IWatched Sony, Pebble I'm watch etc
Then as usual decided it's about time to catch up, err innovate one so I can get on with my real business of filing lawsuits against those who dared innovate them before me.
Apple is said to have filed a trademark application for the term "iWatch" in Japan – just a few weeks after it reportedly did the same in Russia – thus fueling rumors that, yes, Cupertino is indeed planning a move into what CEO Tim Cook calls "wearables." Apple filed for the trademark on June 3, and the filing was made public …
No, it will be an ankle watch. Prototypes have been seen in public already, usually trialled by volunteers under supervision.
Must be something really secret, I thought.
Mind you, it could also be that this new wearable has a peel-off sticky back. No, that wouldn't work, the name iPad is already in use.
Hold on, wait a minute: iLiner?
Pants.
This post has been deleted by its author
I have to wonder what planet the author is living on.
In terms of product sales anything a device like the iWatch (or whatever it might be called) would never be more than 5% of totaly volume.
Oh wait, the traders on Wall St see anytthing less than a 100% increase in profits year on year as sign of tltal failure and sell all their stock in the company.
We shall have to wait and see who is right and if Mr Cook's job really is on the line with the success/fail of this product whatever it may be called and if it is ever put on sale.
"He was told, and told, and told that the eMailer was a huge pile of FAIL, but he knew better."
The stupid thing is that it could have been a useful device - the sort of thing you'd want your ageing parents to have so that you could put an email or text somewhere they might actually see it without having to go and stand behind a reporter for the 10 o'clock news with a placard reminding them to go to their hospital appointment the next morning.
I realise this may be slightly case-specific but you get the idea.
and there was me thinking iWatch was a new site for the Twitter-types to promote films they had seen. Or maybe a site for Financial-types to say which companies they had stocks in.
I know Apple have gone a bit gaga over that whole i(think of a word) thing but does no-one bother trying them out in their head to see if it really does suggest the product they are sticking it on?
Does anyone wear them any more other than jewellery?
Wristwatches made first for ladies (no waist coat for the pocket watch?), then popularised by WWI for men.
A phone is today's pocket watch and the ladies all have jeans or jacket pockets.
They might appeal to teenagers, but who can tell what teens will like?
Perhaps less stupid than Google's Googles.
I still wear a watch, mostly because it was a mandatory work thing (railway) but nowadays, more because it beats having to yoink my phone out of my pocket each time I see to see what time of day it is. Never knock a device simply because something else incorporates the same functionality unless it replaces it in such a way as to be unobtrusive.
Of course the battery life of a watch is usually measured in several years (or indefinitely if you have a windup one or something like a kinetic or solar powered one) whereas most smart phones need charging every day or so. If they could do a smart watch with a battery life of a month I might be interested, but much less than that isn't practical.
Of course the battery life of a watch is usually measured in several years (or indefinitely if you have a windup one or something like a kinetic or solar powered one)
That is only the case if you have only ONE kinetic watch and wear it all the time. Otherwise the spring runs out in about one or two days. People, wearing automatic watches usually put them in rewinder machines for the evening. Very much the same than charging on a daily basis.
Some people do, very very few though ...
http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/19/the-dottling-gyrowinder-watch-winder-is-exercise-in-technical-excess/
While I don't have this one, I do have a winder for a few of my timepieces.
That being said, it takes only moments to set the time on a watch and rewind it if the spring is unwound. Folks have been doing it for a century with no noticeable downside.
A watch is simply a way better device for telling the time than a phone. The phone on the other hand is good at many other things.
Getting a smartphone out of a jean pocket all the time is tedious and if i wasnt sat in front of a PC all day with a clock right in front of me i would consider wearing my watch more often.
Now if i could *comfortably* check the time AND read some news on my watch, id certainly consider a watchputer, but it sure as hell wont be an Apple product.
That's a rather shallow view.
A watch is basically a sundial that conveniently evolved to be wearable, a concept for the German Navy, then became fashionable. The wrist is also the preferred choice to mount instruments for sky and sea divers.
Not sure why there even has to be an argument as to why a computer/comms device shouldn't evolve to be wearable.
As for teenagers, they would be quite capable of making an Altimeter fashionable. If an Altimeter became the 'must have' accessory for kids, it wouldn't be because of appeal.
i actually wear an iPod nano on a wrist strap and use it as a watch, and to listen to podcasts while commuting to work.
so yeah, there is a market
ideally, it'd act as a control interface to your phone. the phone in your pocket has all the processing power and the storage space, the watch on your wrist provides you with the visual clues that you have messages/mail/alarms/events/etc and also provides controls to skip tracks, play, pause, etc. And the earphones on your hear are bluetooth so there are no cables anywhere.
'cept you just need to charge the whole lot up every 2 hours....
Concept already done, and out there. See Star Trek the Motion Picture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Motion_Picture#Props_and_models), and oh yeah, Hyundai made a wrist phone/watch as well (http://www.slipperybrick.com/2007/10/hyundai-phone-wristwatch/). Numerous sci-fi books and shows have addressed the idea, including, notably, Babylon 5 with it's back-of-the-hand-mounted communications device, as well.
So, as a concept, it's already in the wild; one wonders what the hell the allegedly rotten fruit company is up to, this all being the case.
hi,
Motorola released a 'fitness monitor' wrist-mounted device quite some years back. noone really paid any attention.....except that someone ported Android onto it and its a pretty good 'intelligent watch' - for not much cash either. if your geeky side needs some food then check out the 'watch' and its supporting project
MotoActv - http://www.motorola.com/us/consumers/8GB-or-16GB-MOTOACTV/79070,en_US,pd.html
Android hacking for it - http://motoactv.wikispaces.com/guide-root
and example video of such: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psDGKb67oiw (NSFW due to language ;-) )
"it had better be a runaway hit."
True - though part of the problem is it's the media who declare something a "hit" or a "flop", independent of how good those sales are to the competition. Apple might take 76 days to sell only a million phones despite vast amounts of free advertising, and get labelled a "runaway hit". Indeed, even this very article continues the myth of "Apple hit it out of the park with the iPhone" (the original iphone wasn't - only years later did Apple's share gradually grow). The runaway hit of the time was Symbian (with just one single 2009 device, the Nokia 5230, selling 150 million - now that's a runaway hit), and now it's Android.
is that the watch would almost certainly be an accessory for the phone/pad. So it's primary "cool" function would be to give you updates of texts/facebook/twitter etc from a device that was already on your person.
Thus making it pretty pointless from where I'm standing.
I can still just about see the kids in the playground mugging you for your iPad/iPhone, but with the iWatch they're more likely to make the uWanker gesture.
That was my thought. IF Apple are planning a smart TV, I doubt they would call it an "iTV", partly because they already have a product called "Apple TV", partly because at least two broadcasters (UK and somewhere in East Europe) are called ITV.
IF they are planning a wrist-mounted iOS device, my guess is that it would be called iTime
Maybe we are all making the assumption that it is a "watch" device...
What if it is a "computer deivce" and is actually the name for apple's new TV device and associated streaming service as they have recognised that they will not be able to get away with using iTV.
iWatch is a perfectly good name for a streaming video service.
....I already got in first with my patent for a 'square thing with rounded corners and icons on the screen'. My final stroke of genius was adding the bit about it 'having a strap made of any kind of material, which attaches the device to the wearer's wrist'.
Mwahahahahaha soon all their revenuze are belong to me!!!!!!!!! Well it worked for Apple when they attached Samsung so it should work for me too......
Kreyos (http://igg.me/at/kreyos/x/3803346) are already trying to be innovative in this space - can Apple beat them to it (and if they do, will it be good news or bad news for Kreyos and Pebble) ?
I do wonder how many devices I am supposed to carry. iPhone, iPad (or Android tablet, having both), laptop. a smart watch might replace my normal watch (or might not) but it's yet another device to keep charged.