- Status
eodeo
Distinguished
- May 29, 2007
- 88
- 0
- 18,590
As soon as the watch can cost less than 200$ and last for at least a month without charging- I might consider it. Charging once every year would be better. Right now I have a watch that I got a couple of years back. Still works perfectly and battery life only comes to mind when I think about "smart" watches.
I had a smart watch, got rid of it after a week, I was gifted a second one, I got rid of it in a few days. I don't see anything special this iApple aberration is doing better than those two I have had before, or that my phone doesn't already do. And it is not a "well made wrist device", if i wanted one of those I would get an actual well made wrist device. They usually come from Switzerland, they are pieces of art and they transcend time. iApple's aberration will be obsolete in a couple of years at the most.
drapacioli
Distinguished
- Dec 6, 2010
- 308
- 0
- 19,010
No thanks, I'm still enjoying my skeleton mechanical wristwatch, it does absolutely everything I want it to (which is a) tell the time and b) look nice), plus it needs no battery and doesn't need replacing every year!
WHY NO ONE NEEDS A SMARTWATCH
The only reasons for Apple watches is to give Applecsomething to sell, and for the technology writer drones something to get paid for promoting and writing about.
If you don't understand that product promotion is the function of technology reviewers, then you need to wake up. It's the only reason they exist. Their generation of reviews and redundant blogs - chatter - is like TV advertising. Enough repetition, and most people start to believe that whatever is being sold is a normal and necessary part of life. Its why the US has more automobiles than adult citizens, crumbling highways, and a totally inadequate public transportation system. Without a war, the interstate defense highwy system would have never been built. Cars prolifeated only because of advertising a gadget that was inefficient and impractical.
I'm not a Luddite. If I needed a gadget to find way home, I woudn't buy an Apple Swiss army knife device; I'd buy a $3 compass or an $80 GPS with back track route logging. Either has an expected lifetime of decades, not months, is waterPROOF, shockPROOF and perfirms its functiln reliably and wrll.
If I needed a smartphone, I'm not crippled, too lazy to reach into my pocket to read it, or so deaf that I couldnt hear it. I'd get $150 basic Android device, not a +$400 Ai-pple, and have thousands of apps from which to choose. That's if I needed one. I don't. A $30 candybar phone is a better phone. A $125 tablet is a better easier to use portable computing device.
I could buy a new more durable watch evey month for the expected lie cycle of an Apple watch and save money. I could get a Casio with a 10 ATM water rating, a 10 year capacity battery. That $35 watch has multiple alarms, a phone directory and is 100% hacker proof. wear it continuously for 6 or 7 years (twice the Apples recharge cycle ability) without it bring"obsoleted" by its manufacturer. Then for $2 I could install a fresh battery and give it to an 8 year old kid and not worry about it be being broken ir stolen.
The "smart" part of a smartphone is a solution to problems that 99% of the population of the world didn't have before they were introduced, A smart watch is a solution to laziness and a need to boost ones ego by purchasing expensive possessions.
The rationale for smartphones, that they consolidate several gatgets into one, if valid in the first place, that is the strongest argument against a watch that doesn't work without a smartphone (from the same manufacturer!) and performs the trivial functions of -remote display and control over a 3 foot range.
.
The only reasons for Apple watches is to give Applecsomething to sell, and for the technology writer drones something to get paid for promoting and writing about.
If you don't understand that product promotion is the function of technology reviewers, then you need to wake up. It's the only reason they exist. Their generation of reviews and redundant blogs - chatter - is like TV advertising. Enough repetition, and most people start to believe that whatever is being sold is a normal and necessary part of life. Its why the US has more automobiles than adult citizens, crumbling highways, and a totally inadequate public transportation system. Without a war, the interstate defense highwy system would have never been built. Cars prolifeated only because of advertising a gadget that was inefficient and impractical.
I'm not a Luddite. If I needed a gadget to find way home, I woudn't buy an Apple Swiss army knife device; I'd buy a $3 compass or an $80 GPS with back track route logging. Either has an expected lifetime of decades, not months, is waterPROOF, shockPROOF and perfirms its functiln reliably and wrll.
If I needed a smartphone, I'm not crippled, too lazy to reach into my pocket to read it, or so deaf that I couldnt hear it. I'd get $150 basic Android device, not a +$400 Ai-pple, and have thousands of apps from which to choose. That's if I needed one. I don't. A $30 candybar phone is a better phone. A $125 tablet is a better easier to use portable computing device.
I could buy a new more durable watch evey month for the expected lie cycle of an Apple watch and save money. I could get a Casio with a 10 ATM water rating, a 10 year capacity battery. That $35 watch has multiple alarms, a phone directory and is 100% hacker proof. wear it continuously for 6 or 7 years (twice the Apples recharge cycle ability) without it bring"obsoleted" by its manufacturer. Then for $2 I could install a fresh battery and give it to an 8 year old kid and not worry about it be being broken ir stolen.
The "smart" part of a smartphone is a solution to problems that 99% of the population of the world didn't have before they were introduced, A smart watch is a solution to laziness and a need to boost ones ego by purchasing expensive possessions.
The rationale for smartphones, that they consolidate several gatgets into one, if valid in the first place, that is the strongest argument against a watch that doesn't work without a smartphone (from the same manufacturer!) and performs the trivial functions of -remote display and control over a 3 foot range.
.
The rationale that a remote display saves time by letting you do wgat a good email filteting function shoukd fo automatically is foolish.
That email filtering is needed is indesputable. That it doesn't exist in portable device mail client software is ridiculous. Todays smartpones have 100x the computing power of 1990s PCs whose email clients provided that functionality. It's surprising that consumers havent demanded better email filtering from ISPs. Even a basic whitelist would serve most of the urgent message filtering need. From known sender plus priority tag would do 95%.
The reason filtering hasn't caught on in client softwarev is the difficulty of creating rules. That would be an ideal operation for a webapp at the ISP. The app could tag the subject line with standard labels (SPAM, UNKNOWN SENDER, UNAUTHENTICATED, PRIORITY, KNOWN SENDER, etc). All an email client would need to do is sort by the tags, and alert by simpler builtin stardardized rules. If the ISP coukd do the sortig,
Inboxs would shrink to highet piority messages only.
That email filtering is needed is indesputable. That it doesn't exist in portable device mail client software is ridiculous. Todays smartpones have 100x the computing power of 1990s PCs whose email clients provided that functionality. It's surprising that consumers havent demanded better email filtering from ISPs. Even a basic whitelist would serve most of the urgent message filtering need. From known sender plus priority tag would do 95%.
The reason filtering hasn't caught on in client softwarev is the difficulty of creating rules. That would be an ideal operation for a webapp at the ISP. The app could tag the subject line with standard labels (SPAM, UNKNOWN SENDER, UNAUTHENTICATED, PRIORITY, KNOWN SENDER, etc). All an email client would need to do is sort by the tags, and alert by simpler builtin stardardized rules. If the ISP coukd do the sortig,
Inboxs would shrink to highet piority messages only.
teddymines
Distinguished
- Sep 12, 2011
- 44
- 0
- 18,580
If you feel the need to be even more connected, or have a tight relationship with your phone, then a watch-based device may be right for you. Some of us are trying to cut back on the pull of a phone, as well as the overhead of charging/upgrading/updating, so people like that (I am one of them) will likely reject these.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question NordPass issues with email masking?
- Started by Spotty352
- Replies: 0
-
Question low-cost laptop recommendations for gaming?
- Started by gutta
- Replies: 1
-
-
Question Buy a new Changingtouch lapdock recommendation- Started by Harold Robeson
- Replies: 1
-
Blacklisting phone with various variables- Started by Blindcracker
- Replies: 2
-
-
Facebook
Twitter