Hacker News Reader

Comment by edgyswingset | Hacker News Reader

I think there's some substance here. My impression from reading it was that the watch was purchased as a fashion device, but it's still too much of a gadget to really be one.

View on HN

> too much of a gadget

I thought about it quite a bit before the launch and decided against it. The reason is the same reason I haven't gone for any of these: AW is putting all its effort into being something that it's not (a fashionable watch) instead of being the best of what it is (wearable arm tech).

The watch started out as a utility on the arm and evolved into the time masterpiece or fashion piece that it is today. These 'watches' are attempting to skip all of that evolution instead of defiantly re-evaluating what a modern utility on the arm could be.

I'm personally in agreement with the author but not for the same reasons. I think the AW, Android Gear and what-have-you are definitely going to fizzle out in face of some future revolutionary device, possibly before then: people are going to grudgingly realize that they have a phone in their pocket and that they don't need another one on their arm.

Yeah, I feel the same way, too. The watches for iOS and Android really aren't anything more than an extra notification device for me ... my phone already does that, and arguably too much. My $24 Mickey Mouse watch still tells the time when I'm not staring at my phone, and it didn't cost me $400 like the Apple Watch would.

I agree. I wanted a PiP Boy 3000[1]. Apple delivered another piece of wrist jewelry, of which there are far more compelling options in the market.

I'd have camped out overnight for something like this: http://toddham.com/blog/iwatch-concept/

1) http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Pip-Boy_3000

> I'd have camped out overnight for something like this

That's technology! Exactly the type of revolution I was implying.

The problem of "more capability" is that everyone has a smartphone in their pocket. Any interaction that lasts more than 2-3 taps, or 2 seconds, is a failure because the user would have been better served by retrieving their phone. (niche "phone not accessible" situations notwithstanding)

The right answer to wearable tech is less interaction. The value has to be in the device presenting you the right 1-second functionality at the right time. (ala notification triage, Apple Pay, and the laundry list of Home Kit integration that's still TBD)

The best features on the Watch don't exist yet. They're the passive sensors, like the heart rate monitor. I think the best Watch is yet to come, if they can make these breakthroughs in body sensors like blood glucose.

A fashion item means the wears wants people to see it worn. If people are asking questions it means the watch did the job the user wanted.

Perhaps there is more the wearer wants than just be noticed by others? For example, that it looks good.

Well you can notice a nice ring, or a nice mechanical watch, and not feel compelled to ask about it or try it on.

Generally with jewellery you would expect someone to say something like "that's a nice ring," not "hey is that the new Apple Watch? Can I try it on?"

Of course the latter will fade with time. So if that's her biggest complaint then I imagine it won't exist in a few months.

If I brought my quadcopter to work and started flying it around, people would take notice and comment on it. Some might also want to try it out. No one would mistake it for a fashion accessory, however. That's because it is a toy; which is what people who aren't tech geeks think of gadgets: they're expensive toys. The author doesn't want to be perceived as the kind of person who has en expensive toy strapped to her wrist.

That's partially true. But it's also about how it makes you feel. Will most people be able to tell $250 Thomas Pink shirt from $25 shirt? Probably not, especially if the $25 one has good fit. But plenty of people plunk down $150-$250 for a shirt because they appreciate its feel, workmanship, fit, etc.

That's not just your impression, it's literally the last paragraph of the article.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com