There were loads of MP3 players on the market - from small, card based devices by Sony to HDD devices from Archos.
And yes, the iPod still skipped if you tried running with it.
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.
Jony Ive Discusses Steve Jobs and Apple Watch in Vogue Interview
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There were loads of MP3 players on the market - from small, card based devices by Sony to HDD devices from Archos.
And yes, the iPod still skipped if you tried running with it.
Well said, and not surprising so many here just don't get the 'human' connection. Not surprising but still sad. I for one intend to get one for me and for those I love. Technology embracing the human spirit, the human soul. Go Apple.
Right, because there's nothing more touching than sending taps to your wife's wrists instead of showing her genuine human affection.
Maybe because that picture is from Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, which took place in June 2014 (long before the Watch was introduced)
Interesting... I don't remember any skipping at all.
I was using Sony mini-disk players at the time, which I loved. The reason I switched to the iPod was:
- No skipping
- Small form factor (relative to the competition)
- No media storage disks
- iTunes/simple syncing
Most of the competition did not address all of those features. In short, the iPod did have an advantage over the competition, whereas I still can't figure out what the purpose of the Apple Watch actually is.
I hate to say this but... Duh.
Is Apple in Paris to attend the Parisian Surfing Classic or are they there to be part of fashion week?
In marketing terms Apple is making brilliant moves positioning its device to the broader fashion industry in an attempt to make wearing "a" watch cool again - since some us realize that's a very high mountain to climb.
Google, Samsung etc have pushed out watches geared toward the tech world as if wearing a watch is as cool as sporting a new smartphone. No. And a lack of sales so far is proving this true.
Trying to make a watch a "cool" gadget to "wear" will only come from changing people's fashion habits in wearables period.
Phones and watches are not the same animal. Apples competitors seemingly are learning this the hard way.
With Apple from the get go hiring high end talent from fashion to piece together a strategy of perceptual marketing of its watch Apple will now sell its watches in a much wider variety of retailers worldwide than any of its competition by a mile.. Really? Expect Apple to gain valuable new retail real estate in places like Macy's, Nordstrom, Bloomingdales, Neiman Marcus, Harrods, etc etc etc. Likely youll see special watches at Coach, Louis Vuitton....
Seems like many of you haven't pieced together Apples recent hires together with the watches style etc...
Brilliant strategy folks.
There are hundreds of millions of people who are into fitness, go mountain/road biking only a daily basis, work in the outdoors, etc.
Having the phone tucked away in a pack never needed to check on any of the features of fitness this watch is designed to exploit guarantees this is going to be a huge victory in how come a watch is now a health monitoring station and more.
A very accurate assessment imho. Another watch that appealed only to the "tech" crowd would have most likely resulted in a similar result to the numerous other products out there. Apple is targeting a totally different demographic here. With Marc Newson on the team I wouldn't be surprised if gen 2 and gen 3 of the Apple watch includes different designs that appeal to other market segments (athletes, surfers etc) but gen 1 is most definitely a fashion accessory and appeals to that demographic. The Sport edition is there but i expect them to offer different form factors in the future that would be more catered to those environment. I don't see apple sticking to one product for all categories like the iPhone and iPad launches.
Instead of following what google, Samsung, Pebble and others have done apple seems to have taken a different route, that of placing design and materials at par or ahead of the technology and feature set within the watch. Apple doesn't need to sell 100 million Apple watches a year to make it into a success, if it is able to penetrate the fashion market and still rule the smart watch category with the gen 1 apple watch it would be a win as far as the concept is concerned.
People also have the wrong idea that apple's success will only happen if people let go of their 2000-5000 dollar watches and start wearing the apple watch. While the higher end watches play some role the main push will come from the 350-600 dollar category where people go through watches faster and have developing tastes as far as watches are concerned. Think the Nixon's of the world, the Movado's, Vicotinox's of the world. If apple is able to make a dent in the 1000+ watch market, that would be an added bonus but the Edition series doesn't need to be a run away success for the apple watch to be an overall successful product launch
With Marc Newson having a lot of experience with round designs i don't think a round apple watch is very far
http://www.dezeen.com/2007/12/10/ikepod-wristwatches-by-marc-newson/
Last edited:
Ive and Apple should have stayed true to the word WATCH to understand what that thing on your wrist is best used for - notification of the time plus other things you want to be able to know at a glance. An expansion on the original idea.
But they built a device that invites you to DO a lot on it, when for most things the iPhone is much better suited. Quick yes/no reply communications features are fine, but you don't want to spend time fingering around on that tiny screen and locking up your arms that way. And, it's puzzling how Ive could have drawn so much attention to the heartbeat sharing feature in this article, which is really just a gadgety distraction from the core benefit the watch provides.
I think Apple went astray a bit.
But they built a device that invites you to DO a lot on it, when for most things the iPhone is much better suited. Quick yes/no reply communications features are fine, but you don't want to spend time fingering around on that tiny screen and locking up your arms that way. And, it's puzzling how Ive could have drawn so much attention to the heartbeat sharing feature in this article, which is really just a gadgety distraction from the core benefit the watch provides.
I think Apple went astray a bit.
Apple Briefs
Will not bend according to the new engineering guidelines.
Well technically, the OP didn't say he wasn't going to buy it. He was only commenting on the fact that the heartbeat "transmission" feature was creepy to him. It could be possible that he likes everything else about the watch.
As for your question: what's the value of folks stating they will not buy something? I'd posture this: if there are folks from Apple reading these forums, that feedback would be helpful. The folks form Apple could try to understand why and adjust as needed.
Supposedly, Apple does at times leak information about upcoming products to gauge reaction and interest. So yes...negative feedback or reactions would have more than "zero value".
Actually, I'm looking forward to that one. I travel a LOT for business and meetings, and begin to miss my family after many of the longer stints.
I'm picturing how nice it will be to be sitting in a meeting far from home, and have my wife surprise me with a sample of her heartbeat.
Yeah, perhaps next they will have a small remote to control your watch next that requires both the watch, iPhone, and a ring accessory.
Right, because there's nothing more touching than sending taps to your wife's wrists instead of showing her genuine human affection.
Nothing to say you can't do both.
When I'm at the office, away from my wife, sending her my heartbeat shows more affection than sending her an XOXOXO text message.
That's actually not a bad idea. Make your love one's wrist vibrate every time you fart. My wife would probably develop an ulcer under the watch.
What he was wearing was not a smart watch, it doesn't have to display text or photos. A round display for text is just not working, or else there would be loads of round books and monitors. And the smaller the display, the less useful a round display would be.
If you had a pool, you would never take off your watch.
If you had a satellite you'd see that I do have one.
but that still doesn't tell us why you say if its not waterproof its a huge misstep.
Agreed. Ive and Jobs were a genius collaborative team, but Ive alone lacks focus and taste imo. His own designs are good and sometimes even great but never exemplary - he needed Jobs input to get there. And his harping on the creepy heartbeat feature, ugh, he needs Jobs' ghost to rise up and shout "THIS IS SH T!"
----------
Bluetooth schlong ring. Sends gf/wife/stalking victim a throbbing heartbeat whenever you're at full attention.