Apple Watch launch: internet reaction
- 9 March 2015
- From the section Technology
We were given a glimpse of the Apple Watch last year when Tim Cook made it his "one more thing" at an iPhone launch event.
But there were still many unanswered questions after that event. Principally, how much would it cost? How good would the battery be?
What would it actually do?
At Monday's event Apple sought to answer some of those questions in a way that satisfied fans and critics alike. And it threw in a couple of more minor announcements too.
Here's a cross-section of reaction to Apple's latest publicity extravaganza - with some points-of-view less serious than others.
On Apple Watch Edition (the expensive one)...
Actress Anna Kendrick on Twitter: "We should be thanking Apple for launching the $10,000 'Apple Watch' as the new gold-standard in douchebag detection."
Economist Joseph Brusuelas on Twitter: The Apple watch has the feel of Steve Jobs' Lisa [computer]. It's ill conceived, ill considered & likely to go the way of Google Glass.
User jdflan on Reddit: "It's not uncommon for watches to be priced from $350 to $10,000. But the Apple Watch is different. It's not a Rolex. In a year it's going to be obsolete and in 10 years it won't even power on because the battery will no longer hold a charge."
User LiveLaughLoveRevenge on Reddit: "I was secretly hoping that they'd bring something really cool to the table - something to push the tech ahead. But nope. Functionality seems basically the same, and instead they went the route of trying to make it a status symbol - like MK or LV bags, no extra utility, just a brand name."
User Dan Colasanti on Twitter: Dear people whining about the $10,000 to $17,000 18K-Gold Apple #Watch - it's not meant for you - so get over it.
On the other (less expensive) Apple Watches...
The Verge: "It is really confusing to have both the Digital Crown and the communications button on the side. As I tried to navigate the Watch interface, I found myself pressing one or both several times, without knowing which one would take me to the home screen, back out of an app, or launch a feature.
"Coming from the traditional iOS paradigm of a single home button that always takes you home, it's a notable difference."
User ipedro on Macrumors: "18 hours is more than reasonable. How many hours a day are you awake? If you sleep just 6 hours, the other 18 hours of the day, you can have the Watch on.
"Take it off at night, put it on in the morning. 18 hours is a very comfortable margin for regular use without having to ever worry about the battery."
Eighteen hours is reasonable if you didn't want sleep tracking... [and] when a company says typical usage it means that your real world battery time would definitely be less than 18 hours.
Matthew Ingram, writer for GigaOm, on Twitter: "I know the $17,000 Apple Watch is getting most of the attention because it is extreme, but the $349 one actually seems pretty reasonable."
Re/code: Brain explodes from all the options... KABOOM!
On Apple Watch's apps...
Business Insider: "As I watch this demo, it strikes me exactly like how I decided to buy an iPhone. No single thing convinced me. It was a bunch of little stuff, all added up."
James McQuivey from Forrester analysts (via email): "Competitors will also be relieved that Apple didn't really surprise anyone with its features. Samsung and Motorola don't have to worry that Apple has leapfrogged them in many functional ways -- the Moto 360, for example, already does most of what Apple showed today, though sometimes the user has to go looking for those features."
Wired magazine: "App experiences are stripped down to the bare minimum, in terms of looks and functionality. One thing I didn't like: the calendar app. I certainly think third party developers will be able to make something better."
Norm Wilmer, Now Magazine: "The Apple Watch allows you to take calls on your wrist! But only from members of U2. And they won't stop calling. Ever."
On the new Macbook...
Financial Times:"It may not stand up to Tim Cook's claim that Apple has reinvented the notebook, but it was a very thorough reworking of the concept and is likely to set a new standard in thin-and-light."
Engadget: (Discussing the fact the Macbook only has one port - the new USB-C) "I can tell you now that other PC makers have laptops in the works with USB Type-C ports. On the other hand, that kind of port is hardly ubiquitous yet, and for people used to plugging in full-sized USB connectors into their existing laptops, this could be an off-putting change indeed. I know I'm not used to it."
Jessica Roy, NYMag, on Twitter:"I like the gold macbook [because] it is kinda tacky and so am I."
Wired magazine: "It's expensive - the oddest moment of the event was when Phil Schiller announce the $1,299 starting price, and the room just deflated. It's also a little underpowered for such an expensive machine. But good lord is it beautiful."