bagger
Footballguy
not sure that there is a first mover advantage here.Cliff Clavin said:Samsung to release their watch Sept 4th and beat Apple to the punch.
not sure that there is a first mover advantage here.Cliff Clavin said:Samsung to release their watch Sept 4th and beat Apple to the punch.
The other side of Apple vs. Samsung is that Apple still has it's own OS in a desktop/laptop solution. If their smartwatch can tether to the OS Mavericks (or whatever the new OS is) and work within the whole ecosystem like Apple TV, then Apple's smartwatch has a lot more going for it than other smartwatches out there.When it comes to these wearable devices...Slapdash said:Cliff Clavin said:Samsung to release their watch Sept 4th and beat Apple to the punch.
execution>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>timing
There have already been a ton of "smart watches" that frankly all kind of suck, maybe the Samsung will too, maybe the apple will too. I will say that I'd be willing to pay for the convenience of having a small, sleek, waterproof smartphone I could wear on my wrist instead of carrying around a phone in my pocket. So far Samsungs idea of innovation has been a 5"-6" screen that I have to carry in my pocket and that's going the wrong way imo. When I need to view a screen for extended periods of time the 7" tablets are just a much, much better experience than any phone.
Hang out with smaller old women - problem solved.I like the bigger screen on the galaxy. Still fits fine in my pocket and is much better for better for browsing. Iphone feels tiny now when I pick up my old ladies.
I dunno, I think the whole "it's the ecosystem" argument is looking more silly to me all the time. Desktop/Laptop OS's are becoming less and less relevant with each passing day. Even ifans have admitted that itunes is more of a headache than it really<would you like to update now?> to <please wait while we sych> be <update now?>. If you ask me itunes is a microsoft product posing as an apple product. I was bullish on the appleTV/tablet solution for the living room... until Chromecast and the latest nexus7 were released and leapfrogged it. IMO you get a much better living room experience for under $300 than spending close to $500 for the closest apple experience. Worst of all you have to deal with so many more limitations with regard to hardware selection and ways to customize almost anything you want to do. You call it an ecosystem, I call it an albatross.The other side of Apple vs. Samsung is that Apple still has it's own OS in a desktop/laptop solution. If their smartwatch can tether to the OS Mavericks (or whatever the new OS is) and work within the whole ecosystem like Apple TV, then Apple's smartwatch has a lot more going for it than other smartwatches out there.When it comes to these wearable devices...Slapdash said:Cliff Clavin said:Samsung to release their watch Sept 4th and beat Apple to the punch.
execution>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>timing
There have already been a ton of "smart watches" that frankly all kind of suck, maybe the Samsung will too, maybe the apple will too. I will say that I'd be willing to pay for the convenience of having a small, sleek, waterproof smartphone I could wear on my wrist instead of carrying around a phone in my pocket. So far Samsungs idea of innovation has been a 5"-6" screen that I have to carry in my pocket and that's going the wrong way imo. When I need to view a screen for extended periods of time the 7" tablets are just a much, much better experience than any phone.
You think it won't run android?The other side of Apple vs. Samsung is that Apple still has it's own OS in a desktop/laptop solution. If their smartwatch can tether to the OS Mavericks (or whatever the new OS is) and work within the whole ecosystem like Apple TV, then Apple's smartwatch has a lot more going for it than other smartwatches out there.When it comes to these wearable devices...execution>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>timingSlapdash said:Cliff Clavin said:Samsung to release their watch Sept 4th and beat Apple to the punch.
There have already been a ton of "smart watches" that frankly all kind of suck, maybe the Samsung will too, maybe the apple will too. I will say that I'd be willing to pay for the convenience of having a small, sleek, waterproof smartphone I could wear on my wrist instead of carrying around a phone in my pocket. So far Samsungs idea of innovation has been a 5"-6" screen that I have to carry in my pocket and that's going the wrong way imo. When I need to view a screen for extended periods of time the 7" tablets are just a much, much better experience than any phone.
Maybe it's because I carry a smaller screen now but I almost never browse the web on my phone. I use the screen the most often as a gps or text. I NEVER try to watch a movie on it, even if the phone can do that easily. I will admit I think most mobile games suck on a tablet, let alone a phone.Web browsing is pretty much out of question. Phone on it? Going to need a bluetooth headset unless you want everyone hearing your calls or carrying earbuds around all the time. No camera. No email. Everything would have to be voice control and maybe it is just me, but that still sucks. I just don't see why the average person would want it. Seems like a gimmick.
Just because you think it's irrelevant doesn't mean OS X and other Apple technologies are going the way of the dinosaur. Apple's micro device could work with *gasp* other Apple products one already owns. I'm not the one who coined "Apple Ecosystem" either. Sheesh.I dunno, I think the whole "it's the ecosystem" argument is looking more silly to me all the time. Desktop/Laptop OS's are becoming less and less relevant with each passing day. Even ifans have admitted that itunes is more of a headache than it really<would you like to update now?> to <please wait while we sych> be <update now?>. If you ask me itunes is a microsoft product posing as an apple product. I was bullish on the appleTV/tablet solution for the living room... until Chromecast and the latest nexus7 were released and leapfrogged it. IMO you get a much better living room experience for under $300 than spending close to $500 for the closest apple experience. Worst of all you have to deal with so many more limitations with regard to hardware selection and ways to customize almost anything you want to do. You call it an ecosystem, I call it an albatross.The other side of Apple vs. Samsung is that Apple still has it's own OS in a desktop/laptop solution. If their smartwatch can tether to the OS Mavericks (or whatever the new OS is) and work within the whole ecosystem like Apple TV, then Apple's smartwatch has a lot more going for it than other smartwatches out there.When it comes to these wearable devices...Slapdash said:Cliff Clavin said:Samsung to release their watch Sept 4th and beat Apple to the punch.
execution>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>timing
There have already been a ton of "smart watches" that frankly all kind of suck, maybe the Samsung will too, maybe the apple will too. I will say that I'd be willing to pay for the convenience of having a small, sleek, waterproof smartphone I could wear on my wrist instead of carrying around a phone in my pocket. So far Samsungs idea of innovation has been a 5"-6" screen that I have to carry in my pocket and that's going the wrong way imo. When I need to view a screen for extended periods of time the 7" tablets are just a much, much better experience than any phone.
I dunno, maybe it can run Win8 and Ubuntu as well. If what you're asking is "Can it run Gmail?", then I would guess so.You think it won't run android?The other side of Apple vs. Samsung is that Apple still has it's own OS in a desktop/laptop solution. If their smartwatch can tether to the OS Mavericks (or whatever the new OS is) and work within the whole ecosystem like Apple TV, then Apple's smartwatch has a lot more going for it than other smartwatches out there.When it comes to these wearable devices...execution>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>timingSlapdash said:Cliff Clavin said:Samsung to release their watch Sept 4th and beat Apple to the punch.
There have already been a ton of "smart watches" that frankly all kind of suck, maybe the Samsung will too, maybe the apple will too. I will say that I'd be willing to pay for the convenience of having a small, sleek, waterproof smartphone I could wear on my wrist instead of carrying around a phone in my pocket. So far Samsungs idea of innovation has been a 5"-6" screen that I have to carry in my pocket and that's going the wrong way imo. When I need to view a screen for extended periods of time the 7" tablets are just a much, much better experience than any phone.
Exactly. I think people overestimate how much they *need* to be able to watch movies, go on the internet or play games. You can always keep a tablet handy you want those things.Maybe it's because I carry a smaller screen now but I almost never browse the web on my phone. I use the screen the most often as a gps or text. I NEVER try to watch a movie on it, even if the phone can do that easily. I will admit I think most mobile games suck on a tablet, let alone a phone.Web browsing is pretty much out of question. Phone on it? Going to need a bluetooth headset unless you want everyone hearing your calls or carrying earbuds around all the time. No camera. No email. Everything would have to be voice control and maybe it is just me, but that still sucks. I just don't see why the average person would want it. Seems like a gimmick.
To me the watch and google glasses are devices that are only now possible because a voice user interface is possible. Someone posted in one of these threads that they think OS innovation is dead but I strongly disagree. The OS innovation using keyboards/mice/touch may have matured to the point the changes will be granular but the next big OS innovation will be voice commands and predictive computing where your devices guess what you might like to do next based on your past usage patterns.
You seem to have a tough time getting an object out of your pocket and putting it to your ear.Exactly. I think people overestimate how much they *need* to be able to watch movies, go on the internet or play games. You can always keep a tablet handy you want those things.Maybe it's because I carry a smaller screen now but I almost never browse the web on my phone. I use the screen the most often as a gps or text. I NEVER try to watch a movie on it, even if the phone can do that easily. I will admit I think most mobile games suck on a tablet, let alone a phone.Web browsing is pretty much out of question. Phone on it? Going to need a bluetooth headset unless you want everyone hearing your calls or carrying earbuds around all the time. No camera. No email. Everything would have to be voice control and maybe it is just me, but that still sucks. I just don't see why the average person would want it. Seems like a gimmick.
To me the watch and google glasses are devices that are only now possible because a voice user interface is possible. Someone posted in one of these threads that they think OS innovation is dead but I strongly disagree. The OS innovation using keyboards/mice/touch may have matured to the point the changes will be granular but the next big OS innovation will be voice commands and predictive computing where your devices guess what you might like to do next based on your past usage patterns.
Cliff is right about needing a headset for it but I imagine the people who want the iWatch won't mind. Not having to fumble around looking for your phone, finding a place to carry it, dropping it, etc. make up for the headset. Plus for people who don't talk a lot they won't even need the headset ("Honey, pick up some milk on the way home" isn't something you care if people hear).
It's not that big of a deal but it's still a chore. Plus I'm always leaving my phone in the car, if it's on my wrist I can't forget. Another nice feature would be to see who is calling or read a text without digging your phone out of your pocket just to find out it's either someone you don't want to talk to or an unimportant text.You seem to have a tough time getting an object out of your pocket and putting it to your ear.Exactly. I think people overestimate how much they *need* to be able to watch movies, go on the internet or play games. You can always keep a tablet handy you want those things.Maybe it's because I carry a smaller screen now but I almost never browse the web on my phone. I use the screen the most often as a gps or text. I NEVER try to watch a movie on it, even if the phone can do that easily. I will admit I think most mobile games suck on a tablet, let alone a phone.Web browsing is pretty much out of question. Phone on it? Going to need a bluetooth headset unless you want everyone hearing your calls or carrying earbuds around all the time. No camera. No email. Everything would have to be voice control and maybe it is just me, but that still sucks. I just don't see why the average person would want it. Seems like a gimmick.
To me the watch and google glasses are devices that are only now possible because a voice user interface is possible. Someone posted in one of these threads that they think OS innovation is dead but I strongly disagree. The OS innovation using keyboards/mice/touch may have matured to the point the changes will be granular but the next big OS innovation will be voice commands and predictive computing where your devices guess what you might like to do next based on your past usage patterns.
Cliff is right about needing a headset for it but I imagine the people who want the iWatch won't mind. Not having to fumble around looking for your phone, finding a place to carry it, dropping it, etc. make up for the headset. Plus for people who don't talk a lot they won't even need the headset ("Honey, pick up some milk on the way home" isn't something you care if people hear).
By carrying a headset, you've defeated the purpose of not having to carry something in your pocket unless you're okay with being bluetooth earpiece guy then the watch makes sense.
Do people really find voice commands work that well that they'd be willing to only be able to use it? I typically find it more of a frustration. I'll try it once or twice, but unless it is something very generic, it rarely works.
Yeah, I remember. About 10x the price and you weren't able to use your smartphone/tablet as an interface, right? Anyone comparing those two products is grasping at straws.Just because you think it's irrelevant doesn't mean OS X and other Apple technologies are going the way of the dinosaur. Apple's micro device could work with *gasp* other Apple products one already owns. I'm not the one who coined "Apple Ecosystem" either. Sheesh.
Chromecast is nice, but remember Google TV?
A year ago or more I would have agreed with you. Used countless "voice recognition" systems which included turning audio messages into text and it always seemed like a disaster. But in the last year I'm shocked at how far all that has come. Maybe the hardware is finally small/cheap enough in all devices to make it work. Maybe the software is finally catching up to the hardware to make it happen. Whatever the reason I think it's come a long, long way in just the last year and what had been an incredibly frustrating experience in the recent past is pretty usable right now, let alone in another couple of years. Goonsquad was a big proponent of Siri(obviously) but I think it and similar systems will cause a big shift in how we interact with all our tech. The reason you heard so many complaints about the early versions of Siri is because people obviously wanted to use the feature but were just underwhelmed at how the beta version performed.Do people really find voice commands work that well that they'd be willing to only be able to use it? I typically find it more of a frustration. I'll try it once or twice, but unless it is something very generic, it rarely works.
Don't forget that tablets came out of that same garbage pile. So did smart phones. Even early laptops were a complete joke.And, from the ashes of the garbage pile, out came a watch idea. GREAT SCOTT!!!! What a brilliant idea. Yeah... no.
So the only thing you believe it is giving you is the convenience of having it on your wrist instead of in your pocket. If you're constantly forgetting your phone in your car, I'd imagine that you'll be forgetting you ear piece as well with a watch (and remember to make sure you charge both devices).It's not that big of a deal but it's still a chore. Plus I'm always leaving my phone in the car, if it's on my wrist I can't forget. Another nice feature would be to see who is calling or read a text without digging your phone out of your pocket just to find out it's either someone you don't want to talk to or an unimportant text.You seem to have a tough time getting an object out of your pocket and putting it to your ear.Exactly. I think people overestimate how much they *need* to be able to watch movies, go on the internet or play games. You can always keep a tablet handy you want those things.Maybe it's because I carry a smaller screen now but I almost never browse the web on my phone. I use the screen the most often as a gps or text. I NEVER try to watch a movie on it, even if the phone can do that easily. I will admit I think most mobile games suck on a tablet, let alone a phone.Web browsing is pretty much out of question. Phone on it? Going to need a bluetooth headset unless you want everyone hearing your calls or carrying earbuds around all the time. No camera. No email. Everything would have to be voice control and maybe it is just me, but that still sucks. I just don't see why the average person would want it. Seems like a gimmick.
To me the watch and google glasses are devices that are only now possible because a voice user interface is possible. Someone posted in one of these threads that they think OS innovation is dead but I strongly disagree. The OS innovation using keyboards/mice/touch may have matured to the point the changes will be granular but the next big OS innovation will be voice commands and predictive computing where your devices guess what you might like to do next based on your past usage patterns.
Cliff is right about needing a headset for it but I imagine the people who want the iWatch won't mind. Not having to fumble around looking for your phone, finding a place to carry it, dropping it, etc. make up for the headset. Plus for people who don't talk a lot they won't even need the headset ("Honey, pick up some milk on the way home" isn't something you care if people hear).
By carrying a headset, you've defeated the purpose of not having to carry something in your pocket unless you're okay with being bluetooth earpiece guy then the watch makes sense.
Do people really find voice commands work that well that they'd be willing to only be able to use it? I typically find it more of a frustration. I'll try it once or twice, but unless it is something very generic, it rarely works.
Personally, I don't use the phone enough that I would need a headset. I don't have long conversations on the phone. If I was working or driving I would wear one but otherwise I'd just talk to my wrist for a short conversation.
One feature it should definitely have is a radio tuner. A lot of gyms have TV's that broadcast sound through FM so you could wear your watch and headset and watch TV without wires (something I find annoying when working out).
Also, I expect more people to start wearing a headset or headphones anyway to take advantage of listening to music on it. Apple I'm sure will come up with a seamless method of listening to music on a headset and then switching over to a phone call.
As for voice commands, I have used them much but I haven't had the need yet.
I did some reading about the iWatch and it appears to me they aren't designing it as a replacement for the iPhone. They bought a company called Passif that makes low power Bluetooth chips so it's likely that the iWatch will only be able to be used as a phone through a connection to the iPhone. That makes more sense than a full iPhone replacement but I agree that it turns it into a stylish accessory more than anything else.So the only thing you believe it is giving you is the convenience of having it on your wrist instead of in your pocket. If you're constantly forgetting your phone in your car, I'd imagine that you'll be forgetting you ear piece as well with a watch (and remember to make sure you charge both devices).It's not that big of a deal but it's still a chore. Plus I'm always leaving my phone in the car, if it's on my wrist I can't forget. Another nice feature would be to see who is calling or read a text without digging your phone out of your pocket just to find out it's either someone you don't want to talk to or an unimportant text.You seem to have a tough time getting an object out of your pocket and putting it to your ear.Exactly. I think people overestimate how much they *need* to be able to watch movies, go on the internet or play games. You can always keep a tablet handy you want those things.Maybe it's because I carry a smaller screen now but I almost never browse the web on my phone. I use the screen the most often as a gps or text. I NEVER try to watch a movie on it, even if the phone can do that easily. I will admit I think most mobile games suck on a tablet, let alone a phone.To me the watch and google glasses are devices that are only now possible because a voice user interface is possible. Someone posted in one of these threads that they think OS innovation is dead but I strongly disagree. The OS innovation using keyboards/mice/touch may have matured to the point the changes will be granular but the next big OS innovation will be voice commands and predictive computing where your devices guess what you might like to do next based on your past usage patterns.Web browsing is pretty much out of question. Phone on it? Going to need a bluetooth headset unless you want everyone hearing your calls or carrying earbuds around all the time. No camera. No email. Everything would have to be voice control and maybe it is just me, but that still sucks. I just don't see why the average person would want it. Seems like a gimmick.
Cliff is right about needing a headset for it but I imagine the people who want the iWatch won't mind. Not having to fumble around looking for your phone, finding a place to carry it, dropping it, etc. make up for the headset. Plus for people who don't talk a lot they won't even need the headset ("Honey, pick up some milk on the way home" isn't something you care if people hear).
By carrying a headset, you've defeated the purpose of not having to carry something in your pocket unless you're okay with being bluetooth earpiece guy then the watch makes sense.
Do people really find voice commands work that well that they'd be willing to only be able to use it? I typically find it more of a frustration. I'll try it once or twice, but unless it is something very generic, it rarely works.
Personally, I don't use the phone enough that I would need a headset. I don't have long conversations on the phone. If I was working or driving I would wear one but otherwise I'd just talk to my wrist for a short conversation.
One feature it should definitely have is a radio tuner. A lot of gyms have TV's that broadcast sound through FM so you could wear your watch and headset and watch TV without wires (something I find annoying when working out).
Also, I expect more people to start wearing a headset or headphones anyway to take advantage of listening to music on it. Apple I'm sure will come up with a seamless method of listening to music on a headset and then switching over to a phone call.
As for voice commands, I have used them much but I haven't had the need yet.
If you're replacing your phone with a watch, you're giving up email, browsing, apps, maps/GPS, etc and probably still paying the same monthly fee. You may not use any of those functions, but you'd be in the extreme minority for smart phone users. If you aren't replacing your phone, then the watch is providing zero benefit and is simply a "stylish" accessory... which probably isn't very stylish at all compared to any other nice watch.
No, I don't see how those two came from the same garbage pile. Tablets became an alternative to netbooks. People drove tablet sales by neglecting netbooks. Netbooks came from that former garbage heap but not tablets. Smartphones, the iPhone, were spawned off of what Blackberry had done with a qwerty keyboard and web browsing. The smartphone evolved from other phones, not the garbage heap. These watches are not a new concept. If a company somehow created a bracelet of somekind that was ~5 inches long and you could play it using one hand for web browsing and other things, maybe that would begin something but the fact people want to use both hands would deter wide adoption of that. Watches are a fad and will go the way a beta max before long.Don't forget that tablets came out of that same garbage pile. So did smart phones. Even early laptops were a complete joke.And, from the ashes of the garbage pile, out came a watch idea. GREAT SCOTT!!!! What a brilliant idea. Yeah... no.
I'm not comparing anything. It's just the Google has had it share of misses. Even the previous Nexus 7's life cycle has come into question. The new flagship MotoX is pretty much last years spec at a premium price point, with a different way of using processing.Yeah, I remember. About 10x the price and you weren't able to use your smartphone/tablet as an interface, right? Anyone comparing those two products is grasping at straws.Just because you think it's irrelevant doesn't mean OS X and other Apple technologies are going the way of the dinosaur. Apple's micro device could work with *gasp* other Apple products one already owns. I'm not the one who coined "Apple Ecosystem" either. Sheesh.
Chromecast is nice, but remember Google TV?
For the record I think OS X is one of the best desktop OS's ever, but all desktops are creeping toward irrelevance.
I didn't think you coined the term "apple ecosystem", so we are all good there.
All I've heard lately is the " watch" is a 2014 product . I think the iwatch is going to be about as much as a watch as the iphone was to a phoneWhen it comes to these wearable devices...execution>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>timingSlapdash said:Cliff Clavin said:Samsung to release their watch Sept 4th and beat Apple to the punch.
There have already been a ton of "smart watches" that frankly all kind of suck, maybe the Samsung will too, maybe the apple will too. I will say that I'd be willing to pay for the convenience of having a small, sleek, waterproof smartphone I could wear on my wrist instead of carrying around a phone in my pocket. So far Samsungs idea of innovation has been a 5"-6" screen that I have to carry in my pocket and that's going the wrong way imo. When I need to view a screen for extended periods of time the 7" tablets are just a much, much better experience than any phone.
You do realize that tablets were not a new concept either. Apple didn't invent the tablet. Hence, the garbage pile comment.No, I don't see how those two came from the same garbage pile. Tablets became an alternative to netbooks. People drove tablet sales by neglecting netbooks. Netbooks came from that former garbage heap but not tablets. Smartphones, the iPhone, were spawned off of what Blackberry had done with a qwerty keyboard and web browsing. The smartphone evolved from other phones, not the garbage heap.These watches are not a new concept. If a company somehow created a bracelet of somekind that was ~5 inches long and you could play it using one hand for web browsing and other things, maybe that would begin something but the fact people want to use both hands would deter wide adoption of that. Watches are a fad and will go the way a beta max before long.Don't forget that tablets came out of that same garbage pile. So did smart phones. Even early laptops were a complete joke.And, from the ashes of the garbage pile, out came a watch idea. GREAT SCOTT!!!! What a brilliant idea. Yeah... no.
This. These smart watches won't replace phones. They're phone accessories. Like the Pebble.I did some reading about the iWatch and it appears to me they aren't designing it as a replacement for the iPhone. They bought a company called Passif that makes low power Bluetooth chips so it's likely that the iWatch will only be able to be used as a phone through a connection to the iPhone. That makes more sense than a full iPhone replacement but I agree that it turns it into a stylish accessory more than anything else.So the only thing you believe it is giving you is the convenience of having it on your wrist instead of in your pocket. If you're constantly forgetting your phone in your car, I'd imagine that you'll be forgetting you ear piece as well with a watch (and remember to make sure you charge both devices).It's not that big of a deal but it's still a chore. Plus I'm always leaving my phone in the car, if it's on my wrist I can't forget. Another nice feature would be to see who is calling or read a text without digging your phone out of your pocket just to find out it's either someone you don't want to talk to or an unimportant text.You seem to have a tough time getting an object out of your pocket and putting it to your ear.Exactly. I think people overestimate how much they *need* to be able to watch movies, go on the internet or play games. You can always keep a tablet handy you want those things.Maybe it's because I carry a smaller screen now but I almost never browse the web on my phone. I use the screen the most often as a gps or text. I NEVER try to watch a movie on it, even if the phone can do that easily. I will admit I think most mobile games suck on a tablet, let alone a phone.To me the watch and google glasses are devices that are only now possible because a voice user interface is possible. Someone posted in one of these threads that they think OS innovation is dead but I strongly disagree. The OS innovation using keyboards/mice/touch may have matured to the point the changes will be granular but the next big OS innovation will be voice commands and predictive computing where your devices guess what you might like to do next based on your past usage patterns.Web browsing is pretty much out of question. Phone on it? Going to need a bluetooth headset unless you want everyone hearing your calls or carrying earbuds around all the time. No camera. No email. Everything would have to be voice control and maybe it is just me, but that still sucks. I just don't see why the average person would want it. Seems like a gimmick.
Cliff is right about needing a headset for it but I imagine the people who want the iWatch won't mind. Not having to fumble around looking for your phone, finding a place to carry it, dropping it, etc. make up for the headset. Plus for people who don't talk a lot they won't even need the headset ("Honey, pick up some milk on the way home" isn't something you care if people hear).
By carrying a headset, you've defeated the purpose of not having to carry something in your pocket unless you're okay with being bluetooth earpiece guy then the watch makes sense.
Do people really find voice commands work that well that they'd be willing to only be able to use it? I typically find it more of a frustration. I'll try it once or twice, but unless it is something very generic, it rarely works.
Personally, I don't use the phone enough that I would need a headset. I don't have long conversations on the phone. If I was working or driving I would wear one but otherwise I'd just talk to my wrist for a short conversation.
One feature it should definitely have is a radio tuner. A lot of gyms have TV's that broadcast sound through FM so you could wear your watch and headset and watch TV without wires (something I find annoying when working out).
Also, I expect more people to start wearing a headset or headphones anyway to take advantage of listening to music on it. Apple I'm sure will come up with a seamless method of listening to music on a headset and then switching over to a phone call.
As for voice commands, I have used them much but I haven't had the need yet.
If you're replacing your phone with a watch, you're giving up email, browsing, apps, maps/GPS, etc and probably still paying the same monthly fee. You may not use any of those functions, but you'd be in the extreme minority for smart phone users. If you aren't replacing your phone, then the watch is providing zero benefit and is simply a "stylish" accessory... which probably isn't very stylish at all compared to any other nice watch.
For Apple's bottom line though it may be a very good thing as watches have a higher profit margin than phones and computers.
Yeah, and a few years ago wedding photographers would tell me that digital was convenient, but when quality matters they still need their medium and large format cameras to do important work. Now, everyone I know uses digital exclusively. The power of not only mobile device hardware but the quality of software tools are advancing at a pace similar to digital photography a few years ago. Maybe audio/video pro's will need power workstations. If you were to honestly guess what % of computers(smart phones to supercomputers) were being used for that purpose what % would you guess?I still can't imagine having to edit audio tracks with a mobile device. Or video. I suppose it can be done (you can mix small live applications with an iPad, like dialing in stage monitors), but the mobile device still has to connect to an audio desk, because of patching and I/O's.
I think you are both right, but anyone that thinks an ipebble is going to make the stock approach 600 is completely fooling themselves. That would hardly be categorized as innovation by any standard.This. These smart watches won't replace phones. They're phone accessories. Like the Pebble.
So you're leading this into wedding shooters now.Yeah, and a few years ago wedding photographers would tell me that digital was convenient, but when quality matters they still need their medium and large format cameras to do important work. Now, everyone I know uses digital exclusively. The power of not only mobile device hardware but the quality of software tools are advancing at a pace similar to digital photography a few years ago. Maybe audio/video pro's will need power workstations. If you were to honestly guess what % of computers(smart phones to supercomputers) were being used for that purpose what % would you guess?I still can't imagine having to edit audio tracks with a mobile device. Or video. I suppose it can be done (you can mix small live applications with an iPad, like dialing in stage monitors), but the mobile device still has to connect to an audio desk, because of patching and I/O's.
Look, if you think desktop computing isn't dying... that's fine.
What was the "blowup" over the word "ecosystem"?
No, I didn't lead us into small professional markets. Wedding photographers are simply a subset of small professional markets. IMO bringing up small professional markets as if they made a meaningful impact on a market as a whole seemed borderline idiotic, but I'm willing to roll with it.So you're leading this into wedding shooters now.
Well, if you don't use the technology as a pro, then there is no need for you to roll. Because it's useless info for me.No, I didn't lead us into small professional markets. Wedding photographers are simply a subset of small professional markets. IMO bringing up small professional markets as if they made a meaningful impact on a market as a whole seemed borderline idiotic, but I'm willing to roll with it.So you're leading this into wedding shooters now.
Who said Apple invented the tablet? The whole garbage pile is from mass production of supplies that is outdated therefore a "new" product is invented in order to recycle it. Apple, probably, has supplies from iPhones, iPads that can't be used thus the "creation" of a product that will use the left over stuff. Watches are a way to use it up but it's not going to WOW anyone.You do realize that tablets were not a new concept either. Apple didn't invent the tablet. Hence, the garbage pile comment.No, I don't see how those two came from the same garbage pile. Tablets became an alternative to netbooks. People drove tablet sales by neglecting netbooks. Netbooks came from that former garbage heap but not tablets. Smartphones, the iPhone, were spawned off of what Blackberry had done with a qwerty keyboard and web browsing. The smartphone evolved from other phones, not the garbage heap.These watches are not a new concept. If a company somehow created a bracelet of somekind that was ~5 inches long and you could play it using one hand for web browsing and other things, maybe that would begin something but the fact people want to use both hands would deter wide adoption of that. Watches are a fad and will go the way a beta max before long.Don't forget that tablets came out of that same garbage pile. So did smart phones. Even early laptops were a complete joke.And, from the ashes of the garbage pile, out came a watch idea. GREAT SCOTT!!!! What a brilliant idea. Yeah... no.
Apple, probably, has supplies from iPhones, iPads that can't be used thus the "creation" of a product that will use the left over stuff. Watches are a way to use it up but it's not going to WOW anyone.
OMG!!!! An Apple watch!!!! I gots to get me one of those!!!!!Apple, probably, has supplies from iPhones, iPads that can't be used thus the "creation" of a product that will use the left over stuff. Watches are a way to use it up but it's not going to WOW anyone.
oh jesus
I think he's laughing at your laughable understanding of the supply chain.OMG!!!! An Apple watch!!!! I gots to get me one of those!!!!!Apple, probably, has supplies from iPhones, iPads that can't be used thus the "creation" of a product that will use the left over stuff. Watches are a way to use it up but it's not going to WOW anyone.
oh jesus
Um, nope.
I know when Toyota has spare car parts they just convert them to swing sets and cast iron skillets.I think he's laughing at your laughable understanding of the supply chain.OMG!!!! An Apple watch!!!! I gots to get me one of those!!!!!Apple, probably, has supplies from iPhones, iPads that can't be used thus the "creation" of a product that will use the left over stuff. Watches are a way to use it up but it's not going to WOW anyone.
oh jesus
Um, nope.
I won't be getting an apple watch because my phone does everything I need and I'm guessing early generations of the tech are garbage, not unlike samsung's early attempt (or apple's early iphones for that matter).OMG!!!! An Apple watch!!!! I gots to get me one of those!!!!!Apple, probably, has supplies from iPhones, iPads that can't be used thus the "creation" of a product that will use the left over stuff. Watches are a way to use it up but it's not going to WOW anyone.
oh jesus
Um, nope.
Mario Kart said:OMG!!!! An Apple watch!!!! I gots to get me one of those!!!!![icon] said:Apple, probably, has supplies from iPhones, iPads that can't be used thus the "creation" of a product that will use the left over stuff. Watches are a way to use it up but it's not going to WOW anyone.
oh jesus
Um, nope.
Its too bad that Apple refuses to make devices anymore that are repairable or recyclable...they have perfected planned obsolescence.
my wife cracked her iPhone righ down the middle, took it to the apple store and got it fixed for free.Its too bad that Apple refuses to make devices anymore that are repairable or recyclable...they have perfected planned obsolescence.
All this to replace a battery.Its too bad that Apple refuses to make devices anymore that are repairable or recyclable...they have perfected planned obsolescence.
Wat?
Wat?
And still no phone holds it's value as well...
It was the China news that held it down. Its consolidating here again at 550 after consolidating at 520-525. If the impending expected drop of 10-20 % happens in the near future, it could dip below 500 again. I'm betting against that myself. I think we will easily leg up to 600 or more by next quarter personally. Looking to get in cheap on some 570-580 march calls if i can.The General said:Pretty much everything goes up today. AAPL not so much. I don't get it.
I haven't needed to change a battery on my iphone.cstu said:All this to replace a battery.Its too bad that Apple refuses to make devices anymore that are repairable or recyclable...they have perfected planned obsolescence.
Wat?
Wat?
And still no phone holds it's value as well...