Eyewhatch

art

I'm nine months now with a Pebble, find it scratches a completely different itch watch wise, it's very much a functional tool which I use when I really do want to know, say, exactly when a text or particular call comes in. Then there's days when, what I want, is to wear a watch ...

art

So, the iWatch is indeed here... it's a mobile device with a strap really, the watch bit just an after-thought. I'm kind of disappointed in its design from the pics I've seen so far, doesn't have that typical Apple edge, could be anybody's effort from an aesthetic point of view, though the functionality does seem pretty rich.

Wibbs

Looks very 1970's to me. Not sold on it myself. I'd have to see more pics.

Senecio

I think it looks quite smart. It looks more like a quality piece of kit than any other wearable device on the market.

Ghost Train

Looks okay, little bit boring looking maybe, round watch would have been more interesting
350$ would that be 350€ sale price here

Wibbs

I do like, or at least appreciate using the crown as a selector/input device, rather than exclusively using the touch screen part. I mused about this on another forum a while back with regard to smart watches. Watches have crowns(and buttons) so it seems silly not to utilise that in a smart watch. I mean on a normal say chronograph, you use the crown to set and sometimes wind the watch(I'm V old skool ) and you use the pushers to start, stop and rezero the chronograph function. That's before you consider how you could use a rotatable bezel a la a pilots/dive watch as a selection device. For me anyway the rotatable bezel is a bloody obvious one for inputting actions and commands and again we have had them on watches since the early 1930's and are on Casios all the way to Rolexes etc today.

So people are used to that. Hell back in the day of the ubiquitous digital watch all we interacted with were buttons. Now ironically since the iphone and its competitors and Steve Jobs hating external buttons we've drifted from that and IMH that's the mistake. It hobbles the designer and their options. Hence all the smart watches so far are self limited to the screen bit.

There is a balance to be struck of course. I mean I had(and have) a late 70's seiko calculator watch and the buttons were/are just too small to be useful, but you could design a smart watch with say two or four large buttons for selection, a crown for scrolling and/or a rotating bezel for same. One of the nice things about apple's original iPod way back in the day was the simplified scroll wheel and you could do quite a bit with that. If you added a touch screen on top you'd have a lot of options.

So though I'm not so impressed by the watch itself, so far anyway, the simple addition of the crown as an input device might get others to have a wider approach and think outside, actually think within the box of 100 years of wristwatch design and apply it to the smart wrist wearable device type. At the moment I think too many if not all are computer geek designers, not watch geek designers.



*EDIT* I mentioned earlier that the watch has a 1970's vibe to it. Looking at it more I'd say more specifically it has an early 1970's vibe from the French company LIP. They brought in some top end non watch designers at the time, guys like Tallon and Meyer among others and came out with some well funky designs. The Apple watch reminds me a lot of them. If one showed up on ebay as a vintage and I couldn't read the dial I'd swear LIP on first glance. Not too surprising as one of the external designers Apple brought in recently has done watch and clock designs and many of them look like they'd fit right into the 1974 LIP catalogue and one looks like a direct update. I'd add in some early quartz Omegas to that. One publicity shot looks like the Omega Megaquartz marine chronometer on first glance. I have to say I am impressed by their band/strap options. On design anyway I think they have most of the competitors on the run, though feature wise...

art

i thought the opposite, re design vs features: feature wise they've brought together a lot, the third party apps, usual notifications but an instant messaging element too and then what's probably the real seller. all that health kit stuff; design wise though it just reminds me of other nicer things (eg Ventura watches).

Also have to mention again my pebble, specifically in respect of touch screens: three buttons one side, up, down and select, one the other side for back! Also has seven days battery life, a very important aspect not mentioned at Apple yet. The samsung gear's battery is laughably bad and apparently the latest motorola watch is actually worse than that, it won't last a working day never mind lasting morning to night; Apple not mentioning it kind of suggests implicitly it's nothing to crow about either?

Eoin

art wrote: »

Apple not mentioning it kind of suggests implicitly it's nothing to crow about either?

Correct - it's looking like a day's battery life is all you can expect. The functionality would have to be very good to make up for that, otherwise it won't take long for someone to forget to put it on in the morning and then just stop bothering with it.

Edit - I thought tablets were pointless when they came out, but I've done a u-turn since. For most of my business trips, I can now just bring a tablet instead of my crappy work laptop.

I'm still not convinced, and the one day battery life makes it a lot less of a grab-n-go option in the morning. But app developers can be very clever at coming up with new ways for a gadget to be used, so it'll be interesting to see what happens.

Wibbs

Looking at all the pics that have come out since the launch, I am well impressed in one area, the strap options. Man there are some real beauties. The watch itself looks like very nice quality, especially at that pricepoint of around 400 - 500 quid. I can't see Omega being too worried, but Seiko and Casio should be, at least at a comparable pricepoint.

The issue I have and have wittered on about with all smartwatches inc the Apple watch, is that they to me at least are a solution to a non existent problem. They don't particularly add to the devices you already have, much less replace them. That and their built in obsolescence, which runs 100% contrary to the wristwatch as object. Even the least watch interested person expects their Argos special that cost 49.99 to last for at least a decade. Sure the Swatch phenomena was a little about "throwaway" fashion, but they didn't cost 500 quid. Buy the iwatch or whatever and it's not going to work with your phone in 3 years time, never mind 10. The care and feeding of such a device is another issue. Charging once a week would be bad enough, but every day? And this is coming from a weirdo who gets the horn for vintage handwinds.

paddyh117

Stolen from the Apple forum, but really good review here

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review

I've gone from being very Meh about it, to now wanting one.....

could see it as a daily beater and keep my good watch for meetings/nights out

Bluefoam

paddyh117 wrote: »

Stolen from the Apple forum, but really good review here

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review

I've gone from being very Meh about it, to now wanting one.....

could see it as a daily beater and keep my good watch for meetings/nights out

As reported by BGR, no-one has had this watch on their wrists for more than 3 minutes and most for a lot less... Any review at this stage is just conjecture and holds little weight, there is no way the reviewer could have had enough time with the watch to make accurate observations.

The tile says it all:

A Watch Guy's Thoughts On The Apple Watch After Seeing It In The Metal

paddyh117

Bluefoam wrote: »

As reported by BGR, no-one has had this watch on their wrists for more than 3 minutes and most for a lot less... Any review at this stage is just conjecture and holds little weight, there is no way the reviewer could have had enough time with the watch to make accurate observations.

The tile says it all:

mmmmm ok - do you know what "in the metal" means?

he has taken photos with at least 6 different straps, so i think it's safe to assume he had it for more than 3 minutes.

Bluefoam

paddyh117 wrote: »

mmmmm ok - do you know what "in the metal" means?

he has taken photos with at least 6 different straps, so i think it's safe to assume he had it for more than 3 minutes.

All display models in a controlled environment... he saw exactly what everyone esle was shown as they files out of the auditorium after the event... I'm not denying that he saw them in the metal, but I'm suggesting that he didn't have enough hands-on time to write an accurate review

Eoin

Agreed on the strap options - I thought it looked pretty slick on the mesh bracelet.

I can't see Omega being too worried, but Seiko and Casio should be

Tissot as well, with their line of T-Touch gadget watches.

I am not sure if the life of the watch will be as big a deal. In fact, while hardware has moved on considerably; modern phones are actually slightly more future proof, in that it's a hell of a lot easier to update the firmware.

So I think a 3 year life (still not a lot admittedly) is not out of the question.

paddyh117

Bluefoam wrote: »

All display models in a controlled environment... he saw exactly what everyone esle was shown as they files out of the auditorium after the event... I'm not denying that he saw them in the metal, but I'm suggesting that he didn't have enough hands-on time to write an accurate review

Well we shall have to agree to disagree

yes they were display models, but he tried on several straps on both sizes available - without going through all the functionality (which is probably not complete) I'd say he had enough time to test the look/feel and build quality, which is all anyone can expect at this stage.

It's going to be a €350-€400 watch, how much time does he need??

I've had a T Touch at €550, and if i had the choice again, I'd pick one of these

Wibbs

paddyh117 wrote: »

yes they were display models, but he tried on several straps on both sizes available - without going through all the functionality (which is probably not complete) I'd say he had enough time to test the look/feel and build quality, which is all anyone can expect at this stage.

+1 I mean I've held a Patek in my hands for about 5 minutes and even then while I couldn't tell if it was a good timekeeper function wise, you could see and feel the quality over say a TAG. Even in photos of the apple product it looks like a "lot of watch" at that pricepoint. Or this shows the big profits being made on similarly priced watches at the same pricepoint. Some of the straps alone on the apple product are of very high quality going by pics and in the hand reports(and the quality or lack thereof can be felt in bracelets PDQ).

It's going to be a €350-€400 watch, how much time does he need??

I've had a T Touch at €550, and if i had the choice again, I'd pick one of these

I reckon a lot of folks will think similarly. Suunto would be another maker who should be worried, particularly if apple bring out a "rugged" model.

This won't affect high end mechanical Swiss/German makers so much, if at all. That's another market and a small one. The vast majority of non watch people go on name, fashion, availability and price. Hence quartz powered "fashion" watches sell at a rate that would make Rolexes head spin.

Apple will hit that market nicely. They already have the name, they have the fashion thing, or a segment of it, they have the supply ecosystem down pat and if the average price of one of these is around the 500 quid mark the price looks good too. If I was them I'd have them on "sale" as part of a phone/network package, dropping the perceived price even further(an option not open to Seiko et al).

Motorola and other Android makers? Different market. More aimed at "nerds", the rebellious and pricepointers. Brand loyalty is lower, it's all about the function/price and there are an often bewildering array of options. There have been jokes(correctly) that the new iphone is about 2 years outa date. No way would an Android phone be selling if it was a year out of date. Apple gets away with that because of much higher brand loyalty and perceived value. I suspect their watch will plug into this existing ecosystem where other smart watches won't, or not as consistently. Just look at the mainstream hype over this watch compared to the others.

Apple have done this before. Go back to 07 and read industry pundits who in the majority of cases were sure they would fail in the cutthroat phone market. They may pull it off again.

Eoin

paddyh117 wrote: »

Stolen from the Apple forum, but really good review here

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review

Very interesting read, I'm pleasantly surprised that the author is quite open minded about the whole thing.

I think another market that people may be forgetting are the people who are not the target of any watch market. People who think it's pointless to wear something that has maybe 1 or 2 functions that their phone can do. But a functionally rich companion to their ever present phone is something they'd like.

Again, going back to tablets - I think that rather than cannibalising another target market (aside from netbooks, which were one of the biggest tech flops of recent times); they more invented one. This could be similar.

Personally I'm sticking with my Jawbone UP24 because 1) I get a week's battery life out of it, and 2) it doesn't preclude my wearing a real watch.

Rucking_Fetard

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review

I'm not even sure we can call it a watch. Okay, it goes on the wrist, and it happens to tell the time, but that's about where the similarities between Apple's just announced watch and the hand-assembled, often painstakingly finished mechanical watches we write about, and obsess over, end. I was lucky enough to be invited to Cupertino to witness the announcement of the Apple Watch firsthand, and though I do not believe it poses any threat to haute horology manufactures, I do think the Apple Watch will be a big problem for low-priced quartz watches, and even some entry-level mechanical watches.

In years to come, it could pose a larger threat to higher end brands, too. The reason? Apple got more details right on their watch than the vast majority of Swiss and Asian brands do with similarly priced watches, and those details add up to a really impressive piece of design. It offers so much more functionality than other digitals it's almost embarrassing. But it's not perfect, by any means. Read on to hear my thoughts on the Apple Watch, from the perspective of a watch guy. Oh, and there are dozens of in-the-metal pictures, too.

Nolimits

I think it looks pretty ugly as far as a watch goes. The only smart watch that looks like a nice watch is the Moto 360

Anjobe

Eoin wrote: »

I think another market that people may be forgetting are the people who are not the target of any watch market. People who think it's pointless to wear something that has maybe 1 or 2 functions that their phone can do. But a functionally rich companion to their ever present phone is something they'd like.

This hits the nail on the head I think. The Apple Watch is not really targeted at watch freaks, it looks a nice product and possibly quite a useful one too, but I wouldn't ever wear it in place of any of my battered old "real" watches. That's more of an emotional view than a pragmatic one though, and it could really appeal to iPhone users not encumbered with that sort of baggage.

Wibbs

The Moto is v cool looking, nice big screen, though I'd have a few niggles with it. Main among them is that it looks like a watch. Sounds daft I grant you, but IMHO design wise for wrist wearables the sky's the limit or should be. The Moto tries to look like a round faced watch. That to me is boring. The integration of the strap/bracelet fixing point is also a bit awkward.

The other issue is its sheer size. 46mm is huge for a watch. Especially one of that severe shape. It limits the audience. Women or skinny wristed blokes(IE me ) are gonna look like the watch is wearing them. I think this is where apple will get customers. They have two sizes 42 and 38. Much more manageable and a choice. Plus they're more likely to have female fans anyway(just on personal observation I've noted more uptake of their phones among the ladies).

The choice of finish is wide. This is the design/fashion aspect and IMHO is far better integrated than other smart watch offerings so far. The straps alone are very nice.

Price wise Moto wins out though. A lot cheaper than the entry level apple effort and god knows what the 18k one will cost. :eek: I'd imagine the steel bracelet version(which is well lush) won't be too cheap either.

Design wise I prefer the apple. Now this could be down to me loving the 1970's explosion of thinking outa the box design wise when it came to watches. Slap an early quartz/electronic movement in the apple case and it could wear an Omega, Lip, Longines, Rado and a long list of other names on the dial.

Wibbs

Merged the two smartwatch threads to keep us all in the one place.

peasant

With motion sensors, GPS sensors, biometric capabilities and electronic wallet capability this thing is just a slightly prettier ankle monitor* in the wrong position.

Just enter your pps number on first startup and you're good to go





*you know ..those black boxes criminals on parole wear on their ankles...

Wibbs

I could certainly see myself buying one secondhand(while in me cups late night on ebay) in a few years time when the tech has moved on or the concept has fallen on its arse and wearing it as just a watch. All ironical like. The one with the funky leather or steel bracelet model please. Maybe if you cut out the GPS/Bluetooth/etc stuff and just ran the watch and display the battery might last for more than a day.

CarltonBrowne

Wibbs wrote: »

Maybe if you cut out the GPS/Bluetooth/etc stuff and just ran the watch and display the battery might last for more than a day.

Nice idea but I doubt if they offer that level of turning off from the phone interface and my experience of devices that can't connect to a radio source is that they use more energy as they, increasingly desperately, try to connect to mummy. I believe that this is one of the reasons that mobile phones are banned on aircraft as they boost their signal to compensate for the low base station signal. I also remember weekending in East Anglia regularly in the mid 90s where, because of the flat terrain, mobile signal was fairly thin and my battery life was approximately half.

Wibbs

CarltonBrowne wrote: »

Nice idea but I doubt if they offer that level of turning off from the phone interface and my experience of devices that can't connect to a radio source is that they use more energy as they, increasingly desperately, try to connect to mummy.

Yea good point CB. Maybe some enterprising soul will figure out a way to hack them, the way the iOS is. Even then, if it lasted a week between charges(unlikely) it would still be a pain to have to charge your watch.








I'm reminded of those panels you could attach to a phone that apparently reduced the radiation. Joke was it increased the phone output trying to compensate(if the panel worked in the first place).

peasant

How about an apple watch that charges you instead

Zagato

peasant wrote: »

How about an apple watch that charges you instead

Might be able to budget for that

art

CarltonBrowne wrote: »

Nice idea but I doubt if they offer that level of turning off from the phone interface ....

I can run mine disabled from the phone entirely. It will also buzz me if it loses connection to the phone so I can then turn off the connection if needed. Annoyingly where I work, if I leave the phone on the desk, the toilet is at the exact cusp of the connection range so my wrist buzzes to tell me it's lost, no wait I have it, no lost it, wait have... and so on - basically I make buzzing noises when I pee!

art

paddyh117 wrote: »

Stolen from the Apple forum, but really good review here

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review

I've gone from being very Meh about it, to now wanting one.....

could see it as a daily beater and keep my good watch for meetings/nights out

Think that article has started to win me over too, felt nothing on the original announcement but see now more where Wibbs is coming from on the design elements etc which is indeed making the whole thing appear more attractive.