Anglerfish are also notable for extreme sexual dimorphism and sexual parasitism of male anglerfish. In these species, males may be several orders of magnitude smaller than females. Or does this describing iphone users?
Apple has reached an agreement with Disney that will see Mickey Mouse telling the time on its new Watch device. Anyone who buys the new device will be able to select a number of watch faces, with one featuring the rodent star of 20th century kiddie culture. To satisfy fanbois' furious desire for information on the watch, …
To a Londoner if something is Mickey Mouse it's rubbish, the iWatch doesn't look that rubbishy just not sufficiently more useful than the iThing you already have to warrant buying it!
Sending your heartbeat to someone?
Sounds as though they are desperately looking for selling points, if they had a smellophone app maybe you could fart in the general direction of someone you dislike?
I've often wondered if anyone will invent or develop SoIP (Smell over IP) and what uses it could be put to.
So maybe those fast food ordering pages could smell of pizza? You could make your FB page smell of BO when you've been for a run?
Maybe Anonymous could all simultaneously fart at an unpopular target in teh interwebs? DoS (denial of Smell) attacks...
That's probably enough. Especially given my handle...
First I agree that the selling point of sending someone your heart beat is silly.
The point is that they are trying to say is that your watch is no longer just a watch.
If you're old enough to remember when the first electronic LCD watches were introduced.. there were some high end models. Meaning those who bought gold cased plastic battery operated watches as jewelry. Does the author think those people as foolish also? (Most likely before Jasper's time).
Now I can understand that... but then again, I'd want to add a Patek to my collection.
The cool thing and selling point of the watch is that you can change the face at any time, depending on your mood.
In terms of accuracy.... its a joke. Sure 50ms is good enough. Most likely they link to your phone and get the time from the closest cell tower.
If you wanted better accuracy... you would take the radio signal from a known clock and known X,Y,Z coordinate. You know your approximate GPS location to within 100 meters. Now you can calculate the time fairly accurately. The other issue to consider is how often you do this and how accurate is the electric clock in the device?
Now I would pay $$$ for a really accurate watch tied to GPS that did just that. One that could fit in to your pocket. For ~5K you could buy a base station clock for your network that does this.... but it won't fit in to your pocket... ;-)
But I digress. Its an interesting toy... as a collectible... the higher end models may be worth the price.
I always said for me to buy a smart watch it would have to look well smart, my other watches I like for the engineering and looks, the fact they tell the time is a bonus :-) I like the look of the watch edition, though honestly don't all watches have sapphire crystal glass, all mine do :-)
Satnav hmmm I like that, perhaps in navigate mode you get one tap for turning left and two for turning right, that could work for me.
Though it is apple, therefore best to wait for the watch second edition, therefore 2016 for me, if I decide to go for one.
"It uses multiple technologies in conjunction with your iPhone to keep time within 50 milliseconds of the definitive global time standard."
What if you're a bit mad, like me, and keep your watch running a couple of minutes fast so you don't miss the bus, tram, train, boat or whatever?
Anyway it still remains to be seen if the Apple marketing bulldozer can convince Joe Bloggs on the street to part with his hard earned on a device where several "competent" alternative products have failed to do so.
Still a solution looking for a problem in my extremely worthy, and slightly mad, opinion.
"What if you're a bit mad, like me, and keep your watch running a couple of minutes fast so you don't miss the bus, tram, train, boat or whatever?"
Problem is, besides being a bit mad, I'm also an adaptive bastard. So I got used to my watch being fast -- oh, that's OK, the watch is a few minutes fast, I've got time... Famous last words.
It would be interesting if they recognized that foible some have and had a setting for # minutes offset...
Not sure what the point is since you'll still have highly accurate time on your phone, computer, TV, and so forth. Might have worked for some people 20 years ago, but I can't believe it fools anyone now.
I guess you've never been walking dogs or cycling and can't easily get to your phone to see who has messaged or called. If you can see who is calling or who has messaged you might no need to bother getting your phone out (which might be in your backpack if cycling or you risk dropping it if you're trying to control dogs).
"Problem is, besides being a bit mad, I'm also an adaptive bastard."
Yup! My watch is always a couple of minutes fast because I habitually wait until the last minute... and now I ignore my watch because it's always a couple of minutes fast.
I'M DOOMED! DOOMED, I TELL YOU!
I was on the fence about it - I thought there might be some cool stuff and I liked the fitness features but I could just as easily get one of the many other fitness trackers for that. However, since I ride a motorcycle I had been hoping Google Glass would give me a working satnav solution for the road rather than a bulky phone case on my handlebars (which frankly don't have room for one, sport bike and all that) but then I found out the Apple Watch will allow you to navigate by tapping your wrist. OK, that's cool. Sold. Oh, and fishing my phone out to switch music tracks or struggling with the remote on the headphones (which I don't use because they're crap and I've got ATH-M50Xs instead), well the watch does that too.
Like the iPad I suspect this is one of those 'I don't get it so it must be crap' situations, and once we've got the gadget we'll find all sorts of uses for it. Except the Edition version. That's going to be bonkers expensive so I'll likely get the cheap one to test the waters like I did with my first Mac, iPhone, iPad and so on.
That depends on why you think iPhones are "objects of desire". Apple can't make 150 million people a year buy something they don't need through clever marketing, but they can make people choose Apple over alternatives the meet the same/similar needs. If people see the Watch fulfilling a need they have - maybe that they didn't know they have until they saw there was something that could do it - it'll be an "object of desire"
Still seems very unlikely it could ever get to sales figures like the iPhone, unless a killer app is found for smart watches that so far no one else has met or at least not nearly so well. It also will not have the short replacement cycle of phones which will hold it back from ever approaching iPhone sales figures (imagine how many fewer iPhones, Galaxy S / Note, and so on would be sold if people only bought a phone when the one they had before was broken)
>"Wearers will receive a "gentle tap" on the wrist when a message arrives on their mobe and can connect with "favourite people in some new, spontaneous ways not possible with any other device".
Reading that, I just spewed!"
Reading that, I just imagined throwing the watch at someone's head. Although you can do that with other devices, so perhaps I misunderstood the point.
At least you are more likely to buy another iPhone next time and it's likely to still be worth something second hand. I'd be surprised if anyone would pay for one of those Samsung monstrosities new or used. Apple will probably ship more in the first week than they have shipped in 6 month?
This is the company that got out a smartphone with a single button, and everybody called them crazy, and it was incredibly successful. What the heck are they doing adding a crown?? How about just using the touch screen?
Oh, and keeping the time within 50 milliseconds: I consider myself a freak because I want my wristwatch to be within 5 seconds of the exact time… But I don't really see why I would need a hundredfold increase in precision.
So far, it feels like the best use case is a remote control for the phone.
Not much room to accurately touch on a screen that's less than 10% the area of a typical phone screen with big fat fingers. Apple does a pretty good job of thinking through the UI, so I think the digital crown will turn out to be useful, and competing smart watches that are touch only will end up adding something similar.
As for the 50 ms, that is beyond most needs but over the years many watches have used accuracy as a defining feature to indicate quality. Not all certainly, but it is not uncommon. By claiming accuracy better than any watch that doesn't get the radio time signal can claim, they figure it'll appeal to people have heard claims about accuracy before and connote "quality" in their mind.
The mention of accuracy and calling it a "digital crown" (look at the Rolex logo) are both subtle attempts to appeal to people who have owned high end watches for fashion. Not the ones who are all the way up in Rolex territory, but certainly those who have moved well beyond the Timex category and maybe dream of someday owning a Rolex. This is all part of trying to appeal to people as a fashion item even if they don't really need a smartwatch (because, let's be honest here, other than for fitness tracking smart watches have no reason for existing until someone finds that killer app)
"The mention of accuracy and calling it a "digital crown" (look at the Rolex logo) are both subtle attempts to appeal to people who have owned high end watches for fashion. Not the ones who are all the way up in Rolex territory, but certainly those who have moved well beyond the Timex category and maybe dream of someday owning a Rolex. This is all part of trying to appeal to people as a fashion item even if they don't really need a smartwatch (because, let's be honest here, other than for fitness tracking smart watches have no reason for existing until someone finds that killer app)"
If you think of Rolex as 'high end'... then you don't know watches. ;-)
There is something about owning a mechanical watch that will keep good enough time, but never as good as a cheap timex electric. You have to admire the craftsman. And then the artistry of the watch. That's why you pay $$$$. Would you rather own a Porche or a Ford?
Would you rather own a Porche or a Ford?
I'd take a GT40 over a Porsche Boxster any day of any week, although I'd struggle to choose between a Mustang GT500 and a 911 GT3 RS (you can keep the Cayenne and the Boxster thanks).
I also can't see the point of paying the premium for a Breitling or Patek Philippe when a top of the range Casio G-Shock can do much the same job for 10% of the cost. I see the appeal, but it is in brand only; you wear it because it is a Breitling, not because it is chronographically superior to cheaper watches.
I know a few people who like chronographs, and unless I am mistaken, the yearly servicing cost for a Breitling will get you a brand new mid-range Casio that you can then discard 12 months later for a new one.
I am the polar opposite of the target market for the Apple Watch ^^;
Last year I did some driving for a very wealthy client, he had both a Cayenne and a Disco TD4 V6. He preferred the Disco in general and I rated the Disco as better than the Cayenne on a schlepp down the same country lane. I was surprised at how poor the Porsche was as a drivers car, basically an up market 4WD shopping trolley.
The Landy had a better Satnav and UI as well.
My amigo is left-handed. Extremely left-handed. Many lefties simply make due with using their right hand for most tasks, however suboptimally, but my amigo does not. So imagine my surprise to hear that the iWatch is not designed to be ambidextrously used: the crown and magic button are both on one side (instead of the crown centered on one side, the button centered on the other opposite, and the display able to be flipped 180 degrees). Granted, extreme southpaws are likely only a small fraction of the potential market, but for a company known for its attention to the UI experience and whose trademark is "it just works" this seems an odd oversight.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018