# Apple Finally Unveils the "Apple Watch" - I kind of Like it!



## RBrylawski

I know.....it's a smart watch, but hey, it's kind of stylish, has a Sapphire crystal and comes in 18 versions with leather, rubber, Milanese and Stainless link bands in 38mm and 42mm versions. The stainless link version is kind of cool as it offers a release button on the links to let you size the watch with absolutely no tools. There are 3 collections - Watch - Sport Watch and Watch Edition in 18K Gold.

I have to admit I like it better than I expected to and I will likely end up getting one when it's released officially in early 2015.

Here's a link to Apple's site about the watch: Apple - Apple Watch

Watchtime already has an article about it: http://www.watchtime.com/blog/the-a...-14208229&mc_cid=36b29b9a64&mc_eid=e642645067


----------



## John MS

I've been tempted by other offerings too.


----------



## Camguy

Yeah, not bad...not bad at all. I'm not a big square watch fan in general, but it suits the purpose here. I actually like the crown (iCrown?) quite a lot.


----------



## brrrdn

Not for me. I don't have an iPhone, but I wish them success. I work for a hi-tech company and people are already talking about it here.


----------



## SFKLR

RBrylawski said:


> I have to admit I like it better than I expected to and I will likely end up getting one when it's released officially in early 2015.


Not sure why this forum isn't lit up with comments. It's a revolutionary step in watches the likes of which haven't been seen since the introduction of the wrist watch and maybe before. Every watch has a practical aspect, a mechanical aspect and an aesthetic aspect. We may be mostly purists for fine mechanical heirloom-quality timepieces here, but ignoring this new watch is just silly. If Day/date is more valuable than just time, and day date moonphase complications even more valued, then how about time day date moonphase email music phone calls texts google gps directions maps etc? Seriously. For $349.

I'd like one primarily as a collector's piece. What do you think the first moonwatch is worth? The first apple watch, left in box, will only appreciate--even if it's software is obsolete in a decade. I'd also like a stainless steel with mesh thank you. Add an athletic band for health info.

Rant away, purists!


----------



## Arthur M

SFKLR said:


> Not sure why this forum isn't lit up with comments. It's a revolutionary step in watches the likes of which haven't been seen since the introduction of the wrist watch and maybe before. Every watch has a practical aspect, a mechanical aspect and an aesthetic aspect. We may be mostly purists for fine mechanical heirloom-quality timepieces here, but ignoring this new watch is just silly. If Day/date is more valuable than just time, and day date moonphase complications even more valued, then how about time day date moonphase email music phone calls texts google gps directions maps etc? Seriously. For $349.
> 
> I'd like one primarily as a collector's piece. What do you think the first moonwatch is worth? The first apple watch, left in box, will only appreciate--even if it's software is obsolete in a decade. I'd also like a stainless steel with mesh thank you. Add an athletic band for health info.
> 
> Rant away, purists!


All the threads were moved to the smartwatch forums and combined.


----------



## RBrylawski

SFKLR said:


> Not sure why this forum isn't lit up with comments. It's a revolutionary step in watches the likes of which haven't been seen since the introduction of the wrist watch and maybe before. Every watch has a practical aspect, a mechanical aspect and an aesthetic aspect. We may be mostly purists for fine mechanical heirloom-quality timepieces here, but ignoring this new watch is just silly. If Day/date is more valuable than just time, and day date moonphase complications even more valued, then how about time day date moonphase email music phone calls texts google gps directions maps etc? Seriously. For $349.
> 
> I'd like one primarily as a collector's piece. What do you think the first moonwatch is worth? The first apple watch, left in box, will only appreciate--even if it's software is obsolete in a decade. I'd also like a stainless steel with mesh thank you. Add an athletic band for health info.
> 
> Rant away, purists!


Well said, and I agree!


----------



## Ace McLoud

SFKLR said:


> Not sure why this forum isn't lit up with comments. It's a revolutionary step in watches the likes of which haven't been seen since the introduction of the wrist watch and maybe before. Every watch has a practical aspect, a mechanical aspect and an aesthetic aspect. We may be mostly purists for fine mechanical heirloom-quality timepieces here, but ignoring this new watch is just silly. If Day/date is more valuable than just time, and day date moonphase complications even more valued, then how about time day date moonphase email music phone calls texts google gps directions maps etc? Seriously. For $349.
> 
> I'd like one primarily as a collector's piece. What do you think the first moonwatch is worth? The first apple watch, left in box, will only appreciate--even if it's software is obsolete in a decade. I'd also like a stainless steel with mesh thank you. Add an athletic band for health info.
> 
> Rant away, purists!


I'm not sure how it's revolutionary, and I already have a phone that does all the other things.

Anything that is manufactured in the millions will not be a collectors item.

I dislike the look, and fail to see how they're useful, so I'll pass.


----------



## TheWalrus

SFKLR said:


> Not sure why this forum isn't lit up with comments. It's a revolutionary step in watches the likes of which haven't been seen since the introduction of the wrist watch and maybe before. Every watch has a practical aspect, a mechanical aspect and an aesthetic aspect. We may be mostly purists for fine mechanical heirloom-quality timepieces here, but ignoring this new watch is just silly. If Day/date is more valuable than just time, and day date moonphase complications even more valued, then how about time day date moonphase email music phone calls texts google gps directions maps etc? Seriously. For $349.
> 
> I'd like one primarily as a collector's piece. What do you think the first moonwatch is worth? The first apple watch, left in box, will only appreciate--even if it's software is obsolete in a decade. I'd also like a stainless steel with mesh thank you. Add an athletic band for health info.
> 
> Rant away, purists!


It has been - the topics keep getting moved to the smart watch forum.

I like the design. But as a device, it's just not for me. I'll stick to my gears and springs, and quartz crystals.


----------



## UKMike

The first moon landing was 45 years ago. In less than a half of that I am willing to bet you won't even be able to get an Apple Watch to fire up because the flaky battery will have died and replacements will be obsolete. And in another 45 years the Moon watch will still be ticking away. 

The Apple watch is hideous and although I haven't compared capability (because the concept doesn't appeal to me) I much prefer the round designs of the Motorola and LG G-R smart watches, which at least are moderately elegant.


----------



## Cannonball

FINALLY!! A watch I can wear on my other wrist and possibly get away with it!

Half of us will be browsing WUS on that thing by the end of 2015...


----------



## Camguy

Ah, I see...on Gizmodo the crown is called "that little watch nob." :-d


----------



## crownpuller

I'm hugely impressed by the technology and I think the steel bracelet is a work of art; but, do I want one ?.... not really, no. I neither want nor need all those bells & whistles.


----------



## CMTFR

RBrylawski said:


> I have to admit I like it better than I expected to


Agreed. It could be worse, I suppose. It's not for me though.


----------



## brrrdn

UKMike said:


> ..you won't even be able to get an Apple Watch to fire up because the flaky battery will have died and replacements will be obsolete. And in another 45 years the Moon watch will still be ticking away.


Just like an iPhone, the iWatch is only going to last until Apple releases a new version. You're expected to buy a new updated one every year. ;-)


----------



## Arthur M

The last time apple jumped into a market they had no business being in:

"We believe there is enough evidence to suggest Apple will launch such a device. In our view, the appearance of the iPhone (or something like it) poses little risk to RIM's business."
Chris Umiastowski, TD Securities, 12 December 2006

"Apple will launch a mobile phone in January, and it will become available during 2007. It will be a lovely bit of kit, a pleasure to behold, and its limited functionality will be easy to access and use. The Apple phone will be exclusive to one of the major networks in each territory and some customers will switch networks just to get it, but not as many as had been hoped. As customers start to realise that the competition offers better functionality at a lower price, by negotiating a better subsidy, sales will stagnate. After a year a new version will be launched, but it will lack the innovation of the first and quickly vanish. The only question remaining is if, when the iPod phone fails, it will take the iPod with it."
Bill Ray, The Register, 26 December 2006

"The iPhone will not substantially alter the fundamental structure and challenges of the mobile industry."
Charles Golvin, Forrester Research Inc, January 2007

I can't believe the hype being given to iPhone. Even some of my blindly-loyal pro-Microsoft friends and colleagues talk like it's a real innovation and will "redefine the market" or "usher in a new age".
What!?!? [&#8230;] I just have to wonder who will want one of these things (other than the religious faithful). People need this to be a phone, first and foremost. But with 5 hours of battery life? No keypad? (you try typing a phone number on that screen, no matter how wonderful it is - you will want a keypad). And for all that whiz-bang Internet access, you absolutely need the phone to work, immediately, every single time. Will it do that? So please mark this post and come back in two years to see the results of my prediction: I predict they will not sell anywhere near the 10M Jobs predicts for 2008.
Richard Sprague, Senior Marketing Director, Microsoft, January 2007

"The big competitors in the mobile-phone industry such as Nokia Oyj and Motorola Inc. won't be whispering nervously into their clamshells over a new threat to their business. The iPhone is nothing more than a luxury bauble that will appeal to a few gadget freaks. In terms of its impact on the industry, the iPhone is less relevant&#8230; Apple is unlikely to make much of an impact on this market&#8230; Apple will sell a few to its fans, but the iPhone won't make a long-term mark on the industry."
Matthew Lynn, Bloomberg, 15 January 2007

and that's just a few of the many.

All I'm saying is that apple is good at this. They know how to read the market. Just the rumour that Apple was making a watch a few years ago caused big players to try to corner the market before apple jumps in. Looks are subjective. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean many others don't. I like it and I see the functionality and it attracts me. From what I saw and from what I've experience with current smartwatches, the apple watch is ahead, more intuitive and better designed. That was well done, Apple. Time to ditch the BB (The phone, not the watch)


----------



## DrTandoori

I think the watch is ok. I'd still feel naked though, not wearing a mechanical watch. 
That metal strap however... I wonder if it'd fit a normal watch. It looks very nice.


----------



## alx007

Am I the only one that was delighted to see that the seconds hand sweeps, rather than the ugly quartz ticking on the other renditions of smartwatches??? I still think this one is not for me, but loved the little nods apple gave watch enthusiasts.


----------



## alx007

I would also love to see the price of the 18k gold version.


----------



## Tagdevil

It's a disgrace and an insult to watch purists. Some things are meant to be left alone only to be changed and updated by advances in precision and quality craftsmanship, not electronics.










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## pley3r

On the metal band It reminds me of my grandads 1980's rectangle tissot ha


----------



## Tym2relax

If it had a rotating bezel and 1000m water resistance, I'd be in!!


----------



## T1meout

Those 18k gold versions will depreciate faster then a speeding bullet.


----------



## bigvatch

Arthur M said:


> The last time apple jumped into a market they had no business being in:
> 
> "We believe there is enough evidence to suggest Apple will launch such a device. In our view, the appearance of the iPhone (or something like it) poses little risk to RIM's business."
> Chris Umiastowski, TD Securities, 12 December 2006
> 
> "Apple will launch a mobile phone in January, and it will become available during 2007. It will be a lovely bit of kit, a pleasure to behold, and its limited functionality will be easy to access and use. The Apple phone will be exclusive to one of the major networks in each territory and some customers will switch networks just to get it, but not as many as had been hoped. As customers start to realise that the competition offers better functionality at a lower price, by negotiating a better subsidy, sales will stagnate. After a year a new version will be launched, but it will lack the innovation of the first and quickly vanish. The only question remaining is if, when the iPod phone fails, it will take the iPod with it."
> Bill Ray, The Register, 26 December 2006
> 
> "The iPhone will not substantially alter the fundamental structure and challenges of the mobile industry."
> Charles Golvin, Forrester Research Inc, January 2007
> 
> I can't believe the hype being given to iPhone. Even some of my blindly-loyal pro-Microsoft friends and colleagues talk like it's a real innovation and will "redefine the market" or "usher in a new age".
> What!?!? [&#8230;] I just have to wonder who will want one of these things (other than the religious faithful). People need this to be a phone, first and foremost. But with 5 hours of battery life? No keypad? (you try typing a phone number on that screen, no matter how wonderful it is - you will want a keypad). And for all that whiz-bang Internet access, you absolutely need the phone to work, immediately, every single time. Will it do that? So please mark this post and come back in two years to see the results of my prediction: I predict they will not sell anywhere near the 10M Jobs predicts for 2008.
> Richard Sprague, Senior Marketing Director, Microsoft, January 2007
> 
> "The big competitors in the mobile-phone industry such as Nokia Oyj and Motorola Inc. won't be whispering nervously into their clamshells over a new threat to their business. The iPhone is nothing more than a luxury bauble that will appeal to a few gadget freaks. In terms of its impact on the industry, the iPhone is less relevant&#8230; Apple is unlikely to make much of an impact on this market&#8230; Apple will sell a few to its fans, but the iPhone won't make a long-term mark on the industry."
> Matthew Lynn, Bloomberg, 15 January 2007
> 
> and that's just a few of the many.
> 
> All I'm saying is that apple is good at this. They know how to read the market. Just the rumour that Apple was making a watch a few years ago caused big players to try to corner the market before apple jumps in. Looks are subjective. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean many others don't. I like it and I see the functionality and it attracts me. From what I saw and from what I've experience with current smartwatches, the apple watch is ahead, more intuitive and better designed. That was well done, Apple. Time to ditch the BB (The phone, not the watch)


The demand for better smartphones was always there. But demand for dumbed-down smart watches? I don't know about that.


----------



## alx007

Arthur M said:


> The last time apple jumped into a market they had no business being in:
> 
> "We believe there is enough evidence to suggest Apple will launch such a device. In our view, the appearance of the iPhone (or something like it) poses little risk to RIM's business."
> Chris Umiastowski, TD Securities, 12 December 2006
> 
> "Apple will launch a mobile phone in January, and it will become available during 2007. It will be a lovely bit of kit, a pleasure to behold, and its limited functionality will be easy to access and use. The Apple phone will be exclusive to one of the major networks in each territory and some customers will switch networks just to get it, but not as many as had been hoped. As customers start to realise that the competition offers better functionality at a lower price, by negotiating a better subsidy, sales will stagnate. After a year a new version will be launched, but it will lack the innovation of the first and quickly vanish. The only question remaining is if, when the iPod phone fails, it will take the iPod with it."
> Bill Ray, The Register, 26 December 2006
> 
> "The iPhone will not substantially alter the fundamental structure and challenges of the mobile industry."
> Charles Golvin, Forrester Research Inc, January 2007
> 
> I can't believe the hype being given to iPhone. Even some of my blindly-loyal pro-Microsoft friends and colleagues talk like it's a real innovation and will "redefine the market" or "usher in a new age".
> What!?!? [&#8230;] I just have to wonder who will want one of these things (other than the religious faithful). People need this to be a phone, first and foremost. But with 5 hours of battery life? No keypad? (you try typing a phone number on that screen, no matter how wonderful it is - you will want a keypad). And for all that whiz-bang Internet access, you absolutely need the phone to work, immediately, every single time. Will it do that? So please mark this post and come back in two years to see the results of my prediction: I predict they will not sell anywhere near the 10M Jobs predicts for 2008.
> Richard Sprague, Senior Marketing Director, Microsoft, January 2007
> 
> "The big competitors in the mobile-phone industry such as Nokia Oyj and Motorola Inc. won't be whispering nervously into their clamshells over a new threat to their business. The iPhone is nothing more than a luxury bauble that will appeal to a few gadget freaks. In terms of its impact on the industry, the iPhone is less relevant&#8230; Apple is unlikely to make much of an impact on this market&#8230; Apple will sell a few to its fans, but the iPhone won't make a long-term mark on the industry."
> Matthew Lynn, Bloomberg, 15 January 2007
> 
> and that's just a few of the many.
> 
> All I'm saying is that apple is good at this. They know how to read the market. Just the rumour that Apple was making a watch a few years ago caused big players to try to corner the market before apple jumps in. Looks are subjective. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean many others don't. I like it and I see the functionality and it attracts me. From what I saw and from what I've experience with current smartwatches, the apple watch is ahead, more intuitive and better designed. That was well done, Apple. Time to ditch the BB (The phone, not the watch)


I almost agree with you. Only I don't think the Apple watch is after watch purists, but people who stopped wearing watches a long time ago.

TechCrunch said it best in an article I can't link here because it has the f word on the url, but comes as first hit if you google "techcrunch smartwatch article"


----------



## Arthur M

bigvatch said:


> The demand for better smartphones was always there. But demand for dumbed-down smart watches? I don't know about that.


Which features are being dumbed down? From personal experience, they still offer very limited functionality and most are quite cumbersome in design.


----------



## TheWalrus

Tym2relax said:


> If it had a rotating bezel and 1000m water resistance, I'd be in!!


And a solid, reliable, mechanical movement.

And maybe a no-deco chart on the bezel.

Oh, and an orange face.

And a beads of rice bracelet.

Yeah... then I'd get an iWatch.


----------



## metalgear

to each his own, but i see the smartwatch as an extension to the smartphone and fulfills that segment with that particular need.


----------



## Arthur M

alx007 said:


> I almost agree with you. Only I don't think the Apple watch is after watch purists, but people who stopped wearing watches a long time ago.
> 
> TechCrunch said it best in an article I can't link here because it has the f word on the url, but comes as first hit if you google "techcrunch smartwatch article"


Good article. He kind of generalizes when describing the tiers of the watch world, but the point remains:

" The most expensive watches go to collectors, whose rationality is suspect, and the very rich. The mid-range watches go to folks who appreciate the artistry of a fine mechanical timepiece. And the wearables - the iWatch, if you will - will go to everyone else. The Swiss watch industry knows that and is more than willing to let it happen."


----------



## bigvatch

It's funny.... Apple announces they hire the "World Famous" designer of the stylishly ROUND Ikepods ....just days before announcement of their RECTANGULAR smart watches , but it seems the Moto 360 looks far more like stylishly ROUND Ikepods.


----------



## adi4

What's interesting is what they said about 50 ms accuracy. I'm guessing it's just a standard quartz crystal in there that will drift just like atomics, but pretty cool that it will most likely stay within this range as internet connectivity (at least for me) is pretty much always available while my G-Shock does not always pick up the atomic signal.

Definitely evolutionary and not revolutionary for smartwatches, but a good step in the right direction. I'm betting battery life will be abysmal, but I'll probably be more excited about Gen 2 or 3 anyways. It may replace my G-Shock as my running/gym watch IF it's not completely a dud without the iPhone nearby.


----------



## CMTFR

bigvatch said:


> It's funny.... Apple announces they hire the "World Famous" designer of the stylishly ROUND Ikepods ....just days before announcement of their RECTANGULAR smart watches , but it seems the Moto 360 looks far more like stylishly ROUND Ikepods.


They probably solved the old geometric problem...squaring the circle! ;-)


----------



## bigvatch

Arthur M said:


> Which features are being dumbed down? From personal experience, they still offer very limited functionality and most are quite cumbersome in design.


I meant dumbed down compared to a smart phone (which the smart watch is not intended to replace) In terms of just a watch, yeah smart watches offer the most of any other kind of watch which that is one thing I see going for it, but there are drawbacks apparently............always having to charge them, maybe daily.


----------



## Bugra

If they put a Solar or Kinetic movement inside and the watch didn't need to be charged and get the energy from capacitor.

Then it would be a revolution. 

This way it's a smaller version of iPhone. 

I'm sure they will sell lots and eventually somebody will come up with self-charging smart watch. 

This will be start of it like an iphone at early stages.


----------



## drunken monkey

Just because it goes on the wrist and can tell the time, doesn't make it a competitor for traditional mechanical watches, especially those in the luxury markets.

If you don't understand that, you might as well stop logging on here.


----------



## KangarueTheDay

Arthur M said:


> All I'm saying is that apple is good at this. They know how to read the market. Just the rumour that Apple was making a watch a few years ago caused big players to try to corner the market before apple jumps in. Looks are subjective. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean many others don't. I like it and I see the functionality and it attracts me. From what I saw and from what I've experience with current smartwatches, the apple watch is ahead, more intuitive and better designed. That was well done, Apple. Time to ditch the BB (The phone, not the watch)


Give the people something they don't know they want. That was the logic of Steve Jobs. And... It worked.

I think they hit it out of the park with this. Beautifully designed, awesome customization (I love the fact that I can put Mickey Mouse on the dial), and it'll be a great addition to my rotation. Will it replace my mechanicals? Absolutely not. But it will add something different to the mix and will be a wonderful workout companion.

I'll be that guy that's waiting in line to get the first batch!


----------



## balzebub

Never going to wear a smart watch unless it can totally replace my smart phone. I mean if I have to lug around my iphone/android phone anyway, why would I want to wear a smart watch? Just another device I need to charge...

Sent via carrier pigeons


----------



## Rob Roberts

At least more people will have a watch on their wrist! I may have to get one just because I am an Apple Fan. I love my mechanicals too much to wear it often. If it gives accurate blood pressure and vital signs…thats pretty darn cool! Apple devices go obsolete every year or two so I may wait until 2nd generation. Probably not 18 k either!


----------



## Arthur M

drunken monkey said:


> Just because it goes on the wrist and can tell the time, doesn't make it a competitor for traditional mechanical watches, especially those in the luxury markets.
> 
> If you don't understand that, you might as well stop logging on here.


Who's saying that? I don't think I've read a single post saying that and I think it would have stood out if I did see one.


----------



## KangarueTheDay

drunken monkey said:


> Just because it goes on the wrist and can tell the time, doesn't make it a competitor for traditional mechanical watches, especially those in the luxury markets.
> 
> If you don't understand that, you might as well stop logging on here.


There was a very good article written on exactly that. What it basically said is that the luxury watch market has quadrupled since 2000. The Apple Watch will obviously not be competing in the luxury market. However, it has potential to give a big hit to the low-end quartz industry. Personally, I wouldn't spend $350 on an analog quartz when I could have this watch for the same price...

I don't have the link, but the article is titled_ Time's Up Switzerland: Here Comes Apple's Watch_. I would recommend reading it!


----------



## drunken monkey

In my world, all threads form a larger conversation.
That was my reply.

That is all.


----------



## Surfrider

I think it looks really cool and I like iPhones but I probably wouldn't buy one. If the screen stays on all the time and the charge in watch-mode-only lasted 3 - 5 years like a normal quartz, then maybe. Otherwise, all the cell phone/ Bluetooth features are pointless for my purposes.


----------



## impreziv

I will buy one when theyre released. I'll keep wearing my mechanicals on my left wrist, and possibly the iwatch on the right. It'll be a good way to measure the accuracy of my mechanicals to 50 milliseconds!


----------



## Tempus Fidelis

Honestly, as a computer science student and a watch guy, I really like the steps they've taken to design this. Most importantly I think it's great that they have a sweeping second hand, at least giving a nod to mechanical pieces. I may actually buy one, but I'd probably wait until the next generation for a thinner one with some of the initial bugs worked out. I do suppose that there's always the possibility that people who weren't into watches before can buy an Apple Watch and then become interested in offerings from other companies from an analog quartz or mechanical watch (considering that a smartwatch can't really be worn with a suit and tie, at least in my opinion.) My only real question would be wether or not having a purely functional piece on my wrist would outweigh the advantages to having a mechanical...


----------



## unpleasantness

impreziv said:


> I will buy one when theyre released. I'll keep wearing my mechanicals on my left wrist, and possibly the iwatch on the right. It'll be a good way to measure the accuracy of my mechanicals to 50 milliseconds!


There seems to be a question as to whether the Apple Watch can be worn on the right wrist, as it will make accessing the crown/button very awkward. Apple may well have a way of dealing with this, but it was a subject of debate at least initially. And don't forget your iPhone! The watch won't do much of anything without it.


----------



## Arthur M

unpleasantness said:


> There seems to be a question as to whether the Apple Watch can be worn on the right wrist, as it will make accessing the crown/button very awkward. Apple may well have a way of dealing with this, but it was a subject of debate at least initially. And don't forget your iPhone! The watch won't do much of anything without it.


For once, we lefties have an inherent advantage.


----------



## akasnowmaaan

UKMike said:


> The first moon landing was 45 years ago. In less than a half of that I am willing to bet you won't even be able to get an Apple Watch to fire up because the flaky battery will have died and replacements will be obsolete. And in another 45 years the Moon watch will still be ticking away.


Yeah, prehistoric flint knives can still cut as well as they did hundred of thousand years ago, but I'll still use a Spyderco, thanks.


----------



## aardvarkbark

Is the movement in-house?


----------



## dbakiva

unpleasantness said:


> There seems to be a question as to whether the Apple Watch can be worn on the right wrist, as it will make accessing the crown/button very awkward. Apple may well have a way of dealing with this, but it was a subject of debate at least initially. And don't forget your iPhone! The watch won't do much of anything without it.


The iPhones and iPads can flip orientation, 90 or 180 degrees. I wouldn't be surprised if that capability is built into the Apple Watch already, or could be done easily.


----------



## dbakiva

I was impressed with how ambitious Apple's entry into the watch biz was. I expected one watch and perhaps a couple of band options, but this was really impressive, and the $349 entry point seems very attractive considering what it will do. It's a pretty exciting development and I think that Apple really gets it.

I'm not going to jump up and buy one any time soon, but it becomes a very alluring option in the under $500 price range. I've tried twice to like an atomic Protrek. Didn't happen ... this could be the next attempt at some high-techie wristamabob.


----------



## camb66

I was really hoping that it would be less watch like and more bracelet like so that I could wear a mechanical watch and the Apple watch but they have really produced it to look like a watch so that option is out. Like the technology but not a fan of the design. Will not be getting one any time soon.


----------



## Me116

I definitely think it is less hideous than all the other smartwatches. that's about it


----------



## sduford

It has one big flaw, it REQUIRES an iPhone.

I think this will appeal to the young crowd who have never owned a watch and spend their day glued to their iPhones. Will also make a nice health/exercise band.

But a fine watch it isn't.


----------



## Ace McLoud

drunken monkey said:


> Just because it goes on the wrist and can tell the time, doesn't make it a competitor for traditional mechanical watches, especially those in the luxury markets.
> 
> If you don't understand that, you might as well stop logging on here.


Agree.



metalgear said:


> to each his own, but i see the smartwatch as an extension to the smartphone and fulfills that segment with that particular need.


Not sure if it's an extension? It just doubles up on features you already have?



Arthur M said:


> Who's saying that? I don't think I've read a single post saying that and I think it would have stood out if I did see one.


Somebody is bound to say that at some point.



KangarueTheDay said:


> Give the people something they don't know they want. That was the logic of Steve Jobs. And... It worked.
> 
> I think they hit it out of the park with this. Beautifully designed, awesome customization (I love the fact that I can put Mickey Mouse on the dial),* and it'll be a great addition to my rotation*. Will it replace my mechanicals? Absolutely not. But it will add something different to the mix and will be a wonderful workout companion.
> 
> I'll be that guy that's waiting in line to get the first batch!


I won't question your enthusiasm, I can see why people are interested in this, but wont it be odd to only have that functionality for one day a week (depending on the size of your rotation)? The rest of the time you'll 'only' have a regular watch.


----------



## Mike_Dowling

Between two phones, an iPad, two laptops, Kindle Paperwhite, fitbit, toothbrush, bluetooth headset, etc... I just have no desire to own something else to charge, especially a watch that needs to sit on a charger every 12 hours instead of on my wrist. Wake me up when they perfect wireless charging and batteries that last months.


----------



## Blue Jam

Tagdevil said:


> It's a disgrace and an insult to watch purists. Some things are meant to be left alone only to be changed and updated by advances in precision and quality craftsmanship, not electronics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I absolutely love that in support of your "It's a disgrace... not electronics, grrr apple" view you post a picture of a SEIKO. The company that brought mechanical watchmaking to its knees with the popularisation of quartz, the company that continues to blur lines with Spring Drive movements. The icing on the cake is that you posted from an iPad. 

Before I had a smartphone I didn't know that it wouldn't be till I'd consider having internet access in my pocket indispensable (what blessed lives we live to consider such a thing as indispensable). So I'm not going to write off how useful it might be to have at-a-glance access for the many notifications we get each day. I'll watch with interest, but don't think that just because it's worn on the wrist and tells time that it should be of interest to every horologist out there.


----------



## mew88

It didn't look that bad..until I saw this photo from Hodinkee


----------



## TheWalrus

sduford said:


> It has one big flaw, it REQUIRES an iPhone.
> 
> I think this will appeal to the young crowd who have never owned a watch and spend their day glued to their iPhones. Will also make a nice health/exercise band.
> 
> But a fine watch it isn't.


Honestly? I think you're underplaying who's going to like this. This is also going to speak to every bored middle manager, in every corporation and government office who's desperately wanted the ability to casually and subtly check their (a) Tweets (b) sports scores (c) emails (d) Facebook profiles (e) whatever the else they're addicted to online, during every long, boring, 2 hour post-lunch meeting they're required to attend.


----------



## Arthur M

mew88 said:


> It didn't look that bad..until I saw this photo from Hodinkee


Surely that's the 42mm variant? I hope. Luckily there are many combos to suit tastes.


----------



## mew88

Arthur M said:


> Surely that's the 42mm variant? I hope. Luckily there are many combos to suit tastes.


I sure hope it is, the Patek is 36mm if that's anything to go by.


----------



## LesserBlackDog

It doesn't blow my hair back. But it doesn't make me angry, either. I don't feel any particular desire to own one or see how it would have much practical value or use in my life. But I guess I should reserve judgment until it's been on the market for a while.



Arthur M said:


> Surely that's the 42mm variant? I hope. Luckily there are many combos to suit tastes.


I'm surprised by the 38mm and 42mm size choices. Obviously they are limited, to some extent, by functional and technological necessity. But a 38mm rectangular watch will wear more like a 40-42mm round watch - which means it may be too big for a lot of potential users, especially smaller-wristed women.


----------



## sduford

LesserBlackDog said:


> It doesn't blow my hair back. But it doesn't make me angry, either. I don't feel any particular desire to own one or see how it would have much practical value or use in my life. But I guess I should reserve judgment until it's been on the market for a while.
> 
> I'm surprised by the 38mm and 42mm size choices. Obviously they are limited, to some extent, by functional and technological necessity. But a 38mm rectangular watch will wear more like a 40-42mm round watch - which means it may be too big for a lot of potential users, especially smaller-wristed women.


I imagine that minimum battery size was a severe limitation.


----------



## Camguy

I guess I'd hate to be limited to one watch, nor one I have to put on a charger every night. Maybe the charger would be okay, since I'd only wear it once and a while, and it'd be fun, but...


----------



## denmanproject

Ace McLoud said:


> I'm not sure how it's revolutionary, and I already have a phone that does all the other things.
> 
> Anything that is manufactured in the millions will not be a collectors item.
> 
> I dislike the look, and fail to see how they're useful, so I'll pass.


Agreed


----------



## Ace McLoud

It doesn't look too big, I'm wearing mine now:


----------



## denmanproject

Tagdevil said:


> It's a disgrace and an insult to watch purists. Some things are meant to be left alone only to be changed and updated by advances in precision and quality craftsmanship, not electronics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Funny, I can't quite make out the pitchfork in the picture&#8230;&#8230; :-d


----------



## Tagdevil

The WristPad is for juvenile geeks. It'll be a useless throw-in with a purchase of a new iPhone by spring.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## meloie

SFKLR said:


> Not sure why this forum isn't lit up with comments. It's a revolutionary step in watches the likes of which haven't been seen since the introduction of the wrist watch and maybe before. Every watch has a practical aspect, a mechanical aspect and an aesthetic aspect. We may be mostly purists for fine mechanical heirloom-quality timepieces here, but ignoring this new watch is just silly. If Day/date is more valuable than just time, and day date moonphase complications even more valued, then how about time day date moonphase email music phone calls texts google gps directions maps etc? Seriously. For $349.
> 
> I'd like one primarily as a collector's piece. What do you think the first moonwatch is worth? The first apple watch, left in box, will only appreciate--even if it's software is obsolete in a decade. I'd also like a stainless steel with mesh thank you. Add an athletic band for health info.
> 
> Rant away, purists!


It's hard to comment on something when it has just been displayed and won't even be released until next year.
Thanks for your contribution paid-for-by-Apple-stooge.


----------



## Arthur M

Tagdevil said:


> The WristPad is for juvenile geeks. It'll be a useless *throw-in with a purchase of a new iPhone by spring.*
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I hope! That'll make it a lock-in purchase for certain.


----------



## fbd223

I had a bunch of fanboys at work today talking all about it and the what came to mind is... I like watches to be timepieces not gadgets.


----------



## monza06

One more made-in-china redundant toy to mop up the insatiable consumption of some group of people, what's next, the same gizmo you already have but hanging from your neck on a strap, or an ankle bracelet ??


----------



## Coleslaw

Camguy said:


> Yeah, not bad...not bad at all. I'm not a big square watch fan in general, but it suits the purpose here. I actually like the crown (iCrown?) quite a lot.


I also really like the idea of a tactile crown driving my interaction with a apple watch. As a big fan of hand crankers, I love interacting with my watches via a well built crown. A little bit of a shout out to us WIS.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Arthur M

Coleslaw said:


> I also really like the idea of a tactile crown driving my interaction with a apple watch. As a big fan of hand crankers, I love interacting with my watches via a well built crown. A little bit of a shout out to us WIS.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Along with the sweeping second hand; they really didn't have to do that. Definitely a nod to wrist watches and enthusiasts.


----------



## sduford

Battery life will be marginal out of the box and only get worse as you install more apps and the battery ages. So this will be another Apple gadget that people need to upgrade every year. Generating lots of cash for Apple.


----------



## KangarueTheDay

Ace McLoud said:


> I won't question your enthusiasm, I can see why people are interested in this, but wont it be odd to only have that functionality for one day a week (depending on the size of your rotation)? The rest of the time you'll 'only' have a regular watch.


I will agree with you on that. Well, maybe I'll just use it for workouts. Haha.


----------



## Arthur M

sduford said:


> Battery life will be marginal out of the box and only get worse as you install more apps and the battery ages. So this will be another Apple gadget that people need to upgrade every year. Generating lots of cash for Apple.


I would have liked them to announce some sort of servicing type program. Even better would have been for the watch to have upgradable hardware.


----------



## RBrylawski

Interesting discussion so far. I love how some are so aghast at the mere notion of wearable technology. I'm betting some were just as perplexed when the first iPhone came out. I was one of them. I couldn't imagine why on earth I needed anything like an iPhone when my Motorola Razr, received and made calls so nicely. Now, you'd have to wrestle my iPhone or iPad from my hands. It will be interesting over time to see how many here stay in the "not me" camp. I won't even pretend to not be interested. They're just plain cool and something I'll look forward to when they're available. And yes, I'll be ordering the new iPhone 6 on Friday. I already have new iPhone cases sitting in a drawer in anticipation of the new phone!


----------



## Tagdevil

Arthur M said:


> Along with the sweeping second hand; they really didn't have to do that. Definitely a nod to wrist watches and enthusiasts.


A virtual second hand is comedy to watch enthusiasts and especially those who are professionals. An actual sweeping second hand.....ya know, one that actually exists in an actual watch.....is preferred.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Arthur M

Tagdevil said:


> A virtual second hand is comedy to watch enthusiasts and especially those who are professionals. An actual sweeping second hand.....ya know, one that actually exists in an actual watch.....is preferred.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


OK? I'm a watch enthusiast and I certainly appreciate the sweeping hand. I guess that means I'm not a true enthusiast. Why all the hate? Enjoy your mechanical watches. No problem. I'll enjoy both a smartwatch and a wrist watch.


----------



## Ace McLoud

RBrylawski said:


> Interesting discussion so far. I love how some are so aghast at the mere notion of wearable technology. I'm betting some were just as perplexed when the first iPhone came out. I was one of them. I couldn't imagine why on earth I needed anything like an iPhone when my Motorola Razr, received and made calls so nicely. Now, you'd have to wrestle my iPhone or iPad from my hands. It will be interesting over time to see how many here stay in the "not me" camp. I won't even pretend to not be interested. They're just plain cool and something I'll look forward to when they're available. And yes, I'll be ordering the new iPhone 6 on Friday. I already have new iPhone cases sitting in a drawer in anticipation of the new phone!


There is a difference: The iPhone did things a conventional phone couldn't do. Now we have the iPhone (or equivalent), why do we need these same features on our wrists?


----------



## Tagdevil

Arthur M said:


> Why all the hate? .


It's not a watch and shouldn't be called one.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Arthur M

Ace McLoud said:


> There is a difference: The iPhone did things a conventional phone couldn't do. Now we have the iPhone (or equivalent), why do we need these same features on our wrists?


It certainly isn't a 1:1 comparison, but when the iPhone first launched, they were blasted for not having a keyboard and they were told there was no market for a touch screen devices. They made the market. This time, there is clearly a market. Estimates for smartwatch sales are a yearly 700,000. Not a lot, but that's pre apple watch. Interesting forbes article:

How The Apple Watch Legitimizes And Enhances The Entire Smartwatch Scene - Forbes


----------



## RBrylawski

Ace McLoud said:


> There is a difference: The iPhone did things a conventional phone couldn't do. Now we have the iPhone (or equivalent), why do we need these same features on our wrists?


If you have to ask, the Apple Phone is likely not for you. I think some of the features of the watch would be useful.


----------



## Mediocre

Neat, but not for me. I do not care for rectangle watches, this is no different. Also, I still use a Blackberry for multiple reasons. Many of those reasons are the same ones I have no interest in a smartwatch


----------



## mew88

I paid a huge premium to have the first gen Iphone specially imported to my country when it came out. It was a revolutionary piece of technology.

The Apple Watch doesn't have the same effect on me.


----------



## lmcgbaj




----------



## Ace McLoud

Tagdevil said:


> It's not a watch and shouldn't be called one.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


You're being a bit out of order here. It most definitely is a watch.



RBrylawski said:


> If you have to ask, the Apple Phone is likely not for you. I think some of the features of the watch would be useful.


I guess not. I can't see any of these things being useful, or at least outweigh the negatives such as battery-life and small screen-size.


----------



## Tagdevil

Ace McLoud said:


> You're being a bit out of order here. It most definitely is a watch.
> 
> I guess not. I can't see any of these things being useful, or at least outweigh the negatives such as battery-life and small screen-size.


No dial
No crystal
No crown
No indices
No hands
No movement
No case
No bezel
NOT A WATCH

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Ace McLoud

Tagdevil said:


> No dial
> No crystal
> No crown
> No indices
> No hands
> No movement
> No case
> No bezel
> NOT A WATCH
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Let's not argue sematics here. This is mine, and is nothing other than a watch:


----------



## Arthur M

Tagdevil said:


> No dial
> No crystal
> No crown
> No indices
> No hands
> No movement
> No case
> No bezel
> NOT A WATCH
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Sounds like you have a bad case of Platonic essentialism...


----------



## Tagdevil

Arthur M said:


> Sounds like you have a bad case of Platonic essentialism...


Yes, and I am seeking professional help. 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Tagdevil

Ace McLoud said:


> Let's not argue sematics here. This is mine, and is nothing other than a watch:


That is..........indescribable. I'm speechless.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## 93EXCivic

Honestly I keep thinking about getting rid of tech like my iPhone. Since I have a tablet, I wouldn't mind not having a smart phone. I would only miss having GPS but my company pays my smart phone bill so I will keep it now. 

If I get another smart phone, it won't be an Apple though. I am done with their stupid propriety crap like charger cords and the fact that the phone won't stand up to being in your pocket if you are caught in the rain. 

I won't be caught dead with a smart watch.


----------



## Ace McLoud

Tagdevil said:


> That is..........indescribable. I'm speechless.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


It's great, isn't it? ;-)


----------



## RBrylawski

Tagdevil said:


> No dial
> No crystal
> No crown
> No indices
> No hands
> No movement
> No case
> No bezel
> NOT A WATCH
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


That's ridiculous. It has a Sapphire Crystal, tells time, straps around a wrist and does indeed have hands, they're just electronic. I guess by your definition a GShock, without physical hands is not a watch either. But that would be ridiculous too.


----------



## Tagdevil

RBrylawski said:


> That's ridiculous. It has a Sapphire Crystal, tells time, straps around a wrist and does indeed have hands, they're just electronic. I guess by your definition a GShock, without physical hands is not a watch either. But that would be ridiculous too.


Yes, by my definition a GShock is not a watch. It's an electronic device. Like a Garmin.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## RBrylawski

Tagdevil said:


> Yes, by my definition a GShock is not a watch. It's an electronic device. Like a Garmin.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Then you clearly have semantic issues as many here proudly wear GShocks as a watch.


----------



## Hayseed Brown

I really don't get all the commenters who are acting like they just got their feelings hurt by the very act of Apple releasing a watch. They sound like petulant children. No need to take this one personally. And the comments that this product is insulting or offensive are just plain nonsense. If it's not for you, then it's not for you. I know I won't be getting one, as I like my mechanical watches, but I won't look-down upon anyone that does. 

And this design is probably more inspired and well-finished than half of the watches I see on here on a daily basis. The steel bracelet looks fantastic. The case-shape and bracelet-integration options are nice as well. 

And unlike the majority here, I do think this has the potential to be a game-changer. We'll see what the wrist-electronics market does in the future, but if it takes off, there may be a whole generation of people who are too addicted to the functionality of their iWatches (or whatever) to convert to those mid-luxury mechanical watch brands. And this is just the start. In the future, wrist devices may alert you to everything that's going on in your body at the moment (whether it''s sensing the onset of a heart-attack, stroke, illness, blood-sugar level, etc.), plus those other functions inherent to current iWatches. 

Again, may just be too much to give up for the artistry of mechanicals.

But, for now, I'm sticking.


----------



## Will_f

alx007 said:


> Am I the only one that was delighted to see that the seconds hand sweeps, rather than the ugly quartz ticking on the other renditions of smartwatches??? I still think this one is not for me, but loved the little nods apple gave watch enthusiasts.


Nope


----------



## Hayseed Brown

...


----------



## Will_f

Personally, I think it's going to be as revolutionary as quartz was. 

I'm quite looking forward to the mechanical watch prices stagnating or falling for a decade or two. I'll definitely get an apple watch as soon as it comes out (it's seriously cool!) but I'll still be looking at mechanical watches too.

I hope the battery is replaceable. If it's not, then Apple will have a problem. People consider watches differently than phones- more like jewelry. Replacing your watch every 2-3 years will not be as acceptable as replacing your phone.


----------



## wristclock

What??? An effing nano with a strap???!!! If you can get an app that let's you have every watch dial than it may be kinda cool.


----------



## bigvatch

Arthur M said:


> It certainly isn't a 1:1 comparison, but when the iPhone first launched, they were blasted for not having a keyboard and they were told there was no market for a touch screen devices. They made the market. This time, there is clearly a market. Estimates for smartwatch sales are a yearly 700,000. Not a lot, but that's pre apple watch. Interesting forbes article:
> 
> How The Apple Watch Legitimizes And Enhances The Entire Smartwatch Scene - Forbes


"and they were told there was no market for a touch screen devices."

I dispute this part.


----------



## bigvatch

Will_f said:


> Personally, I think it's going to be as revolutionary as quartz was.
> 
> I'm quite looking forward to the mechanical watch prices stagnating or falling for a decade or two. I'll definitely get an apple watch as soon as it comes out (it's seriously cool!) but I'll still be looking at mechanical watches too.
> 
> I hope the battery is replaceable. If it's not, then Apple will have a problem. People consider watches differently than phones- more like jewelry. Replacing your watch every 2-3 years will not be as acceptable as replacing your phone.


"I think it's going to be as revolutionary as quartz was"

What exactly is revolutionary here?


----------



## Will_f

Quartz didn't revolutionize the watch world because it was more accurate (though it was) and it wasn't because it was cheaper (it wasn't initially). It was because everybody wanted one. 

I think you'll see the same with first the apple watch, and then others. If it looks good, is easy to use, and brings a lot of powerful features for the price of a swatch mechanical, it's going to sell well and at the expense of mid range luxury watches. Sure, we mechanical watch enthusiasts will continue to buy multiple mechanical toys, but we will be a minority. Everyone else will be checking their calendar reminders and map directions on their wrist.


----------



## Cannonball

This may draw MORE attention to good mechanical watches. You never know. 

But it will be another nail in the coffin of land line phones.


----------



## Arthur M

bigvatch said:


> "and they were told there was no market for a touch screen devices."
> 
> I dispute this part.


"As nice as the Apple iPhone is, it poses a real challenge to its users. Try typing a web key on a touchscreen on an Apple iPhone, that's a real challenge. You cannot see what you type"
Jim Balsillie, Co-CEO, Research in Motion, 7 November 2007

"We're finding - if you look at the surveys, you can see that large amount of the customers that have purchased touchscreen devices in last two years, they intend to get a device with the QWERTY keyboard on it now, right. I mean, they've got into a point where they've realize that a touchscreen alone is not enough; so that's important"
Mike Lazaridis, Co-CEO, Research In Motion, Inc, 16 April 2010

"10 reasons why the iPhone might flop: 1. The mobile phone market is not the digital music one. 2. Competition will be fierce. 3. Apple's user experience will be affected by Cingular's user experience. 4. The touch screen might not be suitable. 5. Lack of a keyboard. 6. The $500-$600 price tag is conflicting with the demand. 7. Lack of 3G support. 8. Battery life. 9. Lock-in strategy. 10. Apple will need to live up to the expectations.
Daniel Scocco, Seeking Alpha, 18 January 20071. Apple is running ads with all load times removed (edited out).
2. The device is set to run on GSM networks which in North America is not as widespread as CDMA.
3. The cell phone market is already crowded and fiercely competitive.
4. Folks change cell phones every 2 years or sooner.
5. Personally I don't want a device that combines MP3s with phone.
6. My cell phone is so small I hardly notice it's there. Its battery lasts about 10 times longer than my Mp3 player.
7. *No keyboard.*
8. Locked platform.
9. Suspicious Safari on Windows - I've heard rumors you'll HAVE to use Safari with the iPhone.
10. Corporate use - this thing is aimed at the consumer but is touting business-user price."​Francis Shanahan, francisshanahan.com!, 17 June 2007

*iDon't have a real keyboard.*
iDon't run simultaneous apps.
iDon't take night shots.
iDon't allow open development.
iDon't customize.
iDon't run widgets.
iDon't have interchangeable batteries.
Everything iDon't&#8230;Droid does.
Verizon, 18 October 2009

"They (Apple) have brought so much advertising and awareness in this space that they have accelerated the move towards the smartphones. We have customers coming into stores with a feature phone and they are walking out with a BlackBerry. Not everyone can type on a piece of glass. Every laptop and virtually every other phone has a tactile keyboard. I think our design gives us an advantage."
Mike Lazaridis, Co-CEO, Research In Motion, 4 June 2008

I realize I forgot to put in the word "only":

and they were told there was no market for a touch screen only device


----------



## aussielondon

I have seen it and to say this polite, it is not my style.
I think that a watch needs to stick with mechanical movement, as in all reality, who actually needs a wristwatch nowadays? They are 
adornments now, and as such nothing beats a nice Omega or such, or mechanical watch of any type.
But that's just my view.

I much prefer to see the cogs and balance wheel spinning on my cheap Chinese skeleton watch than to have an Apple watch (and I was a huge Apple fanboy as I owned many Macs in the late 90's).


----------



## aussielondon

Will_f said:


> Quartz didn't revolutionize the watch world because it was more accurate (though it was) and it wasn't because it was cheaper (it wasn't initially). It was because everybody wanted one.
> 
> I think you'll see the same with first the apple watch, and then others. If it looks good, is easy to use, and brings a lot of powerful features for the price of a swatch mechanical, it's going to sell well and at the expense of mid range luxury watches. Sure, we mechanical watch enthusiasts will continue to buy multiple mechanical toys, but we will be a minority. Everyone else will be checking their calendar reminders and map directions on their wrist.


And the very reason that we will be the rare few that still wear mechanical watches will make us unique, and there's one thing thats classy and that is a mechanical watch, and also being independent and not following the crowd.
I have never followed mainstream fashions at all, I just do what I like and want, and I am sure many (if not all) of you guys and gals on here are the same, we are cavaliers, we appreciate the intricacies of the mechanical watch and such things, and we are not sheep.
Even if people don't agree with us then they sure respect us.


----------



## jilgiljongiljing

I dont quite see what is revolutionary here, these smart watches have been around for a while now with mostly similar features and capabilities and the Moto 360 IMO looks significantly better. Whenever Apple does it, its revolutionary and awesome, thats it. I actually dont like the design all that much, and I think the usability based on what was shown looks a bit of a chore than anything else. That said, purpose built apps can be HUGE on this and it might just make things really awesome (the hotel room door unlocked by the watch for example was a nice touch)

Yes it will sell because of the fanboys and the regular folk who done really care for a "fine" watch might consider this as a bridge between wearing a watch and wearing a fitness monitor and it will do very well, but I seriously doubt this is going to prevent someone from picking up a fine mechanical timepiece. I dont think there are people out there going, should I buy an Apple watch or should I buy a Tag. I think there is going to be a solid market for both. 

Yes this is intended to be a daily wear item, and hence one can argue that if someone buys this they may not see the need to buy a fine watch, but the "buzz" will die. There will be people who wear it everyday, and people who get tired of charging it everyday, and eventually people who want to wear something "better" than the common Apple watch.

Its a new market, if anything it will affect the fashion watch market quite a bit and the people who were ready to spend MSRP on an Armani watch will possibly buy this instead. But the WUS market is gonna be just fine. Atleast thats my take.


----------



## Will_f

aussielondon said:


> And the very reason that we will be the rare few that still wear mechanical watches will make us unique, and there's one thing thats classy and that is a mechanical watch, and also being independent and not following the crowd.
> I have never followed mainstream fashions at all, I just do what I like and want, and I am sure many (if not all) of you guys and gals on here are the same, we are cavaliers, we appreciate the intricacies of the mechanical watch and such things, and we are not sheep.
> Even if people don't agree with us then they sure respect us.


Speaking from my own experience, my love of mechanical watches has not earned any respect except amoungst other mechanical watch enthousiasts. that's not why I like them though and it doesn't stop me from wearing and apple watch on my other wrist.


----------



## Memphis1

ill buy it just to play dick tracy once in a while....


----------



## Will_f

jilgiljongiljing said:


> I dont quite see what is revolutionary here, these smart watches have been around for a while now with mostly similar features and capabilities and the Moto 360 IMO looks significantly better. Whenever Apple does it, its revolutionary and awesome, thats it. I actually dont like the design all that much, and I think the usability based on what was shown looks a bit of a chore than anything else. That said, purpose built apps can be HUGE on this and it might just make things really awesome (the hotel room door unlocked by the watch for example was a nice touch)
> 
> Yes it will sell because of the fanboys and the regular folk who done really care for a "fine" watch might consider this as a bridge between wearing a watch and wearing a fitness monitor and it will do very well, but I seriously doubt this is going to prevent someone from picking up a fine mechanical timepiece. I dont think there are people out there going, should I buy an Apple watch or should I buy a Tag. I think there is going to be a solid market for both.
> 
> Yes this is intended to be a daily wear item, and hence one can argue that if someone buys this they may not see the need to buy a fine watch, but the "buzz" will die. There will be people who wear it everyday, and people who get tired of charging it everyday, and eventually people who want to wear something "better" than the common Apple watch.
> 
> Its a new market, if anything it will affect the fashion watch market quite a bit and the people who were ready to spend MSRP on an Armani watch will possibly buy this instead. But the WUS market is gonna be just fine. Atleast thats my take.


alot of people said the exact same thing with the iphone came out. It was just another smart phone. Admittedly it was sleek, easy to use, and powerful, but so what....? Anyway, I'm not selling my apple stock.


----------



## aussielondon

bigvatch said:


> "I think it's going to be as revolutionary as quartz was"
> 
> What exactly is revolutionary here?


It's from Apple man! Don't you realise! Everything from the holiness of Apple must by nature be revolutionary (even if it's a new sized power charger plug!)


----------



## black watch

Not made by little Swiss elves. :-(


----------



## aussielondon

Point is that digital watches will never get me excited. I love computers and I can build them, and do some programming (not much) but the point is that digital watches bore me as I am surrounded by tech everyday.
It's nice to have a mechanical watch.
Apples iPhone was good as it improved on the mobile phone, but there's no need to have it on a tiny screen on your wrist, this is going too far now, it's not going to look cool at all. It's going to look really over nerdy (yes I am a nerd but I like to limit how much I display this in front of the ladies).


----------



## Fantasio

I may be a skeptic, but I doubt Apple would design it to have a sweeping hand just to please a small minority group known as WIS. I'd rather think it represents the constant flow of time. :think:



Tempus Fidelis said:


> Most importantly I think it's great that they have a sweeping second hand, at least *giving a nod to mechanical pieces*.





Arthur M said:


> Along with the sweeping second hand; they really didn't have to do that. Definitely *a nod to wrist watches and enthusiasts*.


----------



## Fantasio

Definitely the most hilarious response in this thread.



Tagdevil said:


> No dial
> No crystal
> No crown
> No indices
> No hands
> No movement
> No case
> No bezel
> NOT A WATCH
> 
> *Sent from my iPad* using Tapatalk


Hey wait, that's NOT A TYPEWRITER. ;-)


----------



## Avo

I think having significant smartphone functionality on your wrist could be very useful in many ways to many people. It certainly tempts me.

And if I find that I like it enough, that I find it useful enough, why, then ... I would sell off all my other watches. Because there would be no room on my wrist for them.

Yeah, as of now, I think mechanicals are cool and fun, but ...

If it starts to be necessary in high-power circles to have on-wrist functionality, if you start to look like a dork if you have to take out your _phone_ just to read a _text_, then ... well, then, this could make the "quartz crisis" look like a day at the beach.


----------



## clarencek

I was impressed by the keynote today. 

People doubted the iPhone because they were looking at the device through the lens of a phone. As a phone there's nothing interesting about the iPhone. But it's not a phone, it's a computer. 

The apple watch is also not a watch, it's a computer. And while samsung, Motorola and the others are trying to make smart watches. Apple is putting a computer on your wrist. 

It's got everything your iPhone has. And when they sort out the battery, the dependence on an iPhone (remember when the iPhone needed a Mac computer and iTunes to work / sync), and durability - it will really take off. 

I found the most impressive was they figured out a nice way to use the watch with the crown. Anyway, I'm looking forward to v2.


----------



## Steppy

Personally I will not wear an iWatch, i'm just not interested in it all. I have a laptop and a smart phone and that is enough for me.

But I do think these things will take off in a a big way, all the kids will want one and it will be the new big thing for that generation.

For us WIS's it could make us even more different than we already are, our watches could stand out even more from the crowd.


----------



## summerpurchase

I wonder how it would look on a NATO?


----------



## StufflerMike

We already have a lot of threads on our Smart Watches Forum, this one moved.


----------



## RichieP

I think it's a great device that I would love to have *if *(a) I had an iPhone to work with it and (b) I had vacancy available on my wrist. But I can't part with my watches.
I'd be happy to have one to play with occasionally, but the functionality of the Apple "watch" is something I think you either need to use all the time or don't bother at all. Think about it. You don't see anybody buying a cell phone with the intention of wearing it maybe one out of seven days because the other days they prefer to carry a pocket watch.


----------



## RichieP

Ace McLoud said:


> You're being a bit out of order here. It most definitely is a watch.


I bet we could agree that the small computer in my pocket which does, in fact, display the time, whenever I am not using it for something else, is by no means a "pocket watch." That said, I think there's a pretty good argument that strapping a similar computer to my wrist does not make it a "wristwatch," even though it conveniently displays the time when I'm not using it for it's primary purposes.


----------



## RichieP

SFKLR said:


> Not sure why this forum isn't lit up with comments. It's a revolutionary step in watches the likes of which haven't been seen since the introduction of the wrist watch and maybe before. Every watch has a practical aspect, a mechanical aspect and an aesthetic aspect. We may be mostly purists for fine mechanical heirloom-quality timepieces here, but ignoring this new watch is just silly. If Day/date is more valuable than just time, and day date moonphase complications even more valued, then how about time day date moonphase email music phone calls texts google gps directions maps etc? Seriously. For $349.
> 
> I'd like one primarily as a collector's piece. What do you think the first moonwatch is worth? *The first apple watch, left in box, will only appreciate--even if it's software is obsolete in a decade.* I'd also like a stainless steel with mesh thank you. Add an athletic band for health info.
> 
> Rant away, purists!


I suppose that's possible, but I bet the person who is currently selling a first gen iPhone on eBay right now for $39 would advise against investing a lot of money in apple watches as collectors items.


----------



## arcadelt

Tagdevil said:


> It's a disgrace and an insult to watch purists. Some things are meant to be left alone only to be changed and updated by advances in precision and quality craftsmanship, not electronics.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


That's funny..."Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk". How many technological changes do you think went into that Seiko you are wearing. I'm not saying it will replace mechanical watches, but it is competing for the same wrist space. Make your own choices I reckon!


----------



## Tagdevil

arcadelt said:


> That's funny..."Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk". How many technological changes do you think went into that Seiko you are wearing. I'm not saying it will replace mechanical watches, but it is competing for the same wrist space. Make your own choices I reckon!


What's the problem with using an iPad? Or my iPhone? They have their place. I have nothing against Apple other than calling the WristPad the watch that it's not.

Will watch people leave their real watch at home (ya know...the one with actual character and personality) in lieu of a WristPad driven by the iPhone in their pocket? I think not.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## arcadelt

Tagdevil said:


> What's the problem with using an iPad? Or my iPhone?


I don't have a problem with either, and only thought it funny that the poster was so staunch in his support of mechanical watches, but posted using a piece of technology that is only several years old. Buy an Apple Watch or not...use an iPhone or iPad or not...its all a choice: but I conclude again that the Apple Watch is competing for the same wrist space, and so some will have to make an interesting decision as to how they will use it (if they choose to) and whether is will supplement or replace their mechanical (and to be fair, quartz) watches.


----------



## sduford

Arthur M said:


> "As nice as the Apple iPhone is, it poses a real challenge to its users. Try typing a web key on a touchscreen on an Apple iPhone, that's a real challenge. You cannot see what you type"
> Jim Balsillie, Co-CEO, Research in Motion, 7 November 2007
> 
> "We're finding - if you look at the surveys, you can see that large amount of the customers that have purchased touchscreen devices in last two years, they intend to get a device with the QWERTY keyboard on it now, right. I mean, they've got into a point where they've realize that a touchscreen alone is not enough; so that's important"
> Mike Lazaridis, Co-CEO, Research In Motion, Inc, 16 April 2010
> 
> "10 reasons why the iPhone might flop: 1. The mobile phone market is not the digital music one. 2. Competition will be fierce. 3. Apple's user experience will be affected by Cingular's user experience. 4. The touch screen might not be suitable. 5. Lack of a keyboard. 6. The $500-$600 price tag is conflicting with the demand. 7. Lack of 3G support. 8. Battery life. 9. Lock-in strategy. 10. Apple will need to live up to the expectations.
> Daniel Scocco, Seeking Alpha, 18 January 20071. Apple is running ads with all load times removed (edited out).
> 2. The device is set to run on GSM networks which in North America is not as widespread as CDMA.
> 3. The cell phone market is already crowded and fiercely competitive.
> 4. Folks change cell phones every 2 years or sooner.
> 5. Personally I don't want a device that combines MP3s with phone.
> 6. My cell phone is so small I hardly notice it's there. Its battery lasts about 10 times longer than my Mp3 player.
> 7. *No keyboard.*
> 8. Locked platform.
> 9. Suspicious Safari on Windows - I've heard rumors you'll HAVE to use Safari with the iPhone.
> 10. Corporate use - this thing is aimed at the consumer but is touting business-user price."​Francis Shanahan, francisshanahan.com!, 17 June 2007
> 
> *iDon't have a real keyboard.*
> iDon't run simultaneous apps.
> iDon't take night shots.
> iDon't allow open development.
> iDon't customize.
> iDon't run widgets.
> iDon't have interchangeable batteries.
> Everything iDon't&#8230;Droid does.
> Verizon, 18 October 2009
> 
> "They (Apple) have brought so much advertising and awareness in this space that they have accelerated the move towards the smartphones. We have customers coming into stores with a feature phone and they are walking out with a BlackBerry. Not everyone can type on a piece of glass. Every laptop and virtually every other phone has a tactile keyboard. I think our design gives us an advantage."
> Mike Lazaridis, Co-CEO, Research In Motion, 4 June 2008
> 
> I realize I forgot to put in the word "only":
> 
> and they were told there was no market for a touch screen only device


Three of those quotes are from Research in Motion, the maker of the BlackBerry, don't think you can count those...

What many didn't foresee is that the iPhone was the first device to do touch screen right and to incorporate multi-touch. It was a big leap in touch screen technology and no one knew how it would transform the user experience.


----------



## Arthur M

Tagdevil said:


> What's the problem with using an iPad? Or my iPhone? They have their place. I have nothing against Apple other than calling the WristPad the watch that it's not.
> 
> Will watch people leave their real watch at home (ya know...the one with actual character and personality) in lieu of a* WristPad *driven by the iPhone in their pocket? I think not.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


There are some situations where the functionality (quick response to a text or even getting a glance at it would be huge) would come in useful (work, school), but I don't think anyone will replace a proper mechanical watch with it. It will replace low end quartz watches for people who don't care about watches, and those people are many. For wis, it will live alongside mechanicals, just like many wis currently own swatches or other low end watches alongside their Rolex or Zenith or what have you. I might even wear one on my off wrist, if I can overcome the inherent dorkiness of two watches.

Wristpad:


----------



## dbakiva

fbd223 said:


> I had a bunch of fanboys at work today talking all about it and the what came to mind is... *I like watches to be timepieces not gadgets.*


*
*
From an equally valid perspective, you (and many of us) could be considered the fanboys. There is no doubt that the Apple Watch IS a timepiece, just not one that suits your aesthetic. For the vast majority of people who either do not wear or care to own a mechanical watch, this may well serve as both as fashion (although fashion from a different vantage point) and a practical extension of the electronics in their pocket or purse.

For me, the only thing keeping me from ordering one as soon as it's available, is that I don't think I'm willing to keep my mechanicals at home. So who's the fanboy?


----------



## Tagdevil

Arthur M said:


> There are some situations where the functionality (quick response to a text or even getting a glance at it would be huge) would come in useful (work, school), but I don't think anyone will replace a proper mechanical watch with it. It will replace low end quartz watches for people who don't care about watches, and those people are many. For wis, it will live alongside mechanicals, just like many wis currently own swatches or other low end watches alongside their Rolex or Zenith or what have you. I might even wear one on my off wrist, if I can overcome the inherent dorkiness of two watches.
> 
> Wristpad:


Please don't. Wearing both would make you the High Exultant Grand Master Poobah of Dork.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RBrylawski

Tagdevil said:


> What's the problem with using an iPad? Or my iPhone? They have their place. I have nothing against Apple other than calling the WristPad the watch that it's not.
> 
> Will watch people leave their real watch at home (ya know...the one with actual character and personality) in lieu of a WristPad driven by the iPhone in their pocket? I think not.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I think MANY will.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## migo

Will_f said:


> Personally, I think it's going to be as revolutionary as quartz was.
> 
> I'm quite looking forward to the mechanical watch prices stagnating or falling for a decade or two. I'll definitely get an apple watch as soon as it comes out (it's seriously cool!) but I'll still be looking at mechanical watches too.
> 
> I hope the battery is replaceable. If it's not, then Apple will have a problem. People consider watches differently than phones- more like jewelry. Replacing your watch every 2-3 years will not be as acceptable as replacing your phone.


Apple never had a problem with non-replaceable batteries, and having the product wear out is an excuse to buy a new one. Anyone for whom that really is a problem wouldn't be able to buy even a single mechanical watch.


----------



## Stainless

Fantasio said:


> I may be a skeptic, but I doubt Apple would design it to have a sweeping hand just to please a small minority group known as WIS. I'd rather think it represents the constant flow of time. :think:


Ives is WIS. He is has a pretty deep collection of timepieces. And from this announcement _Apple _is WIS.

- They put a crown on a digital watch. To a WIS, it is an obvious interface controller.
- The case back text is properly engraved, like a proper watch. Others pointed out the hand sweep. The details are important to them.
- The presentation highlighted deployment clasps, but they also made a point of showing a classic buckle. They understand the _need_ to change straps, and have made it easy.

And lastly:

Shark. Mesh.


----------



## BarracksSi

drunken monkey said:


> Just because it goes on the wrist and can tell the time, doesn't make it a competitor for traditional mechanical watches, especially those in the luxury markets.
> 
> If you don't understand that, you might as well stop logging on here.


Also agree.

I know my post will get buried in the noise, but since I've got time to write --

It was never going to be a Fitbit/Fuelband/bracelet. Those are good at just one thing, and that's tracking wrist movement. There is hardly any interface on them that's worth changing. Plus, they already work with the iPhone; and even if they didn't, they have their own ecosystem.

I don't remember any patent drawings surfacing that showed the UI or case design that were shown yesterday. The whole presentation surprised me. The panning icon display, the multifunction crown, the swappable straps, everything was news to me. I caught my mouth hanging open a few times.

Tap messaging? Did you see that? It's kind of a "watch what our engineers can do" feature, but man, it looks neat.

Apple did what they always do: watch others stumble around, take the ball from them, and walk to the end zone on a different plane entirely. Heck, they're the ones who can see through the stadium exit, not just ten yards ahead.

They "waited" until now because all the pieces are in place. They can make their own chips ("in-house" movement?) to run their own OS. Bluetooth is more efficient than ever. NFC needed a shakeup, and Apple's tokenized payment system and iBeacon will do it. Touch display tech is finally ready, honed since at least 2007 (possibly 2005 in the iPhone/iPad prototypes). The developer ecosystem is mature, creative, and ready to write apps via the new tools in WatchKit.

The early announcement came partly for of all those developers, too, because they'll want time to try new ideas and Apple couldn't afford to trust them to keep it secret. It's also because, like the original iPhone, it has yet to be approved by the FCC, and again, if those licensing documents got out, the secret's out and the clones would quickly follow.

Do I want one? I'm about 75% _oh god yes._ My hesitation is regarding battery life. If a subsequent version can solve it, then they can't take my money fast enough.

It's making me reconsider what I want in another watch, too. All of a sudden, my heirloom no-date Omega auto makes perfect sense as a casual watch outside of work. I still might buy a nice mechanical later, too. But, I have lost interest in any more quartz watches besides the solar-atomic Citizen and G-Shock I already have.

That's the interesting part for me. I'm done with $300+ quartz watches. Super-cheap beaters or fancy mechanicals for me now.


----------



## Cannonball

migo said:


> Apple never had a problem with non-replaceable batteries, and having the product wear out is an excuse to buy a new one. Anyone for whom that really is a problem wouldn't be able to buy even a single mechanical watch.


I agree. My only thought/concern would
Be those who buy the gold versions. Imagine replacing your gold watch every 2-3 years.

......

What am I saying!? There are tons of people here who replace their gold watches every 2-3 months!!


----------



## avers

Here's something that doesn't make sense to me.

Watches have been loosing in popularity, many people - especially tech savvy ones - say that they don't need a watch when there are so many gadgets that tell time. I've heard this so many time - "my phone/PC/table/whatever shows time, why would I need to wear a watch?"

This trend has been going on for years. And now Apple expects these people all of the sudden make a 180 degree turn and start wearing watches? Seriously?


----------



## avers

BarracksSi said:


> ... The whole presentation surprised me... the *multifunction crown*, the swappable straps, everything was news to me. I caught my mouth hanging open a few times...
> .


This is not new. My Breitling B-1 has such crown and that watch is almost 15 yrs old.

My car has similar feature - the iDrive control, BMW had is since beginning of 2000s.


----------



## meth68

Ace McLoud said:


> I'm not sure how it's revolutionary, and I already have a phone that does all the other things.
> 
> Anything that is manufactured in the millions will not be a collectors item.
> 
> I dislike the look, and fail to see how they're useful, so I'll pass.


I agree, I mean its not revolutionary in any way other then "its the first watch by apple" and apple fans are like rabid dogs when it comes to products, even bad ones.

Phones do what it does, so its not revolutionary. There has been about 5 decent android watches out already doing the same/more functions. The 360 looks much better then the Apple Watch. Apple will just focus on marketing/hype to sell their product just like what they did with the 5c/5s, hardly an upgrade.

But again, apple can paint a rock white and call it the irock, people will line up 3 days to buy one. So I can see the point of collectors wanting one to stash away for the Apple crowd, I just don't see watch people even caring to use one. The face is lacking, everything was a render (everything looks AMAZING in a render lol) the size/shape of the face just seems feminine, I think women will like it, and it will look very odd on a Male, especially if you have a larger wrist.

I will get my 360 in a week or 2, about 4-6 months ahead of Apple Watch, more functionality, better looking and would have multiple fixes/software tweaks way before this watch even comes out.

But again..... people will flock to it, trust me


----------



## Phong Vu

RBrylawski said:


> I know.....it's a smart watch, but hey, it's kind of stylish, has a Sapphire crystal and comes in 18 versions with leather, rubber, Milanese and Stainless link bands in 38mm and 42mm versions. *The stainless link version is kind of cool as it offers a release button on the links to let you size the watch with absolutely no tools*. There are 3 collections - Watch - Sport Watch and Watch Edition in 18K Gold.
> 
> I have to admit I like it better than I expected to and I will likely end up getting one when it's released officially in early 2015.
> 
> Here's a link to Apple's site about the watch: Apple - Apple Watch
> 
> Watchtime already has an article about it: The Apple Watch: What Does It Mean For the Swiss Watch Industry? | WatchTime - USA's No.1 Watch Magazine


I'm not interest in the watch but Apple's idea about his bracelet is awesome. I wish other watch manufacturers can copy this idea as sizing SS bracelet is a pain in the ass.


----------



## RBrylawski

avers said:


> Here's something that doesn't make sense to me.
> 
> Watches have been loosing in popularity, many people - especially tech savvy ones - say that they don't need a watch when there are so many gadgets that tell time. I've heard this so many time - "my phone/PC/table/whatever shows time, why would I need to wear a watch?"
> 
> This trend has been going on for years. And now Apple expects these people all of the sudden make a 180 degree turn and start wearing watches? Seriously?


Not only do they expect people will, but the reality is people WILL. And many of them from the very same I don't need a watch crowd from the start.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sduford

avers said:


> Here's something that doesn't make sense to me.
> 
> Watches have been loosing in popularity, many people - especially tech savvy ones - say that they don't need a watch when there are so many gadgets that tell time. I've heard this so many time - "my phone/PC/table/whatever shows time, why would I need to wear a watch?"
> 
> This trend has been going on for years. And now Apple expects these people all of the sudden make a 180 degree turn and start wearing watches? Seriously?


Apple does that all the time. Their marketing arm is so good and so powerful they can make people believe pretty much whatever they want.

When the first Mac came out, their marketing was saying that a small monochrome screen, a small crippled keyboard and a one-button mouse were the optimum way to go.

For years they've been saying that the iPhone didn't need a screen bigger than 3.5", Samsung proved them wrong and now they are coming out with larger screens.

Steve Jobs famously said that the optimal size for a tablet was 10" and they would NEVER make a smaller tablet, well guess what...

But i think this Apple Watch is not so much a watch, it is primarily an accessory/interface to the iPhone that happens to look like a watch and tells time. It is an information display and interactive interface for the phone. And they are probably hoping it will drive iPhone sales and of course applications, which is where they'll make their money.

It will be tremendously appealing to the young crowd who are glued to their iPhone and must always have the latest cool Apple gadget. It may be successful with those who previously bought cheap quartz watches and fitness bands. I think this will be the initial market and it will hurt the low-end watch industry and kill the fitness band market.

Given the folks they have hired in the last year, I suspect they will have some killer health related apps. This may become a necessary health monitoring gadget for people with serious chronic conditions like diabetes and high-blood pressure who will now have constant monitoring (except when the device is sitting on the charger) and will be able to set alarm points, graph their data and see trends. They will probably be able to send this to their doctor for diagnosis and I could even see some online services for automatic diagnosis where you're watch will tell you to take your shot because of an impending insulin shock or head to the hospital right now because you're about to have a heart attack. This will open a whole new chapter on privacy concerns.

And as the capabilities of both the iPhone and the watch increases, you'll see new applications coming out that we can't even think of right now. And as the watch's capabilities improve, you'll see more and more functionality move to the watch and the need for the phone will go down and disappear some day. The watch could become your phone.

For example, it is already possible to drive a micro-projector from and iPhone, so now you should be able to control your presentation from your watch. You can also use your phone as a remote control for your multi-media center, well now you'll be able to do that from your watch, as well as control your house's climate and security systems. Imagine someone knocks at the door and you can see who it is on your watch via the security camera. You might even have a panic button on your watch to lock all doors, set off the alarm and call 911.

Like every new technology, we can't even think of some of the future applications that will come out based on this. The PC displaced the mini-computer, the laptop displaced the PC, the tablet is displacing the laptop, the phones are displacing the smaller tablets, digital cameras and MP3 players. Eventually the watch will probably displace the phone.


----------



## RBrylawski

meth68 said:


> I agree, I mean its not revolutionary in any way other then "its the first watch by apple" and apple fans are like rabid dogs when it comes to products, even bad ones.
> 
> Phones do what it does, so its not revolutionary. There has been about 5 decent android watches out already doing the same/more functions. The 360 looks much better then the Apple Watch. Apple will just focus on marketing/hype to sell their product just like what they did with the 5c/5s, hardly an upgrade.
> 
> But again, apple can paint a rock white and call it the irock, people will line up 3 days to buy one. So I can see the point of collectors wanting one to stash away for the Apple crowd, I just don't see watch people even caring to use one. The face is lacking, everything was a render (everything looks AMAZING in a render lol) the size/shape of the face just seems feminine, I think women will like it, and it will look very odd on a Male, especially if you have a larger wrist.
> 
> I will get my 360 in a week or 2, about 4-6 months ahead of Apple Watch, more functionality, better looking and would have multiple fixes/software tweaks way before this watch even comes out.
> 
> But again..... people will flock to it, trust me


I'm going to guess you already own a phone that interfaces with your soon to come 360 watch?

If you do your reasons for buying it are really no different than those who will pair the Apple Watch with their iPhone. No different at all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SFKLR

Think of it as a watch first and only then. Change straps, mesh, metal, rubber, add all your NATO straps. Change the face, change the hands, change to chronograph. Change to Mickey for a day. Change to sword hands, orange face to match orange strap. Enjoy as a watch.

Then have it send you the score of the Giants game in a meeting and smile.


----------



## BarracksSi

avers said:


> This is not new. My Breitling B-1 has such crown and that watch is almost 15 yrs old.
> 
> My car has similar feature - the iDrive control, BMW had is since beginning of 2000s.


Right, and my Citizen changes time zones with the crown, too. The iDrive got such horrible press that I stopped hoping BMW could figure it out.

Nobody's put it on a smartwatch yet, as far as I know. Makes a lot of sense since a finger covers up whatever you're trying to scroll through, and the crown's zoom feature beats two-finger zoom on such a small screen.

Like I said, I don't remember seeing the crown popping up in patent drawings. Neither was the miniaturized, zoom-able sea-of-icons home screen. A previous patent had a virtual hoop or spiral instead, which now looks like a ploy to throw competitors off the trail.


----------



## MrDagon007

My wife and I are watching the Keynote video which gives a good impression about what it does and how it works. 
I am actually quite impressed. They really thought it through, it is not a "me too" product.
Also from a traditional horological point of view I find their bands and bracelets absolutely wonderful and innovative, such as the magnetic woven metal mesh or the slick bracelet that can be resized without tools. They really spent time on all that. Also clever is that each band comes with its own lugs for a perfect fit. I think we will soon see 3rd party nato adaptor lugs.


----------



## xthine

SFKLR said:


> .....
> Then have it send you the score of the Giants game in a meeting and smile.


My Pebble does that minus the smile. 
I wonder if it knows to smile only when your team scores vs. Opposition.

------
Any word on the water resistance? I was hoping for at least 3ATM.

Sent from my HTC One M8 using Tapatalk


----------



## BarracksSi

xthine said:


> Any word on the water resistance? I was hoping for at least 3ATM.


I haven't seen anything official yet. I'll poke around more after I get home.


----------



## G-Shock_Sam

Arthur M said:


> The last time apple jumped into a market they had no business being in:
> 
> "We believe there is enough evidence to suggest Apple will launch such a device. In our view, the appearance of the iPhone (or something like it) poses little risk to RIM's business."
> Chris Umiastowski, TD Securities, 12 December 2006
> 
> "Apple will launch a mobile phone in January, and it will become available during 2007. It will be a lovely bit of kit, a pleasure to behold, and its limited functionality will be easy to access and use. The Apple phone will be exclusive to one of the major networks in each territory and some customers will switch networks just to get it, but not as many as had been hoped. As customers start to realise that the competition offers better functionality at a lower price, by negotiating a better subsidy, sales will stagnate. After a year a new version will be launched, but it will lack the innovation of the first and quickly vanish. The only question remaining is if, when the iPod phone fails, it will take the iPod with it."
> Bill Ray, The Register, 26 December 2006
> 
> "The iPhone will not substantially alter the fundamental structure and challenges of the mobile industry."
> Charles Golvin, Forrester Research Inc, January 2007
> 
> I can't believe the hype being given to iPhone. Even some of my blindly-loyal pro-Microsoft friends and colleagues talk like it's a real innovation and will "redefine the market" or "usher in a new age".
> What!?!? [&#8230;] I just have to wonder who will want one of these things (other than the religious faithful). People need this to be a phone, first and foremost. But with 5 hours of battery life? No keypad? (you try typing a phone number on that screen, no matter how wonderful it is - you will want a keypad). And for all that whiz-bang Internet access, you absolutely need the phone to work, immediately, every single time. Will it do that? So please mark this post and come back in two years to see the results of my prediction: I predict they will not sell anywhere near the 10M Jobs predicts for 2008.
> Richard Sprague, Senior Marketing Director, Microsoft, January 2007
> 
> "The big competitors in the mobile-phone industry such as Nokia Oyj and Motorola Inc. won't be whispering nervously into their clamshells over a new threat to their business. The iPhone is nothing more than a luxury bauble that will appeal to a few gadget freaks. In terms of its impact on the industry, the iPhone is less relevant&#8230; Apple is unlikely to make much of an impact on this market&#8230; Apple will sell a few to its fans, but the iPhone won't make a long-term mark on the industry."
> Matthew Lynn, Bloomberg, 15 January 2007
> 
> and that's just a few of the many.
> 
> All I'm saying is that apple is good at this. They know how to read the market. Just the rumour that Apple was making a watch a few years ago caused big players to try to corner the market before apple jumps in. Looks are subjective. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean many others don't. I like it and I see the functionality and it attracts me. From what I saw and from what I've experience with current smartwatches, the apple watch is ahead, more intuitive and better designed. That was well done, Apple.


Excellent post. I 100% agree.


----------



## RBrylawski

It will be a hoot to come back to this in two years and see how many on WUS post a picture of their Apple Watch in the WRUW threads each day. I'm betting there will be many who do and I'll likely be one of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## G-Shock_Sam

akasnowmaaan said:


> Yeah, prehistoric flint knives can still cut as well as they did hundred of thousand years ago, but I'll still use a Spyderco, thanks.


Love Spyderco!


----------



## G-Shock_Sam

TheWalrus said:


> Honestly? I think you're underplaying who's going to like this. This is also going to speak to every bored middle manager, in every corporation and government office who's desperately wanted the ability to casually and subtly check their (a) Tweets (b) sports scores (c) emails (d) Facebook profiles (e) whatever the else they're addicted to online, during every long, boring, 2 hour post-lunch meeting they're required to attend.


I agree. That is how I've seen people use their Pebbles. Some people aren't allowed to access their phones while working, but they can check their Pebbles, and soon their Apple Watches.


----------



## bigvatch

avers said:


> Here's something that doesn't make sense to me.
> 
> Watches have been loosing in popularity, many people - especially tech savvy ones - say that they don't need a watch when there are so many gadgets that tell time. I've heard this so many time - "my phone/PC/table/whatever shows time, why would I need to wear a watch?"
> 
> This trend has been going on for years. And now Apple expects these people all of the sudden make a 180 degree turn and start wearing watches? Seriously?


Agree. It's a little risky for Apple. I don't doubt there will be reasonable good sales in the beginning, but I can't see it continuing. AFAIK it only mates with Iphone 5 and up.........and leaves out all those Iphone users still using 4S and 4 etc.

Otherwise it is a $350 workout watch that needs to be charged everyday without the ability to do all the things it was mainly intended to do......notifications, messaging etc

Not to mention future versions. Will people be willing to latch onto this idea AND upgrade to NEW WATCH, NEW PHONE every 8 months?


----------



## G-Shock_Sam

Hayseed Brown said:


> In the future, wrist devices may alert you to everything that's going on in your body at the moment (whether it''s sensing the onset of a heart-attack, stroke, illness, blood-sugar level, etc.), plus those other functions inherent to current iWatches.


I agree. I believe this is the start of a Star Trek body scanner type device that monitors your entire body. This might be the start of the future of health care.


----------



## Arthur M

Interesting article by Ben Clymer of Hodinkee:

A Watch Guy's Thoughts On The Apple Watch After Seeing It In The Metal (Tons Of Live Photos)

"At the lower end, I believe the Apple Watch is a serious threat to those less faithful lovers of analog watches. There is a certain percentage of the population that simply doesn't care if they're wearing a watch of any great manufacturing process and the Apple Watch will appeal to them, if it works as advertised. Brands like Suunto should be worried. Casio as well. Even Seiko with its Astron line could fall into the same group of those looking for pure function. The other thing that could spell trouble even for the Swiss is Apple's cool factor with the young. At 16, will someone want a swatch or an Apple watch? At 20 will they want a Hamilton or the Apple Watch 3. At 25 will they want an Omega or an Apple Watch Plus? That should be a very real concern for the Swiss, appealing to a younger generation of buyers who live and breathe Apple."


----------



## RBrylawski

bigvatch said:


> Agree. It's a little risky for Apple. I don't doubt there will be reasonable good sales in the beginning, but I can't see it continuing. AFAIK it only mates with Iphone 5 and up.........and leaves out all those Iphone users still using 4S and 4 etc.
> 
> Otherwise it is a $350 workout watch that needs to be charged everyday without the ability to do all the things it was mainly intended to do......notifications, messaging etc
> 
> Not to mention future versions. Will people be willing to latch onto this idea AND upgrade to NEW WATCH, NEW PHONE every 8 months?


Being realistic, very few people get a new phone every 8 months. Most upgrade on a two year cycle, so it's not that unlikely people will upgrade a smart watch every couple years too.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bigvatch

RBrylawski said:


> Being realistic, very few people get a new phone every 8 months. Most upgrade on a two year cycle, so it's not that unlikely people will upgrade a smart watch every couple years too.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Most people don't upgrade every time a new version is released, ....agreed. Fanboys probably will upgrade at every release time. IMO someone that is inclined to use a smart watch regularly, is probably inclined to upgrade more often than someone that doesn't wear one............just my guess.


----------



## Hayseed Brown

RBrylawski said:


> Being realistic, very few people get a new phone every 8 months. Most upgrade on a two year cycle, so it's not that unlikely people will upgrade a smart watch every couple years too.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Unlike their phones, Apple may have to keep its watch hardware programmable and usable for a while. I don't know how much their 18k gold watches will cost, but it'll certainly be enough where it's not reasonable to purchase one every couple of years. And I'm sure they'll come out with a new titanium-cased one in the future or something. I guess we'll see in due time if this product makes a real splash. But it has as good of a chance as any.


----------



## unpleasantness

sduford said:


> Apple does that all the time. Their marketing arm is so good and so powerful they can make people believe pretty much whatever they want.
> 
> When the first Mac came out, their marketing was saying that a small monochrome screen, a small crippled keyboard and a one-button mouse were the optimum way to go.
> 
> For years they've been saying that the iPhone didn't need a screen bigger than 3.5", Samsung proved them wrong and now they are coming out with larger screens.
> 
> Steve Jobs famously said that the optimal size for a tablet was 10" and they would NEVER make a smaller tablet, well guess what...
> 
> But i think this Apple Watch is not so much a watch, it is primarily an accessory/interface to the iPhone that happens to look like a watch and tells time. It is an information display and interactive interface for the phone. And they are probably hoping it will drive iPhone sales and of course applications, which is where they'll make their money.
> 
> It will be tremendously appealing to the young crowd who are glued to their iPhone and must always have the latest cool Apple gadget. It may be successful with those who previously bought cheap quartz watches and fitness bands. I think this will be the initial market and it will hurt the low-end watch industry and kill the fitness band market.
> 
> Given the folks they have hired in the last year, I suspect they will have some killer health related apps. This may become a necessary health monitoring gadget for people with serious chronic conditions like diabetes and high-blood pressure who will now have constant monitoring (except when the device is sitting on the charger) and will be able to set alarm points, graph their data and see trends. They will probably be able to send this to their doctor for diagnosis and I could even see some online services for automatic diagnosis where you're watch will tell you to take your shot because of an impending insulin shock or head to the hospital right now because you're about to have a heart attack. This will open a whole new chapter on privacy concerns.
> 
> And as the capabilities of both the iPhone and the watch increases, you'll see new applications coming out that we can't even think of right now. And as the watch's capabilities improve, you'll see more and more functionality move to the watch and the need for the phone will go down and disappear some day. The watch could become your phone.
> 
> For example, it is already possible to drive a micro-projector from and iPhone, so now you should be able to control your presentation from your watch. You can also use your phone as a remote control for your multi-media center, well now you'll be able to do that from your watch, as well as control your house's climate and security systems. Imagine someone knocks at the door and you can see who it is on your watch via the security camera. You might even have a panic button on your watch to lock all doors, set off the alarm and call 911.
> 
> Like every new technology, we can't even think of some of the future applications that will come out based on this. The PC displaced the mini-computer, the laptop displaced the PC, the tablet is displacing the laptop, the phones are displacing the smaller tablets, digital cameras and MP3 players. Eventually the watch will probably displace the phone.


So you actually think somebody would rather run a presentation from their watch, on that dinky screen, than from the phone they have in their pocket which has to be there for the watch to work? The phone interface is much larger and easier to use. Smart watches are the worst technology has to offer: they're a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. People supposedly complained the iPhone's screen was too small, so now they have two larger ones but they will just stay in your pocket while users flock to one the size of a postage stamp on their wrist. And everybody needs to control their home heating from their watch. It's why smart watches have been so popular so far, right?


----------



## BarracksSi

Hayseed Brown said:


> Unlike their phones, Apple may have to keep its watch hardware programmable and usable for a while.


I was thinking about this earlier, too.

There are space and power limitations in phones, but watches are severely constrained. Maybe they'll add a camera, especially a front-facing, Dick Tracy-like FaceTime camera, but that's going to eat up precious cubic millimeters, and I don't think there's yet enough room for much else.

Maybe they will build a stronger processor, but that would need power, and for now, that's coming from a small cell and nothing else (as far as we know). Not a good idea to double the clock speed yet.

This means that the hardware probably won't change very much. I'm not expecting a yearly upgrade cycle. Maybe three years; I don't know, though. Bigger changes can be made in software, whether it's just apps or OS updates. (and remember, those can already be handled wirelessly)

For all we know, maybe a happy user will get a Sport model for everyday use, working out, etc, and splurge on an Edition model for nights out. All the data is synced to the phone anyway, so you would still be adding to your walking mileage total during a post-dinner stroll along the pier.


----------



## npulaski

Like others here have said, when smartphones came out I didn't see the use for them. When I finally actually got one, I thought it was the greatest thing ever. 

Right now smart watches don't seem useful to me; I don't need something on my wrist to tell me that the phone in my pocket got a text. Perhaps as the technology and apps mature though, its uses will become more apparent and I'll change my tune.

That said, I'm not a fan of Apple, and I'll never own an iPhone, so the Apple Watch is a no-go for me.


----------



## sduford

unpleasantness said:


> So you actually think somebody would rather run a presentation from their watch, on that dinky screen, than from the phone they have in their pocket which has to be there for the watch to work? The phone interface is much larger and easier to use. Smart watches are the worst technology has to offer: they're a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. People supposedly complained the iPhone's screen was too small, so now they have two larger ones but they will just stay in your pocket while users flock to one the size of a postage stamp on their wrist. And everybody needs to control their home heating from their watch. It's why smart watches have been so popular so far, right?


No, just that they would use the watch as a remote, with the presentation still running on the phone or iPad.


----------



## Will_f

Hayseed Brown said:


> Unlike their phones, Apple may have to keep its watch hardware programmable and usable for a while. I don't know how much their 18k gold watches will cost, but it'll certainly be enough where it's not reasonable to purchase one every couple of years. And I'm sure they'll come out with a new titanium-cased one in the future or something. I guess we'll see in due time if this product makes a real splash. But it has as good of a chance as any.


It's an interesting question: Will people treat their smartwatch like any other consumer electronics and the gold versions will be dropped in the future (possibly becoming collectable like early quartz or apple Is) or will they become jewelry? I'm leaning towards consumer electronics at the moment.


----------



## Hayseed Brown

RichieP said:


> I suppose that's possible, but I bet the person who is currently selling a first gen iPhone on eBay right now for $39 would advise against investing a lot of money in apple watches as collectors items.


One sold on eBay about five minutes ago for $182.50. I'm not sure what the seller originally paid for the watch, but I can guarantee you that the return-on-investment is definitely better than would be on a similarly-priced watch from the same year.

Apple iPhone 1st Generation 2G 16GB at Amp T Great Condition RARE with Bonus | eBay


----------



## makinao

I've been waiting for a well executed electronic "smart watch" for a long time. I almost got a Casio bluetooth model but was disappointed by its limited functions. I thought the Samsung watch was a terrible rush job, and skipped it. The Apple Watch may be what I was looking for. I just don't know if I'll still be using my 4S, and if it will work with the Apple Watch by the time I get one.


----------



## Stainless

G-Shock_Sam said:


> I agree. That is how I've seen people use their Pebbles. Some people aren't allowed to access their phones while working, but they can check their Pebbles, and soon their Apple Watches.


What I want to see: If your calendar has you in a meeting, and your heart rate is near resting, and you check your watch more than 5 times in 5 minutes, a random Siri voice calls you with an 'emergency'.


----------



## elGrafico

I'll very likely get an Apple watch, mainly for the health and fitness features. Battery life will likely be an issue though, as they haven't mentioned it unless I missed something... Apple call the watch life changing, I can imagine it being much more: life saving.

Since once the pulse monitoring is reliable enough, it could be used to detect heart attacks, calling 911 and alerting first responders in the immediate vicinity to the person's location.
Similarly, an SOS tap sequence on the screen (or similar) could be used as a panic button for a multitude of purposes: elderly or vulnerable persons in need of help etc.

I don't agree the digital crown is revolutionary at all, as anyone who's driven a BMW in the last 10 years will recognise, it's just an iDrive turned 90 deg.


----------



## BarracksSi

makinao said:


> I just don't know if I'll still be using my 4S, and if it will work with the Apple Watch by the time I get one.


iPhone 5 and above - which can be, I think, free with a new contract. It's because of the different Bluetooth/iBeacon hardware.


----------



## sduford

I suspect the reason they are not mentioning battery life is that it is still very poor at the moment. Just looking at the size of the watch, the processing power it packs, the type of screen and b the necessary wireless connection, I'm guessing they are struggling to get 8 hours right now. They are hoping to get this up to a "full day" by the time they release it, whatever "full day" means, which I'm pretty sure isn't 24 hours.


----------



## 93EXCivic

elGrafico said:


> I don't agree the digital crown is revolutionary at all, as anyone who's driven a BMW in the last 10 years will recognise, it's just an iDrive turned 90 deg.


Oh dear god. So It will be impossible to use and make you scream and cuss?


----------



## dbakiva

RBrylawski said:


> Not only do they expect people will, but the reality is people WILL. And many of them from the very same I don't need a watch crowd from the start.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm bettin' my Apple stock that Rod's right.


----------



## elGrafico

93EXCivic said:


> Oh dear god. So It will be impossible to use and make you scream and cuss?


Quite possibly! Though Apple has a better record of making user interfaces than BMW.


----------



## shnjb

Tagdevil said:


> Yes, by my definition a GShock is not a watch. It's an electronic device. Like a Garmin.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


This watch also doesn't tell time (hour and minutes) with hands.









Lange think it's still a watch though.


----------



## Sabresoft

Looking at the Apple Watch as a physical object, it is clear that they have done their homework with respect to watches. Their selection of materials such as stainless steel, sapphire crystal and various strap materials are bang on choices for a watch. Their innovation in terms of the straps/bracelets is impressive and makes you wonder why at least one of the 1000s of watch brands out there did think of this before now. The aluminum sport models bring something new to the game. 

Some have commented that they are too thick, but I have several conventional watches that are thicker, and so I believe that balancing the packaging needs with practical physical watch dimensions the thickness is not inappropriate. 

Obviously most current "smart" watches are tethered to smart phones, and while currently the Apple Watch only works with iPhones, depending on what Apple wants the watch to be as a product, it is conceivable that they could also be made to work with Android/Windows devices in the future, although the premium experience would still be with the iPhone. 

At this time it is not clear what features of the watch would be partially or fully independent of the iPhone and which would be fully dependent, although we could make some reasonable assumptions. At worst, without the phone tethered, I would assume that we would have a reasonably accurate watch (equivalent to an RC or GPS watch that hasn't synched for a few days), with features such as chronograph, countdown timer, alarms, and possibly medical sensor related data collection available. 

For security reasons I assume that payment systems would require the phone be tethered, as otherwise a lost or stolen watch would put all the associated credit cards at risk. Then again, if there was a quick way to initiate a payment using the watch (albeit with the phone tethered), then there could still be a risk if both watch and phone were stolen together. 

As to the impact on conventional watches I see the following possibilities:

1. Low end quartz and mechanical watches - the very low end would probably not be impacted too seriously, because an Apple Watch at say $350-1000 (depending on model) would hardly sway a purchaser away from a $200 basic product. 

2. High end mechanical watches - as a direct substitute, the Apple Watch would have little direct impact, as these watches are purchased for their romantic cogs and wheels appeal, and/or perceived value as a luxury statement. Where they might make an impact would be for users who have multiple watches, and who might add an Apple Watch to their collection, and then due to wrist time competition the mechanicals might see less usage, and acquisitions of mechanicals might drop (i.e. you might have 4 mechanicals plus AW, instead of 7 mechanicals). 

3. Mid range mechanicals might see more impact as the prestige and/or convenience of an AW might make the AW a more serious competitor for wrist time, especially for those people who only own 1 or 2 watches. 

4. Mid to high range quartz - would be at the most at risk (radio controlled, GPS, and ABC type or even just expensive conventional quartz). But companies such as Casio and Citizen already have watches that work with the iPhone, so these companies could adapt to the competition with more feature filled models in the future. 

Where the AW might have a positive impact on conventional watch manufacturers is:

1. Putting a device on the wrists of the non-watch wearing (I've got a phone, why do I need a watch) crowd might just open them up to exploring other watches out of curiosity. 

2. To-date smart watches haven't exactly set the world on fire, but the AW, with both impressive smart features and a conventional watch style might just change that. Brands like Citizen, Seiko and Casio, that all have some computer industry products in their corporate families will probably step up to the plate with competitive but stylistically different products. 

Watches currently are as much jewelry as functional device, and so I doubt that a computer on the wrist would totally displace conventional watches, but Apple, by focusing as much on watch style as on gadget features may just change how we use our wrist real estate, and will very likely impact the watch industry. I doubt that the impact will be the same as the quartz crisis of the 70s-80s, but the product mix from major watch companies may well change with the legitimatization of the smart watch. 

I will probably try out an AW, and it will remain to be seen if it would significantly impact my watch wearing rotation. For one I still think that the longer battery (charge) life of my Eco Drive and Tough Solar watches will beat having to charge the AW daily. Then again the functionality of the health monitoring features and easy pay systems might just make this watch a daily requirement, with the other models relegated to evening and weekend usage only. 

Only time will tell.


----------



## BarracksSi

Sabresoft said:


> For security reasons I assume that payment systems would require the phone be tethered, as otherwise a lost or stolen watch would put all the associated credit cards at risk. Then again, if there was a quick way to initiate a payment using the watch (albeit with the phone tethered), then there could still be a risk if both watch and phone were stolen together.
> .......
> 3. Mid range mechanicals might see more impact as the prestige and/or convenience of an AW might make the AW a more serious competitor for wrist time, especially for those people who only own 1 or 2 watches.
> 
> 4. Mid to high range quartz - would be at the most at risk (radio controlled, GPS, and ABC type or even just expensive conventional quartz). But companies such as Casio and Citizen already have watches that work with the iPhone, so these companies could adapt to the competition with more feature filled models in the future.


Regarding security, the Watch uses its skin sensors to detect when you've strapped it on your wrist, then you enter a PIN to start it up. When you take it off, it should switch off or at least go to sleep. The PIN serves as the authentication needed to use Apple Pay, too. You also won't be able to charge it on-wrist because the magnetic charging puck covers the sensors, and there's not a hard-wired data connection to make hacking easier. I would also expect that Apple will include a "kill switch" much like they have on the iPhone that will allow you to "brick" the watch remotely (probably when the thief tries to sync it).

Your watch categories 3 and 4 are exactly the ones that I'm losing interest in, too. I've had a Hamilton in mind for my next watch (and only my second mechanical), but I can't say that it interests me nearly as much now as it did three weeks ago.


----------



## RBrylawski

Sabresoft said:


> Looking at the Apple Watch as a physical object, it is clear that they have done their homework with respect to watches. Their selection of materials such as stainless steel, sapphire crystal and various strap materials are bang on choices for a watch. Their innovation in terms of the straps/bracelets is impressive and makes you wonder why at least one of the 1000s of watch brands out there did think of this before now. The aluminum sport models bring something new to the game.
> 
> Some have commented that they are too thick, but I have several conventional watches that are thicker, and so I believe that balancing the packaging needs with practical physical watch dimensions the thickness is not inappropriate.
> 
> Obviously most current "smart" watches are tethered to smart phones, and while currently the Apple Watch only works with iPhones, depending on what Apple wants the watch to be as a product, it is conceivable that they could also be made to work with Android/Windows devices in the future, although the premium experience would still be with the iPhone.
> 
> At this time it is not clear what features of the watch would be partially or fully independent of the iPhone and which would be fully dependent, although we could make some reasonable assumptions. At worst, without the phone tethered, I would assume that we would have a reasonably accurate watch (equivalent to an RC or GPS watch that hasn't synched for a few days), with features such as chronograph, countdown timer, alarms, and possibly medical sensor related data collection available.
> 
> For security reasons I assume that payment systems would require the phone be tethered, as otherwise a lost or stolen watch would put all the associated credit cards at risk. Then again, if there was a quick way to initiate a payment using the watch (albeit with the phone tethered), then there could still be a risk if both watch and phone were stolen together.
> 
> As to the impact on conventional watches I see the following possibilities:
> 
> 1. Low end quartz and mechanical watches - the very low end would probably not be impacted too seriously, because an Apple Watch at say $350-1000 (depending on model) would hardly sway a purchaser away from a $200 basic product.
> 
> 2. High end mechanical watches - as a direct substitute, the Apple Watch would have little direct impact, as these watches are purchased for their romantic cogs and wheels appeal, and/or perceived value as a luxury statement. Where they might make an impact would be for users who have multiple watches, and who might add an Apple Watch to their collection, and then due to wrist time competition the mechanicals might see less usage, and acquisitions of mechanicals might drop (i.e. you might have 4 mechanicals plus AW, instead of 7 mechanicals).
> 
> 3. Mid range mechanicals might see more impact as the prestige and/or convenience of an AW might make the AW a more serious competitor for wrist time, especially for those people who only own 1 or 2 watches.
> 
> 4. Mid to high range quartz - would be at the most at risk (radio controlled, GPS, and ABC type or even just expensive conventional quartz). But companies such as Casio and Citizen already have watches that work with the iPhone, so these companies could adapt to the competition with more feature filled models in the future.
> 
> Where the AW might have a positive impact on conventional watch manufacturers is:
> 
> 1. Putting a device on the wrists of the non-watch wearing (I've got a phone, why do I need a watch) crowd might just open them up to exploring other watches out of curiosity.
> 
> 2. To-date smart watches haven't exactly set the world on fire, but the AW, with both impressive smart features and a conventional watch style might just change that. Brands like Citizen, Seiko and Casio, that all have some computer industry products in their corporate families will probably step up to the plate with competitive but stylistically different products.
> 
> Watches currently are as much jewelry as functional device, and so I doubt that a computer on the wrist would totally displace conventional watches, but Apple, by focusing as much on watch style as on gadget features may just change how we use our wrist real estate, and will very likely impact the watch industry. I doubt that the impact will be the same as the quartz crisis of the 70s-80s, but the product mix from major watch companies may well change with the legitimatization of the smart watch.
> 
> I will probably try out an AW, and it will remain to be seen if it would significantly impact my watch wearing rotation. For one I still think that the longer battery (charge) life of my Eco Drive and Tough Solar watches will beat having to charge the AW daily. Then again the functionality of the health monitoring features and easy pay systems might just make this watch a daily requirement, with the other models relegated to evening and weekend usage only.
> 
> Only time will tell.


Nicely thought out and written!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Guest

Check out this recent article: Tim Cook Interview: The iPhone 6, the Apple Watch, and Remaking a Company's Culture - Businessweek

The part makes the aWatch at least a little bit WIS-worthy, IMO.



> With an Apple Watch wrapped around his hand brass-knuckle style, Ive reveals that the project was conceived in his lab three years ago, shortly after Jobs's death and before "wearables" became a buzzword in Silicon Valley. "It's probably one of the most difficult projects I have ever worked on," he says. There are numerous reasons for this-the complexity of the engineering, the need for new physical interactions between the watch and the human body-but the one most pertinent to Ive is that the Apple Watch is the first Apple product that looks more like the past than the future. The company invited a series of watch historians to Cupertino to speak, including French author Dominique Fléchon, an expert in antique timepieces. Fléchon says only that the "discussion included the philosophy of instruments for measuring time" and notes that the Apple Watch may not be as timeless as some classic Swiss watches: "The evolution of the technologies will render very quickly the Apple Watch obsolete," he says.
> 
> Ive, 47, immersed himself in horological history. Clocks first popped up on top of towers in the center of towns and over time were gradually miniaturized, appearing on belt buckles, as neck pendants, and inside trouser pockets. They eventually migrated to the wrist, first as a way for ship captains to tell time while keeping their hands firmly locked on the wheel. "What was interesting is that it took centuries to find the wrist and then it didn't go anywhere else," Ive says. "I would argue the wrist is the right place for the technology."
> 
> Ive's team first tried using the same pinch-to-zoom touchscreen they'd invented for the iPhone, but the screen was too small and their fingers obscured the display. A year into the project, the group started toying with what became the Apple Watch's defining physical feature: "the digital crown," a variation on the knob that's used to wind and set the time on a traditional wristwatch. By pressing or rotating the crown, Apple Watch users can return to the home screen, zoom in or out, and scroll through apps.
> 
> Watches are as much about fashion as functionality. Ive and his colleagues indulged their obsession for detail and designed three collections of devices made of different materials and seven watchbands with their own features and flourishes. Ive handles each of the watches with the proud familiarity of a father, demonstrating, for example, how links can be plucked off a stainless steel band by pressing two buttons, no specialized jeweler's tool required. In another bit of engineering cleverness, the watch's packaging doubles as a charging stand; wearers nestle the watch against an inductive magnet inside the watch box to recharge it. (How often they'll have to recharge remains unknown. Apple hasn't yet announced specs on the watches' battery life.)


----------



## BarracksSi

Mollari 2261 said:


> Check out this recent article: Tim Cook Interview: The iPhone 6, the Apple Watch, and Remaking a Company's Culture - Businessweek
> 
> The part makes the aWatch at least a little bit WIS-worthy, IMO.


Two things I notice about that excerpt --

The 6th gen iPod Nano, which was the small, square version that was immediately adopted as an "iPod watch" by many owners after its introduction in late 2010, was discontinued nearly a year after Steve Jobs's passing, and not long after Ive says that they started working on a watch. I don't think the timing was coincidental at all; I contend that that particular form factor was pulled so that Apple can work on an all-new wristwatch without having to "evolve" the Nano. One feature that that Nano had was the ability to rotate its postage stamp-sized display 90 degrees with your finger and thumb. That's a sort of multitouch gesture, but the Nano also _didn't_ use pinch-to-zoom, which jibes with Ive's assertion that pinch-to-zoom is useless on such a small display. The digital crown would have been great for scrolling through song lists on that little iPod, too.

I also liked how Ive noted that, "...the wrist is the right place for the technology." Some of us have been saying that smartphones are to smartwatches as pocket watches are to wristwatches, and he sees things the same way. Heck, we probably aren't too far from being able to leave the phone at home altogether. I think that the only problem left is power management. If it can regenerate power on its own, or use some radical new battery technology, then it'll have enough juice to drive all those radios needed for LTE/GPS/Wifi/BT/etc.


----------



## TheWatchLover

I am a fan of Apple, I do own the iPhone, iPad, iPad mini, iPad Air and even writing this exact post from a Macbook Pro.
I wasn't sure about the Apple Watch when they unveiled it, in general because the did not mention battery life.
Time has passed and more and more rumors say, that battery will last about 24 hours.

Come on, I do wear my watches over night and do not want to charge it every day. So how cool and well designed the app might be, how intuitive to use and how smart it would be, if battery doesn't last at least 3 days – no chance!


----------



## shnjb

I will be buying one for sure.


----------



## youngpro

Apple Watch is for suckers.

For one reason only..............

They already made the Apple Watch 3S XO lol

Seriously though, apple is going to continue to upgrade, increase, add, modify this watch every 6 months. Why get suckered into the first run?


----------



## BarracksSi

youngpro said:


> Seriously though, apple is going to continue to upgrade, increase, add, modify this watch every 6 months.


Why would they?

It doesn't have to deal with cellular network upgrades like the progression through Edge-3G-4G-LTE, it doesn't have a camera to update every year or two, the display won't get any bigger (it doesn't really need a higher resolution, either), it doesn't need terabytes of memory, the UI can't get any more complicated... heck, even the CPU doesn't need to become any faster. What's left?

I can think of two worthwhile upgrades, and one is highly dependent upon the other: more wireless abilities (wifi, LTE, etc) and new battery technology. I don't foresee any smart way to add more radios unless battery tech is wildly improved, and at best, that's probably still five or eight years down the road.

Too many people have gotten used to quick upgrade cycles for little gadgets. I don't think a device this simple lends itself to rapid upgrades. You can't think of it updating quickly like a phone, because, well, it's not a phone. As a device, it's just not as complicated.


----------



## MrDagon007

BarracksSi said:


> Why would they?
> 
> It doesn't have to deal with cellular network upgrades like the progression through Edge-3G-4G-LTE, it doesn't have a camera to update every year or two, the display won't get any bigger (it doesn't really need a higher resolution, either), it doesn't need terabytes of memory, the UI can't get any more complicated... heck, even the CPU doesn't need to become any faster. What's left?
> 
> I can think of two worthwhile upgrades, and one is highly dependent upon the other: more wireless abilities (wifi, LTE, etc) and new battery technology. I don't foresee any smart way to add more radios unless battery tech is wildly improved, and at best, that's probably still five or eight years down the road.
> 
> Too many people have gotten used to quick upgrade cycles for little gadgets. I don't think a device this simple lends itself to rapid upgrades. You can't think of it updating quickly like a phone, because, well, it's not a phone. As a device, it's just not as complicated.


Next to battery upgrades and more independence from a nearby phone, the big thing (in my opinion) will be adding extra sensors. It is well known that Apple hired a few specialists on non-intrusive sensors, for example someone who developed this for blood glucose monitoring. I think this will be the killer app, and how the apple watch will progressively become more attractive.
But, the v1 would still be a useful little device for those who own it. It is not because Rolex makes minute adjustments to its submariners on a regular basis that the old ones are suddenly not attractive anymore.


----------



## aussielondon

clarencek said:


> I was impressed by the keynote today.
> 
> People doubted the iPhone because they were looking at the device through the lens of a phone. As a phone there's nothing interesting about the iPhone. But it's not a phone, it's a computer.
> 
> The apple watch is also not a watch, it's a computer. And while samsung, Motorola and the others are trying to make smart watches. Apple is putting a computer on your wrist.
> 
> It's got everything your iPhone has. And when they sort out the battery, the dependence on an iPhone (remember when the iPhone needed a Mac computer and iTunes to work / sync), and durability - it will really take off.
> 
> I found the most impressive was they figured out a nice way to use the watch with the crown. Anyway, I'm looking forward to v2.


No it won't take off as the screen is the issue... in the iphone the screen is large enough to comfortably use for many things, but on something the size of a watch? NO WAY!

If I am reading a screen and wanting computer functionality, then I need more than a tiny screen thankyou very much Apple.
Also in todays world the watch is not needed with all the phones and laptops and tablets we have about the place, as well as public clocks.... we wear watches now purely for how it looks on us, lets admit the truth here.
How hard is it to pull the phone out of your pocket to do some GPS or check the time or browse the web to search for the closest restaurant etc?
Not hard!
So a smartwatch is plain stupid I think, and it will go the same way as digital display watches of the 1980's went. As after that craze people went back to analog displays (albeit still Quartz powered), but they didn't like the digital display.

I knew the iphone would work as mobile phones at the time were digital anyway, the iphone was the next step... but watches have shown that they don't want to be digital (display), even if they use quartz powered circuit boards.

The wrist watch is an adornment, the phone is not, this is what Apple does not understand.


----------

