Why do you think it should match that turnaround time?
When you release new hardware, you need constructive feedback from millions of users, not just the internal folks at Apple!
Why do you think it should match that turnaround time?
Because milking a product makes a boatload of money?Why should they milk it for that long?
But you don't need that feedback if you don't release the hardware. Your argument seems circular.When you release new hardware, you need constructive feedback from millions of users, not just the internal folks at Apple!
Why should they milk it for that long? Apple is a master at selling a boatload of new iPhone every other year with very little changed. All they need to do is add one new feature to the current AW, call it the new AW, and that's tens of millions more sales for them.
Because milking a product makes a boatload of money?
But I really wouldn't characterize it as 'milking'. They've obviously spent a lot of money refining the software. I finally watched the keynote this evening and I have to say the watch os3 improvements are impressive.
The first iPad was released in April 2010. The hardware was replaced in March 2011, less than a year after initial release date. The Watch should match that turnaround time (less than 1 year). The difference between Steve Jobs and Tim Cook when leading the ship!
I believe that the number of people who perceive an iPhone as a must-have device is much larger than those who perceive the Apple Watch in the same vein as opposed to many who perceive the Watch as a nice-to-have device especially given its price point. Hence, chances of people buying bucket-loads of Watches is going to be rare I suppose.
I'm excluding fanboys and of course nerds and geeks like ourselves who visit Macrumours and the like and live and breathe Apple and its tech
Yesterday, before I saw the impressive improvements in watchOS 3, I would've agreed with you.wOS 3 is a free upgrade to all. If they want tens of millions more in sales, they'd do better to release the next generation AW even if it has a single new feature added (like Siri in the iPhone 4s).
Yesterday, before I saw the impressive improvements in watchOS 3, I would've agreed with you.
But now, if the fence-sitters try out an OS 3 watch, I'm thinking they might get off the fence. Particularly now that watch prices are coming down dramatically if you shop around.
One new feature won't do it at all.
Tell that to the tens of millions of iPhone 4 owners who upgraded to iPhone 4s just to get Siri.
Do you understand how blood pressure cuffs work?Mr. BarracksSi: There won't be a cuff (see above) engineers will figure out a way to mirror the functionality of a cuff in sensor embedded on the watch without a cuff! That is what engineers do--create solutions to problems that seem impossible to solve!
Tell that to the tens of millions of iPhone 4 owners who upgraded to iPhone 4s just to get Siri.
Sure but then, the Watch and iPhone are not quite in the same league are they ? One's a cash cow and the other is a rising but distant star on the horizon.
Cheers !
It's so obvious now! They just figure it out! Why has nobody thought of this before?Mr. BarracksSi: There won't be a cuff (see above) engineers will figure out a way to mirror the functionality of a cuff in sensor embedded on the watch without a cuff! That is what engineers do--create solutions to problems that seem impossible to solve!
I wonder if a small inflatable blister on the back of the watch would work? As long as the watch itself is worn tightly, you might be able to get a blood pressure reading out of that? Probably not 'medical grade" data, however.Do you understand how blood pressure cuffs work?
The "one new feature" would serve to get media attention and exposure. But it could just be a cool strap?It just doesnt make sense to release another watch when this one has just improved so much. One new feature won't do it at all.
I wonder if a small inflatable blister on the back of the watch would work? As long as the watch itself is worn tightly, you might be able to get a blood pressure reading out of that? Probably not 'medical grade" data, however.
And it's on the wrist, not the arm - so that might not be a good place? And they'll have to design a miniature air pump that fits inside the watch. Then there's battery consumption and the fallibility of an added bunch of electromechanical components. Not looking good.
No, they'll probably need to invent a whole new technology for measuring pressure. I can't imagine FDA approval would be quick, either.
[doublepost=1465989971][/doublepost]
The "one new feature" would serve to get media attention and exposure. But it could just be a cool strap?
However, if in fact the FDA has to approve this, it will never happen. I hope that is not the case.
It'll most certainly require FDA's approval.
Speaking of an inflatable blood pressure monitor on the wrist: http://gizmodo.com/omron-somehow-squeezed-an-inflatable-blood-pressure-mon-1749166381
Wow! It does exist in a watch, so Apple engineers don't have to do anything except make it better and smaller. So all the naysayers to my previous posts--it is possible!
It's pretty much a given that AW2 will be released along with wOS3. It's already unprecedented that they updated to wOS2 without updating the AW.
Why do I always get the feeling that it is mostly current owners of the AW disbelieving a AW3 release this year?
Why do I always get the feeling that it is mostly current owners of the AW disbelieving an AW2 release this year?