Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Report Tempers iWatch Expectations, Device May Have 'Simpler' Technological Capabilities

That mockup looks more like an iBracelet than an iWatch. Frankly, it's hideous. I stopped wearing watches like 20 years ago. They always seemed to make my wrists hurt over time. It's not much bother to pull an iPhone or iPod touch out of my pocket and glance at it (more like a pocket watch) and my wrists have no pressure on them. I'd have zero use for an iWatch. Maybe they could make an iHat or iGloves or even iUndies. Who wouldn't want music playing up their private areas, after all? :rolleyes:

Seriously, just sticking an 'i" in front of something and then adding more music playback devices for every clothing apparatus seems pointless. They need to start thinking more function appropriate.

Frankly, something like an iFridge would probably be more useful with Siri integration. Siri, print out my shopping list based on the regulars that are low.... Scratch that. Order them from Delivery2Home and have them delivered tomorrow between 4 and 5PM. Overkill? Maybe. Useful? Potentially very if it can detect what's in your fridge with sensors, etc. and learn what you like plus voice ordering, etc. Maybe it wouldn't sell in droves right away, but if it was an extra $800 feature, I'd be it'd sell in the long run if it worked well enough.

They should be aiming for an intelligent house in the long run, kind of like the Star Trek Next Generation Enterprise where you can talk to the computer anywhere in the house and it will take care of whatever with any device connected to the network (fridge, washer, dryer, thermostat, security, garage door, etc. etc. and I don't mean just basic on/off type stuff, but integrated sensors and feedback (like the fridge example). It should know where you are in the house and who you are as well. Your son might get, "You are out of Gatorade, would you like me to re-order?" whereas it might ask you on Starbucks coffee drinks or something. Smart pantries, robot lawn mowing...most things could be automated or semi-automated. I've seen lots of parts to such systems, but very few whole house solutions that didn't cost a small fortune or which were more of a pain to use than just doing it yourself. It needs to be whole house (and remote) and voice automated (reliably) or it becomes a chore rather than a savings.
 
rumplestiltskin said:
Maybe let's have a few alarm features (with SNOOZE capabilities - something that my iPhone can't do with a 3rd-party app
Click to expand...

Please excuse me if I'm misunderstanding as perhaps the third party thing is referring to additional features, but if u were to hit the volume or power button whilst the alarm is going off, the alarm will snooze for 10 min :)

If you were being sarcastic, then MY BAD #
 
Please, no. I'm likely to purchase it anyway (sigh...) but the rumor/mockup posted last week was everything I was hoping for. :(
 
goMac said:
I'm not sure why people are asking for a music player on this. Why? Are you going to be plugging headphones into your watch? What's wrong with your phone?
Click to expand...

It would control your phone. Ever go jogging with your phone in your hand? Sucks.
 
cocky jeremy said:
It's an iBracelet, not an iWatch. lol.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm the minority when I say this is similar to what I was expecting/hoping for. At least the idea of it... So many here are posting they'd rather have an actual "real watch" form-factor and I absolutely loath that idea in regard to what I want for the iWatch.

bretm said:
It would control your phone. Ever go jogging with your phone in your hand? Sucks.
Click to expand...

Yes. My phone always bounces out of my basketball shorts. :''''(
 
The two main factors that will make or break the iwatch will be the price and the battery life.

If it costs only $99 than it doesn't have to do much to succeed. If it costs $299 though it has the be something special, which I don't really doubt because this is Apple we're talking about here. Also battery life has to be a week at least! Nobody wants to charge a watch everyday.
 
Wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't a stand alone device.

If it tethered to iPhone - less components required, therefore cheaper to build and sell, and resulting in better battery life.

Samsung Smartphone tries to be a smart phone on your wrist and as a result has a battery life of 24 hours. The Sony smart watch fares better, but still, only 3 days. Pretty pitiful.

If you want an iWatch with decent battery life it will definitely not have cell connectivity - that will kill battery life - particularly when considering any battery is going to be very small and having a sim card will only make the watch larger. Instead, iWatch will get its connectivity from an iPhone, via BT4.0 and have better battery life with a slim profile.


goMac said:
Except a wireless headphone sort of system (BT2.0) is going to suck up way way too much power on a watch.
Click to expand...

Why BT2.0 when there are BT3 headsets available?
 
Last edited:
I was really excited about the glucose reading, blood pressure, and heart rate monitoring. Probably will skip it without any other those capabilities.
 
nooaah said:
I was really excited about the glucose reading, blood pressure, and heart rate monitoring. Probably will skip it without any other those capabilities.
Click to expand...

These would be dream features but it doesn't look like the tech is available yet. Hopefully someday.

----------
iBreatheApple said:
Please, no. I'm likely to purchase it anyway (sigh...) but the rumor/mockup posted last week was everything I was hoping for. :(
Click to expand...

So you'd buy it anyway even if it's not what you wanted? :confused:
 
Well, if it is a standalone device, wouldn't you need to buy a data plan for it. Who would pay for a data plan on a watch or wristband? Or, who would pay for two data plans, one for a smartphone and another for a watch? Seems like it almost has to be tethered to a smartphone and not standalone.
 
Apple's overall focus with the iWatch is said to be on the experience rather than the technology. With the iWatch and its accompanying health-related app, Apple aims to make health tracking "a mass market behavior" by increasing its mass market appeal and moving the concept beyond something that interests just "data-obsessed" people.
Click to expand...

I think that's a fundamentally bad thing. Not only that, but I don't think it'll catch on - people will buy the device because it's a new futuristic Apple gadget, but I don't think most people need to know (or care to know) the intricate metrics of their bodily processes.

This is a niche product, but most people won't get that or will overlook it and buy one anyway, which they'll end up not using and regretting. That could hurt Apple's brand in the long-term. Their brand means that there are certain types of devices Apple shouldn't make.

I get the feeling that they're under pressure to deliver the next big thing and since they're finding a full-fledged TV too hard (politically, with all of the content deals required), they're going for this. The first couple of generations will likely sell a lot of units, but after that I think it will be a drain on their brand.
 
firewood said:
Getting FDA approval for anything falling under medical device regulations may be way too slow for a fashion device/accessory that has to be shipped before it goes out of fashion, or even gets copied to flood the market in countries where medical device laws are not well enforced, before the FDA even finishes looking at it.

Maybe there should be a fast track for these products, similar to process for vaccines for the latest flu.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's nothing a fat cheque can't solve.
 
It's a ring around your wrist with a needle that dispenses psychotropic drugs , drugs that make you follow Apple like a bunch of rabid dogs, insulting every other product out there with some "Chip on the shoulder' commentary about how ..."Apple this and Apple that" while never venturing outside your comfort bubble to see how things are outside the Eco-Dome .

That's right folks , it's not a watch, just another iPhone
 
iZac said:
Steady your expectations, people!
Click to expand...

I was thinking, you can't expect that much. But then again... how long have they been working on it!

If the guys at pebble could pull something like the steel off, anything other than an amazing product would be disappointing from Apple.
 
Mr. Gates said:
It's a ring around your wrist with a needle that dispenses psychotropic drugs , drugs that make you follow Apple like a bunch of rabid dogs, insulting every other product out there with some "Chip on the shoulder' commentary about how ..."Apple this and Apple that" while never venturing outside your comfort bubble to see how things are outside the Eco-Dome .

That's right folks , it's not a watch, just another iPhone
Click to expand...

:eek: How have you been? It's good to see you post.
 
If this iWatch will only be a watch and a body status thing, then its gonna flop. Why all the fuzz if its just another Nike+ fuelband ?
 
Just because others try to make a "watch" do everything, doesn't mean that's what apple is up to.

I've always thought an apple "iWatch" would be a smaller, simpler device, maybe not even as big as a watch (iRing?;)) that simply has a M8 co-processor, "sensors", and a mic, communicating via bluetooth LE only (no wifi, no other connectivity), it will not replace an iPhone, but work with other iOS devices (the mic will be for voice control and siri in the other device). It will be useful for personal fitness & health monitoring, and possibly for hospitals and physical therapists. It may also be a new type of remote for a new type of apple tv. This will keep the price down also.

This will not be your new iPod or iPhone...think different.

(I don't think it will look like any rendered pics I've seen here or elsewhere.)
 
Like Apple TV - Hobby category?

Looks like iWatch is heading towards "hobby" category without exciting features that can differentiate Apple from the rest. Most of the functionalities are already covered by various products albeit not in an useful and integrated fashion. Unless Apple comes out with its own easy to use implementation, it might keep it like "also" another one in thier portfolio list and cover them in future expansions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back