New Apple Lust Objects for 2010 and onward

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (16745 of them)

the u+k thing about the iwatch is not the iwatch itself but the insane amount of money and resources being poured into this thing

the Quim of Bendigo (Autumn Almanac), Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:12 (ten years ago) link

yeah nobody knows what it's gonna be called till they officially announce, but the iwatch is like apple's worst kept secret

I remember when the ipad was the itablet

also iwatch 100x less annoying than google goggles

truth bomb lawyer mean mean pride (Edward III), Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:14 (ten years ago) link

updates as in platform or hardware?

― educate yourself to this reality (sunny successor), Wednesday, May 22, 2013 5:20 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

both... iOS 7, prolly an iPhone 5s and ipad 5, tho the latter seems comically pointless or designed to anger ppl

truth bomb lawyer mean mean pride (Edward III), Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:17 (ten years ago) link

i wonder if there's going to be a generational disconnect between the designers like ive, who are of an age where it is a natural thing to have watches on their wrists, and this generation, which is used to having watches dangling from a steampunk coat pocket chain.

Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:19 (ten years ago) link

people still use watches? even the kids?

Nhex, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:21 (ten years ago) link

^^^ This is key. I have major doubts that a strap-to-your-body media device is going to catch on.

WilliamC, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:33 (ten years ago) link

I'm not interested in these and I installed OS X public beta and I wear a watch. Unless this looks basically nothing like i imagine this seems like something for the scoble/segway crowd.

caek, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:36 (ten years ago) link

if the iphone is mainly a phone then the iwatch will be mainly a watch

the Quim of Bendigo (Autumn Almanac), Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:39 (ten years ago) link

seriously 'i don't wear a watch' is not a reason to reject a rumoured digital bracelet out of hand

the Quim of Bendigo (Autumn Almanac), Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:43 (ten years ago) link

But the iPhone is not mainly a phone? It is that yr point?

caek, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:44 (ten years ago) link

Is 'I don't wear a bracelet' a good reason?

caek, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:44 (ten years ago) link

I can see something like a square iPhone/iPod Touch Mini that's similar enough to the old 6th gen iPod Nano. Wristband (sold separately!) might have some value-added like the "smart covers" of the iPad.

Elvis Telecom, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:53 (ten years ago) link

I'm feeling my age... sick of iWhatever talk. I just want to see a new Mac Pro.

Elvis Telecom, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:55 (ten years ago) link

well you're in luck then http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/06/tim-cook-something-really-great-coming-in-2013-for-pro-mac-users/

markers, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:58 (ten years ago) link

maybe

markers, Wednesday, 22 May 2013 23:58 (ten years ago) link

i just kind of grosses me out. like kitchy spywear. wheres my iphone adidas?

educate yourself to this reality (sunny successor), Thursday, 23 May 2013 13:53 (ten years ago) link

apple's gonna have a really hard time getting rich people to buy into this, watches are too much of a status symbol. i think i've made this point before. rich people much rather be seen wearing a patek philippe than an iwatch.

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 13:58 (ten years ago) link

that's a good point, although the counterpoint is "are only rich people buying iPhones/iPads?"

they are either militarists (ugh) or kangaroos (?) (DJP), Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:12 (ten years ago) link

well I think there's always been a trickle down effect, since apple products are so expensive

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:15 (ten years ago) link

yeah but the Venn diagram of "ppl who can afford Apple products" and "ppl who buy insane status watches" isn't two equal, overlapping circles; it's like a dot inside a much larger circle

the more interesting question is probably "how many people wear watches who aren't insanely rich?" as hinted at upthread; if the general trend is not to wear a watch unless it conveys a certain level of status/privilege, what is Apple's plan to make this thing radiate the right type of status such that the market of ppl who can afford it but aren't already wearing ridic status watches want one?

they are either militarists (ugh) or kangaroos (?) (DJP), Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:19 (ten years ago) link

no way, the whole point of iphone is that everyone can have the same one the rich kids have

and it's not like they're expensive compared to any other smartphones out there

we're up all night to get (s1ocki), Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:19 (ten years ago) link

xp

we're up all night to get (s1ocki), Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:19 (ten years ago) link

ya i doubt apple is worried about the 0.00001% of the population who wear $50,000 watches, and iphones were never a thing that got popular cuz only rich people used them

we're up all night to get (s1ocki), Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:20 (ten years ago) link

If you can afford an iphone, you're rich. at least you're richer than people on $20/month plans with no-name phones who really would rather have an iphone. That's pretty much all the status differential apple needs.

Philip Nunez, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:27 (ten years ago) link

isn't it plausible that this is just the replacement for the nano? like, you could buy wristbands for the nano & different digital "clock faces" already. so now they'll just soup up the nano a bit more, & there's your iwatch. I dunno, I don't see them going bigger than that on this, because yeah, watches, woo hoo

Euler, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:28 (ten years ago) link

my point was more that the type of person who wears watches these days is more likely to be the kind of person who does so as a status symbol, not as a utility

the iphone is diff than other apple products in that it's really 'affordable' [via carrier subsidies]

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:32 (ten years ago) link

is it really that different price wise? I still totally feel the apple sticker shock with iphone same as any other apple product.

Philip Nunez, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:36 (ten years ago) link

all the other top smartphones sell at the same $100/$200 pricepoint w/ contract

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:41 (ten years ago) link

yeah the only time buying an iPhone really hurt was when I was replacing one I lost mid contract cycle

fortunately my pockets flow with paper, so *waves Roley in the sky*

they are either militarists (ugh) or kangaroos (?) (DJP), Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:48 (ten years ago) link

it's true, the levels are pretty comparable these days. apple came down in phone prices in recent years (by devaluing older models) to compete

Nhex, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:50 (ten years ago) link

The competing phones are fancy too, though, no?

Philip Nunez, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:54 (ten years ago) link

yeah... but i think there's real social pressure to have a good smartphone

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:58 (ten years ago) link

i dunno if apple can manufacture desire to a smart watch out of whole cloth

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:59 (ten years ago) link

like they did with the ipad

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:59 (ten years ago) link

the iphone is diff than other apple products in that it's really 'affordable' [via carrier subsidies]

when you take into account the monthly bill though, and the fact that a non-top-of-the-line ipod touch is like three hundred bucks, then

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 14:59 (ten years ago) link

or two hundred, rather.

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:00 (ten years ago) link

people are used to paying $100 a month for their phone bill

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:03 (ten years ago) link

since even a dumbphone without data, limited voice and text is like $50 a month

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:03 (ten years ago) link

thank u based capitalism

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:03 (ten years ago) link

people are used to paying $100 a month for their phone bill

― 乒乓, Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:03 AM

i'm pretty much proof that this isn't compeltely true

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:04 (ten years ago) link

i do not have and have never had an iphone

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:04 (ten years ago) link

I suspect if apple pulls through on just a more polished pebble-like watch, that would be enough of a "I didn't know I wanted that before but I want it now" thing

Philip Nunez, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:07 (ten years ago) link

well markers we're talking about broad demographic trends here, not outliers

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:11 (ten years ago) link

lol

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:12 (ten years ago) link

proud outlier since [birth year redacted]

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:13 (ten years ago) link

whatever, i'm being a little nitpicky here, because you're not exactly wrong, i'll have one of these things soon enough

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:14 (ten years ago) link

(hopefully)

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:14 (ten years ago) link

the weird thing is that i don't feel like i'm missing out on too much by not having one

markers, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:14 (ten years ago) link

people are used to paying $100 a month for their phone bill

― 乒乓, Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:03 AM

good luck usa.

caek, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:19 (ten years ago) link

caek let me add u to my based family plan

乒乓, Thursday, 23 May 2013 15:21 (ten years ago) link


This thread has been locked by an administrator

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.