no, he's making a good point, for some of us who are fans, but don't worship apple.
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.
Swiss Watchmakers Rebuff Apple's Partnership and Hiring Advances
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
no, he's making a good point, for some of us who are fans, but don't worship apple.
A CNN video on "The Future of Smartwatches":
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/tech/2014/03/27/future-of-smartwatches-orig-mg.cnn.html
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/tech/2014/03/27/future-of-smartwatches-orig-mg.cnn.html
I don't get what you're saying. My mother tongue's french. It doesn't change the fact that they have stolen the design once, so they can't be trusted by swiss watchers.
Dell is a weak comparison to mac's. There are far better comparisons than dell, they are mediocre at best and overpriced for the quality control and service. I guess you missed this post of mine with a sager at exoticpc which is far better than Dell and easy to upgrade with upgradable graphics card. Check these spec's against a 2000.00 macbook pro, from my other post:
Again I like mac's, but there is no comparison in price vs spec's. Since dell is not top notch and apple is lets please compare apple to a top notch pc. I say again we are saving up for macbook pro 15's, and I have a 5 year old dell studio 1555 I have replaced everytihg in except for processor and memory (dell sucks), but I will not try to claim the price is the same between a good pc and apple. There ARE reasons to go with apple though, no denying. Price is not one of them.
Also, most of apple's components are the same as used by pc's. For motherboards foxconn makes a lot of different mobo's and they are not even the best. The case on a macbook pro is MUCH better than most pc makers use though for one thing and I think apple's quality control is better. Not to mention osx and their service. Those things are mostly what stand out, most parts are the same though. Really OSX and their service is what puts them above most, if not all.
In fact I did (miss it). Does it happen to come with built in photo, movie, music, jukebox, integrated calendar, mail & address and mapping apps?
Exactly.
Last edited:
Look at the spec's, it's better equipped with 2.8 haswell (vs 2.6 mbp highest option), 2 hard drives including 1ssd, better graphics card, blu ray, 9 in 1 cardreader, than the 3300.00 mbp and there are options to upgrade higher than that. At 1900 it's not compared to the 2000.00 mbp but the 3300. at best.
The Apple apple app's are not worth 1400.00 plus. Not remotely as pretty much all of that stuff can be had, and better, for free. On my iphone I use almost none of the apple apps, I doubt that will change on a mbp.
Like I say, there are reasons to get a macbook pro but being even close to the same price is not remotely one of them and apple's app's are way to weak to make up for more than a few bucks of difference.
OSX and the support as I said above. If I could run osx on that laptop I would in a heartbeat.
Apple must really like the swiss to try this again...
First they got busted over the clock face in iOS, and it looks like their just not learning anything...
I bet Apple will need to pay Swiss again for some technical botch up...
If everyone would just patent stuff BEFORE beginning to do/make anything, there would be no court issues with patent infringement..
Trouble is, everyone wants to get out of the gate first. "We can worry about patents after."
That's not how it works... And it's no surprise every company is learning the hard way...... I would rather every company patent something, and delay, knowing, then to just dive in, only to be sued later and pay $$ in court fees any day..
If people just thought beforehand.
First they got busted over the clock face in iOS, and it looks like their just not learning anything...
I bet Apple will need to pay Swiss again for some technical botch up...
If everyone would just patent stuff BEFORE beginning to do/make anything, there would be no court issues with patent infringement..
Trouble is, everyone wants to get out of the gate first. "We can worry about patents after."
That's not how it works... And it's no surprise every company is learning the hard way...... I would rather every company patent something, and delay, knowing, then to just dive in, only to be sued later and pay $$ in court fees any day..
If people just thought beforehand.
My pun was more about Nintendo not willing to release any games on iOS. They are not being quick at realizing that people will not buy dedicated gaming console anymore.
Because almost all their games would suck without proper gaming controls and mobile controls just aren't there yet.
Also, they are a vertically integrated developer - have you ever expected Apple to release OS X for generic/3rd party hardware?
Pretty much anyone who is even slightly more than a casual gamer will have a console or a sufficiently powered PC.
I... have to agree here. I mean, age-wise I sit right in-between Gen X and Y, so I can see the value of a traditional watch, as well as the movement away from them; I work with, in, and around technology; I've been a tech-and-gadget-geek for as long as I can remember... but that's also included various watches. Granted I haven't worn a "casual" watch regularly for a good while, but that's mostly due to the fact I spend most of my day on a keyboard and I end up taking the watch off anyway for comfort. Despite that, I do sometimes like to put one on; if I'm dressing up for something, I definitely pull out a nice watch my dad left me and wear it with a suit. It's just as much a jewelry/fashion piece as it is a practical technology.
I suppose there's an argument that no one carries pocket watches anymore, but they're still made & collected. And in a lot of ways, the cell phone's "watch" functionality is basically a 21st century pocket watch. So there's no reason a smart watch shouldn't be considered, nor is there any reason to think that traditional watches are "vanishing" or "obsolete" or whatever. For *plenty* of people, a device that tells time / provides a simple alarm / offers a timer functionality on a battery that will last for months/years is more practical than a hyper-technical device that will likely need to be charged every few days or so.
Blackberry, Nokia and Microsoft dismissed the iPhone and look what happened. Two of them went to the wall and Microsoft are too big to fall but suffered a good beating.
Swatch are making a grave mistake....
Swatch are making a grave mistake....
It takes decades for an individual to develop type II diabetes. And most of them won't develop it anyway. And cancers, and bad driving habits, and neurological diseases kill more people than diabetes.
My point still stands: what would be the point of any wearable that would require being worn for decades so it could make reliable statistics?
You're the one claiming it is cheaper than a Nexus 5, YOU demonstrate it.
The RRP in China is about $330. $20 cheaper than the Nexus 5 but it is being released months after the Nexus 5 using the same technology (when there isn't the same premium on the components).
Besides that, pretty much everywhere else in the world it is more expensive than the Nexus 5.
Last edited:
Where did I oppose to these facts? Sure the number is large, as is US population.
Average diagnosis age for diabetes surely has decreased, probably thanks to increasingly bad eating and exercising patterns, but where do you prove my point wrong?
Diabetes death rate: 20.8 / 100,000
Cancer death rate: 172.8 / 100,000
Heart diseases death rate: 178.1 / 100,000
My point hasn't changed. Why keep track of what is essentially a symptom? Why focus on just one minor part of a complex equation? Knowing poor sleep leads to overeating both in children and adults, why not use the wearable as an actimeter, reminding the user to be especially cautious when choosing portions when he or she may not have had a good night sleep before? Same goes for exercising.
What would be different is when wearables integrated more factors of the health equation so as to avoid monitoring the wearer as a perpetually diseased individual. FWIW, I can eat whatever I want, regardless of the amount of fat, sugar, sodium, without worrying about gaining weight or developing diabetes. My father can, as did his. I take blood exams from time to time, and nothing wrong on pressure (just a bit low), glucose, fat, or any other measurement related to liver condition. I can be considered slightly underweight with a BMI hovering around 18.9 and a comparatively small stature. With a month regimen of daily McDonald diet (more than 3000 calories a day, no exercising, my expense estimated at around 1800) I did once in order to increase my BMI, I barely reached 19. True, I didn't follow on because it was becoming very expensive (as is McDo for what you get), and didn't really taste that good.
What we do have a problem with in the family is arthritis and cancer. Would a watch be able to measure that? So just blood sugar measurement wouldn't cut it when it comes to measuring probability of one developing a chronic condition.