Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Would Steve Have Released This Watch?
- Thread starter osx11
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I accept the facts.
Tim Cook is the CEO. Did he tell ABC that the question about Steve Jobs was stupid-ass? No; Cook answered the question.
sk1wbw, do you disagree with Apple's definition of historic?
Steve Jobs released dalmatian and psychedelic print iMacs. He released the plastic colored iBook. He released a buttonless iPod shuffle. He released the fat nano and the plastic iPhone 3/3G (after the original metal iPhone). He totally could have released this. And if he did he would have talked it up in a way only he could that would make everyone drool over it.
Cook, who worked with Steve Jobs is well within his right to talk about Steve. Surely more than the arm-chair tech pundits here. People who knew and worked with him have far more right to speak about him. Hint: Reading the biography doesn't make you a Steve Jobs expert.
Hopefully you can see the difference. But you want because you ignore me!
No one can really ever know.
Sounds like a double headed question to me as well. On one hand it sounds like "Is this the Watch Steve would have created?" or basically is this an apple worthy watch.
The other is despite it being an Apple worthy watch, would he still have made it?
Personally I think if he was going to make the watch it probably wouldn't be far off this, so in that sense. I think the watch is pretty Steve/Apple.
But I don't think he would have pursued this market, so in that sense I would say no, he wouldn't have.
Sounds like a double headed question to me as well. On one hand it sounds like "Is this the Watch Steve would have created?" or basically is this an apple worthy watch.
The other is despite it being an Apple worthy watch, would he still have made it?
Personally I think if he was going to make the watch it probably wouldn't be far off this, so in that sense. I think the watch is pretty Steve/Apple.
But I don't think he would have pursued this market, so in that sense I would say no, he wouldn't have.
Maybe off-topic in as few words as possible, please, what things were associated with the two dips before and after the launch of App Store?
I said it before when Moto360 was announced and I say it again, having a touchscreen on your hand is just and extension of your mobile device. And what's up with the possibility of to view maps and read text? That's awful! Just take your phone out of the pocket, it takes few seconds.
This is definitely flawed approach to smart wearables.
I prefer something like this, actual watch with some essential digital content. No text reading, no maps, no BS.
https://www.behance.net/gallery/19743713/Rado-Hyperchome-Smartwatch-Powered-by-Blackberry-10
This is definitely flawed approach to smart wearables.
I prefer something like this, actual watch with some essential digital content. No text reading, no maps, no BS.
https://www.behance.net/gallery/19743713/Rado-Hyperchome-Smartwatch-Powered-by-Blackberry-10
I didn't see the interview. But yes, if the reporter asked that same stupid ass question, then I as Tim Cook would have said the same thing. Stop worrying about what would Steve make.
That David Muir interview, on the day of Apple's announcement, did question Cook about Jobs. The link above leads to a pleasantly short clip. I sensed no animosity from Cook; nothing to suggest that the interviewer was a stupid ass.
More recently (less than two days ago):
Tim Cook Speaks on Steve Jobs, Apple's Interest in TV, and Beats Acquisition in New Interview
In the fifty-something minutes, I sensed nothing from Cook to suggest that the interviewer was a stupid ass. I thoroughly recommend watching, without a break, from start to finish.
In the meantime, please stop worrying about people asking questions.
I don't see how the question can honestly be answered. He's passed on now and cannot be sought out for opinion. Our opinions on the question are wholly irrelevant as well because all we can do is speculate and to what end? Suppose someones says "yes, Steve would have." What would that accomplish? Or to the contrary, if someone says "no, Steve would not have" Would that answer accomplish anything different?
Either answer, opinions they will be, makes no difference to anything. It won't change the Apple Watch, or how its viewed by the public today. Maybe Steve had some influence on it over 3 or 4 years ago, prior to his death, if they at Apple were even working on it back then. Regardless if he did or didn't, it still has little bearing on the question you pose.
The question itself is an exercise in futility.
Please see above, the Cook quote. Also, the more recent interview linked from a MacRumors news article there, again, are questions from the interviewer about Steve Jobs.
To some shared knowledge of speculation, although that's not necessarily an 'end'. Something more thought-provoking may arise during discussion
Would he have released it? No. He would have killed the project.
I think this project got too much momentum at Apple and without Steve no one had the balls to call it out for what it is - a confused, me-too product.
Tied to an iPhone = fail.
Six different ways to interact = fail
A million options = fail
Sending heartbeats? Really? Fail.
It solves nothing; is too limited in it's current form.
And why would you buy a gold one? Hardly a classic timepiece that's going to be handed down through generations...
I think Steve would have said, "stuff the 'analysts', we roll when we're ready and not before". This product is clearly half baked.
I think this project got too much momentum at Apple and without Steve no one had the balls to call it out for what it is - a confused, me-too product.
Tied to an iPhone = fail.
Six different ways to interact = fail
A million options = fail
Sending heartbeats? Really? Fail.
It solves nothing; is too limited in it's current form.
And why would you buy a gold one? Hardly a classic timepiece that's going to be handed down through generations...
I think Steve would have said, "stuff the 'analysts', we roll when we're ready and not before". This product is clearly half baked.
You are forgetting few things.
First, its an initial step of Apple into a new computing category of wearables, or supermobiles. There are pebbles, LG watches, S gear, Sony watches. If Apple doesn't enter the competition, it will be left out and forgotten.
Second, Jobs would release anything that increases Apple's margin and profits. He had obligation to do it. Whether it will sell, a slightly different question. There were failures like Cube for example under his watch and predecessor of iCloud. Eventually, Cube became a new MacPro, I believe and iCloud is earning money. So yes, Steve would do it.
Second iteration of iWatch will probably have 3G and wireless and GPS. S gear has it. Design wise, after reading about LG and motorola and looking at their images, AppleWatch is better. It is also much more functional then the Blackberry Rado watch. So its not all bad.
My vote made the poll exactly 50.0% - 50.0%, Eighty five votes each way.
( I voted yes)
I find that fascinating.
( I voted yes)
I find that fascinating.
The revolution wasn't in the updates, it was in the original product - updates were used to bring whatever product it was into line with the competitions' devices.
Examples would be:
Original iPod\iTunes: saw the dawn of mass online music sales! Before iPod there was a niche market, but most people were sharing\pirating ripped .mp3's, rather than actually buying anything. iTunes made it easy to pay for music.
Original iPhone\App Store: the Glass touch screen and the Touch UI (now known as iOS) was something nobody had done so smoothly before - it raised the Public's level of expectation from other manufacturers, as everything before that was now considered "clunky". Later revisions only served to add the functionality of other Smartphones. Apps were becoming the default way of adding useful programs to your smartphone and they just worked - which is something some other manufacturers still haven't got to grips with.
Original iPad: Portable browsing on a tablet small enough to carry, but big enough to be practical, Connectivity & Synchronisation to other devices on a never before seen level.
Original
Watch, ...the Jury's still out on any truly Revolutionary functionality, and if there is some revolutionary tech installed, we don't know because Cook didn't sell it hard enough.
The revolution wasn't in the updates, it was in the original product - updates were used to bring whatever product it was into line with the competitions' devices.
Examples would be:
Original iPod\iTunes: saw the dawn of mass online music sales! Before iPod there was a niche market, but most people were sharing\pirating ripped .mp3's, rather than actually buying anything. iTunes made it easy to pay for music.
Original iPhone\App Store: the Glass touch screen and the Touch UI (now known as iOS) was something nobody had done so smoothly before - it raised the Public's level of expectation from other manufacturers, as everything before that was now considered "clunky". Later revisions only served to add the functionality of other Smartphones. Apps were becoming the default way of adding useful programs to your smartphone and they just worked - which is something some other manufacturers still haven't got to grips with.
Original iPad: Portable browsing on a tablet small enough to carry, but big enough to be practical, Connectivity & Synchronisation to other devices on a never before seen level.
Original
iTunes is what made iPod but iPod came first. It will take a few years before we'll know if
Watch is successful of not. But one thing it has in common with other Apple product launches is the naysayers don't think it will be successful.Just want everyone to know that I'm typically not a fan of the "Would Steve have done this" questions and comments.
However, with this controversial product, I was genuinely interested in people's opinion on this topic. And the fact that the poll result is about 50/50 shows that this is indeed a significant and debatable aspect of this product's launch.
However, with this controversial product, I was genuinely interested in people's opinion on this topic. And the fact that the poll result is about 50/50 shows that this is indeed a significant and debatable aspect of this product's launch.
The revolution wasn't in the updates, it was in the original product - updates were used to bring whatever product it was into line with the competitions' devices.
Examples would be:
Original iPod\iTunes: saw the dawn of mass online music sales! Before iPod there was a niche market, but most people were sharing\pirating ripped .mp3's, rather than actually buying anything. iTunes made it easy to pay for music.
Original iPhone\App Store: the Glass touch screen and the Touch UI (now known as iOS) was something nobody had done so smoothly before - it raised the Public's level of expectation from other manufacturers, as everything before that was now considered "clunky". Later revisions only served to add the functionality of other Smartphones. Apps were becoming the default way of adding useful programs to your smartphone and they just worked - which is something some other manufacturers still haven't got to grips with.
Original iPad: Portable browsing on a tablet small enough to carry, but big enough to be practical, Connectivity & Synchronisation to other devices on a never before seen level.
Original
Exactly. I'm just hoping this will make sense with other future product announcements; ecosystem benefits.
As it stands the watch is not much to write home about.
And people said that about the first iPod and first iPad. What I find amusing is people who never knew Steve Jobs personally, never worked with him seem to think they know what he would/wouldn't do better than those who worked with him for 15+ years.
I know what you mean, but I don't completely agree. Clearly we're all just speculating here, however... I think, the iPod and iPad are a different kettle of fish; they solved an immediate problem first and foremost - and then they were adapted into all the wonderful things we know today.
What 'problem' does the Watch solve? It sticks a couple of sensors on your arm, but then fails the test of actually being useful in the times when one might actually wear one.
For example:
*Athletes would use one, except the is not water proof and is tied to an iPhone (which they'd rather not carry).
*Notifications? Hmmm, yes, looking at the phone in my pocket is just waaaay too hard...
*Tell the time..? because there aren't a million devices in my home/work all flashing the time already?
*Gorgeous jewellery piece? Not really, and you'll want to update that in a year or so.
*Wear over night to monitor sleep..? Nope, it'll be charging.
Don't get me wrong, I want to like it, but there is just no good use case for it right now. Make it water proof, slim it down, ensure a week's battery life (or add kinetic charging - even as a supplement), cut the dependence on the iPhone, esp with a GPS ad it'd be getting closer.
Right now it's just a confused me-too.
Maybe I'm wrong, convince me; give me one must-have use case that it can do right now (as described in release). I just can't see it.
Apple Watch use cases
I can't offer a compelling current use case, I suspect that Apple suggestions of cases will be strategically timed.
An idea from a few months ago: singlehanded point and click
I can't offer a compelling current use case, I suspect that Apple suggestions of cases will be strategically timed.
An idea from a few months ago: singlehanded point and click
Thoughts
Is there any evidence that one of the posters here imagines that about herself/himself?
With respect, it seems a little as if you think you know the voters better than they know themselves. The same might be said for some of the other posters … this it not intended to be inflammatory, just food for thought; I can't see anyone here writing as if they are superior to the CEO.
Without examining the validities of those two things (maybe too sensitive a subject) … without reference to Steve Jobs … I'd like to somehow put myself in the shoes of anyone who is either (a) 'wilfully ignorant of' or (b) 'overly concerned with' health-related issues – with a focus on measurement. It's difficult to put into words what I'm thinking … it'll probably continue in a different topic, I might eventually bring it back here.
Is there any evidence that one of the posters here imagines that about herself/himself?
With respect, it seems a little as if you think you know the voters better than they know themselves. The same might be said for some of the other posters … this it not intended to be inflammatory, just food for thought; I can't see anyone here writing as if they are superior to the CEO.
Without examining the validities of those two things (maybe too sensitive a subject) … without reference to Steve Jobs … I'd like to somehow put myself in the shoes of anyone who is either (a) 'wilfully ignorant of' or (b) 'overly concerned with' health-related issues – with a focus on measurement. It's difficult to put into words what I'm thinking … it'll probably continue in a different topic, I might eventually bring it back here.
exactly like the iPod nano 6th gen, i felt they got that one right but it just needed more improvement. like adding bluetooth and app development for it, haha wishful thinking.