iWatch Reportedly Launching in October with iOS 8 and Curved OLED Touchscreen

[Moorepheus]

Small size 1.3 + large size 1.7 = 3

Half Life 3 confirmed on iWatch.


I wonder what kind of charging options they will choose. Lightning would be unsightly on such a small device on your wrist. It would be a first if they add Qi/inductive charging. I hope there will be an elegant way to have it charging while docked on your nightstand!

If apple was smart, they could try what Citizen does with their watches, SOLOR cells in face. However, I am not sure how that will work with the OLED, so that might not be possible. Also, I know another watch brand that uses MOTION to charge the batteries, forgot who made those. But your right, a charging port would be really BAD on these watches.

 

[Dave245]

I'm wondering if the iWatch is only going to be aimed at people who work out at the gym, counting steps taken, miles run and so on, or is this going to be product that's aimed at everyone with much more functionality

Personally i do not go to the gym, BUT i do like to keep track of steps taken and calories i eat. I currently use the Steps+ App in the App store. How would an iWatch be better than the app i'm currently using

I think if Apple are doing an iWatch, they need to make it something we will WANT to wear not something we "have to wear" I think Tim Cook got it exactly right when he said that people "wear glasses because they have too not because they want too" when he was asked about Google Glass. And i think the same could be said for a watch, most people wear them because they HAVE to in order to be able to tell the time, but how many young people wear watches? as a rule they DON'T, i know i don't because i have an iPhone that tells me the time. and the same goes for my friends and most people i know at University.

 

[macduke]

So it's a Squidget?

Image

I can say with great confidence that Apple will never release something with Squid in the name, and especially not this thing, lol. Might as well hang an iPod Touch around your neck. Funny joke though. Some people just don't get good design. How old is this graphic? I assume it's fairly recent since it's talking about Burberry and Angela Ahrendts is a recent hire, but it uses iOS 6 graphic elements.

 

[CmdrLaForge]

Curved OLED just like the mock up displayed?

Seriously, how about just making up a fresh iWatch news icon and stop repeating the same ridiculous concepts over and over. We get the idea already.

Actually I quite like the watch in the picture.

----------

I cannot see what the big deal is about this. Yes, it's another new market that Apple will probably dominate if they get the Burberry exec to market it correctly with splashy ads in all the glossy fashion magazines, famous athletes seen posing with them, Jay-Z and Beyonce, Rhianna and all the other 'cool' style icons shown wearing them.

Gimmicky nonsense - what's wrong with conventional watches? What's wrong with conventional books?

Nothing is wrong with anything conventional. If they are only adding Gimmicks then the watch would make little sense. But usually Apple doesn't do that but provide real added value.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Actually I quite like the watch in the picture.

Great. CTRL-Click on it --> Save to "Downloads". You can now look at it all day long. But the MR editors should stop using it to accompany iWatch ads. It's tedious to see the same concepts posted that have zero connection to Apple.

 

[wizard]

From all the other unconfirmed rumors, apple was investing in the Arizona sapphire plant specifically for the iwatch. Not sure if this article necessarily contradicts the other rumors, but it makes me wonder.

The ability to grow sapphire boules large enough for iPhone screens is right on the edge of what current technology permits. So there is reasons to suspect that much of that sapphire is destined for devices other than iPhone. The only problem here is the volume Apple is installing in Arizona, that could indicate a break through in production of large crystals suitable for cutting large windows from.

It is a curious thing really and when it comes right down to it Apple could have many uses for the material as it could be used for everything from heat spreaders to chip substrates. I wouldn't be surprised to find the "logic board" for this device to be built upon sapphire. Everyone assumes windows when sapphire is brought up but there are many uses Apple could out the material to work for.

 

[smiddlehurst]

I agree. But why would Apple implement a feature in Yosemite to see when you recieve a phone call and to even answer it? I mean, it seemed like a feature that I thought would be the most promising for an iWatch, not on OS X. Imagine working on your computer, then why would you still be wearing an iWatch? The point I'm trying to make is that by focusing on integration between OS X and iOS, it looks like they're taking away some features I would deserve for their watch..

Uh, I may be being dense here but how would you take a phone call on your iWatch? That makes no sense to me as it's not going to have a mic and speaker built in. You're going to look at the screen on your wrist then go fishing for your phone by which time it's probably clicked over to voicemail. Or, I guess, if you've got a bluetooth headset then it does make a bit more sense but even so it's hardly a killer feature.

For me the big killer feature with wearables is treating them as extensions of the phone to enable it to better interact with the world via sensors. Health is an obvious example as, potentially, would be NFC. Sure there's many more possibilities of course.

 

[wizard]

I cannot see what the big deal is about this. Yes, it's another new market that Apple will probably dominate if they get the Burberry exec to market it correctly with splashy ads in all the glossy fashion magazines, famous athletes seen posing with them, Jay-Z and Beyonce, Rhianna and all the other 'cool' style icons shown wearing them.

Rhianna would look good in just an iWatch! She certainly doesn't need much more than that!

Gimmicky nonsense - what's wrong with conventional watches? What's wrong with conventional books?

The problem I see Apple having is to get people to wear such devices at all. Wearing a watch often sends the wrong messages to people around you. Beyond that iPhone is the modern equivalent of a railroad engineers pocket watch.

Folks, Just ignore me, I'm getting old and crabby. When you get to my age, you're not so easily impressed with some things.

I think you are justified. As the article notes Apple is apparently cranking up mass production to levels well beyond what the entire industry has put out in a year. That is a big gamble if you ask me. I just don't see a heated demand for an iWatch unless it does far more than is being suggested. Watches in general don't sell that well.

The idea that it runs iOS 8 gives me hope though. I just don't know about how much tech can be stuffed in such a watch. It would be neat if it had full cell phone capabilities all on its own. If not that WiFi capabilities.

 

[hansonjohn590]

I agree. But why would Apple implement a feature in Yosemite to see when you recieve a phone call and to even answer it? I mean, it seemed like a feature that I thought would be the most promising for an iWatch, not on OS X. Imagine working on your computer, then why would you still be wearing an iWatch? The point I'm trying to make is that by focusing on integration between OS X and iOS, it looks like they're taking away some features I would deserve for their watch..

Why would you answer a phone call from a watch?

 

[iMacBooked]

Uh, I may be being dense here but how would you take a phone call on your iWatch? That makes no sense to me as it's not going to have a mic and speaker built in. You're going to look at the screen on your wrist then go fishing for your phone by which time it's probably clicked over to voicemail. Or, I guess, if you've got a bluetooth headset then it does make a bit more sense but even so it's hardly a killer feature.



For me the big killer feature with wearables is treating them as extensions of the phone to enable it to better interact with the world via sensors. Health is an obvious example as, potentially, would be NFC. Sure there's many more possibilities of course.

Apparently I wasn't clear enough. My point just was that the iWatch seemed to be the right tool to see when you're recieving a call (so just the caller ID function, not calling itself) but that by implementing the exact same feature into Yosemite, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to still wear an iWatch while working behind your Mac for example. I was just trying to say that by adding things like that to OS X, they reduce the possible amount of iWatch-only features.

 

[Roller]

If apple was smart, they could try what Citizen does with their watches, SOLOR cells in face. However, I am not sure how that will work with the OLED, so that might not be possible. Also, I know another watch brand that uses MOTION to charge the batteries, forgot who made those. But your right, a charging port would be really BAD on these watches.

I have a light-powered Casio watch that also resets the time every day, so I never have to fiddle with it. But I'm sure that its power consumption is much less than it will be for Apple's device. I doubt if current solar cell technology could keep it charged.

 

[Subalee]

If I can't start a doc on my Mac, transfer it to my watch and then finish it on my work Mac, Apple is doomed.

what's iCloud for then?

 

[wizard]

I agree. But why would Apple implement a feature in Yosemite to see when you recieve a phone call and to even answer it?

If you build the feature into iOS for remote answering why not leverage that feature in Yosemite? You (Apple) already have all the hardware and software in place is it that much more difficult to add the functionality to Yosemite - obviously not and by doing so you have a unique feature to market to the public.

By the way it doesn't even matter if the public uses this feature, it is the capability to market it as a unique solution that makes it valuable.

I mean, it seemed like a feature that I thought would be the most promising for an iWatch, not on OS X.

What would stop iWatch from making such a feature available? Once the facility is in place Apple would want its use to be wide spread. I could see the feature being built into Apple TV and other devices.

Imagine working on your computer, then why would you still be wearing an iWatch?

You didn't seriously ask that question did you?

The point I'm trying to make is that by focusing on integration between OS X and iOS, it looks like they're taking away some features I would deserve for their watch..

They aren't focused on anything specific. This is the problem with WWDC and its coverage in the press, many people just don't grasp what is happening there. To put it bluntly not everything discussed there is public knowledge. Nor does Apple release all of the goodies at the event. To put it simply if iWatch exists there would be zero mention of it at WWDC. At best you would need to read between the lines so to speak to get an idea about what is coming.

What is coming is a massive iOS release that frankly will take developer awhile to fully digest. In fact I suspect that many apps will lag rev wise, when it comes to using all the features available to them in iOS 8. Apple is talking publicly about 4000 new APIs, that is huge and provides feature for just about every app currently shipping b Apple.

 

[Chatter]

I think it basically just going to be a remote sensor which looks like a watch but needs an iPhone to read the data. I guess you might be able to remotely control the music apps on your iPhone through the iWatch but I wouldn't think it will have any memory or stand alone iPod functionality. That way they can keep the price down and basically use it a marketing tool to get more people to keep buying the iPhone.

Ya, I think you are probably correct. Continuity would probably tie all these different devices together and maybe the iwatch is a "on-person controller" of sorts. Either way, its exciting.

 

[joshdammit]

I think if Apple are doing an iWatch, they need to make it something we will WANT to wear not something we "have to wear" I think Tim Cook got it exactly right when he said that people "wear glasses because they have too not because they want too" when he was asked about Google Glass. And i think the same could be said for a watch, most people wear them because they HAVE to in order to be able to tell the time, but how many young people wear watches? as a rule they DON'T, i know i don't because i have an iPhone that tells me the time. and the same goes for my friends and most people i know at University.

That's a stretch. People wear glasses because they have trouble seeing. They don't need a watch to tell time. Most people I've met who wear watches do so as a fashion accessory. Sure, sunglasses have become fashionable, as well, but they still help people see (in bright sunlight.) Just like you can get fashionable prescription glasses.

Nobody needs to wear a watch. They wear one because they want to, and there's a definite market in that.

Then again, you went ahead and admitted that you can use your phone or ask somebody for the time, so I'm not entirely certain what point you're trying to make.

 

[wizard]

I have not worn a watch for 16 years, for me they are useless, my phone has a clock so why have something strapped to my arm that does just that 1 task.

Now if it can do other things too for me i might want something strapped to my arm again.

It would have to do a lot!

I don't really read books, but my mum who is a heavy book reader has gone kindle because conventional books take over your house to the point where you cannot move for books. So she went digital, also she loves being able to get the 2rd or 3rd book in a series immediately after reading the previous.

That is good for her but used books are so cheap that I have huge problems buying the electronic versions. Frankly they never got the value equation right.

Honestly I'm not sure if Apple can come up with the marketing BS required to successfully move iWatches. To be successful they would need to change the publics perception of the whole idea.

 

[iBreatheApple]

I presume they are aware that name on the right hand watch, John Doe is the name given to an unidentified corpse!
Is this watch dead on arrival then?

John Doe is also a commonly used placeholder for name fields. And Apple didn't create this.

 

[amirite]

Just 'another' sim card to buy then

Well it could be wifi only and tether to the phone.

 

[xgman]

I thought the prior rumor was for a round screen. Why would a round screen need to be curved?

 

[Born Again]

Only 3 versions?!

Wow that white couple wearing the I watches are going to look extremely dorky.

No thanks.

 

[sammaffei]

Blood Sugar

If it can accurately read blood sugar levels, my diabetic dad would buy one for $500 if he doesn't have to keep sticking his fingers.

 

[prowlmedia]

Only 3 versions?!

Wow that white couple wearing the I watches are going to look extremely dorky.

No thanks.

Retracted because I am an idiot.

 

[wizard]

Definitely getting this. I wonder what the upgrade cycle will be for watches now? I'm a watch wearing guy and I usually get a new one every 4–5 years, nothing too fancy in the $200–250 range. If they hit a $199 price I will upgrade every two years with my iPhone, but I'm thinking this thing will likely be in the $299+ range, which might make it every 3-4 years like an iPad. Remember it's unsubsidized so you can't compare it to an iPhone.

Some of the rumored technology, is frankly expensive technology, I could see this cost much more if it has the capability to run iOS8. Doing so would require a new generation of chips operating at extremely low power levels. All of this needs very compact and expensive assembly techniques. In the end it could cost twice what you are suggesting above.

As for upgrade cycles, that is an interesting question. If they get 14 nm chips from TSMC, off pilot production lines, it might take awhile to see the next rev adding real technical value to the watch. To pull off some of the rumors they will need to be on the bleeding edge of production systems at all parts suppliers. There is the reality that some of the rumors are at best wild ass guesses, so maybe we don't get the advanced device imagined in the first rev.

I wonder if iWatch will have continuity with iPhone, iPad and Mac? At least at a basic level to start. Would be neat to unlock my Mac using my iWatch to authenticate since it's always out in front of me. TouchID on iWatch would be quite neat to pay for items in the store. Instead of fumbling around for your phone the point of sale system could recognize your watch using iBeacons and you press your thumb down to pay.

I don't see any value in that really. It probably could be done but I don't see a made rush to payments and frankly didn't see anything at WWDC Keynote that implied that Apple was moving into payments. They could of course as not everything gets discussed at WWDC.

It would be a bit disappointing if everything launched in October instead of September like the last couple of years, but if they need time to get it right then by all means.

The big problem here is Intel. Normally Apple would have had viable Mac revisions by now. iPods & iOS in general has always been late summer anyways so I don't see a big change here.

There is a lot of complicated iCloud stuff going on in iOS 8 and Yosemite and if anything Apple needs to take their time. I know day one I'm going to be hitting iCloud hard with a large paid account migrating my Dropbox and photos.

Day. One is never a good time to go all in!!!!!!!

I bet a lot of other people will be testing it as well. It could also be launching later because of the rumor of the iPhone 6 5.5" having some manufacturing issues, combined with a new product rollout in the iWatch. Gives everyone a less tight schedule to ensure a high-quality product with plenty of units in stock.

You can't believe the rumors. You can enjoy the rumors but believing them is a bad thing.

 

[outphase]

I cannot see what the big deal is about this. Yes, it's another new market that Apple will probably dominate if they get the Burberry exec to market it correctly with splashy ads in all the glossy fashion magazines, famous athletes seen posing with them, Jay-Z and Beyonce, Rhianna and all the other 'cool' style icons shown wearing them.

Gimmicky nonsense - what's wrong with conventional watches? What's wrong with conventional books?

Folks, Just ignore me, I'm getting old and crabby. When you get to my age, you're not so easily impressed with some things.

What's wrong with a phone that's just a phone? If we didn't have advancements in various tech fields, we wouldn't have computers in our pockets more powerful than computers of years past.

 

[Moonjumper]

If apple was smart, they could try what Citizen does with their watches, SOLOR cells in face. However, I am not sure how that will work with the OLED, so that might not be possible. Also, I know another watch brand that uses MOTION to charge the batteries, forgot who made those. But your right, a charging port would be really BAD on these watches.

I have a Pulsar watch that is motion powered. I believe the mechanism is Seiko, who make their own watches as well. I have seen a number of other brands as well that do the same thing.

My watch is quite bulky, although newer generations are much better (mine wasn't even the latest generation when new 14 years ago). But the system still might be too big when all the smart watch stuff has to fit in as well.