Tim Cook: Our Objective With Apple Watch Is to Change the Way People Live Their Lives

[bbeagle]

This device is meant to be tethered to your iPhone. The tethering aspect alone will nibble at the battery constantly, not only on the watch end, but the phone end as well.

Yes, exactly. Usage of your watch should lower usage of your phone, so the phone's battery at the end of the day shouldn't be less than it is now

I'm hoping they copy Android and utilize turbo charging. My sons phone charges well over half way in 10 minutes, which he says gives him around 8 extra hours of usage.

Yes, I hope so too. The ads all say 15 minutes give you 8 hours of usage... but whatever, that's good.

Someday, devices will charge in like 10 seconds and our kids will think THAT is long.

 

[AGSP]

Rubbish

Dear Tim,

You're there to accumulate trillions of $$$$ offshore where its doing nothing useful and moreover avoiding taxes in the US and other economies where the products are sold.

There is no other Company in the World that sells the best "Ever" i-gadget ever other year (so the one that was the best ever before, wasn't actually that good, was it?) on the premise it's making my life better!

The iPhone may have been revolutionary back then, but it's just a phone, an expensive phone, with an Apple Badge.

The Apple watch isn't a watch, it's a $350 gadget that won't tell the time when the battery runs out, and if you spend as much time looking at it in the car (like you do with your iPhone) you'll realise that crashing can be expensive.

Your Apple Watch gadget will only every do what your iPhone already does, and poorly with that tiny little screen, and rubbish battery life - but you'll probably buy one because you think it looks cool.

Well coolio, you are really quite stupid, as you just spent $350 on something quite pointless!

 

[rdlink]

Change the way people live their lives at $349 STARTING price? That's a good top of the line price, but starting price, entry level? Not on your rich life sir.

Nah, it's not going to change anything for me. It's not that much effort to pull my phone out of my pocket if I need to do "smart" tasks. I mean, this is at the end of the day, an accessory to the iPhone. It can't stand alone even. Not only that, if it requires bluetooth connectivity or anything like that, it will be an accessory that just depletes the battery faster. And I'm not even about to try typing on my wrist, or reading extensive work emails on it.

Nice novelty for people who have the definition of disposable/unwanted income, but this isn't the "iPod" of today. At best this is the iPod Hi-Fi of today.

Edit: And "Can't live without"? That's a bit strong. I mean, I love my iPhone 6 Plus. Thoroughly enjoy it, as well as my iPad Mini 3 and my MacBook Pro, and all my past Apple devices. But I could certainly live without it. And it's far more useful than the watch will be. Hyping something too much can actually be damaging too. It builds excitement in ignorant folks who will be let down when they realize it's not only something they could live without, but also something that adds little if anything to the Apple experience they already had.

Wow. You've got it all figured out for us, don't you? Fact is people pay a lot more for watches that do a lot less. I'm not going to jump on the Apple Watch, but I am going to look at it and see if it has value for me before making a decision. I bought a Pebble through Kickstarter, and have been largely disappointed with it. However, recent updates have caused it to have some use for me. For instance I can now reliably use it for tracking my pace and distance during runs. So if I am trying to hold specific pace through a long run I can keep an eye on the watch and adjust me speed accordingly. The problem? I sometimes run at night, and there is no backlight on the Pebble. So perhaps the Apple watch could overcome that for me. And there could be other value adds that come along with it.

My point is that you seem to be coming to all sorts of conclusions regarding the usefulness and value of the Apple Watch, without ever having laid your eyes or hands on one. And Tim Cook didn't get to be the CEO of the most valued company in the world by making off the cuff claims and comments. Perhaps you might be better served to take a wait and see attitude, and make your own conclusions once you've actually seen how the product functions in the real world.

 

[iSee]

There are plenty of running watches that do have integrated GPS. These do not have sexy looking animated displays like Apple, but battery life is enough for ultra marathons etc.



Polar has such "gps pods" for some legacy running watches. Pretty outdated now.

Christian

There's only so much is going to fit into a wrist-worn device... In fact, very little will fit in a watch form-factor. Apple -- or any other company -- has to be very selective about what's included.

To add GPS they have to take something else away -- there'd be an impact on battery life, or size, weight, screen, etc. Or any combination of those. Considering that the watch is normally paired with a phone, adding GPS on-board only supports a few more use-cases. Yet it would have a big impact on its other properties.

We'll see if Apple has chosen wisely.

 

[Mistrblank]

Guess I'm not on this too.

The only thing I'd wear would be for fitness tracking and I can get one of those for far cheaper. There isn't much else that I can't do by taking my phone out of my pocket and looking at it.

I can't wait for the awkward socialness of this though when you go out and it looks like people can't be bothered with spending time with you because they keep looking at their watch.

 

[dontwalkhand]

I'm interested to see what the corporate world will do to embrace this like they did the iPhone. Construction workers using it as walks talkies? Wrist based inventory management? We'll see.

 

[sinsin07]

Dear Tim,

You're there to accumulate trillions of $$$$ offshore where its doing nothing useful and moreover avoiding taxes in the US and other economies where the products are sold.

There is no other Company in the World that sells the best "Ever" i-gadget ever other year (so the one that was the best ever before, wasn't actually that good, was it?) on the premise it's making my life better!

The iPhone may have been revolutionary back then, but it's just a phone, an expensive phone, with an Apple Badge.

The Apple watch isn't a watch, it's a $350 gadget that won't tell the time when the battery runs out, and if you spend as much time looking at it in the car (like you do with your iPhone) you'll realise that crashing can be expensive.

Your Apple Watch gadget will only every do what your iPhone already does, and poorly with that tiny little screen, and rubbish battery life - but you'll probably buy one because you think it looks cool.

Well coolio, you are really quite stupid, as you just spent $350 on something quite pointless!

... pointless!

can be applied to all of the above

 

[iMcLovin]

I could imagine this device changing my life. Instead of a calm steady day Im constantly looking for a place to charge.....No thanks Tim!

 

[pubwvj]

I'm not interested in wearing a watch on my wrist. Implants. Yes. Wearables. No.

 

[spinedoc77]

Yes we do.

Oh, you meant the watch? No, you just charge it

Lol, seriously the apple watch sounds like the movie Logan's Run where you die when your life sensor goes off. Man I'm old, does anyone even remember that movie?

 

[samcraig]

I'm interested to see what the corporate world will do to embrace this like they did the iPhone. Construction workers using it as walks talkies? Wrist based inventory management? We'll see.

How would construction workers use this as a walkie unless they paired it with a headset. And at that point - why use a smart watch?

Wrist based inventory management? Maybe to ask siri to look something up. But generally speaking, a watch isn't a good device for typing and I'm not sure Siri (and it's integration with Apps) is that advanced enough that it would be more productive that other devices.

----------

Lol, seriously the apple watch sounds like the movie Logan's Run where you die when your life sensor goes off. Man I'm old, does anyone even remember that movie?

Saw that movie in the theater - I guess that makes me "old" ?

 

[J. Jizzle]

So I assume with this being a watch and all, the glare of the sun will have absolutely no impact on someone's ability to use the watch or see the screen outdoors, right? Anyone ever use their iPhone, iPad, or Mac Book (or any smart phone, tablet, or laptop) outdoors in the bright sun? It's pretty much impossible to see what's on the screen - practically useless in my opinion.

 

[Daws001]

My wrist is ready. Give us the precious.

 

[Freeks]

"Tim Cook: Our Objective With Apple Watch Is to Change the Way People Live Their Lives"

Big Fat lol Tim
It ain't gonna happen.

 

[2457282]

To date, I have been ambivlent about the Apple Watch. I gave up the watch when I got the iPhone, not sure I want to go back to puting something on my wrist. Having said that, the notion that something on my wrist will change the way I live my life actually scares me.

 

[AppleWarMachine]

making a very personable watch...for one to be more unpersonable

it way change the way you life you life...in a negative way

 

[sputnikv]

Change the way people live their lives at $349 STARTING price? That's a good top of the line price, but starting price, entry level? Not on your rich life sir.

Nah, it's not going to change anything for me. It's not that much effort to pull my phone out of my pocket if I need to do "smart" tasks. I mean, this is at the end of the day, an accessory to the iPhone. It can't stand alone even. Not only that, if it requires bluetooth connectivity or anything like that, it will be an accessory that just depletes the battery faster. And I'm not even about to try typing on my wrist, or reading extensive work emails on it.

Nice novelty for people who have the definition of disposable/unwanted income, but this isn't the "iPod" of today. At best this is the iPod Hi-Fi of today.

Edit: And "Can't live without"? That's a bit strong. I mean, I love my iPhone 6 Plus. Thoroughly enjoy it, as well as my iPad Mini 3 and my MacBook Pro, and all my past Apple devices. But I could certainly live without it. And it's far more useful than the watch will be. Hyping something too much can actually be damaging too. It builds excitement in ignorant folks who will be let down when they realize it's not only something they could live without, but also something that adds little if anything to the Apple experience they already had.

when the iphone was first announced, steve balmer openly and bombastically mocked the price in an interview saying ultimately that no one would buy something so expensive.

 

[bbeagle]

Guess I'm not on this too.

The only thing I'd wear would be for fitness tracking and I can get one of those for far cheaper. There isn't much else that I can't do by taking my phone out of my pocket and looking at it.

I can't wait for the awkward socialness of this though when you go out and it looks like people can't be bothered with spending time with you because they keep looking at their watch.

I don't think you understand what the watch is.

Yes, a fitness tracker is less money, but it also doesn't give you notifications, so you pay less for it. Very easy to understand.

It's NOT meant for you to be looking at all day. It's to save you time looking there for a quick second instead of your cell phone - to enable people to glance down then glance up in a conversation instead of taking out a cell phone, swiping, seeing the notification, putting it back. A LOT better than what we have now.

The same people that use their cell phones all day will be using their watch all day. Nothing will change.

----------

I can see the Samsung commercials now showing Apple watch owners sitting around with their watches plugged in and charging while waiting for a flight, during meetings etc.

And that commercial will backfire as well, just like the previous one.

Apple phones do not have shorter batteries than other phones. It's a problem for ALL phones, which is why the commercials made no sense.

If Apple phones don't last as long, it's because people USE them more, not because the batteries are less. Which makes Samsung's point backfire.

 

[0098386]

People (myself among them) gladly paid $399 for an MP3 player in 2001. Why wouldn't they spend less than that for something that does a lot more today?

It does? Smart watches are partner devices. They only work as intended when partnered with a nearby phone, tablet or computer. An iPod needed one but once it was synced you could go anywhere you wanted. One could argue the original iPod did more, independently at least.

----------

This smart watch trend is BS!

No, smart watches are great if you need them. I've never missed a call since getting a Pebble, and being able to quickly read emails/notifications/text messages is a genuinely useful. And then there's the remote control function for iTunes is necessary if you have headphones without an inline remote.

For me the Apple Watch, and other Samsung ones, they go too far and perform unnecessary functions. Games on a watch (even to me as a game developer and collector) seems a bit pointless!

Smart watches, IMO, are best when they're simple.

 

[Dave245]

I don't think you understand what the watch is.

Yes, a fitness tracker is less money, but it also doesn't give you notifications, so you pay less for it. Very easy to understand.

It's NOT meant for you to be looking at all day. It's to save you time looking there for a quick second instead of your cell phone - to enable people to glance down then glance up in a conversation instead of taking out a cell phone, swiping, seeing the notification, putting it back. A LOT better than what we have now.

The same people that use their cell phones all day will be using their watch all day. Nothing will change.

----------



And that commercial will backfire as well, just like the previous one.

Apple phones do not have shorter batteries than other phones. It's a problem for ALL phones, which is why the commercials made no sense.

If Apple phones don't last as long, it's because people USE them more, not because the batteries are less. Which makes Samsung's point backfire.

This 100% this!! the Watch will not be used 24/7 so battery should not be an issue. I love the idea of the fitness aspect of the Watch, the fact that the Watch can be set to send a tap every hour to remind you to move around, its a great idea that i think people like myself will love. But i also think that the Apple will be great because of the potential for the Apps. I for one are really looking forward to this Watch.

 

[0098386]

I don't actually believe that $349 is a big ask for this device. People routinely pay thousands of dollars for watches that do nothing but tell time, and not even that accurately. Even fashion watches routinely cost hundreds of dollars.

Those have an incredible lifespan, though. What happens when Apple no longer support old watches? Or what happens when the battery dies? A few years back I paid £150 for, what I thought at the time, as a very nice watch. And I still have it, still wear it as it only needed its battery changing once.

People spend much more on "real" watches but they do last a lot longer. And also don't need charging once every 19 hours .

 

[Keirasplace]

It does? Smart watches are partner devices. They only work as intended when partnered with a nearby phone, tablet or computer. An iPod needed one but once it was synced you could go anywhere you wanted. One could argue the original iPod did more, independently at least.

----------



No, smart watches are great if you need them. I've never missed a call since getting a Pebble, and being able to quickly read emails/notifications/text messages is a genuinely useful. And then there's the remote control function for iTunes is necessary if you have headphones without an inline remote.

For me the Apple Watch, and other Samsung ones, they go too far and perform unnecessary functions. Games on a watch (even to me as a game developer and collector) seems a bit pointless!

Smart watches, IMO, are best when they're simple.

The watch can also sync info/music/calendar (so says Apple's web site), collect heartbeat, accelerometer data (or whatever other info) and also sync it. you can play music untethered from the phone through bluetooth, so not sure why you think it is doing less than the Ipod.

 

[phpmaven]

Finally someone who sees it the same as me. Considering people spend thousands on Rolex watches, spending $349 - $1000 is not a big ask, especially considering it can track your fitness, the customisation and the apps it will likely use, not to mention how great it looks.

Anybody who knows anything about watches knows that $349 is chump change for watch.

 

[J. Jizzle]

What happens when Apple no longer support old watches?

I'd expect the same thing that happens when Apple no longer supports an iPhone, iPad, or computer. Eventually you get a new one. The one thing I believe apple does an outstanding job on is support. Compared to other companies Apple does a better job at supporting their products, and for longer periods of time than the standard 2 years with other companies.

 

[iSee]

when the iphone was first announced, steve balmer openly and bombastically mocked the price in an interview saying ultimately that no one would buy something so expensive.

To be fair, he was right about that part... at least Apple agreed with him and dropped the price if the iPhone $200 a few months after the launch.

$350 is not too high a price, though. The Apple Watch is in an entirely different league than competing smart watches yet is only $100 - $200 more. History tells up people don't consider $350 very much for a watch.

(Not that that gets Ballmer off the hook... he fundamentally misunderstood the competitive challenge posed by the iPhone, utterly dismissing it as serious competition when in fact it had redefined personal computing. MS lost years to Apple and Google thanks to his stupidity. Google, on the other hand, immediately responded to the iPhone and did OK despite having no real foothold in OSs before then.)