Ive on Apple Watch: One of the Most Difficult Projects I've Ever Worked On

[Iconoclysm]

If apple had come up with the 360 you'd be saying how awesome it is.

The 360 is ugly as sin, like strapping the bottom of a soda can to your wrist...could you imagine a woman ever wearing one? I'm honestly flabbergasted that anyone who thinks the apple watch is ugly would even make an attempt at saying the 360 is nice. It takes the ultimate Android loyalty to stand by that thing.

Here, want a smartwatch that looks nice, functions well, and isn't Apple? Step away from Android:

http://www.withings.com/activite/en-US

----------

I remember you guys making fun of the 5+ inch phones a couple of years ago. Now apple makes them so now they're cool. You have to have one. If they made a round watch that looked exactly like the 360 you'd be talking about how awesome round watches are.

Really? Do you specifically remember these specific people making fun of them?

We get it, you think Apple users are dumb, message received loud and clear. You can go back to some Android forum and talk about those products now...or is there nothing to discuss?

----------

Some people like round. It's called choice.

This is the G Watch R.

If choice is a factor, why does the Apple watch alone have more style options than all of the Android watches combined right out of the gate?

----------

Apple has been on a campaign to discredit the Moto 360 because they know it is their biggest competition.

You can see it on here in Macrumors how it immediately turned into bashing the 360 and already they've started again with the flase rumors of the bad battery life, which has already been proven to be a flase rumors. Probably started by apple paid blog posters such as the ones here.

Now, let's see how long it takes for me to get banned for telling the truth.

Paid blog posters...where would you put them if you were Apple? On a forum where people who like Apple go or on a forum full of Android users? So why are so many Android fanatics on this forum? I think the answer is pretty obvious and I think you're probably as suspect as any other.

 

[fortysomegeek]

Some people like round. It's called choice.

This is the G Watch R.

The LG R watch, in my opinion, is a better looking watch than the Moto 360 if you are going for the round look. However, both have two problems.
1) They look like they have the build material of a $200 Citizen.
2) The sizes are enormous.

Here is a picture of it next to a Panerai. I have a Panerai and I know how my Panerai is considered XXL "oversize"

This brings up the problem of women and conservative men.
Right off the bat, it eliminates a large percentage of the population.

I've said this in the past and I'll say it again.

44mm watches are favored by extra large, larger than life personas of Hollywood Action A-List actors. Stallone, Statham. They have the physical physique and stature to pull off a 46-47 mm watch.

Basically, the entire cast of "The Expendables" wear 44mm Panerais. This is common fact. Now, imagine your typical skinny silicon valley geek wearing a watch bigger than your A-List Hollywood actor. Just picture that in your head for a second and see why these over-size watches are outlier, niche products. They HAVE to cater to women and conservative men in addition to the fashion youths. In order to get traction in the market, there must be a size under 40mm.

Fashion comes and goes. Just as the Bell bottom jeans of the 1970s was considered fashionable.It is now passe. Oversize, zero bezel non-diving, non-expedition, non-tactical, wanna-be dress watches is a fad. Large watches like the Panerai and IWC Pilot are big because that is part of their DNA. They're big for a reason. Everything else that is big should have a reason to be big. Are the MOto 360 and LG deep sea diving watches that can withstand 100 fathoms or 4,000 feet of pressure? No, then why are they as big as big deep sea diving watches? Casio G-Shocks are big for a reason. They're functional and built for abuse.

 

[melendezest]

Some people like round. It's called choice.

This is the G Watch R.

I love that.

Definitely a man's watch, though (which suits me fine, but the wife, not so much).

 

[KrakaJap]

Fashion comes and goes. Just as the Bell bottom jeans of the 1970s was considered fashionable.It is now passe. Oversize, zero bezel non-diving, non-expedition, non-tactical, wanna-be dress watches is a fad. Large watches like the Panerai and IWC Pilot are big because that is part of their DNA. They're big for a reason. Everything else that is big should have a reason to be big. Are the MOto 360 and LG deep sea diving watches that can withstand 100 fathoms or 4,000 feet of pressure? No, then why are they as big as big deep sea diving watches? Casio G-Shocks are big for a reason. They're functional and built for abuse.

I don't disagree with Moto, or any tech company for that matter, needing a much larger variety in sizes and I'm definitely not going to argue "fashion" with anyone (that's just silliness)... but perhaps (this being Moto's first smartwatch) the reason for it being on the larger side is for accessibility/readability or perhaps it was a physical limitation since they used outdated parts. It sounds like we're all trying to fit the smartwatch into some sort of "standard" of common sense. That's not going to be easy to do, if possible at all because of the fashionable nature of watches and extreme variety of taste. Obviously, there are plenty of people who love the 360 and obviously those who find it utterly ridiculous.

IMO if anything looks ridiculous it's the Samsung Gear S The smartphonewatch that was clearly designed by Paul Bunyan.

 

[melendezest]

Yes, you're right. Apple wouldn't make such a mistake. However, they've obviously picked square for a reason.

I believe that reason to be perhaps the engineering and tooling required for a square watch was already halfway done for the iPod Nano.

To convert to a round form factor would introduce a lot more work.

Granted, this is pure speculation however.

 

[fortysomegeek]

I don't disagree with Moto, or any tech company for that matter, needing a much larger variety in sizes and I'm definitely not going to argue "fashion" with anyone (that's just silliness)... but perhaps (this being Moto's first smartwatch) the reason for it being on the larger side is for accessibility/readability or perhaps it was a physical limitation since they used outdated parts. It sounds like we're all trying to fit the smartwatch into some sort of "standard" of common sense. That's not going to be easy to do, if possible at all because of the fashionable nature of watches and extreme variety of taste. Obviously, there are plenty of people who love the 360 and obviously those who find it utterly ridiculous.

I agree with you on the part about not debating fashion as taste is entirely subjective.

However, it goes back to the original premise of this thread. The difficulty of designing a smartwatchs. The knee-jerk response to
"Hey look at the Moto 360, I'ves can't design worth sh*" fails to look at the over-all picture.

My premise is probably what Tim Cook had in mine. Design something that is inoffensive with the widest, broadest reach as possible. It also makes the wisest business decision. Not something to appeal to tech nerds on a form/blog/website. In this case, the Moto 360 and LG R fails simply due to size. It does not appeal to women mostly.

If you go with that premise, you really have only two common watch sizes that will give you the broadest reach: 36-38 (for women and conservative men) and 40-42mm (for 18-55 year old males). And when you have a 38mm watch, UI/UX and user interaction is very, very difficult with only touch screen controls. Thus, this is the job of a real designer. Not some arm-chair internet critic. This explains the use of a crown. It also explain the reason for NOT using a circular display. At 38mm, a circular size will have to make some drastic text/ui compromises. If an arm-chair critic can show me an example of a 38mm circular display with ease-of-use, then I have no problem with that.

 

[Redneck1089]

Solid or plated. 18k? People would throw that away over here or give it to kids.

Gruber confirmed that it's solid 18k gold. The price will be out of this world. I think his estimate of around five grand is a good one.

 

[Blake10]

This is what I was expecting from Ive.

Image

Round designs are dead on arrival. Engineering and design 101 buddy .

 

[rei101]

Glad to hear he really studies whorology. Now I know where his AAPL is going to.
Anywho, as much flak as apple gets, it's always good to hear they are willing to wait for a finished product, instead of a quick holiday money grab.

Usually they have a product to sell on holidays and another one after. I mean, if they sell two new products people will chose one or the other, it is marketing.

Is like releasing two big movies during the same weekend, both will have marginal numbers but if you give 2 or 3 weeks separation, they will make more money each.

 

[Blake10]

A smart watch can never be a smartphone. A smartphone basically replaces your laptop in many ways. A smart watch will never be a smartphone.

Are you really going to check all your messages, email, documents, answer and make calls from a watch?

Give me a break.

Ok so you sound like Bill Gates in 1980 when he said something like "who needs more than 500 kb of memory" .. Don't make inane claims like that. phone/tablets are gradually replacing the laptop... watch will replace the phone.. don't underestimate the power of Moore's law.

 

[tjhassan]

I read allot of hate for the Apple watch. I dig it, I would buy it.

 

[kdarling]

Really? Do you specifically remember these specific people making fun of them?

Seriously?

People lose all credibility when they claim that nobody in an iPhone forum ever made fun of phablets being used as phones, or never repeated Apple comments about one-handed use being most important.

If choice is a factor, why does the Apple watch alone have more style options than all of the Android watches combined right out of the gate?

If you're throwing in number of watch bands, note that many smartwatches, such as the LG, accept standard 20-22 mm bands. I don't think Apple can ever make THAT many different versions..

 

[IJ Reilly]

If you're throwing in number of watch bands, note that many smartwatches, such as the LG, accept standard 20-22 mm bands. I don't think Apple can ever make THAT many different versions..

Likely not, but we also don't know yet whether Apple will allow third parties to make Apple Watch bands.

 

[fortysomegeek]

Likely not, but we also don't know yet whether Apple will allow third parties to make Apple Watch bands.

The Apple watch uses magnetic clip system that fastens straps with various lugs. This isn't something new. Someone could make a standard 20mm/22mm lug that fastens to the case and they can use any strap they want.

The unique thing about this is you don't need jewelry tools to swap straps and the locking mechanisms produces unique different lug combinations that give the watch a different look. The Milanese strap has a flat lug like the early 1920 Rolex oysters.
Like this

Whereas the sports straps have a molded fit.
The edition one has a Santos type lugs.
The SS Bracelet has an IWC style flushed lugs
Very versatile look besides changing straps.

 

[D.T.]

If an arm-chair critic can show me an example of a 38mm circular display with ease-of-use, then I have no problem with that.

I’ve been saying since for some time, a circular UI wastes a ton of space (or you wind up creating a “virtual” rectangle content space resulting in a _giant_ device).

From a general UI design perspective (web, device UI, where I do have experience), you don’t really want content flowing into concave/convex spaces. This is a nice visual overview of how content works great on a [tall] rectangular display vs. a circle.

 

[Service Droid]

If apple had come up with the 360 you'd be saying how awesome it is.

Statements like this are such crap and make you look like an arrogant fool. Telling people what they would say in a hypothetical situation is just downright ridiculous.

Almost as idiotic as the people talking about the Apple Watch and saying "Steve jobs would have ... "

 

[DudeDad]

I remember you guys making fun of the 5+ inch phones a couple of years ago. Now apple makes them so now they're cool. You have to have one. If they made a round watch that looked exactly like the 360 you'd be talking about how awesome round watches are.

I think the 6 plus is to big. The Galaxy note is too big. The Moto is huge, even if it was made by Apple. So there.

 

[Tech198]

"Apple wanted to make "the best product in the world" and is "willing to wait."

ya, but are customers willing to wait...... ..

Ive always says "the best product" in every keynote.....

Seems, Apple's focus is above and beyond about not "just doing your best." Thy must be perfect...

You do realize, not everyone is perfect, some people like imperfections about a company... (edits: oh, that came out wrong)

 

[Trapezoid]

Seriously?

People lose all credibility when they claim that nobody in an iPhone forum ever made fun of phablets being used as phones, or never repeated Apple comments about one-handed use being most important.

The person said "you guys" said x, now it's y, implying its the same person/persons saying x and y. You lose credibility when you agree with that insinuation since its, you know...false.

 

[IJ Reilly]

The Apple watch uses magnetic clip system that fastens straps with various lugs. This isn't something new. Someone could make a standard 20mm/22mm lug that fastens to the case and they can use any strap they want.

I would not be surprised if the Apple method of attachment is patented. It's unclear if they would encourage a third party market for straps as we know too little about the watch's reliance on strap fit.

 

[kdarling]

Statements like this are such crap and make you look like an arrogant fool. Telling people what they would say in a hypothetical situation is just downright ridiculous.

He meant people on the forum in general.

Look around. You'll see plenty of posts from people talking about how they didn't like the iPhone 6 and the Watch at first, but that their designs are starting to grow on them, now that they have no other choice.

The person said "you guys" said x, now it's y, implying its the same person/persons saying x and y. You lose credibility when you agree with that insinuation since its, you know...false.

Oh. You think that "you guys" refers to YOU specifically.

Well, welcome to the internet. It's not email. And alas, you are not the center of the universe here. None of us are. Many cases of someone saying "you" does not actually mean "us" in particular.

This common misunderstanding is why I usually try not to use the word "you" in my posts. I say "they" or "we", because too many newbies and self-centrics fly off the handle thinking that they must be the "you" in the sentence.

 

[Trapezoid]

Oh. You think that "you guys" refers to YOU specifically.

Well, welcome to the internet. It's not email. And alas, you are not the center of the universe here. None of us are. Many cases of someone saying "you" does not actually mean "us" in particular.

This common misunderstanding is why I usually try not to use the word "you" in my posts. I say "they" or "we", because too many newbies and self-centrics fly off the handle thinking that they must be the "you" in the sentence.

This only furthers my point that it's a completely useless statement to make. If this "you"doesn't refer to me and it doesn't refer to you, it must refer to someone right?

If it doesn't the person who said it is lying. If it does they should be able to produce an example. Of course they can't though, and neither can you (and yes I'm referring to you specifically)

You lose credibility when you start championing this phantom "you"that supposedly exists but your cant provide evidence of.

The funny thing is you're usually a credible guy, then you start saying this stuff. gimme a break, guy.

 

[GrabASnookie]

I would stay away from anything apple makes for the first time. Wait for the Watch "S" or whatever the next one is called.

That crown will fall off or something weird is going to happen. Trust me.

Agreed.
now that you mention the crown, I'm beginning to wonder...

 

[Trapezoid]

Agreed.
now that you mention the crown, I'm beginning to wonder...

Is there any apple first generation product that had flaws where things started to fall off? Never heard of that but would be interesting to read about.

I left ios after the first iphone and didn't come back until the ipad. But never heard of anything like that.

 

[KrakaJap]

This only furthers my point that it's a completely useless statement to make. If this "you"doesn't refer to me and it doesn't refer to you, it must refer to someone right?

If it doesn't the person who said it is lying. If it does they should be able to produce an example. Of course they can't though, and neither can you (and yes I'm referring to you specifically)

You lose credibility when you start championing this phantom "you"that supposedly exists but your cant provide evidence of.

The funny thing is you're usually a credible guy, then you start saying this stuff. gimme a break, guy.

So are you specifically saying that no one here in this forum ever made fun of larger screens? And by made fun of I mean simply stating an opinion of how ridiculous it looks and/or would be awkward to hold, etc. etc. Apple's own commercial about "common sense" was an easily assumed direct attack on Samsung considering at the time (I believe) Samsung was the only company with a smartphone out that large. They may not have said "Samsung" but who else could they be referring to? I'm hearing people argue these direct, named, attacks on Apple by Samsung but really... who else could they possibly refer to even if they left out the names Apple and iPhone? There's only a single iOS smartphone platform and that is iPhone so any advertisement against features (or lack of) in iOS and the hardware is going to be a "direct" attack. And here's a real shocker... this is not new in advertising at all and is used quite often regardless of what we might think of it.

But back on the subject of "you"... I took the original statement of this to be general and not direct because kdarling is absolutely correct in that it is used far too often for generalizations (read: "you guys"). And now "you guys" seem to be arguing semantics and by you guys I'm referring to a much smaller group of people

So just stop already, you guys. Who really gives a *****?