Skip to main content

What's Going On With The iWatch?

There's a lot of noise and iWatch related to-ing and fro-ing at Apple right now, if the tech news industry is to be believed anyway. I'm struggling to see why.

Apple might be getting overly hung up on the iWatch as a product, but really its already delivered most of what it needed to in the last generation iPod Nano.

That Nano is an interesting product. My suspicion is that the radically different form factor was chosen specifically to test the ground for an Apple watch. And on that basis it was a phenomenal success. The reversion back to the standard Nano form factor earlier this year pretty much confirmed that Apple was going to build a watch - why else the radical volte face on the Nano design?

To deliver the iWatch Apple doesn't have to change that Nano design radically. Add more traditional watch band mounts, low energy Bluetooth 4 for connectivity to your iPhone for alerts and a set of Bluetooth earbuds for use as a music player. If they can squeeze in some of the technology which supports Fitbit or Fuelband even better.

The last change would be a switch to an AMOLED display, to allow the watch face to be displayed at all times without killing the battery - something that's an absolute must on a watch.

Looks don't need to change at all - chunky watches are popular right now and the Nano sat comfortably in that space. The better integration of the watch band should reduce the depth sufficiently without having to significantly drop case depth - important if a lot of technology is going to be squeezed in here.

Its a question of ambition here. Do Apple want to be challenging the likes of Omega and TAG-Heuer for lower volume top end sales or are they keen to occupy the middle ground and possibly sell bucket-loads in the Swatch space?

At the right price and without being over ambitious Apple could disrupt the watch market. Further delay is just allowing the competition more time to catch up.

Apple its time to deliver.


Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…