Slashdot Mirror
Apple Plans To Release a Cellular-Capable Watch To Break iPhone Ties (bloomberg.com)
According to Bloomberg, Apple is planning to release a version of the Apple Watch later this year that can connect directly to cellular networks, a move designed to reduce the device's reliance on the iPhone. From the report: Currently, Apple requires its smartwatch to be connected wirelessly to an iPhone to stream music, download directions in maps, and send messages while on the go. Equipped with LTE chips, at least some new Apple Watch models, planned for release by the end of the year, will be able to conduct many tasks without an iPhone in range, the people said. For example, a user would be able to download new songs and use apps and leave their smartphone at home. Intel Corp. will supply the LTE modems for the new Watch, according to another person familiar with the situation. Apple is already in talks with carriers in the U.S. and Europe about offering the cellular version, the people added. The carriers supporting the LTE Apple Watch, at least at launch, may be a limited subset of those that carry the iPhone, one of the people said.
For apple, this may be the first step towards a world where, if you so desire, the iWatch IS the phone, and the iPad (with an LTE modem and adequate SW, of course) is the screen for said phone.
So, when you are on the go with the iWatch only (say, excercising, trecki9ng, or, for the ladies, dancing with an ultra small dress and an ultrasmall purse), you get basic phone functionality from the watch (voice Calls, SMS receive, push notifications, alerts, preset answers) over a narrowband low power 4G connection, and when the iWatch is close to the iPad, the iPad becomes the full fat phone (including a wideband LTE Channel) and uses the SIM from the watch...
Of course, I am not saying apple will do this this autum*. Only apple know IF they will do it, and WHEN they will do it. But that, IMHO, will be an unbeatable combo, and will be the day when these SmartWatches come on their own...
Took a long while, I was asking for this in 2015....
* Otoño Coño
*** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
...or is anyone else also concerned about the long-term safety of a fairly high-powered microwave transmitter strapped to the same location of your wrist for days/months/years?
Another attempt to play catch up to Samsung.
Gee, if this review of the Gear S3 is any indication, I sure Hope not!
https://www.cnet.com/products/...
Another attempt to play catch up to Samsung.
I'm actually wearing a Gear S as I write this, so yeah, I get it. Just a few minutes ago I took a call from my daughter on my watch without my phone being in bluetooth range. (I keep leaving the damned thing on the charger at home.)
But Apple's design philosophy for the watch was always as an accessory for the iphone, not as an independent device. It was a "force multiplier" for iphone sales, never intended as a separate product. (I had to do some reading when this article came out, because I hadn't been aware that Apple hadn't already done this.)
The technology to put the great majority of the feature set of a smart phone into a watch (confined only by the small screen) has been available since at least 2014. It was not ineptitude, but a deliberate marketing decision on Apple's part not to use it.
And even now, it looks from TFA that the new i-watches won't take calls on their own.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
"I like X, I don't understand why others like Y"
- Every Slashdot comment for the past 20 years
I'm really surprised that Apple hasn't done this (a GSM-capable watch) yet. It seems like a case of being dragged into it by their competitors.
No, it's a case of competitors trying to get out ahead of Apples obvious long-term roadmap and still failing anyway.
The reason of for failure of course is that Apple makes products that provide useful features but are still basically usable by non-technical people.
People have done smart-watches with cellular ability before but they suck to use and they certainly suck battery life down. In any case, they simply did not provide good compromises to add that feature.
It was as obvious Apple was going to add cellular capability eventually as it was they were waiting do to so until the battery issue would not impact the design or battery life greatly. They apparently are close to that point as technology and signal coverage improves (no need for a giant antenna or large power drain for reception if cellular reception is strong enough to begin with).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Phone is in pocket since walking perhaps hands occupied. Alerts easy to view on watch to evaluate if should react quickly or later. If need a quick response can do voice or simple presets like "ok", "busy now ", etc... Convenient BT remote for selfies now can participate in pics. Can use the phone finder too when misplace. Pairs with BT chest strap HRM for jogging . Has built in HRM for more stationary checking. Helpful to proactively manage limited battery. Put in standby when not using. It is currently a tweener accessory with modest use cases. At a few hundred dollars priced more than a simple watch but less than designer watch. Just like a tool box it can be useful for some depending on use. If exercise or hiking a larger use Garmin might be better but if have an iPhone iWatch a versatile all around accessory. I get my money's worth use it many times per week for convenience that is worth more than a boutique coffee or other beverage. If Apple offers a a cellular version then hope they offer flexible power options vs always on.