Yikes. Too expensive for me. Not interested in any "smart watch" yet. Not until I won't have to charge the battery every night... Maybe if it was once a week (is that a stretch?)
Maybe some day. I really want a smart watch as I like the idea. I just don't think an entry level option should cost as much as my dive watch which uses no battery.
I've had a Pebble for two years and wear it every day. I charge it every 3-days because I use it quite heavily (lot of vibration notifications, I have it set to display "seconds" requiring a screen refresh 60 times a minute, I have the backlight set to always on, etc) but some people get a week out of it even with the Bluetooth always on.
The epaper with led backlight approach by Pebble is the right way to go until battery technology improves. OLED or LCD technology just saps too much power, and what use is a watch if the display isn't "always on."
The Apple watch is really nice, but like the Android Wear competition, doesn't offer anything really compelling yet. The base features that Pebble has are all that are really needed for a basic smartwatch accessory unless you actually plan to use the healthkit features (at which point the Pebble Time is still less than half the cost of the Apple Watch)
This info is what I needed! A Pebble would have been useless to me if it didn't display seconds, and I wasn't sure if I could. (I may have been under the impression, back then, that it was using e-Ink).
Honestly, the Pebble Time seems like the perfect watch. Maybe a little thick, but that's about it.
Jobs' Mob has decided that the only way that punters will buy their nearly useless iWatch is if they are forced to watch adverts for the thing.
This morning iPhone users woke up to receive and undeletable advert for the iWatch and applications they didn't need forced on them. Now most Apple fanboys were overjoyed that Apple was paying them some attention, but others were less happy.
iOS 8.2 adds in the companion app for the Apple Watch, which Apple talked about in its event on Monday. The app is useful if you have an Apple Watch, as it lets you pair the device with your iPhone. However no one has an iWatch, and no one with any common sense would buy one.
So the Apple Watch app is pretty much just an ad for the watch that you can't delete. It has a bunch of videos showcasing what the Apple Watch can do, and lets you know when you can pre-order one.
There are a large number of tweets from outraged iPhone owners. We guess that Apple has not learned from the time that it forced people to download and listen to U2's latest album, that you should not force people to download things they don't want.
Either that or it is sheer arrogance and stupidity that Apple really does believe that people want to pay $350+ for a device which means they don't have to take their iPhone out of their pocket (but still have to carry it).
Uhm, unless there is some magical e-ink, not yet found in e-readers, refresh rate is close to 1fps, I think 15fps for e-ink is not even remotely imaginable.
On top of it, the low power consumption of e-ink stands only when you do NOT update screen frequently, which isn't the case if you refresh it every second.
In the 7 years we've had the iPhone, battery life has not gone significantly up. Instead phones have gotten thinner, from the 11-12mm with the first phone to now 6.9mm now. 5 years from now, expect to be doing more power intensive things during the day (maybe GPS, LTE), but I wouldn't expect a week's worth of battery life in the near future. That's not the point of the product.
And besides, even if it were able to stretch out to 2-3 days, an inconsistent pattern would make it a bit harder to remember to charge on a regular basis.
I'm surprised with how "exercised focused" the Apple Watch is they didn't include a kinetic or solar drive like Citizen and Timex have used for decades. "Ecodrive" wouldn't charge the watch, but it would help improve the battery life quite while working out. My wife has an old Citizen that gets a week charge from 15 minutes of walking, and this is 1990's technology. The watch is also tiny (28mm dial, 5mm thick) so I assume the charging mechanism is pretty small.
About mechanical (kinetic) charging mechanisms: That takes space (and therefor, capacity) from the battery that can't be appreciably recouped by charging the watch via exercise. The difference in power requirements of a well-tuned regular watch vs. a smart watch are enormous. Besides, it would mean that Apple expects 90% or more of the customers to actually exercise. Good luck with that.
Solar, on the other hand, could make sense. That is, if they could work solar charging into the back layers of the display. It would seem impossible to have both a bright display while simultaneously able to absorb light from the sun...so, no.
So... have you looked at the Pebble, Pebble Steel, Pebble Time, or Pebble Time Steel? 7 to 10 days of battery life is entirely normal, and their e-paper-like reflective LCD displays allow them to read in direct sunlight with ease.
I have, but I was hoping for a proper smart watch with a better ecosystem if that makes any sense. I'm looking closely at what they'll have next. Would love a Pebble running Android Wear.
The starting price for the "Edition"(stupid, stupid name) is insane. I saw someone touting online that it probably wouldn't cost more than $2500. I guess they were wrong.
I also think it looks a bit overcomplicated. You have the touchscreen, "force touch" and the crown for navigation. As well as an extra button for bringing up your friends list. Doesn't seem as intuitive as the iPhone did when it came out.
More like 1 year, until they come out with a more powerful watch, and the people who spend a lot on toys want to upgrade to the latest. In 3 years it'll be both dead and obsolete since the battery will fail.
Dang $400 for the 42mm sport with a plastic band, uhm no thanks. $200 and I would check it out but $400 for a toy watch that will probably be outdated in 2 years when Apple watch 2 comes out? And $450 for the 42mm Link Bracelet!? Wow guess I'm spoiled with my $400 Citizen that is still going strong after 10 years.
Such an outrageous price for a piece of electronics! People are willing to pay huge sum of money for a Rolex or Patek Phillippe because those are works of art, mechanical marvels handmade by experienced craftsmen. These Apple Watch are still unmistakably electronic toys that will get obsoleted after a year when Apple introduce the 2nd gen. Apple's 1st generation product are mostly bad and get technically outdated very quickly. I guess only rich people or die-hard Apple fans would pay that much for a piece of half-baked experiment.
What rot. People are willing to pay a huge sum of money for a Rolex or Patek Phillippee because 1) They can 2) They like what they think spending $$$ on a swiss watch says about them.
And yet, you find the price of an Apple Watch Edition outrageous? Please, get back to use when you've managed enough self-awareness to realize that you are regurgitating swiss watch marketing talking points as some sort of objective fact.
I think you're being similarly uncritical in your thinking about the future of the Apple Watch, or the present, for that matter.
No, they aren't works of art, mechanical marvels handmade by experienced craftsmen, etc. They are also all marketing. Rolex and Patek Phillippe are super complex mechanical devices, and the only reason they are worth any money is marketing, pure marketing.
Seriously, most Patek Phillippe and Rolex watches aren't even competitive with high jewel watches throughout history, and there is nothing cool, advanced, or awesome about a mechanical jewel watch, esp today. They keep horrible time and always will. They are at best a fashion accessory for old folks.
I would argue that the Apple Watch is a work of art in the same sense that a Rolex is. How do you define that anyways? For a Rolex I would surmise you mean the manufacturing and assembly process. Apple Watch is a sublime demonstration of the best end-to-end manufacturing money can buy. If you think high end watches are better manufactured than an Apple Watch, you would be surprised. Apple is using more expensive mills, tighter tolerances, better procedures, better alloys. Apple Watch has no moving parts, it is more accurate and has a longer life between services. Except you get essentially that same level of fit and finish for $349 or for $17,000. So in that sense it is interestingly democratizing.
I don't want an Apple Watch today, perhaps not next year, perhaps never. Maybe it will flop entirely. However, comparing it to Swiss automatic movement watches is not cut and dry on any vector.
This is the first time that Apple has ever priced me out of any of their products. I have a MBPr, iMac 5K, iPhone 6 Plus, as well as slightly older Minis and iPods. I've always realized that these Apple products were pricey, although not out of line with their direct competitors. The Apple Watch, however, would seem to cost twice as much as I'd be willing to pay for this functionality. It'll be interesting to see how sales go.
Yeah, Apple products have historically been high priced, but always within reach of the middle-class consumer. This though is uncomfortable even for the comfortably well-off and insane for the rest of us.
The Apple watches are crap I suppose. First you need an iPhone to pair it to get access the 'smart' things. Second, battery is crap too. I think it needs some kind of energy recovery system to charge the battery (e.g. using the wrist pulse to generate induction power, similar to wireless charging or NFC). Overall, I see these smart watches as just marketing tools for Apple to suck more money from their brainwashed followers.
What a big surprise. There is nothing that can be done with a useless product. The Apple watch has only one purpose, to suck stupid Apple drones into handing more money to the evil empire.
Jobs' Mob has decided that the only way that punters will buy their nearly useless iWatch is if they are forced to watch adverts for the thing.
This morning iPhone users woke up to receive and undeletable advert for the iWatch and applications they didn't need forced on them. Now most Apple fanboys were overjoyed that Apple was paying them some attention, but others were less happy.
iOS 8.2 adds in the companion app for the Apple Watch, which Apple talked about in its event on Monday. The app is useful if you have an Apple Watch, as it lets you pair the device with your iPhone. However no one has an iWatch, and no one with any common sense would buy one.
So the Apple Watch app is pretty much just an ad for the watch that you can't delete. It has a bunch of videos showcasing what the Apple Watch can do, and lets you know when you can pre-order one.
There are a large number of tweets from outraged iPhone owners. We guess that Apple has not learned from the time that it forced people to download and listen to U2's latest album, that you should not force people to download things they don't want.
Either that or it is sheer arrogance and stupidity that Apple really does believe that people want to pay $350+ for a device which means they don't have to take their iPhone out of their pocket (but still have to carry it). <<<<
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
38 Comments
Back to Article
lilmoe - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
Yikes. Too expensive for me. Not interested in any "smart watch" yet. Not until I won't have to charge the battery every night... Maybe if it was once a week (is that a stretch?)cmdrdredd - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
Maybe some day. I really want a smart watch as I like the idea. I just don't think an entry level option should cost as much as my dive watch which uses no battery.Samus - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
I've had a Pebble for two years and wear it every day. I charge it every 3-days because I use it quite heavily (lot of vibration notifications, I have it set to display "seconds" requiring a screen refresh 60 times a minute, I have the backlight set to always on, etc) but some people get a week out of it even with the Bluetooth always on.The epaper with led backlight approach by Pebble is the right way to go until battery technology improves. OLED or LCD technology just saps too much power, and what use is a watch if the display isn't "always on."
The Apple watch is really nice, but like the Android Wear competition, doesn't offer anything really compelling yet. The base features that Pebble has are all that are really needed for a basic smartwatch accessory unless you actually plan to use the healthkit features (at which point the Pebble Time is still less than half the cost of the Apple Watch)
mkozakewich - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
This info is what I needed! A Pebble would have been useless to me if it didn't display seconds, and I wasn't sure if I could. (I may have been under the impression, back then, that it was using e-Ink).Honestly, the Pebble Time seems like the perfect watch. Maybe a little thick, but that's about it.
zodiacsoulmate - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link
it is using e-ink, it has low refresh rate but still way faster than 1frame/second.(probably around 15fps)BittenRottenApple - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link
Link to comment further down below:http://www.anandtech.com/comments/9067/apple-revea...
BittenRottenApple - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link
Source and Copyright:
http://fudzilla.com/news/mobile/37224-iphone-insta...
>>>>
More Malware
Jobs' Mob has decided that the only way that punters will buy their nearly useless iWatch is if they are forced to watch adverts for the thing.
This morning iPhone users woke up to receive and undeletable advert for the iWatch and applications they didn't need forced on them. Now most Apple fanboys were overjoyed that Apple was paying them some attention, but others were less happy.
iOS 8.2 adds in the companion app for the Apple Watch, which Apple talked about in its event on Monday. The app is useful if you have an Apple Watch, as it lets you pair the device with your iPhone. However no one has an iWatch, and no one with any common sense would buy one.
So the Apple Watch app is pretty much just an ad for the watch that you can't delete. It has a bunch of videos showcasing what the Apple Watch can do, and lets you know when you can pre-order one.
There are a large number of tweets from outraged iPhone owners. We guess that Apple has not learned from the time that it forced people to download and listen to U2's latest album, that you should not force people to download things they don't want.
Either that or it is sheer arrogance and stupidity that Apple really does believe that people want to pay $350+ for a device which means they don't have to take their iPhone out of their pocket (but still have to carry it).
<<<<
BittenRottenApple - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link
Edit: This link is working:http://fudzilla.com/news/mobile/37224-iphone-insta...
Please excuse the inconvenience.
medi03 - Saturday, March 14, 2015 - link
Uhm, unless there is some magical e-ink, not yet found in e-readers, refresh rate is close to 1fps, I think 15fps for e-ink is not even remotely imaginable.On top of it, the low power consumption of e-ink stands only when you do NOT update screen frequently, which isn't the case if you refresh it every second.
jeffkibuule - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
In the 7 years we've had the iPhone, battery life has not gone significantly up. Instead phones have gotten thinner, from the 11-12mm with the first phone to now 6.9mm now. 5 years from now, expect to be doing more power intensive things during the day (maybe GPS, LTE), but I wouldn't expect a week's worth of battery life in the near future. That's not the point of the product.And besides, even if it were able to stretch out to 2-3 days, an inconsistent pattern would make it a bit harder to remember to charge on a regular basis.
Samus - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
I'm surprised with how "exercised focused" the Apple Watch is they didn't include a kinetic or solar drive like Citizen and Timex have used for decades. "Ecodrive" wouldn't charge the watch, but it would help improve the battery life quite while working out. My wife has an old Citizen that gets a week charge from 15 minutes of walking, and this is 1990's technology. The watch is also tiny (28mm dial, 5mm thick) so I assume the charging mechanism is pretty small.Urizane - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
About mechanical (kinetic) charging mechanisms: That takes space (and therefor, capacity) from the battery that can't be appreciably recouped by charging the watch via exercise. The difference in power requirements of a well-tuned regular watch vs. a smart watch are enormous. Besides, it would mean that Apple expects 90% or more of the customers to actually exercise. Good luck with that.Solar, on the other hand, could make sense. That is, if they could work solar charging into the back layers of the display. It would seem impossible to have both a bright display while simultaneously able to absorb light from the sun...so, no.
coder543 - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
So... have you looked at the Pebble, Pebble Steel, Pebble Time, or Pebble Time Steel? 7 to 10 days of battery life is entirely normal, and their e-paper-like reflective LCD displays allow them to read in direct sunlight with ease.coder543 - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
to be read*Why is there no edit button in 2015?
lilmoe - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
I have, but I was hoping for a proper smart watch with a better ecosystem if that makes any sense. I'm looking closely at what they'll have next. Would love a Pebble running Android Wear.cmdrdredd - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
You can get a better watch than Apple offers for thousands less than they ask. They're mad.The sport model is the only one which is priced even somewhat close to where it should be.
lilmoe - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
15000 smaks! This better have some diamonds on it because I'm sure it ain't worth its weight in gold!cmdrdredd - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
As a bonus Google announced that Android Wear will be able to sync with iOS. So you can use the Moto 360 with your iPhone soon.Laxaa - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
The starting price for the "Edition"(stupid, stupid name) is insane. I saw someone touting online that it probably wouldn't cost more than $2500. I guess they were wrong.I also think it looks a bit overcomplicated. You have the touchscreen, "force touch" and the crown for navigation. As well as an extra button for bringing up your friends list. Doesn't seem as intuitive as the iPhone did when it came out.
mkozakewich - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
That's actually really cheap, for a luxury gold watch.Laxaa - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
But a luxury gold watch will last you several decades. The Apple Watch will probably be obsolete after three years.JeffFlanagan - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
More like 1 year, until they come out with a more powerful watch, and the people who spend a lot on toys want to upgrade to the latest. In 3 years it'll be both dead and obsolete since the battery will fail.JeffFlanagan - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
It's also cheap for a house, but we're talking about an electronic smartwatch here.Samus - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
wow. I mean. wow. lmfao.TallestJon96 - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
Didn't we replace watches with smartphones?agentbb007 - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
Dang $400 for the 42mm sport with a plastic band, uhm no thanks. $200 and I would check it out but $400 for a toy watch that will probably be outdated in 2 years when Apple watch 2 comes out? And $450 for the 42mm Link Bracelet!? Wow guess I'm spoiled with my $400 Citizen that is still going strong after 10 years.nandnandnand - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
How many transistors in the Apple S1 SoC?tipoo - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link
They didn't say, but it's reportedly as powerful as the old A5 in the 4S.DanD85 - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
Such an outrageous price for a piece of electronics! People are willing to pay huge sum of money for a Rolex or Patek Phillippe because those are works of art, mechanical marvels handmade by experienced craftsmen. These Apple Watch are still unmistakably electronic toys that will get obsoleted after a year when Apple introduce the 2nd gen. Apple's 1st generation product are mostly bad and get technically outdated very quickly. I guess only rich people or die-hard Apple fans would pay that much for a piece of half-baked experiment.easp - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
What rot. People are willing to pay a huge sum of money for a Rolex or Patek Phillippee because 1) They can 2) They like what they think spending $$$ on a swiss watch says about them.And yet, you find the price of an Apple Watch Edition outrageous? Please, get back to use when you've managed enough self-awareness to realize that you are regurgitating swiss watch marketing talking points as some sort of objective fact.
I think you're being similarly uncritical in your thinking about the future of the Apple Watch, or the present, for that matter.
ats - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
No, they aren't works of art, mechanical marvels handmade by experienced craftsmen, etc. They are also all marketing. Rolex and Patek Phillippe are super complex mechanical devices, and the only reason they are worth any money is marketing, pure marketing.Seriously, most Patek Phillippe and Rolex watches aren't even competitive with high jewel watches throughout history, and there is nothing cool, advanced, or awesome about a mechanical jewel watch, esp today. They keep horrible time and always will. They are at best a fashion accessory for old folks.
Spoony - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
I would argue that the Apple Watch is a work of art in the same sense that a Rolex is. How do you define that anyways? For a Rolex I would surmise you mean the manufacturing and assembly process. Apple Watch is a sublime demonstration of the best end-to-end manufacturing money can buy. If you think high end watches are better manufactured than an Apple Watch, you would be surprised. Apple is using more expensive mills, tighter tolerances, better procedures, better alloys. Apple Watch has no moving parts, it is more accurate and has a longer life between services. Except you get essentially that same level of fit and finish for $349 or for $17,000. So in that sense it is interestingly democratizing.I don't want an Apple Watch today, perhaps not next year, perhaps never. Maybe it will flop entirely. However, comparing it to Swiss automatic movement watches is not cut and dry on any vector.
milleron - Monday, March 9, 2015 - link
This is the first time that Apple has ever priced me out of any of their products. I have a MBPr, iMac 5K, iPhone 6 Plus, as well as slightly older Minis and iPods. I've always realized that these Apple products were pricey, although not out of line with their direct competitors. The Apple Watch, however, would seem to cost twice as much as I'd be willing to pay for this functionality. It'll be interesting to see how sales go.r3loaded - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
Yeah, Apple products have historically been high priced, but always within reach of the middle-class consumer. This though is uncomfortable even for the comfortably well-off and insane for the rest of us.limpy - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
The Apple watches are crap I suppose. First you need an iPhone to pair it to get access the 'smart' things. Second, battery is crap too. I think it needs some kind of energy recovery system to charge the battery (e.g. using the wrist pulse to generate induction power, similar to wireless charging or NFC). Overall, I see these smart watches as just marketing tools for Apple to suck more money from their brainwashed followers.crispbp04 - Tuesday, March 10, 2015 - link
a $15,000 watch with a 6 month product lifecycle. Time to buy AAPL! People will be taking out 2nd and 3rd mortgages just to keep up with the times.BittenRottenApple - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link
What a big surprise. There is nothing that can be done with a useless product. The Apple watch has only one purpose, to suck stupid Apple drones into handing more money to the evil empire.BittenRottenApple - Friday, March 13, 2015 - link
Source and Copyright:http://fudzilla.com/news/mobile/37224-iphone-insta...
>>>>More Malware
Jobs' Mob has decided that the only way that punters will buy their nearly useless iWatch is if they are forced to watch adverts for the thing.
This morning iPhone users woke up to receive and undeletable advert for the iWatch and applications they didn't need forced on them. Now most Apple fanboys were overjoyed that Apple was paying them some attention, but others were less happy.
iOS 8.2 adds in the companion app for the Apple Watch, which Apple talked about in its event on Monday. The app is useful if you have an Apple Watch, as it lets you pair the device with your iPhone. However no one has an iWatch, and no one with any common sense would buy one.
So the Apple Watch app is pretty much just an ad for the watch that you can't delete. It has a bunch of videos showcasing what the Apple Watch can do, and lets you know when you can pre-order one.
There are a large number of tweets from outraged iPhone owners. We guess that Apple has not learned from the time that it forced people to download and listen to U2's latest album, that you should not force people to download things they don't want.
Either that or it is sheer arrogance and stupidity that Apple really does believe that people want to pay $350+ for a device which means they don't have to take their iPhone out of their pocket (but still have to carry it).
<<<<