![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hrjI confess that despite some necessary rules about acquiring new toys ("you must demonstrate that you'd really play with it once you have it"), in the end I always seem to be a sucker for each new Apple thingie. I love my iPhone. I held out on the iPad until I'd come up with a list of five things that I could/would do with it that I couldn't do with any other appliance. Not so much with the "get the complete set of sizes" thing -- I can't imagine what I'd want a mini-iPad for that I couldn't do better with either the full size or the phone. And of course my Mac laptop IS my brain. (Though I'm probably getting due to upgrade. Just need to do a complete analysis of how the newest OS will fuck over my current favorite programs first.)
But I cannot see myself buying an Apple Watch.
I was in Walnut Creek last Saturday for a haircut (this was just at the leading edge of when my current lung crud was raising its head so I still had brain power) and decided to swing by the Apple Store to check things out. Yes, I know the Apple Watch has been on the market for quite some time now, but there's no rush, right? I had only the vaguest notion of what the functionality of the thing was -- basically a sort of micro-iPhone, right? But it talks to your iPhone so it can delivery a more convenient interface without needing the internal capacity? OK, as far as it goes that was the right impression. But I hadn't quite realized just how limited the functionality was.
So as far as I can tell, you've got basically 20 functions. A quarter of them are essentially clock functions of some sort. Another quarter are informational interfaces equivalent to the "swipe down info" on the phone screen (calendar, weather, various notifications). Another quarter are basically "remote control" options for programs on other devices (camera, music, passbook).
The only really specialized functionality are the "fitbit-type" activity monitoring functions. But even more than a fitbit(tm) device, it must be worn on the wrist to function (due to body sensors) and therefore may be selective in what types of activities it detects. (If it's using an accelerometer, then vigorous activity that involves little hand motion may be under-reported.) And while it's "water resistant", wearing it while paddling still sounds counter-indicated. So all the issues I had with an actual fitbit still hold.
That brings us around to the final two factors.
Back when I got my first cell phone, I stopped wearing watches and never looked back. The tan on my left wrist has been seamless for quite some time now. I like not having anything on my wrist. Everything I ever wore a watch for now happens on my phone far more conveniently. One of the reasons I disliked the fitbit (and one of the reasons I took to wearing it on my ankle) was that annoying presence. If there were an Apple Watch that you could wear as a pendant, as a pocket watch, as a brooch, or as any of these interchangeably, then I might consider it. But it needs that body contact for the fitness functions. And that puts me off.
And then there's price. Let's just say that after taking phone plan discounts into effect, I'd end up spending more for an Apple Watch than I did for my full-function phone. More than I did for my iPad. I'm not saying that I judge on a price-per-gram basis, but I do judge on a price-per-function basis. And I just can't see that there's any way it would be delivering hundreds of dollars worth of function-value to me.
So, Apple? I'm happy that you're exploring new ways to entertain the gadget-geeks (in which category I do, indeed, fall) but you've seriously missed the target with this one as far as I'm concerned. I'll pass.
But I cannot see myself buying an Apple Watch.
I was in Walnut Creek last Saturday for a haircut (this was just at the leading edge of when my current lung crud was raising its head so I still had brain power) and decided to swing by the Apple Store to check things out. Yes, I know the Apple Watch has been on the market for quite some time now, but there's no rush, right? I had only the vaguest notion of what the functionality of the thing was -- basically a sort of micro-iPhone, right? But it talks to your iPhone so it can delivery a more convenient interface without needing the internal capacity? OK, as far as it goes that was the right impression. But I hadn't quite realized just how limited the functionality was.
So as far as I can tell, you've got basically 20 functions. A quarter of them are essentially clock functions of some sort. Another quarter are informational interfaces equivalent to the "swipe down info" on the phone screen (calendar, weather, various notifications). Another quarter are basically "remote control" options for programs on other devices (camera, music, passbook).
The only really specialized functionality are the "fitbit-type" activity monitoring functions. But even more than a fitbit(tm) device, it must be worn on the wrist to function (due to body sensors) and therefore may be selective in what types of activities it detects. (If it's using an accelerometer, then vigorous activity that involves little hand motion may be under-reported.) And while it's "water resistant", wearing it while paddling still sounds counter-indicated. So all the issues I had with an actual fitbit still hold.
That brings us around to the final two factors.
Back when I got my first cell phone, I stopped wearing watches and never looked back. The tan on my left wrist has been seamless for quite some time now. I like not having anything on my wrist. Everything I ever wore a watch for now happens on my phone far more conveniently. One of the reasons I disliked the fitbit (and one of the reasons I took to wearing it on my ankle) was that annoying presence. If there were an Apple Watch that you could wear as a pendant, as a pocket watch, as a brooch, or as any of these interchangeably, then I might consider it. But it needs that body contact for the fitness functions. And that puts me off.
And then there's price. Let's just say that after taking phone plan discounts into effect, I'd end up spending more for an Apple Watch than I did for my full-function phone. More than I did for my iPad. I'm not saying that I judge on a price-per-gram basis, but I do judge on a price-per-function basis. And I just can't see that there's any way it would be delivering hundreds of dollars worth of function-value to me.
So, Apple? I'm happy that you're exploring new ways to entertain the gadget-geeks (in which category I do, indeed, fall) but you've seriously missed the target with this one as far as I'm concerned. I'll pass.
