Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Pelea, Jan 23, 2015.
For watching movies/Tv, it's still a stupid thing to do...
So before the Ipad then, if you looked on some public transport, I suppose you would of called all the iPhone users, using their phones for such things, stupid then?
Maybe you need an eye exam. I can see fine on a 3.5 inch screen. I don't see why you'd need bigger. I can see why someone would like bigger, but "need" no. Nice to be able to watch movies or TV on a nice portable screen.
Watching a movie in such a tiny little screen?
God's sake... just because you can, doesn't mean you should!
Staring at a such a tiny screen for 1 hour, 2 hours? No!
Well you have your opinion. I think people watch movies on screens that are too big sometimes and they miss things that are happening because their eyes can't cover the entire screen. I have no issue watching things on a small screen. I don't know why you think your dumb opinion should go for everyone.
I rarely agree with Tanegashima, but in this case I think he is correct. I don't think many people will be watching movies on Watch. Once you get that small, you lose a lot of details. Plus you'll have an iPhone, with a larger screen, more storage, and a longer battery life along your side.
And with that regard, I don't think that it should be any measure in the usability of the device, especially not out of the gate. Maybe in the future as things mature, maybe one day we'll watch videos on our wrists... one day. And we will benchmark against that because then it will be relevant to our usage.
You're sitting too close to your TV set, then...
Yes, my opinion is so dumb.
So you buy a TV that's so big for your that you can't even see the entire screen, then you complain, they you watch an entire movie in a screen that's so small, that you can only only see it at less than an arm's length.
Perfect sense! /s
By focusing so close, you're stressing your eyes. DUH.
Unless you have miopia, and in that case, you need a pair of glasses, it's everything you shouldn't do.
The last report I read about the battery life stated that we'd be lucky to make it until lunchtime without having to recharge it!
From 9to5mac website:-
Apple had originally suggested that the Watch would need to be charged nightly. Somewhat of a pain, but given that most people charge their phones each night, not the end of the world. Instead, the following has been cited:
– displaying the clock face alone (with ticking hand etc) will provide for 3 hours of use
– heavy app use will provide 2.5 hours of use
– standard app use will provide 3.5 hours
– using it as a fitness tracker will provide 4 hours of use
This will be a disaster if true!
This is constant/active use of these things. For it to be dead by lunchtime you'd basically have to spend your entire morning doing nothing but interacting with your watch. I don't know what you do at your job, but at mine I'd probably get fired if I spend half of the workday playing with my watch.
That's not how I read it, doesn't it say that showing just the clock face alone with a moving second hand gives you 3 hours of battery life while 'heavy use' gives you 2.5?
The watch won't display the time constantly, but will supposedly know (via arm position, motion or both) when you look at it and display accordingly. That's where the 19 hour figure comes in.
Anyway, aside from people complaining that a blank watch looks bad, this strategy does come with a valid criticism: the kind of motion/position sensing which allows this system to work has never been truly successful in other products. I can attest that Pebble wasn't perfect with the backlight initiation. If the watch turns on too frequently it will hurt battery life, and if it's not sensitive enough people will have to contort themselves to see the time.
If Apple nails this aspect of the UI, then I'd call that innovation. If not, it's going to be one of the biggest complaints people have about the watch. But considering the same sensors claim to know when you're standing as opposed to sitting, I'd say there's at least a chance Apple's got the tech to pull it off.
Apple would never release a watch with like that. It won't be s Moto 360.
Apple has a reputation to maintain. And they don't desperatle need money from a watch. They need a watch to don't lag behind competition.