Yesterday I really hoped to be amazed. Please Apple show us that you were able to reinvent the smartwatch the way you revolutionized the smartphone with the iPhone (haha, as I predicted, many now think the smartphone era started in 2007). Or how greatly Apple changed the music industry with the iPod and iTunes - in fact the first case study in our book Communities Dominate Brands with Alan Moore, the signature book of this blog - is iTunes and the iPod. At that time when our book came out ten years ago, most in traditional media and many even in the music industry were unsure of how radically digital media would change their industries. Our readers on this blog have known and been following all that intensely over the years.
So it was now time to see Apple's latest attempt at iRevolution. Exactly what is the Apple Watch and what can it do? What we saw instead was an iDud. Yes the iChoir was still in an iTrance but the real world already woke up during the presentation that wait, there is nothing more? This is the same stuff we saw last September? Where is the iMagic? Where is the iRevolution. So now that we know, its time to do the autopsy of what went wrong with Tim Cook's first new iToy released after Steve Jobs had died.
iWATCH: ITS 1999 CALLING
First, was it just me, or did you also get the distinct feeling that gosh those examples and apps we saw were lame. Not lame as companies or ideas (Shazam, Uber etc) but as beautiful tech solutions to our lives? Come on, its 2015. So airline boarding pass? On your wrist? Seriously? Finnair offered the first mobile check-in service via mobile phones 14 years ago. Mickey Mouse clockface on a mobile? Disney Japan were selling those on NTT DoCoMo's i-Mode featurephones back in 1999. Yes party like its 1999. SIXTEEN years ago. On yes featurephones. Talking about featurephones, paying with your wrist? Have you been to my hometown Hong Kong recently? Our subway system sells smart watches that do the subway payment from the wrist already using NFC, have done so for two years (the Octopus system) but paying with NFC... thats more than 10 YEARS old idea on mobile phones. You don't need an iPhone for that, not even a smartphone, Japanese DUMBphones have done NFC mobile wallets for more than ten years now using Felica on NFC. Duh.
Shazam? Worked on the cheapest Nokia dumbphone in England twelve YEARS ago. NFC operated locks? Have you been to an Assa-Abloy store recently? They've been selling NFC locks for years, Stockholm's Clarion Hotels were among the first in Europe to offer NFC locks several years ago and the first countries to do NFC locks were Japan and South Korea yes, ten YEARS ago. So why the oohs and aahs about the remote control of your garage door? Come on. Sonera's home remote control functions did that 16 years ago - via SMS. You don't need a smart watch for that. You don't need an iPhone. You don't need a smartphone. You can use the cheapest Motorola or Huawei dumbphone and send an SMS and open your garage door - and this was available in your pocket in the previous MILLENIUM. Apple Watch, its 1999 calling.. what the hell are you doing peddling these old chestnuts in an APPLE event about the future? Come on! We wanted to see something iAmazing. What we saw was a review of two decades of mobile tech history outside the USA repackaged for Apple fanboys as if this was somehow radical.
DICK TRACY WATCH... NOT
Dick Tracy's watch was science fiction when showed in the comic books. What made Dick Tracy's tech amazing was not that it was on the wrist but that a telephone (and videophone) was MOBILE. As McGuire's Law states: The utility of any activity increases with its mobility. Not that it was on the wrist, but that it was mobile. Maxwell Smart, our fave TV secret agent parody Agent 86 from the 1960s has the humor version of that, not as a phone on his wrist, but the mobile phone embedded into his shoe. The utility was still there - mobility while the size in the 1960s was 'believable' that a phone could be miniaturized to fit a shoe, if constructed by the CIA for secret agents at the time. Then we went into space, with Star Trek original series and the communicator was the flip-walkie-talkie all Star Trek crew members carried on away missions, and the modern concept of the moblile phone was born in its fictional vision. Again not sci fi because it fit in the pocket, it was sci fi because a phone was mobile. The Motorola Star-Tac phone was designed to mimick that Star Trek vision and we normal humans could finally carry that phone in our pocket. Mobility. The utility of any activity increases with its mobility (not necessarily by its miniaturization. A pocket TV is not preferred over a plasma screen TV and current phablet phones also go against miniaturization).
So you know what. Since the first pocket-sized mobile phones, we've also had many wristwatch-phones launched, mostly from Japan and to usually big tech fanfare. Seiko in 1994 did a pager-watch. Casio offered us the wrist-based camera and screen in 2000. Citizen offered the accessory Bluetooth-connected watch tethered to your mobile phone in 2006. LG did the full Dick Tracy videophone watch in 2009. They went exactly nowhere. The vision of Dick Tracy, that we have to use our wrists to talk, or the vision of Star Trek that its a pocketable gadget we can bring to our ears and mouth to talk - were in contest and it was a total knockout. The wrist-based phone had zero chance whatsoever. The brilliance of Dick Tracy's wristwatch videophone was not that it was strapped onto our wrist, the utility, the brilliance was the MOBILITY. And THEN the utility of a pocketable phone-shaped device was far superior to bringing our watch to our mouth or ear, and the screen on the smartphone is far bigger than that on the wrist. Now we have that, in the cellular networks giving us mobility to our phones which is why we sleep with them and take them to the toilet and can't imagine life without them (as I first predicted in my second book mProfits thirteen years ago).
When Tim Cook said look, its the Dick Tracy watch, I've wanted to do this since I was 5 years old - I knew the iWatch was doomed. Oh no. After years of researching the Apple Watch concept, how could the brilliant people at Apple fall for that? This was tested and tried many times, it is not a winner. There is a better way, its called a mobile phone (aka smartphone). When the other iMagic gadgets were introduced, they instantly justified themselves. We saw they were winners. Clearly better than anything out there. This Apple Watch, even half a year AFTER it was first shown can do what. A Mickey Mouse clockface you could buy in the last millenium - for your PHONE.
This is the losing proposition that they somehow try to push, even as Apple themselves cannot show u anything to justify it. Its like steam-engined cars. Yes, early on in the age of steam as first electric cars and gasoline-powered cars were being made, some steam engineers constructed steam-engine powered vehicles. Slow heavy cumbersome beasts that only worked on very level ground and took forever to start up etc. But some were made. It was a technical dead end. The wristwatch-phone concept is similarly a dead end. This has been tried by the most gadget-mad nation on the planet, Japan, where the wristwatch industry has most of its giants, and where miniaturization is a special artform - yet it failed there. If wristwatch-phones (including true Dick Tracy videophone-watches) fail in Japan, what chance is there for the rest of us? But was the Apple Watch even a proper Dick Tracy watch?
IS IT MOBILE - RINGING IN THE POCKET TEST
No its not a Dick Tracy (video)telephone-watch on your wrist. It fails the basic test of mobility. I have been teaching for years in my workshops about what is mobile and what is not. So for an Apple example, why was the iPod musicplayer destined to fall when competing against musicphones like the Sony Walkman phone at the time. Apple's CFO Oppenheimer later admitted, that the Walkman phone was the exact reason why Apple had to develop and launch its iPod-phone/musicphone that became the iPhone (many have forgotten that the original iPhone of 2007 was not a smartphone, it was a musicplayer mediaplayer internet browser featurephone). But I was the first to explain it here on this blog back in 2005, how the iPod was destined to lose to musicphones - and boy was I crucified by Apple fanboys about that blasphemy at the time haha. Nice to see Oppenheimer give the final word on that haha.
But take two other related Apple products. The iPod Touch - do you remember that? In early years the WiFi-only non-cellular touch-screen iPhone-lookalike was selling about 50% of the rate of the iPhone. Where did that go? It died. I told you so. And what of the iPad? Tablet PCs. I said mobility wins. Now from Q4 of 2014 phablet-sized smartphones already outsell tablets worldwide. This year 2015 is the first year that phablets outsell tablets on an annual basis and tablet PC sales are stalling globally while smartphone sales and phablets keep growing. 40% of new smartphone sales in China a YEAR AGO (long before iPhone 6 Plus) were on phablet-sized screens already reported Kantar last April. What is it about mobile phones and smartphones? Why don't we carry our PSP and Gameboy videogaming in our pockets 24 hours a day or sleep with our digital standalone cameras from Nikon, Canon and Olympus? Why aren't we carrying Casio pocket TVs everywhere everyday like to the toilet and the movies? But we carry our mobile phones.
I was the first to give the test of 'is it a mobile' or is it only ultra-portable. An iPod MP3 player was not a mobile device, it was ultraportable. An iPod Touch looked like an iPhone but was not mobile, it was only ultraportable (and died). An iPad is - as I explained many times on this blog - only an ultraportable, it was never destined to sell in the volumes of the iPhone because an iPhone is a 'mobile' but an iPad is only an ultraportable. The iPad has to be considered in the PC industry, the iPhone can be considered in the mobile industry. The mobile industry completely dwarfs the PC industry in every metric from users to unit sales to revenues to profits. What did Apple start to call itself? Apple used to be called 'Apple Computer'. It dropped 'Computer' from the official Apple corporate name in 2007 when the iPhone was introduced. Now Apple calls itself a mobile company and most of its business is derived from the iPhone. So what is this test? Its very simple:
Ringing in the pocket test. Can it alert us while we are in a moving taxi? And does it fit into our pocket. The smartwatch is yes strapped to our wrist, but it would fit our pocket so size-wise it could be a mobile where obviously an iPad is too big and unless we start to wear MC Hammer style clown-pants with enormous pockets, an iPad is too big to pass the 'ringing in the pocket' test. So how about the ringing? We just saw Tim Cook receive a call on his Apple Watch, onto his wrist. Surely this is proof. No, it isn't. The device does not have a SIM card. It does not have a cellular connection. The only way it can provide an alert that you have a call - is IF you have your iPhone upon your body near enough to the Apple Watch. If you left your iPhone home, and went jogging, and only wore the Apple Watch - the call won't reach you! The vital SMS text message about the urgent matter with your daughter at school - will not reach you. It Is NOT the Dick Tracy watch. It is a pretender! It is a fake! It won't take your calls - unless you have your iPhone with you at all times. How stupid is that? So it adds all the weight and inconvenience of a small smartphone strapped onto your wrist but it CAN'T be used alone (and still be a phone, still have connectivity). So if you did want to go for a jog or leave your iPhone in the locker at the gym and just use the Apple Watch on your wrist, it no longer is connected. It fails the 'ringing in the pocket' test. It is only an ultraportable gadget, it is not a mobile gadget!!!!
Understand this. Some smart watches out there now from several brands ARE true mobile devices, that can connect stand-alone to the cellular network and receive our calls or messages even if we forgot our phone. So if we want to go say partying at night to the clubs/discos/bars and want to leave the big screen smartphone home, a proper connected smartwatch is potentially a replacement. An Apple Watch is not. It doesn't have a SIM card, it does not have a cellular connection. It needs the wireless tethering to our iPhone just to provide that functionality that Tim Cook showed on the stage.
This is a DESIGN FLAW. It puts the Apple Watch into the INFERIOR category. This has been tested WITH APPLE PRODUCTS many times before. The Newton did not revolutionize pocket computing because it failed the mobility test. The iPhone did because the key difference is that the iPhone is connected. Absolute proof, simultaneous device of lower cost and near identical specs, iPod Touch has been discontinued because the more expensive iPhone had one thing - it has true mobility. The iPod Touch was only ultraportable. You needed to find a WiFI network to find the connectivity. That is not 'mobility'. If it can't ring in your pocket, like for example when you're on a moving bus or train, then its not a mobile. There are PLENTY of smartwatches that ARE mobile, the Apple Watch is not. The Apple Watch is only an ultraportable device - that worse, requires permanent iPhone proximity for its full functionality. That is bad design. You cannot leave your iPhone and only take the Apple Watch. Now you are out of touch. That is lunacy. And that was CLEARLY misdirected by Tim Cook on stage. He suggested this is the Dick Tracy watch he always wanted. No its not. A Samsung Gear smartwatch or say the LG smartwatch, they are truly mobile as they have SIM card slots and can operate alone, leaving the main smartphone home - and still take messages and/or make calls from the wrist. The Apple Watch fails the ringing in the pocket test. That means, the Apple Watch (in its current format) cannot win against the true mobile rivals. And yes, Samsung's Gear is the bestselling smartwatch currently (said Smartwatch Group who is as far as I know the only one to publish a worldwide smartphone market share count so far).
This is not rocket science. This has been discussed in books by many experts for years. My Ringing in the Pocket test is a perfect test so far in every single instance it has identified winners and losers in the mobility races, from those gadgets that are merely ultraportable and destined to be second class citizens of the digital future. And why should you believe me? I wrote the first case study of digital convergence at a national scale in my 5th book Digital Korea so I've defended these views in public for a decade now and am still standing haha, with 140 books by other tech authors quoting me, my positions on mobile are well accepted to be valid. Its not like some silly Wall Street analyst discovered some iLove a couple of years ago and now thinks he or she understands the whole global market of mobile haha. But how can Apple fail so badly in basic design? They have gone through this path SEVERAL times before and have ADMITTED moblie won in the past. Why this silly gadget? I really really hoped we were going to see an iRevolution at that Apple event yesterday, that they had discovered something radical for us but no. This is an iFlop they designed. It is destined to fail in the market (by its second iteration, I'll get to that, the first edition always sells well because of iSheep who flock to the iChurch).
12% WANT TO BUY IT
You will see plenty of hype-induced reporting that tons of people will flock to buy the Apple Watch. I saw for example a UK survey of 2,000 consumers by Intelligent Environments that said 12% of British adults want to buy the Apple Watch. Note, first, that these surveys were all done before yesterday's Apple event, on expectations that it is iMagic on the wrist and will perform miracles and without considering cost. They also do expect, even after Tim Cook's performance yesterday that this wrist-thing will take our calls and messages, so we don't have to carry the big phone everywhere.
So secondly, that was desire without knowing the device. Once users find out it only works when you have an iPhone - and only the latest versions of the iPhone, so having an Android device (over 80% of all new smartphones sold worldwide are on Android and under 15% are iPhones) or another non-iPhone will mean you can't use the Apple Watch (in any meaningful way). An iPhone could be used without owning a Mac. An iPod could be used without owning a Mac or iPhone. This matter was never part of the equation. So thirdly then there is price. Those surveys were done before price was discussed (the Apple Watch prices start at 349 dollars and up, pretty much double the world average price of smartphones in the market today - at 189 dollars according to Smartwatch Group 2015).
And remember, we buy 600 and 700 dollar iPhones in many Industrialized countries like the USA and Japan - with contract and for a heavily discounted subsidised price (with hidden monthly payments and interest, for the remaining 24 months). But in those markets that 349 dollar Apple Watch will seem quite expensive indeed - as it will not have a carrier subsidy - it has no SIM card why would any carrier subsidise some ultraportable tech gadget that doesn't use the cellular network... In markets where consumers pay full retail price for their smartphones upfront, rather than hidden in 24 month contract subsidised prices, like say Italy and South Korea, the iPhone OWNERSHIP is far lower where consumers are far more rational in considering the value they are paying for. And an Apple Watch can only be sold to an existing iPhone (5 or 6 series) owner to be of any utility other than decoration on the wrist.
MY ANALOGY THE NOTBOOK
So let me give you now my analogy I thought of after yesterday's Apple event. What is this device? Let me give you my idea of the Notbook. Not a Notebook, but remove the letter E. a Notbook. Tomi Ahonen's brilliant idea to revolutionize the digital tech industry. So you own a notebook, most of our readers here on this blog own PCs and most of those are notebook portable PCs. Now I have a radical idea for you. Buy my Notbook. It is like a Notebook PC, it has a smaller screen so our movies and web browsing is less fun than on a real Notebook. It is still too big to fit in your pocket, so you have to have it in your briefcase. It has an inconveniently small keyboard so typing is clumsy. It is not a NETbook, it has no connectivity and no option to connect to networks (and no USB port). It has a weak battery life, worse than your notebook, and here is the killer - it only works if you have your notebook ALSO with you! in your briefcase. The Notbook will not work alone without that proximity. Oh and this costs more than most TABLETS... How is that for a killer product category?
Now, I am sure some clever dick can think of some bizarre use cases even for that ludicrous idea. But that is what you have now if you buy the Apple Watch. You HAVE to have the iPhone with you. The Apple Watch now adds what? A smaller screen. A less convenient input interface. It has a horribly bad battery life of 18 hours. It doesn't have much of the tech we have in our smartphones like the camera that is the second most used feature now (behind only SMS text messaging and ahead of voice calls). And it costs more than a good mid-priced smartphone or basic tablet. What the f.... There is NOTHING that the Apple Watch can do, that the iPhone in your pocket cannot ALSO do, except most of the time the iPhone does it better. The only things the Apple Watch can maybe do slightly better - is alerts. Is that a killer app for this industry? No. So we come to the big table..
30 MINUTES 3 MINUTES 30 SECONDS 3 SECONDS
I had introduced this simple tool to illustrate why a mobile phone (or smartphone) was DIFFERENT from a portable PC like a PDA (like Apple's Newton) or a laptop computer. I called it the 30 minute / 30 second tasks. We have plenty of 30 minute tasks that take our time, our concentration, and we want great tools to do proper work and a good working environment. Like now, writing this blog, I am at a Starbucks and authoring this story on my laptop PC. Those are 30 minute tasks. There are also 30 second tasks, that appear suddenly into our pockets. Them we an deal with urgently and immediately via our mobile phones (now smartphones) ie via a quick voice call or responding to an SMS text message or posting a quick Tweet to Twitter or picture to Instagram. 30 Second Tasks. These show that there IS a distinct use case that is DIFFERENT for the '7th mass media' 'mobile internet' than the traditional '6th mass media' legacy PC internet. This was radical thinking a decade ago, now its totally accepted by the tech world that you have to 'mobile optimize' and 'of course' mobile is different from the PC legacy internet. But I was first to show you why and how to understand it. Now, that was evolved to incorporate tablets (3 minute tasks) that fit in the middle. And now last year, my dear friend Zahid Ghadiali took that 30 minute / 3 minute / 30 second tasks thinking, and added the OBVIOUS part that I had missed... what about 3 second tasks? The tasks for the wrist? Is there a separate use case for 3 second tasks and how does that compare to mobile? So we came up with this table combining our thinking:
Table courtesy of Xplano Tech and Zahid Ghadiali. You may use with accreditation.
(incidentially, Apple apparently advises that all Apple Watch apps should be designed for under 10 second use cases, so they too seem to be onboard with the 3 Second metaphor). So look at the areas of OVERLAP and what is left OUTSIDE of overlap? Healtcare... Almost anything that a smartwatch can 'solve' we can ALSO do with a smartphone. BUT with the Apple Watch, that iPhone HAS to be in the pocket with us anyway. So now there is almost no added utility from the smartwatch. At least with stand-alone smartwatches that are truly mobile, like Samsung's Gear, we could consider one or the other. And then if the only real valid use case is around healthcare, and that is WHY you want to carry on something new and heavy on your wrist, why not then get the Pebble that at least lasts many days on one battery charge and is customized to those uses. The Apple Watch is a promise of something we really don't need, it fails to deliver on what people expect, is hideously expensive with bad battery life and with the crazy need for (wireless) tethering to the always-present iPhone, it isn't freeing us from tech, it is tying us to MORE tech. It is the digital iHandcuff !!!
18 HOUR BATTERY LIFE
So there will be some nice health apps no doubt. And now, what about my health when I am least aware, when I MOST need the monitoring? When I sleep.... and exactly that is WHEN the Apple Watch fails me again. 18 hour battery life means I have take it off my wrist every night and recharge it. And thus it is NOT monitoring my health 25% of my life. And now considering this expensive digital gadget purchase, a rival smartwatch that has 2 day or 5 day battery life becomes FAR more sensible if 'health' was the justification to buy it. Again, lost business for Apple, a win for rivals. And yes, just like with the iPhone, the big gains from the Apple hype blitz are the competitors. Now its the rival smartwatch makers who will have a good year when in the store their gadgets are compared alongside the first edition Apple Watch.
This is exactly as I predicted with the iPhone, its biggest impact was to boost sales of RIVAL smartphones from Nokia to Blackberry to LG. There is this silly myth that the iPhone killed Nokia or killed Blackberry. Yes, the iPhone was a killer, it killed the weak American rivals like Palm, Dell, HP, Motorola and Danger. But Nokia? The iPhone was launched in 2007. Nokia sold 39 million smartphones in 2006. So how much did Apple destroy of that business? Apple grew to 14% of the global smartphone market by year 2010 (the heavy growth period, since then iPhone market share has stabilized). And Apple sold 47.5 million iPhones that year 2010, obviously a record year at Apple. How much of that came from Nokia? Actually Nokia grew from 39 million to ... 104 million smartphones sold by 2010. Yes while Apple grew massively from zero to 47 million, growth of 47 million over 4 years, Nokia grew EVEN MORE by a gargantuan 65 million, utterly dwarfing Apple's amazing growth that same period. For every 3 new iPhone customers Apple acquired, Nokia got 4! The iPhone was the best thing that could happen to Nokia in igniting the smartphone market. And Nokia did this profitably! The last quarter of 2010, Nokia set a Nokia record profit in its smartphone unit for the first time the Nokia smartphone unit generated more profits than the dumbphone unit (that sold 3 times more handsets at the time and had been the engine of Nokia's decade on top of the handset industry). Same is true but to a lesser extent for Blackberry. Yes go check the numbers, Apple's iPhone didn't kill the Blackberry, from 2006 to 2010 Blackberry grew but Apple DID kill rivals, the weak American brands like Palm, Dell, Motorola, Danger, HP etc (and Windows Mobile). Nokia didn't start to collapse until madman new CEO Stephen Elop (worst CEO of all time - not worst as in Nokia's worst or the worst in mobile industry, yes they say worst of ANY CEO in ANY industry in the economic history of mankind, as he's been called in many sources) decided to bankrupt Nokia's profit engine from February 2011. This will be very much an analogy for the Apple Watch too. I don't mean Nokia collapse haha, I mean how the iPhone helped Nokia and Blacberry sell more smartphones. The small smartwatch industry will get a big boost as the Apple Watch finally starts to ship in April.
Now back to the Apple Watch (I have to do those bits about the history else some random visitors will post comments here based on the myth that for example iPhone killed Nokia haha). What happens when the battery dies? Ah, the iWeight on my wrist. So you had a normal day, then there is an emergency at work and it runs late, you are at the office till midnight and glance at your wrist - the Apple Watch is dead. Now you are lugging around a dead weight. Nice. But it shows. So all your buddies too see that how's that expensive iToy doing? Oh its died... good value then? Or you had a normal day with your pals, then one of your friends has some occasion to celebrate. You got to the bar. One drink turns into three then seven, and now its past midnight and some pretty girl asks why is that ugly thing on your wrist blank. Oh, the battery has died, its actually a pretty expensive and nice Apple Watch... soon you learn not to say such foolish things to pretty girls in bars.
Another eve you have a lucky night and head to that hot girl's apartment. And other things are far more important than your Apple Watch than recharging it. Tomorrow all day at work you walk around with the iWeight showing an iDeadface. Or you notice the Apple Watch battery is dead - and you don't want to walk around with a dead heavy gadget on your wrist, now you remove it and put it in your desk drawer. And as this is totally not normal behavior, when you leave for home that day, you forget the Apple Watch at work - and in ALL of these cases, the iPhone in your pocket is doing just fine and doing ALL the things you thought you wanted the Apple Watch to do. And even if your iPhone battery runs out, it is hiding in your pocket, not showing to everybody around you that you're an iDork so heavily into the iCult that you even walk around with the iBranding of a dead iWatch on your wrist.
INCONVENIENT
And then the convenience factor. The smart watch is attached to the wrist. Its viewing angle is not naturally facing us. The screen size is more 'portrait' view than 'landscape' view which we can easily do with the mobile phone. To read text we need to twist the arm somewhat, far more uncomfortable than holding a mobile phone. And using it means two-handed operation. The Apple Watch is a right-handed design (scroll button for right-handed people). And the Apple Watch is not waterproof, only water resistant. All again minor flaws that may be fixed in future editions but the twisting-aspect and tiny screen are fundamental weaknesses as is the tiny TV screen size of pocket TVs compared to home TVs on flat screen and projection systems. A smartwatch is simply not as convenient for the things we want to do on a digital connected device whether reading a website or incoming message or gosh, composing a reply or wow, taking the watch to our ear to listen to it or talk to it... The form factor HAS BEEN TRIED and it is inherently worse than a mobile phone. A modern smarttphone with a touch screen trumps the Apple Watch on essentially everything, which means most users will tire of it.
Some of these are problems that ALL smartwatches have, but with 18 hour battery life these are about the worst on the Apple Watch. And because the Apple Watch can do nothing that the (wirelessly) tethered iPhone can't do - you very soon learn that whenver the Apple Watch battery dies, you can still continue doing all that with the iPhone instead. And you learn, the iPhone is the indispensable item (it is 'moblie' it rings in the pocket, hence we have to take it everywhere all the time) and the Apple Watch is merely an ultraportable device we can easily live without.
Some will love their Apple Watches and will wear them happily indeed proudly everywhere and get extra chargers for work etc. MANY others who buy the first edition Apple Watch will tire of it and soon find its not worth strapping on everyday and many of those will then stop wearing it altogether. Some of those will seek another solution, maybe another brand smartwatch or the next edition Apple Watch but most who tire of that iHandcuff will never buy another smart watch by anyone. They will be 'burnt'. It is a very expensive digital toy that turns out to be an iDisappointment that they will regret buying.
iSHEEP iCONGREGATE AT THE iCHURCH
So its time to call the iFlock to iChurch. In April yes, we will see people again standing in line to be the first to buy the iWatch sorry Apple Watch. Its now a religion. This wasn't the case before the iPod but now Apple have conditioned the iSheep to behave like Pavlov's Dogs to form into a line and stand overnight to be the first with the latest iToy.
That works as long as EVERY past time it was worth it. And it was with the iPod and iPhone and iPad. But I predict Apple Watch to be a rare iFlop. And this pattern of the iCall for the iFaithful will be put to the ultimate test in a post-Steve Jobs era, what about the NEXT time they do an iToy. If you build it, will they come? But yes, now, April 2015 we will see a crazy rush of early shipments of the Apple Watch. Yes yes millions will buy it, can't imagine iLife without it. And some will buy it because its a short-term get-rich investment (carrying them abroad and selling at big profits in the black market) and some see it also as a valid long term investment. An original first-edition iGadget and they will save the packaging and care for it, hoping to sell it on Ebay some day in the future.
Those are not normal consumers. Those are not those 12% of British consumers who thought they would buy an Apple Watch this year. Those are the iSheep, the truly iFanatical iLoyalists. Its not enough for them to get the new tech they take pride in being among the first. They are fans. Like I am a fan of James Bond, I fly to Britain the week the new Bond film is released so I can see it there in the cinema. I don't do that for the next Bourne fillm or Oceans 14.. I am a Bond fan, I behave like a fan. Apple has built perhaps the world's largest fan base, at least by a consumer brand that can be thus activated to show up (yeah pop stars, your Justin Beeberlakes and Lady Googoos and 40Cents can get more fans to go crazy yes..)
WILL TIRE IN 6 MONTHS
So we've had BETTER smartphones in use for years now. And we have consumer surveys about their behavior. And they find that a high proportion of smartphone buyers stop wearing the bulky heavy wrist device in about 6 months. Some continue to use it and will buy another and be happy. But many tire of it and stop wearing it. And now the iDisappointment. Tim Cook yesterday showed us NOTHING that was radical or cool that we didn't have before. That was not the Mac or the iPod or iTunes or the iPhone or the iPad. The Apple Watch presentation yesterday was essentially a reheat of the September show. And the examples? Come on, 15 year old examples!!! There are no compelling reasons to get the Apple Watch that we can't already do on the iPhone and if you really wanted a smart watch onto your wrist for Dick Tracy calls and 'smart stuff' significantly smarter watches already exist. As to health and sports-oriented 'killer app' areas, far better dedicated devices exist that are far slimmer on the wrist and have far better battery life. This is not a case like with the iPod that was far better than a Walkman cassette portable music player or the iPhone was a better web-browsing internet-phone of 2007 than anything else that was out there (or iPad offered VASTLY broader utility than Kindle). Or the lightyears that the original Macintosh was ahead of the DOS-based IBM Personal Computer offering back in 1984. This is an iDud.
AND WHAT ABOUT FASHION
So yeah, I am an expert on mobile, I am not an expert on the wristwatch industry and definitely not an expert on the fashion industry. I did hear an interesting comment on TV where a woman was asked if she'd wear the Apple Watch to a first date, and she said no. And the point was, that therefore it is not a fashion item (at least not for women). It does NOT make you seem more pretty, it makes you seem like an iDork. In Silicon Valley's alternate universe where they have to fly in single women from New York haha, maybe that is a sign of affluence but for the rest of the planet, after the initial hype wears off, the Apple Watch will soon become a badge of iShame, and definitely many single women will learn very fast to spot the iDorks and steer away from the gadget-obsessed iCultists who can be expected to quote Steve Jobs on a first date and then serenade that chick with what, love poetry in Klingon on the second date? So the men too will soon learn to leave the Apple Watch off the wrist when going clubbing or hitting the bars and pubs. And what does THAT do to to Apple iLove and the iCult. Up to now it was always a good thing to show the Apple logo anywhere. What will this iFlop do to the undying Apple love? If that stands in the way of real love, suddenly the men are separated from the iSheep and yes, this is the first case in ages, that the iBranding is seen as unsexy indeed undesirable.
Which then means a very short span that the Apple Watch is popular on wrists. We already had the overall trend away from traditional wristwatches. We saw the study for example by O2 in the UK in 2012 that over half of the British had already quit wearing a wristwatch altogether. Mobile wins! This is as I predicted back in 2002 with my second book mProfits where I wrote "there are some people already who are abandoning the wristwatch in favor of the mobile phone". Yes. Trend was starting in 2002 enough to be observed and ten years later it was half the population. Now Apple wants to go against that trend with a device that doesn't solve ANY problem its own iPhone didn't do, and in most cases do far better.
SECOND GENERATION IS THE iFLOP
So the first generation will sell well because iSheep. Some will love it and find really good uses, that brilliant app that works with whatever thing they wanted to do etc. Others adopt some of the new behavior especially for the USA where NFC payments are so radical and new, and the Apple Watch can be that mobile wallet interface yes. Some who use the Apple Watch will not wear it every day and will find that niche use case when its worth strapping on the iChain. And many who DO wear it, will take it off on special occasions when they notice its uncomfortable or not appropriate. Remember at these prices for a person who is prone to wear a watch, odds are the person also owns a 'nice' party watch, so going out for the evening, they might replace the Apple Watch with that other watch. All this erodes the times we find utility out of the Apple Watch but always we carry the iPhone. So when it comes time to replace the iPhone of course Apple Watch owners will buy the next iPhone. But.....
When it comes time to buy the next Apple Watch ie version 2, many who bought the original, will find no reason to buy the next version. And many who bought the original, have tired of it and won't buy ANY other smartwatch. And some who bought the original, will have moved to another brand. And those who buy iStuff because they are iSheep, that iPassion will be gone. This was a rare iFlop the iDud. So the SECOND edition is the death of the Apple Watch. Those who were duped into paying 350 dollars or much more for the original, will not come back for version 2. Only Apple loyalists are invited and many will be burned. So by the time the second edition comes, the common consensus view is that no, this is not a must-have gadget and several other devices should be considered. The total market for smartwatches by Apple's second edition will have stalled and is likely in decline and then a few years later the whole category is as relevant as the PDA, the pocket TV and the standalone MP3 player are today. But the iPhone will continue to be a bestselling smartphone even then.
And what huge wasted effort by Tim Cook to create this iFlop? This was never going to be a mass market success. They knew that. Why then even bother. This will damage the iPassion, perhaps irreparably. How does that impact the longterm success of Apple and the whole iEcosystem. Why didn't Apple instead do something like the iCamera I wrote about where a real valuable mass market exists and Apple could rule it by offering functionality and excellence that the industry giants currently don't provide. A product category that would EXPAND the iChurch and find new iLoyalists. Huge profitable market waiting to be demolished by iRevolution, far more valuable than watches. Yeah. Lets see if Apple can find a better place. Maybe the iCar?
If you want to read what I first thought of the Apple Watch last September, that article is here. If you want to compare my thoughts and see what I wrote about the relevance of the iPhone before it launched in 2007, that article is here. And to prove we never get everything right in the forecasting business, here are my thoughts of the iPad before it launched, I got most of it right but the sales volume massively off.
Killer #2, it isn't waterproof but merely water resistant. You aren't going to wear it in the shower or pool. And I wonder about working or exercising where it will get scratched or impacted.
Killer #1 is the 18 hours. They should have done e-ink, ble reduced and more. A swappable battery. 30 minute Qi recharge.
and it isn't 25% unless you only sleep for 6 hours or wake up and put it on when it is recharged. 8 hours + shower or other time.
Posted by: tz | March 10, 2015 at 05:58 PM
My second thought was Google Glass was more functional. It was just there and "ok, glass" would do something useful if your hands were busy. A crown makes it a two handed device - as does touch. May as well pull out the phone as one hand can do most things.
The old Palm Pilot was the right idea of a peripheral - it brought clippings and notifications from your desktop.
Posted by: tz | March 10, 2015 at 06:05 PM
Don't be such a Debbie Downer. This device will do just fine. It isn't the next iPhone or iPad, but those kinds of products don't come around very often. Apple needs a wearable because it's possible that wearables will ultimately replace the cell phone (or at least a lot of its functionality). It won't happen tomorrow or even 3 years from now, but it likely will happen eventually.
Compared to the original iPhone and iPad, the Apple Watch is well done for a first generation Apple product. It looks good, particularly in the stainless steel version. I think there is a lot of promise in Research Kit, and Force Touch has already made the leap to the MacBook line. People have such unrealistic expectations of Tim Cook and Apple. I'd have shortened yesterday's presentation and focused more on fashion, but the long term success won't be based on yesterday's presentation or even the initial reaction. I remember there was a backlash against the original MacBook Air. It was underpowered and featured one USB port. It was a slow seller at first, but it's become Apple's mainstream product. I predict the same with the new MacBook introduced yesterday.
Posted by: Catriona | March 10, 2015 at 06:26 PM
@tz, Google Glass was creepy. Apple Watch is more discreet. As soon as I saw Google Glass I knew it wouldn't work as a consumer product. Google should have kept it a beta and developed it for medical and industrial use, where it could serve a legitimate purpose.
Posted by: Catriona | March 10, 2015 at 06:28 PM
@Catriona:
"...because it's possible that wearables will ultimately replace the cell phone (or at least a lot of its functionality). It won't happen tomorrow or even 3 years from now, but it likely will happen eventually."
Possible... as a long shot.
likely... rather not.
Just do a little test yourself and try to simulate a phone call with a wrist bound device. No, it's not the most comfortable thing to do, a regular mobile phone is far, far less stressful. So as a future replacement for regular smartphones it's a no-go by default for entirely mundane aspects, no matter how advanced the tech gets.
What we see here is marketing in full swing trying to peddle the latest useless gadget to unsuspecting customers.
Posted by: RottenApple | March 10, 2015 at 07:08 PM
Hmmm..., interesting web site. But, I see the microsoft trolls pretending to be neutral but consistently attack Google every chance they get. Not a productive discussion. I see just trolling non-sense from some posters. Gotta to wonder who is getting paid by micro$oft?...
Posted by: Truth | March 10, 2015 at 07:48 PM
To all in this thread (and continuing from yesterdays' posting)
Think about Apple Watch what we just heard yesterday. Compare to Macintosh 1984 or iPod 2001 or iPhone 2007. Those were revolutions and it was OBVIOUS the day they were shown. Wow, how can computers behave like this? Gosh if it rally is this easy as the original Mac, yes, even our parents could be users some day... without going to computer courses. The iPod, what? Carry how many songs with me? Thats my whole music collection.... and the iPhone. A revolution.
This Apple Watch, there is NOTHING that it did we didn't have. Nothing. It did NOTHING that other smartphones don't do already - and often do better. The trend is AWAY from wearing ANY watch. Do you seriously think that this device that added NOTHING revolutionary to us, will somehow reverse the unstoppable worldwide trend away from wearing wristwatches. Seriously? Its the YOUTH who most are quitting wristwatches, so if you find some older (haha readers of this blog) people who find that value in 'health' haha, they are prone to also be among the luddites who still have that old trusty watch they strap onto their wrists..
So do you see this truly as the Macintosh momement, the iPod moment, the iPhone moment. Or is this a Lisa or Newton, at best its too early and future TOTALLY revised editions will build on this (failure) or at worse, its a dead end already now. There was NOTHING that thrilled us as a miracle on our wrists. Nothing. Not one thing why to get it except ooh, we do metal now in an Apple way, ooh Apple Steel, ooh, 18K gold. Where is my digital utility that the Mac had or iPod or iPhone?
Tomi Ahonen :-)
Posted by: Tomi T Ahonen | March 10, 2015 at 07:52 PM
Siri on AW: Now because “active listening” for a “Hey Siri” command can drain the device’s battery quickly, users should note that the “Hey Siri” command can only be implemented when the Apple Watch is raised to a user’s face. Or you can press the button. Hand up! Don't Siri!
Apple Excessory.
I wonder if you can gold-plate the aluminum version.
Interestingly, I stopped wearing any watch as soon as I had a phone - all of which display the time. I'm still using a "featurephone" which connects to my bluetooth headset, has somewhere above 12 hour talk time and a month idle (with extended battery), and it boots in 5 seconds. And I have a hotspot. Now if the AppleWatch was even wifi enabled, it might be useful. But I have my tablets. And one BLU cheap android phablet (Studio 7.0" dual sim - really good battery life) With all the widgets that instantly show everything I'd see on the watch.
On twit.tv, Leo Laport pointed that out about Android widgets v.s. Apple.
Posted by: tz | March 10, 2015 at 08:04 PM
It's an Apple TV or "Ping" social music moment.
GG was creepy, but it was already in your field of view, so you didn't have to do any kind of gesture. Your field of view was overlaid with the information and it could record.
And note - Android (and Windows!) smartphones do notifications better because they have widgets - all the various bits of info right on the homescreen. Apple doesn't have then on the iPhone (you have to swipe or tap or something). So you have Apples fix: a $350 widget platform. That isn't waterproof and has bad battery life (for a wearable).
Posted by: tz | March 10, 2015 at 08:15 PM
Actually, as I recall the original iPod announcement, it was met with a "meh." It was hyped as the next big thing, and the reaction was along the lines of "Apple did all this for a music player that only works with Macs?"
The Verge had a good point. The Watch's best selling point is one that neither Apple nor Google want to talk up. It helps us keep our phones in our pockets or purses, and not take them out all the time. I think little things such as opening up hotel doors, unlocking cars, etc. will also drive the case for getting it. Since Apple is behind it, companies will take it seriously. Just as Apple Pay was able to get the notoriously stodgy U.S. banks to get on board the way Google Wallet was not, I think Apple Watch will get more attention from hotel and retail chains.
The fact that we're all talking about this here shows its relevance. Was there a thread back when the Galaxy Gear was released?
Posted by: Catriona | March 10, 2015 at 08:17 PM
If I see 25 % of apple store employees or guru bar people using an apple watch by august, i will be shocked.
Women receiving mocks from friends or from men are likely to shelve these 18 hour lasting door stops.
On the plus side, the mhealth data collection possibilities via a global user base are mond bending.
S.
Posted by: steve epstein | March 10, 2015 at 08:20 PM
Here's one guy who thinks the Apple Watch will be a success. But what does he know?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-10/swatch-co-inventor-sees-apple-causing-ice-age-for-swiss-watches
Posted by: Catriona | March 10, 2015 at 09:52 PM
So, only water resistant: this could be a severe drawback if turns out that the iWatch gets damaged by sweat during sports.
Battery life is short.
As a fashion accessory it is a gamble, because it's expensive, and every year a new model comes out, making the previous one look outdated. Not to mention the edition version.
Mostly works only with an iPhone (but you would mostly be carrying your phone with you anyway, so this is not really crucial)
I don't know.
However, it's not the usual uses that will make or break this device, but some possibly unexpected use, where having an intelligent device on your wrist may be useful.
We'll see.
Meanwhile, Apple is placing (or trying to) place itself even more as a luxury brand. And prices are growing. Not a bad move. Not bad at all.
Posted by: Earendil Star | March 10, 2015 at 09:52 PM
Years before Seiko did a pager watch Motorola made an excellent one that worked with traditional paging systems. It wasn't even that huge and the battery lasted a full month!
Posted by: Steve | March 10, 2015 at 10:04 PM
@Earendil Star, my guess is that we'll see improvements in areas like water resistance and battery life in the next version. I don't think sweat will damage the watch, but immersion is not recommended. Supposedly Apple is experimenting with new ways to add waterproofing to the iPhone, and presumably it would also make its way to the Watch.
Posted by: Catriona | March 10, 2015 at 10:20 PM
For once I 100% agree with every single word you wrote. I don´t know if I am a big iSheep, but for sure I really love my iPhone and I owned iPhones since the 3G.
I don´t understand Apple´s rational behind the Watch, there is clearly a big hole at Apple, nobody knows nothing about watches, smart or not.
AND WHAT ABOUT FASHION:
I´m surprised you omitted the Watch Edition (the 17K gold freak), WHO IN HIS OWN MIND thinks that anybody will buy a 17K electronic device which will be obsolete in a year?? A 17K Apple Watch is not a 17K gold Rolex (or put your favorite brand), at the end of the day the Rolex is an asset, a statement, it says who you are, it has a soul, those of us who really appreciate watches understand that a watch mechanism is the soul of the watch, I don´t like gold watches but I understand those who choose to encase this "soul" in a gold jacket. What is inside the 17K Apple Watch? 25 dollars of crap...Off course this applies also to LG, Samsung or Motorola smart watches, but at least these companies are no trying to sell their products as "luxury items", they are plain an simple plastic piece of craps, and they know it.
I really cannot believe seriously that any Swiss Watch Maker are concerned about Apple making a watch. A phone is an utilitarian article, says nothing about you, or may be the only thing is if you prefer iOS, Android, or whatever, big or small and black or white, no more, no less.
A watch is a bold statement about you, for a man not a kid or a nerd choosing a watch is like choosing a good pair of shoes or an expensive tie, a watch tells a lot about you: are you a gentleman, an adventurer, conservative, innovative, elegant, sport, etc etc,
Think about JAMES BOND, his watch does a lot of thinks, but is a SEAMASTER (or Submariner before), not a Chinese peace of crap with a display...(yeah, I know about the Hamilton Pulsar and the Seikos, but even Bond could make mistakes...and were the 70s), could you imagine Bond using an Apple Watch?????
I´m not going to leave my Aquatimer for this, hey, I´m not going to leave my IWC for anything with the word "smart" on its name, I only will swap it for my Submariner or my Seamaster from time to time.
Of course this applies not only to the Apple Watch, again it applies to Samsung, LG, Motorola, etc, but at least these companies are not try to sell their smartwatches as real luxury watches, I thought that Apple has taste enough to understand this.
As per pure function, again agree with you, is really limited. If you need an activity tracker and you are a watch lover buy yourself the Withings Activite, it´s expensive ($450) but elegant as well, if you don't want to spend so much the Activite Pop is $150, is a peace of plastic but at least it is designed to adult people, all the "smart" things are done by the app in your phone.
Posted by: John | March 11, 2015 at 12:14 AM
I agree with Tomi that this iWatch will be a dud. It has no autonomous functionality, poor battery life, unexciting applications. For an expensive fashion accessory, it should have some very exclusive functionality -- like the "concierge" service on the Vertu phones (whose specs were never that great).
I disagree with Tomi that iWatch will die afterwards, and agree with Leebase that Apple will improve it at the next iteration. However, I totally disagree with him that this will be the kind of incremental improvement typically brought to other product lines at Apple.
In fact, iWatch v.2 will be to the current iWatch what the iPhone 2G was to the ROKR E1, or the iPad 1 to the Newton: a complete redesign from scratch, throwing away most of the assumptions built in the previous device -- because it was so mediocre. I expect iWatch 2.0 to have practically nothing in common with the first foray of Apple into wrist-wearable devices.
Posted by: E.Casais | March 11, 2015 at 08:14 AM
@Leebase:
"So which is it? A flop or a device sure to sell to millions?"
These do not contradict themselves.
Knowing the mentality of the typical iSheep they'll flock out in droves to be the first to get the new iGadget.
The real question here is whether the smartwatch as a product group can stick or if it fizzles out after initial interest has been served.
We also have no idea how much Apple spent on R&D and advertising to get the watch out, so yes - even if it sells a few million it may still be considered a flop.
@John:
Nice to see an Apple user who hasn't lost his touch with reality. Especially your take on the 17k luxury version. I have to admit I never thought that far - but for a first generation release with all its flaws and inevitable quick replacement cycle this truly sounds like lunacy to buy such a thing...
Posted by: RottenApple | March 11, 2015 at 08:17 AM
If its a dud, then its 2nd hand value will only go up, like with Roland 808 drum machines. Thrown in the trash! But now you'd trade your 18k gold watch for one.
Buy up these iWatches before they get stacked on top of ET game cartridges in New Mexico.
Posted by: mark | March 11, 2015 at 09:36 AM
@ E Casias, I expect the next version to be more like what the iPad 2 was to the original iPad. That version endured the longest, and is still around in some form as the basic iPad mini. However, there are still plenty of original iPads still in use.
The biggest limitation to me is that it is still heavily dependent on the iPhone. My guess is that they couldn't make it so (comparatively) small while maintaining decent battery life without outsourcing so much to the phone. That should change in future generations as it switches to 14nm processors.
Most of the naysayer criticism reeks of the "let's complain until we're finally right" sentiment that has dogged every Apple release since the iPod back in 2001. The Apple Watch isn't a blockbuster in its current form, but should generate sufficient interest to insure a second and third generation. And we will see a bigger emphasis overall on fashion. The new MacBook, for instance, looks really sharp, and the latest rumor is that we'll have more colors (and Force Touch) on the next iPhone.
Posted by: Catriona | March 11, 2015 at 10:46 AM