[Mugge]

Aw come on! A device that can't keep track of time over three days? That would require an almost deliberate effort these days.

I propose that you put your iPhone in airplane mode for three days and then compare it to a friends iPhone.

[Kickaha]

No shit!!! LOL Every digital device relies on a very precise clock at its heart. It's the most basic function there is.

[Mugge]

Gruber has a review of the Apple Watch up now: http://daringfireball.net/2015/04/the_apple_watch

Good news about the battery life too, though, he also notes the silliness of the accuracy claims.

[Quagmire]

I am still curious about the Apple Watch, but I am still waiting for version 2 or 3 to really give it a serious thought. In one way I do want one. The fashion aspect I love. Just swap to the sport band when working out, etc. Something my steel watch can't do right now.

On the other hand, it's what the reviewers are saying. While the Apple Watch is the best smart watch out there, it's great, etc, but is a smart watch even helpful? Is it just a fad/Apple trying to get money out of us or will the Apple Watch become another iPod/iPhone/iPad where it transforms how we interact with our tech and daily lives*?

* I don't think the Apple Watch will revolutionize it like those three have, but simply evolves it.

[Wrao]

Nilay Patel's review on The Verge seems underwhelming. He's generally a bit of an Apple homer, or at the very least not someone who has a chip on his shoulder *against* them as some seem to. So to see him give it 'only' a 7 seems fairly damning.

Still, I can't shake the feeling that anyone approaching the Watch, reviewers especially, from the perspective of how they review any other gadget is going to inherently be kind of missing the point and the real litmus test, the $17k question is how it makes you feel after a few days usage to take it off. I think, if at that point you find yourself missing having it on then it hardly matters one lick about any of form/function/usefulness debate. But if you find yourself thinking 'eh I gotta put my watch back on' or going swaths of time without even really thinking about it, then that'd be a pretty strong indicator that the watch is far more niche than Apple and others might want to believe and it will ultimately fizzle quite spectacularly(though I wouldn't say failure, just that its reality will be a lot more grounded than some might believe)

[Brave Ulysses]

The reviews are what I expected.

It is a great device with a lot of possible potential but the initial product is underwhelming and lacks in focus and performance.

I think Apple is definitely on to something here, but I think the realities of the technological challenge they were up against surpassed their expectations and they bit off far more than they could chew for version 1. It does seem as if it is a half baked Apple product, which is a bit weird, since we aren't use to Apple's major introductions being that way. Limited features, yes. But just ok all around? no.

[Messiahtosh]

I think you need to try one out. I was blown away. I'd go for the 38mm after seeing them up close and using them, too.

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Wrao Still, I can't shake the feeling that anyone approaching the Watch, reviewers especially, from the perspective of how they review any other gadget is going to inherently be kind of missing the point and the real litmus test, the $17k question is how it makes you feel [...]

Exactly. You can't review a piece of jewelry the way Consumer Reports reviews a washing machine.

Jony Ive used a phrase in the original Watch video, "inspire desire," that really stuck with me and I think it perfectly captures this. Gadget reviewers are always looking for technical reasons why one thing is better or worse than another; this is why you see sites like PhoneArena that are weirdly obsessed with things like "screen-to-body ratios" and why gadget bloggers always talk about "lustworthy specs." But no one outside of the most neckbeardy of geeks really lusts over specs, do they? What "inspires desire" are those troublesome non-objective things like emotions that normal people have.

I think this is something that the fashion world understands far better than the tech world. A nice coat isn't expected to justify its niceness with specs. It's expected to be made better than a cheaper coat, of course—there are very real differences in the way cheap clothes are made, and you're paying to avoid all those cost-cutting measures—but it's understood that the most important thing about it is how it makes you feel. Buying shoes isn't just about protecting your feet from sharp objects.

I think a lot of men (and let's face it, most gadget reviewers are men) are uncomfortable with spending money on something "just" because of how it makes them feel, even though that's what they do. They want logical reasons to back up their decision. So they might replace their old plasticky Samsung phone with a Galaxy S6 mainly because it looks nicer and feels fancier and because it's new and shiny and it just feels good to own new and shiny things, but they'll tell themselves they're buying it because of the higher gigahertz or more megapixels, even if they had no complaints about the old gigahertz or megapixels. (After all, they're a man! They don't care about fashion, gross!)

This is one of the reasons so many geeks can't seem to even comprehend Apple's (seemingly obvious to most people) appeal: They're overpriced-by-the-specs things that "just" feel really good and look really nice! Why can't the sheeple see, the Galaxy has more gigawhatsits and resomolutions! Everyone must just buy Apple products because Apple unlocked the "marketing" cheat code, or something.

You can basically tell which products are targeted at men by how many numbers (horsepower! razor blades!) are in the ads. Because if you want to talk to to men, you can't acknowledge that they have feelings, that's like Bro Code 101. (Even Nike shoes, which many men wear purely as a fashion statement, have to justify their value with a lot of talk about how the advanced BioSpring 3000 technology lets you jump higher, and "dominate" the court or whatever.) The surest sign that a product is not targeted at men is an exclusively emotional appeal in the ad, like the words "indulgent" or "flattering." With that in mind, here's some words and phrases from the Apple Watch website: "something you can’t wait to put on every morning," "beauty," "look great," "thoughtfully designed," "perfect finishing touch," "the expression that suits you best."

I'm not terribly surprised the Apple Watch is getting the reviews it is. Part of that is because I'm not surprised the software isn't all the way there yet, but most of it is because I feel it's something that isn't really meant to be reviewed the way a "gadget" is. And it's not really made for your average gadget reviewer, either.

I ordered an Apple Watch, and—this is where the Apple-haters heads would explode—it has very little to do with any specific thing I wanted to actually do with it. I don't think people are going to buy these things the way they buy computers, where they buy them to complete some task. I'm sort of interested in the fitness tracking, but I mostly bought it because I was curious, and because I just wanted it. Jony Ive did his job, and it inspired desire. It's a beautiful watch, and I think I would like to wear it, because it just feels good to wear nice things.

Apple always says they want to be at the intersection of science and art, technology and the humanities, logic and emotion. I think the Apple Watch is the product where that's most true, where they're most able to explore both roads, where they're most free to pursue beauty for beauty's sake. That's not something you can chart on a spec sheet or capture in a number at the end of a review.

[Messiahtosh]

I don't understand why people think the software isn't good. It was loaded with apps/widgets and it ran very smoothly.

Really good post, by the way!

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by Robo … gigawhatsits and resomolutions …

Scates, are you hiding in Robo's keyboard?

—

Good post, and nailed it!

[addison]

Originally Posted by Messiahtosh I don't understand why people think the software isn't good. It was loaded with apps/widgets and it ran very smoothly. Really good post, by the way!

So I think you said you played with the ones that were bolted down and were connected to the iPad which offered a description of what the watch was doing? Those are the ones I played with too but I didn't know what they were running the apps off of. I didn't see any phones around. I asked an employee but they had no idea. Anyway, I still thought it ran sluggish on a lot of things. Especially maps. And the learning curve is a lot steeper than their other products. I didn't have much time to spend with it but I think the reviews have it spot on this time. It's interesting for sure but there is no way to justify the cost at this point especially for anything more than the Sport model. My store also had two Edition models even though they aren't selling them. They were in the table. Looked nice but the price? You have to be either nuts or nouveau riche.

[Messiahtosh]

Originally Posted by addison So I think you said you played with the ones that were bolted down and were connected to the iPad which offered a description of what the watch was doing? Those are the ones I played with too but I didn't know what they were running the apps off of. I didn't see any phones around. I asked an employee but they had no idea. Anyway, I still thought it ran sluggish on a lot of things. Especially maps. And the learning curve is a lot steeper than their other products. I didn't have much time to spend with it but I think the reviews have it spot on this time. It's interesting for sure but there is no way to justify the cost at this point especially for anything more than the Sport model. My store also had two Edition models even though they aren't selling them. They were in the table. Looked nice but the price? You have to be either nuts or nouveau riche.

Yeah, I tried the ones that were bolted down with the iPad displays on the side.

I don't think you have to be nuts. I have a $400 bullova watch that looks great and self-charges by movement and it is something I could easily see being replaced by the Apple Watch. People buy engagement rings that cost as much as the Apple Watch Edition, and more normally ones costing a lot beyond even the Apple Watch, so a piece of fine jewelry at this price (which this is) is not absurd. It is expensive, but it is not gouging, it's fair. The reviews haven't said that, which I think is a kind of low blow to Apple. They didn't just toss an iPod nano out there with a cheap strap on it and list it at $400. This thing looks and feels great and works really well. My wife kept commenting on how nice the Modern Buckle strap was and how soft the leather was (and prior to going and seeing one she was adamant about not wanting one). Would Pebble offer that? Microsoft? Motorola? Samsung?

Rich? $350 doesn't mean you have to be "rich" to buy one. It means you have to at least have some decent savings and a solid job or be in a two income family without more than one child if you're going to splurge on it. Or you might just prioritize jewelry or technology above other things? Who knows, but many of these things are now backordered into July.

[Robo]

The modern buckle really is the standout choice. I'm glad they added a more masculine black color, even if it still only comes in 38mm. It feels great.

And I know my leather.

[Messiahtosh]

Originally Posted by Robo The modern buckle is really the standout choice. I'm glad they added a more masculine black color, even if it still only comes in 38mm. It feels great. And I know my leather.

The rose leather Modern Buckle that my wife liked is backordered and not available until July at this point.

[Robo]

Sucks to be the sensible people that waited to actually try one on, hahaha

[Robo]

Originally Posted by Messiahtosh Rich? $350 doesn't mean you have to be "rich" to buy one. It means you have to at least have some decent savings and a solid job or be in a two income family without more than one child if you're going to splurge on it. Or you might just prioritize jewelry or technology above other things? Who knows, but many of these things are now backordered into July.

I think he was talking about the Edition models. I'd say if you can afford a $10,000 watch, you cout as "rich."

But for the other models, I actually agree with you. Someone told me I was stupid for buying a $750 watch, and maybe I am, but it's been like seven months since the announcement. I'm not rich, I don't drop $750 on a watch every day, but I knew I would want this and so I just planned ahead and saved a little of my fun money out of each paycheck. The same person has spent about the same amount of money since September on cable television, but for some reason that's considered essential and way less extravagant. I don't pay for cable, and bought a watch with the savings. Priorities.

[Messiahtosh]

Originally Posted by Robo I think he was talking about the Edition models. I'd say if you can afford a $10,000 watch, you cout as "rich." But for the other models, I actually agree with you. Someone told me I was stupid for buying a $750 watch, and maybe I am, but it's been like seven months since the announcement. I'm not rich, I don't drop $750 on a watch every day, but I knew I would want this and so I just planned ahead and saved a little of my fun money out of each paycheck. The same person has spent about the same amount of money since September on cable television, but for some reason that's considered essential and way less extravagant. I don't pay for cable, and bought a watch with the savings. Priorities.

Exactly. The Edition is for athletes and people who make $100,000+ a month and so it won't even be a drop in the bucket. Apple just wanted a piece of that action - can't blame them for that. The Edition is not being marketed to Toyota Corolla buyers, so it's not even worth looking at it in that way.