Subscribe
Sign in
Apple Watch — The most personal device Apple has ever created
94
Replies
Best
@eriktorenberg i think elaboration would be really interesting here. i feel like for a lot of people it was the exact opposite, where google glass was the future and actually seemed innovative, whereas the watch wasn't all too different from the existing smartwatches out there, and didn't have any *must-have* features.
@krrishd Apple creates hardware, software, and peopleware. It cultivates, builds and eases us into new behavior, even when the particular technology(ies) have been around for some time. What results is Thiel's "Last Mover Advantage" as we wait for Apple to bless each new product category.
@basche42 agreed, but what would make it something someone "really wanted" in your opinion? a lot of the stuff has been around for a while, and I agree that Apple is innovative in that it'll bring it to the forefront, but what feature really makes it worth the price tag?
@krrishd Not sure - and great question. I suspect for mass market it will be the health aspect (they also can recruit a much richer app ecosystem at first than any of the android health wearables).
I'm super excited to see how product creators use Watch. As @nireyal has written about before, interface changes can lead to new opportunities and huge shifts in consumer behavior (eg facebook gaming to mobile gaming).
Battery life? Waterproof? Storage? Connectivity (besides BLE)? - This is stuff they will be working on in the next few months I think. Nothing major regarding today's presentation (ability to show it), but imho major regarding usability etc. when a gazillion people are going to buy this thing (including moi)
Pricing: like Google Glass, I think the watch should start at $199/249 to appeal to the masses (cause it is an accessory). Only when we have new batterie tech widely available (graphite & Lithium anodes for example) this can be a standalone device (syncing calls, messages etc. over the internet instead of BLE).
Still, if they can make some changes (perfect it), this well be huge imo, and if you have a full Apple setup, this will be your usage:
Watch 60%
Ipad 25%
iPhone 10%
Mac 5%
thoughts?
P.S the real killer is going to be the EDITION high end 18Karat gold one: https://www.apple.com/watch/appl... - very smart fashion move
@bramk interesting projected breakdown of usage, although I'd bump up the iPhone percentage much higher and drop the iPad's.
I need to play around with that dial...I'm not convinced by that interface decision at all!
I would have preferred a circular touch-activated bezel around the screen, which would allow touch gestures analogous to the iPod wheel dial. Swipe your finger clockwise or counterclockwise along the bezel to zoom in/out or make selections.
Furthermore this would have allowed the watch to be worn on either the left or right arm, without locking out left handed users.
With both interface elements (dial, button) on the right side only, it seems too unnatural to be worn on one's right arm. Controlling the dial with the thumb of your left hand or reaching over/around the display to control it with the other fingers is very uncomfortable.
The use of that dial undoubtedly wants to pick up on the language of the watch dials of classic wrist watches. But I think this was the wrong element to be chosen.
In the last decades you didn't have to wind up or reset your clock on a daily basis. Maybe you used the dial once per year? Or on occasion when traveling to a distinctively different timezone.
To me it would have made much more sense to have picked up on the symbolic character of the "tachymeter", the turnable scale around the rim of analog chronometers, which we all used to play around with constantly anyways.
@boettges "Maybe you used the dial once per year?" I wear a dumbwatch. I use the dial about once a month. Most common use case is to change the time (travel, day light savings) or change the date (skipping the 31 on months with only 30 days). So a bit more frequent then you suggested, but still not daily or weekly by any means.
I will say I use the tachymeter even less, as in not at all. Useful if you're a diver, but not much to use it for otherwise.
@eric3000 Oh right, I forgot about the bi-monthly day skip. That was my reason to switch to a watch without a calendar a couple of years ago.
Not saying that the tachymeter is actually used more often, it is rather a question of the message about it's accessibility that this element conveys.
Just having this rotary element on top of the watch seems more natural than on the side.
The crown was specifically placed on the side (sometimes even hidden under a ring) to make accessing it hard to avoid accidental misadjustment.
I'm really looking forward to seeing what the WatchKit SDK will allow. Definitely will allow custom notifications from existing apps like the Facebook and Twitter examples, but what will Watch-only apps look like?
Other questions on my mind:
- How do you download apps onto the Watch?
- What is the battery life like?
- Will there be a marketplace for watch faces? Potential side income website? Noticed someone just bought applewatchfaces.com today
I liked the innovation of digital crown to replace pinch gestures. Yet, the demo seemed a bit confusing. There were times when using the crown would make sense to me, but Kevin Lynch swiped instead. And visa-versa. Swipe on a watch seems like a poor gesture, and I thought the crown would replace it. The crown plus the addition of haptic touches and voice I think makes most sense for main interactions.
I'm hoping a hands-on demo will alleviate my fears about this.
EDIT: Digital crown is the new iPod clickwheel
@eric3000 I noticed the same thing. I think it might have been because the demo watch was not on his wrist. It might make more sense to use the crown then.
*as i currently understand it* - Apple Watch seems to me to be, most importantly, a technological bridge to allow Apple to offer Apple Pay via NFC to its iPhone 5/5s existing users. Ones who won't / cant' yet upgrade to iPhone 6 (believe it has the proper BTLE for the pairing - someone pls educate me if I am way off)
This helps address the immediately one of the chief obstacles to building a payment network: Metcalfe's Law. By putting a lower (ok - relatively lower lol) price point on the Apple Watch, Apple may have hacked its own adoption cycle for mobile payments through what almost amounts to backwards compatibility.
@basche42 Did the watch have NFC though? I didn't catch that, but it may just have been the constantly lagging live feed...
@kjemperud I'm not sure either - but I think that all of the "open your hotel door with your watch" stuff that is coming out almost definitely requires NFC - don't think that can reliably be accomplished yet with iBeacon/BTLE only
@basche42 Yes, that's what I thought. Making it compatible with the iPhone 5S, 5, 5C as well seems like a bridge to bring the payment system to existing customers. But how many will actually get the watch? 5% of existing customers?
Is TouchID required for the payment system? If so, the iPhone 5 and 5C will fall short.
Will you have to enter the "fallback"-password beforehand?
It's interesting to think about that inconvenience to enter the password as an incentive to upgrade your phone then.
@boettges Great questions. I believe there will be some redundancy and multiple ways to skin a cat. Lots you can do with software here to ease the hardware transition.
I think it would also be interesting to bring in @aprilzero in on this conversation, considering that he's building http://gyrosco.pe . What are your thoughts on this Anand?
@krrishd It's a great start. Assuming they can figure out the battery life problem so you have it on pretty much continuously, it'll be a really great source of data for Gyroscope and other apps.
Not excited about the lack of waterproofing, I think any excuse to take it off will be fatal. The power is in having truly continuous and accurate data.
I would get it for the heart rate stuff alone, if that works well. Usually they don't work as well when you're moving or running/sweaty/etc. Nothing else can do that well right now. The UI and app features to me are almost just an extra.
Looks beautiful (to my preferences) and the functionality blows competitors away. The up-market pricing lowers my purchase intent significantly, but I'm in for the presumably-cheaper V2.
Also, I'm concerned that they made no mention of battery life - on the watch, or the watch's effect on the iPhone's battery life. My iPhone5 can already barely last until the afternoon, even without an always-on watch connection.
Things Apple got right:
- Personalization
- Price
- Crown interface (great way to manage the Apple Watch)
Things Apple got wrong:
- Battery (no mention = bad news)
- I can't find a killer feature that will make regular people buy this.
Overall, it's a product I'll get, but it's tough to say whether regular folks will covet it. I need to play to know.
@benparr Great breakdown, especially on the bad news about battery life (Re/Code reports that Apple reps told them it'll need a re-charge every night). I think this version of the watch will be a lot like the original iPhone. It'll be a device that draws a lot of attention in the wild, but it will take the second or third versions to really catch on with massive adoption.
$349 makes sense as a starting point for a v1 device. Not even the iPhone immediately appealed to everyone (although that very quickly changed). If Apple keeps up with their past performance, the price will drop as the appeal/functionality increases.
Can't wait to start building apps for this. There are going to be completely new types of user behaviour and interactions to understand, and a whole new design language and constraints to go with it. Going to be fun.
What do we actually know about that array of sensors on the bottom?
It measures the heart rate, but how? Is it "yet another" optical measurement, like the Basis Health Tracker (http://bit.ly/1nK764K) or the Samsung Gear Fit does?
What about about other sensors, besides basic gyroscopic movement detection? Will it be able to recognize specific exercises and count repetition, such as the Atlas Fitness Tracker (http://bit.ly/1rVKDtj) aims to do?
@boettges They covered HR sensors in the keynote. IR + visible spectrum measurement of HR.
According to this behind-the-scenes report from the event the final systems aren't decided yet. But it at least includes the pulse sensor & accelerometer (plus access to all the iPhone's sensors).
Given that they announced heart rate and step counter functionality, plus the ability to discern vigorous exercise vs walking vs standing, I'd say the answer to your question is "yes".
Meh. Can't help but think an "apple fuelband" would fit the "job to be done" a bit better based on the positive feedback regarding the health/fitness benefits.
My husband was going to buy some great monstrosity garmin I think that has gps, heart rate etc for the same price. Now he can go more elegant. Of all the watches with added bits this seems to be the most attractive so far. I hope the sports version is waterproof. I'm happy if I can tell it to be quiet and just access emergency things - will mean I can go out without clutching my phone like an addict :-) - might even start taking my camera out again instead of the phone too. For a first cut it looks good. It will sell more than a few... :-)
@helencrozier the apple watch has no GPS... unless you pair it with your iPhone.. That makes it basically completely useless as a sport tracking device
@cpuricelli dash i must have missed that in the small print. :-(
Actually pretty disappointed now as I also thought I could be heading out the door with no phone as it would hook up to runkeeper... Maybe later.
I keep thinking about how the ipod and iphone needed to be tethered to a PC to bootstrap the experience. I think this is just the beginning of a device thought-through to be wrist-first. Maybe or maybe not for everyone, but certainly just the start.
@andrewfarah Remembering what we saw isn't done..
This watch had a series of affordances (mechanisms, gestures, metaphors) that have not been used before and all are focused on the wrist form-factor. I was a little surprised to see just how many of these there were (contrast with just swipe/pinch zoom, or click/drag). Nevertheless, these are now and interesting and clearly thought about for the form factor. This hasn't been done as holistically on the wrist before -- I suspect we will see a lot of changes in the app/platform before we all get to wear the watch. At the same time, it is clear this is purpose built for the form factor in ways that others have not.
To say that I'm excited would be an understatement. This has been what I've been waiting for ever since the idea that an Apple watch might be a reality. The phone is a Pandora's box of distraction. As soon as it's unlocked, the world is my oyster. As someone that's prone to getting lost in apps once the phone is open, the Apple Watch is PERFECT for me. I can't wait.
Not a fan. iPod was, "all your CDs in your pocket" - a unique value - it made your CDs unnecessary. Then iPhone made iPods unnecessary. And iPhone made wearing a watch unnecessary too. But the Apple Watch is currently an accessory to your phone. Meh. You know what would've been cool? If Apple Watch made your iPhone unnecessary. That's the kind of vision I want from Apple - or at least the expectation they've built for me.
I feel the urge to buy one, but know it's an uphill battle for Apple. Ever since I switched from Android to iOS, I've been missing Google Now and direct Google Maps integration like crazy. I can't lock myself further into Apple's sub-par services just for the sake of hardware. I think the services around Android Wear are going to make it better in the long-term, but Apple definitely just set the standard when it comes to physical build quality.
@zachtratar I haven't used Android extensively. Can you elaborate on what you like(d) better about Google Now vs Siri, and the android gMaps app vs iOS gMaps?
@staringispolite The differences in quality are very glaring. Apple Maps directions are completely off 10% of the time, whereas I've only had Google send me a strange way one or twice, ever. Siri is a complete mess compared to Google Now. Google Now is like asking a real assistant for information, whereas Siri feels like talking to a robot that only gets it right 30% of the time. The types of searches you can do on Google Now are much more extensive.
@zachtratar I'm not talking about Apple maps, I'm talking about iOS's gMaps. I haven't noticed any big difference. Interesting to hear your XP with Siri vs GN. (I've never seen either look/feel natural). What are some queries GN can do that Siri can't?
@staringispolite Integrates directly into Google Now === way better. "Ok Google, Navigate to this restaurant". You may not even know where the restaurant is, but Google does. Apple screws that command up *a lot*. In addition, gMaps isn't going to be directly integrated into the Apple Watch. Apple prioritizes their own apps and ecosystem.
@zachtratar I vastly prefer typing to those voice-style commands, but if that weren't the case, I can totally see that being important. Just tried using Siri and it (a) understood what I said (b) plugged in something completely different into the map, and (c) used Apple Maps.
Oooooh good point about Apple Watch using Apple Maps. I assume (hope) Google Maps' team releases an app of their own for directions. (Also hoping Strava does this for their Routes feature)
Backchannel