“Yes, there are a few reasons you might want to strap a lens onto your wristputer. I get it. Being able to FaceTime from your wrist saves you the trouble of reaching for your phone. And again, it could be a solid marketing talking point,” Brian Barrett writes for Wired. “But the list, I think, ends there. Meanwhile, there many, many reasons to reject this idea, and we’ll start with the one that might most resonate with you the most: It’s antithetical to why you made the Watch in the first place.”
“A FaceTime call would not be one of the ‘glanceable moments’ the Apple Watch enables,” Barrett writes. “It would be a squintable horror, a tiny eternity spent yapping at a stamp-sized acquaintance on your wrist.”
“Oh, and about that wrist, which is where the Apple Watch lives, because it is a watch. Where do you position it during a FaceTime chat? Normal rib-height gives your video pal a terrifying view of your chin(s) and nostrils, but raising your hand to face-level for conversational duration would be both uncomfortable and make you look insane,” Barrett writes. “I honestly can’t fathom what you’re thinking, if you are really thinking it, other than maybe Dick Tracy made watch calls all the time so it must be okay? But even then, Dick Tracy was a detective; his wrist calls were matters of life and death, an allowable exception to any manner of rudeness. Also, he was a cartoon. ”
Much more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: What do you think, would you like to be able to FaceTime chat via Apple Watch? Or would you rather a camera that points forward (from Watch’s pinky-side edge as opposed to up from the Watch face), so you can snap images right from your wrist?
Both (if they’d fit)? Or, no camera at all?
Apple Watch 2 to feature FaceTime camera, iPhone-free Wi-Fi, premium-priced $1000+ models, sources say – June 18, 2015