What's so innovative about the Apple Watch?
What's so innovative about the Apple Watch? What has Apple done since the launch of the iPhone that was truly innovative? I read articles all he time about features this and software that, but I haven't seen anything where it was definitively proven where Apple has been cutting edge for years.
christopher rizzo called me a troll for questioning his religious adherence to Apple consumerism.
So, can someone explain where Apple is truly innovative? I'm not talking about a minor change like the USB-C port or "slide to unlock" but a true innovation that's once again changing the industry.
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3043419/what-the-apple-watch-does-that-googles-watches-dont
christopher rizzo called me a troll for questioning his religious adherence to Apple consumerism.
So, can someone explain where Apple is truly innovative? I'm not talking about a minor change like the USB-C port or "slide to unlock" but a true innovation that's once again changing the industry.
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3043419/what-the-apple-watch-does-that-googles-watches-dont
Comments
Anyhow, I don't care to argue with you over this stuff because it gets nowhere. If you want to know what Apple innovates, do some research! I will give you a hint, you mentioned one product above, which will become a standard soon enough but Apple couldn't claim innovation because of politics. But of course, I do not expect you believe that!
"I'm not talking about a minor change like the USB-C port or "slide to unlock" but a true innovation that's once again changing the industry."
Beyond that, nothing was mentioned.
The difference in the number of devices you own versus the number of devices I own make absolutely no difference to whether Apple is innovative or not.
And the "do your own research" argument means you don't understand how professionals have debates. He who makes the claim must provide the proof of that claim. It's called the Burden of Proof. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof).
And the one product I mentioned above ... you mean the USB-C connector? That's not an innovation and more than changing the tires on your car is an innovation in performance.
christopher rizzo, I can't help but shake my head at your continued thinking that Jason ON was not acknowledging Apple having some part in development, or future adoption of USB-C. And in all honesty, Apple should be known for something more than just trying their hand at additional interconnects. It's well known they rotate plugs to force users to have to buy yet another plug to charge their stuff.
The trash can Mac Pro that came out a year or two ago was/is pretty innovative on hardware design. Their efforts to consolidate notifications has been rather cool.
I think what's going on right now is setting the precedence for making a seamless experience between phone, computer, watch, AV, car, and home automation. I hope they don't fuck it up. I don't see much momentum right now.
So less looks a innovate, to introduce something new; make changes in anything established. Or to introduce (something new) for or as If for the first time.
So does Apple fall into this? Yes they do
New updates on iPhone Os to hard wear
New Macs Os and hard wear
To the apple watch. All fall into this "innovate"
Then less look at the link you posted about what the apple watch can do that android wear can't. This shows lack of understanding of the apple watch of you think this is true. The apple watch can do a few things that android wear can't right now. Maybe you should look at the apple watch feature list little harder.
The thing Apple does is not necessarily bring the first of an innovation or product category to market, but when they do, they do so in a way that people actually enjoy using them.
They didn't bring the first MP3 player to market, but they brought one to market and streamlined the way people get music on it.
They didn't invent the smart phone, but they made one with a multi-touch display that allowed using the web browser much easier and closer to a desktop experience than what was out at the time.
They made the process of buying and adding applications to smartphones much easier than the competitors at the time such as Windows Mobile where you had to purchase from 3rd party vendors - having to provide payment information and complicated installation procedures for each application instead of a consolidated store that allowed simple click purchases.
They didn't invent laptops, but they make laptops that are lightweight with long battery life an come with probably the best trackpad/OS combination of any computer. Laptops that sleep and wake quickly with hardware that works well with the OS. No driver issues.
They didn't invent fingerprint scanning on phones, but they made it reliable and fast.
They didn't invent tablet computers, but they made one that didn't try to shoe-horn a desktop OS into a touch screen interface.
They didn't bring the first smart-watch to market, but I bet the one they did will make the experience better for those who use it. Still too early to say on that.
And a good debate never hurt anyone except the guy with a tiny ego.
In the original USB 3.1 Bus specification July 2013, if you read through the document (631 pages) you will find that Apple did not contribute to the bus specification. the following are the lead companies
Hewlett-Packard Company
Intel Corporation
Microsoft Corporation
Renesas Corporation
ST-Ericsson
Texas Instruments
IF you look at the the USB 3.1 power specification (586 pages) you will see that Apple was not an original contributor and was only listed as a contributor after the August 2014 revision.
If you look at the USB-C connector documentation (171 pages) You will see that, of the lead Chairmans: two where from Intel, one was from Foxcon and one was from Seagate. Nowhere does it give special recognition to Apple.
In short we have proof that Apple did not help develop the USB 3.1 bus specification or power specifications and that it was a group effort led by others that developed Micro USB-C.
_As for innovation, everything about that watch is a marvel, from the strap to the crown. Nobody is innovating at design like Apple! Laugh if you want but Samsung and Moto will be borrowing what they can from Watch. _
I failed to see where Apple was innovating anything in this product. New, perhaps. Innovation? No.
The way Apple fanboys would have us believe, Apple is making leaps and bounds in innovation even when they're clearly copying other products. I wanted to know if Apple was being innovative anymore or are other companies being innovative and Apple just putting a "pretty" spin on the designs.
Well, I guess technically I did have an iPod. I got an iPod touch back in 2010 while I was still using a Windows Mobile smartphone (HTC Imagio, after two Palm Trios, and an HTC Touch). Before getting the Imagio, I tried out a Motoroloa Droid, but was not that happy with the software available for it at the time. I was impressed with the iPod Touch and how well it worked. I went full in on Apple buying a late 2010 MacBook Air after my experience with the iPod Touch and also seeing how well the trackpad worked on co-worker's computers and realizing I liked the idea of a 3lb laptop with a 13" screen (which I still use and I'm typing this on).
I don't know why people who don't use Apple products are so against them and feel somehow Apple is duping their users. A slick video will only go so far. If people weren't having good experiences with their products, then they wouldn't keep buying them.
I have a laptop I've been using for over 4 years that I still am really happy with, that has held up well, is still speedy, runs the latest OS and does what I need to do. It was a somewhat expensive purchase, but over time it has proven to be a good purchase. I didn't buy it because of some mythical hype, a slick video or as a status symbol. I bought it because I had a really good experience with another Apple product and I knew people who were really happy with their Apple laptops. Based on the experience with this laptop, I'll likely replace it with another Apple product when it stops working for me.
Or you could spend your night do something more productive.
That is what they do best in the industry. Their products always have premium space in third party retailers and they have their own stores to sell and support their products. Throw in a massive advertising push and they have an almost guaranteed win.
Also if they want a particular part they have the size to buy in massive bulk at a discount price, often buying all units produced of that part for a set period of time. That massive buying power over the last 10 years or so has allowed them to garner massive profits and to supply retail with more than enough units to sell in massive quantity.
Now I'm not saying the Apple Watch isn't a good product, but Apple could sell millions of a mediocre or even bad product because of these advantages.
There is no one that could compete with Apple. Even if Google had the perfect smart watch OS and Motorola built the most amazing smart watch, they would still have no chance outselling Apple.
Samsung is the only company with the size, marketing and verticality to come close at competing with Apple. But they lack in retail and produce a few good products (Note 4 and Galaxy S6), and a bunch of crappy low end devices diluting their brand and profit margin.
Oh and smartwatches are just early, I'm not concerned about 720K Android Wear watches. As more people get interested in smart watches, be it from seeing other people with them or advertising, even from compeititing products it will help drive all units. As it doesn't matter if the Apple Watch got your interest in smart watches. If you don't have an iPhone, you can't use it. So people will end up with Android Wear or Pebble. So no, Apple Watch can't kill Android Wear. They're not competing with one another.
Also "no one else brings technology to the people", than what is this thing on typing on then? That comment you made there makes no sense.
I went from Walkman to Diskman to Mini-Diskman to a Rio Carbon to a Windows Mobile PDA to a Smartphone.
Addendum: my arguments are specifically about their mobile devices tablet, watch, phone. If you are an artist, I would recommend an Apple computer anytime but if you are a regular consumer it is the biggest waste of money, especially if all you do is check email and browse the net
I think it was on the original topic (the link above) where I said Apple's more of a marketing company than a technology company these days. Just like Google is an advertising company.
Great if you want an extremely usable uncluttered no-fuss computer with a super sharp display for editing photos and workstation use. Not for you if you are a hardcore gamer that builds your own desktop and purchases every graphics card revision the day it hits the shelf. I found that over time, I prefer the uncluttered no-fuss route.
But marketing can only take a company so far if their products don't meet the consumer's expectations. Good product experiences = repeat buyers. Product satisfaction does not always correlate to it being the latest and greatest technology. Overall design, package and usability goes a long way toward happy customers and repeat business and product loyalty. They are a technology company that specializes in product design.
Now, Apple makes a product. We're all aware of that. They make a good product by all accounts. But do they make a product that's leaps and bounds ahead of, or better than, their competition? No. But their marketing would have you believe it.
I already said, Apple makes a decent product, but is it better than its competition? Their marketing would have you believe that it is. Just look at the linked post above as an example: the Apple Watch does virtually nothing Android Wear doesn't already do and yet the Apple fanboys are saying it's a pinnacle of innovation.
How much enjoyment you have with a product is very subjective and can't be measured. Would you have just as much enjoyment with an Android and a Chromebook or a Lumia Phone and Windows 8.1? Who can know?
Chances are you locked yourself into the Apple ecosystem and won't even consider an alternate option. Which is fine. It merely means you've fallen hook, line and sinker for the Apple marketing/PR machine.
That is what marketing is supposed to do. It would be bad marketing to come out and say "Hey, we also have a watch. It might not be better than the competitor, but we think you should buy it." No, they are going to say - "here' s our watch and we worked really hard on it and we think it is the best thing in the world!" Sure, fanboys will pick up on that and get excited about it.
I don't think I understand the knee-jerk reaction against Apple products though. It reminds me of the scene in Ferris Bueller's Day off when Jeannie is in the police station. She complains about Ferris getting away with ditching school and how everyone thinks he is so cool. Charlie Sheen's character tell her : "Your problem is you. Worry about yourself, not what your brother does."
Apps don't cross over. You buy a app on iOS you don't get it free on android. So goes the other way around
Car system. Android car stuff does work with apple and apples don't work with google
Android wear/ apple watch. Neither work with other side
Home stuff. Is a mix bag but sure we see android and apple only devices here soon
In other words. We don't have freedom to switch from one side to the other any more due to Eco systems BOTH have put into place. We are all just sheep of one side with no freedom to explore other options. Unless we feel like buying shit ton of new stuff
Android wear/ apple watch. Neither work with other side.
That may change soon.
http://www.macrumors.com/2015/03/03/android-wear-app-iphone-ipad/
I will touch on the one thing which may be the single most important thing I heard in the last keynote: Apple has introduced "Research Kit" which will make truly important strides in the field of medical research. They are leveraging their incredible numbers of units in the wild to help the medical community gather the one thing they could never get enough of previously: live, active and accurate data on a massive scale.
This data can and, let me be so bold as to say, will change the pace of medical research by including so many more people than was ever possible before.
Can google do the same with Android?
Sure they can and they damned well should. This is so important that Apple has removed the possibility of a "mine is bigger than yours" battle simply by making it open source.
That, friends, is innovation just so you can recognize it when you next see it. That is leveraging your consistent platform and huge up-to-date user base to do something which will help to improve ALL of our lives.
Or would you prefer not to benefit because it was an Apple Innovation?
You can put your dicks away now and start thinking about what you, personally, will contribute to our people as a whole before you expire. What will your legacy be?
Please don't let your epitaph read, "... (S)he was only good at feeding the flame on the Internet"
http://www.cio.com/article/2401997/internet/google-future-tech--10-coolest-google-r-d-projects.html#slide1
Looking to the Future
Google's side projects tend to have a forward focus. The company pours resources into researching everything from space elevators to robots--and, of course, pinpointing what all of us will be doing or using in the future. Let's take a look at ten items that Google is putting resources into developing.
Home Automation
For years we've been hearing about a refrigerator that orders milk for you when you're running low, but Google wants to expand the idea to the entire home. Its Android @Home platform already has connected light bulbs, coffee pots, and more in the works. On top of that, Google has its eye on moving beyond the home, to a much broader "Internet of Things." At the company's most recent developer conference, it rolled out its open accessory development kit for Android, inviting makers everywhere to get busy connecting anything from small gadgets to big machines.
Robots
Google is reportedly running a secret division dubbed "Google X," which includes a lab in an undisclosed location where robots rule the roost, according to the New York Times. There's no evidence of an army of T-1000s being built somewhere underground in Silicon Valley, however. Apparently Google is trying to build bots to perform all sorts of mundane tasks around the home and office (such as making coffee or copies), which will give humans greater flexibility to work remotely and focus on higher-level duties.
Driverless Cars
At Google, cars aren't just a means of transportation--they're also an engineering problem to be solved with piles of data and cash. It just makes sense that the company that provides directions and street-level data for all locations should make the cars to take you to them as well. The New York Times reports that part of Google's plan could be to show passengers location-based ads for the businesses the self-driving cars whiz past.
Space elevators
Believe it or not, Google is just one of a number of organizations and individuals interested in setting up the infrastructure to leave Earth's atmosphere without the use of rocket propulsion. Space elevators are reportedly another project on the Google X agenda (see previous slide). The idea is to run a ribbon from Earth to a counterweight in orbit that allows easy access to space for all kinds of scientific experimentation and other ventures. Many people believe that we could have such lifts operational in less than a decade.
Clean Energy
Developing renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal power is one of the main goals of Google's nonprofit arm, Google.org. The project concentrates on solar-powered turbine engines to create electricity, as well as on low-cost heliostats, which are mirrors that track the sun and concentrate solar energy. Google also supports efforts to map the world's potentialgeothermal energy sources. The goal is to create renewable sources that are cheaper than burning coal, which currently generates most of the power in the United States.
New Drugs
Google is interested in investing in new ways to fight disease. Its investment portfolio includes a stake in Adimab, which uses a novel approach involving yeast cells to speed up the discovery of new antibodies. Another Google company,iPierian, uses a technique called "cellular reprogramming" to create new drugs that attack diseases by modifying them.
Climate Change Insurance
Smart Thermostats
A Google future seems to involve making everything smarter, from drugs to cars and even home thermostats. This idea is one of the driving forces behind NEST, the sci-fi climate-control system that learns the best way to keep your home comfortable--while also saving on energy bills. NEST has already rolled out to some customers, and a waiting list has formed for the next batch.
Cancer Treatment
Fighting cancer fits perfectly with the do-good theme present in many of Google's investments. Google Ventures put some money intoFoundation Medicine, which combines genomic and molecular data to create a new approach to cancer care. Perhaps curing cancer is just another engineering problem.
Predicting the Future
Google is so committed to the future, it should come as no surprise that the company is even interested in predicting it. Another Google investment is in Recorded Future, a company that seeks to parse the universe of information available online for clues about what's to come.