The Apple Watch killer app will be....

[Crosspjc]

It's interaction with homekit/car play. The Internet of things is slowly gaining momentum and will be huge once a standard has been set.

I envisage the apple watch being contextually aware. It will anticipate when you are near your house or car and give you options over locks, heating, lights even switching on your kettle.

This combined with Siri will result in a remote control for your life. The apple watch will always be on your wrist so there will be no hunting around for your phone.

This is how I see the apple watch changing my life.

 

[maflynn]

This is how I see the apple watch changing my life.

It could but that level of functionality doesn't exist, car makers will need to integrate apple services into the cars and developers and/or companies will have to roll our homekit products. So far we've not really seen much.

 

[Piggie]

And what about the vast majority of product that are not compatible?

Will they in time all use a different standard?

Or is no one really THAT interested?

We've had automatic lights, Automatic curtains, and loads more gadgets for years, even decades for some things.
But in the real world, people still come home from work, unlock the door with a key, turn the light switch on by hand, open the fridge, take something out, put it in the oven and cook it.

Sure, you could NOW live in a very automatic world, but truth is, most people really cant be bothered and it's just less to think about and far more simple to just do things the way we always have. With the odd gadget or appliance to make like easier here and there.

That's what's happened in the real world despite all the fancy stuff you COULD buy.

 

[Crosspjc]

I would agree to an extent but the cost entry barrier for these "toys" was too high. Plus the refresh rate of such items are over a long period of time.

New products are becoming available to the main stream such as NEST. I would compare it to double glazing which has become the norm. The Internet of things will also become the norm.

 

[Piggie]

I would agree to an extent but the cost entry barrier for these "toys" was too high. Plus the refresh rate of such items are over a long period of time.

New products are becoming available to the main stream such as NEST. I would compare it to double glazing which has become the norm. The Internet of things will also become the norm.

Perhaps, but double glazing is just a better window that sits there

Humans, most of them, esp as they simply get older, and I don't mean OLD!
Still enjoy a simple life.
Kids love gadgets, but you do, to an extent grow out of that.

We will see. I can only speak from the vast majority of people I know that just carry on in their lives, with the addition of some modern convenience differences, in the same general way as people have done for ages.

We have automatic central heating, yes, that's nice.
Dishwashers and rumble driers.
We have cookers with timers on, but I've never actually known anyone who even uses that.

Do you get up and pull the curtains, or do you press a button and watch as an electric motor closes the curtains and a computer system turns the light on and off to save you using the switch.

The modern, electronic, computerised home has been here for years, decades in some respects, but for the most part, I'd say people just don't want all the complexity.

We love a real door, a real curtain pole, a real light switch.

We just want things to get rid of the nasty stuff.
washing cloths, drying cloths, cooking food quicker, heating the home.

 

[Crosspjc]

There are extremes but having a connected device which is just a better version of the original is exactly the point that the manufacturers want to push. When you come to refresh a product do you want the same or for a similar price something better.

I agree curtains and lights are not that useful but there will be other things such as locks, payments, heating and other stuff I'm not clever enough to think of.

 

[Piggie]

There are extremes but having a connected device which is just a better version of the original is exactly the point that the manufacturers want to push. When you come to refresh a product do you want the same or for a similar price something better.

I agree curtains and lights are not that useful but there will be other things such as locks, payments, heating and other stuff I'm not clever enough to think of.

I'm really not even sure there is THAT much interest in heating.

Now, you have a thermostat in the house, in the middle generally (hallway?) that you adjust if you want.

You have thermostatic valves on each radiator so you can vary how hot each one gets. Warm in the lounge, cool in the bedrooms.

And you have a timer, which turns the boiler on and off, 2 or 3 times a day.

I'd suggest for 99% of people this is fine, simple, and "just works" as it is, without any app or computer programming involved.

In the same way, Humans LOVE physical things.

It does not matter if Apple made their watch have the same power as an i7 Devil Canyon Gaming PC with triple GTX Titan graphics.
Many will still think it's just a gimmick and junk and want real gears, bits of engineered metal and springs, all working together in their watch.

We, Humans, LOVE real physical things.
And NOTHING is going to change that.

 

[drsox]

The BIG issue with all this is Reliability. Mechanical stuff works until it fails (and is usually easy to troubleshoot). Electronic stuff can fail in lots of ways and is not easily verifiable.

Just think if you have a water leak from your washer and you're entering "Shut Off Water" on your control device and waiting for the solenoid on the valve to close !

I think there's a future in allowing electronic devices to set control points but not in allowing electronic devices to actually do the controlling.

 

[Piggie]

The BIG issue with all this is Reliability. Mechanical stuff works until it fails (and is usually easy to troubleshoot). Electronic stuff can fail in lots of ways and is not easily verifiable.

Just think if you have a water leak from your washer and you're entering "Shut Off Water" on your control device and waiting for the solenoid on the valve to close !

I think there's a future in allowing electronic devices to set control points but not in allowing electronic devices to actually do the controlling.

At the end of the day this is all about companies trying to make money.

They invent something, many things, and a small selection of these inventions make their way into everyday use.

The problem now is that some people seem to be under the illusion that every new item they come out with WILL be a winner.

It's never been like that, and it never will be.

 

[Runt888]

The biggest problem with smart homes is that they would need to be very smart in order to be useful and better than what we have now. Peoples schedules and needs vary all the time, and the majority of "smart" gadgets you can get today just aren't smart enough to make them worth the hassle of buying and setting up.

I think the whole concept of an integrated smart home is something we won't see for a long time (and even then only in new homes). Rather, we will get a bunch of individual smart products that gradually replace the "dumb" versions.

For example:
1. I have a nest that I think is awesome, because I could never be bothered to figure out how to program my previous thermometer. The nest was relatively inexpensive, easy to set up and use, and appreciably better than what I had before.
2. I am looking for a smart sprinkler system that knows how much water my grass needs, how much rain we've gotten, and abides by watering restrictions. So far none of the ones on the market fit my needs, but they are getting close.
3. I would love a washer and dryer that could message me (by phone, Apple watch, etc) when the load is done.

All of the smart gadgets that I think would be useful are standalone products that use smart features to be better than the dumb versions. I don't see much value in:
1. Lights that turn themselves on - this falls under the category of needing to be much smarter to be useful. If it relies on my phone or my watch then it's worthless to anyone else. For this sort of thing to take off it would need to know when anyone is in the room, regardless of any device they may be carrying; it would need to do away with the light switch entirely.
2. Ovens that turn themselves on when you're on the way home - too much planning involved to ever become mainstream, plus how many times do you have something that can sit unrefrigerated in an oven all day?
3. Refrigerators that know what is in them - again, needs to be much smarter. If it relies on user input at all then it's not going to work.
4. Door locks, garage door openers - these fall in the category of easy to replace but not all that much better than what came before. I can see how in some situations they could be useful, but they need to be much more reliable (especially the door locks) than they are currently. And I'm not sure how much I would trust the garage door to close automatically when I drive away (plus, it would need to be smart enough to know if someone else was using the garage and wanted it open).

Sorry for getting so off topic - I've always wanted a smart home and have spent way too much time thinking about ways it could work and researching current tech.

 

[drsox]

I don't see much value in:
1. Lights that turn themselves on - this falls under the category of needing to be much smarter to be useful. If it relies on my phone or my watch then it's worthless to anyone else. For this sort of thing to take off it would need to know when anyone is in the room, regardless of any device they may be carrying; it would need to do away with the light switch entirely.

Funnily enough this is the one item that would be useful for me.
We have a house that wasn't properly restored and so there is one staircase that doesn't have adequate controls for lighting (the restorer didn't put enough wires between the three floors). So we have had to use X10 wireless switches to turn on/off the landing lights from above and below. Trouble is - they don't work reliably and proximity sensors aren't any use either. So app controlled lights would be the one thing I would pay for.

 

[Cashmonee]

It's pretty difficult to improve upon the light switch. A door knob is pretty tried and true. People won't switch these things out easily. The connected/smart home has been "coming" forever it seems, and never seems to gain traction. Why would I want to use a watch, or phone for that matter, to turn off a light. I could either open an app, which takes a few button presses, maybe some swipes too, or flick a switch. The gain is not worth the cost and effort. I think the "Internet of Things" is a bunch of crap that will never actually take off. I don't need my toaster to be online so I can make toast from my bedroom. A simple timer will perform the most useful aspect of "The Internet of Things" which is why no one will buy into it.

The other major issue with the whole idea is that people are too fickle. We don't actually want the lights to be at the same brightness at a particular time everyday. We aren't that regular.

 

[kdarling]

I envisage the apple watch being contextually aware. It will anticipate when you are near your house or car and give you options over locks, heating, lights even switching on your kettle.

Of course, it would actually be the iPhone that's aware, pushing that info to the watch to remotely display and to get simple control feedback.

 

[Crosspjc]

For now, but native apps will be available at the end of 2015. Local connection will be available over Bluetooth etc.

 

[Julien]

For now, but native apps will be available at the end of 2015. Local connection will be available over Bluetooth etc.

Yet to be seen if Apple will allow the next SDK's native 3ed party Apps access to the radios (BT specifically since the WiFi is Apple use only). I doubt they will because of battery issues.

 

[Crosspjc]

It's pretty difficult to improve upon the light switch. A door knob is pretty tried and true. People won't switch these things out easily. The connected/smart home has been "coming" forever it seems, and never seems to gain traction. Why would I want to use a watch, or phone for that matter, to turn off a light. I could either open an app, which takes a few button presses, maybe some swipes too, or flick a switch. The gain is not worth the cost and effort. I think the "Internet of Things" is a bunch of crap that will never actually take off. I don't need my toaster to be online so I can make toast from my bedroom. A simple timer will perform the most useful aspect of "The Internet of Things" which is why no one will buy into it.

The other major issue with the whole idea is that people are too fickle. We don't actually want the lights to be at the same brightness at a particular time everyday. We aren't that regular.

Some interesting hints at Apple's vision for the watch in this Tim Cook interview:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/watch/11439847/Apple-Watch-will-replace-your-car-keys-says-Tim-Cook.html

"This will be just like the iPhone: people wanted it and bought for a particular reason, perhaps for browsing, but then found out that they loved it for all sorts of other reasons."

"The watch is designed to be able to replace car keys and the clumsy, large fobs that are now used by many vehicles"

This combined with Apple Pay would mean you could leave your wallet and car keys at home. Seems a pretty good selling point to me. Battery issues would be my only concern.

 

[virginblue4]

It's pretty difficult to improve upon the light switch. A door knob is pretty tried and true. People won't switch these things out easily. The connected/smart home has been "coming" forever it seems, and never seems to gain traction. Why would I want to use a watch, or phone for that matter, to turn off a light. I could either open an app, which takes a few button presses, maybe some swipes too, or flick a switch. The gain is not worth the cost and effort. I think the "Internet of Things" is a bunch of crap that will never actually take off. I don't need my toaster to be online so I can make toast from my bedroom. A simple timer will perform the most useful aspect of "The Internet of Things" which is why no one will buy into it.

The other major issue with the whole idea is that people are too fickle. We don't actually want the lights to be at the same brightness at a particular time everyday. We aren't that regular.

As someone who has the philips hue bulbs, it's nice to be able to use my iPhone / iPad to turn my lights off while lying in bed or at my computer.

Plus they can display up to 16 million colours, which is very nice.

 

[Cashmonee]

Some interesting hints at Apple's vision for the watch in this Tim Cook interview:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolo...will-replace-your-car-keys-says-Tim-Cook.html

"This will be just like the iPhone: people wanted it and bought for a particular reason, perhaps for browsing, but then found out that they loved it for all sorts of other reasons."

"The watch is designed to be able to replace car keys and the clumsy, large fobs that are now used by many vehicles"

This combined with Apple Pay would mean you could leave your wallet and car keys at home. Seems a pretty good selling point to me. Battery issues would be my only concern.

That's pie in the sky kind of stuff honestly. Years and years away, and would require cooperation from companies that are not necessarily terribly willing to play nice with Apple. I can definitely see things like that become a reality, especially the Apple Pay idea (though there is significant resistance to that already), but again, they are still conveniences that have questionable value. If I am buying alcohol, I still need my license and hence a wallet of some sort. Same if I am driving. The watch, and "internet of things" for that matter, are solutions in search of a problem.

As someone who has the philips hue bulbs, it's nice to be able to use my iPhone / iPad to turn my lights off while lying in bed or at my computer.

Plus they can display up to 16 million colours, which is very nice.

I don't disagree, but one of the things that kept me from getting Hue for my house was the complaint that many people had about not being able to flick the switch on the way to bed. I believe that is fixed now, however. Leo LaPorte has given the ultimate example in my opinion of how useful this stuff is. He has a Nest and Hue. Both were installed in his house. He moved, and never took the time to install them in the new place. If these internet-connected, smart devices were so amazing, that wouldn't happen.

 

[Arran]

Leo LaPorte has given the ultimate example in my opinion of how useful this stuff is. He has a Nest and Hue. Both were installed in his house. He moved, and never took the time to install them in the new place. If these internet-connected, smart devices were so amazing, that wouldn't happen.

I'd flatly disagree with Leo. I've had a coupe of nests since they were first released and I'd definitely fit them in a new house. I like the ease of use and that they automatically reduce heating and cooling when nobody's home, but kick-in when we're around. My family has unpredictable schedules.

I'm only a recent convert to Hue (about 6 months). I resisted at first because of the stupid you-need-you-phone-to-turn-on-the-light issue. That was a deal killer. But now they have these little remote control "tap" switches you can just stick anywhere. I have three in my bedroom alone and another four downstairs. They control about a dozen bulbs (grouped in areas and "scenes") and the result is awesome. They're also completely useable by wife, kids, visitors and house sitters - all without a phone.

I also have various groups of bulbs set on timers to gently wake us up in the morning and make sure the house is lit at night, even if nobody's home.(particularly if nobody's home).

A few Belkin we-mo light switches and motion sensors for some inside and outside lights complete the picture. They've been installed for years. Again, fully programmable and remote-controllable, and 100% usable without a phone.

I don't really mess around with the whole setup now. It all just works rather well.

A bit pricey, for sure, but a fraction of what it would've cost to pay an electrician to re-wire my home. And when I do move, most of it comes with me.

 

[Cashmonee]

I'd flatly disagree with Leo. I've had a coupe of nests since they were first released and I'd definitely fit them in a new house. I like the ease of use and that they automatically reduce heating and cooling when nobody's home, but kick-in when we're around. My family has unpredictable schedules.

I'm only a recent convert to Hue (about 6 months). I resisted at first because of the stupid you-need-you-phone-to-turn-on-the-light issue. That was a deal killer. But now they have these little remote control "tap" switches you can just stick anywhere. I have three in my bedroom alone and another four downstairs. They control about a dozen bulbs (grouped in areas and "scenes") and the result is awesome. They're also completely useable by wife, kids, visitors and house sitters - all without a phone.

I also have various groups of bulbs set on timers to gently wake us up in the morning and make sure the house is lit at night, even if nobody's home.(particularly if nobody's home).

A few Belkin we-mo light switches and motion sensors for some inside and outside lights complete the picture. They've been installed for years. Again, fully programmable and remote-controllable, and 100% usable without a phone.

I don't really mess around with the whole setup now. It all just works rather well.

A bit pricey, for sure, but a fraction of what it would've cost to pay an electrician to re-wire my home. And when I do move, most of it comes with me.

I don't dispute that some people like these things and have use for them. However, I would argue that for the vast majority of people their usefulness nowhere near justifies the initial cost and pain of setup. Especially when considering the mixed reviews many of these things get, in particular the Nest. This is all evidenced by almost all of these products remaining niche years after release.

I feel the Watch may end up in this category. Useful, interesting, convenient, but not at the steep asking price, especially if it is locked to one platform. It will sell well, especially at first, but I don't see smart watches, particularly expensive ones, becoming a mass market consumer device. Just like all the smart home (now rebranded "Internet of Things") stuff that has come before it.

 

[8CoreWhore]

Have a "smart car"?

All kinds of things the Watch (or just iPhone) is good for.

 

[8CoreWhore]

I don't dispute that some people like these things and have use for them. However, I would argue that for the vast majority of people their usefulness nowhere near justifies the initial cost and pain of setup. Especially when considering the mixed reviews many of these things get, in particular the Nest. This is all evidenced by almost all of these products remaining niche years after release.

I feel the Watch may end up in this category. Useful, interesting, convenient, but not at the steep asking price, especially if it is locked to one platform. It will sell well, especially at first, but I don't see smart watches, particularly expensive ones, becoming a mass market consumer device. Just like all the smart home (now rebranded "Internet of Things") stuff that has come before it.

But it's awesome for those that can afford it.

 

[Cashmonee]

All kinds of things the Watch (or just iPhone) is good for.

Really cool! I guess the question would be why pay out at least $349 to view information I already have on the car or the phone? Oh by the way, both of which would offer a vastly superior experience. This is actually the exact point I am making. You point out a niche car company that is going to display cabin temp or current speed on your watch. Think about why you would want that, and you will quickly realize that of those pictures, there is not a single task that is made easier by the watch. If anything they are all harder than using your phone or the car/key itself.

----------

But it's awesome for those that can afford it.

Who said anything about affording it? Value and affordability are two very different things. I would say things such as the Watch, Nest, Hue, etc don't offer enough value to justify their asking price. Again, I feel that is accurate as Nest, Hue, and the like are barely niche products.

 

[8CoreWhore]

Really cool! I guess the question would be why pay out at least $349 to view information I already have on the car or the phone? Oh by the way, both of which would offer a vastly superior experience. This is actually the exact point I am making. You point out a niche car company that is going to display cabin temp or current speed on your watch. Think about why you would want that, and you will quickly realize that of those pictures, there is not a single task that is made easier by the watch. If anything they are all harder than using your phone or the car/key itself.

----------



Who said anything about affording it? Value and affordability are two very different things. I would say things such as the Watch, Nest, Hue, etc don't offer enough value to justify their asking price. Again, I feel that is accurate as Nest, Hue, and the like are barely niche products.

"Value" is subjective. Millions will want it, millions will not.

 

[Crosspjc]

That's pie in the sky kind of stuff honestly. Years and years away, and would require cooperation from companies that are not necessarily terribly willing to play nice with Apple. I can definitely see things like that become a reality, especially the Apple Pay idea (though there is significant resistance to that already), but again, they are still conveniences that have questionable value. If I am buying alcohol, I still need my license and hence a wallet of some sort. Same if I am driving. The watch, and "internet of things" for that matter, are solutions in search of a problem.u



I don't disagree, but one of the things that kept me from getting Hue for my house was the complaint that many people had about not being able to flick the switch on the way to bed. I believe that is fixed now, however. Leo LaPorte has given the ultimate example in my opinion of how useful this stuff is. He has a Nest and Hue. Both were installed in his house. He moved, and never took the time to install them in the new place. If these internet-connected, smart devices were so amazing, that wouldn't happen.

I would imagine that the car unlocking would form part of CarPlay which most of the major car manufacturers are interested in. at a guess it would work the same as keyless go. As for the cost, a new key for my Audi isn't far off the cost of the sport.

In the UK energy providers are giving away NEST free so it is becoming more mainstream.

I see your point but I think the Internet of things on a smaller scale to the automated house is nearly upon us.

----------

Really cool! I guess the question would be why pay out at least $349 to view information I already have on the car or the phone? Oh by the way, both of which would offer a vastly superior experience. This is actually the exact point I am making. You point out a niche car company that is going to display cabin temp or current speed on your watch. Think about why you would want that, and you will quickly realize that of those pictures, there is not a single task that is made easier by the watch. If anything they are all harder than using your phone or the car/key itself.

----------



Who said anything about affording it? Value and affordability are two very different things. I would say things such as the Watch, Nest, Hue, etc don't offer enough value to justify their asking price. Again, I feel that is accurate as Nest, Hue, and the like are barely niche products.

I think you are taking the Tesla app out of context. I believe the temperature screen is to remotely warm/cool your car before you get in it. Great for UK winters! The charge screen seems very useful if you are not in the car etc.