Apple Watch, anyone?

Forums › Apple iOS and devices › Apple Watch, anyone?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

9360 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1258044 13-Mar-2015 17:45

jeffnz: ... The battery time isn't a big issue people just need to realise it isn't just a watch so trying to make some comparison with a 'dumb' watch is ridiculous ...

Comparison with a dumb watch may be ridiculous, but a wearable electronic device that requires a recharge every day just to stay alive is equally ridiculous.

Sideface

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1258051 13-Mar-2015 17:54

Sideface:
jeffnz: ... The battery time isn't a big issue people just need to realise it isn't just a watch so trying to make some comparison with a 'dumb' watch is ridiculous ...

Comparison with a dumb watch may be ridiculous, but a wearable electronic device that requires a recharge every day just to stay alive is equally ridiculous.

not really how long does a smartphone last, admittedly they are improving but it wasn't long ago that all phones, including Apple, didn't last longer than a day and it hasn't stopped people buying them. Mind you it was the same with phones in trying to compare them with thier dumb phones, should be used to the bitching bu now I suppose.

edit: spelling additional comment

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

Sideface

9360 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1258056 13-Mar-2015 18:02

jeffnz:
Sideface:
jeffnz: ... The battery time isn't a big issue people just need to realise it isn't just a watch so trying to make some comparison with a 'dumb' watch is ridiculous ...

Comparison with a dumb watch may be ridiculous, but a wearable electronic device that requires a recharge every day just to stay alive is equally ridiculous.

not really how long does a smartphone last ...

Smartphones are also ridiculous, but you don't have to wear them

I'll buy a smartphone when their battery life improves, and not before ...

Sideface

blakamin

4431 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1258204 14-Mar-2015 01:31

The heart rate monitor thing is a bit *gadgety*... it's been proven optical wrist-mounted heart rate monitors don't work properly as they measure blood flow and not the electrical impulses that a chest-worn monitor does.
So, totally pointless for people that really need it or proper fitness use.

They'll do resting heart rate if you don't move.

Some old news from cnet

And apple haven't reinvented the "wheel"

Dingbatt

6756 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1258225 14-Mar-2015 08:36

blakamin:
And apple haven't reinvented the "wheel"

But when they do it will be " the most advanced wheel ever ".

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1258227 14-Mar-2015 08:41

jarledb:
Geektastic:
Breitling have just replaced the Emergency with a new version that uses the new satellite PLB system as well as the old 121 transmitter for SAR location.

Aaaaand then you are talking USD 15,000. Personally I can't understand why you would spend that much money on ANY watch.

Because it might save your life in this case. And because it's way cooler than a smart watch.

1eStar

1604 posts

Uber Geek

#1258303 14-Mar-2015 11:51

blakamin: The heart rate monitor thing is a bit *gadgety*..."

My feeling is heartrate monitors on watches will be like 3d cameras on phones. Give it a couple of years and people will have forgotten about the whole idea.

I think I have a pretty good idea if my heart is still beating or not, I dont need my watch to tell me.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

stocksp

708 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1259315 14-Mar-2015 14:06

I'm a runner and I use the heart rate monitor on my Fitbit surge extensively - one of the reasons I bought thr surge was to do away with the heartstrap you have to use with polar. The accuracy of the surge optical hrm is actually pretty good, and I'm assuming the same will be so for the apple watch. Once again tho - battery life is the killer for apple watch

jarledb

Webhead
3257 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1259683 15-Mar-2015 15:41

Geektastic:
Because it might save your life in this case. And because it's way cooler than a smart watch.

If you really spend a lot of time in remote places so you need such a watch, then this will probably be a better investment: http://www.inreachdelorme.com/product-info/inreach-explorer.php

It will save you a lot of money and let you send and receive messages via satellite, as well as contact the right emergency services if you need them.

That will have saved you about 14,600 USD.

Now, I would be willing to bet that most people that buy that Breitling watch doesn't actually need it for the emergency service it could provide. Its more of a "show off" piece. On par with buying a Porsche instead of a VW (or cheaper car).

So much the same kind of "logic" that will be behind the people that buy the 15,000 USD Apple Watch Edition.

Jarle Dahl Bergersen | Referral Links: Want $50 off when you join Octopus Energy? Use this referral code
Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by making a donation or subscribing.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1259828 15-Mar-2015 20:00

That's a Spot unit on steroids. A plb is better and has no annual charges.

I'd still rather have a smaller unit that remained on my wrist at all times as well. No one likely to need such a device should have only one.

Paul1977

5047 posts

Uber Geek

#1260046 16-Mar-2015 09:53

I was a YES before the pricing was announced, and am now almost certainly a NO.

I had already decided that the black stainless steel was the one I wanted, foolishly thinking that there wouldn't be a huge variation in price. But at US$1099 I'd say we'll be looking at around NZ$1500 for that one.

The price of the actual watch probably isn't too bad, but the price of straps is ridiculous.

jaidevp

331 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Spark NZ

#1260066 16-Mar-2015 10:26

I'm keen on the sports version. Don't currently have a way to acquire it from Aus, yet however.

Paul1977

5047 posts

Uber Geek

#1260155 16-Mar-2015 12:25

Paul1977: I was a YES before the pricing was announced, and am now almost certainly a NO.

I had already decided that the black stainless steel was the one I wanted, foolishly thinking that there wouldn't be a huge variation in price. But at US$1099 I'd say we'll be looking at around NZ$1500 for that one.

The price of the actual watch probably isn't too bad, but the price of straps is ridiculous.

OK, AU$1629 which is roughly NZ$1695. But they will jack up the price for NZ, so I am guessing NZ$1799 for the Black Stainless Steel.

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1260960 17-Mar-2015 12:17

I was keenly waiting on the Apple watch to be released but they fact is that they are far too expensive.

I have signed up for the new Pebble Time Steel and it will be due around August, however in my googling this morning I spied the Alcatel OneTouch watch, this looks like a nice piece of kit and should be around $300 NZD comes with heart rate monitor and some other goodies.

I think I may end up with 2 smart watches, but hey I have 2 wrists :)

seoras

101 posts

Master Geek

ID Verified

#1261981 18-Mar-2015 21:17

I was trying to explain to a client this week the benefit of an App over a website and I found myself summarizing it as "an App, on a mobile device, is more personal than a website which is more public".

I've not been convinced of the worth or necessity, if there will ever be one, of the Apple Watch.
However in the context of what is "more personal" I think it may be the next step in the evolution of personal technology.

Technological evolution, when it comes to human interaction, has proven to be anything but logical in evolution or progression.
What we all thought would be technology successes, and next big thing, have instead been flops. And vice versa.
The "video phone" being a good example.

Anyone remember Amstrad trying to sell a video phone or the promise of video phone calls with ISDN in the 90's?
Even today with smart phones offering video chat in HD we still make phone calls.

Another example is "text messaging", which a summer student at Nokia added for fun, not because anyone thought they'd prefer it over a voice call.
It ended up becoming bigger than voice which the mobile networks were built for.

So when it comes to "personal communications" it's messaging first, then voice and then video.
Human need for intimacy & personal communication using technology aren't obvious, or logical.

Then there's the whole easy checkout payments thing with Apple pay.
That, i think, has Apple's rivals panicking right now more than anything.
On the watch it looks even easier than the phone which already looks slick and quick.

I'm not buying an Apple Watch for now but I'm keeping a very open mind about it.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5