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
The reason they are trying to push it on the fashion crowd is because this is the only way to make it popular to the masses.
There are two options:
1.) Make it a techie futuristic gizmo
2.) Make it a simple fashion thing
BOTH OF THESE ARE INSANELY HARD BATTLES TO FIGHT.
The cell phone killed the watch. There is literally no point to wear one outside of fashion in 2014 and it takes something really special to make people want the burden of wearing something, when they could just have a free flowing wrist.
So both 1 and 2 are Mission Impossibles.
But number 1 has limited scope even in potential. Despite a few million nerds, nobody is going to want a nerdy gismo.
So number 2 becomes the only other scope to go after. Hoping its some passive thing where over the years, it becomes a thing that is elegant, simple, yet practical enough to be welcome on your personal wrists.
Both 1 and 2 are long shots, but 1 is impossible because they could never overcome that geek feeling to have success on a massive scale.
There are two options:
1.) Make it a techie futuristic gizmo
2.) Make it a simple fashion thing
BOTH OF THESE ARE INSANELY HARD BATTLES TO FIGHT.
The cell phone killed the watch. There is literally no point to wear one outside of fashion in 2014 and it takes something really special to make people want the burden of wearing something, when they could just have a free flowing wrist.
So both 1 and 2 are Mission Impossibles.
But number 1 has limited scope even in potential. Despite a few million nerds, nobody is going to want a nerdy gismo.
So number 2 becomes the only other scope to go after. Hoping its some passive thing where over the years, it becomes a thing that is elegant, simple, yet practical enough to be welcome on your personal wrists.
Both 1 and 2 are long shots, but 1 is impossible because they could never overcome that geek feeling to have success on a massive scale.
No, a novelty is something novel. It doesn't have to be useless at all.
You mean owners will prey for a significant update year after year without getting one? Let's hope not, eh?
Not only is Ive not wearing an Apple watch (hard to believe that they would not have had him wear a prototype at the interview) but he's wearing a watch with a round face.
Ive, like myself, is a fan of nice timepieces. I would be willing to bet that the majority of his watches and most of his favorites feature a round dial.
I'm still gobsmacked that Apple chose to go with a rectangular face for the Apple Watch when nearly all iconic timepieces are circular.
----------
I think you mean pray.
If owners were preying for an update, it would mean that they were stalking Apple developers in parking garages.
Ive, like myself, is a fan of nice timepieces. I would be willing to bet that the majority of his watches and most of his favorites feature a round dial.
I'm still gobsmacked that Apple chose to go with a rectangular face for the Apple Watch when nearly all iconic timepieces are circular.
----------
I think you mean pray.
If owners were preying for an update, it would mean that they were stalking Apple developers in parking garages.
The heartbeat thing IS gimmicky and creepy, as others have noted. I also feel like they've error by not having more ways to measure health/fitness stats in it.
The thing Ive is right about is if they are going to convince people (beyond geeks) to wear this on their wrist, it has to be fashionable.
The thing Ive is right about is if they are going to convince people (beyond geeks) to wear this on their wrist, it has to be fashionable.
That thing can't even display the contents of a text message, much less allow me to answer it without pulling out my phone.
"The cell phone, of course, killed the watch to some extent. Now he wants to reset the balance."
This is another disconnect with the result. If he wanted to restore the idea of a watch, he wouldn't have reduced the ipod down to watch size (touch screen for the wrist). He would have used a real watch face with Apple sensors inside that work "seamlessly" with the iPhone.
This is another disconnect with the result. If he wanted to restore the idea of a watch, he wouldn't have reduced the ipod down to watch size (touch screen for the wrist). He would have used a real watch face with Apple sensors inside that work "seamlessly" with the iPhone.
Yes. In a stock photo from before the announcement of the Apple Watch, he is not wearing the Apple Watch. Great observation skills.
And yes, he is wearing a watch with a round face. There are people who can wear a watch with a round face tomorrow and a watch with a rectangular face tomorrow. Some people wear blue jeans today and khakis tomorrow.
I am still gobsmacked that Apple would market that device as a watch, when the watch functionality is such a minor aspect of the device. Now people go on about how a timepiece should or shouldn't look.
It's not a timepiece.
It's a device that displays information from an attached smartphone and allows for communication through that smartphone. Oh yes, it also displays the time. The displayed information happens to fit mostly into a rectangular space, so I don't see why it should be forced to fit into a round space just because the minority usecase calls for a round display according to the preferences of some users.
In 5 years, when all "timepieces" are rectangular, people will complain about how terribly ugly round watches look anyway.
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.
Because it's a fitness tracker as says the back of the watch, with all those fancy crystal windows. Because the primary driving pair-up to the iPhone is Health app. Because you can send your heartbeat
I.E. for a fitness watch (or sport edition), it not being waterproof kind of defeats the purpose of a fitness watch, don't you think? If I want to jump in the pool, I don't want to say oh crap there goes my Apple watch, with water damage.
Really, not too much to ask to be honest. Spend anything north of 300+ and most watches are waterproof to at least 10M. Although I tend to buy them good to 100+M for diving.
I'm not sold on the Apple watch. Then again, I wasn't sold on the iPod, or mp3 players in general. It seemed a lot of trouble going through your entire CD collection, ripping them to MP3 (or AAC, or whatever format Apple used then). Downloading music wasn't all that convenient, either. And then, if you wanted to listen to a particular song, you had to navigate menus on the click wheel. There was no way that was going to catch on in a big way.
Other people were dubious that Apple could really break into the mobile phone market, against giant players like Sony Ericsson and Nokia, or compete with Blackberry on texting.
Even if I don't buy an Apple Watch gen 1, I'm not ready to pronounce it DOA before the "A" has even happened.
I'm still waiting for Twitter to go belly up. 140 characters? Give me a break!
Other people were dubious that Apple could really break into the mobile phone market, against giant players like Sony Ericsson and Nokia, or compete with Blackberry on texting.
Even if I don't buy an Apple Watch gen 1, I'm not ready to pronounce it DOA before the "A" has even happened.
I'm still waiting for Twitter to go belly up. 140 characters? Give me a break!
No back to you. Yes, there are multiple meanings to the word, but they are not necessarily interchangeable as you want to make it in this case. The poster clearly used "novelty," as in a novelty item, not a new idea, or experience. He was using the word in is most derogatory meaning. A novelty item is a fad item that has not real use other than itself; i.e. a toy or bauble.
Nice try though.
No. I said I want something to display information from my phone. Just telling me that I have a message is not useful information for me. The phone vibrates in my back pocket, or it beeps in my backpack. I don't need a dumbwatch now to tell me now that I am getting a message.
And I said I want to control the phone from the watch. Also not possible.
My general requirement is that I don't want to pull the phone out of my backpack. That watch does not fulfil that requirement. It doesn't fulfil any requirement. It is useless. I can't think of a single usecase where I don't have to pull out my phone with this watch.
And yet they chose to call it the "Apple Watch". What was that about observational skills?
I'd love for a round table of all the head players past and present to talk about the last 10+ years of Apple and Steve.
Where will your iPhone be, Apple Watch is said to be an extension of it?
I see a lot Redundancy, but don't get me wrong, I'm all for the Apple Watch and I will get one. Just going to wait for the dust to settle after it's release!
I think for now the Watch needs to be an extension of the iPhone mainly due to battery life and limited computing power. The screen though is also too small for making it a completely independent device. I think in time the watch will transmit its information to various displays in your home or in the palm of your hand which in terms will render the iPhone more of a display than a computing/phone device.
Actually, they never had a lock on timepieces, they just knew how to market them, then again, you are probably to mainstream to notice that.
Besides, those watches are ugly as hell. Have you ever thought about the fact that watches are one of the indicators of your personality? Yours are yelling lack of confidence and attention.
Because it's a fitness tracker as says the back of the watch, with all those fancy crystal windows. Because the primary driving pair-up to the iPhone is Health app. Because you can send your heartbeat
I.E. for a fitness watch (or sport edition), it not being waterproof kind of defeats the purpose of a fitness watch, don't you think? If I want to jump in the pool, I don't want to say oh crap there goes my Apple watch, with water damage.
Really, not too much to ask to be honest. Spend anything north of 300+ and most watches are waterproof to at least 10M. Although I tend to buy them good to 100+M for diving.
Yes, and as I said, I have an expensive $350 Garmin 620 running watch. It's not water proof; i.e., immersible. It's only water resistant. So that busts your theory that $300 watches are waterproof. Most expensive running watches are not, in fact, waterproof unless they are triathlon watches. Running watches, which are more advanced than a simple fitness band, can handle a thunderstorm fine and that's all most need. Also once more, Apple hasn't advertised it as a diving watch. Diving and fitness watches are different beats just as a yacht and Sunfish are. Sunfish sales don't tank because of Yacht sales.
So again, I don't see where it needs to be water proof, i.e., immersible for x feet for x time. You don't seem to know either it seems.
While we're on the subject, whose dumb idea was it to market the iPhone as a "phone"? It's a handheld personal computer that happens to make phone calls.
And where did the name "watch" become synonymous with "timepiece"? Shouldn't they have called it a "wrist clock" or something that make sense?
And why is a "clock" called a "clock" in the first place, when it comes from the word for "bell"? If a clock doesn't have anything like a bell, then it is not worthy of that name.
All of the above is moot if people in general refer to the Apple watch as a watch, and a bell-less clock as a clock. General usage overrules pedantry, whether the pedants like it or not.
Once it is out, I am sure there will be stories/videos on how sharing heartbeat to their doctors saved their lives... *face-palm*
Reminds me the verizon "can you hear me now" guy. You know its stupid. You know you hate it. But you know its going to be a thing. urgh...
Stock photo from an undetermined time period...That photo could be from a year ago.
Chupa, let's keep it simple shall we.
Can I swim with it?
If not, I won't buy it. That's all I am saying.
Waterproof, water resistant, whatever.
Can I jump in the pool or ocean and swim for as long as I like- not dive.
Why am I here? Because I have purchased tens-of-thousands of dollars of Apple merchandise, most of which is fantastic and I love. So, am I disloyal to the Apple tribe if I find one product unsatisfactory?
I understand that Apple didn't invent MP3 players, but compared to what was available, the iPod and iTunes were not what anyone was expecting to happen, and neither was the iPad.
So if Apple came out with the "Apple Buggy Whip" should I be impressed? I don't need a better buggy whip and I don't need a better watch. I need a wearable computer that significantly improves my daily life and the Apple watch ain't that, at least not yet.
Maybe the Apple watch 3 will be something, but not this thing.
Some people like watches and may think this thing is awesome and I say more power to you. I'm just saying I had hoped for something more about the future than about the past.
I thought that too until you realize that it just opens him up to too many questions and people asking to touch it and try it on. Knowing how shy he seems, I don't blame him.