Apple Watch First Impressions From Watch Experts, Fashion Sites

[melendezest]

Its funny, I did a little experiment and I showed a few friends the iWatch compared to the gear and the motorola smartwatch and they were by far more into Apple's option just on looks and perception of quality alone. The tech forums are full of a bunch of nerdy trolls that have 0 sense of style anyways so can we really expect.

----------



You nailed it...a rectangle with a strap looks similar to another rectangle with a strap, you must be a genius or something kappa

Yes. Yes I am.

 

[MaloCS]

I get your point you are trying to convey but is this really Skeuomorphic? In the sense it HAS to solved a design issue. The Crown is a necessity to solve a real problem.

A real design issue in the fact the watch must come in various size to appeal the widest audience possible. A 46mm Motorola 360 is simply not acceptible to women when the common size for women is 38mm and for mens is 40-42mm.

When you have that small of a screen, pinching and zooming does not work. That is a real problem and a designer must address that and not just based on how something looks. If you know a better way to navigate a 1.3" screen, I'm open to hearing it.

A home button at the bottom? That would make it bigger in both directions. Furthermore, a home button on a 38mm case would have to be smaller and smaller than the iphone's. How can you design something that works 38mm? Voice commands? Sure, that may work to some extent but then you limit yourself. How do you exit out a running app with a spoken voice? "Exit Twitter?" "Set timer on my camera" to fire a shot. I can see the rapid successions of voice commands just to do something real simple. Wait. Pause. Wait Pause. Speak. The Apple watch has an iPhone camera remote. "Set Zoom on camera" "Set Filter" "Set white balance." "Go to camera mode instead of video mode" "Focus on subject on left" "Click shutter." vs. a few twist and clicks on the crown. You will see the latter more intuitive.

First and foremost the job of a designer is to solve problems with real constraints. Look at the issues first. Then ask yourself, how would you solve them. You'll then realize it isn't easy.

It's Skeuomorphic because it's mimicking 150 year old watch designs. The crown, in today's high tech industry is very old fashioned. Designing the Apple Watch to look like a traditional watch is like designing the Contacts app to look like a 1960s era, leather bound phone book. Sure, the Apple Watch looks cool and it sure does look like a traditional watch but that form factor is old fashioned and it doesn't do justice to the tech that Apple put into it. The industrial design of this product release screams laziness.

This device's industrial design is a huge fail, not because it's blingy but because it's a modern piece of tech which deserves it's own unique form factor. If I'm wearing a piece of tech I want it to look modern and cool, not tired and old school. It's my opinion that these new wearable devices need to have a unique look instead of trying to copy the look of traditional watches.

First and foremost the job of a designer is to solve problems with real constraints. Look at the issues first. Then ask yourself, how would you solve them. You'll then realize it isn't easy.

First, I never would have constrained my creative process to a form factor that's been around for 150 years. I would have passionately fought for a new form factor that would compliment the high tech nature of the product. I would have tasked my designers to get off their lazy asses and create something unique and fresh, not tired and old fashioned.

Additionally, I would have scaled back the functionality of the device in this iteration. I would have made it a one trick pony but extremely elegant and reliable for that single function. Then, as tech gets better and smaller I would expand the functionality in upcoming releases.

That's how I would have approached the process.

 

[hansonjohn590]

Don't know about you, but when I think "good watch" I'm not thinking of $350 watches. And when I do look at $350 watches, I expect they'll be damaged/falling apart/out of style in a few years anyway.

I have a $20 Timex from the 80's that still works and is in great condition. You have absolutely no idea what your talking about.

 

[melendezest]

I'm glad your mechanical watch makes you feel all manly, I've never depended on a watch for that feeling.

I said nothing about how me feeling anything. Perhaps you're a little too "in touch" with your feelings.

The reference was simple: the Watch looks girly to me, just like rainbows and unicorns on a t-shirt does.

I'm a man. I choose not to wear things either designed for women or perceived as such (by me).

Feel free to "cross dress" as you see fit, though.

 

[mackinmike]

Here's another that's not included in op post.

Apple Watch 'too feminine and looks like it was designed by students', says LVMH executive - Telegraph - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/11088667/Apple-Watch-too-feminine-and-looks-like-it-was-designed-by-students-says-LVMH-executive.html

 

[fortysomegeek]

First, I never would have constrained my creative process to a form factor that's been around for 150 years. I would have passionately fought for a new form factor that would compliment the high tech nature of the product. I would have tasked my designers to get off their lazy asses and create something unique and fresh, not tired and old fashioned.

You still didn't negate my main premise. How do you appeal the widest audience as much as possible? Both men and women. And for fitness, health and some app possibility.

And how do you make it desirable without being a tech gadget. You must address the fashion aspect of it. If soccer moms aren't buying it, there is no point to even release a product at all.

Additionally, I would have scaled back the functionality of the device in this iteration. I would have made it a one trick pony but extremely elegant and reliable for that single function. Then, as tech gets better and smaller I would expand the functionality in upcoming releases.

That's how I would have approached the process.

I, too, like the fit-bit idea but there is no screen.
Secondly, some of the bracelets concepts I saw was pretty cool but there are a few problems: a) they look too feminine. No man is going to wear a bracelet. b) no way it will be that thin in those mock-ups.

If you have a screenless or super thin small fit-bit band, what is the point? It won't get any market traction. It won't appeal to any iOS developers. You need iOS developers and apps to make the Apple watch work. Otherwise it has no compelling advantage to Google's and Microsoft approach.

What form factor are you proposing? A ceramic type band in the mockups?
A screenless fitbit? And how do they (or whatever you envision) appeal to the audience I just mentioned above.

This product is not for you , not for me. Or anyone who has very specific wants. It is designed for the widest possible audience. Someone who likes tech, someone who wants health. Someone who wants fashion.

 

[kdarling]

When you have that small of a screen, pinching and zooming does not work. That is a real problem and a designer must address that and not just based on how something looks. If you know a better way to navigate a 1.3" screen, I'm open to hearing it.

HTC had a good idea in some of its touch phones: a zoom control line across the display bottom where you slid your finger back and forth. Super easy.

But the obvious better way is to not create a UI that needs zooming in the first place. This is a like a solution creating a problem. It sure as heck looks like they decided to use the crown first, then designed the UI to justify it.

--

I think the biggest problem with smartwatches for now and the foreseeable future, is that they have such a short lifespan. A lot of us have digital watches and calculator and PDA and smart watches filling a spare drawer

Thus they make far more sense if they're priced as throwaways.

Or.. if someone actually came up with a timeless design for a case that justified a high price, make the internals replaceable.

 

[melendezest]

This style was always there. Because stereotypically rounded, easy to use and fun is seen as "female; not sure why exactly. Same cultural stereotype is what keeps women out of STEM fields.


Apple is obviously, and always has been, a women .


Things that have painful edges, are ornery to use and make you look like you eat concrete for lunch and are as much fun as a colonoscopy are obviously masculine.

They should put razor blades around the edges of the watch to make it more masculine ;-).

----------



The core of Apple is not tech, it is design; tech that adapts to life not the other way around.

There's always has been a personal aspect about Apple, how it fits the person is important to its identity.

They had the colour computers while everyone else had the beige towers. That should tell you something.

Whoa, way to take things out of context. We're talking mere design, which is subjective.

"Easy to use" and "fun" did not factor into the argument that Apple's style of late seems to be less neutral and more feminine. This is arguable, yes, but lets not try to turn this into a chauvinistic vs feministic issue when it doesn't exist.

I concede, there may exist a (admittedly shifting) paradigm where men are considered "hard" and women "soft", and styles have reflected this. I ascribe to this paradigm, but purely out of preference: I prefer to be hard and I like my women soft. So it follows, that under that paradigm, round, bubbly, neon-colored items are "feminine" and hard-edged, muted, austere designs are "masculine".

This is simply an issue of taste, and I was pointing out my own. The watch is girly, in my opinion, which is why I don't like it. iOS 7/8 is girly, in my opinion, which is why I don't like it. My wife, on the other hand, likes both, and did so immediately, using terms like "sexy" and "cute" to describe them.

No harm, no foul.

 

[MaloCS]

You still didn't negate my main premise. How do you appeal the widest audience as much as possible? Both men and women. And for fitness, health and some app possibility.

And how do you make it desirable without being a tech gadget. You must address the fashion aspect of it. If soccer moms aren't buying it, there is no point to even release a product at all.

First, I wouldn't have designed the device from an "appeal to everyone" perspective. I would have designed the device to look fresh and unique as well as do a specific set of tasks extremely well. I wouldn't have included a feature to view photos or maps, I would have limited the functionality to collecting data and displaying a simplified version of texts and emails.

Second, as technology becomes more powerful and size decreases I would add more functionality until the "watch" becomes nothing but a miniature iPhone worn on my wrist. Unfortunately, this iteration is years away at best so for now I would stick with the one trick pony and price it accordingly.

I, too, like the fit-bit idea but there is no screen.

I'm not a fan of the FitBit because it has no screen. The Fuelband, despite it's dot matrix display, just feels high tech and fresh. It's definitely a one trick pony but it does it's job exceptionally well.

As far as the FuelBand's industrial design is concerned I wear it everywhere I go. From work to church to the gym to camping to dinner at a 4 star restaurant, the FuelBand is always on my wrist doing what it does best, monitoring my fitness data. It looks just as good when I'm wearing a suit as it does when I'm wearing my workout clothes. Plus, the durability and power capabilities of the FuelBand are out of this world. In fact, I'm on day 7 without having to charge it.

The point I'm trying to make is that Nike took the time and energy to create a form factor that is fresh and unique. The form factor of the FuelBand compliments the technology and doesn't hamper it. I wish Apple would have taken the same philosophical approach (not necessarily a band but an effort to create something unique).

Secondly, some of the bracelets concepts I saw was pretty cool but there are a few problems: a) they look too feminine. No man is going to wear a bracelet. b) no way it will be that thin in those mock-ups.

If you have a screenless or super thin small fit-bit band, what is the point? It won't get any market traction. It won't appeal to any iOS developers. You need iOS developers and apps to make the Apple watch work. Otherwise it has no compelling advantage to Google's and Microsoft approach.

What form factor are you proposing? A ceramic type band in the mockups?
A screenless fitbit? And how do they (or whatever you envision) appeal to the audience I just mentioned above.

The Apple Watch is the poster child for the "jack of all trades, master of none" philosophy. I actually like the design for a piece of jewelry but for a tech device that should reside more in the utility category it just fails. If the design direction was to create a piece of jewelry first and a piece of tech second then it wins. However, if the direction was to create a piece of tech that excels at technological functionality it simply fails.

The Apple Watch is a gorgeous piece of jewelry but it's a lack luster attempt at a piece of tech that needs more utility.

This product is not for you , not for me. Or anyone who has very specific wants. It is designed for the widest possible audience. Someone who likes tech, someone who wants health. Someone who wants fashion.

I believe it's technically feasible to design a product that has tech, health and fashion in a package that is fresh and unique. I will never understand why Apple chose to pattern their brand new, high tech gadget off of a design paradigm that's been around for 150 years. The design, no matter how much bling they put in it, is old fashioned.

When Apple released the iPod they didn't make it look like a Sony Walkman or Sony Discman. They gave the iPod a unique look that ushered in a new wave of industrial design. Additionally, when Apple released the iPhone they didn't make it look like an old school dial phone or cellular flip phone, they created a unique industrial design that complimented the technology they were putting into it. Just try and imagine what the iPhone would have looked like if they designed it to look like an old school dial phone or a cellular flip phone.

 

[CmdrLaForge]

I will buy one and I do not care for most of the things what it can or cannot do. What I want it for is an iPod for running that can connect to bluetooth headsets. So I wanted a sports watch from Apple and this is exactly what I got.

Thanks !

 

[shanson27]

Normally I hate square watches, all watches I've ever worn were round, but this time...., I'm in LOVE !

----------

I will buy one and I do not care for most of the things what it can or cannot do. What I want it for is an iPod for running that can connect to bluetooth headsets. So I wanted a sports watch from Apple and this is exactly what I got.

Thanks !

According to apple this is also a mp3 player, when you leave your
iPhone at home, so maybe comes with 8 gig of memory space

 

[MaloCS]

I will buy one and I do not care for most of the things what it can or cannot do. What I want it for is an iPod for running that can connect to bluetooth headsets. So I wanted a sports watch from Apple and this is exactly what I got.

Thanks !

Will the Apple Watch have on board storage for hundreds of songs or does it simply rely on a Bluetooth connection to the iPhone for access? I believe you will still need to carry your iPhone to stream your music.

From what I've read the functionality of the music player is limited to controlling the music player on the iPhone. I.E. press the next track button on the watch and the iPhone hears the request, changes the song and sends the appropriate signal to your bluetooth headphones. I do not believe the Apple Watch has the capability to request data from the cloud and stream it to bluetooth headphones without it being tethered to an iPhone.

The marketing material clearly states that you can leave the iPhone at home and still listen to music. I would like to know how if the Apple Watch doesn't have a cellular data connection for streaming. Are they talking about on board storage of physical files? If so, how much storage are we talking about? Color me confused.

 

[CmdrLaForge]

Normally I hate square watches, all watches I've ever worn were round, but this time...., I'm in LOVE !

----------



According to apple this is also a mp3 player, when you leave your
iPhone at home, so maybe comes with 8 gig of memory space

Image

Actually that's what I understood from the site and presentation as well. Of course it will not hold my entire library but some hours of songs is just enough.

----------

Will the Apple Watch have on board storage for hundreds of songs or does it simply rely on a Bluetooth connection to the iPhone for access? I believe you will still need to carry your iPhone to stream your music.

From what I've read the functionality of the music player is limited to controlling the music player on the iPhone. I.E. press the next track button on the watch and the iPhone hears the request, changes the song and sends the appropriate signal to your bluetooth headphones. I do not believe the Apple Watch has the capability to request data from the cloud and stream it to bluetooth headphones without it being tethered to an iPhone.

The marketing material clearly states that you can leave the iPhone at home and still listen to music. I would like to know how if the Apple Watch doesn't have a cellular data connection for streaming. Are they talking about on board storage of physical files? If so, how much storage are we talking about? Color me confused.

Rumors say it has 8 gigs storage. Which would be just fine. At least for me.

 

[MaloCS]

According to apple this is also a mp3 player, when you leave your iPhone at home, so maybe comes with 8 gig of memory space.

Image

I don't understand why Apple now requires us to physically load music files onto the device for playback. Especially since they've been pushing cloud based services (which require an internet connection) down our throats for a few years. Apple has no remorse in calling people like me data hogs when we voiced our concerns about inadequate on board storage in the iPhone. Now they're telling people like me that on board storage of music files is a benefit.

Apple Watch spiel: "See, there's no need for an on board cellular data connection because you can upload your music files directly to the Apple Watch. Pretty cool huh?"

compared to...

iPhone spiel: "There's no need to store your music files on your iPhone, only data hogs would even consider doing that. Just subscribe to our iCloud services and stream your music anytime you wish. Pretty cool huh?"

Seems like Apple is spinning the technical limitations of the device despite the fact that they tout a different philosophy when it comes to the iPhone.

 

[Keirasplace]

I don't understand why Apple now requires us to physically load music files onto the device for playback. Especially since they've been pushing cloud based services (which require an internet connection) down our throats for a few years. Apple has no remorse in calling people like me data hogs when we voiced our concerns about inadequate on board storage in the iPhone. Now they're telling people like me that on board storage of music files is a benefit.

Apple Watch spiel: "See, there's no need for an on board cellular data connection because you can upload your music files directly to the Apple Watch. Pretty cool huh?"

compared to...

iPhone spiel: "There's no need to store your music files on your iPhone, only data hogs would even consider doing that. Just subscribe to our iCloud services and stream your music anytime you wish. Pretty cool huh?"

Seems like Apple is spinning the technical limitations of the device despite the fact that they tout a different philosophy when it comes to the iPhone.

You won't have to "load" anything, just create a playlist on your phone and tell your watch to sync it when in range (it can even sync while playing some songs off it). That's a very simple implementation. No headaches at all.

You can't stream to it from the internet unless you want a device that lasts 3 hours before it dies.

The main limitation for functionality of any small device these days is battery life. If somehow they can make communication or GPS chips 1/10 the power or make batteries better, then you'll get all your wishes and more.

----------

HTC had a good idea in some of its touch phones: a zoom control line across the display bottom where you slid your finger back and forth. Super easy.

But the obvious better way is to not create a UI that needs zooming in the first place. This is a like a solution creating a problem. It sure as heck looks like they decided to use the crown first, then designed the UI to justify it.

--

I think the biggest problem with smartwatches for now and the foreseeable future, is that they have such a short lifespan. A lot of us have digital watches and calculator and PDA and smart watches filling a spare drawer

Thus they make far more sense if they're priced as throwaways.

Or.. if someone actually came up with a timeless design for a case that justified a high price, make the internals replaceable.

The UI is probably still in flux; what we may see eventually will be refined. Not putting your fingers all over the face for many interactions (but you can still use that if you absolutely want too...) is the right decision.

As for Jack of All Trade, many people are bitching about all sort of supposedly missing communication functions... When the mere fact that it is worn all day precludes them.

The only other option is to downsize the offering to a sports band (that you do not wear except when exercising) and then they could have included things like a GPS... The GPS cannot be included on a watch with any long battery life.

But, then, it would be a lot harder for Apple to differentiate itself in that field, so what would be the point for them? Sell, what everyone is selling? They'd also sell a lot less of them since its a more niche application.

 

[Fabio_gsilva]

It will be rough to my wallet...

A new Ipad and iPhone are mines are already too old to rock'n'roll albeit too young to die...

A time capsule to take advantage of the faster dsl and wifi conectivity and to have a back up utility...

And now a watch... Oh, Apple, you are hurting my pocket!!!

 

[MaloCS]

You won't have to "load" anything, just create a playlist on your phone and tell your watch to sync it when in range (it can even sync while playing some songs off it). That's a very simple implementation. No headaches at all.

You can't stream to it from the internet unless you want a device that lasts 3 hours before it dies.

The main limitation for functionality of any small device these days is battery life. If somehow they can make communication or GPS chips 1/10 the power or make batteries better, then you'll get all your wishes and more.

You make valid points that I agree with completely. However, if I was in charge I would have ditched the problematic functionality in lieu of tech that is lean and extremely reliable. Then, once the internals were decided I would wrap it in a fresh and unique package. I wouldn't have borrowed a form factor that is 150 years old to house my company's latest high tech gadget. It would have gotten it's own unique and modern look, a look that would usher in a new wave of tech fashion and set the bar for other tech companies looking to capitalize on wearable devices. Since Apple ushered in a modern look when it designed the iPod, iPhone, iPad and iMac there was no reason why it's customer base would expect anything less.

The only other option is to downsize the offering to a sports band (that you do not wear except when exercising) and then they could have included things like a GPS... The GPS cannot be included on a watch with any long battery life.

True, if you're trying to cram an entire iPhone into a device the size of a traditional watch face. However, I would have ditched this philosophy and created a device, albeit a "one trick pony" device, that provides an excellent user experience for the functionality it does include.

I do not believe that Apple, arguably the best modern day tech company in terms of innovation and design, could not create a device that blew the market away with it's innovation. Even if that device was a FuelBand clone of sorts, I truly believe that Apple could have taken that idea and made it light years ahead of what's already on the market. Then, as time passes and tech gets leaner and smaller, add in more and more iPhone functionality until the "watch" is nothing more then a miniature iPhone on your wrist.

But, then, it would be a lot harder for Apple to differentiate itself in that field, so what would be the point for them? Sell, what everyone is selling? They'd also sell a lot less of them since its a more niche application.

I disagree with this paragraph. Not for one second do I believe that Apple would have a hard time wrestling away market share from existing wearable devices, be they watches, bands or glasses. The innovation that Apple has traditionally provided is lacking in their watch device. They did absolutely nothing in terms of innovation on the Apple Watch. It's nothing but a poorly shrunken down version of the iPhone (or an exceptionally upgraded version of the iPod Nano, depending on how you want to look at it) mounted on a traditional watch band. The only innovation in this device is the UI and the new services. The industrial design of the Apple Watch can hardly be considered innovative when it copies it's cues from a design paradigm that's 150 years old.

Apple missed the opportunity to do something really innovative with this device.

 

[grahamperrin]

… I like my women soft. …

To each his/her own

I'm ambivalent about the shapes of Apple Watch. I imagine them being worn by both men and women, without detracting from a person's sexuality.

Apple aside, for a moment, what I found truly amusing was the recent appearance of an adapted car radiator hose alongside some dainty platinum bracelets …

https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=19563912#post19563912

 

[Tech198]

Fashion

I don't want Apple to go into the fashion industry. It's one thing churning out Mac products, its another thing to show it off to "fashion sites"

That just further gets my goat... and further sets it in stone. If Apple wanted to do this, they could of done it with all their products, because they are "technically fashionable" too arn't they ?

Sorry Apple, u lost me before the Apple watch.

 

[CocktailHour]

Left Handed

Hi. I'm right handed, but would like to hear from left handed people about what they think about the main control being on the right side.

I think the wheel/button is a good solution for the design, except I have to wonder what usage would be like for lefties. Thanks.

 

[HardBall]

Normally I hate square watches, all watches I've ever worn were round, but this time...., I'm in LOVE !

----------



According to apple this is also a mp3 player, when you leave your
iPhone at home, so maybe comes with 8 gig of memory space

Image

I think there is some special appeal about that shape.

Here's a concept by a designer on what could have been if the watch was round and a bit thinner. All else being the same, a simple change in shape make this a much more riveting timepiece. She really makes a compelling case of why that form is a far better representation of what an archetypal watch looks like, and why it holds so much allure:

 

[shanson27]

I think there is some special appeal about that shape.

Here's a concept by a designer on what could have been if the watch was round and a bit thinner. All else being the same, a simple change in shape make this a much more riveting timepiece. She really makes a compelling case of why that form is a far better representation of what an archetypal watch looks like, and why it holds so much allure:

Image

Image

Image

Image

I like the square design

 

[grahamperrin]

Hi. I'm right handed, but would like to hear from left handed people about what they think about the main control being on the right side.

I think the wheel/button is a good solution for the design, except I have to wonder what usage would be like for lefties. Thanks.

Apple Watch Will Allow Left-Handed Users to Choose Interface Orientation – most of my thoughts are there.

 

[skaertus]

I wonder what the % mac owners is of people buying a PC, instead of a mac, because of the dis-satisfaction as to the updates in software and Macs..and how many people have bought macs because they have been introduced to the mac, via iPod,iPhone and iPad and subsequently bought a iMac or macbook on the back of them buying other devices.

There should be some.

There are definitely some computer geeks dissatisfied with Apple neglecting updates and dumbing down its software and dropping Macs in favor of PCs for this reason.

And there are also some morons who fell in love with their iPhones and bought Macs because they are made by Apple and are beautiful.

 

[cmvsm]

I like the design, idea, and think that this is the next wave of the future in terms of functionality. That said, the watch has to be tethered to an iPhone via Bluetooth to be fully functional??? The idea is supposed to be minimizing what you are carrying and maintaining the functionality. All this is doing is adding another device that my iPhone already does..Total fail with respect to design and execution Apple.....