
The Apple Watch - benigeri
http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch/
======
chipotle_coyote
While someone else already made the reference to this quote, it's hard for me
not to recall Commander Taco's (in)famous dismissal of the original iPod when
I browse these comments.

Personally I don't know that there's _any_ watch that would really get me to
start wearing watches at all again -- I never liked them that much to begin
with. But this knocks down an awful lot of the criticisms I've had of existing
smartwatches. The smaller Apple Watch is 38mm, certainly not small but by no
means an irrationally huge behemoth. (Even the larger is only 42mm, I
believe.) When you consider the three lines, two sizes, and multiple bands,
there's dozens of combinations available. You may personally not like the
fashion sense, but other than the Moto 360 this is the first smartwatch that's
had a fashion sense to criticize. (And guys, the Moto 360 is 46mm, so let's
not pretend it's svelte, either.)

But what's really interesting to me is that Apple has clearly put a _lot_ more
thought into how interactions on a device like this should work than anybody
else. Yes, I'm sure every single component has an antecedent you can point to,
just like the iPhone's interaction model. Except that nobody put it all
together like that before the iPhone. And nobody put it all together like
_this_ before the Apple Watch.

I'm not so glib as to say that catcalls when Apple introduces a new product
are a sure sign of success (I remember the iPod Hifi, thanks). But again, it's
hard not to see a few recurring patterns in the responses: oh, look, it
doesn't do everything that it could (or that competitors already do!) and it's
too expensive. If it sells well, it'll only because of the Apple faithful
buying everything.

And, of course, if it sells well, than within a year all smartwatches will
adapt its interaction model. Other manufacturers will come out with variants
that Apple isn't making, and we can move onto the evergreen phase of
dismissing Apple as a company that just copies everybody else.

~~~
personZ
_it 's hard for me not to recall Commander Taco's (in)famous dismissal of the
original iPod when I browse these comments_

You should also remember that he was hardly in the majority with those
comments. Further he was _technically_ correct, and the iPod succeeded because
of a synergy with other parts of Apple's empire (notably iTunes).

 _But what 's really interesting to me is that Apple has clearly put a lot
more thought into how interactions on a device like this should work than
anybody else._

How so? Google put, it seems, enormous thought and effort into Android Wear.
It is a whole interaction and ecosystem built specifically for smart watches.
Because Tim Cook gives some trite speech about not using a smartphone OS on a
watch (this was, it is worth noting, not long after celebrating how xcode now
supports dynamic layouts...you know, the thing that Android did a half a
decade ago, and was widely deridden as "running smartphone apps on a tablet")?

You've tried to cover every possible Apple defense, so you seem pretty
committed, but you have to understand that a lot of people are derisive
because we've been hearing the Apple faithful railing about these same
attributes of competitor devices for months. Announcing before availability,
large and bulky, needs to be tethered to a device, _square_ , and so on...I
have to imagine all of those once liabilities will suddenly turn into
strengths.

I love my Apple products, but there is absolutely no doubt that there is a
distortion field, and it really is hard to stomach.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
Yes, there kind of is a distortion field, but I'd argue it's with notions like
"Apple has never announced a major product months before availability" and
"nobody has ever made a large square watch." Both of these are trivially
demonstrated false. And I'm sure Google has put thought and effort into
Android Wear, but what you dismiss as a "trite speech from Tim Cook" looks to
me like a stake in the ground. Google says you can shrink smartphone UX to a
smartwatch; Apple says you shouldn't, and you should do these other things
instead. This informs a whole lot of things about the way the UX works. The
Apple Watch's relationship to the Moto 360 looks to me less like the iPhone
6's relationship to the Moto X than like the original iPhone's relationship to
other high-end smartphones of 2007: obviously a lot of shared DNA, but trying
to address the same problem space in a measurably different way.

Yes, Android had dynamic layout before iOS. And? Qt had it before everyone. As
a general rule, everything everyone ever gets enthusiastic about can be safely
dismissed as having first appeared in a Nokia product that all 27 Finns who
bought it are still fanatical about. Also, it was probably implemented in
Lisp.

~~~
ibrahima
> Google says you can shrink smartphone UX to a smartwatch; Apple says you
> shouldn't, and you should do these other things instead.

The fact that you believe what Apple says about Google rather than taking the
two minutes to actually look at how Android Wear works and see that that
statement is completely false shows that the distortion field is in full
effect.

~~~
beedogs
I mean, this is the same company that, during the keynote today, repeated the
lie that they're the mob that brought us the computer mouse. People just
accept Apple's misstatements and half-truths and outright lies as fact now.

~~~
danellis
Did they actually say that? What's the exact quote? I thought they said
something about all their products using innovative interfaces, not that the
innovations were theirs.

Still, when they were talking about the digital crown, they did make it sound
like they were trying to claim they invented the optical rotary encoder.

~~~
makr
"Macintosh introduced the mouse." from the official liveblog:

[http://www.apple.com/live/2014-sept-
event/2cd7d38c-f769-4fc4...](http://www.apple.com/live/2014-sept-
event/2cd7d38c-f769-4fc4-918e-5bba170f381c/)

~~~
danellis
"Introduced" is a subjective word. The Alto had a mouse, but I don't think it
was used outside PARC. It doesn't seem too far from the truth to say that the
Macintosh introduced the mouse to the world.

------
antr
My two cents: I don't know any person who is into serious running (I'm into
triathlon, so add cycling and swimming) who would spend $350 on the Apple
Watch and additionally you are required to have your iPhone with you to use
the GPS. A sports watch without GPS, IMHO is a no go at $350. For <$300 I can
get GPS, HR, ANT+, waterproof* and +20h battery life. e.g. Garmin Forerunner
910xt.

(I won't comment on the lack of info on battery life and water resistance).

*Edit: changed from water resistant to waterproof.

~~~
bobochan
Exactly. I put off buying a GPS watch because I wanted to see what Apple was
going to offer. Answer: Nothing.

I really cannot imagine a more useless product than this watch. It requires an
iPhone and seems to essentially serve as a small, remote interface for your
phone. And how do I navigate that small interface? With an even smaller
"digital crown." I hate trying to set the time on my watch, and now they
expect me to interact with something more complicated using a tiny, rotating
nub?

Imagine a typical scenario. You are walking down the street and suddenly need
to navigate somewhere. How many minutes are you going to waste playing with
that little nub and resizing things on the screen before finally pulling out
your phone and just using that.

The only argument for this watch is that it might be helpful for those times
when pulling out your phone is just too onerous. I regret that I do not have
the type of lifestyle where that is a serious limitation.

~~~
lhnz
Whether this will be useful all rests on the quality and differentiation of
the haptic feedback.

For example, imagine walking down the street towards your destination and
feeling the right side of the watch vibrate to signal that you should turn
right.

If your watch can communicate contextual information related to your intention
and local then it will be superior to (1) wearing a socially inappropriate
device like the Google Glass, (2) being called out to by a device, (3)
fumbling in your phone in order to then open the correct app.

Apps that correctly use haptic feedback should be able to silently and subtly
give users superpowers without forcing them to clumsily interact with a
product.

I actually wrote about the benefits of this back in 2012 [0], though I was
talking about phones and notification fatigue back then (and not leveraging
Future Interface style stuff.)

[0] [http://sebinsua.com/your-thigh-as-an-interface-from-your-
pho...](http://sebinsua.com/your-thigh-as-an-interface-from-your-phone-to-
your-mind)

~~~
tolmasky
The overriding feeling I had during this keynote is that every feature that I
found cool in the watch I would much prefer on my phone.

Cool watch app? Wait, actually that would be cooler and more usable on a big
screen...

Haptic feedback? Agreed, awesome idea, but no reason it can't be on my phone
and buzz my leg instead of my wrist.

~~~
jlebar
> Haptic feedback? Agreed, awesome idea, but no reason it can't be on my phone
> and buzz my leg instead of my wrist.

It's frequently lost upon this crowd (I'm guilty of this myself) that half of
the population in the West frequently wears clothes which lack pockets.

~~~
ChristianBundy
Your statistic confused me until I realized you were [assumedly] referencing
females who keep their phones in their purses/bags.

~~~
hayleyanthony
Please try to say women, not "females." I don't think you meant anything by it
but when you always see that usage, (common in tech spaces) it starts to feel
a little dehumanizing.

~~~
wmeredith
Oh lord, get over it. Female is degrading now?

~~~
yusefnapora
Well, it does make you sound like a Ferengi.

~~~
wmeredith
What's a Ferengi?

Edit: Nevermind. I Googled it. Star Trek alien.

------
wlesieutre
"Maybe if we don't mention lefties, everyone will forget they exist"

Righty watches aren't a big deal for us to use because you only use the crown
to set them, and you only set them twice a year. On the Apple Watch, you're
going to use it all the time.

It's not even that I couldn't use my right hand, it's that I don't want a
bulky $350 gadget permanently strapped to my left hand, which I frequently use
for doing things. Great recipe for (best case) being irritating, or (worst
case) getting smashed into stuff.

Maybe it can be rotated 180° to go on a right arm? It'd mean the button and
crown positions are backward, but it'd be better than nothing. I see no
mention of that option anywhere, so for now I assume you can't.

Either way, doesn't support the 4S, costs more than I'm willing to spend, and
will hopefully get thinner in future releases. I'll jump on the smartwatch
train eventually, but not with this one.

~~~
grumblestumble
I don't see why the face wouldn't be reversible - it detaches completely from
the strap, and it's not like the software UI is going to be upside down - your
phone can already handle that. The only difference will be that the crown is
below the button.

~~~
wlesieutre
Agreed, it just seems like something that Apple ought to mention. Can't find
it anywhere on their website. And orientation changing makes sense for a phone
feature because people switch between portrait and landscape, while this is a
permanent setting that 90% of people would never touch.

It'd be a giant oversight for Apple though, and I'd be surprised if nobody on
their design team is left handed.

~~~
yaeger
Yes, I would have also thought that since this was a presentation to the
general consumer and not just a tech demo ala WWDC where these things don't
matter yet, that they would have addressed this issue by showing a person
taking the watch from one wrist and putting it on the other and thus showing
the device can be turned around and used just like before.

------
georgemcbay
Who would have thunk that of all the end-of-2014 smartwatches, the one that
would make you look the least like a dork would be the one from Motorola?

Shame about the battery life, though. Please fix that Motorola, I want to give
you my money so bad, but cannot do it until you fix the battery life.

~~~
taude
You know, I was thinking the same thing. I think I prefer the roundness of the
360, than the rectangular Apple design. However, you won't catch me wearing
either of them until you don't have to have a phone with you.

I'm thinking Minimum Viable Phone (or communications device) that I can wear
on my wrist when doing thing, and have some casual interactions with text
messaging, and glancing at emails)...

~~~
masklinn
> I'm thinking Minimum Viable Phone (or communications device) that I can wear
> on my wrist when doing thing, and have some casual interactions with text
> messaging, and glancing at emails)...

The problem's these require extensive radio interaction/SoC, without a phone
support (which can stream the information via bluetooth LE) you have to carry
that in the watch itself.

~~~
taude
Yeup. So wake me when this becomes a reality: I'm sure somone's patenting
building a cellular antenna into a watch band as I type this. Plus, I'm sure
6G networks will be faster and require even less power....

~~~
masklinn
The antenna is not the problem, the radio chips (and power) are.

~~~
alwaysdoit
Specifically, you need enough power to regularly transmit an electromagnetic
signal on the order of miles that scales with the inverse square law.

Considering that they can't even get the battery life up without that
requirement, it might be a while unless we make significant scientific
breakthroughs in battery or wireless technology.

~~~
andor
_Considering that they can 't even get the battery life up without that
requirement, it might be a while unless we make significant scientific
breakthroughs in battery or wireless technology._

"Both the Samsung Gear S and the Gear Circle will be available in global
markets in phases through Samsung’s retail channels, e-commerce websites and
via carriers beginning October."

~~~
alwaysdoit
Gear Circle requires a smartphone for connectivity. I'm interested to see what
kind of battery life the Gear S is able to get with a 300mAh battery.

------
rebel
Am I the only one who thinks the available/previewed watch faces don't match
the intended goal of the device? This event was all about fashion, inviting
all of the fashion journalists and talking about personalization. Not a single
one of those watch faces look appealing, and worst off they do nothing to
shake off the "geeky" stigma attached to smart watches. I think the design has
potential when it gets a little bit thinner (v2?), but the previewed watch
faces look absolutely awful to me. You'd think that would be the easiest part
of building a super computer that fit on your wrist.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _and worst off they do nothing to shake off the "geeky" stigma attached to
> smart watches._

I disagree with you on this. For me, this smartwatch, like all the other
recent ones, is _everything but geeky_. They look like they're designed for
everyone except the techies (they probably are). I for one would love a
smartwatch that gives the vibe of advanced, "hackery" technology.

~~~
silentscope
> is everything but geeky

I'm a nerd, and I'm sorry to be crude but NERD ALERT. A smart watch today
starts at Geeky and works, laboring and awkwardly, towards generally
acceptable.

If you think a smart watch by any manufacturer, at this early point, is
everything but geeky you gotta get out of the office.

------
zmmmmm
My biggest take away is that Apple has failed to advance the state of the art
in any meaningful way here. I guess hype is always hype, but people really
expected that Apple would do something that would knock this out of the park -
a week long battery life, a flexible watch face, or a bracelet style 360
degree screen or something else that would just reset the whole space. It
didn't happen. This device may sell well (or not) but it's basically a peer to
the current entrants in this space, not a generation ahead like many people
expected.

~~~
jamesrom
It's exactly one generation ahead.

~~~
markild
How so? Genuine answer.

I fail to see what this offers that the other products in this space doesn't
have. At least hardware-wise.

~~~
idlewords
A set of new UI primitives and the hardware to support them (crown thingy,
tactile feedback chip).

~~~
vadman
I have doubts about the crown thingy -- turning a watch crown while the thing
is on your wrist is quite uncomfortable. I understand it's a big crown, but
still doesn't seem ergonomic to me.

------
fidotron
This is an intriguing situation because while the "No wireless, less space
than a Nomad. Lame." comment will always haunt those that criticise Apple
product launches this is the first one in years where the product looks more
like it's actually the Nomad being mentioned, and the iPod has yet to arrive.

I'm going so far as to say that smartwatches and VR represent the desperate
flailing of a tech industry that's run out of ideas that will connect with
people. We had a good boom post iPhone, but this kind of thing just doesn't
look like there's any point to it.

~~~
MrScruff
In my opinion you're utterly wrong about VR, it's going to be a transformative
technology and will precipitate a massive push for high end real-time
graphics. People want new experiences without leaving their sofa and VR will
bring that in spades.

As far as the watch goes, I think it will make money but less than the iPad.
It's clearly pitched as a fashion accessory and will find a market. Just not a
big enough one to satisfy analysts.

~~~
deong
> People want new experiences without leaving their sofa and VR will bring
> that in spades.

It's far from clear that they're actually willing to do anything about it.
Look at 3D TVs. No one wants to sit on their couch lazily watching whatever's
on with special glasses.

If VR was a passive technology like HD -- by which I mean you buy a new TV and
everything is better without any further action on your part -- I'd be more
confident that you're correct. But it's not. I can't see headsets as a thing
people are going to wear sitting on their sofa with the family. Game consoles
seem like an obvious target with an audience that might be receptive, but
otherwise, I just can't envision mass adoption.

~~~
MrScruff
I don't argue that it would be an easier sell if it wasn't so anti-social to
use. But it certainly can't be compared to 3D TVs or movies for that matter,
which are an awful hack.

This generation's VR is the real deal, and while the technology isn't quite
there yet, it's within touching distance. People will be prepared to put up
with the inconvenience because the experience will be significantly more
compelling than anything else they've seen. It will be massive based on word
of mouth alone.

~~~
deong
I think that very much depends on perspective. The technology powering a
current-gen headset might be brilliant, but the headset itself -- not the
technology but the very idea that I need a headset is still very much an
"awful hack". At least to me, and I suspect quite a few others. I could be
wrong of course...just my predictions there, but that's my problem with the
tech.

~~~
MrScruff
I guess what I'm saying is that if the experience is 10x more compelling
(which is what I think it will be), then people will put up with it.

Putting on skis and getting to the top of a mountain is inconvienent but
people still do it.

~~~
deong
Some people ski, occasionally. I can totally see that future for VR as well,
and I didn't mean to suggest otherwise. For gaming, it's at least potentially
very compelling. I just don't see it as a technology people want for more
general use. I don't think we'll be using it browsing Facebook or sitting in
the park.

People don't wear skis around in their daily life. Skis are very much a
special purpose item that most people use between never and about once a year,
with never the runaway winner, if you consider the fraction of even relatively
affluent people who don't ski at all.

~~~
MrScruff
I think you're taking the ski thing a little literally. I'm using it as an
example of how people will do something quite arduous, expensive and dangerous
because it gives them a unique experience. Obviously the 'overhead' of putting
on a VR headset is massively less than that of skiing.

If you think of VR as being a new screen technology, I can see why you might
come to the conclusion you have. But true VR (where you have 'presence') goes
far, far beyond that. I agree it's not going to be a general purpose platform
like the smartphone, but I think it will still be high impact.

Do I think people will be browsing Facebook with VR? Probably not. The
challenge for Facebook will be to create an environment based on their content
that you would want to visit.

~~~
deong
I didn't really intend that to be literal. I'm going with the "skiing as a
metaphor" here. Yes, people will do something arduous and inconvenient for the
experience, but they do it rarely. The inconvenience is tolerable when you do
it every once in a while to get a unique experience. The same level of
inconvenience is not at all tolerable as part of your day to day life.

If the argument is that VR will become "an experience", then I'm fine with
that. But a capital-E-Experience is the opposite of everyday mass adoption.

------
wiremine
I spent about 20 minutes reading through some of the now 650+ comments, and
I'm a bit surprised how common the arguments are on both sides. It feels like
the entire tech community has the same basic argument every time a new 1.0
apple product is released:

Those who don't like the product:

\- it is feature incomplete

\- the hype doesn't match the actual product

\- it doesn't actually look that great

\- there are other, better products already on the market

\- it is overpriced

\- one or two interesting feature doesn't equate to "innovation"

And those who like the product (or love Apple) tend to have counter-points for
each argument.

I'm curious if anyone has compiled a list of day zero critiques over the years
for Apple successes (Mac, iPod, iPhone) or failures (Mac toaster, hifi, etc.)?
It would be fun (and maybe a bit informative) for the community to review.

Edit: fixed spacing and wording.

~~~
gaoshan
I think you are spot on with this comment. The reaction to this watch is not
substantially different from every other reaction to a major Apple product (or
OS version or whatever else they announce).

It can be entertaining to read (got me interested in the Garmin Forerunner
that was mentioned) but it's just people at a bar chatting about the topic of
the day.

------
leoc
Two small things:

* The product pages for the individual Watch lines, especially [http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-sport/](http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch-sport/) , are the first time I can recall Apple using sex or (literal) sexiness in its advertising. (We'll pass over the "Rip. Mix. Burn." [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ECN4ZE9-Mo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ECN4ZE9-Mo) cringefest ...)

* I await Gruber's reaction with considerable interest...

~~~
eslaught
Regarding your first point, see:

[http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2011/08/advertising-and-
fut...](http://adcontrarian.blogspot.com/2011/08/advertising-and-future-of-
apple.html)

~~~
leonroy
Don’t necessarily agree with everything in that article but it's remarkably
prescient.

------
phirschybar
To those who are concerned about mainstream adoption of a watch like this, I
remind you of the Pebble Kickstarter which was one of the most successful in
Kickstarter history. And all those contributors had no guarantee that the
Pebble would see the light of day. There is serious demand for a watch that
does even what the Pebble originally promised, which is still far far less
than what the Apple Watch has now proposed to do.

I have been a Pebble watch owner for over a year, after having given up
wearing watches around the time I owned my first cellphone. I have come to
feel the same NEED of having my Pebble on as I, and everybody else, has with
their phone in their pocket. All of the quirks of the Pebble and everything
that I have come to realize is missing with the Pebble, is addressed elegantly
with the Apple Watch. 'Canned' and voice responses to messages... Huge. A non-
obvious alternative to the classic vibration (which is obvious to people
nearby when using the Pebble) in the 'tap' technology... also clever and
smart.

~~~
shrikant
Just fyi (happy Pebble owner since the Kickstarter), Pebble Glance now gives
you the ability for canned responses to texts straight from the watch.

------
julianpye
The main innovation I like is NFC in the Watch. This makes so much sense. What
is the big advantage of pulling a phone from your bag instead of a wallet?
Paying with a wrist, opening doors with your wrist, entering the metro with
your wrist. Can't wait for the next Wear releases from Samsung to have it
integrated :)

~~~
crwll
Sony Smartwatch 3 has NFC (and GPS). Too bad it's rather ugly. AFAIK, it only
currently uses NFC for pairing to a phone, but the hardware is there and
Android Wear will hopefully soon include complete support for it, like they
recently did with watch GPS support.

~~~
julianpye
Unfortunately it is only a passive tag for pairing. You can't to do anything
else with it, so it cannot read other tags itself.

------
3pt14159
Super disappointed with this. I was hoping for a bunch of sensors that fed my
iPhone. Not something to discretely take meetings during a meeting.

Here is what is missing for me:

1\. Sweat sensor.

2\. Insulin sensor.

3\. Smarter/more accelerometers to intelligently _automatically_ detect what
I'm doing. For example, if I start lifting 50 lbs in a dumbell bench press it
should __know __that! My iPhone should auto update a fitness tracking app. If
I start biking my normal "track" here in Toronto, it should automatically know
that! So underwhelmed here.

4\. No mention of emergency assistance "stuff", (like detection of heart
attacks, or spiking insulin levels).

5\. Some really stupid / weird features, although I do kinda like the shared
heartbeat one. Would be fun on exercises / first date makeouts :)

~~~
unclebunkers
>> For example, if I start lifting 50 lbs in a dumbell bench press it should
know that!

Exactly how do you propose this would work?

You are disappointed by diabetic specific monitors, the lack of an app that
I'm sure someone will create someday, and something that physics will likely
never be able to solve. I think it's safe to say that your expectations
started in the realm of fantasy. Innovation can't ignore reality.

~~~
3pt14159
There are already devices that have proved this concept in production (and
waiting FDA approval) or on the market.

~~~
unclebunkers
Could you provide a link? I feel I'd have heard if any physics defying devices
exist.

------
arihant
Here are my first thoughts (I kind of won't be doing device specific
nitpicking as this is the first iteration. We are sure the concept will evolve
with time):

Good things:

1.) The Tap-talk feature is an absolute genius for me. This, exactly this, is
the perfect non-intrusive yet hyper connected way to intimately stay in touch
with someone. Just tap on their wrist, so simple. Make a little scribble to
show emotion, so beautiful.

2.) The digital crown seems very interesting. I know the concerns on this
thread, but if you see the demo again, the nob is bigger and is fluid enough
to rotate by rolling just one finger on it. We hate crowns on our watches not
because we have to rotate them, but because they are hard to rotate. This one
might be different.

3.) The built. It starts at $349, while Android Wear is at $250-300 range. But
then this is sapphire glass with at least steel body. And their is mention of
actually how a watch is accurate with time, something 3 other companies didn't
do.

4.) Multiple sizes is a good thing. Small people, petite ladies don't like to
wear big sizes. I like how adaptive this watch is with the sizes, materials,
straps.

Now on to the awkward parts:

1.) They gave developers at least 4-5 months time to implement the tap-talk on
Android Wear. By the time this watch actually comes to stores, it would be
beaten down concept.

2.) They gave Android Wear manufacturers all the time to step up their game.

3.) The killer app, even in on-stage demos, seems to be the maps app. The
Apple maps, unfortunately. That makes it profoundly useless wrist weight for
anybody living outside of handful countries it actually works in. That gives
Android Wear a terrible advantage.

4.) No GPS on watch. So basically I have to carry my phone in pocket during
runs. There is already GPS apps which do that. So that makes this watch
essentially a display.

5.) No word on battery.

6.) Apple launched a watch today. A week earlier Moto launched a better
looking watch. This is a sentence I never thought I'd say.

Would I have bought it today if Apple launched it? Yes.

Will I now that Apple has given me months to think it over? No.

~~~
prawn
I'm surprised that the Apple Watch looks so much like a watch. I was keen to
see how they might break that concept apart and create something really novel.

~~~
theon144
I'm sorry? I don't really want to sound like I'm bashing Apple, but I'd never
see something round, rectangular and bulky and think "watch" up until the
recent advent of smartwatches. Apple Watch is as un-watchy as any of the
competing smartwatches, in my opinion.

~~~
realo
Here you go... Big, rectangular bulky watch. They cost 2.5 _million_ dollars
each, but have no Bluetooth... _sigh_

[http://www.independentjewellers.com/blog/2012/04/the-most-
co...](http://www.independentjewellers.com/blog/2012/04/the-most-complicated-
watch-in-the-world/)

------
DominikR
Even though I am an Android developer, I played with the thought of buying the
iPhone 6 (the big one) and an Apple Watch, because Swift is kind of a reset
for developers and I am very happy with my MacBook.

But now that I've seen the keynote, I've got some issues with the watch:

First of all, I feel it's too expensive, because those smartwatches are
basically obsolete after a year. (at least to me)

It would have been good if Apple would allow those watches to be sent in and
upgraded, especially for the version that uses a gold casing, which I suspect
will be extremely expensive. (probably > $1000)

The design of the watch is not bad, but not good either. I would have no
problem wearing it, but I don't like that rectangle look. (the Moto 360 looks
better to me)

But on the other hand I like the navigation wheel a lot. I'm pretty sure that
this alone will allow for more complex apps than what we see on Android Wear
at the moment.

The new types of messages that Apple presented isn't interesting to me, but I
can see the younger audience using it a lot.

~~~
wil421
>First of all, I feel it's too expensive, because those smart watches are
basically obsolete after a year.

I felt the same way when introduced rMBP but the prices are going down.
Hopefully, they will go down in the next couple years. Personally $200 would
be perfect but $350 is too much especially when I can get a new iphone for
less (with a subsidy from my carrier).

------
jroseattle
I haven't worn a watch in at least 15 years. A good chunk of my friends and
colleagues as well.

I'm sure there are interesting use cases, but my summary view is this seems
like a current-generation iPod with a wristband.

No prediction of how successful it will be, but I kind of think this will be
more niche than mainstream.

~~~
Cthulhu_
Same; for me it was mostly a practical reason though, my wrists started to
hurt from computer work and the strap (metal one) was annoying against the
edge of my laptop, so I had it off most of the time. Of course, if this thing
proves to have added value (and just notifications isn't added value for me, I
don't get them that often and if I do they're not important enough to warrant
having to check them at all times), I'd consider going back to watches -
pulling out your phone to check the time isn't the most convenient of actions.

------
oldmanjay
i can't imagine this selling well, but i also couldn't imagine the ipad
selling well and history showed i don't know what i'm talking about, so it'll
probably be a huge hit.

~~~
tdicola
I'm with you--I thought the iPad was dumb and happily ate crow after using
one. Looking at the Apple Watch today I'm scratching my head wondering what's
the point and who really wants to be even more distracted by their devices.

~~~
themoonbus
I had the same reaction to the iPad as you, and now am a very happy owner.
Because of this, I now withhold my opinions until I can try out products in
person, although I personally could never see myself owning a smart watch.

------
agscala
The watch looks very nice indeed but _starting at_ $350 is ominously steep
especially since it requires an iPhone

~~~
kreutz
Watches aren't subsidized and there are thousands of dumb watches that people
pay well over $350 for already.

~~~
darkstar999
Those "dumb" watches will still work in 5 years. Hell, they will still be nice
in 100 years. Smart watches won't hold up for 5 years.

~~~
Zikes
Most "dumb" watches that cost over $350 will retain the majority of their
value well past those 5 years, too. Apple's first generation watch will be
~$50 in 5 years.

~~~
happyscrappy
Android gear can't sell for $50 now.

~~~
zevyoura
The first Samsung Gear watch was only announced a year ago (Sep. 2013), and
you can get it for <$150 new. Pretty sure it will be well under $50 for that
model in 4 years.

------
psbp
It may be that Google did a pretty good job of preemptively responding to the
Apple Watch, but I don't find this that much more interesting than the already
not very interesting Android Wear devices.

~~~
kayone
> preemptively responding to the Apple Watch

That's really interesting way to phrase it. if tables were turned would you
say the same thing or would it be Google responding to apple or worst, Google
copying apple?

~~~
nevi-me
Assuming that Google hasn't spent "years" working on the Android Wear platform
compared to Apple's "years", does it mean that based on what we've seen
tonight vs. Wear, that Google has done better? I'm certainly of that opinion.

There were a lot of speculators who should be humbled by putting the "iWatch"
on a pedestal before it was even released. I personally don't like the way it
looks, though Apple considered something interesting, that not everyone's
wrist is huge, and made 2 versions (Android Wear OEMs can of course counter
this by flooding the market with 'choice')

~~~
kayone
I totally agree with you and think that google's wear is a better offering.

My original reply was referring to the fact that even though Google came to
market with its wear device first (years ago with glass and months ago with on
the watch) it's still being called a response to apple's non existent (at the
time) product.

however if tables were turned and google were to release its first wear
product months from now, after apple, NO ONE would call apple's watch a
preemptive response to Google's wear. It would either be reported as Google
copying apple or best case scenario Google's response to apple's innovation.

eg. No one called the original iPhone a preemptive strike on Android.

------
ebbv
The fact that this requires me to bring my iPhone on a run kills it as a sport
watch. I can get a high quality GPS watch for $150 that doesn't require me to
bring my iPhone.

Or if I am OK with bringing my iPhone I can just use it.

Dumb, dumb move on Apple's part.

~~~
k-mcgrady
Sure it might not be for serious runners but about half the people I see
running have a phone strapped to their arm. If they also have the watch it
means they can see the display while running and get more accurate data. For
those people it's not a big deal. If you're the sort of person who buys a GPS
watch of course it won't be for you. When has Apple ever catered to niche
markets?

~~~
ebbv
Yeah, that's exactly my point. I used my iPhone 3G for 2 years of running when
I first started. Why would I blow $350 on an Apple Watch to get marginal gains
that a $150 GPS watch can also give AND let me ditch carrying the phone.
Which, arm strap or no, is bulky and at risk of destruction.

------
mladenkovacevic
It's a little thick isn't it? But it's got a design that I can see evolving
over time. Not bad for a square-ish watch.

Except I don't see any features that I need to plop over $350 for. In terms of
health-related metrics the Basis watch is more feature-complete, and over half
the price [http://www.mybasis.com/](http://www.mybasis.com/)

In terms of personal assistant features, Google Now takes the lead along with
any smart-watch that takes advantage of it and Android-wear.

When the iPhone released, I believe the market was primed for a next-
generation smartphone. I don't think this is true for wearables now. The Apple
Watch will have a much touger climb than the iPhone ever did.

~~~
snowwrestler
I think the value proposition for the watch will build as the sum of many
parts: style + health sensor + payment token + presence token + wrist comms +
apps(?).

Think of it as sort of a persistent "me key" in a smart-connected world. But
that world is still in its infancy, so the watch doesn't seem very valuable
yet.

I think it's similar to the iPad in that there is not really a built-in value
proposition. The iPad's value is 100% in its apps...but when it launched,
there were not a ton of iPad apps.

In contrast, the iPhone was bringing a clear value prop from day one: phone
calls, email, and iPod. But even then the real value prop took a long time to
develop. Remember the keynote, when Jobs said "a phone... an iPod... an
Internet communicator"? The first two got huge applause, the last one not so
much. That term clearly confused a lot of people.

But if you look at how people use their smartphones now, it is by far the
biggest portion of the value of an iPhone. Both phone and iPod functionality
is being eaten by Internet services (VoIP and Spotify/Pandora).

------
rwhitman
I started wearing watches on a regular basis about a year ago and it has
become an addictive new hobby, I'm up to 4 now and feel naked without one.

The primary use-case for a wristwatch - being able to glance at your wrist to
tell the time - is actually very underrated in it's usefulness. We forget that
watches started out as a pocket device until the military started strapping
them onto the wrist for practical purposes.

When the cellphone came around we abandoned 100+ years of natural design
evolution in favor of the more powerful new technology, but when that tech
starts to fit comfortably in the same place that was so natural for the last
century it will be a sea-change in the way we look at wireless tech...

------
na85
For me it's now official: Apple has ceded its position as an industry
leader/innovator, and become a follower.

This is a really, really lame product.

~~~
terhechte
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."

[http://beta.slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-
releas...](http://beta.slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-
ipod)

~~~
leoc
I think the analogy probably doesn't stand up:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8293961](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8293961)
A better analogy may be what things would have been like if Apple had kept
slogging it out in the handheld-computer market between '98 and '07.

------
bhartzer
Yes, you can use Apple Pay with the Apple Watch. Great addition, no more
digging in my pocket for my iPhone Plus (if I can actually get it out of my
pocket).

~~~
robmcm
This is very usefull for those people that keep our phones in bags rather than
pockets.

The more I think about it it more I think this watch isn't aimed at me...

------
scj
I wear a watch, but I think about it as jewelry, and incidentally as a time
piece. And until there is a killer app for a watch, I will continue to do so.

Originally, I posed myself the question _if_ I would wear a smartwatch if
there is no such thing as a killer app. The answer is yes, but _when_ is a
better question. And the partial answer isn't about it being a smartwatch or
dumbwatch, but about being an uglywatch or not.

I think this watch fails the uglywatch criteria. Which is an odd thought to
combine with Apple.

~~~
chrissnell
This Apple watch is clearly not intended for people like you and me. You won't
see James Bond wearing an Apple Watch and you won't see NASA strapping them
around the sleeves of space suits like an Omega Speedmaster. This is another
piece of electronics that will look as dated as a CueCat or dot-matrix printer
fifteen years from now. A classic timepiece, on the other hand, will retain or
gain value over time. I bought my Rolex Submariner for about $6000 in 2009.
Just five years later, a new Sub costs close to $9000. The value of used
Rolexes is even higher. I wouldn't be surprised if my watch has doubled in
value.

The Apple Watch has its place: it's an alternative to a Suunto or Garmin
training watch, or an everyday watch for people who wouldn't spend more than
$500 on a timepiece. It's a fashion item but it's not jewelry. Like the
original iPhone, its scarcity may create an initial aura of exclusivity but
things will die down once you see a 14 year-old on the bus wearing one.

~~~
jawngee
Rolex's are the worst investments in watch collecting. Rolex is highly
susceptible to overshadowing, so even though a new one is more expensive than
when you bought it, it doesn't mean your watch is worth that. It's worth even
less if you didn't service it in 2013 and didn't keep the paperwork (Rolex's
must be serviced every 3-4 years to maintain value).

Of course, that doesn't mean you can't find someone dumb enough to unload it
on for more than you paid it, but a collector isn't going to give you that
value for it.

The Rolex Daytona is the exception to this rule though, but Submariners are
mass-produced and common for luxury watches.

Source: I collect watches.

------
computerjunkie
My Two Cents : I love watches, but a smart watch is just not for me. I prefer
the craftsmanship it takes to create a watch that is delicately engineered to
give you the exact time and makes sure the timekeeping is always accurate.

This is what a watch is supposed to do, keep time.

I feel smart watches are somewhat a novelty _at the moment_. There is simply
too much functionality involved in smart watches, although they say its been
dumbed own. When I look at my wrist, I want a quick glance of the time and a
small moment to appreciate what is sitting on my wrist.

The idea around of smart watches brings so many possibilities.But I don't feel
they are solving actual problems.

Design - Motorola is a company that is so underrated in the industry, the [0]
Moto 360 was something I expected apple to release.Its actually a nice looking
smart watch which seems to complement your lifestyle. Trust LG to follow suit.
Square dials are just unpleasant to look at, but that's just my personal
taste.

Battery life is another no go for smart watches right now - What if I'm on
getaway hike for the weekend where I need to check the time and a watch
compass regularly? I can get a Casio G Shock for hiking trip that is solar
powered for half the price.

Its still early days to judge from afar. A couple of years, a couple of
generations, and the prices falls down as always then maybe I'll check it out.

[0] [https://moto360.motorola.com/](https://moto360.motorola.com/)

~~~
jlangenauer
I'm with you. I love my iPhone, but it will be a cold day in hell before my
wrist sports one of these.

That said, I'm certainly interested to see where it will go - especially, as
someone else said - once watchmakers start dealing in tech rather than tech-
makers dealing in watches.

~~~
computerjunkie
_once watchmakers start dealing in tech rather than tech-makers dealing in
watches._

This couldn't have been said any better.

------
LiweiZ
As the first step in watch market, Apple is in the right direction. Is this
watch the ideal one we expect? Maybe not. Unlike others, they have found a
path in design, but the logistics weighs more currently. So they are not able
to go far at this moment. And the segment has attracted more and more
competitors. It is not difficult to see they are struggling to balance the
time to enter and their ability to offer an ideal product now. It's just the
beginning.

------
Igglyboo
really hate the curved look, bringing back memories of the 3GS. I thought we
moved on to sharp corners.

~~~
laichzeit0
I'm so glad I'm not the only one on this. Really dislike the curved / beveled
designs.

~~~
Igglyboo
The iPhone 6 is meh but I really dislike the look of the watch.

~~~
72deluxe
It looks like a Samsung doesn't it?

------
paul_f
The iPhone only seems affordable because it is tied to a 2-year contract.
Otherwise it would be $800 and Apple wouldn't sell anywhere near as many as
they do.

At $350, I don't see how Apple Watch is going to crack the volume markets.
Think 15yo girls.

~~~
gurkendoktor
I am pretty sure that many contracts will throw in a watch for a few $/month.

------
taude
It's really a deal breaker that the watch needs a phone to be tethered. If I'm
going to look at a map, I'm just going to use the phone that's in my pocket.
Similarly, I don't really need a buzz notification into my wrist to know text
messages are coming in.

Not to mention, even though it's an Apple design, it still looks like a nerd-
toy.

------
joesmo
It seems that the Apple Watch needs an iPhone nearby to do anything useful.
This is extremely disappointing and a complete failure from the get-go.
Essentially, Apple Watch just becomes a tool for those too lazy to take their
iPhone out of their pocket. It's absolutely useless for exercising or other
activities where one wouldn't typically carry a phone. That was supposed to be
one of the main selling points and one of the main target audiences. As a
runner myself, I can't see wasting any money on this unless it gets its own
Wifi/LTE/Bluetooth/Storage capabilities and I can leave my phone behind. It
seems Apple missed this quintessential requirement.

------
kumarm
It is cheaper to tie iPad Mini to wrist than buy an iWatch :).

~~~
gpmcadam
And that's basically the same thing, too! /s

------
vermooten
Also: why the hell do I need to see what the moon's gonna look like 6 days
from now?

~~~
tdicola
Very useful feature for werewolves. This watch will be a hit in the Twilight
universe.

~~~
leoc
It's essential information when I'm smuggling rum, or planning my escape from
lunatic asylums.

~~~
72deluxe
Or for knowing when an apocalypse will occur. If the moon isn't going to look
normal in 6 days, then I'll know that I need to hide and launch my rocket-
ship.

------
paul
It's surprisingly unattractive, but I think people here may be underestimating
the quality of the interaction design. Of course it's impossible to know
without trying one, but they've clearly put some thought into it. The video is
worth watching: [http://www.apple.com/watch/films/#film-
design](http://www.apple.com/watch/films/#film-design)

------
72deluxe
I notice in all of the pictures and videos that the "crown" (nub on the side)
is a render....? Kind of like all of Behringer's new product announcements:
you see them on their website and they may or may not ever actually exist or
get released. Does this mean they haven't finished it, or have rushed to get
to appear to be in the market before it is swallowed up by Android watches?

~~~
mbca
Ever since the days of the original Firewire-only iPod, they've done 3D
renders for extreme closeups like that. They are usually very accurate but
still, it seems like it would be just a bit more honest to use a photo.

~~~
72deluxe
I didn't know that - thanks. I suppose it would be difficult to show that
rotating nub without animation.

------
blinkingled
Tim Cook tried to make the Apple Watch his iPhone moment but it came across as
off - the Watch really is nothing as revolutionary in any way shape or form as
the iPhone was.

It is thick. They had to resort to gimmicks - communicating heart rates,
drawing fish, three dots to ask for lunch(!) - to make it sound useful. The
price is off by at least $100. They specifically danced around mentioning
battery life - with these many features it might not actually be all that
better than the competition - an area where Apple habitually shines.

The UI also looked complicated to me - two ways to control it - touch and the
unimaginatively named crown thing. Which is again very un-Apple. (When the
watch is on your wrist I kept thinking how easily am I going to find the
crown. For a normal watch that thing is very rarely used and that too when it
is not on the wrist.)

Not that I think SmartWatches are here to stay as a mainstream product but the
little hope we had that Apple will knock it out the park with some must have
feature - that hasn't panned out with the iWatch for sure.

~~~
_pmf_
> the Watch really is nothing as revolutionary in any way shape or form as the
> iPhone was.

The iPod brought portable digital music collections to the masses.

The iPhone revolutionalized personal computing.

The Watch has exchangeable wrist straps.

~~~
jodrellblank
The Watch is Siri, out of your pocket. It's [http://www.dailymobile.net/wp-
content/uploads/2014/05/Michae...](http://www.dailymobile.net/wp-
content/uploads/2014/05/Michael-Knight.jpg)

------
ChuckMcM
Interesting, a payments system that works only if you have the latest iPhone,
and a watch that only works if you have (possibly latest) iPhone. I love the
display, and I think they have some great ideas here but I was hoping more for
the 'ipod' replacement that would work with any iOS 8 device (like iPads too)
instead of a remote for your phone.

~~~
craigching
Apple Watch works with 5, 5c, and 5s. And of course 6 and 6+

~~~
digikata
And if you notice, NFC of course isn't in the 5, 5c, 5s. So it makes me wonder
if Apply Pay will work with a watch paired to an iPhone 5 series device. That
might be a little nudge to get the Apple watch.

~~~
craigching
Oh, that's a good point. You're probably right, can't use Apple Pay with a
watch paired with 5/5c/5s. I noted that the credit card information is
available via passbook, but the 5's don't have the related hardware to support
Pay, right? I mean the watch has the NFC, but the ability to generate the one-
time numbers probably has to come from the phone?

~~~
ChuckMcM
It all seems a bit tangled together doesn't it? I get that when it makes sense
but not when it crimps the addressable market fairly severely.

------
anmonteiro90
Main drawback is you need an iPhone in order to have one. Couldn't there be a
version that didn't?

~~~
Cthulhu_
I was hoping for an iPod Nano evolution myself, i.e. a standalone device that
gets extras like GPS and connectivity when near your iphone, but alas.

Actually, was there anything on the ipod product line?

~~~
anmonteiro90
Nope, no announcements at least

------
brianmcdonough
It's amazing, the variety of attitudes and opinions on this thread. People
don't spend this much energy arguing the fine points of war and yet, it really
is just a watch.

The promotion is genius. Not sure about the watch, but if the chatter is any
sign, it's already a success.

------
Rapzid
My take away from the page is that it is entirely focused on cosmetics and
construction. It seems loud and clear they are positioning this as a piece of
designer apparel... I think Apple understands the most important thing most
people in the market for a watch are interested in; How desirable it is to
others. The whole page just talks about how hawt it is.

As others have mentioned, I believe Google has put massive thought into smart-
watch interaction and how it integrates within your life as a utility. I'm not
saying Apple hasn't. But I am saying Apple's watch sales are going to be crazy
nuts. People have room for one watch as a fashion statement. If it's not going
to be an Armani who do you think they'll go with?

------
nilsimsa
The one thing I like about my current watch is that is is solar charged. I
haven't had any issues with replacing batteries for nearly 7 years. I'm not
sure if I'm ready to charge yet another device on a regular basis.

------
adamjs
Two words: Universal Identity. That's the killer use-case that everyone is
missing. The Apple Watch has an NFC-chip, internet connection, and an API--
this is going to happen. (They've already announced a partnership with W
Hotels for the Watch to replace keycards in rooms.)

I think this would be super-convenient in the short-term but seems very
worrisome in the long-term. My watch/phone/drivers-license is NOT me, and the
more we rely on a single-point for authentication, the greater the potential
for abuse and theft. More solutions need to be created.

------
exodust
But we already know the time, it's on our phones? I don't get why anyone would
buy this watch apart from trendy reasons.

I bet sales will be low. Body monitoring sensors are better off hidden I
rekon, then you can wear any watch, or no watch, and your phone does all the
interfacing with the hidden sensors. All this should be open technology too,
compatible with any phone rather than tied down to one system. It's your body
after all, our data's fate shouldn't be a corporation's monopoly money.

------
malbs
At first I was thinking I had to have one of these. Then I read feature page
where it subtly tells you that most of the functionality is based on being
tethered to an iphone. What a pity.

------
LukeWalsh
Glad they finally got rid of that hideous header on the homepage

------
wooyi
I run and occasionally do sprint tris. I carry a phone for both riding and
running as I use Strava to track and compete with others. The thing I'm
excited about is that this watch has a HR monitor, which is what I would need
as you train based on intensity.

Not to mention when you're stranded 50 miles due to a flat tire, you'll need
that phone to call for a pickup.

Others have mentioned listening to music,..etc. (I don't)

Look - you're going to carry a phone everywhere you go on land.

------
paradite
Any official site for WatchKit? I can't seem to find any.

~~~
k-mcgrady
I'm assuming it's part of the iOS SDK like GameKit, MapKit etc. So
developer.apple.com/ios

------
edpichler
This is just the first release of another killer product from Apple. To
compare, the first iPhone did not have some basic features found in many cell
phones, including stereo Bluetooth support and 3G compatibility.

I really believe that Apple will earn a ton of money, like in the first years
of iPod or iPhone era.

And the watches market size, bigger than cell phones, computers and portable
music. It's a pity to do not have this company listed here, on stock market of
Brazil.

~~~
cowardlydragon
Seriously?

A killer product from apple innovates on battery life, form factor, materials,
and especially software. At least some or all of those come into play to make
for a superior product.

This is debatably better than the Moto 360.

Oh, and it's VAPORWARE, not being released until next year after Christmas.

I agree with others. This is a sign that Apple is no longer a leader in
innovation. The glow of Jobs is fading from the company, despite how much I
hate his beatification.

~~~
anmilo
wait, you define vaporware as something that will be released within the next
6 months?

------
thomasahle
Snapchat seems like the best suited form of communication for a device like
this. I wonder why Apple didn't fit a camera into that huge black bevel..

~~~
gurkendoktor
Either Apple has left that for v2 just as with the original iPad, or people do
actually find all these semi-hidden cameras creepy. I know I do (not a fan of
Glass, either).

~~~
LeicaLatte
True that. I find them creepy as fuck!

------
ars
Are those actual photos on the home page or computer renderings?

Because I hate how that thing looks - it looks sort of like a cartoon, like
something from WALL-E.

~~~
craigching
I agree on the looks in isolation, but the pictures of people wearing the
watch makes them not look so bad IMO. I was surprised at the functionality,
though, especially Apple Pay.

------
deanclatworthy
I was rather impressed but at 350USD and most likely 350e in Europe it's an
expensive purchase. Still no word on battery life either.

~~~
MBCook
In the keynote they made mention that it's easy to charge each night, which
probably means a day or two.

That's better than the few hours some people are getting with the Moto 360,
but it's not great. Let's hope it's at least one day consistently.

I'm interested to see the reviews. I wonder if they've reached too far.

------
r0fl
Curious to see how much the solid gold model costs.

------
brian_cloutier
Miniaturization has come a long way, but there's no way this costs just $350
to make. Has Apple's strategy changed? They've always sold hardware at a
healthy margin and made trivial amounts off software and music.

There are some really nice features here, I would probably buy one if I didn't
prefer android so much. But is it so nice that it will drive iPhone sales?

~~~
taude
There's gotta be some expensive parts in there, like that sapphire screen.

~~~
asadotzler
Sapphire screens that size are commonplace in real watches. I'm guessing that
only added a few dollars to the BOM.

------
capkutay
The only reason I want this watch is the exact features they were demo'ing:

Quickly respond to texts without having to pull out and unlock my phone

See who's calling me

Using the map to track where I am in a route

It seems like they nailed the low-hanging fruit and designed a pretty nice
looking watch. Apple watch and the moto 360 both deserve credit for making
smartwatches that don't look like total nerd gadgets

------
supernova87a
Samsung's watch also needed a phone to work, and was just slightly clunkier.
Why does Apple get such adulation in comparison?

------
Shivetya
My biggest disappointment, they announced a product they cannot ship. I
remember the good old days, ITS AVAILABLE TODAY. Now Apple is nothing than
just what they used to lampoon, a creator of announcements; not products.

Perhaps we can hope they use the time to take the obvious feedback flowing in
and make it right by launch

~~~
RyJones
This stymies people considering buying competitor watches for this Christmas
season, which is the big reason to pre-announce.

------
n72
For many watches are used as a signaling device. That is, an expensive watch
indicates to people that you have money. I assume these people aren't going to
downgrade to an apple watch. I don't know what percentage of watch owners this
is or whether it could affect uptake, but it could be factor.

~~~
nilkn
While this might be true on one level, once you get into the realm of $350+
watches it can be very hard (if not impossible) for the casual and uninformed
observer to guess whether a watch cost $500 or $5,000.

$350 is already more than most people spend on any watch, and that's only the
entry-level price -- I imagine some of the more premium versions of the watch
are going to be $500+, though that's just speculation. That's quite expensive
for a watch for the vast majority of people I think.

~~~
orbifold
I'm fairly sure chronometers start at >1000$ dollars and truly expensive
watches use either expensive metals or gems to signal their value. Also there
are no Rolex, Patek Phillipe etc. that have that price. Quartz watches are
uninteresting as a status symbol.

------
buro9
I haven't bought into Apple stuff too much, just an iPad and an Air. No
iPhone, I have Android instead and my desktop is Linux.

Question: Is the phone a mere accessory to the iPhone, or can it stand alone
or with any phone (inc' Android and Windows Phone)?

~~~
aianus
iPhone only

~~~
buro9
Alas, and it looks really gorgeous too.

------
neil_s
The linked to page made me wonder whether Apple had released a watch that was
literally just a watch, just a fancy time-keeping device. Its not until you go
one level up and go to features that it shows what the watch can actually do.

------
thearn4
I can't help but think that there really is a hard limit on the number of
powered electronics that a person is willing to routinely carry on their
person, and that number is one. Am I alone in feeling this way?

------
ggchappell
Beautiful page, but kinda worthless IMHO.

When I look at it, I'm wondering: what's the UI like for a computer that isn't
much bigger than my finger? (And if it's any good, why isn't it front &
center?)

------
callesgg
I want a smart clock that looks like a clock not like a small wrist
calculator.

Is that so hard?

------
teyc
I'm surprised they haven't done a chunky smartwatch. That would provide plenty
of battery life, and more room for electronics, while at the same time fill a
bigger unmet niche.

~~~
72deluxe
Which niche would that be? People with bionic arms? Or weight-lifters? :-)

------
LeicaLatte
As someone with 5 watches, I can't wait for this to release.

~~~
72deluxe
Do you have that many arms too?

~~~
LeicaLatte
Are you saying you don't wish you had 5 arms? You must be a fool.

But the answer to your question is, I was gifted 4 of them once people saw
that I wear a watch. Watches work like that.

~~~
72deluxe
I would be happier with 4 arms, as a fifth arm would make balancing awkward.

Let's hope that if you get a "smartwatch", people will start buying you plenty
of them!

~~~
LeicaLatte
I am not getting a "smart watch". Its called Apple Watch.

------
72deluxe
Does anyone else really like the subtle ways to share sketches / heartbeats?
It kind of makes it more personal than just a Google Now / cards interface.

Nice touch (literally).

------
tdicola
I worry this will be a massive target for theft. If someone sees you wearing
an Apple Watch they know you have at least a $350 watch and $400+ phone on
your person.

~~~
Cthulhu_
Not really a valid argument; a lot of people have their phone out at all times
(or even just to check the time), which isn't even attached to their wrists
like this one is. Second, at $350, the resale value on the black market is
what, $50? $100 if you're lucky? Not sure if a robbery is worth that.

Besides, how do people with expensive watches (Rolexes and whatnot) manage?

~~~
gone35
I think tdicola's point is that, unlike any other watch, having an iWatch in
your wrist _immediately_ signals you also have an iPhone 5 or higher tucked
somewhere in that moment --since the watch, stupidly, only works tethered to
an iPhone apparently.

As it happens, this kind of wealth signaling is a legitimate personal safety
risk in many countries today, esp lower- to middle-income ones. In those
countries, very few people can afford to wear expensive watches; and when they
do, they just don't wear them around everyday in every public setting --more
like for special occasions, private parties, meetings, etc. Note the risk is
not just 'merely' mugging: it can also be kidnapping (you or your loved ones),
'doxxing' you and your family and emptying your bank accounts and so forth, or
even extreme forms of assault --beatings, rape or death. So it's kind of a big
deal.

iPhones, on the other hand, can be carried and used discreetly at all times,
in non-conspicuous cases and using hands-free earphones --that is, until now,
if you happen to be wearing a beaming iWatch right on your wrist, thus
defeating the whole point.

------
AshFurrow
Pretty sure the title of this should just be "Apple Watch", which is the title
in the browser. Apple considers their products proper nouns.

------
foobarbecue
So, it's basically a tiny external screen for your iPhone right? Snore. Wake
me up when they put cellular capabilities in there.

~~~
72deluxe
Won't it feel like you're in Knight Rider if you're talking to your wrist all
of the time?

"Hey Kit! Prepare to meet me round the back of the house!" "MICHAEL. MICHAEL."

------
EGreg
The Apple watch looks hot, but will it use a different store than the iOS
store? Where is the info on registering apps for it etc?

~~~
robmcm
I expect there will be no stand alone apps, they will be extension to iPhone
apps. Therefore you need an iPhone app with a watchKit module in it to use it
on the phone.

------
cdnsteve
My perspective is that the majority of the market already owns a smartphone.
Companies are trying to get new gadgets out there in peoples hands to increase
sales and keep the corporate machine rolling. The problem is, people are happy
with just their phones. I think wearables will have a very very slow uptake,
especially since they require you to have a smartphone in your pocket.

Someone call me when they get holograms to mass market, then I'll be
interested.

------
T-zex
Does it have an SDK for the third party apps?

~~~
jaredtking
Yes, it's called WatchKit. Supposedly you can create third-party apps,
glances, and notifications.

------
doczoidberg
serious question: Does this watch anything do what my phone in my pocket
doesn't?

I can't see a benefit of using a smartwatch.

~~~
72deluxe
I think it complements your phone. So it is more convenient to glance at your
wrist than rooting around in your pocket and getting your phone out, something
some people find quite rude.

If the trends reversed and they shrunk phones (like they did in the 90s) and
put a strap on them, then they could easily replace the watch. But then
battery life would be abysmal.

------
ForFreedom
Why do I have to buy a watch for my fitness, I can arm-band my iphone and have
all the details.

------
cpursley
This makes me want.... a regular watch with good battery life.

------
nodesocket
There is even an 18 karat gold edition. Sapphire crystal, waterproof, imported
leather from the Netherlands. It goes behind the technology, to also embrace
some of the finer things that make a quality watch... Quality.

------
dheer01
Steve jobs would have kept the configurations to only one.

~~~
darkstar999
Steve Jobs is dead.

------
pinaceae
ths is using a system on a chip designed by Apple themselves - what the hell.
they're going all in on chips. intel quo vadis?

------
fvdessen
I would have been nice to have real photographs.

------
pasiaj
Does anyone know what the lower button does?

~~~
thomasahle
They said it 'opens a view of friends that you can click on'. They only showed
it briefly.

------
bg0
I just wanted to swim with it... :(

------
vermooten
I don't want my heart rate and other health data getting uploaded to Apple and
anyone else. Big blocker for me.

------
freekh
Was expecting something more than this from Apple - the vision seems to be the
same as what google had for google wear. Hardware wise it is not much of an
increment either (my opinion only of course). Then again, I didn't really get
excited over the iPad either and that was a huge success.

Setting that expectation aside, I would be fine with something simpler if it:

\- it was classy looking: thin and round, steel and real/sapphire glass -
ideally something that looks like one of those simple swiss clocks from the
1960s

\- had an e-ink screen

\- had a gps, which I can turn on and off

\- had bluetooth notifications in case my phone is near

\- had bluetooth audio support; and

\- had spotify support. And here I mean that I want to be able to play music
which has been synced to my watch over bluetooth, a cable or while docked.

\- had heart-rate monitor would also be a plus of course.

\- has enough battery for at least about a week, unless I am using the gps
(for 2-3 hours), in which case it is fine if I have to charge it afterwards.

Want to use it as a regular watch (with the occasional message/calendar
notification and perhaps even daily weather updates), and as a music player
and as a gps for when I am running/biking.

Pebble almost have it, but their watches are way too ugly (my view only of
course), too large for my wrists (so says my partner at least) and they don't
have the extras that would make me really want one. I guess Spotify would have
to be a partner as well, but I have Spotify on my radio so I guess it is only
a small step to something like this as well.

Should be possible with todays technology though I am not really into HW. In
terms of processor-power it really only needs to keep track of time, draw the
watch face every second, draw the notifications/menu/..., handle user input
(could be buttons not capacitive) and play music (which probably is the most
resource intensive thing, but an easy match for any modern SOC). So for
processing, battery shouldn't be a problem. An e-ink screen is thin and does
not require much power either. Bluetooth 4 LE chipsets are very power friendly
I think, so I would imagine that should be fine as well. They are also fast
enough (1 mbp/s) for syncing notifications and even for the occasional sound
track sync (I don't mind waiting 5-10 minutes for an album). The gps doesn't
really have to give me directions, only log my position and would be used only
when I am running/biking, and as I said, should be possible to switch it
completely off.

The battery could be in the (detachable) wristband - I think I have seen quite
thin and flexible polymer batteries around on the internet (though I am not
sure if they are thin/flexible enough). Could also have different looks on the
wristbands so you get one leathery-looking (for normal usage) and one plastic
looking (for sports) like apple did (liked that part though it is hardly
innovative).

------
aikah
meta : I'm glad the product pages dont involve using JS to fuck up
scrolling,for once. This fad needs to go.

------
JustinBlaird
Broken link

~~~
smackfu
Just CDN issues.

------
sremani
Does it come with a kill-switch ?

------
personZ
As much ink was spilled about competitors' failures, it's interesting that
this won't be available some until vague window next year, and needs to be
tethered to an iPhone.

The interface looks interesting. The ridiculous draw pictures to each other
bit, though -- what a gimmick.

~~~
unclebunkers
It will be the most used feature by young lovers everywhere...

~~~
xgbi
> It will be the most used feature by _rich_ young lovers everywhere...

FIFY. At $349 a pop, I doubt you want to cruise in college with this on the
wrist.

~~~
unclebunkers
A $350 watch is a too expensive, but $325 beats headphones are chill? When I
walk through the seedier parts of town where most of the rent is paid in food
stamps and wishes, I still see beats headphones.

~~~
makomk
Beats headphones are really heavily counterfeited at a tenth the price or
less. I expect a lot of the ones you saw were fake.

~~~
72deluxe
Do they also counterfeit the ridiculous bass response in them? Or do they put
decent drivers in them, like Beyerdynamic DT 770s with Beats logos on them?
That'd be funny.

------
freeasinfree
I expect muggings for jewelery to be making a comeback.

~~~
photojosh
This will probably use Activation Lock as well.

[http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/06/20/police-say-
ios-7-a...](http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/06/20/police-say-
ios-7-activation-lock-is-significantly-reducing-thefts-of-apple-products)

------
notastartup
It would be nice if there was a watch which could do everything a smartphone
can do. make calls, take photos and videos, instantly teach me how to fight
like Jason Bourne on demand etc.

------
mgarfias
The thought of the thing buzzing when one of serveral very talkative/verbose
friends starts spamming me with SMSes drives me into a rage. And thats just
thinking about it.

------
cowardlydragon
To all of you criticizing the features, just remember:

It's vaporware.

~~~
__david__
Vaporware does not merely mean "announced but not released".

------
drinchev
Yeah okay, blah blah. I was at IFA Berlin 2014 and asked the SONY lady: "Hey
what's the killer feature of your watch?". She said "It shows the time and
tracks your steps!".

IMHO Apple Watch did a great job. I couldn't find any smart watch that have
navigation ( although with a paired smartphone ) and a possible ecosystem of
apps that can use it. The whole IFA ... nobody could offer this.

Althought, Of course it might be better, but Apple did a good job agains other
tech companies in this field. Period.

disclaimer: I'm not that big apple fan boy.

~~~
cowardlydragon
Moto 360 is supposed to do navigation.

------
antidamage
I've taken a hard look at every single smartwatch that's come out to date and
found them wanting. I couldn't at any point bring myself to wear a device that
needs to be charged every night and isn't "always on" yet doesn't have all the
features I wanted. Little by little they got closer, but nobody had nailed it
until Apple did.

I think it'll initially be seen as a superficial luxury, much like a
smartphone. Then without much effort and without anyone noticing it'll become
a device that's at first convenient to have and then inconvenient not to have.

I'm definitely getting an Apple watch and it'll take some amazing competition
to steer me in another direction. I guess this means I'll have to get a Mac
some time too.

------
marknutter
I always measure the future success of a new Apple product by both the number
and volume of negative comments related to. The greater the volume, the more
likely it is to be successful. By all accounts, Apple Watch is going to be a
smash hit.

~~~
wfjackson
How did that work out for Ping ?

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1659306](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1659306)

~~~
marknutter
Hardware

------
thomasahle
The Apple fans [1] impress me with their non-fanaticism on this one. If this
is a general trend across religions, I like where we are heading. Props!

Apple watch certainly has qualities though. It's exciting to see how the
market will develop now that all parties have opened their cards.

[1]:
[http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/2fxe2t/its_hideous/?s...](http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/2fxe2t/its_hideous/?sort=top)

~~~
mg74
"all parties"

Cue poor Microsoft sobbing in a corner

~~~
thomasahle
I don't think there are any rumors of Microsoft going into this market, is
there? I don't know if they have anything to bring to the table.

~~~
72deluxe
Bring to the table? If they actually made the table computer (the ORIGINAL
Microsoft Surface), that'd be great. A computer that doesn't get in the way.

