Is Apple just trying to persuade you that a watch is integral?

[Ledsteplin]

I think some or missing the point, it's not about wearing a device, it's the seamless dissemination of information without being intrusive to your life, blending the line between man and machine. Because people wear watches and often forget they even have them on its even less intrusive than a phone , that's the point of wearables, it's the integration and functionality that's possible. Aside from the obvious intelligence being built into something that was previously unconnected to the machines and environment around it.id stop thinking about that it's a watch and start looking at the vision to understand.it could be anything a necklace, a ring, whatever ...

My point is that I don't need that integration and functionality. My iPhone serves me well enough without a tiny partial version of itself on my wrist. My iPhone is in no way intrusive in my life. Reaching in my pocket and pulling out my iPhone is no issue for me. I can probably access my email faster that way than most will be able to do on an Watch.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5.

 

[acadia11]

My point is that I don't need that integration and functionality. My iPhone serves me well enough without a tiny partial version of itself on my wrist. My iPhone is in no way intrusive in my life. Reaching in my pocket and pulling out my iPhone is no issue for me. I can probably access my email faster that way than most will be able to do on an Watch.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5.

You don't need, but it is how we will work with machines in the future. You don't need a mouse we had keyboards, you don't need a screen we had switches, lights and plotters, you didn't need a cell phone many older generations are content with lan line and snail mail, but better or worse a wearable is the next step, and eventually we will have implants ... This is the procession of technology ... It's actually a science principle called the singularity. Great books on the subject , check one out.

 

[acadia11]

My point is that I don't need that integration and functionality. My iPhone serves me well enough without a tiny partial version of itself on my wrist. My iPhone is in no way intrusive in my life. Reaching in my pocket and pulling out my iPhone is no issue for me. I can probably access my email faster that way than most will be able to do on an Watch.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5.

You don't need, but it is how we will work with machines in the future. You don't need a mouse we had keyboards, you don't need a screen we had switches, lights and plotters, you didn't need a cell phone many older generations are content with lan line and snail mail, but better or worse a wearable is the next step, and eventually we will have implants ... This is the procession of technology ... It's actually a science principle called the singularity. Great books on the subject , check one out.

As to your doing it faster to check mail, all depends on the implementation. What if the mail was read to you. And you never had to reach for anything. After using the pebble I tell you seeing who was calling was not faster than just looking at your wrist. Again, this is what Apple does really well showing the masses the vision.

 

[Derrick4Real]

That's great.

Could you address the question I asked at the end of the original post?

No i don't think they will cripple what we have now to sell a watch. They will cripple what we have now because of flaws in design choices and Jobs no longer being there to make sound decisions. For example, iTunes, admittedly already not good, loses it's sidebar for no reason making it less user friendly. Simply poor design by people that likely don't have robust music libraries. Now maybe i'm unclear on what you think they'll cripple. My phone is for music, texting, the occasional call, emergency calls, photos. I know others play games on them or even watch netflix. My laptop does desktop publishing, encoding of video, video editing. Point is most of the things i use these devices for aren't suited for a watch. There was overlap between ipods and phones but they didn't cripple iPod's hat I know of. Same with phones and ipads. i'm guessing if there was so much overlap that they had to take things away from an existing device they wouldn't have made the device to sell to begin with. There is also the very big factor that Apple is more and more dependent on the iphone as it's profit center. Every quarter iphones make up more and more of the percantage of apple's profit. ipods, laptops, don't make up the percentages they used to. It makes no sense to damage you're money maker.

 

[Derrick4Real]

I think some or missing the point, it's not about wearing a device, it's the seamless dissemination of information without being intrusive to your life, blending the line between man and machine.

I don't need that or care about that

 

[acadia11]

I don't need that or care about that

It's not about you, it's about technology.

 

[qbnkelt]

Initially I was really excited and thought I would get one. Right now I'm planning to go home and then to Scotland and England in September so I'm not going to go through that extravagance.
I'd rather have my upgraded iPhone in September 2015 than a watch this year.


Sent from my SEXY GORGEOUS AWESOME GOLD 128G iPhone 6 ️️️

 

[Septembersrain]

I never wear regular watches, I wouldn't wear a smart watch.

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

It's not about you, it's about technology.

No. It's about how the individual user wants to use the tech to their advantage. If the tech is deemed cumbersome by the user, then it is useless to that user.

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

Initially I was really excited and thought I would get one. Right now I'm planning to go home and then to Scotland and England in September so I'm not going to go through that extravagance.
I'd rather have my upgraded iPhone in September 2015 than a watch this year.


Sent from my SEXY GORGEOUS AWESOME GOLD 128G iPhone 6 ️️️

Please say hello to Rowdy Roddy Piper for me.

 

[acadia11]

No. It's about how the individual user wants to use the tech to their advantage. If the tech is deemed cumbersome by the user, then it is useless to that user.

How would you know what it is, and people haven't been using it. Wearable tech is new but it is for here to stay.

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

How would you know what it is, and people haven't been using it. Wearable tech is new but it is for here to stay.

I know what a wrist watch is. I couldn't give two money doo-doo's about what the technology is involved in it because it doesn't change the fact that it has to be tethered to my wrist like a wrist watch. Knowing that it has to be placed there to be "convenient", it already is cumbersome to me. Therefore it is useless.

 

[qbnkelt]

Please say hello to Rowdy Roddy Piper for me.

. I'll try....


Sent from my SEXY GORGEOUS AWESOME GOLD 128G iPhone 6 ️️️

 

[acadia11]

I know what a wrist watch is. I couldn't give two money doo-doo's about what the technology is involved in it because it doesn't change the fact that it has to be tethered to my wrist like a wrist watch. Knowing that it has to be placed there to be "convenient", it already is cumbersome to me. Therefore it is useless.

Again. The fact it is watch is irrelevant , it's the concept of wearable integration. The how it will be done and effectively be implemented is what companies are working on. Again. You are considering it as a watch and what one can do with a watch , which is not looking at the problem wearable tech is trying to solve. There will be implementations and possibilities that you wouldn't even imagine at this point.

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

Again. The fact it is watch is irrelevant , it's the concept of wearable integration. The how it will be done and effectively be implemented is what companies are working on. Again. You are considering it as a watch and what one can do with a watch , which is not looking at the problem wearable tech is trying to solve. There will be implementations and possibilities that you wouldn't even imagine at this point.

The next step is implanting something inside of my skin. That's the only way.

 

[acadia11]

The next step is implanting something inside of my skin. That's the only way.

Read my original quote, this is exactly, the way it is going with what is known as the human machine singularity, it's a science principle. Wearable tech is the current because we still aren't able to get small enough for creating intelligent enough implants, plus all the safety work that needs to be done , etc ... But yes you are absolutely right, up next implants.

As I write in a previous post

"You don't need, but it is how we will work with machines in the future. You don't need a mouse we had keyboards, you don't need a screen we had switches, lights and plotters, you didn't need a cell phone many older generations are content with lan line and snail mail, but better or worse a wearable is the next step, and eventually we will have implants ... This is the procession of technology ... It's actually a science principle called the singularity. Great books on the subject , check one out."

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

Read my original quote, this is exactly, the way it is going with what is known as the human machine singularity, it's a science principle. Wearable tech is the current because we still aren't able to get small enough for creating intelligent enough implants, plus all the safety work that needs to be done , etc ... But yes you are absolutely right, up next implants.

As I write in a previous post

"You don't need, but it is how we will work with machines in the future. You don't need a mouse we had keyboards, you don't need a screen we had switches, lights and plotters, you didn't need a cell phone many older generations are content with lan line and snail mail, but better or worse a wearable is the next step, and eventually we will have implants ... This is the procession of technology ... It's actually a science principle called the singularity. Great books on the subject , check one out."

It's creepy.

 

[acadia11]

It's creepy.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_Is_Near

Eh... Its progress Im sure someone from the past would look at all the things we have and think it's creepy. For the generations of the future it will seem the norm.

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_Is_Near

Eh... Its progress Im sure someone from the past would look at all the things we have and think it's creepy. For the generations of the future it will seem the norm.

I don't care about the future generation. I'll be dead.

You've twisted the subject of this thread to something else.

 

[acadia11]

I don't care about the future generation. I'll be dead.

You've twisted the subject of this thread to something else.

The answer was a response to someone who said I don't see the point of iWatch. And my response if you think about the item as just a watch then you wouldn't.

Much like if you thought of a cellphone as just a device for making phone calls, while on the go, you wouldn't see the point. So, I'm quite sure from app developers to chips that will be eventually integrated into it, the use will go far beyond anything you can imagine right now.