“We’ve heard for quite some time that Apple is hard at work on its next big thing, a smartwatch. There’s even a product name all picked out by the pundits, the iWatch. According to persistent rumors Apple has dozens, maybe even hundreds, of its brightest employees getting the iWatch ready to blow everybody away,” James Kendrick writes for ZDNet. “As exciting as rumors make the smartwatch sound, I don’t think Apple is going to be able to adequately address some practical issues.”
“If you’re like most people you have the smartphone, in the case of Apple’s iWatch that would be the iPhone, in your hand most of the time that you’re free to use a smartwatch. There’s no compelling reason to look at the watch when you have a nice, big, high-resolution screen in your hand,” Kendrick writes. “The smartwatch ends up being used mostly as, you guessed it, a watch. Even that is less than useful as the time is displayed on that iPhone in the hand.”
Kendrick writes, “The watch display would have to be a touch screen to be practical, and that brings challenges when a screen is that tiny. If you display icons and controls big enough to be tapped with a fingertip, that little screen gets filled up really quickly. You end up with a touch screen that doesn’t display much at all which limits the practical functions Apple can give to its fancy iWatch.”
“Apple has surprised us before and while I don’t think it can solve these problems perhaps it has one more thing. Maybe they’ve figured out how to address all the issues I’ve raised, and come up with a unique, compelling function to get us to snap up the iWatch,” Kendrick wusses out. “If they do release a watch that doesn’t address the problems outlined here I predict the iWatch will fail miserably. Of course, I’ve been wrong before so Apple might just make me eat crow.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related articles:
What Samsung will learn from Apple’s iWatch? – August 29, 2013
iWatch’s novelty emerges as Apple assembles team of sensor and fitness experts – July 18, 2013
Apple’s iWatch nearly ready for the world; but is the world ready for iWatch? – July 2, 2013
Apple files for ‘iWatch’ trademark in Taiwan, Mexico, and Turkey – July 2, 2013
Apple files for ‘iWatch’ trademark in Japan – July 1, 2013
Analyst: Apple’s iWatch ‘increasingly likely’ for second-half 2013 launch – June 8, 2013
Apple reportedly files for ‘iWatch’ trademark in Russia – June 5, 2013
Why Apple is going to make and sell millions upon millions of iWatches – May 30, 2013
Apple’s iWatch could take out Swatch, others, even luxury watch makers – May 29, 2013
Apple CEO: Google Glass a ‘difficult’ product, hints at ‘iWatch’ – May 29, 2013
Analyst: Apple’s iWatch may not launch until late 2014, use biometrics and iPod nano tech – May 23, 2013
Apple’s iWatch imminent? – April 22, 2013
Survey shows exceptionally strong consumer interest in an Apple ‘iWatch’; iPhone dominates in customer satisfaction – April 19, 2013
iWatch? Apple’s Kevin Lynch heading former team of iPod engineers on new projects – April 12, 2013
Apple’s iWatch will measure far more than time – March 12, 2013
Disney ‘MagicBands’ showcases massive potential for Apple’s iWatch – March 6, 2013
Apple’s iOS-powered ‘iWatch’ facing battery life challenge, sources say – March 4, 2013
Apple seeks to introduce ‘iWatch’ as soon as this year, says source – March 4, 2013
Apple doesn’t need Corning for an iWatch, LG Display is ready to go with flexible OLED displays – March 3, 2013
Apple supplier Corning: It’ll be three years before companies start making ‘Willow’ flexible display products – February 28, 2013
Apple patent for flexible display slap bracelet ‘iWatch’ could fire up stock again – February 22, 2013
How to profit from Apple’s iWatch, Nike’s FuelBand and Google’s Glass – February 22, 2013
Apple’s iWatch concept is real – and here’s how it might work – February 22, 2013
ABI Research: Apple ‘iWatch’ could prove to be revelation in wearable tech – February 21, 2013
Apple patent application reveals slap bracelet ‘iWatch’ with flexible touchscreen display – February 21, 2013
Apple ‘iWatch’ leaks: Preemption or desperation? – February 19, 2013
Patents may point the way towards Apple iWatch – February 19, 2013
Samsung trying to beat Apple to market with ‘iWatch’ rival? – February 15, 2013
What if an Apple iWatch replaced most of the iPhone’s functions? – February 13, 2013
Apple ‘iWatch’ beyond ‘experimentation phase,’ sources say – February 13, 2013
Features that would make Apple’s iWatch a killer product – February 12, 2013
7 reasons why Apple’s unannounced ‘iWatch’ won’t fly – February 12, 2013
Patent application reveals Apple secretly developing wearable computing platform – February 12, 2013
Morgan Stanley: Apple iWatch, iTV could generate additional $80 billion annually – February 12, 2013
With ‘iWatch,’ Apple could turn wearable devices into next big thing – February 12, 2013
Why Apple is working on ‘iWatch,’ not ‘iGlasses’ – February 11, 2013
WSJ: Apple testing ‘iWatch’ device – February 11, 2013
iWatch: Apple developing curved-glass smart watch, sources say – February 11, 2013
Tog: The iWatch will fill a gaping hole in the Apple ecosystem – February 7, 2013
Why Apple should hang-up on the iPhone, iWear is next – January 6, 2013
Analyst sees wearable computers from Apple as future replacement for iPhone – January 2, 2013
Apple and Intel secretly building Bluetooth smartwatch that connects to your iOS devices, say sources – December 27, 2012
Apple patent application details display-integrated cellular antennas – May 6, 2012
Apple patent app details next-gen microstrip cellular antenna for future MacBooks, iWatch and beyond – October 25, 2011
well I currently hope you eat crow… My guess is that you will
The guy could never get hired at Apple, too stupid. 😎
Really Folks?
You agree will a guy that goes on and on about how it can’t be done, it will not work, there are too many problems?
This is not a person you want on your team.
NOT an A+ asset.
It’s perfectly ok to have an existential conflict, but why involve the rest of the world? Another pundit so close to making a point, yet…
This article turned out to be surprisingly useful, for it stimulated a wide-ranging discussion here and many good points were made.
Well played. 🙂
ZDNET…oh yeah, those guys. I haven’t visited that idiotic site for quite sometime. You can only read STUPID for so long until the humor fades away.
Only the pundits are developing the iWatch
Yes, I agree. These “pundits” assume they know what the “iWatch” will be, and then explain why it won’t work or be successful.
His two “unsolvable” issues…
(1) I have an iPhone, but I don’t carry it on my body everywhere, such as when I’m at home or when I go running. That’s why people still buy iPods (even though an iPhone can do “everything”), because they are useful for situations not well-suited for an iPhone.
> If you’re like most people you have the smartphone… in your hand most of the time that you’re free to use a smartwatch.
What? Even when I have my iPhone with me, it’s not glued to my hand. It’s usually in my pocket, and I don’t always want to pull it out and press the home button (like when I’m on a crowded bus or train), just to check the time. That’s why people still wear wristwatches, and a “smart” watch will provide a lot more info than just the time.
(2) The screen would be too small? Apple is not designing iWatch to replace iPhone. That would be stupid. More likely, iWatch complements iPhone, if the customer has an iPhone. The screen will be large enough for what iWatch does, because Apple will design it that way. iWatch will not perform functions that require a larger screen.
I think iWatch will be MUCH more than what most of these tech “experts” imagine.
What a lousy writer.
I don’t know about that. He thinks the problems can’t be solved, even by Apple.
Then he says, maybe Apple could do it, but I doubt it.
Personally, I put my watch in a drawer when I got my first iPhone.
The watch is still in that drawer and it still has the correct time, I just checked.
Me too. But if the I watch did nothing more than silently alert me via vibration or small electrical signal to incoming calls or whatever else I might designate, I would buy one. And wear it all the time.
An iWatch needs to be both more than a watch and more than a simple relay for the iPhone. It needs to have specific, separate functions that work with an iPhone (probably over Bluetooth Low Energy) and actually provides usefulness you can’t get from carrying an iPhone.
It would be nice if it could track and store data and play music without the iPhone being nearby for workouts. Sync automatically once in range of the paired iPhone. It could monitor heart rate, GPS maps, reps lifting weights, be waterproof for swimming and count laps/play music, etc.
Hopefully Apple has a couple of crazy, must-have features to cram into it. The iWatch could be very interesting and useful, or just a watch that talks to your iPhone.
how freakin lazy…
you cant pull your damn phone out of your pocket to check the time… you think while you are in the washroom you leave your 700 dollar phone at your desk and need a watch to tell you – a call was missed – this world is fcuked up – no one needs a blood watch like this
too many blood gadgets – I remain iPhone faithful – a complete – powerful enough computing solution – small enough to take even to the wash room…
people think they are so damn important and need constant connectivity – this is so bs – a watch to monitor the stocks – waste of a life – do something – make something be passionate – return something to society what you gain – dont get hooked on all the hype and believe you need something to be happy – and definitely not a watch to keep you on time – that solution was invented long ago.
I think he makes a good point, and it’s one that I’ve thought of myself. What would be the purpose of creating the iWatch? I think it is impractical and would be more of a high-end digital watch than an “iPhone-ish” product that also happens to tell time. With the decline in the watch market (mainly due to smartphones), I don’t see this product doing well.
One functionality that a “smart watch” could integrate would be a personal activity monitor like Fitbit Flex or Nike Fuel. Of course, not everyone wants that, but if it was integrated by default, I suspect people would use it for at least some portion of the functionality. A natural use for that would be for exercise, rather than carrying an iPod or iPhone.
It could also augment a smartphone for times when grabbing it out of your pocket or purse is not convenient. I can think of a number of instances that, while not frequent, add up to a nice bonus function.
I do not know if there is a killer function for a smart watch, but it could be that there are a number of convenience functions that when all added together, make for a useful product.
and with your arguement well taken, lets think differently now
imagine iPad mini – with telephone capabilities – and a blue tooth ear plug activated by Siri – now “phablets” are no longer laughable. Keep your device in its pouch – and when needed – the larger screen is welcoming.. no need to hold a large device up to your head to use… communications are changing… Bells Alex are here. we got Skype, FaceTime, viber etc… video calling requires one to look at the screen not hold the device to your head….
solution – a “phablet” with blue tooth ear plug not a iWatch
Anybody who knows Apple will understand that Apple has a tremendous track record for simplifying things. An iWatch won’t have lots of buttons to choose from, it will only have a very small number of them – think about Apple’s remote control for Macs.
Hitting a small target on a touch screen is a problem that Apple have already solved. The keys on an iPhone keyboard are only a few mm across and your thumb could easily cover four or more of them at once, but it’s still easy to type accurately with your thumbs on an iPhone. The touch sensing algorithm calculates the centre of the area touched and treats that spot as the target, irrespective of how many other keys were also touched.
Kendrick’s principle argument appears to be that nobody has made a successful smart watch so far, therefore it isn’t going to happen for Apple. I would suggest that he looks at some previous Apple products or services and thinks again.
its ugly
its reminiscent of iPod nano and Nike watch
it sucks battery life like water
but its a smart fcuking watch – thx you Italy
http://www.imsmart.com/en
they were First – Apple better innovate beyond styling here
The thing many people, including the poster seem to forget or not take into account is that there are many times you do not have access to your phone.
Some reasons…
Work may require you to have it turned off, especially if it has a camera.
Social settings, looking at your watch is less rude then pulling out your phone while talking. Also some worry about the camera app or noise of the phone. Theatres and clubs for example.
Working with your hands on the job or even at home it can also be more convenient to look at your watch then grab your phone.
To me these mean that notifications, reminders and alerts may be useful. Simple readouts like pulse, timers, caller ID would be useful.
Playing games it would be more useful as a controller (motion sensors) then a screen. Though some puzzle apps might be neat. Try balancing a ball, Jinga, things like that.
Text messages are typicaly short so workable and connecting to your phone to talk will be of limited use for most people.
oh wow – essentially a silenced phone – the reason most times places enforce phones off are – the signals freakin interrupt things of more importance… like X-ray devices or intra-net services – people wearing these wrist watches would then have there phones on still to receive notifications — if not the watch would be its own device with sim card too… nope this aint gonna work – sorry
This iWatch talk is nothing but iBait for Samdung and Google to waste their resources on while Apple comes out with something else so kick ass, that they’re all left scratching their collective copycat heads – again!
agreed, perfect bait – a trojan wrist watch – while Apple goes around back to secure other important things – the bait was taken already – google and samsung decided to start research after Apple claimed they were interested.
I sit at a desk most of the day, in one appointment after another. I have to keep close eye on the time. I keep my iPhone in my pocket, so it’s not just laying around when I step out for a minute. It’s easy to look at my watch to check the time, but very awkward to try an pull my phone out of my pocket. That’s what works for me.
Now, I have no idea if Apple is developing an iWatch, but I feel absolutely certain that, if they are, using it to check the time will not be it’s primary use or the main reason people would wear it. The name iWatch may be an understatement. If it ever comes out, who knows what they will call it. Apple trademarked iSlate shortly before the iPad was released.
at most peoples desk they have a computer – i do not know one computer that does not display the time… lol
I am unfortunately forded to use a Dell with Windows 7, and the time is a very difficult to read font in the lower right hand of my screen. When I am talking to someone, it’s very awkward to turn my head 90 degrees to the right and lean forward towards my screen to make out the time.
Only the most idiotic, or self-centered, walks around with their damned phone in their hand all the time. This includes teenagers who always seem to be accompanied by a white glowing screen in the dark, making them, and anyone else clutching their phone in their hand a target for an instant mugging.
It always makes the phone owner look as though they think they’re the only person around who actually owns one:
“Look, look everybody, I’ve got a mobile phone! Hey, everyone, aren’t I really cool, I’ve got a mobile phone that’s better than yours!”
Fucking idiots.
And no, I don’t want a smart watch, either. I have no overriding need to see what emails have arrived in the last five minutes, or whatever Facebook or Twitter posts have turned up. They’re just not important enough.
I wear a watch, it gives me accurate enough time just by the merest glance at my wrist, instead of having to drag a phone out of my pocket, wake it up, then get it the right way round,
all of which takes twenty times as long.
because the phone does many things ‘wienis’,
it usually is in peoples hands…
browsing – navigating – playing games – watching movies – chatting – the phone does far more than making calls – so it is totally natural its in the hands far more now then before
and for taking pictures too – god help you Rorschach
BULL! Think of every single time u have to reach in your drawer or pocket and fumble for your iPhone to answer a call or read a text! Now, how about a quick look at your iWatch with zero fumbling in .2 seconds? Buzz! iWatch! Ring! iWatch! Chime! iWatch! Human nature proves time and time again, convenience is #1. Therein lies the entire generation of entitlement-drunk freeloaders you and I pay for because movement is inconvenient! But that’s another subject no amount of technology will help!
why then have a phone….
one day SIRI can handle everything from and like a phone can much simpler – yet you lose the games the browsing and webpages – you KEEP music with iRadio and CALL is a service by SIRI… no need even for a screen… ONE button — talk to SIRI… hey what time is it… hey i am at Where Street how to get to This Street… hey Siri please call My Wife…
yeah then who THE HECK needs a phone…
DICK TRACY year is coming
I just published a blog post today called Imagining the iWatch at http://anandabits.com/blog/imagining-the-iwatch. It describes the problems the iWatch will solve and why it will be a success. The author of this article should check it out…
For years I used an old iPod nano as a watch…and it’s great
Tell time, listen to music, count the number of steps, mini photo viewer, with now stumbling for iPhone stuck in coat pocket or bag.
There are so many thing that are it can do…just don’t think of it as an alternate to the iPhone
Cant wait…unless it has a plastic wrist band
Where do I start? This opinion piece is so myopic as to be laughable, so let’s skip it and jump straight to the issues that Apple will have to address to make the potential iWatch a delight to use, or it’s a no go.
First up, connectivity and battery life. Apple will probably use a low power BT or direct device-to-device WiFi connection. That means Tim’s desired biometric sensors, a 1.5-2 inch display, probably curved to allow easy viewing by turning the wrist, a custom battery wrapping around in the band, and a lightning connector. The device may have some minor built-in low power functionality such as a clock or biometric display from the built-in sensors, but that’s it. Major functionality will reside in the linked iPhone or iPod. This will allow people to stick their toe in the water to see if they like the idea, then go whole hog when they’re ready for accessing the linked device.
The connection will have some serious power management interface with the linked device to turn it off or wake it up on command, from either side of the link. This will permit long life in stand-alone mode using built-in functions, and perhaps day length when making more frequent connections for iPhone/iPod functionality, which will indeed require nightly plug-ins for recharging. How you use the device will determine how frequent you must power up. It will NOT be an always-on connection.
Ok, that’s the technical part. Next up, functions to delight the user. That means an app on the iPhone/iPod to configure the display on the iWatch. There will of course be some default stuff Apple has selected to be viewable on the iWatch the moment you initially establish the link. Perhaps local weather, stock activity, social media notifications, news alerts, but these will likely be checkable items in the Settings app, so you can decide what will be pushed to your wrist for display. This will give you control over how often you want data pushed to your wrist for display, and thus how quickly you will drain its battery.
Next, thrown in Apple’s design ethic, quality control, and customer service, and you have a potential formula for success.
The drivers for whether this ever sees the light of day will be power management software, display technology, battery design, weight, all thrown together in a package Apple can market with a 35% profit margin to make it worth its while. We’ll see. I’d like to see it happen.
Such wisdom! Thanks, James. I’m sure Apple has thought about NONE of these issues. It’s a real 50/50.
I believe everyone is getting the iWatch wrong. Here is my prediction:
It won’t have a traditional touchscreen that we see in other watches or the previous gen iPod nano. It will instead just show persistent or incoming “data” that you could “navigate” with simple back/fwd gestures. Something like the Nike fuelband.
It will have 4 main functions
a) Display time/weather
b) Display notifications from another iOS device
c) Monitor, track and display health data. The detailed info will only be available on a custom iOS app. These health/activity sensors will be its biggest feature.
d) iBeacon receiver
In summary, the iWatch will be a thin sleek minimalist “band” with a long (not rectangular) 1-2″ high PPI, low power display running sideways on the band with a ton of sensors, something like fuelband. No square/round display with touchscreen. No camera. No replying to text messages or emails. Just a band you put on and forget (or occasionally check to monitor time, weather, notifications and activity/health state).
Less than 50% of survey respondents recently said they wear a watch, instead relying on their smartphone. Me too, only wearing my smart Omega at the odd evening function.
So I guess the iWatch doesn’t thrill me too much – but happy to be blown away by an unexpected Apple thrill-factor!
The reason no one can figure out what to expect from the iWatch is because they are either limiting the concept too much or they are trying to expect too much from the device. Take for instance the Pebble. Minimal functionality limited mostly to telling time and giving notifications from the smartphone in your pocket through a coarse, monochrome text display.
Will Apple’s device (assuming it exists – so far there’s no hard evidence) similarly be an adjunct to the smartphone or will it be its own standalone device? Are they redundant? Or complementary?
Perhaps the low-energy BT will allow off-loading all the processor duties to the iPhone, with the watch acting as a mirror of the display, or utilizing an app that streamlines the iPhone’s output to the iWatch’s limitation.
Or, why does it have to be shaped like a wrist-watch? What is the size limitation? What if it was the size of the old long iPod nano, laid length-wise on the wrist? Or maybe slightly bigger. Too long? That device could play video for hours, had a radio, and a clock, surely by now we could up the battery, add a touch screen, biosensors, accelerometer for gesture controls, and some other neat features (or again, if it could simply access and mirror features from your phone – compass, GPS directions, music control, etc.). Put accessory/mic and earphone jacks on it if it has the memory and processor power for it’s own nano-like independent function.
This doesn’t have to replace your fashionable Rolex. It is its own thing. People still wear neck-ties, and those certainly aren’t functional in any way.
Sorry for the ramble.
I suspect what Apple is working on is an iPhone that is worn on the wrist.
Agreed. Perhaps there’s convergence in the old iPhone nano rumors (that have yet to pan out) and the iWatch concept.
first off – iWatch is not the NEXT big thing – guaranteed not.
Automotive industry and Siri is.
Television and tv content is.
Simpler user interfaces and better user experience is.
a WATCH – hell no.
What would make people wear watches again?
How about the ability to make payments, start a car, open a door and find out information without having to pull a device out of your pocket all the time.
Fingerprint and heartbeat technology to recognise the owner would do the trick.
There’s a good reason James Kendrick is not a product designer.
One could argue he is indeed not even a decent journalist.