[Macworld]

Post your comments for The Macalope: They never learn here

[aestival]

The problem with the wrist-device market is that people are increasingly unwilling to wear something on their wrist that isn't purely for show -- watches didn't go away so fast just because they were redundant: they were annoying. Apple would have no problem selling a status device, but despite what certain anti-Apple pundits say, Apple devices have always been primarily useful, and not primarily for show.

Count me among those who prefers to keep tech on my person... out of plain sight. No bracelets, glasses, anklets, hats, rings, or gloves please.

[palane]

Even more fun. I decided to pick one of the Apple iFlop writers at random and add mea culpa to the search. Turns out that Michael Kanellos has a long history of wrong iPredictions and is a long time iDoomsayer for Apple. [I should trademark those terms.]

Kanellos wrote inaccurately that Apple would never link up with Intel. Here follows his mea culpa after the Apple/Intel announcement:

"The red carpet was unfurled Monday, but a year from now, Apple will be lumped into the same courtesy shuttle as Toshiba, Sony, Gateway and the other "not in the top five" PC makers. Acer sells more computers than Apple and therefore will likely qualify for higher volume discounts.

"Apple will also lose one more aspect of its uniqueness, which the company seems to crave, so who knows what will happen next? Feeling a bit dejected, Apple may start casting about again. Look, there's Hector Ruiz of AMD, the company might say to itself. He talks quite a bit about the importance of the emerging market. They're sort of an underdog...

"I highly doubt that just because Apple will account for fewer Intel chip sales than Acer, that the company will pay more per processor. Jobs didn't enter into a deal with Intel--which can chalk up the design win as a marketing coup and with the potential for getting Apple's consumers electronics business--without a pricing guarantee over the next few years that ensures that future Macs will be price competitive. Otherwise, as Kanellos points out, AMD starts to look good to Apple, but Intel wouldn't like that...."

Oh, Macalope, where were you back then?

[obewaun]

Quote

Oh, Macalope, where were you back then?

Since the mythical beast has never indicated his age, but refers to his parents offering him alphlpa, is it possible the Macalope was just a twinkle in his Fathers' eye at the time?

[LynnRCarter]

Quote

Count me among those who prefers to keep tech on my person... out of plain sight. No bracelets, glasses, anklets, hats, rings, or gloves please.

The future for Apple is to go after markets beyond those it has already won. If Apple is to grow much larger than it is, it will need to innovate outside of its traditional markets, just like it did with the iPhone. There are many newly thrilled Apple customers who never used one of Apple's computers. I would not be surprised to see Apple grab some other product niche and take it over.

Maybe this new product will be for a market other than you or me. That will be okay as long as they keep thrilling me with MacBook Pros, iPads, and iPhones. I don't need everything Apple decides to make and sell!

[StefN]

I dislike wearing watches but I'm beginning to get it. Add up the possible medical features that require wristbands. Add all the exercise features already using wrist sensors. Cue Nike. Input using a localized Siri for timers and reminders. Put on a big red emergency alert button for folks who fall down stairs. Do location monitoring for folks who need that. Inside, it will have some superb, souped up technology from those Apple tech labs. Throw in a little solar panel, just for the heck of it.

It's not a watch. Others have/will do watches. Apple wouldn't do a watch. It does multiple market disruption. And it loves the engineering and design challenges of small and simple computers. Nobody does small and simple better. Ever. At $200 it will sell a milliard units. OK, $199.

[palane]

There's ample opportunities to fuse design and tech. We're considering picking up a NEST Thermostat. It's pricey at $249, but the LCD screen is going out on the $75 unit we bought five years ago and it's behavior is a little flaky.

I was a longtime pocket watch users, but the mobile phone took that spot in my pocketses. It's nice, but try to discretely check the time in a meeting going oh so long.

[Harvey]

Quote

The problem with the wrist-device market is that people are increasingly unwilling to wear something on their wrist that isn't purely for show -- watches didn't go away so fast just because they were redundant: they were annoying. Apple would have no problem selling a status device, but despite what certain anti-Apple pundits say, Apple devices have always been primarily useful , and not primarily for show. Count me among those who prefers to keep tech on my person... out of plain sight. No bracelets, glasses, anklets, hats, rings, or gloves please.

You have your opinion... I have mine ;-)

I'd love to have a wrist watch that do everything that my iPhone can do. Since I use Bluetooth for listening to music/videos, and making phone calls, it makes a huge amount of sense to me.

For example, I would rather check on calls and data by simply glancing at my wrist, than digging into my pockets to find my iPhone turn it on, find what I want, turn the iPhone off and then put it back into my pocket... especially when I am busy doing something else.

Wearable computers has been a goal of many companies for years, and we are now at a point where current technology makes this practical.

A wrist computer is much more practical, comfortable, and less ridiculous than a computer that you wear in front of your eyes like a Borg... even though this is the questionable direction that Google is headed.

[technologist]

I'm not one to bet against Apple, but in this case, I think the only place such a device could catch on is on some utterly insignificant little blue-green planet whose ape-descended life forms are so amazingly primitive that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea.

Fortunately, such a planet has proven itself quite amenable to Apple's devices.

[aestival]

Harvey, on 14 February 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Wearable computers has been a goal of many companies for years, and we are now at a point where current technology makes this practical.

I agree that it's now practical, but the idea itself dates back to a time when wristwatches were commonplace and computers were unbearably bulky. Heck, it predates the mouse and windowed computing interfaces! These days computers are smartphones/tablets and include shared functionality (cameras, telephony, typing) that is especially poorly suited to a wrist form factor.

Explain to me how we share a watch device or piece of worn computing, especially in a world where that's quite likely to be with someone smaller/larger (i.e. opposite sex). Do you envision a world where everyone uses compatible worn computing? That seems as unlikely as smartphones no longer having cameras.

I appreciate that a large slice of the technophile demographic is slavering for wrist and wearable computing, but that doesn't mean there's actually a broader market, any more than there's one for virtual keyboards or smart glasses.

[TimMacMan]

It would be ideal for NFC transactions - no digging for your phone, just wave your hand by the checkout terminal.

[robogoboqfy1]

Maybe it'll be "just a hobby". That seems to be a good way to approach it so far. Apple has thrown a dart at the wall to see what it hit several times in the past. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. But why not give it a try. The Pebble seems to have a pretty high demand.

[robogoboqfy1]

Quote

Explain to me how we share a watch device or piece of worn computing, especially in a world where that's quite likely to be with someone smaller/larger (i.e. opposite sex). Do you envision a world where everyone uses compatible worn computing? That seems as unlikely as smartphones no longer having cameras. I appreciate that a large slice of the technophile demographic is slavering for wrist and wearable computing, but that doesn't mean there's actually a broader market, any more than there's one for virtual keyboards or smart glasses.

Not sure why we need to "share" a watch. Not really the point.

[aestival]

robogoboqfy1, on 14 February 2013 - 10:36 AM, said:

Not sure why we need to "share" a watch. Not really the point.

Really? I hand my phone to other people all the time, and even more so my iPad. Also, while a bracelet as jewelry might make sense for life, I'm not inclined to buy tech gadgets that I use for a few years and then have about zero chance of ever selling used (or giving to relatives, etc.) I expect that it's a very small segment of the market that treats Apple devices as routinely disposable: the extremely wealthy and the extraordinarily irresponsible.

This post has been edited by aestival: 14 February 2013 - 10:57 AM