Just posted this in comments to the other article "If the announced size is the height of the body ,excluding the hinges ,then the thickness including the back hump appears over 12mm and the screen on the 42mm one is most likely 1.5 inches and 5:4 AR."
Anyway, besides the crown is not a good idea when you have touch and air gestures, if you mean having some controls on the side then maybe but not like that. Keep in mind that not everybody keeps their watch all that tight on the wrist so the less poking at it , especially on the side, the better - ofc for any device that looks like a watch, for smarter designs it's a bit different. Avoiding to go a a long rant but got to add that you can't make it thin or have good battery life you you layer scree, PCB< battery and finally back cover with sensors. You are better off not releasing anything than doing that but it seems that everybody is so eager to release half baked products at crazy prices. Dumbphone hardware at Nexus 5 prices.
The Apple Watch is okay, but nothing compared to what I expected it to be. I think it will have a hard time matching up to the top smartwatches on the market. /Jake from http://www.consumertop.com/best-wearable-tech-guid...
Yeah I'm not buying this crown part as an input method, almost seems like trying to revive the iPod click wheel... It went away for a reason. The point about the way people wear watches is something I hadn't even thought about, tho I'm not sure a touchscreen wouldn't be affected by that either, probably less so tho.
Customization will be huge with the average buyer tho, as will the two size options... I've heard my sister tell me about a dozen times that all the Wear devices are strictly men's watches in her mind. That being said battery life for the smaller model might be a big issue.
The crown is very useful. But there are still touch and scrolling gestures. It does make a number of things easier. Apple showed pinch as a good purpose for the crown. Hard to pinch on such a small screen. Hard to tap sometimes as well. So the crown, with its turning and button, as well as the button below do add to the ease of use.
I expect we'll see similar designs come out later on.
I wish it had a round face and was thinner. I'm also not keen on the demos they showed that mostly seem to do what my smartphone can do better, which I think has been an issue with ""smartwatches" all along. Perhaps they should have waited a year.
So you're saying that a smartwatch developer should delay manufacture until they have a product that can do what your smartphone does? Don't you understand the difference between a smartphone and a smartwatch? The latter is an adjunct to the former; it will never do anything better than the smartphone. The whole idea is to put the most-used functionality of the smartphone on your wrist, so you don't have to be reaching into a pocket all the time. Apple hit the ball over the fence, beyond the bleachers, out of the park, and across the street with this product. It's so far beyond any competitor that it's laughable. They will sell hundreds of millions of these within the first few years. Most of the criticisms here seem silly to me when viewed in light of the immensity of Apple's achievement. "Wish it had a round face." Really? Seriously?
I'm not hating the dial deal if it is done right. Touch and swipe is nice but on such a small screen I won't want cover it as much. It also has a pressure response.
The problem are things that weren't mentioned like: is it water proof/resistant? Battery life? How does it do in extreme temperatures. I live in MN and my phone gets sluggish outside shoveling because of the negatives.
I like the fitness aspects and would have appreciated a thermometer on either phone or watch. I don't have any huge issues of having to have an iPhone with it, but I am not fond of it likely using only Bluetooth because of the range. I'm guessing it only connects via BT. To me this is the best proposed first attempt at a smart watch to date. I'd like to see totally wireless charging. What Apple is doing is enough. It would have been dead to me if it had some sort of plug in.
I have paid $300 for a watch before but the styling was better, it charged by motion, and it wouldn't be obsolete in a year. I'm not crazy about the starting price.
Most of the watch faces in Apple's demo DID display the temperature on the main dial. They don't need a thermometer to do this as the weather app for your locale will be within a degree or two of the temp where you are -- i.e., including a thermometer would seem to be a waste of precious space in a device that needs to be small. Even if they did include one it wouldn't be as accurate as the weather app's display because both the phone and watch would be warmed by proximity to your body.
I disagree about the digital crown. It is actually a horrible idea. Anyone who has experience with regular watches remembers using the crown to set the time/date/etc... Not a horrible thing but also not comfortable. Usually you'd take the watch off to do it to gain better access to the crown. Even with the textured edge everyone I see using this crown on the Apple Watch is still having to grip it fully and not just roll it from the top. That is a completely uncomfortable thing to do. It will be slightly easier because of how thick this watch is and how far up off the wrist it will sit judging by the band connection points. But that too is a problem and creates a usually less than loved watch. Finally it makes things awkward for left handers. This should have been a wheel which worked by rolling it - essentially like a wheel on a mouse. And it should have been positioned on the bottom of the watch face - above the band. That way you could easily thumb it along with your free hand. It would be protected from being operated too much or too easily by accidental engagement and it could have been worn/used on either wrist. I'd complain about the lack of being able to use a regular watch band but I'm sure apple will sell conversion units that clip in and regular bands can attach to. I'm sure they'll be insanely priced as well. I'm guessing $39 for the pair. Ultimately this will sell well but not in the huge numbers people expect of Apple products and it will come to be seen as something of a disappointment if not an outright flop. The most clever thing they did was the haptic notifications. But that won't be anything for Android wear to easily copy and by the time this Apple product comes out Android Wear will already be iterating or close to it. In the end the Apple Watch is capable of some neat things but most of them are not things people will want to do on a watch. Zoom in and out of maps? On a 1" class screen? When I have to have a phone with me to make use of that watch screen anyway? Who the hell is going to do that? Everybody will do it of course. Several time the first day and a few more to show off to people. Then never again. Meanwhile no GPS on board. Severely hamstringing this thing to play on its own for a while with the phone at home. Like for jogging or the like. Android Wear seems much more flexible there.
I think ultimately no one has managed to make a case why the smartwatch should be a mass market device, and it's unlikely anyone will do so (tho just saying it will probably spur some brilliant dev to prove me wrong).
I do see a big market for them by attacking certain niche usage cases. Very busy people who are on their feet all day (from hospital docs to warehouse workers) as well as certain sports would benefit immensely from even the functionality already available, just more refined.
I'm disappointed Wear hasn't been iterating faster tbh but I expect this will light a fire under their behinds. I do think they need to allow the OEMs to experiment a bit more. An athlete won't want the same watch as a doc for instance, specialized models shouldn't be discouraged. Having a variety of OEM trying different things should spur more innovation.
P.S. Hell, I don't think anyone ever proved tablets were a must have device, you can STILL do all the same things on a phone or a laptop. A tablet sure is convenient on the couch tho, or the backseat of a car, or...
That kinda convenience/compromise is what smartwatches need to be aiming at... It's just the style and aesthetics matter that complicates things.
"from hospital docs to warehouse workers" Hospital docs don't wear watches and warehouse workers can't afford a uWatch (that's my new name for the iWatch, the ugly Watch!) Now if you look what SAP is doing for warehouse workers to use Google glass, that is an interesting idea.
In fact, ALL of us hospital docs wear watches. The only time one would take a watch off is when scrubbing to enter an operating room. That said, there's almost nothing I saw in Apple's demo that would be useful to a hospital physician. That's not to say, of course, that some clever fellow won't come up with a medical app that would need to be accessed so often that the watch would provide a better or handier interface than the doc's phone or tablet.
Agree about the crown. Just adjusting for daylight savings twice a year is annoying enough on a regular watch. Can't imagine using the crown multiple times per day. Surely having the forward bezel as a capacitive slider would have made more sense? Could zoom/scroll like the crown, also whilst not blocking the screen like using the crown, but far less annoying. Could have also made it round and used a rotating bezel (like on diving watches).
I disagree. The crown is a great idea. Touch screens on watches are just too small for every gesture mode. This makes a lot of things easier. If you watched the demo's, you'd see that. Sometimes, something old is better than something new.
We can look at digital cameras to see that. In the beginning, people were ecstatic over the possibility of new camera forms due to the lack of film rolls and other large mechanical parts. We got some very odd cameras that got great reviews. But ultimately, digital cameras settled into the old forms, because they were the best.
I've got an Hp digital scope. It was one of the first. A great four channel model that I bought back in 1998. Cost $5,000. The controls are very digital. But the next generation, Hp went back to more analog like controls, because the engineers found the digital controls difficult to get used to. Now, all digital scopes have controls that look, and act analog, even though they aren't.
Same thing here.
So I see some guys, such as yourself just not getting that there are times when touch isn't appropriate. But I look back to these other things, and say you are wrong. Sometimes the newest isn't always the best. Look at the demo's. Don't just make assumptions.
I actually used those 'old things' on quite a few watches back in the day. That's why I'm saying it's a horrible idea. They are not convenient to use. I would typically remove the watch from my wrist to get unobstructed use of the crown. I was not alone in this. If there is an issue with touch or not it doesn't make the crown more workable. Not that it won't work. It will just be hella annoying.
It's amazing to me that so many folks are willing to stick their necks WAY out in predicting what a horrible idea the crown is without ever having touched one. One would have to be psychic to make the judgements you all are making, and one would also have to be able to refute in advance the thousands and thousands of hours of experience Apple engineers accumulated in designing this control. I don't see how people could be so close-minded. You just cannot make any statements about utility of the crown until the Apple Watch has been in general use for a few months. We knew for certain that Windows 8 was a travesty before it was sold because we had access to it. No one outside of Cupertino has any idea whatsoever about the functionality of the crown.
and it took me all of 5 seconds to come up with 2 alternatives that I think would work better. Personally I think a round smart watch with a rotating bezel for zooming/scrolling would be much better. Way less fiddly than the crown. Using one/two sides of the bezel as sliders (like on a laptop touchpad) I think would also work better than the crown for rectangular watches. Need to scroll through a list? Simply swipe along the edge. No fingers covering the tiny screen and also way less fiddly than using the crown.
I agree that having such a small screen, touch gestures are perhaps not the best answer, but that doesn't make using a crown the best or even better.
Samsung could also use their curved screen edge tech to display notifications you can see without twisting your wrist to look at the face. Could then double as an extra touch control area for when you are looking at the face.
I'd prefer not to have to reach over to the watch at all. Very awkward, especially for a big guy. So put the input into a ring on the opposite index finger. A couple of buttons, a mic, and a scroll wheel or something, reachable by the thumb.. Actually, I'd rather have HUD, so give me that ring and a version of Glass with no forward camera and miniaturized so it looks exactly like glasses. One could choose between the glasses or the watch for fitness reasons.
Raising the ring toward your mouth to talk would reduce the "crazy person talking to himself" aspect of having the mic on the glasses.
The crown is a non-starter to me for regular input. Maybe as an actual "winder" (mini-generator) for occasional use.
The abundance of black could also be to mask the giant bezels. It was criticized a lot, but I actually like Motorolas tradeoff of a small black sliver at the bottom better than this all around fat bezel.
Very good point. And I agree about the Moto 360 making the right choice there. I don't mind the round one from LG with the timing bezel - except that apparently the timing bezel is completely fake. If it had turned and been a usable control it would have been brilliant.
So instead of just a phone I can use a watch as long as I also bring the phone? I think not. Call me interested when the watch can send and receive at least SMS independently and has independent GPS. So I can use a phone OR a watch.
That's the Gear S, then. A semi-stand alone (it needs a Samsung phone/tablet to download the apps, which is contrived at best, pathetic at worst) that does what you ask. You can take and place calls with it, too.
It might be. But for the next couple years everyone and their brother will be calling it the iWatch regardless. And every pedant will gleefully be constantly informing that it isn't the correct name. And nobody will care.
Hm, why does it seem like I am the only one finding it really ugly? Making a good looking smart watch is hard, I get it. But Apple watch is pretty close to the top of the ugliness scale. Not? M.
The idea that millions of debt-laden Americans are going to rush out and drop $350 on a watch is insane all by itself. But when you consider what this watch is supposed to offer? Its number one killer app seems to be fitness. Which implies running. But I wouldnt want to be out running with a $350 frickin target on my wrist, especially when it directly implies that you are also carrying a $700 prize in your pocket. After all, you need an iphone to use the watch, no? I am NOT running around with $1000 on me. Especially in today's world where this grossly narcissistic iMentality is resulting in massive destruction of the middle class and mass destitution across large swaths of the country. I wouldnt want the rage of all that destruction focused on me and my shiny iStuff as I'm going out for a jog. But, hey, what do I know. Lots of people like to flaunt their faux iWealth. More power to em. Hope it ends well for em as we move towards an increasingly destitute country with tent cities and roving gangs like Chicago and LA.
Wow! Even after this hideous thing Anandtech is unable to provide any meaningful esthetic criticism to Apple. I really had enough. This is not a site for users anymore. This is pure manufacturer's advertising.
Nobody really knows what it is. Starts at $350 but that is surely for the smallest, least optioned and most basic of the designs. I am purely guessing, of course. But I'm thinking the larger middle-of-the-road model is a $500 item.
I hadn't considered the 38mm version would be less expensive than the 42mm version. For some reason I am actually expecting them to be the same price for either size, but different prices for the three different styles, and perhaps some variance based on band style.
I'm not particularly impressed by the design, although the materials and execution look nice, as in well made, well put together. It looks dated out of the box. The quick disconnect wrist band makes for nice variety, and strengthens the fashion accessory role of the watch.
Design wise I find the Moto360 far more interesting to behold, with its reinterpretation of a classic circular watch and razor thin bezel. It creates far more of curiosity in seeing it light up.
At first glance I didn't like the design, but after watching some more videos and photos of people actually having that watch on their wrists (especially the black steel one with a nice band), I started to like the design. Now I find the apple watch pretty. I took another look at the moto 360. And while I like the idea of the round display, I prefer a square display, because of more space for information and interaction. Additionally, the moto 360 somehow still looks a bit cheap to me, because it seems to be nothing more than a round piece of metal with a band going through it, while the Apple watch has a lot of options for individuality and some combinations I find really good-looking. My watch would be a black steel one with a nice black-colored band. Also I like the idea of that Crown. I was always worried about how to interact via touch only, because there are some situations, that make it difficult to use a touchscreen on such a small device (especially when you have the smaller apple watch with even LESS room for touch controls).
In my opinion, this and Moto 360 + the LG watch are the only good ones in the market, while the Apple Watch is my favourite because of its customizability and some gimmicks it has.
The apple way, selling over expensive crap to stupid consumers that like to get robbed.
This has been a disastrous launch in every respect. The iwatch is such an ugly piece of crap, it is truly unbelievable how a company, formerly known for its remarkable design, dares to put out such a crap ton of shit. Some characteristics are glaringly obvious and inherent to it: over expensive, hardly innovative, limited functionality and usability (need of an iPhone to make it work), looks exactly like a toy watch and so on.
There are of course way better smart watches out there, especially form the likes of Samsung, Sony, Motorola, Asus, LG, simply put, there is no need for another piece of over expensive junk.
The iPhone 6 is technologically stuck in pre-2011 times, a base model witch a capacity of 16GB without the possibility to use SD cards isn't even funny anymore. The screen resolution is horrendous, it isn't water proof, shock and dust resistant, it offers nothing innovative, just some incremental updates over its predecessor, both lacking severely behind their competitors at their respective launch dates.
Now the Iphone 6 Plus offers a „Retina HD“ screen, full 1920x1080p, oh wow, where have you been for the past 4 years apple, talk about trailing behind. That’s pathetic. The interesting thing about that is the fact that apple always manages to sell backwards oriented, outdated crap to its user base, all while pretending to be an innovative technology leader. The similarities regarding any form of sectarian cult are striking.
You gotta love how Apple always comes up with new marketing bullshit terms, aka "Retina HD", with the intention to manipulate its users while preventing easy comparisons with its competitors by withholding the actual specs. Apparently it’s not enough to have an 1080p screen, you have to call it "Retina HD" to make those suckers buy it, otherwise someone could look at the 4K Amoled and Oled screens form LG and Samsung devices and get outright disappointed. Same goes for everything else. Every outdated „feature“ needs to get its own marketing label to persuade buyers with crappy „experience“ and „usability“ ads, while covering the truth with marketing gibberish, knowing full well that only a fraction of aforementioned buyers cares to look at the facts and dares to compare them.
Car engines come to mind. For comparisons shake let’s look at a 1.0 liter, turbo charged petrol engine and a V8 compressor. What’s better should be obvious, but by calling the former an „ecobooster“, thus giving it a special marketing label, this joke becomes a „feature“, something positive that can be added tot the list of features of a car.
By doing so a negative aspect is transformed into a positive one, the reality is distorted, non tech savvy buyers are manipulated and comparisons are made more difficult (another layer of marketing bullshit to overcome), well done marketing department. You see , if something is seriously lacking (of course for profit, what else), don’t bother explaining, just give it a nice marketing term, distort reality, make it a feature and call it a day. Fuck that!!
The Apple Iphone 1 and Ipad 1 might have been innovative at their time, but since then, the bitten apple has been continuously rotting from the inside outwards, always swarmed by millions of Iworms which regale themselves with its rotten flesh, not forgetting all other Americans who support apple by means of their tax dollars to finance its bought US Treasury/Government bond interest rates.
Last but not least, every Apple product includes a direct hotlink to the nsa, free of charge, something that might make it a good value, after all.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
43 Comments
Back to Article
jjj - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
Just posted this in comments to the other article"If the announced size is the height of the body ,excluding the hinges ,then the thickness including the back hump appears over 12mm and the screen on the 42mm one is most likely 1.5 inches and 5:4 AR."
Anyway, besides the crown is not a good idea when you have touch and air gestures, if you mean having some controls on the side then maybe but not like that. Keep in mind that not everybody keeps their watch all that tight on the wrist so the less poking at it , especially on the side, the better - ofc for any device that looks like a watch, for smarter designs it's a bit different.
Avoiding to go a a long rant but got to add that you can't make it thin or have good battery life you you layer scree, PCB< battery and finally back cover with sensors. You are better off not releasing anything than doing that but it seems that everybody is so eager to release half baked products at crazy prices.
Dumbphone hardware at Nexus 5 prices.
jjj - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
lol sorry for the deluge of typos and missing letters, i hate this keyboard, using a backup that is just horrible.jakebruno - Thursday, October 9, 2014 - link
The Apple Watch is okay, but nothing compared to what I expected it to be. I think it will have a hard time matching up to the top smartwatches on the market. /Jake from http://www.consumertop.com/best-wearable-tech-guid...StealthX32 - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
For anyone who ever has used a Blackberry, the crown works well if the UI is built around it.That said, I'm waiting for the impending lawsuit from Blackberry...
Impulses - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
Yeah I'm not buying this crown part as an input method, almost seems like trying to revive the iPod click wheel... It went away for a reason. The point about the way people wear watches is something I hadn't even thought about, tho I'm not sure a touchscreen wouldn't be affected by that either, probably less so tho.Customization will be huge with the average buyer tho, as will the two size options... I've heard my sister tell me about a dozen times that all the Wear devices are strictly men's watches in her mind. That being said battery life for the smaller model might be a big issue.
melgross - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
The crown is very useful. But there are still touch and scrolling gestures. It does make a number of things easier. Apple showed pinch as a good purpose for the crown. Hard to pinch on such a small screen. Hard to tap sometimes as well. So the crown, with its turning and button, as well as the button below do add to the ease of use.I expect we'll see similar designs come out later on.
solipsism - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
I wish it had a round face and was thinner. I'm also not keen on the demos they showed that mostly seem to do what my smartphone can do better, which I think has been an issue with ""smartwatches" all along. Perhaps they should have waited a year.milleron - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
So you're saying that a smartwatch developer should delay manufacture until they have a product that can do what your smartphone does? Don't you understand the difference between a smartphone and a smartwatch? The latter is an adjunct to the former; it will never do anything better than the smartphone. The whole idea is to put the most-used functionality of the smartphone on your wrist, so you don't have to be reaching into a pocket all the time. Apple hit the ball over the fence, beyond the bleachers, out of the park, and across the street with this product. It's so far beyond any competitor that it's laughable. They will sell hundreds of millions of these within the first few years. Most of the criticisms here seem silly to me when viewed in light of the immensity of Apple's achievement. "Wish it had a round face." Really? Seriously?gevorg - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
Apple Watch is just an accessory to iPhone. Not even close to being as big as iPod, iPhone and iPad (as Apple tried really hard to drum up the hype).eanazag - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
I'm not hating the dial deal if it is done right. Touch and swipe is nice but on such a small screen I won't want cover it as much. It also has a pressure response.The problem are things that weren't mentioned like: is it water proof/resistant? Battery life? How does it do in extreme temperatures. I live in MN and my phone gets sluggish outside shoveling because of the negatives.
I like the fitness aspects and would have appreciated a thermometer on either phone or watch. I don't have any huge issues of having to have an iPhone with it, but I am not fond of it likely using only Bluetooth because of the range. I'm guessing it only connects via BT. To me this is the best proposed first attempt at a smart watch to date. I'd like to see totally wireless charging. What Apple is doing is enough. It would have been dead to me if it had some sort of plug in.
I have paid $300 for a watch before but the styling was better, it charged by motion, and it wouldn't be obsolete in a year. I'm not crazy about the starting price.
Impulses - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
Latest iterations of Bluetooth get perfectly usable range and they're lighter on battery than anything. What alternative were you hoping for?milleron - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Most of the watch faces in Apple's demo DID display the temperature on the main dial. They don't need a thermometer to do this as the weather app for your locale will be within a degree or two of the temp where you are -- i.e., including a thermometer would seem to be a waste of precious space in a device that needs to be small. Even if they did include one it wouldn't be as accurate as the weather app's display because both the phone and watch would be warmed by proximity to your body.savagemike - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
I disagree about the digital crown. It is actually a horrible idea. Anyone who has experience with regular watches remembers using the crown to set the time/date/etc... Not a horrible thing but also not comfortable. Usually you'd take the watch off to do it to gain better access to the crown.Even with the textured edge everyone I see using this crown on the Apple Watch is still having to grip it fully and not just roll it from the top. That is a completely uncomfortable thing to do. It will be slightly easier because of how thick this watch is and how far up off the wrist it will sit judging by the band connection points. But that too is a problem and creates a usually less than loved watch.
Finally it makes things awkward for left handers.
This should have been a wheel which worked by rolling it - essentially like a wheel on a mouse. And it should have been positioned on the bottom of the watch face - above the band. That way you could easily thumb it along with your free hand. It would be protected from being operated too much or too easily by accidental engagement and it could have been worn/used on either wrist.
I'd complain about the lack of being able to use a regular watch band but I'm sure apple will sell conversion units that clip in and regular bands can attach to. I'm sure they'll be insanely priced as well. I'm guessing $39 for the pair.
Ultimately this will sell well but not in the huge numbers people expect of Apple products and it will come to be seen as something of a disappointment if not an outright flop.
The most clever thing they did was the haptic notifications. But that won't be anything for Android wear to easily copy and by the time this Apple product comes out Android Wear will already be iterating or close to it.
In the end the Apple Watch is capable of some neat things but most of them are not things people will want to do on a watch. Zoom in and out of maps? On a 1" class screen? When I have to have a phone with me to make use of that watch screen anyway? Who the hell is going to do that? Everybody will do it of course. Several time the first day and a few more to show off to people. Then never again.
Meanwhile no GPS on board. Severely hamstringing this thing to play on its own for a while with the phone at home. Like for jogging or the like. Android Wear seems much more flexible there.
Impulses - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
I think ultimately no one has managed to make a case why the smartwatch should be a mass market device, and it's unlikely anyone will do so (tho just saying it will probably spur some brilliant dev to prove me wrong).I do see a big market for them by attacking certain niche usage cases. Very busy people who are on their feet all day (from hospital docs to warehouse workers) as well as certain sports would benefit immensely from even the functionality already available, just more refined.
I'm disappointed Wear hasn't been iterating faster tbh but I expect this will light a fire under their behinds. I do think they need to allow the OEMs to experiment a bit more. An athlete won't want the same watch as a doc for instance, specialized models shouldn't be discouraged. Having a variety of OEM trying different things should spur more innovation.
Impulses - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
P.S. Hell, I don't think anyone ever proved tablets were a must have device, you can STILL do all the same things on a phone or a laptop. A tablet sure is convenient on the couch tho, or the backseat of a car, or...That kinda convenience/compromise is what smartwatches need to be aiming at... It's just the style and aesthetics matter that complicates things.
Speedfriend - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
"from hospital docs to warehouse workers"Hospital docs don't wear watches and warehouse workers can't afford a uWatch (that's my new name for the iWatch, the ugly Watch!)
Now if you look what SAP is doing for warehouse workers to use Google glass, that is an interesting idea.
milleron - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
In fact, ALL of us hospital docs wear watches. The only time one would take a watch off is when scrubbing to enter an operating room. That said, there's almost nothing I saw in Apple's demo that would be useful to a hospital physician. That's not to say, of course, that some clever fellow won't come up with a medical app that would need to be accessed so often that the watch would provide a better or handier interface than the doc's phone or tablet.rhangman - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
Agree about the crown. Just adjusting for daylight savings twice a year is annoying enough on a regular watch. Can't imagine using the crown multiple times per day. Surely having the forward bezel as a capacitive slider would have made more sense? Could zoom/scroll like the crown, also whilst not blocking the screen like using the crown, but far less annoying. Could have also made it round and used a rotating bezel (like on diving watches).melgross - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
I disagree. The crown is a great idea. Touch screens on watches are just too small for every gesture mode. This makes a lot of things easier. If you watched the demo's, you'd see that. Sometimes, something old is better than something new.We can look at digital cameras to see that. In the beginning, people were ecstatic over the possibility of new camera forms due to the lack of film rolls and other large mechanical parts. We got some very odd cameras that got great reviews. But ultimately, digital cameras settled into the old forms, because they were the best.
I've got an Hp digital scope. It was one of the first. A great four channel model that I bought back in 1998. Cost $5,000. The controls are very digital. But the next generation, Hp went back to more analog like controls, because the engineers found the digital controls difficult to get used to. Now, all digital scopes have controls that look, and act analog, even though they aren't.
Same thing here.
So I see some guys, such as yourself just not getting that there are times when touch isn't appropriate. But I look back to these other things, and say you are wrong. Sometimes the newest isn't always the best. Look at the demo's. Don't just make assumptions.
savagemike - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
I actually used those 'old things' on quite a few watches back in the day. That's why I'm saying it's a horrible idea. They are not convenient to use. I would typically remove the watch from my wrist to get unobstructed use of the crown. I was not alone in this.If there is an issue with touch or not it doesn't make the crown more workable. Not that it won't work. It will just be hella annoying.
milleron - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
It's amazing to me that so many folks are willing to stick their necks WAY out in predicting what a horrible idea the crown is without ever having touched one. One would have to be psychic to make the judgements you all are making, and one would also have to be able to refute in advance the thousands and thousands of hours of experience Apple engineers accumulated in designing this control. I don't see how people could be so close-minded. You just cannot make any statements about utility of the crown until the Apple Watch has been in general use for a few months. We knew for certain that Windows 8 was a travesty before it was sold because we had access to it. No one outside of Cupertino has any idea whatsoever about the functionality of the crown.rhangman - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
and it took me all of 5 seconds to come up with 2 alternatives that I think would work better. Personally I think a round smart watch with a rotating bezel for zooming/scrolling would be much better. Way less fiddly than the crown. Using one/two sides of the bezel as sliders (like on a laptop touchpad) I think would also work better than the crown for rectangular watches. Need to scroll through a list? Simply swipe along the edge. No fingers covering the tiny screen and also way less fiddly than using the crown.I agree that having such a small screen, touch gestures are perhaps not the best answer, but that doesn't make using a crown the best or even better.
rhangman - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
Samsung could also use their curved screen edge tech to display notifications you can see without twisting your wrist to look at the face. Could then double as an extra touch control area for when you are looking at the face.keninct - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I'd prefer not to have to reach over to the watch at all. Very awkward, especially for a big guy. So put the input into a ring on the opposite index finger. A couple of buttons, a mic, and a scroll wheel or something, reachable by the thumb.. Actually, I'd rather have HUD, so give me that ring and a version of Glass with no forward camera and miniaturized so it looks exactly like glasses. One could choose between the glasses or the watch for fitness reasons.Raising the ring toward your mouth to talk would reduce the "crazy person talking to himself" aspect of having the mic on the glasses.
The crown is a non-starter to me for regular input. Maybe as an actual "winder" (mini-generator) for occasional use.
tipoo - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
The abundance of black could also be to mask the giant bezels. It was criticized a lot, but I actually like Motorolas tradeoff of a small black sliver at the bottom better than this all around fat bezel.savagemike - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
Very good point. And I agree about the Moto 360 making the right choice there. I don't mind the round one from LG with the timing bezel - except that apparently the timing bezel is completely fake. If it had turned and been a usable control it would have been brilliant.isa - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
So instead of just a phone I can use a watch as long as I also bring the phone? I think not. Call me interested when the watch can send and receive at least SMS independently and has independent GPS. So I can use a phone OR a watch.Gadgety - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
That's the Gear S, then. A semi-stand alone (it needs a Samsung phone/tablet to download the apps, which is contrived at best, pathetic at worst) that does what you ask. You can take and place calls with it, too.The Von Matrices - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
I'm happy they didn't call it the iWatch. The iWhatever name is getting stale.savagemike - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
It might be. But for the next couple years everyone and their brother will be calling it the iWatch regardless. And every pedant will gleefully be constantly informing that it isn't the correct name. And nobody will care.B3an - Tuesday, September 9, 2014 - link
Ugly, tacky, pointless.yannigr2 - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
You have a very stylish LG Watch R and a 3G Samsung Gear S. No reason to buy this one.mschira - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
Hm, why does it seem like I am the only one finding it really ugly?Making a good looking smart watch is hard, I get it. But Apple watch is pretty close to the top of the ugliness scale.
Not?
M.
Shadowmaster625 - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
The idea that millions of debt-laden Americans are going to rush out and drop $350 on a watch is insane all by itself. But when you consider what this watch is supposed to offer? Its number one killer app seems to be fitness. Which implies running. But I wouldnt want to be out running with a $350 frickin target on my wrist, especially when it directly implies that you are also carrying a $700 prize in your pocket. After all, you need an iphone to use the watch, no? I am NOT running around with $1000 on me. Especially in today's world where this grossly narcissistic iMentality is resulting in massive destruction of the middle class and mass destitution across large swaths of the country. I wouldnt want the rage of all that destruction focused on me and my shiny iStuff as I'm going out for a jog. But, hey, what do I know. Lots of people like to flaunt their faux iWealth. More power to em. Hope it ends well for em as we move towards an increasingly destitute country with tent cities and roving gangs like Chicago and LA.Gadgety - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Good point. I bet most are running around inside a gym, though, for those very reasons.apertotes - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
Wow! Even after this hideous thing Anandtech is unable to provide any meaningful esthetic criticism to Apple. I really had enough. This is not a site for users anymore. This is pure manufacturer's advertising.HisDivineOrder - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
No comment on its MSRP?Seems like any discussion of its ultimate value should include its pricing.
savagemike - Wednesday, September 10, 2014 - link
Nobody really knows what it is. Starts at $350 but that is surely for the smallest, least optioned and most basic of the designs. I am purely guessing, of course. But I'm thinking the larger middle-of-the-road model is a $500 item.solipsism - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I hadn't considered the 38mm version would be less expensive than the 42mm version. For some reason I am actually expecting them to be the same price for either size, but different prices for the three different styles, and perhaps some variance based on band style.Spunjji - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I am genuinely surprised at how unattractive this device is. Roll on version 2?Gadgety - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
I'm not particularly impressed by the design, although the materials and execution look nice, as in well made, well put together. It looks dated out of the box. The quick disconnect wrist band makes for nice variety, and strengthens the fashion accessory role of the watch.Design wise I find the Moto360 far more interesting to behold, with its reinterpretation of a classic circular watch and razor thin bezel. It creates far more of curiosity in seeing it light up.
eric1803 - Thursday, September 11, 2014 - link
Design is always a matter of taste.At first glance I didn't like the design, but after watching some more videos and photos of people actually having that watch on their wrists (especially the black steel one with a nice band), I started to like the design.
Now I find the apple watch pretty.
I took another look at the moto 360. And while I like the idea of the round display, I prefer a square display, because of more space for information and interaction.
Additionally, the moto 360 somehow still looks a bit cheap to me, because it seems to be nothing more than a round piece of metal with a band going through it, while the Apple watch has a lot of options for individuality and some combinations I find really good-looking.
My watch would be a black steel one with a nice black-colored band.
Also I like the idea of that Crown. I was always worried about how to interact via touch only, because there are some situations, that make it difficult to use a touchscreen on such a small device (especially when you have the smaller apple watch with even LESS room for touch controls).
In my opinion, this and Moto 360 + the LG watch are the only good ones in the market, while the Apple Watch is my favourite because of its customizability and some gimmicks it has.
AppleCrappleHater2 - Monday, September 15, 2014 - link
Worship the holy apple.The apple way, selling over expensive crap to stupid consumers that like to
get robbed.
This has been a disastrous launch in every respect. The iwatch is such an
ugly piece of crap, it is truly unbelievable how a company, formerly known for
its remarkable design, dares to put out such a crap ton of shit. Some
characteristics are glaringly obvious and inherent to it: over expensive,
hardly innovative, limited functionality and usability (need of an iPhone to
make it work), looks exactly like a toy watch and so on.
There are of course way better smart watches out there, especially form the
likes of Samsung, Sony, Motorola, Asus, LG, simply put, there is no need for
another piece of over expensive junk.
The iPhone 6 is technologically stuck in pre-2011 times, a base model witch
a capacity of 16GB without the possibility to use SD cards isn't even funny
anymore. The screen resolution is horrendous, it isn't water proof, shock and
dust resistant, it offers nothing innovative, just some incremental
updates over its predecessor, both lacking severely behind their competitors at
their respective launch dates.
Now the Iphone 6 Plus offers a „Retina HD“ screen, full 1920x1080p, oh wow,
where have you been for the past 4 years apple, talk about trailing behind.
That’s pathetic. The interesting thing about that is the fact that apple
always manages to sell backwards oriented, outdated crap to its user base, all
while pretending to be an innovative technology leader. The similarities
regarding any form of sectarian cult are striking.
You gotta love how Apple always comes up with new marketing bullshit terms,
aka "Retina HD", with the intention to manipulate its users while preventing easy
comparisons with its competitors by withholding the actual specs. Apparently it’s
not enough to have an 1080p screen, you have to call it "Retina HD" to make those
suckers buy it, otherwise someone could look at the 4K Amoled and Oled screens
form LG and Samsung devices and get outright disappointed. Same goes for
everything else. Every outdated „feature“ needs to get its own marketing label
to persuade buyers with crappy „experience“ and „usability“ ads, while covering
the truth with marketing gibberish, knowing full well that only a fraction of
aforementioned buyers cares to look at the facts and dares to compare them.
Car engines come to mind. For comparisons shake let’s look at a 1.0 liter, turbo
charged petrol engine and a V8 compressor. What’s better should be obvious, but
by calling the former an „ecobooster“, thus giving it a special marketing label,
this joke becomes a „feature“, something positive that can be added tot the list
of features of a car.
By doing so a negative aspect is transformed into a positive one, the
reality is distorted, non tech savvy buyers are manipulated and comparisons are
made more difficult (another layer of marketing bullshit to overcome), well done
marketing department. You see , if something is seriously lacking (of course for
profit, what else), don’t bother explaining, just give it a nice marketing term, distort
reality, make it a feature and call it a day. Fuck that!!
The Apple Iphone 1 and Ipad 1 might have been innovative at their time,
but since then, the bitten apple has been continuously rotting from the inside
outwards, always swarmed by millions of Iworms which regale themselves with its
rotten flesh, not forgetting all other Americans who support apple by means of
their tax dollars to finance its bought US Treasury/Government bond interest rates.
Last but not least, every Apple product includes a direct hotlink to the nsa,
free of charge, something that might make it a good value, after all.
Ceterum censeo Applem esse delendam.