Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Just because a new model is released every does not mean you are forced to spring for the latest. It is not as though traditional watchmakers are only releasing a new model once every generation. But there's no doubt there is much curiosity surrounding future model releases.

Right. But you know as well as I do, when Apple Watch 2 comes out with even more sensors, and Apple Watch 3 comes out with even more sensors, what will happen. It's a lose/lose game. You can't use the original iPhone these days for even the most basic of tasks. The original apple watch will soon be in this class. Even if you wanted to avoid the cycle of conspicuous consumption associated with technology these days, you wouldn't be able to unfortunately.

Also, traditional watchmakers don't ask you to purchase iterations of their product. You buy one, and in most cases you are done.
 
Nice! The idea of keeping my watch/activity monitor on for months at a time is actually appealing. And it looks cool.
 
I honestly can't tell you what I wanted the apple watch to be, but what they are making isn't it, at least not the version 1 watch. I had hoped to be blown away and was, and am disappointed in the watch. It will sell millions.

Just my $.02.

One problem I see is people's expectations. The naysayers want a watch that looks like a Rolex and has a full phone, GPS, Bluetooth, NFC Payment radio, accelerometer, gyroscope, and flash hard drive, and is waterproof to 200m.

Those folks are going to be waiting a long time for the technology to catch up.
 
One problem I see is people's expectations. The naysayers want a watch that looks like a Rolex and has a full phone, GPS, Bluetooth, NFC Payment radio, accelerometer, gyroscope, and flash hard drive, and is waterproof to 200m.

Those folks are going to be waiting a long time for the technology to catch up.

The LG Watch Urbane LTE is awfully close to your list:

urbane_lte_specs.png
 
software software software

its all about the software

Exactly. That second watch is a superb idea. Subtle to the point of actually being invisible as a smart watch, which is very cool. IMHO the watch form factor is too small to ever really replace your phone. You'll always need to take it out often anyway.

The key is getting the software right. Skipping the UI on the watch itself frees up for a better UI on the phone, huge increase in battery life, and more room in the watch, as well as more R&D energy, put in more useful things than a 1" screen, like more sensors, smarter interfaces with the host phone etc.

I think that no matter what, it is going to be frustrating to manipulate the Apple Watch UI on that small screen. I'm not convinced that most people won't revert back to doing almost everything with the phone anyway.

Having smart components inside a traditional watch is actually a really good idea. You accomplish the task while not sacrificing the look. I personally think the smart watches that are coming to market are too bulky and ugly. But put some components in a slimmer, more traditional time piece and I may be persuaded to actually get one. Good work Swiss.

Yup. When you think about it, it is a very Applesque idea. Really good idea. If given the choice of a great looking traditional watch with all the same sensors and smooth phone interface as the Apple Watch, I would choose that one any day.

There seems to be a smell of fear from some watch-makers that they will be obsolete for some reason. They won't. Not to mention, they are mechanical companies that are about to compete with hardware and software designers. It's like a bicycle maker deciding to make airplanes. Same end goal (from here to there), but totally different in every way (I just LOL'ed at myself when I remembered the wright brothers)

All companies in all industries need to evolve in order to stay in existence and thrive. The rate of that evolution is of course different in different industries, but it is still there.

I would be on board. A traditional watch with smart functionality would be way more appealing to me. I own several watches so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

I agree completely as noted above. Apple must have also have analysed this approach and rejected it for making cartoon smiley faces instead... :p

That 'Objectives' interface looks strikingly familiar…
Image

Good. Apple ususally does a pretty good job with these things, so being inspired by their designs isn't a bad thing at all...but they also aren't the first ones to use this type of radial dial either.

----------


How big is this watch? 48mm? Looks great...

----------

One problem I see is people's expectations. The naysayers want a watch that looks like a Rolex and has a full phone, GPS, Bluetooth, NFC Payment radio, accelerometer, gyroscope, and flash hard drive, and is waterproof to 200m.

Those folks are going to be waiting a long time for the technology to catch up.

Don't forget week-long battery life!
 
O

Which begs the question: Buy the Gen1 AppleWatch, or wait until cellular functionality is included so it's a standalone device...?

I forgot to mention multi-day battery life and iOS compatibility so I can stay within my beloved ecosystem.

Does it need standalone functionality eg 3G or 4g lte? Could many get by with wifi and some secure iCloud sync. After all us apple users don't talk to people unless they're on iMessage and FaceTime right? haha
 
Does it need standalone functionality eg 3G or 4g lte? Could many get by with wifi and some secure iCloud sync. After all us apple users don't talk to people unless they're on iMessage and FaceTime right? haha

According to most of the naysayers here, if it isn't a stand alone Dick Tracy-style device, waterproof, and have multi-day battery life, its a non-starter. Since I still have an iPhone 5s and plenty of retail locations in my area are installing NFC, I'm probably going to bite. ...If they'll ever tell us how much they cost!
 
Now introducing 'smart' components into traditional timepieces is a very neat idea. This just might get me onto the wearable tech bandwagon everyone appears to be on nowadays.
 
You can't use the original iPhone these days for even the most basic of tasks.

The most basic of tasks would be to use it as a phone, and to send and receive text messages or email, browse the interweb and play music. Are you saying that it cannot be used for this?
 
The most basic of tasks would be to use it as a phone, and to send and receive text messages or email, browse the interweb and play music. Are you saying that it cannot be used for this?

Yes. I am saying exactly that. for one, cellular technology has evolved, necessitating in the need for more than EDGE. So already you're now required to carry a second device to provide wifi.

Also, the last OS supported by the original iphone is 3.1.3. So yes, it's near impossible to do anything with the orignial iphone. Same with the original iPad. The Apple watch will soon be in the same category.
 
I agree. What we've seen from Apple, so far, looks like something a child would put on while they are playing.
People who MAY be convinced to start wearing a watch won't do it if the watch looks hideous, which describes what we've seen.

You're falling into the all too common trap of assuming everyone has the same tastes and priorities as yourself. What is considered attractive varies from person to person. As does how much physical appearance is even weighed in a purchasing decision verses functionality.
 
The Watch is the complete opposite of the iPhone, as far as surpassed expectations. With the phone, it was more:

View attachment 532023

With the watch, it was less in some ways, and in some ways, a repeat:

View attachment 532022



Yep. That's what is so heavily ironic about the entire Watch design: that Jon Ive is supposed to be so against skeuomorphism.

Yet Apple made it about as skeuomorphic as you can get by bringing in horological experts for inspiration, designing it to look like a wristwatch, naming it "Watch", spending a lot of time on fashion bands, and even throwing in a totally skeuomorphic rotating crown.

A lot of people expected a breakout futuristic, unique design. Instead, Ive came out with the same old rounded rectangle motif that he clearly feels most comfortable doing... and then covered it in a skeuomorphic patina to make it even a safer design.

Yes, they'll sell millions. But it is a safe product, not a bold one.
If it looked like the top left design, then I would buy it.
 
The Watch is the complete opposite of the iPhone, as far as surpassed expectations. With the phone, it was far more than was expected:

View attachment 532023

With the watch, it was less in some ways, and in some ways, a repeat design:

View attachment 532022



Yep. That's what is so heavily ironic about the entire Watch design: that Jon Ive is supposed to be so against skeuomorphism.

Yet Apple made it about as skeuomorphic as you can get by bringing in horological experts for inspiration, designing it to look like a wristwatch, naming it "Watch", spending a lot of time on fashion bands, and even throwing in a totally skeuomorphic rotating crown.

A lot of people expected a breakout futuristic, unique design. Instead, Ive came out with the same old rounded rectangle motif that he clearly feels most comfortable doing... and then covered it in a skeuomorphic patina to make it even a safer design.

Yes, they'll sell millions. But it is a safe product, not a bold one.


Great post! I've felt the same since Apple showcased the Watch last Fall.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.