Next-Gen iPhone & iPhone Nano Speculation

[Deleted member 13524]

Bluetooth.

Again, it makes no sense. The thing only works if there's an iphone around.
If there's an iphone around, you'll use the iphone to stream music through bluetooth.

You could use the watch as a remote controller for the itunes app, but I see no reason to use the watch itslef as a music player.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Again, the 3,5" screen of my 4S is just too small for me for typing, either I have to slow down or I make a lot of typos. The 5 doesn't help because the screen isn't wider at all.
4,7 is also not that big either, my sister has an Experia of about the same size and it's not a ping pong racket. But it should be much better for typing, and I also welcome the larger screen for web, email and such. It really seems to be the sweet spot IMHO - I'm not even sure if there are any mid level phones with smaller screens on the market at all.

 

[zed]

But, but... you'll lose your common sense!

apple really love abusing their customers hands
first they told us the only way you could have a tablet smaller than 10" was if you sandpaper your fingers, then they released an ipad mini, thus people had to sandpaper their fingers cause otherwise it wouldnt work.
Now it looks like we're gonna have to break our fingers to get extra length to reach all the way across the screen

 

[wco81]

That is the tradeoff, especially with the bigger one. More screen real estate, perhaps enough that you don't need a tablet any more and can do more browsing and reading on it, versus usability and portability.

May not easily fit into pockets of some jeans for instance.

 

[Grall]

That's a conspiracy theory as good as any other.

Heh, okay.

Apple can claim all they want that they've been "working on this for 3 years" or a decade or they invented watches or they invented time itself, etc. etc. It doesn't mean it's true.

You have reason to believe it's not true? It's pretty obvious (to anyone with half a brain anyway) there's been loads of work sunk into this device. It wasn't cobbled together a couple weeks before the unveiling event. We know it has involved every department of Apple for a long time due to the rumors we've heard over the past couple years.

Pebble used the concept presented by Microsoft's SPOT from 2004 and made it usable.

Yeah, but with all due respect to a really nice gadget, the Pebble is nothing like the iWatch. It's not in the same ballgame, or even same league. I could list all the things that differ between the Pebble and iWatch, but I'd look like a crazed fanboy, so I'll pass.

From there, many companies saw the potential in there and launched mee-too-devices, Apple included.

Err, NO. Pebble launched in january 2013. Apple's smartwatch has obviously been worked on for much longer than that.

We've been putting sensors and displays in wrist watches for decades now. It's not exactly a brilliant and original idea to make a watch that connects to a smartphone.

Haters gonna hate...

Do note I never said Apple invented smartwatches. Obviously they did not. However why the ferverent activity amongst competitors all of a sudden - samsung especially? Samsung has launched like four watches in as many quarters now (most, if not all of them pretty crap by the way.) Why so many smartwatches showing up with optical pulse meters all of a sudden?

Again, Apple won't be first, but they'll be first to do it right.

 

[zed]

http://www.gizmag.com/sony-smartwatch-3-review-hands-on/33700/
OK this watch is also ugly (like the iWatch)
but its waterproof (unlike the iWatch) and has accelerometer, compass, gyro and GPS (from what I read the iWatch doesnt have GPS, the others IDK) it also doesnt need to be by a phone i.e. you can use it independantly, eg for when you go for a run. (just back from a 24km mountain walk myself, ok it was a walk so I took my phone, but if I was running thats not easily possible, those armband things are a PITA)

non ugly smartwatches, to show its possible
http://www.gizmag.com/moto-360-vs-lg-g-watch-r/33708/

about the disaster that is the iWatch there are 2 plausible theories
A/ apple is trolling us
B/ jony ive spent all the development money on crack cocaine and hookers

well we know apple don't do funny, thus that leaves us with option B, I hope it was worth it jony

edit : oh yeah (reading the above posts about muysic playback) the above sony watch plays music also

 

[eastmen]

Yeah, but with all due respect to a really nice gadget, the Pebble is nothing like the iWatch. It's not in the same ballgame, or even same league. I could list all the things that differ between the Pebble and iWatch, but I'd look like a crazed fanboy, so I'll pass.

well yea my pebble lasts for a week without charging while it sounds like the iwatch has to be charged each night.

My pebble also cost less than half what the iwatch costs and that was last year vs next yea pricing.

Apple is now behind the curve. They used to be ahead with the first few iphones but then they lacked basic features like wifi calling and nfc for a few generations. They even made a whole marketing complain making fun of larger screen devices and now finally 3 years later get around to releasing their own

 

[liolio]

Apple is now behind the curve. They used to be ahead with the first few iphones but then they lacked basic features like wifi calling and nfc for a few generations. They even made a whole marketing complain making fun of larger screen devices and now finally 3 years later get around to releasing their own

What is relevant for me is that:
At one point Apple had the opportunity to become the leading OS in the mobile (phones+tablets), they had what it takes on the hardware and software side as well as the momentum to do so in the consumer realm.
Apple decided to remain the niche company (even if it is pretty big one) MSFT made them when PCs took over Macs, they decide to stick to pretty high-end and fashionable devices as well as high margins going along such the products.

Sounds good? That type of strategy is not bad by self but it was not a fit for where the market was heading:
Maintaining significant technological dominance was to get tougher and tougher (and costlier and costlier).
There were big competitors with the means to compete
And more importantly iOS and iTHings by the volume of their sales were no longer a niche high end product.
=> it was time to take over the market /become the dominant actor => Apple did not wanted to trade high margins for volume => end result today and tomorrow their glory on the mobile is behind them no matter the efforts they put in hardware and software (now it is not like they are to lose money anytime soon).

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Not being water-resistant is a nail in the coffin IMO.

From all the stuff I've seen until now, I think I'd only be willing to try the Motorola 360.



Fun fact: the Moto 360 uses an OMAP3630. Yap, a 4 year-old 45nm SoC from Texas (I didn't even know they still had those).
It makes us wonder how much of MotoActv is inside of Moto 360.

Oh and look: the MotoActv is 3 years old, so it was already being sold by the time Apple claims to have started to work on the iWatch.
But naah, Motorola must have used a time machine to know what Apple was going to launch 3 years later, so they could pre-copy it.

 

[aaronspink]

Most young people I know are not wearing a watch and are absolutely not considering starting to wear one again. I doubt a smartwatch would change that trend. We'll see...

yes many great jokes about this on twitter including the more Notable one by Ellen DeGeneres

"So excited for the Apple Watch. For centuries, we’ve checked the time by looking at our phones. Having it on your wrist? Genius. #AppleLive"

 

[Grall]

"So excited for the Apple Watch. For centuries, we’ve checked the time by looking at our phones. Having it on your wrist? Genius. #AppleLive"

I lol'd IRL. Ellen is great.

My pebble also cost less than half what the iwatch costs and that was last year vs next yea pricing.

The Pebble is a really neat gadget and all, but you can't compare it straight off vs iwatch like that. Pebble has the most primitive SoC bar none in the mobile space period. It's got early 1990s era level of performance and storage. 1-bit paper display. No backlight (unless it's dark). No touchscreen, no sound. Of course the battery's gonna last a week. It's like complaining you have to refuel your Bugatti Veyron a lot more often than your Toyota Prius. (Actually that's a crap analogy, because the Prius is a cutting-edge automobile, but shit, I couldn't think of anything else. Lol. Maybe exchange the Prius for a Volkswagen Beetle?)

=> it was time to take over the market /become the dominant actor => Apple did not wanted to trade high margins for volume => end result today and tomorrow their glory on the mobile is behind them no matter the efforts they put in hardware and software (now it is not like they are to lose money anytime soon).

??? Apple's making more money than anyone else, from where exactly do you get that their glory is behind them?

Not being water-resistant is a nail in the coffin IMO.

It IS water resistant. It is not water proof - which is a bummer, I agree. I would so have loved keeping this thing on in the shower after a workout, that's how I lost my previous watch, by taking it off in the locker room and leaving it there in the open for someone to steal...

From all the stuff I've seen until now, I think I'd only be willing to try the Motorola 360.

The 360 is a neat watch for sure, but the dated hardware in it is disappointing; it is slow and sometimes erratic due to weak CPU, and battery life is quite poor from what has been reported so far. BT connectivity is also spotty at times. If it'd featured a modern SoC at least performance and battery would have been much better.

But naah, Motorola must have used a time machine to know what Apple was going to launch 3 years later, so they could pre-copy it.

Again dude: why so many watches launching now? Why a new watch launching with crappy old hardware (answer: to get it out FAST and pre-empt a major competitor). Why is everyone adding pulse sensors?

...COINCIDENCE! Right?

 

[liolio]

??? Apple's making more money than anyone else, from where exactly do you get that their glory is behind them?

They do make money and will continue to do money yet from an investors pov, the prospect is pretty negative, their market shares are set to go down, the peaks in market share as well as wrt capitalization are behind them.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

A lot of smartphone customers have abandoned Apple in the past years, some because they wanted a larger phone, some because Samsung became a more fashionable brand. There's a good chance they'll win a lot of those people back with the new phones.

The watch is a pretty niche market for now. However, if it turns out to be desirable enough - for whatever reason - it can also move some more iPhones. Yeah it's not that good, I'd never want one, but from all the available ones, it does seem to be at the top. I mean if you really, really had to get one, would it be any of the Android ones?

 

[Grall]

...I think this video is relevant for this thread:

 

[Grall]

their market shares are set to go down

Apple doesn't particularly CARE about market share, they care about profits. When they pull in what, ten, fifteen billion in pure surplus each quarter...who cares if they haven't gotten the low-end of the smartphone demographic locked down? There's precious little money to be made there, and chasing the low-end customers actually hurts your high-end, profitable line of product.

 

[silent_guy]

Apple doesn't particularly CARE about market share, they care about profits. When they pull in what, ten, fifteen billion in pure surplus each quarter...who cares if they haven't gotten the low-end of the smartphone demographic locked down? There's precious little money to be made there, and chasing the low-end customers actually hurts your high-end, profitable line of product.

A graph says more than a thousand words: http://www.asymco.com/2014/03/18/invaluable/
Pay particular attention to the one that says 'profit share'. In that category, there's just 2 players, which is astounding if you think about it.

 

[zed]

A graph says more than a thousand words:

aye what search for the words 'profit share'
no hits
so Im not sure what this dude is saying. I assume hes talking about apples failing/falling profitshare
ok yes its going down (but wait for it) apple has a secret weapon
no its not larger phones
its
the iphone!!!!!

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Actually Apple's profits are now increasing, whereas Samsung's are dropping.
Also, Apple's profits are about 450% of Samsung's, and that's with selling about a third as many phones.

Market shares can be looked at from many possible angles. Total smartphone market and high-end smartphone market are quite different, and profit rates are much higher if you only sell expensive ones.

Apple is already doing very well, and as I've already said, the iPhone 6 might easily steal away Galaxy S5/6 customers from Samsung in the next year.

 

[Mariner]

Well, don't forget that Apple's profit includes income from lots and lots of content. They are making money hand over fist from iTunes and the App Store, not just selling the hardware itself.

They are reaping the benefits of setting up all the infrastructure for modern smartphones on a commercial basis and no hardware vendor is going to be able to match them in this aspect. They've not only invented the market in this respect, they've also managed to lock their users in extremely well so no interlopers are really making any inroads in iOS terms. Amazon keep chucking money at the sector but with little success so Google are their only competitors though they aren't really making much of an effort in the hardware market.

(Note: I've no idea about the figures, however, so it may be true that Apple are making more money from the sale of the phone hardware itself than Samsung.)

 

[zed]

I'm just looking at wiki
Apple net profit 2013 37billion. 2012 41billion
Thus they've fallen.
Samsung 2013 net profit is 30billion no idea 2012 but I think smaller.
Anyways no idea where that 450% more profit comes from its not on the wiki pages.
Apple will do well next year though. Why. Because ppl want phones larger than 3,5"
I.e. they want larger than the perfect size. Apple has the be the company that does the most about faces ever.