1.3" and 1.5" display size incorrect
I will argue that for a new product category, Apple is indeed doubling down on secrecy as very little makes sense regarding the quoted traditional small display size:
- traditonal is not in Apple's dictionary of disruption and entering a new product category
- traditional is not cause for Apple' trademark of surprise, delight and wow
- traditional form factor was built centuries ago for telling time, not displaying modern apps and contextual data
- small screen produces baby software with limited usability, operability and poor experience
Even if Apple's main focus is on feeding health and fitness data into other devices and not functioning as a standalone device capable of presenting its collected data well by itself then there is still a BIG problem. How do you convince the new generation, teenagers, that a wearable device is so cool as to wear it on their wrists? Tim Cook specifically mentioned this at a D conference and the answer is definitely not a traditional form factor with a tiny display and attachable bands.
I believe Apple has already shown us its way in its discovered patent for an interactive bracelet made of one flexible display designed according to the same template as the iPhone. This time, Apple identified as the low value part not the buttons, but the attachable bands. The high value part again is the display so it will be expanded at the expense of the low value parts, while still capable of working the same function, holding the device on the wrist.
With the futuristic looks, possibilities for fashion customization through software and contents viewable from any angle and wrist orientation, and a large viewable area allowing proper apps without a magnifier, it ticks all trademarks of a new Apple category which did not exist before. One capable to reinvent an existing category, surprise and wow, and work like magic.
