Apple’s rumored ‘iWatch’ is too late?

“Apple is always highlighted in investing news, but buyer beware — sometimes hype is just hype. Apple’s iWatch appears to be a reality; even Bloomberg noticed its 79 patent applications with the word ‘wrist’ in it. But that doesn’t mean it’s worth your time,” Renee Butler writes for TheStreet. “A bevy of people say this iWatch is going to be a game changer… I say, several other companies are already producing ‘smartwatches.’ So unless Apple comes up with something truly revolutionary, it is going to clock more down days than up, in the near term.”

MacDailyNews Take: Apple doesn’t enter markets in order to perpetuate the status quo. Apple enters markets in order to disrupt them, because they’ve invented a better way. If Apple releases a smartwatch, it won’t be like “other companies.” We now return you to the musing of someone who’s totally unfamiliar with, or ignoring, the way Apple has operated through history.

Butler writes, “Year after year, companies have been launching various versions of these “smartwatches.” There’s Sony’s (SNE_) SmartWatch, which is compatible with Google’s Android operating system. Kickstarter raised a mammoth $10.27 million last year to help bring Pebble to market; this one runs both iOS and Android (although it cannot run SMS on iOS). Heard of the MartianWatch, MetaWatch or I’m Watch? In all that time, these ‘smartwatches’ have yet to catch on. Apple is just playing catch-up. In other words, Apple would be really behind the mark if it didn’t produce its own version.”

For what it’s worth (about zero) the full article is here.

MacDailyNews Take: As with everything else, if Apple doesn’t think they’re bringing something new to the table, a game-changer, then they won’t enter a market. (At least, they shouldn’t, if they’re still being run correctly, which we believe they are.) This goes for watches, TVs, streaming radio, and anything else the rumor sites can dream up.

Related articles:
Disney ‘MagicBands’ showcases massive potential for Apple’s iWatch – March 6, 2013
Swatch CEO on Apple iWatch potential: ‘Personally, I don’t believe it’s the next revolution’ – 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

32 Comments

    1. Who says that’s what it will be.
      It will likely be heavily synchronous with the iPhone, iCloud
      Access gps, motion sensors etc.
      A dick Tracy watch is a fail.
      A watch that is not waterproof is a fail.

  1. This Renee Butler seems to have a history of Apple click bait articles. A quick search turns up one from a few months back proclaiming disappointing sales of the iPad mini, stating that it has a more narrow target audience than the iPad… which is the complete opposite of the truth.

    I wanted to see if she had anything circa 2010 about the dire prospect of Apple entering the tablet market, but I’ve already wasted too much of my time on Ms. Butler.

        1. What would this iWatch do? This device has no defined purpose and no established use. It’s a phucking mirage, vaporware. Someone simply scoured through Apple’s patent applications and imagined the proverbial “one more thing” without knowing what Apple’s intentions are.

  2. its the natural evolution of the iPod. It not just has to be a great product, it has look absolutely great or people won’t wear/buy it. that’s the trick to wearable anything. people are picky about what they wear, just as much as or more than the phone the use.

    1. And I think everyone should steer clear of any name for this type of product with the name “watch” in it. Telling time is not why anyone would buy such a thing. A watch is the least what these products would be.

  3. This is the same old drivel that has been recycled many times in the past. Others are already doing something, so Apple cannot possibly succeed. Let’s play the substitution game and replace “Watch” with “Phone”…

    “Apple is always highlighted in investing news, but buyer beware — sometimes hype is just hype. Apple’s iPhone appears to be a reality; even Bloomberg noticed its 79 patent applications with the word ‘phone’ in it. But that doesn’t mean it’s worth your time,” [arbitrary journalist] writes for [arbitrary rag or blog]. “A bevy of people say this iPhone is going to be a game changer… I say, several other companies are already producing ‘smartphones.’ So unless Apple comes up with something truly revolutionary, it is going to clock more down days than up, in the near term.”

    Who knows? Renee Butler may be right. If so, however, it would just be a fortuitous mistake along the same lines as a broken analog clock being right twice a day.

    1. Interesting game:

      “At the time of publication the author had no position in any of the stocks mentioned.”

      “This article was written by an independent contributor, separate from TheStreet’s regular news coverage.”

      The Street and Cramer state all the time that they have stock in AAPL and sold half. So, yes, the “author” doesn’t own AAPL stock but Cramer and TheStreet do! Trying to indirectly push the stock?

  4. And when Apple introduces an iWatch, Renee Butler will be racing to be the first to tell us that it isn’t any good because it’s not like the Pebble. Then the iWatch will go on to sell in massive numbers, precisely because it’s not like existing smart watches.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.