Apple's watch

http://www.cnet.com/news/apple-dials-up-apple-watch-smartwatch/

How ugly is this thing?

93EXCivic wrote: How ugly is this thing?

No worse than what samsung has.

Diddy loves it.

I don't see it as ugly really. I don't dig the SS band at the top of the page, but there is a picture with three watches side-by-each further down. It's a smooth square. I don't plan on getting one....ever, but it's not ugly to me.

It's got nothing on the digital watch revolution of the late 70's early 80's.

Or... maybe it does have something... like that.

I can understand the utility of a "smartwatch" - decline calls, read texts, skip tracks etc without getting the phone out of your pocket, unlocking the screen, farting around with menus, then reverse steps 1-3. But theyre not particularly attractive (though the apple device does look to be a step in the right direction versus some of the others that Ive seen out there).

In time, I predict that a watch-like device will house the processor, battery, media storage etc, and transmit to a pair of glasses to view the "screen" - search for "google glasses", and youll see that we are not too far off.

I wonder when I will get a glowing set of digits under my skin that show how long I have left to live?

neon4891 wrote:

93EXCivic wrote: How ugly is this thing?

No worse than what samsung has.

It looks better than the Gear, IMO, and I say that as a died-in-the-wool Android guy. However, the Moto 360 is still the best-looking of the smart watches.

I dunno---- it looks cleaner and has more use than the "diving" chronographs that people seem so fond of. Suuuure you're going diving--- with a big shiny watch. Hope you like feeding barracudas! You know what shiny things in the water are called? Lures

These days when everyone has a clock in their phone a watch is nothing more than man jewelry. (not that man jewelry is bad--however 99% of the time it's fashion, not function) The Apple watch at least has functions that a regular watch does not--- elevating it from just a fashion statement. It's not something I want, or see myself wearing--- but I'm sure the techies will line up for it.

Also, wasnt Seiko all over this in the 80s?

Doesn't matter, to me it's still not useful enough to even justify having to charge your watch. Or even having to pay that much for a watch in the first place.

Joe Gearin wrote: These days when everyone has a clock in their phone a watch is nothing more than man jewelry. (not that man jewelry is bad--however 99% of the time it's fashion, not function) The Apple watch at least has functions that a regular watch does not--- elevating it from just a fashion statement. It's not something I want, or see myself wearing--- but I'm sure the techies will line up for it.

Yeah but a really ugly disposable plastic thing.

How many of these will still be functional in 10 years...

I can't ever see myself turning in my mechanical watches for one of those.

Ah, the irony...
The cell phone in your pocket with a clock nearly killed the watch market over the past 15 years, now, the cell makers are trying to get into the watch business.

Killed may be too strong of a word but the handset certainly did affect watch sales.

Needs more keyboard.

If I had a lot more money than I do now- or it were 4 years or so ago when I was still running the iPhone Apps podcast I ran for a few years, I'd likely be all over one of these.

Disclaimer: I already own a smart watch- I got in on the Pebble KickStarter and have had one for a year and a half or so now, and it feels weird to not have it on. And I'd not worn a wristwatch since back in HS when I decided I liked pocket watches more. I still have my pocket watches, but haven't used one in pushing a decade- because I've usually just used my phone for the same purpose. The Pebble though serves as a great front-end to my phone, allowing me to leave the phone in my pocket and still read texts/emails, control music playback, and even adjust the temperature on our networked thermostat from my wrist.

I'll have to get my hands on one at an Apple Store to really get a solid idea of how good of a job that they've done, but it looks like one of the better-done next-generation smart watches (my Pebble being the first/current) that I've seen. I haven't seen any of the video of the controls yet, but expect if I know Apple that it works remarkably intuitively and smoothly. If it has a NFC antenna like the new iPhones (which it kind of looks like it might since they say it can be used with Wallet), I'd be even more likely to consider it since I don't intend to drop the $600 (would need to get one unsubsidized...) to get an iPhone 6 or 6 Plus.

Either way, I would like one but the price tag is steep for me at this point. But, I am sold on the iPhone 6.

So to get the whole iphone "experience" its now almost a grand? Really? Can it at least replace GPS running and biking watches or do I still need to have the phone and it's inaccurate GPS for that?

That is the only way I can see this being even remotely useful.

I was waiting for KITT to drive up on the stage.

no watch … and as often as not don't have my phone with me shrug

93EXCivic wrote: Yeah but a really ugly disposable plastic thing. How many of these will still be functional in 10 years... I can't ever see myself turning in my mechanical watches for one of those.

I don't disagree on the 10 years thing, they'll be either broken or obsolete. But they're certainly not plastic. Metals and sapphire glass all the way, not much to decry on the materials front for me.

I do think it's funny how we get close to what all of us wanted as a kid - the super cool stuff that Michael Knight used to communicate with KITT and the watch that Dick Tracy used - and all we can do is complain about it. It's apparently cool to be unable to enjoy neat stuff.

I'm not going to buy one, but damn these things are cool. I would have loved to have one at 13. I've outgrown it, sure, but at least admit it's neat. Otherwise you're just posturing!

dculberson wrote: I'm not going to buy one, but damn these things are cool. I would have loved to have one at 13. I've outgrown it, sure, but at least admit it's neat. Otherwise you're just posturing!

It is just a load of circuits and nothing impressive compared to already existing smartwatches.

Now this is neat.

Loads of circuits that take the combined efforts of tens or hundreds of thousands of man hours to design, a clean room and hundreds of people to manufacture, and achieve things that until a year or two ago were impossible. It's neat.

That watch is neat, too. I could belittle it by saying it's just a fiddly overly ornate rich person's bling that does nothing but tell time no better than we've been able to do for hundreds of years, but I would be lying - it's damn cool. But I can recognize more than one thing, and more than one type of thing, for being neat, cool, well made, what have you.

Describing something as "just a load of circuits" is almost comical to me, though. That's like saying an F15 is "just a load of metal."

In reply to dculberson:

Ok maybe load of curcuits is harsh but I just can't understand the appeal behind smart watches. They have crap battery life, look like crap, don't work if you don't have you phone on and are going to be outdated in a few years. For $350, I could get a vintage Omega, vintage Ulysse Nardin, vintage Universal Geneve, maybe a vintage JLC or one of maybe microbrand mechincal watches.

While totally irrelevant to me as I refuse on principle to own Apple products (I'll take my Skynet from Google, thank you very much) I like the one with the stainless mesh band. Doesn't look awful.