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

Tim Cook at D11: Wearables Are 'Incredibly Interesting', Nothing Great on the Market

Simplest thing to solve ever.

Take the functionality of a:

- Nike FuelBand
- iPod
- Watch
- A few basic iPhone functions
- Biometric sensors

Add in different colours for fashion. Boom, you're done.

This is not rocket science. I'd buy one and I'm wearing a Nike FuelBand now.
 
Anyone else think the delay in a watch and apple tv is that some how they'll come up with a pretty cool way for the watch to control the TV? Motion?
 
Can someone explain what the excitement is over?

Mostly I don't get the excitement over iwatch (or itv, for that matter). There are some useful features such as BT reminders or msg but input would be a bugger, Siri included.* As an accessory it would be kinda nice, same for a shrunken redesigned ipod. As a new major product line comparable to the iphone et al, well, could someone explain why it excites you?

A computerised vambrace** would be more interesting, imho, than an iwatch or Google Glasses et al as you could actually get a decent computer and display in there. Display and a severe lack of fashionable presence are the main things would make me wary of obtaining such a device, currently, though they have great potential. I think a motor cross styled armour would be acceptable in some situations but it would take a major change in 'acceptability' for e-braces™ to take off.

* I would like Siri et al but they don't work for me, even after this time. Yet it detects my wife's voice no problem on her random usage. :sigh: And it would be preferable to not require a Internet connection.

** Intel used to have an advert with a computer on the arm. Can't find a pic but I think it was an 'intel inside' ad from the late '80s. It looked awesome.
 
I'm more excited for an iWatch than anything else from Apple, really.

The Macs they have now are great, the iPhone is solid, and there's not much you can do with the iPad. A TV doesn't really interest me (unless it's a better Apple TV with apps), so I can't wait to see what they do in the wearables department.
 
For the iWatch, I am interested to see how Apple would solve the actual look of the thing. What materials would be used for the body and the bracelet. Watches take a surprising amount of abuse. Plastics and even leather and metals can look scrappy and get damaged pretty quickly. Plastics are usually not a problem as often these watches are fairly cheap and can be considered disposable. More exotic materials cause the prices to increase, sometimes dramatically. I see this as an interesting dilemma, as well as the obsolescence of the technology. How much will people be prepared to spend on such a watch? How disposable will it be? How often will people be prepared to upgrade? Those individuals who have watches like Tag, Omega, Rolex etc, can they be persuaded to switch and use an iWatch, will the functionality be beneficial enough?

Interesting to see how things pan out in this market.
 
maxosx said:
How boring. Borrowing a page from Steve Jobs, Cook bashes other's products, so as to make Apple look good when they pump out iWatches by the millions.
Click to expand...

hahaha, i completely agree with you, apple is talking bad stuff about competitors so that their iwatch sells well when it comes out. dirty game,apple.
 
Apple won't get you to buy their watch today because they haven't released it!

jmgregory1 said:
I would be the first to say that Apple designs great hardware, computers (Mac Pro), laptops, iPhones and iPads and have no qualms about having anyone see I use their hardware, but at least today, Apple won't get my money or attention for an iWatch. I love my Seiko Arctura Automatic and will wear it until it stops working, which will be a long time from now given it is an automatic. Watches just seem too much like a piece of jewelry and few people like to wear the same jewelry that millions of other people have.

There is a reason why there are so many watch companies and styles of watches. It just doesn't seem like the next evolution of tech. Not to me at least.
Click to expand...


----------

We learn that Tim Cook deeply understands Apple philosophy and is not just an operation guy!

Rogifan said:
So we need three separate write ups for basically nothing? As expected we learned nothing new from Cook except that he hired someone from the EPA. What exactly is there to discuss? :confused:
Click to expand...
 
doelcm82 said:
Nor will people who once wore glasses, but have moved to contact lenses, or corrected their vision through surgery.

I haven't worn a watch in decades, either.

I could be wrong. This generation might really embrace these wearables while (most) old fogies like me shake our heads. Then they will in turn shake their heads while the next generation rushes to implantable computers.

These kids with their "transistor radios" have no respect for the way we did things in the good old days.
Click to expand...

True. The desire not to have to wear glasses (contacts, LASIK) is a multi-billion dollar industry. It's going to be hard to reverse this culture.

Plus, there's going to be a very fine line between "wearables" and fashion accessories. It's going to be a tough job for wearables to distinguish themselves from a fashion accessory, which in itself is just a passing fad. Different styles of watches come and go. I couldn't imagine just sticking with one in the long term. That is, if the iPhone was a watch, would I still be wearing it after the last 6 years. The answer is no.
 
kas23 said:
He's right about the glasses. People who've never worn glasses before are certainly not going to jump at the opportunity.
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't know. I see plenty of hipsters wearing glasses they do not need.
 
Am I going to be stating the obvious here about people who don't wear glasses won't wear a glasses based device because of this, yet the majority of these people will also wear sunglasses so Mr Cook is pretty wrong, because in effect everyone wears glasses.

And as to people having never worn a watch, give them a Rolex and I think they would wear it, he hasn't made very good statements and comparisons here to talk up Apple, not very good at all. In fact pretty arrogant in a way.
 
robjulo said:
Oh, I don't know. I see plenty of hipsters wearing glasses they do not need.
Click to expand...

Yes, and it's because they are fashionable in appearance. There is nothing fashionable about Google glass. Myself, I wear glasses on a daily basis. I switched from contacts. And the only reason I do so, is for aesthetic reasons. They look great.

And that brings up another problem. If I wanted to wear GG, would I have to put them over my glasses? So, the hundreds of millions of people in this world cannot wear GGs without putting on contacts? If so, that's a collosal fail.

Plus, I don't think I like the idea of stuff popping up in my field of vision. Definitely could drive with these on.

----------
apolloa said:
Am I going to be stating the obvious here about people who don't wear glasses won't wear a glasses based device because of this, yet the majority of these people will also wear sunglasses so Mr Cook is pretty wrong, because in effect everyone wears glasses.
Click to expand...

Good point. But are GG going to offer a tint so they can be used as sunglasses? Probably not because you need to see stuff on the screen. So the functionality of GG will be limited.

I do think GG will sell a bunch. But I see them fizzling out after a couple of years as the fad fades away.
 
he's right about the Google glass, only small number of people would like to wear it, but he's wrong about phablets, phablets are great, they are very useful, you don't have to carry a tablet and a stylus, if apple doesn't want to make a phablet doesn't mean they should insult other phablets.
 
Attonine said:
For the iWatch, I am interested to see how Apple would solve the actual look of the thing. What materials would be used for the body and the bracelet. Watches take a surprising amount of abuse. Plastics and even leather and metals can look scrappy and get damaged pretty quickly.
Click to expand...

My watch was purchased in 2001, worn every day. The only time I ever took it off for protection was while using a jackhammer on some major area of concrete. It still looks good. Glass has not a scratch, gold bits look golden. So it can be done.

It might be that being on your wrist is a reasonable safe position, because anything that would damage your wrist watch would be also dangerous to your hands and arms and you would avoid these dangers.
 
In nearly every interview I've read with Tim - everything is "very interesting" or Apple is "very interested."
 
kas23 said:
Yes, and it's because they are fashionable in appearance. There is nothing fashionable about Google glass. Myself, I wear glasses on a daily basis. I switched from contacts. And the only reason I do so, is for aesthetic reasons. They look great.

And that brings up another problem. If I wanted to wear GG, would I have to put them over my glasses? So, the hundreds of millions of people in this world cannot wear GGs without putting on contacts? If so, that's a collosal fail.
Click to expand...


Google glasses don't look that bad. They are certainly WAY better looking than, say, the original brick cell phones. Those looked absolutely ugly but they were hip too and people were not deterred from using them because of appearance. More importantly, GG is generation 1.0. In a few years I expect they will look like the glasses from Mission Impossible and nobody will find them objectionable for fashion reasons.

I don't own any google or android hardware but I would seriously consider GG if not for the price point and resale restrictions. I think Apple and its fans are wrong to dump on them. this seems the way of the future to me and the first truly innovative hardware product from google.

And btw, they are already planning to get GG with corrective lenses
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57...-google-glass-for-prescription-frames-coming/
 
iWatch...mem....

"The watch, which will integrate with Apple's existing mobile lineup, is expected to feature a 1.5–2.0 inch display."

Great. Another too-phouqing-small display that integrates with my too-phoquing-small iphone display. :mad:
 
I wouldn't mind a big improvement on the nike fuelband, which isn't very good. I could leave my phone at home when i go jogging. Can't however see many interesting features that would make me consider using an "iWatch" as my watch on a daily basis.

Airline companies already preparing new things to say prior to take off "please turn off all your watches".
 
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