen that's immediately accessible at the turn of your wrist.
I personally think it's incredible that a text goes to my watch and I can ignore it or respond with a quick tap or Siri without using my phone or taking more than a couple of seconds. It's convenient and, frankly, a lot of fun.
I may be in the minority, but having a call go to your watch is incredible. You have the option of ignoring it, hanging up, or taking the call and talking - all without needing your phone. It's awesome, it really is.
Finally, the modular watch face gives you time, activity tracking, battery life, weather, and your next appointment all in one screen that's immediately accessible at the turn of your wrist.
Don't know what you were expecting but as a device to compliment your iPhone it is fantastic. I use Siri frequently through the day to reply to messages and glancing at notifications saves me a hell of a lot of time as I have multiple email accounts delivering an awful lot of messages the majority of which I need to monitor but not reply to. I can now go out with friends and not have to keep my iPhone in my hand all night, oh, and that reminds me. I was out at a work do last week and I had not noticed before just how much time everyone spends looking at their phones these days, probably because I had my head in mine.
Definitely not arguing with you but the Apple Watch could have all those feature if it was as big as the Fenix. Holy crap that is huge!
lol it definitely is. I realize that's a turn off for many people.
I do hope Apple adds GPS to the Apple Watch, though. And if Apple doesn't want to increase the size of the watch to accommodate it, perhaps they can utilize the band to house it. We know that Apple has already be exploring the possibility of using the band to incorporate additional functionality, such as using it to house a battery, as per this patent.
Here's a copy/paste from another post I made where I outline my thoughts about this further:
Having said all that, what is the next technology we're likely to see in future Apple Watch updates? If I had to bet, I'd say GPS. GPS has obvious implications for mapping and fitness: many people (myself included) would love to leave the iPhone at home while exercising, all the while having the route mapped by the Apple Watch. Unfortunately, GPS will kill Apple Watch's battery life. So what are Apple's choices?
- Put GPS in the Apple Watch case, with the caveat that it will drain your battery very quickly. (This assumes no revolutionary advances in battery technology in the next few years).
- Make a larger version of the Apple Watch that houses GPS (and possibly other sensors) and a larger battery.
- Put GPS into the Apple watch and sell a band that has a battery that extends the watch's uptime. (See the patent above).
- Sell a band that houses both the GPS (other sensors, etc.) and the extended battery.
- #1: possible, but frankly seems very un-Apple like to me, as they have always either maintained or improved battery life over successive generations (true for iPhone, iPad, etc.)
- #2: I wouldn't mind seeing the Apple Watch Sport evolve into a true "sport watch". Fitness enthusiasts have already demonstrated that they are willing to wear slightly larger/bulkier watches in exchange for tracking/sensor functionality. That said, Apple has typically reduced the size of their products over successive generations (excluding iPad 3 which heavier than iPad 1 and 2). Also, while a segment of the consumer market would love a device like this, a larger segment would most likely not.
- #3: the downside of this solution is: what happens if you don't wear the band with the extend battery? Would Apple still let you use the GPS, knowing it would kill the Apple Watch's internal battery? Doesn't seem likely.
- #4: combining the extended battery and GPS into one band ensures that the watch always has sufficient battery to power GPS (in this solution it's possible that the GPS would only draw power from the extended battery, ensuring that the watch itself always has enough power for itself). The downside of this solution is that you only get GPS if you wear this band.
Finally, and to be clear, the most Apple like solution (i.e., elegant, minimal, etc.) is to house everything within the watch case, which itself would is slim and offers "all day" battery life. I have no doubt we'll see this one day, but unless Apple is willing to wait many years, they may have no choice but to utilize bands that provide extended functionality (which isn't so bad, it'll be another revenue/profit making SKU for the company. <sigh>)
I have not found this to be the case with my testing, nor did Consumer Reports vs the leading chest strap.
I get the sense that it's more of an accessory to the iPhone. Honestly, if I wasn't already someone who wore a watch and appreciated good watch design, I probably wouldn't have ordered one. And I didn't order one until I could justify spending the money on the standard model but did once I found out my work gives out about $500 in reimbursements for using a health tracker to be healthy.
I like wearing a watch because I constantly check the time and consider it a fashion piece that I enjoy. It's a bit more expensive than any other watch I've owned but it can also do a lot more. I've been wanting to purchase a dedicated fitness tracker anyway because when I'm working in the yard (which I'm doing a lot of right now redoing our backyard) I don't usually bring my phone because it's not waterproof or even resistant and it's uncomfortable when I'm working and bending at lots of crazy angles. I think the OP is on to something about the product in general and how it feels vs. what Steve would have done with it, but I think when you consider it a 1.0 product and an accessory, it's actually pretty neat. I see the potential and am excited to see where things go.
I like wearing a watch because I constantly check the time and consider it a fashion piece that I enjoy. It's a bit more expensive than any other watch I've owned but it can also do a lot more. I've been wanting to purchase a dedicated fitness tracker anyway because when I'm working in the yard (which I'm doing a lot of right now redoing our backyard) I don't usually bring my phone because it's not waterproof or even resistant and it's uncomfortable when I'm working and bending at lots of crazy angles. I think the OP is on to something about the product in general and how it feels vs. what Steve would have done with it, but I think when you consider it a 1.0 product and an accessory, it's actually pretty neat. I see the potential and am excited to see where things go.
While I agree with (I want GPS in the Watch as well) also don't forget your Garmin is a $150 MORE than Apple Watch Sport 42mm and $200 more than 38mm.
There is a precedent. The Sony Smartwatch has GPS built in. So it is possible.
I could see Apple making different feature sets for each watch. I mean, really, who is going to run or wear to the gym the Edition model? So the next Sport model might be GPS and warranty on waterproofing, Apple Watch might be faster processing and bigger battery and Edition, might have some free apps/additional service, etc.
This is the first time I can remember that significantly different price points did not yield "more". The more expensive iPhone offers more memory. The more expensive Mac has a better processor, etc, etc. But with Apple Watch the $17,000 version does NOTHING different from the $349 version. Now, it is possible they stick to this and if successful we see gold iPod's. Or they could change feature sets to address specific users.
I see this especially true with the Sport Model that the materials were specifically chosen for the active person.
Steve advertised the iPhone as smarter than smartphones and easier to use than cell phones (dumbphones in modern lingo). It was a phone for everyone.
@4:38
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQKMoT-6XSg
I love my apple watch, here is why
- I am a watch guy. I always wear one.
- I do like the design of this watch very much
- I mainly use the
watch just as such - a watch
- I love the additional functionality that it brings with it
- I am a watch guy. I always wear one.
- I do like the design of this watch very much
- I mainly use the
watch just as such - a watch- I love the additional functionality that it brings with it
The Samsung Blackjack!! I pulled that out and showed it to my 13 year old a couple of weeks ago. He looked it like it was an old rotary phone. that was a really great phone at the time. It was also the last phone I had before I got an iPhone.
And once again, we have to bring Steve Jobs' corpse back out and decide what he would have or wouldn't have done.
The iPod got the same reaction. "It's just a more expensive and more restrictive version of what you can already get. What's this even for?"
I've been missing a watch since I gave up my last one in 2009, and taking my phone out to check on the time gets old when you're trying to catch a train.
So I just got my SS 42 ML today, and while I like playing with it, for me, sitting in front of a computer most of the day, there's very little reason to use it, except because it looks pretty good, I think.
Out in the wild will be more interesting, but if you don't need a watch, I don't expect that having an Apple Watch will add so terribly much value to what you already have.
But I may change my mind after I start getting more notifications while I'm out and about.
So I just got my SS 42 ML today, and while I like playing with it, for me, sitting in front of a computer most of the day, there's very little reason to use it, except because it looks pretty good, I think.
Out in the wild will be more interesting, but if you don't need a watch, I don't expect that having an Apple Watch will add so terribly much value to what you already have.
But I may change my mind after I start getting more notifications while I'm out and about.
Oh, I know what he said...
I watched it when it happened.
My point is that the target was people who already used smart phones and people who already used iPods and wanted to combine the two.
Which is also in the keynote.
Apple also wanted, and ultimately got, all the business customers who were guaranteed upgrades and had phones paid for by their companies. In effect, they wanted the market that was dominated by Blackberry.
If you think that the general public were sold on it out of the gate, you're incorrect.
It wasn't until sometime between 3GS and 4 that the iPhone really took off.
----------
I really enjoyed it. I was never into Blackberry and I tried the Palm Treo but didn't like it, either. I clung to my old Sony-Ericsson T610 until the Blackjack was released.
That said, I didn't have it long before the iPhone was out and I made the switch. I've owned very model of iPhone (except the 5C, but my kids had those) ever released.
I even had a 6 and a 6 plus, but I decided to go 6 plus... husband has a 6.
It's a watch. It tells time, and, as a bonus, gives directions, the weather, et cetera. If you couldn't decide if you wanted it or not until you bought it, then it's your fault.
Last edited by a moderator: