Jony Ive Reveals Exclusive Apple Watch Sport Bands at Milan Design Week

[ginkobiloba]

....

Stunning as the iPod/iTunes success proved to be, there is almost no connection to be made with this watch, except that it's a product Apple sells. I've tried to find any convincing explanation why this is the next iPod/iPhone/iPad, and the only case that makes any sense is a health and fitness monitoring. I'll admit that eventually many of us will wear devices that measure our vital stats 24/7, but let's remember that this watch doesn't do any of that whereas the first iPod most definitely held and played your MP3's. If the eventually does this monitoring in a revolutionary way, then I may be convinced, but right now it's less useful than a fitbit from two year ago. Additionally, wristwatches, seem retrograde for a company that did more to wipe out the need for wristwatches than anyone else. Smartphones are what people check the time with.

....

Apple's Watch is not revolutionary, it's just a very good product ( as in : the best smartwatch out there ) and that's perfectly OK. The problem is that with Apple, there seem to be only binary positions in arguments : either it's a revolution, or it's a total fail. I don't know any other company in the world where this absurdity applies. There is a whole range of degrees between "Revolution" and "Fail" ( I know that is not your position, but there are a majority of arguments here that are like that )

One day, the technology in batteries and sensors and cpus will be advanced enough that smartwaches will become an essential personal tool. But one would be crazy if he thought that Apple will just wait until technology reaches that point, there is pressure on them to start occupying the terrain as soon as possible, even if that means that the Watch will be another "hobby" like the Apple TV.

Also don't forget that it's the upcoming apps that are really going to give the aWatch it's usefulness. You can't expect Apple to provide everything themselves. Personaly, I only switched from "Cool smartwatch, but I don't need this" to "OOh, I think I want one now" after seeing previews of Citymapper's app for the Watch . Their iPhone version has become essential to me, and it's utility is even more justified on a watch. And there are other apps that made me reconsider once they announced availability for the aWatch , like 2DO, etc..

And lastly, I totally disagree with your assertion : " Additionally, wristwatches, seem retrograde for a company that did more to wipe out the need for wristwatches than anyone else. Smartphones are what people check the time with." 90% of people I know have a watch on their wrist. Maybe it's an age or a cultural thing, but I see far more people on the street wearing a watch than not.

 

[flat five]

These posts point out how little rebuttal there is to the criticisms being leveled against the watch. To say that there have always been doubters is dismissive and just makes me more certain there is almost no case to be made for this product.

not really sure what you're expecting people to say.
the fallacy in your argument is that you're saying "the watch is not a compelling product" when it should be more along the lines of "I personally am not compelled"

the watch is certainly compelling. proof of that is all over these forums. "the watch is not compelling" isn't a factual statement. All you're asking for is for someone to change your individual point of view at which point, you'll say "ok, the watch is now a compelling product".. as if you're the deciding voice on how interesting something is.

we all have the same info. nobody has even used the thing yet and you're demanding someone to make a case which sways your opinion. it's not possible this instant.. with time, it will become possible and odds are (based on historical evidence), your current opinion will eventually sway. seeing that nobody has access to exclusive info here, nobody is going to be able to change your mind. nobody can pull proof from the future either at this time so historical evidence is pretty much the strongest indicator they could use right now. sure, it may be on the weak side but it's all one can point to as far as hard evidence goes..

the way youve positioned your stance, it's not (entirely) possible for anyone to 'win' other than yourself.. and it goes back to you using an opinion of yours as fact.

 

[Jimmy James]

Listen Macrumours if you don't stop doing stories about this stupid watch I swear I'm going to cancel my subscription, I know you'll miss me.

Correction: The story is about the watch bands.

----------

The more it's marketed as a fashion accessory the less interesting it seems to me.

 

[robeddie]

Correction: The story is about the stupid watch bands.

----------

The more it's marketed as a fashion accessory the less interesting it seems to me.

Fixed that for you

 

[Poochi]

I am perfectly happy with Apple's strategy

Everyone gets access to the same underlying technology, and the only difference is the option to spend more to look a little different. This is great!

 

[friedmud]

I hope they end up releasing some of these colors... Orange would be awesome!

I have to believe that a lot of people that see little utility in the Watch are simply not the demographic Apple is targeting. For instance, for the past 6 years I lived in a small rural town. In a smaller town the pace of life is such that I wouldn't have been that interested in the watch: "I can pull out my phone any time I need some info"

However, I moved to Boston last year... and everything is completely different. My commute is one hour each way bus-train-walk then walk-train-bus. I have about 3-4 meetings per day with 15 minute walks through the streets for each one. I'm in and out of my office all day long.

When you're on the move like this you realize just how inconvenient it is to try to pull out a phone for even something simple like checking the time or seeing where your next meeting is, let alone responding to a quick "when are you going to be home for dinner" while you're walking or getting walking directions to that bar where you're meeting a colleague for lunch.

The Watch is made for people on the go. Is that everyone? No. But there are millions of people around the world who are on the move every day and need a quicker more convenient interface to their digital information.

Just because you don't see utility in it: doesn't mean there isn't any!

 

[elgrecomac]

Are you listening to yourselves?

You're getting excited over a unapologetically plastic WATCH BAND! Is the watch so UNcompelling as a device that there is fervor over a band it is attached to? Come on everyone, calm-the-hell down.

If I were the buyer of this device, which, in this beta version I am not, I'd be worried that Apple is drawing your eyes and attention AWAY from the device. Why is that? is there so little there in a $350-$17,000 device that they and their incredibly effect marketing dept (the best in the world), got you all talking about 2 pieces of plastic. I am the only one seeing the silliness factor here?

 

[Four oF NINE]

Here's another thought I've been having. The 38 mm is tiny, and even the 42 mm is smallish. Why not a 46 - 48 mm version? It would allow a much bigger battery and larger screen and all the other good things missing or currently compromised to accommodate the available smallish sizes.

 

[MR-LIZARD]

Apple's Watch is not revolutionary, it's just a very good product ( as in : the best smartwatch out there ) and that's perfectly OK. The problem is that with Apple, there seem to be only binary positions in arguments : either it's a revolution, or it's a total fail. I don't know any other company in the world where this absurdity applies. There is a whole range of degrees between "Revolution" and "Fail" ( I know that is not your position, but there are a majority of arguments here that are like that )

I agree whole heartedly with this. A company can make a product that makes a nice tidy profit and drives customers to them. It doesn't have to be their best selling product ever to be successful. (Obviously if it is then I'm sure they'd be more than happy).

And lastly, I totally disagree with your assertion : " Additionally, wristwatches, seem retrograde for a company that did more to wipe out the need for wristwatches than anyone else. Smartphones are what people check the time with." 90% of people I know have a watch on their wrist. Maybe it's an age or a cultural thing, but I see far more people on the street wearing a watch than not.

.
This does seem strange to me too. I've seen lots of people say they haven't bothered with a watch since owning a smartphone on this forum so I guess it is "a thing". I've never thought of ditching my watch as a quick look to my wrist for the time (and maybe date) has always been too convenient in comparison to digging out a phone. Plus a watch makes a nice accessory to wear for aesthetic value.

It seems to me that the Watch is a companion device for the iPhone and so providing a convenient "mirror" for your iPhone's time display is just a convenient extension to save you having to get your phone out. Chuck in the other features it offers and you have much more than a retrograde product.

 

[OoOOOOOOoooOOOO]

i would like to know how much it costs apple to make each of these fluorelastermer (sp?) bands.

like for the iphone 6, i bought the leather case, (which is really nice even if the quality isnt that great), but for $45 i know it was mostly profits for apple.

 

[Preclaro_tipo]

iTray

 

[MrXiro]

Really, alienating.... So, those students will buy worse phones just because they heard through the grape vine Apple gave a few watches to a few high profile people? You think most students are that connected to, care enough about, this kind of information?

The only people who would be thus alienated would be people who couch their identity in being: anti-conformists, anarchists or very leftists and techno geeks. The usual suspects of Apple haters btw; many of these already don't own anything Apple and never will.

Everyone else won't give a flying hoot. The fact Apple products have always been seen as elitists and overpriced by some group (this is an ancient complaint, I remember it from the 1980s to even the early 2000s), and more and more students buy them proves just that.

You do know that young folks of means actually buy a lot of very expensive branded wares of all kind don't you. How do you think brands like Lulu-lemon and Gap made their billions?

The option for those "alienated" people would be cheaply built, poorly thought out, Android or windows devices, built by multi-national corporations with often worse environmental or labor records; not exactly something they'd want to endorse either.

I think you yourself are out of touch with those students if you think they give a crap about all of this, which is based on a few sightings (which 99% won't have seen or heard about) and a few more fashion magazine expose (which is not directed at them at all).

The focus of the two announcements were all mostly on the watches function and Apple's current TV commercials and the internet, is what most would have seen. All of these show a classy useful product of very high quality. That's the message of teens, college students that are the actual targets for this will have got from it.

What's with the aggressive response to my opinion?

----------

Design shows like this show things that are coming in the future, not things that are already here.

----------



What hate? My nephew says he'll probably get one. He works in IT for a medical services company. I would be very disappointed if Apple became yet another company who only cares about what kids want.

There is a ton of "hate" for the Apple Watch out there. Mostly from people who don't understand why smart watches exist but they attack the Apple Watch first... heck in this very thread there is a post about how the Apple Watch "is the most useless device Apple has made" or something like that.

I don't know how people on here and the internet in general can totally misconstrue what others say... but I never said "catering to kids only" but catering to the high end a bit too much. I can get the celebrity endorsements; you see your heroes wearing the "bling" and you want it.

But going in the direction of a fashion show and fashion magazines just feels like the wrong move IMO. It doesn't have that same "Think Different" feel I've come to expect from Apple, more of a "think conformist".

 

[OoOOOOOOoooOOOO]

there's a whole subset of apple users who are fashion-challenged, and i get why this foray into the fashion world is an affront to them. but apple has always been stylish, and since wearable tech is the future, apple had to tap on the fashion industry. no one is going to wear a fugly watch (well, actually, people do wear the pebble, so i retract that statement), so they had to make it sexy. but the style of the watch is only one facet of what makes the watch appeal to the masses.

and high end fashion is not about conforming. it's about exclusivity and quality. that's why the prices are jacked and there's so many combinations for personalization.

 

[friedmud]

and high end fashion is not about conforming. it's about exclusivity and quality. that's why the prices are jacked and there's so many combinations for personalization.

Agreed. People have high-end fashion mixed up with Gap and JC Penney's.

High end fashion is almost the exact opposite of "conforming"... each piece is completely unique and the prices reflect that.

That's why they were showing off these uniquely colored bands at a fashion shindig... people into high-end fashion crave uniqueness and without something "exclusive" to show Apple wouldn't have much of a leg to stand on in such a crowd.

To elgrecomac .... ummm... the story was about the watch bands. That's why we're discussing them. Look at other Watch stories where more is talked about than the bands.

Also: in lieu of any of us having actually used the watch one of the primary things to discuss is the aesthetics of it!

 

[flat five]

High end fashion is almost the exact opposite of "conforming"... each piece is completely unique and the prices reflect that.

no they're not.
the pieces being worn/displayed on the runway are unique and they're designed as a sort of highlight/summary of the season's line but you typically don't walk into Chanel and buy the $25k thing Cara Delevingne was wearing on the runway.

---
edit- I live in (arguably) the fashion capital of the world.. and you don't see this:

...when walking down the street.. you do see the models and plenty of fashion conscious people out there but rarely to never are they wearing the custom stuff from the runways.

 

[neonart]

These posts point out how little rebuttal there is to the criticisms being leveled against the watch. To say that there have always been doubters is dismissive and just makes me more certain there is almost no case to be made for this product...

No matter what has been said positive about the watch, the "haters gonna hate, hate, hate". I've been an Apple user since 1993 and have seen the pattern so many times.

In 1998 when the iMac came out it was the same thing. It was dissed as just a pretty computer that was limited and did nothing any other computer couldn't do. A flop. $1299! Crazy. There was nothing compelling you could say in 1998 about an iMac that would change the views of the haters. I'm glad to say I had a first gen iMac and loved it. The iMac changed how computers where viewed industrywide. Apple has sold millions and millions of iMacs, including to those who bashed them in the beginning.

In 2001 the iPod was BASHED for not having anything new or great. See thread 500. $399! Crazy. There was nothing compelling you could say in 2001 to change the view of the haters. I'm glad to say I enjoyed my first gen iPod, and all the ones after that until today. The iPod, needless to say, became one of the most influential tech products of our generation. Apple has sold millions and millions of iPods, including to those who bashed them at the beginning.

In 2007 the iPhone was said to be too expensive, people dissed the lack of a keyboard. Many said the iPhone did nothing their old phone and iPod could't do. They didn't want to get online with a tiny screen that didn't even do Flash. It wasn't Windows CE, it wasn't Palm. $599 out of pocket! No way! I'm glad to have been 3rd in line at ATT on release day for the iPhone back then, a 4s in 2011, and a 6 last year. Apple has sold a few iPhones since the first one and completely changed the industry.

In 2010 the iPad was also hated by the haters. Who needed that!? That's what a laptop is for. Thats what the iPhone is for said the naysayers who had previously said they wouldn't use the iPhone to surf the web. $499! Crazy. Netbooks are better and cheaper. My wife loved her 1st Gen iPad and we love our iPad Airs. There was nothing you could tell a detractor then that would have made it compelling. Apple has also sold a few of those. Netbooks are gone, and all manufactures make an iPad clone.

And here we are. 2015. The Apple Watch starts at $349. Less than any of those previous products, including the iPod back in 2001. It's a fashionable watch. A portable music player. It can make calls & send text messages from your wrist even if your phone is in your pants in the dirty laundry upstairs. It can give you directions, pay for stuff, open doors, control your TV, check you in at hotels and airports, start you car, measure your heart rate, track your exercise, and thats just before the App ecosystem really takes off. (Have some foresight here.)

But to the haters, it's too expensive, it needs an iPhone, it just another smart watch, it's ugly, the battery doesn't last long enough, it's just a fashion accessory, only the apple faithful will buy it, etcetera.

Well, here we go again.

 

[Datalinks]

a transparent one would be fun

 

[Gameboy70]

I guess my main point is that it is ironic that Apple is finally doing a fashion focused marketing campaign after years of what I considered misguided analysis that the iPhone was selling based on it being fashionable.I always thought that Apple didn't even pull out the big guns in trying to make iPhone fashionable.

I don't think the iPhone had anything to do with the Watch's marketing. Apple chose the fashion circuit for the Watch because it's their first product that consumers actually wear. Even without buying into the "clothes make the man" ethos, it's obvious that what we wear influences how we're perceived, and that on some level, wearables need to have a cachet that products you leave in your pocket or use at home don't require. Companies that focus exclusively on a wearable's functionality at the expense of it's social connotations will have another Google Glass on their hands.

No matter how successful Apple is at selling computers and consumer electronics, there will always be a larger, insatiable market of customers who like to products that enhance their appearance like nice shoes, shirts, and jewelyy.

 

[doelcm82]

What you are quoting is the Jobs -> Scully -> (bozos) -> Jobs transitions that is Apple's history. Apple survived the IBM PC launch keeping themselves exclusive having the capital to make the Mac. Scully, wanted broad consumer while Steve wanted to stay high end (unlike what the Jobs movie said) and Steve lost.

I guess since the dancing models in the iPod commercials are just in silhouette, you can imagine them any way you like. You see them as haute couture, I see them as ordinary kids having a good time with Apple products.

 

[Gameboy70]

This lead to glorified accountants and other commodity type CEOs taking the color out of the logo. At one time, having a gray scale Apple logo outside your office was a sign your were disappointed with the commodity approach Apple was taking at the time.

When Steve came back, he considered the Apple brand the highest value commodity the company had and not the technology. Thus, the high end image and brushed metal look on almost all the products.

IIRC, the monochrome logo transition happened in 1998 under Jobs 2.0.

 

[macs4nw]

No matter what has been said positive about the watch, the "haters gonna hate, hate, hate". I've been an Apple user since 1993 and have seen the pattern so many times.

In 1998 when the iMac came out it was the same thing. It was dissed as just a pretty computer that was limited and did nothing any other computer couldn't do. A flop. $1299! Crazy. There was nothing compelling you could say in 1998 about an iMac that would change the views of the haters. I'm glad to say I had a first gen iMac and loved it. The iMac changed how computers where viewed industrywide. Apple has sold millions and millions of iMacs, including to those who bashed them in the beginning.

In 2001 the iPod was BASHED for not having anything new or great. See thread 500. $399! Crazy. There was nothing compelling you could say in 2001 to change the view of the haters. I'm glad to say I enjoyed my first gen iPod, and all the ones after that until today. The iPod, needless to say, became one of the most influential tech products of our generation. Apple has sold millions and millions of iPods, including to those who bashed them at the beginning.

In 2007 the iPhone was said to be too expensive, people dissed the lack of a keyboard. Many said the iPhone did nothing their old phone and iPod could't do. They didn't want to get online with a tiny screen that didn't even do Flash. It wasn't Windows CE, it wasn't Palm. $599 out of pocket! No way! I'm glad to have been 3rd in line at ATT on release day for the iPhone back then, a 4s in 2011, and a 6 last year. Apple has sold a few iPhones since the first one and completely changed the industry.

In 2010 the iPad was also hated by the haters. Who needed that!? That's what a laptop is for. Thats what the iPhone is for said the naysayers who had previously said they wouldn't use the iPhone to surf the web. $499! Crazy. Netbooks are better and cheaper. My wife loved her 1st Gen iPad and we love our iPad Airs. There was nothing you could tell a detractor then that would have made it compelling. Apple has also sold a few of those. Netbooks are gone, and all manufactures make an iPad clone.

And here we are. 2015. The Apple Watch starts at $349. Less than any of those previous products, including the iPod back in 2001. It's a fashionable watch. A portable music player. It can make calls & send text messages from your wrist even if your phone is in your pants in the dirty laundry upstairs. It can give you directions, pay for stuff, open doors, control your TV, check you in at hotels and airports, start you car, measure your heart rate, track your exercise, and thats just before the App ecosystem really takes off. (Have some foresight here.)

But to the haters, it's too expensive, it needs an iPhone, it just another smart watch, it's ugly, the battery doesn't last long enough, it's just a fashion accessory, only the apple faithful will buy it, etcetera.

Well, here we go again.

Right on my friend. Sometimes I think it's probably a waste of time to reply to the haters because that time could be better spent exchanging opinions with those that have well-thought out and reasonable reservations, rather than blind or dismissive viewpoints.

 

[Al Downie]

Whatever happened to Apple?

Watchstraps?

Seriously?

 

[jagolden]

the only colors i need are black, grey, cognac, and oxblood. all these dayglow colors are hideous.

C'mon, live a little! Show some color!
Those are great for the boardroom, but...

Can't wait to 'sport' the lime green version! Could be a little off-putting to some...natures way of saying "do not touch".

 

[robeddie]

You're getting excited over a unapologetically plastic WATCH BAND! Is the watch so UNcompelling as a device that there is fervor over a band it is attached to? Come on everyone, calm-the-hell down.

If I were the buyer of this device, which, in this beta version I am not, I'd be worried that Apple is drawing your eyes and attention AWAY from the device. Why is that? is there so little there in a $350-$17,000 device that they and their incredibly effect marketing dept (the best in the world), got you all talking about 2 pieces of plastic. I am the only one seeing the silliness factor here?

Bang! Agreed 100%. People here are getting 'excited' by two strips of colored plastic. At this point, it's almost as if this is a joke Apple site making fun of Apple fans.

 

[Gameboy70]

These posts point out how little rebuttal there is to the criticisms being leveled against the watch. To say that there have always been doubters is dismissive and just makes me more certain there is almost no case to be made for this product.

It's only dismissive if you abstract the criticisms leveled against the Watch as mere "naysaying". The rebuttals to the actual criticisms have more often than not been more specific: that the iPad was criticized for being "just" a big iPod Touch or didn't do anything people couldn't already do with their laptops; that the iPod had less space than a [Creative] Nomad or was overpriced compared to portable CD players.

The one and only case for a smartwatch is that it's more convenient than a device that sits in your pocket—the same reason wristwatches overtook pocket watches. Look at how many people keep their phone out (in their hands or on the table) when seated just to avoid having to pull it out and put it back constantly. This behavior is almost entirely unconscious. If you asked them if the find pulling out their phone repeatedly to be onerous, most of them would say no. This is no different than the pre-iPad era when users were so inured to PC boot-up times that they scoffed at the need for instant-on devices.

I've been using smartphones for over 10 years, but I've never stopped using a wristwatch despite the timepiece in my pocket. Checking the time with a glance is just more convenient. It's not a question of whether I "need" a watch. The same principle applies to notifications, reminders, etc.