Understanding Apple's Wearables Strategy | Hacker News Reader

Understanding Apple's Wearables Strategy

techpinions.com

21 pointsadam15 comments

Interesting article, but ... Why are we going on about Apple's 'wearable strategy' when they don't even have a device out there? I noticed during I/O that some 'prominent' people were discussing the 'iWatch' like it's already in stores. Why are we even entertaining such detailed assumptions about things that we don't yet know of?

That's what I thought when I started reading the article, but the author does make a good point about the closeness between Apple & Disney. You have to think there's going to be at least some sharing of lessons learned between the two companies.

In some ways, it's interesting that Apple is almost "driving" the market without even being a part of it yet. Everyone assumes that Apple is working on an iWatch, and companies are scrambling to get out and take as much share as they can. The first I heard of Smart Watches was really Pebble, but then quickly there came rumors that Apple was building one, and suddenly Samsung rushes a few to market.

I think people assume that Apple will set the standard on a quality watch, and maybe have it be unique and special in some way. I think people would be underwhelmed if they came out with something that was almost exactly what Samsung/LG/Motorola is coming out with. People like to speculate on what they'll do that will make it stand apart.

I think it's also helped along by the fact that this would be the first new product of Tim Cook's Apple. It's been a few years coming, and expectations are high: what does this mean for AAPL over the next 10 years, can they still innovate...?

and companies are scrambling to get out and take as much share as they can

From a pro-Apple perspective, it undoubtedly looks this way, confirmed when every Apple follower brings up Apple in the context of competitive product.

From a neutral perspective, it looks like nothing of the sort. SoCs are getting more powerful, and more efficient. Screens are getting much, much better. Batteries are getting better, and longevity increases with all of the other improvements. Software is getting better.

Biometric and wearable devices have been around for years, but technology is finally making them very practical. But the category is truly inevitable, as predicted on so many sci-fi movies of decades ago.

Recall when Samsung introduced the Note. It, the "Phablet" was deridden on every Apple blog. Bound for certain failure, we were told. Now Apple is coming out with a 5.5" smartphone.

It's kind of funny to deride something as a pro Apple stance and use Apple's 5.5inch phone as an example of Apple flip-flopping. The iPad mini would have been a better example of Apple caving as it exists.

We know Apple is producing larger phones. There is zero mystery about that. It is entirely relevant that the same pundits who now have a lot to say about wearables also got larger smartphones entirely wrong.

And no, the mini is not relevant, as a core facet of the Note was that it was a large smartphone, not a small tablet.

However I didn't "dismiss" anything. I pointed out that there is a perspective bias in how one sees things. Samsung, for instance, came out with the Gear before the iWatch was even more than a murmur. But now, not unexpectedly, everyone else is somehow reacting to Apple.

I think you're missing my point. The mini tablet category was dismissed by Jobs. It became apparent that people wanted smaller tablets. And then Apple made it and by numbers it sells well, possibly better than the full sized one. This is an example of Apple caving to demand despite appearances of knowing best. I was not comparing the Note to the Mini, I was comparing Apple's attitude to consumer demand. I thought that comparing a real product and real example was more meaningful that relying on supply chain rumour which has a poor track record.

"I think people assume that Apple will set the standard on a quality watch".

It seems to be a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy. None of the iPhone tech was new, but once Apple released it people started paying attention to touchscreen smartphones.

Likewise for their tablet.

We speculate because its fun. But its not like we're pulling ideas out of the sky. Bits and pieces have been given to us, for example, iPhones now have fingerprint sensors. Its unlikely that all they'll ever do is unlock our phones. We also know of general problem spaces like mobile payments, or health/fitness tracking. Tim Cook himself said wearables are an interesting space and that he wears a Nike fuelband, thats pretty much a signal that they're working on a wrist device. We also know about their high profile hires of people who worked on health devices.

Ultimately, we entertain these assumptions because its fun and potentially profitable for us.

tooling has already begun

It is one of the strangest things I've ever seen. Apple hasn't even announced a watch, but everyone with the slightest knowledge of the tech industry or following financial markets knows they're coming out with it. I already "know" what it looks like [0]. But we don't have any way to guarantee what it will look like or even do. My only question is, why wouldn't apple just announce it already?

0:http://static.knowyourmobile.com/sites/knowyourmobilecom/fil...

I still don't feel that Apple's next big move will be wearables. I think it's going to be something you can use in your living room, likely with games. Maybe iOS devices as game controllers.

Why is everyone so certain the iWatch is happening? Maybe I've been out of the loop but I haven't seen a confirmed, legitimate statement from Apple about it and I really don't see why Apple would release one. Watches aren't as common, the screen size leaves little utility and you've probably got your phone nearby anyways.

Happy to be totally wrong but I think a living room play makes more sense than a wrist play.

You can already use your iPhone as a game controller, they have standardized frameworks available and 3rd party manufacturers like Logitech sell them.

However, that will never be a billion dollar market for them. It would be a supplementary feature for Apple TV, but would never be a big thing alone.

The article is a little behind the curve, particularly with Google already releasing wearables.

Take what he says about Disneyland / Starbucks and apply it everywhere. That's what Google is already doing with Android. The wearable isn't the monitor, simply because 99.999999% of current wearable users will already have device with Google ID & location tracking (Google Maps).

(Curious how Maps tracking will play out on iOS...)

It make sense bur requires a lot of 3rd party devices to support those ”iWatches”. And in general it's not about personal smart watches but about smart houses. And this is a huge (potential) market with major player like google interested in.

So if author is right, a new marketing war is coming.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com