Everyone is so negative here. It sounds to me like a lot of people are making judgements without personal experience. I'll admit, I thought some of the same things before I got a pebble (which I originally bought just for development).
Having notifications on your wrist is actually really great. Being able to decide if that buzz is important now or not is actually useful, and it absolutely isn't more detrimental to being with people and having conversations.
Perhaps you don't get your phone out for every buzz, but you probably do at least check it most of the time when someone is calling you. Seeing who it is on your wrist and deciding if it can wait is much faster, more seamless, and less of an intrusion.
It may not be worth as much as this costs, certainly for a lot of people, but it absolutely is a great feature. The Apple Watch is also far more powerful than the pebble, and it looks much better too (to be fair the steel pebbles don't look bad, the original though...). It will be interesting to see if there is ANOTHER killer app in addition to the notifications that the more power enables.
For me, I feel like I need fewer notifications in my life. The more I can batch tasks together the more time I can spend in deep, interrupted though. The trend towards being more connected more often has benefits but drawbacks as well.
I own three smart watches, notifications are fine. And because Apple is Apple, millions more people will line up and get to see how somewhat useful they are.
It does seem in this case that a large amount of the value Apple is delivering with this product is on the "Apple as a lifestyle brand" side, not from a technological or design insight, or even (subjective, I know) from a fashion perspective.
I suspect that a lot of what will be going on is: "I'm an upper middle class or above person who likes/can afford an Apple talisman" tribal thing. Kind of like buying $5 coffee and sitting browsing the web on a MacBook Air. (Not casting shade: I have been know to do that)
But it'll be really cool if this new large pool of wearable users leads to the discovery of more killer apps.
As an educator, I can immediately think of a half-dozen small interactions/services/tools that I would employ if they did not distract me away from my primary tasks (or give the appearance that I am distracted, which is often just as detrimental).
Considering this, my gut says the real value of a wrist-bound device will be in the development of context & task-specific micro-utilities (rather than simply reducing the need to remove a phone from your pocket to check notifications).
So - maybe there won't be a 'killer app'; there will be a constellation of 'killer apps' that demonstrate value through the collective impact of their very small contributions to your life.
Not really, it's pretty obvious they are checking their watch to see if they have a notification. To me it's exactly the same as pulling your phone out since people have been using phones as watches for some time. It interrupts the conversation and it is rude.
As an aside, the user experience on this page is absolutely atrocious:
1. The title font is nigh-unreadable.
2. It took me several seconds to figure out that my browser hadn't frozen when I encountered the first big image in between 'chapters.'
3. Every time a pull quote starts animating in, my scrolling stutters.
Seriously, Wired, you have one job: show me content (and ads, admittedly, which is arguably what I'm reading), and then get out of my way. No browser stutters, no illegible headlines, no confusing 1920x1080px images. Just content.
> ads, admittedly, which is arguably what I'm reading
I got this feeling too. Strongly. Its an interesting article but it clearly isn't all that objective.
That aside; there is something to be said for displaying the content in an appealing way. Wired has failed at this, obviously, but I don't think we really want them to just be giving us bare content.
Wow, Apple is really working the press on the Apple Watch rollout. It's got to be tough for a journalist to write the kind of stories. Great access, but you are basically just repeating whatever talking points the company wants to put out.
I take the core of the article to be (paraphrased): "Your phone is ruining your life. You're subject to the tyranny of its notifications. You want a less obtrusive way to check your notifications."
A few problems with that:
1. Understand that Jonny Ive and the movers and shakers at Apple probably get an order of magnitude more notifications than most people do. They are, after all, important people with lots of scheduling and lots of communication. My phone isn't ruining my life. I don't get a notification every few minutes.
2. Android Wear is a notification device. We've seen how people like Android Wear: they think, eh, it's okay. What is going to make Apple Watch different? The people I know with Android smartwatches aren't saying, "Oh, god, I almost love this but if only the watch were prettier," or "If only the UI were a little more polished." They're saying, "It's nice to be able to get notifications on my wrist, but it's not a life-changer and it isn't worth hundreds of dollars."
3. And part of the reason for #2 is that if you're really getting lots of meaningful notifications, you're going to want to act on some of them, and the watch form factor is just fundamentally bad for acting on anything.
As long as smartwatches are just notification devices, they're inessential peripherals that probably won't get truly popular until they're sub-$100.
If there is a killer app suited to the watch form factor, it hasn't made itself known yet, and it may not exist. Or it might exist and just be hard to find. I think there are surprisingly few really killer apps on the smartphone form factor -- the only one that I think genuinely fits the bill is Uber and its competitors.
EDIT: As several people have pointed out, the browser, messaging, navigation, and camera of the smartphones are definitely killer apps, and are what made the smartphones obviously useful from day one. I agree with that and just left that context out. My comments about Uber are more to do with "new things that you can only do on a smartphone that weren't there on day one, that are also genuinely useful." There are remarkably few apps like that on the smartphone. I think that smartwatches are in trouble because the stuff that's there on day one isn't very compelling (look at notifications), and evidence suggests that it's very hard to create all-new highly compelling apps that aren't obvious on day one.
For me, and I hate all sorts of smart objects with a passion, a smartphone's killer apps (that is, what makes me own the hateful thing) are:
* GPS navigation (when I drive - or walk somewhere abroad)
* Camera
* WhatsApp (glorified SMSes, yeah, with the drawback of those damned groups - but, well, it works much better for messaging)
* Email (occasionally, not happy occasions since it sucks for email)
* Web (same reservations as email)
* The hateful parking app that still beats pushing coins into parking ticket machines
That's a lot of stuff for someone not really liking these things.
Since a smart watch is too small to do all these things and a tablet does nothing I really need on top of these things, and none of these things sufficiently better to justify its larger size, I hope there won't be a compelling reason to own either. A phone however has just the right form factor because I can now not have all those other things (a camera, a GPS navigator, a tablet/laptop, small change for bloody parking machines, etc.) without having to carry a bag with some device (and I used to walk around with a small bag but things get stolen from such bags unfortunately; so now I walk around with a wallet in one pocket and a smartphone in another like an idiot.)
> 3. And part of the reason for #2 is that if you're really getting lots of meaningful notifications, you're going to want to act on some of them, and the watch form factor is just fundamentally bad for acting on anything.
Yes! I've had a pebble for quite some time now and while they've significantly upgraded their API and device functionality they most recently added the ability to reply on your watch, which IMO is absolutely useless. Why anyone would want to fiddle on their watch for a minute or more when they can send the same message in a fraction of the time on their phone is beyond me.
There's also a fundamental problem here: you don't want to be subject to the tyranny of notifications, but the people making apps want you to. They'll find any and all reasons to push a notification to your watch so that you will engage with their app.
I agree with your analysis of the watch as a notification device. But with regards to the smartphone - the major killer apps it had we're: solving boredom(browser+games), better communication tools(facebook), and gaining access to lots of info everywhere(browser). Some of this things are based on strong psychological needs and many of them are addictive, so you got killer apps.
In theory, glancable notification might have been addictive, but after trying it it appears that it isn't for most people. But it's not to say we won't have killer apps for the watch.
The thing that i find most damning for the watch is that we lack even visions of killer apps for the watch, while we certainly did have visions about the phone before it appeared - people did want to browse on the go.
The only interesting and realistic vision of the watch i've read is that it would be an identity device(easier payments, opening doors, etc) and a UI for our home automation devices plus a notification device.
It's not a very interesting vision, it's just buys people a little bit of extra comfort and isn't really useful unless in very specific context(like running). But who knows, maybe that combined with the fashion, being a status symbol and apple's involvement will sell well.
I also don't get a lot of notifications to my phone. But my younger coworkers do. They are frequently fiddling with their their phones to keep track of any number of ongoing text conversations, Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, notifications from social games, etc.
Let's set aside whether you or I want to live that way, or if we think it's rude. It's their reality. A smart watch might be really useful for those folks if it works well.
That's the key--if it works well. The first iPhone didn't do much that any other smart phone did. It just did those things way better. Same with iPod and MP3 players. It seems at least possible to me that a similar jump is possible with smart watches.
I don't "get" the "Watches save you from distractions" pitch at all. It only works if you're willing to ruthlessly pare down the notifications that you receive. (else your wrist buzz as much as your phone) And, further, you have to be ready to admit that most of the notifications that remain usually don't require immediate response from you. (else you'll just be wasting time trying to respond via watch, or pulling out your phone for a proper response)
If you're in a place where these things can be, or are, true, you can change the settings on your phone and be done with it.
>If there is a killer app suited to the watch form factor, it hasn't made itself known yet, and it may not exist
The only "killer" feature I could see a smartwatch offering is way down the line when smart cars are around i.e. being able to lock/unlock your car from your wrist, locate it in a carpark easily with your wrist, get notifications if it's being stolen direct to your wrist or, being able to start/stop the ignition from your wrist, etc.
That would be convenient. No more keys and you wouldn't have to pull out your phone to carry out these basic operations. Further down the line, I can see something like being able to tap your wrist and your self-driving car starts itself, unparks itself and comes to your location being a super use for it.
But these are quite a way off and even then the cars with these technologies will be far too expensive for the average person currently eyeing up a smartwatch.
I think your critique of notifications is good, but there is a bit more to the Apple Watch.
(As far as notifications go, iOS already allows you to respond to a phone call with a selection of canned text messages. I find them useful when I can't talk and I could see this type of reply being useful for a non-trivial subset of notifications.)
As I see it, there are three main features of the Apple Watch:
I'm not sure I agree with point #3, I think that remains to be seen based on the creativity of not only Apple but the entire community. I totally agree though making digestible and actionable content is hard on a small device.
Maybe it's a shallow example but canned text responses are something that was a great adaptation of the thought: 'well we don't have the affordance to provide a keyboard to the user'. I expect to see other things like this get iterated on.
Bottom line I think we'll just have to wait and see how this thing matures, if it does at all.
> if you're really getting lots of meaningful notifications, you're going to want to act on some of them.
Sure. But the problem is for every 1 meaningful notification we are getting 10 that just deserve a glance and 10 that could be answered with just a "I'll call you back", "Yes/No", "Sounds good" type response. Just look at your phone's notifications how many actually required a thoughtful response ?
The problem is that there is very little that you can do with a <=1" screen apart from check the time.
I think the reason everybody is working so hard on smart watches is in case somebody else comes up with an actual use case for them, they want to be ready to implement it.
I'm surprised at everyone's insistence that smartwatches ape the physical sizes and shapes of traditional watches. It strikes me not unlike past insistence that smartphones needed to have physical keyboards and removable batteries.
Every declared and hypothetical use for a smartwatch would be better-served with a larger screen. Something this side of a pip-boy, to be sure, but at least twice as wide as the display on the Apple Watch. (Increased internal volume for battery would more than make up for increased screen size.)
If everyone was still wearing watches, trying to slide in on familiarity might make some sense. But watches have been on the decline since even basic cell phones began to spread. I understand you have to make something people are willing to wear. But making it familiar, at a cost to its ability to do everything people might want it for, is a short-sighted mistake.
The biggest benefit for me to get an Apple Watch is so that I don't have to check my phone during meetings, lunches etc when I get a phone call or email. In fact I can see myself using my phone a lot less.
Throw in other benefits e.g. tracking fitness, playing music wirelessly whilst running, opening my car door, navigating whilst in the car (and having it display maps on my head unit using AirPlay), being able to make payments etc and it's definitely useful.
It just plays in well with this notifications based world we live in. It means you can very quickly check a notification and be done with it. With your phone it's a lot more effort and often you can miss the notification anywhere.
so true - but don't you think that it's only a matter of time? Some of the futuristic applications that we only imagine today are probably not that far away... but I think it is misguided to limit wearable focus to watches.
So the solution to be more "present with the people around you" is to have you look at your wrist every two seconds, rather than just keep your phone in your pocket and look at the messages in 15 minutes ?
That's just bullshit. This will make people even less present, because they'll be even more tightly connected to the invisible communication happening while you're talking to them.
Had my phone running out of batteries today for the first time in months, while i was waiting for someone, and so i ended up just looking at streets and nature around me, doing nothing. That is how you feel more present and aware of your surrounding.
We all know trends are like pendulum. One day, one generation will be fed up with digital overcommunication, and will get back to less invasive technology. I'm looking forward to that day.
>This will make people even less present, because they'll be even more tightly connected to the invisible communication happening while you're talking to them.
This is an insightful prediction I hadn't considered. People oftentimes have their phones on silent because they don't want to be bothered at certain times, or can at least ignore some intermittent buzzing. The ease of checking your wrist at every buzz will make it more tempting to divert your attention to it. While it may save phone pulls, it will increase distraction from the task at hand. Now not only do I have a choice whether to check the notification, I now know what the notification is and have to decide whether to act on it or not. Surely that added multitasking will make it more difficult to concentrate.
Just like studies they've done on emails, it's better to let them pile up for a period without notification than to quickly glance at each incoming email. People are just better at concentrating on one thing.
> "Lynch is leaning forward in his chair, telling me about his kids: about how grateful he is to be able to simply glance at his Watch, realize that the latest text message isn’t immediately important, and then go right back to family time; about how that doesn’t feel disruptive to him—or them."
I'm sorry, but how in the world is this any different than the Pebble, Sony, and Android Wear smartwatches that came before it? I mean, I get that the iPhone revolutionized the smartphone; I had a Treo 650 when the iPhone was released, and while I still miss the Treo to this day, I can readily admit the iPhone took the concept in new and better directions.
But the Apple Watch doesn't bring anything new to the table. Yes, it's a hybrid Fitbit/Smartwatch...but so is the Microsoft Band. Which, by the way, works with all three major phone OSes; the Apple Watch works with the iPhone only, because of course it does.
I guess I just don't see what all the fuss is about. Yes, the iPod was a revolutionary device, the iPhone even more so, and the iPad can be thanked for all the great (and not so great) Android and Windows tablets out there now. But in this case it's the Apple Watch that is the also-ran, the follower...not the innovator.
It's integrated with iOS at a level no other device will ever be because Apple makes it. If you are interested in a smart watch and have an iPhone there is a very strong argument for the Apple Watch over everything else.
Will that be enough to make these kind of devices more popular? I'm not sure, I'm interested to see what happens.
The iPod, iPhone, and iPad all entered markets well after they were established and against well-financed competitors with a good track record (including some of the companies you mention by name). Yet, the Apple products took off.
In retrospect we can look back and identify reasons that they took off over existing competitors. But at the time they were announced, there was quite a bit of doubt that they could or would succeed.
This doesn't mean that the Apple watch will do the same thing--it could certainly flop. It just means that based on history, it's hard to know in advance, based just on the keynote and ads, whether or why an Apple product will beat existing competitors.
I think the key difference is that Sony and Android both approached the watch as a smaller phone. You can play angry birds on it, and you can play music, and shop online and do everything that a phone can. In that sense they haven't built a new device, they built a miniature phone with a wristband.
So whatever Apple is building, it's definitely not an "also-ran" because the category doesn't exist yet. Whatever wins this category will look and feel markedly different from a smartphone, just like how the first real smartphones looked and felt different from their predecessor "smart"phones like the razr and blackberry.
Whether Apple can bring a viable product to the market remains to be seen.
I'm glad Apple was so thoughtful with their UX. However, I think the appeal of quality watches is their timelessness and endurance. They could conceivably work just as well centuries from now. The iWatch can't work more than a day without intervention (charging).
Apple is going for a paradigm shift with how we view watches; similar to what they did with the iPhone. It is best not to think of the iWatch as a watch but rather as a 2nd screen for the iPhone with sensors and haptic feedback.
>Along the way, the Apple team landed upon the Watch’s raison d’être. It came down to this: Your phone is ruining your life.
Well, don't let it.
But seriously, how do they think the watch is going to be any different? You get a tweet, you interrupt your conversation with the person next to you to look at your wrist. You've just disconnected from the world and been rude to someone.
I some ways it would be more rude. Looking at a watch while with someone traditionally sends a different message (I'm bored) then looking a phone which is just disrespectful.
It also has those weird fixed full page photos. You need to scroll past them, but there's a point where you are moving the scroll wheel and literally nothing happens, and you need to keep scrolling. Very disconcerting.
So much marketing, so little time for people to get reasonable answers to questions such as:
Why exactly do I need an overpriced watch that I need to charge every day and replace every few years? A watch which does much less than my phone. To send taps and heartbeats? Seriously?
Call me a whiner but I really think there are much bigger problems to solve and it's kinda sad to watch Apple do something... because growth and expectations.
Anyway, I hope they find the problem for their solution.
The best approach here is to keep an open mind. Yes it's hard to imagine this being a must have device, but it was hard to understand what Apple was onto with the iPhone until you held it in your hand and lived with it.
Significantly new/different products or services often surprise once they are actually used and can easily be better, or worse, that what they seem on paper.
I have been running Watch apps in the simulator and still don't feel enough of the experience to form a final opinion.
I don't think a watch will solve the problem that Apple's trying to solve with it. If anything, notifications on your wrist will probably be even more distracting than a phone in your pocket.
From my own experience - owning a Pebble - I find that the notifications aren't actually distracting. I'm able to completely put my phone away, which means I'm less tempted to Twitter/Facebook/HN apps, but comforted in that I'm able to see if anyone has called/texted me for an emergency.
I find myself wanting one just for the health monitoring aspects but I don't really have any interest in wearing a watch on my wrist and am even less interested in it as a fashion statement.
[+] [-] clarky07|11 years ago|reply
Having notifications on your wrist is actually really great. Being able to decide if that buzz is important now or not is actually useful, and it absolutely isn't more detrimental to being with people and having conversations.
Perhaps you don't get your phone out for every buzz, but you probably do at least check it most of the time when someone is calling you. Seeing who it is on your wrist and deciding if it can wait is much faster, more seamless, and less of an intrusion.
It may not be worth as much as this costs, certainly for a lot of people, but it absolutely is a great feature. The Apple Watch is also far more powerful than the pebble, and it looks much better too (to be fair the steel pebbles don't look bad, the original though...). It will be interesting to see if there is ANOTHER killer app in addition to the notifications that the more power enables.
[+] [-] spacehome|11 years ago|reply
For me, I feel like I need fewer notifications in my life. The more I can batch tasks together the more time I can spend in deep, interrupted though. The trend towards being more connected more often has benefits but drawbacks as well.
[+] [-] msabalau|11 years ago|reply
It does seem in this case that a large amount of the value Apple is delivering with this product is on the "Apple as a lifestyle brand" side, not from a technological or design insight, or even (subjective, I know) from a fashion perspective.
I suspect that a lot of what will be going on is: "I'm an upper middle class or above person who likes/can afford an Apple talisman" tribal thing. Kind of like buying $5 coffee and sitting browsing the web on a MacBook Air. (Not casting shade: I have been know to do that)
But it'll be really cool if this new large pool of wearable users leads to the discovery of more killer apps.
[+] [-] germinalphrase|11 years ago|reply
Considering this, my gut says the real value of a wrist-bound device will be in the development of context & task-specific micro-utilities (rather than simply reducing the need to remove a phone from your pocket to check notifications).
So - maybe there won't be a 'killer app'; there will be a constellation of 'killer apps' that demonstrate value through the collective impact of their very small contributions to your life.
[+] [-] ocfx|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aaronbrethorst|11 years ago|reply
1. The title font is nigh-unreadable.
2. It took me several seconds to figure out that my browser hadn't frozen when I encountered the first big image in between 'chapters.'
3. Every time a pull quote starts animating in, my scrolling stutters.
Seriously, Wired, you have one job: show me content (and ads, admittedly, which is arguably what I'm reading), and then get out of my way. No browser stutters, no illegible headlines, no confusing 1920x1080px images. Just content.
[+] [-] Zelphyr|11 years ago|reply
I got this feeling too. Strongly. Its an interesting article but it clearly isn't all that objective.
That aside; there is something to be said for displaying the content in an appealing way. Wired has failed at this, obviously, but I don't think we really want them to just be giving us bare content.
[+] [-] Excluse|11 years ago|reply
1. Opinion. I had no problem, but to each his own.
2. I will admit that the full-size images hung around for a little too long.
3. Did not encounter this issue.
In my opinion, the methods of presentation (including the lack of ads) complemented the pleasure of my reading experience.
[+] [-] smackfu|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kmfrk|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aetherson|11 years ago|reply
A few problems with that:
1. Understand that Jonny Ive and the movers and shakers at Apple probably get an order of magnitude more notifications than most people do. They are, after all, important people with lots of scheduling and lots of communication. My phone isn't ruining my life. I don't get a notification every few minutes.
2. Android Wear is a notification device. We've seen how people like Android Wear: they think, eh, it's okay. What is going to make Apple Watch different? The people I know with Android smartwatches aren't saying, "Oh, god, I almost love this but if only the watch were prettier," or "If only the UI were a little more polished." They're saying, "It's nice to be able to get notifications on my wrist, but it's not a life-changer and it isn't worth hundreds of dollars."
3. And part of the reason for #2 is that if you're really getting lots of meaningful notifications, you're going to want to act on some of them, and the watch form factor is just fundamentally bad for acting on anything.
As long as smartwatches are just notification devices, they're inessential peripherals that probably won't get truly popular until they're sub-$100.
If there is a killer app suited to the watch form factor, it hasn't made itself known yet, and it may not exist. Or it might exist and just be hard to find. I think there are surprisingly few really killer apps on the smartphone form factor -- the only one that I think genuinely fits the bill is Uber and its competitors.
EDIT: As several people have pointed out, the browser, messaging, navigation, and camera of the smartphones are definitely killer apps, and are what made the smartphones obviously useful from day one. I agree with that and just left that context out. My comments about Uber are more to do with "new things that you can only do on a smartphone that weren't there on day one, that are also genuinely useful." There are remarkably few apps like that on the smartphone. I think that smartwatches are in trouble because the stuff that's there on day one isn't very compelling (look at notifications), and evidence suggests that it's very hard to create all-new highly compelling apps that aren't obvious on day one.
[+] [-] _yosefk|11 years ago|reply
* GPS navigation (when I drive - or walk somewhere abroad)
* Camera
* WhatsApp (glorified SMSes, yeah, with the drawback of those damned groups - but, well, it works much better for messaging)
* Email (occasionally, not happy occasions since it sucks for email)
* Web (same reservations as email)
* The hateful parking app that still beats pushing coins into parking ticket machines
That's a lot of stuff for someone not really liking these things.
Since a smart watch is too small to do all these things and a tablet does nothing I really need on top of these things, and none of these things sufficiently better to justify its larger size, I hope there won't be a compelling reason to own either. A phone however has just the right form factor because I can now not have all those other things (a camera, a GPS navigator, a tablet/laptop, small change for bloody parking machines, etc.) without having to carry a bag with some device (and I used to walk around with a small bag but things get stolen from such bags unfortunately; so now I walk around with a wallet in one pocket and a smartphone in another like an idiot.)
[+] [-] therobot24|11 years ago|reply
Yes! I've had a pebble for quite some time now and while they've significantly upgraded their API and device functionality they most recently added the ability to reply on your watch, which IMO is absolutely useless. Why anyone would want to fiddle on their watch for a minute or more when they can send the same message in a fraction of the time on their phone is beyond me.
[+] [-] untog|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] minthd|11 years ago|reply
In theory, glancable notification might have been addictive, but after trying it it appears that it isn't for most people. But it's not to say we won't have killer apps for the watch.
The thing that i find most damning for the watch is that we lack even visions of killer apps for the watch, while we certainly did have visions about the phone before it appeared - people did want to browse on the go.
The only interesting and realistic vision of the watch i've read is that it would be an identity device(easier payments, opening doors, etc) and a UI for our home automation devices plus a notification device.
It's not a very interesting vision, it's just buys people a little bit of extra comfort and isn't really useful unless in very specific context(like running). But who knows, maybe that combined with the fashion, being a status symbol and apple's involvement will sell well.
[+] [-] snowwrestler|11 years ago|reply
Let's set aside whether you or I want to live that way, or if we think it's rude. It's their reality. A smart watch might be really useful for those folks if it works well.
That's the key--if it works well. The first iPhone didn't do much that any other smart phone did. It just did those things way better. Same with iPod and MP3 players. It seems at least possible to me that a similar jump is possible with smart watches.
[+] [-] roc|11 years ago|reply
If you're in a place where these things can be, or are, true, you can change the settings on your phone and be done with it.
[+] [-] borgia|11 years ago|reply
The only "killer" feature I could see a smartwatch offering is way down the line when smart cars are around i.e. being able to lock/unlock your car from your wrist, locate it in a carpark easily with your wrist, get notifications if it's being stolen direct to your wrist or, being able to start/stop the ignition from your wrist, etc.
That would be convenient. No more keys and you wouldn't have to pull out your phone to carry out these basic operations. Further down the line, I can see something like being able to tap your wrist and your self-driving car starts itself, unparks itself and comes to your location being a super use for it.
But these are quite a way off and even then the cars with these technologies will be far too expensive for the average person currently eyeing up a smartwatch.
[+] [-] a_c_s|11 years ago|reply
(As far as notifications go, iOS already allows you to respond to a phone call with a selection of canned text messages. I find them useful when I can't talk and I could see this type of reply being useful for a non-trivial subset of notifications.)
As I see it, there are three main features of the Apple Watch:
1. Notification & quick reply device 2. Fitness tracking 3. Payment device (ApplePay)
Are those three features (and/or the myriad of smaller features) enough? We'll have to wait for people to actually use it to find out :-)
[+] [-] jfernandez|11 years ago|reply
Maybe it's a shallow example but canned text responses are something that was a great adaptation of the thought: 'well we don't have the affordance to provide a keyboard to the user'. I expect to see other things like this get iterated on.
Bottom line I think we'll just have to wait and see how this thing matures, if it does at all.
[+] [-] threeseed|11 years ago|reply
Sure. But the problem is for every 1 meaningful notification we are getting 10 that just deserve a glance and 10 that could be answered with just a "I'll call you back", "Yes/No", "Sounds good" type response. Just look at your phone's notifications how many actually required a thoughtful response ?
[+] [-] geon|11 years ago|reply
2/3. Isn't acting quickly on notifications exactly what Apple has been working on?
[+] [-] jmkni|11 years ago|reply
I think the reason everybody is working so hard on smart watches is in case somebody else comes up with an actual use case for them, they want to be ready to implement it.
[+] [-] roc|11 years ago|reply
Every declared and hypothetical use for a smartwatch would be better-served with a larger screen. Something this side of a pip-boy, to be sure, but at least twice as wide as the display on the Apple Watch. (Increased internal volume for battery would more than make up for increased screen size.)
If everyone was still wearing watches, trying to slide in on familiarity might make some sense. But watches have been on the decline since even basic cell phones began to spread. I understand you have to make something people are willing to wear. But making it familiar, at a cost to its ability to do everything people might want it for, is a short-sighted mistake.
[+] [-] threeseed|11 years ago|reply
The biggest benefit for me to get an Apple Watch is so that I don't have to check my phone during meetings, lunches etc when I get a phone call or email. In fact I can see myself using my phone a lot less.
Throw in other benefits e.g. tracking fitness, playing music wirelessly whilst running, opening my car door, navigating whilst in the car (and having it display maps on my head unit using AirPlay), being able to make payments etc and it's definitely useful.
It just plays in well with this notifications based world we live in. It means you can very quickly check a notification and be done with it. With your phone it's a lot more effort and often you can miss the notification anywhere.
[+] [-] KFW504|11 years ago|reply
Interesting article on the topic: http://www.economist.com/news/business/21646225-smartwatches...
[+] [-] bsaul|11 years ago|reply
That's just bullshit. This will make people even less present, because they'll be even more tightly connected to the invisible communication happening while you're talking to them.
Had my phone running out of batteries today for the first time in months, while i was waiting for someone, and so i ended up just looking at streets and nature around me, doing nothing. That is how you feel more present and aware of your surrounding.
We all know trends are like pendulum. One day, one generation will be fed up with digital overcommunication, and will get back to less invasive technology. I'm looking forward to that day.
[+] [-] TheBeardKing|11 years ago|reply
This is an insightful prediction I hadn't considered. People oftentimes have their phones on silent because they don't want to be bothered at certain times, or can at least ignore some intermittent buzzing. The ease of checking your wrist at every buzz will make it more tempting to divert your attention to it. While it may save phone pulls, it will increase distraction from the task at hand. Now not only do I have a choice whether to check the notification, I now know what the notification is and have to decide whether to act on it or not. Surely that added multitasking will make it more difficult to concentrate.
Just like studies they've done on emails, it's better to let them pile up for a period without notification than to quickly glance at each incoming email. People are just better at concentrating on one thing.
[+] [-] morganvachon|11 years ago|reply
I'm sorry, but how in the world is this any different than the Pebble, Sony, and Android Wear smartwatches that came before it? I mean, I get that the iPhone revolutionized the smartphone; I had a Treo 650 when the iPhone was released, and while I still miss the Treo to this day, I can readily admit the iPhone took the concept in new and better directions.
But the Apple Watch doesn't bring anything new to the table. Yes, it's a hybrid Fitbit/Smartwatch...but so is the Microsoft Band. Which, by the way, works with all three major phone OSes; the Apple Watch works with the iPhone only, because of course it does.
I guess I just don't see what all the fuss is about. Yes, the iPod was a revolutionary device, the iPhone even more so, and the iPad can be thanked for all the great (and not so great) Android and Windows tablets out there now. But in this case it's the Apple Watch that is the also-ran, the follower...not the innovator.
[+] [-] MBCook|11 years ago|reply
Will that be enough to make these kind of devices more popular? I'm not sure, I'm interested to see what happens.
[+] [-] snowwrestler|11 years ago|reply
In retrospect we can look back and identify reasons that they took off over existing competitors. But at the time they were announced, there was quite a bit of doubt that they could or would succeed.
This doesn't mean that the Apple watch will do the same thing--it could certainly flop. It just means that based on history, it's hard to know in advance, based just on the keynote and ads, whether or why an Apple product will beat existing competitors.
[+] [-] jsun|11 years ago|reply
So whatever Apple is building, it's definitely not an "also-ran" because the category doesn't exist yet. Whatever wins this category will look and feel markedly different from a smartphone, just like how the first real smartphones looked and felt different from their predecessor "smart"phones like the razr and blackberry.
Whether Apple can bring a viable product to the market remains to be seen.
[+] [-] logn|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Swizec|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] therealwill|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chiph|11 years ago|reply
Well, don't let it.
But seriously, how do they think the watch is going to be any different? You get a tweet, you interrupt your conversation with the person next to you to look at your wrist. You've just disconnected from the world and been rude to someone.
[+] [-] acomjean|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smitherfield|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smackfu|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jccalhoun|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] smanuel|11 years ago|reply
Call me a whiner but I really think there are much bigger problems to solve and it's kinda sad to watch Apple do something... because growth and expectations.
Anyway, I hope they find the problem for their solution.
[+] [-] WhitneyLand|11 years ago|reply
Significantly new/different products or services often surprise once they are actually used and can easily be better, or worse, that what they seem on paper.
I have been running Watch apps in the simulator and still don't feel enough of the experience to form a final opinion.
[+] [-] jgv|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] datsun|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jbrooksuk|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] verisimilitude|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] damon_c|11 years ago|reply
Would it work to wear one around the ankle?
[+] [-] Fastidious|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hajile|11 years ago|reply