It's similar to the theory that mandating a lower nicotine content in tobacco would curb addiction.
And I already had a relatively "clean" notifications list, it's easy to get a total barage from all sorts of crappy third party games that want to beg you to play once a day.
The only thing I am longing for now is that I am on-call 24x7 and need to get Phone Calls & Messages.. you can set Do-not-disturb while sleeping to allow phone calls (all or from contacts), but not messages. I'd like to disable all notifications at night except messages or even better yet could set a per-app preference. Main reason is that I have notifications I like for youtube uploads for example, but I don't want them at night time.. which is common because a lot of channels are USA time and I am Australia time.
My watch is always on mute (vibrate only) and it has only a subset of the notifications that my phone has. My experience is it is less demanding of my attention than my phone.
The whole argument reads to me like "to free myself i could just get a feature phone but that would be uncool, so i will buy a smartwatch instead"
Do you pull your phone out of your pocket to set timers/alarms? Fire off quick texts? Do you pull your phone out of your purse just to check the time? Gee, why not put all of that on your wrist?
And the point of responding to the GP is, this super low friction doesn't have to mean even more overwhelming interruptions if you don't want it to. You can mute or DND notifications if you want.
1. Typing messages on a keypad (T9 predictive), annoying as I usually just send messages for work
2. Swapping the sim card between two phones on the weekend / evenings
Battery life was phenomenal.
Does anyone know how to copy an Australian sim card?
I can even, despite its age, use it to make a WiFi hotspot so my development phone with no credit can go online when I'm outdoors.
The problem with cheap feature phones for me right now is that I can't find any supported by most US networks that don't suck. The new ones suck way more than the old ones, noticeable delays when pressing keys, etc.
As such I love the thought. It's nothing a dumb phone can't offer right now, but the convenience of it being in watch form would just be fantastic.
Developing for the Samsung Gear S2 was one of the most frustrating experiences in my life. Tizen is a trainwreck.
There are no games being changed with that platform.
The Gear S2 3G has an eSIM for 3G. No phone required.
Many Chinese Android watches have offered direct cell connectivity for a couple of years now, as does the LG Watch Urbane 2nd Ed LTE ( Android Wear ).
Was pretty cool to be able to leave your phone at home and still have full 3g coverage, especially when out running/cycling/surfing. Opera mini browser was sufficient for looking things up on the go.
Like others have mentioned, Tizen is a hot mess though. In the end the lack of a spotify app was the main pain point for me. Apple will do well to fill that gap.
For people who want to run and listen to Spotify this may be great.
But that stupid cell company fee will keep me away. Just like it keeps me off cellular iPads.
Apple could move to something like Google's Fi easily with the virtual sim capabilities...
Maybe it isn't an option in your area, but a lot of people do have the option.
Because they're nice like that.
In most places that's not as balkanized as the US carrier market, you basically get multiple SIMs for your plan and that's it. Nobody gets to question what kind of device you put those SIMs into.
It is used mostly for tablets here(main simcard is in the phone) or a mifi for car.
I don't expect to use my iPad (or anything else) away from Wi-Fi all that much, so that may be part of the issue. If I thought I'd use it more $10 may seem more reasonable. Like if I traveled a lot.
are you saying that everybody who has smartphone needs 100% of what makes it a smartphone?
There are some interesting startups targeting the possibilities here, but right now, smart watches provide a less capable experience for everyone right now.
Anyway, the Apple Watch has a perfectly usable 10-key entry screen; that's what is used to unlock the Watch. Have you actually seen an Apple Watch?
that said my 5.2" phone doesn't have a perfectly usable tenkey, forgive me if I'm skeptical of a watch screen.
I agree I'd be more likely to use Siri or the Contacts app on the watch.
... I'm not sure yet whether that was a joke or not.
This entirely depends on your carrier. I have a single account for both iPhone and iPad wth 10Gb/mo to "spend" between them however I see fit. I'm with EE.
If adding a device to the pool also came with a little bit of extra data that might make it work out, but that's not the way it works.
Essentially I'm penalized for trying to use their services more. Instead of a nominal fee and making their money from selling more data, I have to pay a bigger fee just for the possibility of using the small pool I already have.
Not having to deal with tethering is not worth $10 a month to me.
I have a friend with a cellular Samsung watch. He pays an additional $5/mo.
And for extra cheapskate-ness you don't event get one extra GB when you do that. Pay more for less.
I didn't know watches were less. I can't find anything on Verizon's site (from a quick glance) that mentions them, only that "tablets and hotspots" are $10/mo.
Even at $60 I don't think I'd do it. I might for my iPad, but not my watch.
I pay $30/5GB (then throttled unlimited), so if I have to switch to a $50/month plan for a shared pool and add another $10 for a second device, then we're up to $360/year.
The only question for the watch (or any other device) is the additional fee for that and any extra data I might end up needing.
I think the fact that it cost $20 to put my phone on the network (not including any data costs) is already stupid. But it's too late there.
Also, sorry, I didn't notice you were talking about the annual price.
I hope the plans would spread. I really wanted a cellular capable iPad but couldn't stomach the extra cost + monthly fee + extra data usage.
I've heard iPads with. Ugly in cell arenamazing since you can use them any time and it's so much easier than tethering.
But I won't know.
We don't need large screens to consume more content - we need content to look larger and more content to be seen in our eyes. I see wearables (watches, combined with earphones, and eyewear of some kind) becoming independent of a smartphone as one step forward in this evolution.
Another possibility for low energy devices is to have them use energy from outside the physical batteries in them. They could be light powered and use ambient light (for powering the gadget and recharging batteries), kind of like "solar powered" calculators that we've had for decades (that could be used for hours and still work with very less ambient light). The batteries would then act more like stand-in backups when ambient light isn't enough. This would require great gains in low energy processing (so I'm not comparing a calculator with a smartphone here). But I'm guessing this will also be an approach that'd be tried while we're on the way to getting significantly higher battery energy densities.
Whoever gets to do eyewear with AR without it looking dorky and without it being bulky will be the pioneer in making it widespread. These cannot be like how the Apple Watch is today, requiring an almost daily recharge when the device is no longer worn. The bigger challenge for Apple, as the devices become more feature rich, would be to continue keeping as much computation as possible on-device for enhancing privacy (and using differential privacy wherever apt), instead of offloading it to the cloud like its competitors look at things.
A semi intelligent seeming voice interface that handles most and then a secondary backup display only for purely visual things.
In the short term, the sticking point is the cell contract.
If there is a reasonable add-on price to your existing phone rate, this is going to catch on. The more reasonable the rate, the quicker it will catch on.
Longer-term, the standalone service contract (Watch-only, no phone) will become more significant. People don't have an intrinsic urge to carry a rectilinear slab in their pocket... they have an intrinsic urge to communicate with each other. As a watch form-factor becomes more convenient, they will happily switch, in droves.
The finger handwriting works reasonably well too. It's slow though, at least for me, so better for short messages.
If you don't want the watch to interact with your phone at all, then you would be fine. But you'd presumably be losing quite a bit of functionality by doing so.
I've got several Apple devices on extra Project Fi SIM cards (including an iPhone). All work fine. I've also tested on the primary SIM succesfully.
The problem is that gave me something I wanted: the internet everywhere.
This gives me something I've been living without and don't want to pay that much for then privilege of: my smart watch working when I don't have my phone.
But 3G/LTE? It's easier to find an HDMI receiver that'll process HDCP. Nevermind something hand-solderable...
The integrated 3G & GPS in my ThinkPad is very convenient.
They could have done what they did with the iPhone (And what HTC did first on the M7), injected plastic isolating part of the casing as an antenna but that would have been aesthetically odd.
The silver is too sterile.
Calls, Messages, Email, and Siri with voice to command short replies.
Map directions, Apple Pay, and Car2Go and I'd be set.
(Or do something else to make the watchband more useful. Antennas maybe?)
The Apple Watch already can and does use WiFi and will connect to existing configured access points:
Presumably if you tethered your personal phone to a second phone, then the apple watch could and would also connect directly to that second phone's WiFi hotspot without your personal phone present.
An Apple Watch with a small screen is a misfire and a watch that works standalone is somewhat missing the point. Watches were supposed to be remote control devices for our phones. Nothing else. This move feels like a cheap limited feature phone, not the future.
Edit: Maybe I am missing the point. Imagine a standalone watch that broadcasts wifi signal. Now imagine a thin ipod touch on the other hand piggybacking on the watch. That would be like reimagining the future.