Third-Party Tesla App Provides Look at Opportunities and Limitations of Apple Watch Development [Updated]

[DC Wallaby]

There is also the time it takes you to put on the watch and charge it each day.

Yes, because it takes so long to put on a watch. Yes, putting it on may negate the time saved in, what, two interactions a day, tops? As for the time charging, do you expect me to sit and wait for the watch to charge? If it charges overnight, when I'm not directly interacting with any electronic devices ... what difference does it make?

Yes, charging is a drawback, especially if the battery life issue is as bad as some of the more pessimistic commentators are expecting. But acting like taking a watch on and off is somehow going to negate the convenience of the watch in and of itself is nuts.

I'm all about convenience and have no problem paying for something but this watch is a complete waste of time and money. I have yet to see one thing that would make me want to purchase it. I can assure you that the entry price is not an issue at all. I just don't see 1 compelling feature of the watch coupled with awful (not certain at this time) battery life and a super thick frame. I'd rather have my Rolex. At least I don't babe to worry about the battery dying on a daily basis.

More power to you. Spend your money on the products you want to buy. If you don't see the value in the Apple Watch, oh well.

 

[projectle]

Did it occur to you that you can use your iPhone or iPad to do the same thing? (Instead of using this gaudy, ugly and overly expensive watch.)

You're talking about people who bought a Tesla in the first place. As such, you think that they don't have disposable income and an predication for tech?

 

[mj1108]

Apple isn't locking down or crippling anything, they clearly told us last year AppleWatch SDK will come in two phases. The first one will be a serverly limited SDK that will require the iPhone to do the bulk of the operations and will not have access to all hardware features. This simply is because Apple needs more time to build up SDK, just like the original iPhone.


The second phase will come later this year with the full SDK to let devs build more powerful Watch apps with more hardware support and doesn't require iPhone.

In other words, it's really best to wait until the second or third gen. By then hopefully they don't have the iPhone requirement.

 

[MikhailT]

In other words, it's really best to wait until the second or third gen. By then hopefully they don't have the iPhone requirement.

That's always the case with Apple products, the main question is can you wait?

 

[meetajhu]

I went to his site and then this happened

 

[Aniseedvan]

My phone is in my handbag on vibrate only as I'm at work. My children's school rings - having my watch alert me to this is important. Please remember not all of us have pockets to have our phone on our person...

 

[rdlink]

You're right, who wouldn't spend 350+ to not need to use their 650+ phone.

You think that there is something ridiculous about spending $350 on a watch when you spent $650+ on a phone? Oy vay!

----------

I'm all about convenience and have no problem paying for something but this watch is a complete waste of time and money. I have yet to see one thing that would make me want to purchase it. I can assure you that the entry price is not an issue at all. I just don't see 1 compelling feature of the watch coupled with awful (not certain at this time) battery life and a super thick frame. I'd rather have my Rolex. At least I don't babe to worry about the battery dying on a daily basis.

Can't believe anyone wearing a Rolex would be concerned about the aesthetics of their watch. Butt ugliest timepiece ever made.

 

[Col4bin]

You're talking about people who bought a Tesla in the first place. As such, you think that they don't have disposable income and an predication for tech?

Valid point. To each his own.

 

[Serban]

Even the Rolex commercials are scared about apple watch...It doesn't tell time, it tells history...so remark for smartwaches that makes more than tells time :00

 

[Millah]

Apple isn't locking down or crippling anything, they clearly told us last year AppleWatch SDK will come in two phases. The first one will be a serverly limited SDK that will require the iPhone to do the bulk of the operations and will not have access to all hardware features. This simply is because Apple needs more time to build up SDK, just like the original iPhone.


The second phase will come later this year with the full SDK to let devs build more powerful Watch apps with more hardware support and doesn't require iPhone.

Thank you. I was beginning to think I was the only person that paid any attention to Apple when they said that. Too many people just jump to conclusions without actually listening first

 

[iSee]

This guy's English is terrible. He doesn't seem to express what he means so I'm not sure quotes from his blog make for a very informative article. E.g., he's badly misusing words like "potential" and "pessimistic". These refer to future expectations. But he's strictly talking about the limitations of the current Watch Kit SDK.

I don't think he even saw (or perhaps simply didn't understand) Apple's previous statements about Watch development coming in two phases, where native development is coming later.

I'm just not sure why anyone would listen to some random, clueless guy.

Anyhow, the phased rollout of WatchKit makes sense for a couple reasons.

While the full WatchKit SDK is, no doubt, heavily in-use internally at Apple as they create the built-in apps, properly documenting, supporting and polishing a widely used public SDK takes a lot of time. Presumably those devs are busy with the Apple Watch release at the moment.

Meanwhile, the limited SDK is still quite powerful since app-specific code actually runs on a phone. (In some ways these apps can be more powerful than a purely native Watch app since they run on a more powerful and better connected device.

And there's nothing wrong with getting devs used to this architecture, which gives Watch apps access to the capabilities of a more powerful device while saving battery life on the watch itself.

 

[SpectatorHere]

They've still yet to convince me this product is anything but stale, old, and tired. A computer watch? Are you seriously telling me that's what they think anyone other than a tiny few want or needs? Aside from possible functionality manipulating an AR interface and as a health monitor device, these watches offer no reason for existing. And that's not even considering how ridiculously hideous the fatty computer watch look...nor their silly price or battery life.


This product category is so outdated and dumb, it's sad to see Apple going along with it. They should fire whoever came up with this and retask anyone and everyone associated with it.

 

[x5tuu]

You think that there is something ridiculous about spending $350 on a watch when you spent $650+ on a phone? Oy vay!

----------



Can't believe anyone wearing a Rolex would be concerned about the aesthetics of their watch. Butt ugliest timepiece ever made.

You do know Rolex is a brand and not a model right and they make/made way more than one model of timepiece... Unless you are branding all Rolex timepieces as "butt ugly" in which case the naivety of you is quite overwhelming

 

[Rogifan]

They've still yet to convince me this product is anything but stale, old, and tired. A computer watch? Are you seriously telling me that's what they think anyone other than a tiny few want or needs? Aside from possible functionality manipulating an AR interface and as a health monitor device, these watches offer no reason for existing. And that's not even considering how ridiculously hideous the fatty computer watch look...nor their silly price or battery life.


This product category is so outdated and dumb, it's sad to see Apple going along with it. They should fire whoever came up with this and retask anyone and everyone associated with it.

Well since they didn't convince your now for sure this product will be a failure.

 

[doelcm82]

They've still yet to convince me this product is anything but stale, old, and tired. A computer watch? Are you seriously telling me that's what they think anyone other than a tiny few want or needs? Aside from possible functionality manipulating an AR interface and as a health monitor device, these watches offer no reason for existing. And that's not even considering how ridiculously hideous the fatty computer watch look...nor their silly price or battery life.


This product category is so outdated and dumb, it's sad to see Apple going along with it. They should fire whoever came up with this and retask anyone and everyone associated with it.

You're such a trendy fashionista, and computer watches are so, like, last week.

 

[macsmurf]

This watch has more computing power than the systems used to originally pilot us to the moon.

And around one thousandth of the battery power

 

[Col4bin]

Even the Rolex commercials are scared about apple watch...It doesn't tell time, it tells history...so remark for smartwaches that makes more than tells time :00

C'mon, are you seriously telling me that Rolex who make 5-6 figure $$$ luxury timepieces are worried about a dorky $350 Apple Watch? When status-conscious corporate execs, royalty, or anyone else with serious disposable income are in the market for a luxury timepiece, they are looking at purchasing the likes of Rolex, Berquet, Patek Philippe, etc. I assure you these companies are not threatened.

I am confident that Apple will be successful in carving out a niche in the currently depressed smartwatch market. There's so much room there for Apple to thrive and be very profitable. (They should pose a threat to watch manufacturers who sell their timepieces at under $1k.)

A common misperception that I see on these forums is that many Apple fans fail to understand what motivates the purchase of a luxury fashion wearable. Just because it's basically an iPhone on your wrist doesn't automatically mean that everyone will want the Apple Watch over a real timepiece. It's not one type of watch over the other, and many consumers could choose to buy both for differing reasons. There's plenty of room in the under $1k market for both types of watches to co-exist.

 

[RobertMartens]

This looks awesome!. Haters gonna hate, they hate us because they ain't us. Lol

What does your uranus have to do with this?

----------

I'm afraid "limitations" will be the word most associated with iWatch original.

It is not called iWatch nor has it ever been. Kind of reminds me of iTouch.

----------

What are the advantages of this iWatch thing over Google Wear? More limited functionality and worse battery life?

If the leaks are remotely true, Apple should keep this one in the incubator for a while longer.

Otherwise, it looks lamer (and more expensive) than some of these: https://play.google.com/store/devices/collection/promotion_500013a_android_wear_us?hl=en

And we all know how well they are selling.

It is not called iWatch nor has it ever been. Kind of reminds me of iTouch.

----------

Why do people still insist on calling it iWatch?!

Hey, don't you think we need grammar nazis

 

[groovyd]

Give And Take

I think it is a bit of give and take here. Apps on your wrist is still a new paradigm and it is going to take time until developers appreciate trying to keep it simple rather then providing every bell and whistle they can think of all smashed into this miniscule interface. For the looks of it this Tesla app is on the edge of overly intricate for Apple's notifications and nudges intention of the watch. Put all the fancy tricks on the phone and limit the watch to just the very essentials.

I actually think Apple is limiting their API for exactly this purpose, to force developers to think differently. They will of course open up more API in the future but it would be good to stress simplicity in the early apps to set a precedence for clean design into the future.

 

[fjfjfjfj]

Size

What size do you think the watch in the first image is? I really want the larger model but have little skinny man wrists and am afraid I will have to get the smaller model.

 

[rdlink]

You do know Rolex is a brand and not a model right and they make/made way more than one model of timepiece... Unless you are branding all Rolex timepieces as "butt ugly" in which case the naivety of you is quite overwhelming

I've seen a lot of Rolexes. Never seen one that is not gaudy and ugly. But I do understand that taste is a personal thing. I'd just never strap one of those things on my wrist, even if I did have $8000+ to spend on a watch.

I personally prefer Movado. Even though their quality comes nowhere near the level of a Rolex, I find them to be better looking, more stylish watches. And frankly, that's why I wear a watch.

 

[doelcm82]

What size do you think the watch in the first image is? I really want the larger model but have little skinny man wrists and am afraid I will have to get the smaller model.

Your best bet is to wait until the Apple Watch comes out and to try one on. I'm thinking that's what I will do. It's possible that having a smart watch will become important enough to me that I will not want to wait a single day. But I'm going from not wearing a watch at all to the Apple Watch. I can afford to take some time and be more sure I'm getting the right one.

If you're really in a hurry, try an actual size paper cutout..

 

[JeffyTheQuik]

This post may be appropriate today...

Early January, 1998, the predictions were in. The 0-4 Super Bowl record Denver Broncos, with John Elway, the quarterback that was at 3 of those losses, was returning, and they were going to be blown out by the vastly superior Packers. All the experts said they were going to be blown out. The NFC had won the Super Bowl since forever.

Then, they played the game, and the Broncos won.

This is why they play the game.

For all of you prognosticating on the failure or success of the Watch, you're right. You are all right, and if you predict doom and gloom long enough, you'll eventually be right.

In April, they'll play the game, and the 2.5% of the intended audience, MacRumors members (estimating 1 million registered users - 860,000 two years ago, and extrapolating) will be split, saying what a piece of crap, or fine jewelry it is.

For those that want to "wait until it's perfect," show me the perfect device that was so on day 1, or the first generation. For those that say, "just release it, I don't care," for $350 (or whatever it costs), you may want something that is refined.

That's why we play the game.

 

[D*I*S_Frontman]

I have my doubts about this product. Most people use their smartphones as 21st Century "pocket watches" these days. The gesture of turning your left hand down and peering at your wristwatch is fading, just like holding a camera up the your face to look through a viewfinder is.

That said, how man hundreds of posters here were flat-wrong about the iPod at its launch? "No one will buy a $500 mp3 player." So I am fully prepared to be wrong on this, but Cook's RDF is pretty weak compared to Jobs. I don't get the impression Cook has a vision to change the world and mold its future to his designs.

I enjoy using and depend upon Apple products. I fear the Watch will be a major misstep, but with over $100 billion war chest, Apple can afford a failure or two along the way. Time will tell.

 

[teslo]

I have my doubts about this product. Most people use their smartphones as 21st Century "pocket watches" these days...

...So I am fully prepared to be wrong on this, but Cook's RDF is pretty weak compared to Jobs. I don't get the impression Cook has a vision to change the world and mold its future to his designs.

i just feel like wearables will become so powerful they'll replace many people's phones altogether. not yours or mine, maybe, but in 5 years the apple watch will be about as powerful as the i6 is today.