"Nothing that will convince a kid that's never worn glasses or a band to wear one* - until we stick a half-eaten fruit logo on it?
He's also never heard of sunglasses...
Tim Cook reckons that wearable tech is "incredibly interesting", but he doesn't think Google Glass will appeal to everyone. Speaking at the All Things D Digital Conference, Cook hinted at the existence of the rumoured iWatch and dissed the likely popularity of Google's foray into wearable technology. "I'm interested in a …
" If you have to wear glasses to read your email or look things up then you (a) can't look cool in shades and (b) wear your usual glasses."
But you can get shades that match your prescription (as I have, sort of*) - so (b) is covered, though (a) is an arguable point, both with shades, and shades that match your prescription.
* Prescription updated, shades not. Must rectify that at some point!
I really wish people would only wear sunglasses to reduce glare from the sun… Unfortunately, there are far too many who wear sunglasses after dark. One guy I knew even wore two pairs of sunglasses after dark: One on his eyes, and one on his hair, to hold in place his fashionably-ruffled hairdo.
"One guy I knew even wore two pairs of sunglasses after dark: One on his eyes, and one on his hair, to hold in place his fashionably-ruffled hairdo."..Whilst checking is iPhone every 2 seconds, abalancing his iPad whilst updating his facvebook profile on his way back to his 4x4!
WOW he must be really interesting because he's got all the "cool" stuff!
What a c**t!
I sometimes wear two pars of glasses, but only one pair are sunglasses. One does reside on the top of my head, when I do.
In fairness to me though, both are a rather strong prescription, and normally it means I have been going in and out of buildings on a sunny day.
If they want this to catch on, they need to develop a way to apply it to whatever glasses are considered "fashionable" or happen to be my prescription. And maybe get it bright enough to use on a sunny day.
"If you have to wear glasses to read your email or look things up then you (a) can't look cool in shades and (b) wear your usual glasses."
I'm sure they can still look cool, but besides that... people wear watches to tell the time, if you have to use a watch to read emails or look things up then, you'll get a lot of cramp in your arm ;)
Not to mention look like a kid from the 80s who still thinks "digital watches are a pretty neat idea".
"Nothing that will convince a kid that's never worn glasses or a band to wear one*
He's also never heard of sunglasses...
You're obviously less cynical than I am. Because what I thought was: He's obviously never heard of product placement.
If you give celebs enough money, they'll wear anything. Often you just need to give them the product for free. They do seem to love a freebie...
I don't remember Jobs ever saying that a tablet computer was a mobile replacement.
Go back to his original pitch, it was a device between a mobile and a laptop. Some people carry laptops around all the time, they could actually just carry a tablet around if they're mainly using it for online purposes.
I was talking about the iPhone. The clue was the date. The iPad didn't come out until 2010.
When the iPhone launched, most of my friends had very small mobile phones and the trend had broadly been for things to get smaller and smaller. In 2006 my mobile was less than a half the size of my current handset, for example. Then the iPhone comes along - a big slab of glass compared to a lot of other devices around at the time.
"Tim Cook reckons that wearable tech is "incredibly interesting", but he doesn't think Google Glass will appeal to everyone."
What? Like the MEGA FAIL iPhone which has appealed to the lowest common denominator!
Experience shows, be wary of IT types carrying iPhone! You'll have to dig yourself out of the hole they will leave you in. But at least you'll have some nice pretty graphs/reports.
On the subject of that pesky stock price, he said that the fall was "frustrating" for everyone at Apple, but put it down to "cycles" in the market.
LMAO. Since Nov 2012, AAPL and the S&P500 have been moving in entirely the opposite directions. This on top of AAPL having a Beta of 0.9 says the following:
1. Tim Cook is no fool. He knows 'cycles' have nothing to do with AAPL's share price performance.
2. His remarks were 'throw away' lines to non-finance-savvy journos. He knew they would lap it up, and they did.
This doesn't detract from the fact that the company under his leadership is in trouble. Investors have gotten a better return over the last 6-7 months from investing in the S&P500. He really does need to produce one of those 'several game changers' or he'll be out of a job. The company owners won't pay $$$ to a guy when they can do better themselves with a simple passive investment strategy.
Obviously, he was only talking about Apple and not the whole market. A singe stock can have a cycle independent of the wider sector. Most of the price fluctuations have been based on pure sentiment and emotion. I am surprised they are not more volatile, but I guess the bottom line is that they are so incredibly profitable that it balances out the hype and despair.
That's the whole point. Cock was talking about the 'market' being in cycles. AAPL has a Beta of 0.9 while its price performance has not at all tracked the S&P500, ie. it's not following the market cycles. It's on it's own 'cycle' - one that is driving the stock into the ground.
As to price fluctuations being based on 'pure sentiment and emotion' - Do you really think that the big money men (handling billions of funds) drive their investment decisions on 'pure sentiment and emotion'? Do stockbroker analysts all throw fundamentals out of the window and recommend to the firms' clients based on 'hype and despair'. WTF are you talking about?
'they are so incredibly profitable'... that their share price has tanked while the overall market has moved onwards and upwards.
That type of 'armchair' stock analysis has no place in reality and is the same sort of shyte you get from Tarot Cards, Chartists and Palmistry.
ARMCHAIR ANALYST MEGA FAIL
Two words: Facebook flotation.
Of course the "big money men" aren't driven by pure sentiment and emotion. They are driven by the desire to make money...by manipulating share prices on the very edge of legality, and that means up as well as down.
Consumer product sales are driven by, among other things, sentiment and emotion. So manipulating them affects share prices. And the way the money people get rich is by making shares go up and down, and creaming off profits either way.
We don't know why the Apple price goes up and down so much but I suspect that, if we did, we would be very angry with some men in hedge funds and banks.
I have a few watches and clocks around(I like time tracking) but frankly unless I have some specific reason for it I won't wear a watch with me and haven't worn one in years.
I have all the time in the world for what I usually need to do and don't need to be tied down to when something and some such needs to be done.
Smartphones took the place of digital watches as the "wow" thing to show your mates.
In the 80s having a watch that played James Bond or something was something to be amazed by. The number of alarms your watch had was how it was judged. The first speaking watch was a bit "wow" for about 5 minutes :)
"The people in their twenties that I know (admittedly a fairly small sample) never wear watches. If you want to know the time, look at your phone."
Oh so tragic! Just wait those "friends" will be wearing a watch if Apple designs and definately not makes one.
Then the tune will change again. As you age you will realise just how weak people really are!
You obviously don't understand how coolness works. Ubiquity is not coolness. If everyone had a Ferrari would they be cool? of course not, so even Ferrari have decided to cut production to maintain exclusivity,
For something to be cool they're often less obtainable, often due to higher price.
"Nothing looks stupider; these getups are the modern-day equivalent of the slide-rule scabbard or the calculator pouch on the belt, marking the user as belonging to a class that is at once above and far below human society."
Neal Stephenson, Snow Crash, 1992
but not as far below as (alleged) tech gurus who channel 1990s SciFi !
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019