UKC

Will anyone be getting one?

I must say that i fail to see the attraction....but perhaps will be proven wrong as they become the next iPod/iPad?
Or has Apple got it wrong this time?

ps please apple-haters, try to avoid being tooooo predictable by using the word 'sheeple'

In reply to Kimono:

Despite being a massive Apple fan i'm struggling to justify the expense... let alone the price differences... I'm not convinced yet!

In reply to Kimono:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B_p097LUsAERj7a.jpg

In reply to Kimono:
I'll be buying one - had a Pebble until recently, and I really like the fact it told me who was texting/ringing etc - so only really flashed up what's on your phone. Apple Watch looks to have (a bit) more functionality so I'll give it a go.

In reply to Kimono:


I think they have it wrong. I was thinking about buying a couple of the £14,000 pound version, one to wear and one spare in my pocket in case I get home late from the wall and the battery has run out on the one I'm wearing. But I was disappointed that they are only offering a Gold case and am definitely going to wait until they come out with one in Platinum.

In reply to Kimono:

Well I might get one... save me from the tyranny of having to get my smart phone out of my pocket to check my txt's not to mention the outrageous effort in swiping a card to get into a hotel room..... phew even the thought of it has me breaking out in hives.

Apple, God bless them!

In reply to Kimono:

I, for one, won't be swapping any of my watches for one.

A remote start/stop button for Strava on my Galaxy would be handy, though.

In reply to Kimono:

If the optical heart rate sensor proves very reliable I will get one. Both of the elasticated waist band ones that I have tried have been a bit skittish, and become uncomfortable after 2 hours into a run. I would imagine the Apple Watch will also make a great cycle computer display when using a GPS app, and as a bonus I can use it to change my music playlist etc.

In reply to Kimono:

Can you tell the time on it?

In reply to Robert Durran:

im guessing that we don't even realise the ways in which it will be used. I guess its all down to the apps but either its gonna be the biggest flop ever, or we'll be looking back in 5 years with wonder that we managed to live without them

In reply to wintertree:

"Elasticated waist band" optical heart rate monitor "Waist band"??..... I think your doing it wrong!

Optical HR monitors are just plain crap all round. Yes, a CHEST strap is a bit of a pain but very accurate and if using a Garmin HRM RUN you get Run Dynamics thrown in.

Why would the iWatch make a good display for a cycle computer? bit dangerous on your wrist and a bit tiny mounted on your handle bars. Whats wrong with an Edge?

In reply to Indy:

i have to agree...i really don't like to have to look at my wrist for data....much prefer mounted on bars, and then i might as well stick with my Garmin

In reply to Indy:


Obviously I meant chest... Normally I only get my elbows and my shoulders mixed up...

To date, optical HR monitors have been crap - but Apple have inconceivably more wealth, developers, hardware gurus, expertise, patents and so on than anyone who has made one before. They're one of the rightest entities in the world - so if anyone can make one work, it's Apple. As I say, if they've made it work, I'll get one...


Given the suite of sensors in an iPhone and the associated watch they should be able to replicated this.

In reply to wintertree:



What does that last bit mean?

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

I'm not sure if they have, I can remember chatting to a bloke who had come come skiing with us about ten years ago, he was singing the praises of smart phones, the ability to rebook your easyjet flight home sitting on the chair lift ....blah blah. I was completely sceptical and negative. Guess what I did at Christmas - yup rebooked our easyjet flights home on a chair lift using my iPhone.
So moving to iWatch I can buy one for GBP 299, thats not out of the way for a piece of wrist jewellry - yes you can spend GBP 13,500 on one and I suppose there is a market for it (# 1 daughter will be pleading - but no worries it will be to no avail) but it's not mass market thats what the GBP 299 ones are for.
My real issue with them is the constant upgrading that will go on. Buy one this April - next April a thinner, better "cooler" version will be released, and the whole rigmarole starts again.
Apples technology is excellent, but their marketing isn't very (if at all) far behind. They're the biggest company because they are doing things right.

In reply to wintertree:


Didn't stop them developing i-tunes though did it?

In reply to Willi Crater:

Or the myriad of other turkeys that have been allowed to (very) quietly sink without a trace!

In reply to Yanis Nayu:


Hopefully they meant to type brightest?

In reply to cander:
I have no doubt that in the future a smart watch will an essential piece of kit maybe to monitor your health ie it'll be able to tell you that you're dehydrated or that your glucose is too low/high or your immune system is low BUT at this moment in time they're an expensive gimmick as smart phones once were.

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

Richest entities. Oh to be able to spot spelling mistakes...

In reply to Kimono:

I'm an Apple fan, not obsessively, but I'm on my third iPhone, bought an iPad within a couple of months of launch and have had various Macs.

I just can't see a use for the watch at the moment, I had a look at the various android ones when they came out and thought the same. I guess it really comes down to the aps and what they can deliver.

Another factor for me is that I really like watches, or should I say chronographs, and enjoy having an expensive chunk of Swiss mechanical technology on my wrist, which only really comes off (swapped for a Garmin) when doing sport.

In reply to Indy:

But they're not expensive - 300 quid for a watch isnt out of the way these days

In reply to Kimono:


I won't, my watches are mechanical or disposable and I see no reason to change that.
jk

In reply to Indy:


I don't know about you but I get that from feeling a bit peaky. I really don't want or need a machine with a direct line back to its maker and f*** knows who else telling me that and keeping a log of it.

jk

In reply to Kimono:
Think I have misunderstood the topic, I was expecting Chris packham and Kate humble talking about Cox orange pippins

In reply to cander:

I would hazard a guess that they will last as long as a phone, be out of date and start to go slow after a year or two of software upgrades. The battery will start to become poor at holding a charge and you will get the hump with having to take your charger with you on holiday. Ergo, £300 is a lot of money for a watch imo.

and 5 hours battery life? That's pretty rubbish if true

I suspect they will be offered free with a phone within 6 months. Could be wrong as betting against Apple is usually a mugs game

In reply to Kimono:

I won't be buying one. I don't wear a watch for a start and I don't think they will enhance my life enough to make the £300 worth spending.

The one apple product I would buy if they ever get round to making on is an Apple Sat Nav (iNav if you will).

How they havn't made one of these is beyond me... legitimate tracking of customers locations, chance to improve their woeful iMaps, potential to stream local advertising on to the screen and have preference for sponsored searches for garages, food etc. Full interface with iPhone and iWatch with voice activation and everyone has a car and need directions. Seems like a no brainer to me. But what do I know.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

I've read 18 hours with everything enabled. Still not great, especially if one of its USPs is that it can act as a health monitor as well as an alternative interface for your phone.

In reply to The New NickB:
I really like gadgets - I'm wearing a Fenix 3 at the moment, which is (so far) the best watch I've had - GPS so no need to change for running, notifications of anything I want from my phone (and I do like the ability to know who's ringing me in meetings, whether Liverpool have scored etc), compass, barometer, gives me a UK grid reference etc etc.

I'll shamelessly buy an Apple Watch as it does a lot of extra stuff, plus I think it looks really cool.

There again I've got a Garmin Vivoactive and a Pebble Time Steel on order - so I tend to be quite active on ebay!

In reply to The New NickB:


I think there are two things it really needs to be compelling that it doesn't have yet:
a. More than 18 hours battery life. At least 36 hours and ideally a week. This is going to be hard to do without a lower power display.
b. It needs to be able to pay for things and unlock cars and doors in practice rather than just in theory so it can displace wallets and keys. Battery life is tied into this, you can't trust a watch to do critical things like open doors and make payments if there's a chance it will be dead when you need it.

In reply to Kimono:

I'm going to make my own, using this handy instructional video: -

youtube.com/watch?v=Yq9vQJBpuNA&

In reply to Kimono:

I think all it achieves is saves the ultra lazy the energy required to remove a mobile from your pocket. Battery life is 18hrs, which within a few months will really be 6-10hrs at best. It's water resistant, not waterproof so hardly suitable for the outdoors.. it's a gadget to wear to the pub on an evening, after which you can put in back on charge ready for tomorrow night.

In reply to The New NickB:

Anticipating many questions on battery life, Apple has given the topic its own information page, The phrase “actual results will vary” appears eight times on this information page

In reply to summo:


I guess they might be more useful for people carrying oversize phones which end up in bags since they dont fit pockets.

In reply to dissonance:

aren't they called tablets?... perhaps I'm just a little old fashioned! My smartphone (HTC) is 3 1/2 years old, not huge, not small, but still works perfectly, I bought a new battery a few months for £10.. the money I've saved on not chasing the latest can be spent to better things.

Plus, if folk wanted a phone with a large screen, the last thing they would want is a watch with a grid square sized face/screen.

In reply to summo:


The phone and tablet market do seem to be merging a little. The thing is the more the phone gets like a tablet and better for internet and various apps, the more people want an alternative interface for the phone. Not me, I'm happy with a normal sized phone, but there has definitely been a market shift in that direction.

In reply to The New NickB:


I agree, I just prefer the simply options, there is so much redundancy in having multiple devices, which aren't cheap, all doing the same thing, in almost the same way.

Can you sense that I haven't been captured by the i-products marketing / propaganda!

In reply to summo:


Nope phablets (a shit term i try and avoid using) eg the Samsung note and then the apple 6+ copy.


It depends if you want to quickly check if its worth getting a hernia getting the phone out. These are no longer phones which fit comfortably in a pocket hence I can see why being able to check them on a watch might help (not as much as buying a smaller phone but...)

In reply to Kimono: I love the idea of a smart watch being a bit of a gadget fiend but at the moment I don't realy see a use for them.
As things get smaller and more powerful and the watch totally replaces the smart phone I might get one but to make it viable it would need to be fully voice activated and have a way to display more information than the tiny screen can support.
Maybe a tie-up with something like Google glasses or even a contact lenses.

My biggest obstacle though would be my current watch, 20 years ago when I was young and single I spent 2k on a Rolex and have worn it every day since then.
Its battered and scratched and there is a small chip on the screen and I would not want to be without it.

In reply to dissonance:

I think a modest sized rucksack, say 40-50 litres an old school computer inside. Motor bike battery and 240/12v inverter.. to power it ( wind turbine/solar panel optional) link this to a helmet mounted monitor, much like a fold down visor on a work helmet? Mouse connected to a wrist pad? Problem solved.

I think apple are inventing things, then trying to justify the use, rather than having a problem that needs solving.

so an apple watch is a solution for replacing jeans which you are kidding yourself that you still fit into?

In reply to Kimono:

I'll stick to telling the time by the sun whilst eating an apple.

In reply to summo:


Apple are pretty late to this game. Although that it is being treated as the second coming does mask that.


have you seen the size of some phones now?
Only pockets they would fit into are map pockets on outdoor trousers.
Dont get me wrong I aint a fan of them. However I can see that there is a potential market for it.

In reply to Kimono:

No, 18 hrs battery life is a showstopper! Actually any battery life measured in hours or even days (sorry Pebble) is a turn off when it comes to watches. Maybe I will change my mind in the future. I did when it came to cellular phones and now I'm a busy charging slave of an old iP4...

In reply to dissonance:

if the watch/phone actually did anything useful that isn't already readily covered by an existing, cheaper device that has longer battery life, then I could see even a minor need for one.

Realistically, tech will leap along, the current range of watches will obsolete in no time at all in terms of functions, but until further big leaps in battery tech arrive, or power generation (like old style kinetic self powering watches) then the watches will remain the choice of tech geeks or those with more money than....

In reply to Kimono:

It has been my impression that over the past decade or so the wearing of watches of any kind is in decline. I don't know of anyone under the age of 25 who habitually wears a watch, a few have expensive blingy monstrosities that don't really give the time but I count them as jewellery rather than anything useful. Will the Apple Watch appeal to people who don't already wear a watch?

Mind you, I'm at the other end of the spectrum. I don't habitually wear a wristwatch but I am never without one of my lovely wind-up pocket watches.

In reply to dissonance:


Personally I can't stand them as an organisation and have little or no interest in their products and the shite talk they inspire like product ecosystems associated with them. Though this quote pretty much sums up the brilliance of the apple marketing machine.

Creative labs were making portable hard-drive MP3 players before the iPod but they weren't as slick and didn't have the marketing push.

HTC were making touch screen, keyless, software/app enabled phones for about 1-2 years before Steve Jobs ever uttered the words iPhone in public. Yet the iPhone changed (?) the world allegedly.

I'd be fairly certain the same applied to the iPad though at this point i've no interest in looking. Apple have never been true innovators they have been fancy designers with to start with a unique selling point in Jobs's presentations and determination to do things differently (whether it made sense or not, I'm thinking refusal to adopt USB or flash). Later this morphed into a huge cash pile and a reputation people paid attention to. Though when saying they're late to game just remember that in their recent history (last 10 years or so) they've practically never been the true innovators they paint themselves to be they're just good at selling it that way.

No one has answered my question yet and told me yet whether they can tell you the time?

In reply to Robert Durran:

Yes

In reply to Indy:


Essential? Really? What's wrong with feeling thirsty and knackered?

It's all gimmicky bollocks.

In reply to cander:

It's outrageous. My phone tells me the time and it cost £15. With a bit of duct tape I could strap it to my wrist.

In reply to summo:


I agree, I cant see a need personally but I can see why some would like it (because they made a crap decision earlier in the buying process).
The best bet seems to be that Apple are mainly aiming for Asia with it.
Same with the other companies.

In reply to Robert Durran:

depends how long you have been wearing it. A few hours since last charge and it will start getting iffy.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Only for 18hrs, then its back to the £10 Casio.

In reply to Robert Durran:

If you feel thirsty then your already dehydrated which will effect the functioning of your kidneys. Minute build ups of toxins in the kidneys over time because of yoyo dehydration might have a knock on effect to something more serious.
What if a smart watch could let you know to drink a glass of water/fluid BEFORE your body got dehydrated?

What if a diabetic could be automatically warned that there blood sugar trend was likely to cause a problem so action needs to be taken.

In reply to Indy:


Maybe the smart watch could also predict when my bladder will be full and flash up a notification before I feel need the need to pee.

In reply to Indy:

Except that's utter bollocks. You have fallen for the "hydration industry" marketing. Oddly, after billions of years of evolution, our bodies are pretty good at identifying when we need to drink.

e.g.
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/14/5379.abstract

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

Maybe it will.

In reply to MG:

Exactly.

I can't see any role for this in my life at all (I gave up wearing a watch ages ago - I always have my phone in my pocket anyway and I don't like jewellery, I never find it comfortable).

Only time I wear a watch is a GPS one for running, and I'm sure it won't be an expensive Apple one, it's a robust Garmin intended for running!

Neil

In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:

It all reminds me a bit of Sinclair's watch-calculator back in the 70s, the days when people wore watches that had to be pressed to turn the display leds on for a few moments ! The "cool" digital watch fad was mentioned in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy iirc.

In reply to Neil Williams:



You were doing well up till that! What's wrong with a map?

In reply to Robert Durran:

It doesn't show where I am, its purpose is to track me so I can upload to Strava to look at pace etc. I mostly run from home so no map needed!

Neil

In reply to Robert Durran:

He probably uses Photoshop too...

In reply to Robert Durran:


It'll tell you the time left of the battery power!

In reply to MG:

I'm not sure the abstract suggests that thirst is a good indicator of dehydration, just that drinking water is pleasant when we are dehydrated, and unpleasant when we are fully hydrated. I wouldn't call either of these feelings 'thirst', i.e. the desire/impulse to drink; they are the feelings you get when you do drink.

In reply to Kimono:

http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/gear-news/viewranger-ready-for-apple-watch---s... one.

This is quite cool, but still won't be buying

In reply to Kimono:

As it seems that the Watch is not waterproof, then its a definite nono for me. I am a kitesurfer and the one time i really need the time is when I'm out in the water.

In reply to Kimono:

and another thing, how come they didn't call it the iWatch??
Any ideas?

In reply to Indy:



Man seems to have survived the past 1-2millions years (modern man) without the need for a watch to tell him to drink and I think our ancestors worked and sweated a hell of a lot more than the average apple watch wearer is going to. Chances are the most they'll ever sweat is during that 10 secs they pay for the thing.

In reply to captain paranoia:
I think you are splitting hairs but regardless, you dont need a watch to tell you to drink!!

In reply to Neil Williams:


Well, you could measure how far you have run on a map (a piece of string works well), time your run on a cheap Casio watch and then use S=D/T. Works for me. But maybe I'm missing something......

In reply to MG:


Well that's a pretty shit watch then; put it on in the morning and the next morning you don't know when to get up!

In reply to Robert Durran:

Or I could use a relatively cheap piece of technology that will do that to a much more detailed level, showing for instance how I perform on hills or on specific sections of route?

Neil

In reply to Kimono: Ooh I can see a ton of uses for these. I guess I'd regard it as a remote display from your phone that is inconvenient to remove and put back, similarly to handlebar mounted devices monitoring HR, power etc.

Wrist mounted GPS sub display? And yes, for long, 6 hour plus races a tool that tells you when to eat and drink is more than helpful

At the moment I think the biggest limitation is that it's not a standalone device (to the best of my knowledge). I think the ability to pay with it was alreafy announced?

In reply to Neil Williams:


I would suggest that your body and brain at the time has already told you how performed on a route, everyone can sense if they are coping with a pace well... or despite going slowly up a hill, they are struggling like $hit! A heart monitor might confirm that you are blowing out your ar$e, but it's not telling you much new. A gps will only show you again where you were struggling, but you should remember that anyway?

Even if you were doing efforts, say 10x400m, when timing and recovering you can always sense if you are going well or not etc.

For me a stop watch and heart monitor covers it all, but then I'm a little old school, or old before my time.

In reply to wbo: > Wrist mounted GPS sub display? And yes, for long, 6 hour plus races a tool that tells you when to eat and drink is more than helpful

but this watch isn't capable of either.

Plus, if you were racing at such a level that these things were super critical and could justify the cost of such a device, you'd have a coach, personal trainer, team doctor, nutritionist etc. anyway.

In reply to Robert Durran:

You probably are missing something. Tracking runs & rides on strava and being able to compare to other users is a fair bit more fun and user friendly than bits of string and notes.

Sure, you don't *need* strava but then you probably don't need to do the string thing either, or go for the run in the first place.

To the OP - another vote for "not interested". We got used to phones being disposable a while ago but I don't fancy a watch that a) has to be charged daily and b) will be redundant very quickly and most important c) doesn't actually have a feature I'd find useful - I don't have diabetes or a heart condition and I know when I need a piss.

In reply to Summo: I would disagree- there are a lot of people spending more money than this on powermeters for bikes now - rich, keen amateurs will lap these up when the apps and hardware settle a little

I am more old school than most anyone I know and I can still see the appeal of these.

In reply to summo:


I don't get this heart rate monitor thing. If my heart can't pump enough oxygen to my muscles, I feel f***** and might have to slow down. What more information do I need? But then maybe I'm a little old school.......

In reply to Mutl3y:


I don't know what a strava is (some new fangled technology thing?), but to me maps, timing, measuring, bits of string etc is good fun (and cheap and simple) because it is very "hands on", and has a nice sense of contact with what you are actually doing on the ground rather than leaving all the measuring and calculation to a box of electronics.

In reply to Mutl3y: I'd never pretend that I "need" any of these things (I don't "need" a microwave, a cyclo-cross bike or a dog, but I have them and like them) - but I enjoy knowing how far I've been, how I'm going against previous runs/rides (and my HR compared with effort definitely helps me know when I'm coming down with something and can ease back on training) and looking at stuff on Strava is fun.

I certainly don't "need" an Apple Watch (just like I don't need an iPhone or indeed a telephone - although seeing as I work remotely most of the time it'd be a bit tricky to run a conference call by writing to people...) but I'll certainly be getting one (and I'll probably get my Mrs one, given how seldom she actually answers her phone...) - I've had a Pebble and now have a Fenix 3 - both of which send me notifications from my phone, whether that's texts/emails when I'm in meetings or out and about, or stuff like Google maps directions when I'm Boris Biking round London, which avoids me having to stop and get my phone out - hardly life-changing but useful and fun.

In reply to Robert Durran:


You are definitely missing something Robert. If you are doing that every time you go for a run, you are missing valuable training time, not to mention a life. £100 investment that lasts five years, that's about 6p a run for me. For that I get 20x the data, it is more accurate and I haven't spent 20 minutes measuring my run with a bit of string.

In reply to Robert Durran:


A little!

In reply to The New NickB:


I don't do it every time I go on a run (usually I just run how I feel and time a standard run if I want to see how I'm doing). Anyway, I love maps (proper ones made of paper) and don't consider time spent looking at them wasted.

In reply to The New NickB:

The Independent are pretty rude about it today:

http://ind.pn/1wXoXjz

In reply to The New NickB:


Mmmm........I'm not convinced it's me that needs to get a life!

In reply to cap'nChino:

Given that the last attempt at a mapping app by Apple was comically bad I am not usre they will want to step inot the SATNAV game any time in the near future!!

In reply to Robert Durran:

When the great "reset" happens....I want to be in Mr Durrans' gang

In reply to Robert Durran:


You're not making the strongest of cases there Robert!

In reply to Removed User:

The coolest feature a watch can ever have (apart from tell the time) is the ability to undo a ladies dress. Where's that feature Mr Ives?

youtube.com/watch?v=tShiZ6ezVJU&

(1m 40 seconds)

In reply to andy:

Where did you get the Fenix 3? I can't find one in stock for love or money......A fantastic piece of kit that will run rings around the Apple watch (see what i did there)

In answer to Op, Apple watch is a no from me, i'm out.

In reply to Robert Durran:


I think you're trying your best to deliberately miss something here and are being perversely obtuse. There's a lot of that on this forum and it ends up turning into a kind of four-yorkshiremen type sketch where people try to outdo each other about how much they've eschewed the trappings of modern society. Kind of luddite-porn.

It's not either/or. It's just life moving on.

We don't need running hot water but it sure as hell saves time and makes life more pleasant.

I log all my runs on a Garmin so I don't need to worry about tracking where I've been. I also love paper maps but its a question of what is most appropriate for the context you're in at a particular time. After all a paper map isn't much good when driving and trying to avoid traffic, but some GPS app like Waze that is being updated based on other people's real-time movements is much more valuable and I know what I'd rather have.

I'm a keen adopter of technology (not planning on getting an Apple Watch though) and find that generally it makes life better. Mobile internet technology means I can live in the French Alps and go and climb, ski, run, hike etc but still work in a job and career I love and am good at, and not have to travel into a major city every day. However if you don't want or need to embrace the always connected digital world then feel free not to - just accept you're in an ever decreasing minority.

Sorry for picking on you specifically - I'm not as such, just the anti-everything-new mentality I sometimes encounter on this forum. Apologies if I've misrepresented you.

In reply to The New NickB:


I'd rather be running or doing other interesting stuff than obsessing over endless "data". So you want x20 data? x100? x1000?.

In reply to yorkshireman:


I think you've got me more or less spot on. I just hate endless gadgetry and would happily go out of my way to miss it, especially in the hills (it's kind of part of the point).

In reply to Robert Durran:


Who said anything about obsessing over data. My point was a simple, cheap GPS watch gives you lots more useful data than a map and a piece of string and requires little or no effort to collect. Some of that data can be useful, especially if you have any desire to train seriously.

You could of course reject all technological aids, that is fine, but if that is the case, what are you doing on UKC.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:



Best post so far on the subject.

In reply to Robert Durran:


But don't you think that such a rigid viewpoint closes you off to new experiences? Like I said, you don't have be extremist - you can find a medium - its not a question of 'endless gadgetry' or living in a cave.

I'm working at home right now but in 20 mins I've got an hour free and I'm going to walk the dog up to the second ski lift and down through the forest. I don't think I'll see anyone and I won't have any mobile signal - it will be lovely to switch off for an hour but I'll do it via conscious effort. That's not always possible and I've gone for a run before now with my mobile dialled into a conference call with headphones (admittedly one I didn't need to talk much) - but the alternative would have been sitting at home (or worse still, in an office) doing the same thing.

I'll come back and have a video conference with colleagues in the US and Mexico, and later on message my wife on Whatsapp who is travelling on business, but its a great way for us to keep in touch and I'll likely send her some pictures of the walk. Not essential, but again, adds to our sum of human happiness.

I'll likely read a (paper) book later but also stream Better Call Saul on Netflix. So really just picking and choosing the technology (and printed paper was cutting edge technology once) that suits me.

In reply to Robert Durran:


I only ever use mine for long aerobic runs or recover sessions. The rest of the time I go by feel.

In reply to The New NickB:


It was just your unqualified "x20 data". I didn't say anything about obsessing. It just came across as if more data could only be a good thing.

In reply to The New NickB:


I like to draw a line between being inside at a desk and being outside doing the stuff I enjoy doing outside without technological distractions.

In reply to Robert Durran:


That's not true is it. Have a look at your post at 12:27.

In reply to Robert Durran:


That's fine, I won't criticise you for that arbitrary and personal decision, perhaps in return you could accept that some technology can be beneficial to people in the outdoors, doesn't have to be distracting and in any case people are free to make arbitrary and personal decisions.

Personally, I'm not one to take a phone or music on a run, but as someone who runs pretty much every day and competes, a GPS watch is a very useful tool to measure and monitor performance. It isn't a distraction, it's not even looked at on most runs, when it is it is used to aid hitting specific targets on specific sessions, in those cases the distraction is welcome.

In reply to The New NickB:


Oops, you're right! Apologies. But your post still cane across as if more data was an unqualified good thing.

In reply to Robert Durran:


I accept that it did to you.

In reply to The New NickB:


You're right; people can do what they want. But there are alternative viewpoints and I sometimes wonder whether some people are missing out by always jumping on the connected/data bandwagon rather than just going with their senses and self sufficiency.

In reply to Robert Durran:

That can of course be turned around the other way - "by always jumping on the no technology bandwagon..."



Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:


Indeed. I confess to occasionally thinking it might be useful to get a weather forecast through my phone (actually, apparently I can but I don't know how to - someone once showed me but I've forgotten).

In reply to Robert Durran:


The Apple Watch will probably have a really simple App for that, you'll be camping outside the Apple Store to be first in line before you know it!

In reply to Moorside Mo:


Only if the forecast is good...

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

And the reception

In reply to GrahamD:


I'm sure they'll be very welcoming!

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Back in those days a £20 note would work just as well



(so I've heard).

In reply to RedFive:


Ordered way back in January from Cotswold (with a cheeky 20% discount code), so got one of the first batch to arrive. It is fab - looks good (although given my time again I'd get the silver one, as the coating on the Sapphire I have is a bit scratch prone), superb battery life, compass, UK grid refs, altimeter, notifications work superbly (as stated above, Google Maps turn notifications when cycling in London are ace) - generally a top watch.

However, will still buy an Apple watch!

In reply to Kimono:
38mm watch with stainless steel link bracelet £819

38mm sport watch with plastic strap £299

So is the bracelet £520, or am I missing something?

In reply to Yanis Nayu: Sport one has aluminium case, watch has stainless steel - although the straps are phenomenally expensive - the steel bracelet one is over £300 if you buy it separately.

In reply to andy:

Indeed. Doesn't quite stack up.

In reply to Kimono:
I am the Gemini Man, and one press of a button renders me invisible for 15 minutes.
Apple should drink Carling Black Label.

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

It does though, because Apple have fooled (almost!) everyone out there into buying their products at VASTLY over inflated prices. But it's their money, who gives a f*ck!

In reply to Lusk:
Depends what you're after. I bought a MacBook Pro after looking at Windows machines, and for similar spec/robustness/battery life and a lower resolution[1] screen (such as the comparable HP EliteBook machines that looks like Macs) you'd pay just as much.

OTOH I have an Android phone and tablet.

[1] I *love* the high resolution Retina displays - they give me so little eye-strain compared with low resolution displays - and no Windows laptops seem to have gone that way yet - or at least very few. Full HD 1080 seems to be the best you get, whereas the 13" Retina MacBook Pro is 2560x1600.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:





Have become proud owner of same this week (after last, bottom of range MBP gave nothing but problems). It's now my seventh Mac since 1971. An iBook I have, dating from nearly 10 years ago, is still going strong (if slowly) as an emergency backup.