Out of all the first-gen Android Wear devices, I like the Moto 360 the best because it actually looks like a watch (albeit a big, masculine watch that looks good on big guys like me but not for most mainstream consumers). But what I find interesting about Motorola's two ads is how they're promoting the not-so-silent vibration mode as a marketable feature.

I think a vibration sound is annoying. Just ask my puppy who freaks out every time he hears my Pebble vibrate.

Apple Watch's "Taptic Engine" is completely silent and according to bloggers with first-hand experience, it literally feels like someone is tapping you.

Patrick Salyer:

Consumers have been longing to get rid of passwords for years. Ad nauseam, we’ve heard the clamors for the end of passwords because of the deluge of usernames and passwords we have amassed and the inherent security issues and frustration they create. Imagine never needing to create another user name or password again for any site or app by using your Apple ID. That’s what Touch ID promises.

Ultimately, Touch ID and Apple Pay are proxies for Apple ID, which is becoming paramount to what is sure to be a strategy to overtake other identity providers.

Consumers will love using Apple ID for authentication on sites and apps because of the seamless experience – imagine being able to authenticate quickly not only at point-of-sale systems and mobile apps using your thumbprint but also on third-party sites just by having your phone in close proximity to your computer.

Businesses, or relying parties, will love it because they’ll get more registrations, identify more customers across devices, and have lower shopping cart abandonment. Apple, in turn, will establish more permanence with users, further entrenching them into the Apple ecosystem.

I've believed the exact same thing since TouchID was announced.

I've also been bullish on the Apple Watch being key to killing passwords.

TorrentFreak:

While it’s been fun and games for a while, makers of some of the world’s most expensive and well known watches are now targeting sites offering ‘pirate’ smartwatch faces in order to have digital likenesses of their products removed from the market.

TorrentFreak has learned that IWC, Panerai, Omega, Fossil, Armani, Michael Kors, Tissot, Certina, Swatch, Flik Flak and Mondaine are sending cease and desist notices to sites and individuals thought to be offering faces without permission.

I'd love to see the day these luxury watchmakers design official smartwatch faces and sell them online (at a premium). Hell, they could even design limited edition watchfaces and sell a fixed number of them. I'd personally throw down money for an official Panerai face.

If people are willing to spend on trivial things such as stickers for chat apps or epic beasts in World of Warcraft, why not embrace the digital marketplace?

MG Siegler:

I like that Apple is seemingly being thoughtful, measured, and realistic in this roll out. This SDK makes it clear that Apple will not be promising the world with the v1 of Apple Watch. Instead, we’re likely to get something much more akin to the first version of the iPhone. As you’ll recall, that initial device, while magical, only ran apps produced by Apple. Third party developers were required to use the web to reach users on the device. Apple is clearly being more lenient here — but not that much more lenient. The only apps that will run natively on Apple Watch to start will be made by Apple.

Slow and steady is the way to go. We've seen Apple do this time and time again, with the iPod, iPhone, and iPad.

In a decade we'll see the Apple Watch will grow into the most important device for mainstream consumers, akin to what the smartphone is for people today. Until then, Apple will take their time to do it right, adding the right features as the necessary technology becomes technically and financially feasible.

In the meantime, Samsung has rushed out their sixth version of their smartwatch line in one year, all of which have been flops. Because apparently, at Samsung, quantity and doing things first is more important than doing it right.

Business Insider:

The wording here makes it sound as if there's a chance that Apple would be able to remove the S1 and replace it with, say, the S2 or S3 in the future. After all, Apple has the entire computer on one chip. It just has to rip out that little computer and replace it with a new one.

As Apple upgrades the computing power, it could replace the chip for, say, $500, Gruber suggests. This sounds high, but this is what it costs to service a high-end luxury watch every few years. If this were to happen, it would solve the problem of turning the watch into an obsolete brick after a few years.

This is only speculation but the potential for this is truly fascinating and it's the kind of innovative thinking I expect from Apple.

Every year, Apple proudly boasts how its latest iPhone is the thinnest, most powerful, and most power efficient iPhone ever. And every year, most of us yawn at it.

But what we're seeing now is the very best of Apple, using everything they've learned from compacting the iPhone to miniaturize an entire computer into a single chip. That alone is a huge innovative achievement. If the S1 chip ends up being swappable? Man, that would be a game changer for smartwatches.

Whatever Apple ends up doing, it's already pretty clear that Apple is approaching this as a modern, fashionable timepiece for the future, not a disposable $300 wannabe mini-smartphone for the wrist.

A Blog To Watch:

Apple actually made clever use of the Apple Watch's relationship with the iPhone. Apple Watch users will install an Apple Watch app on their iPhone, which will be used to download apps onto the watch as well as likely manage Apple Watch settings. A user's iPhone is also used to help with computational demands. Apple cleverly pushes a lot of processor needs to the phone in order to preserve Apple Watch battery life. Thus, the Apple Watch is snappier, with longer battery life because a lot of tasks can be off-loaded to the host phone.

Smart way to handle Apple Watch apps for the first few generations until the Apple Watch can stand on its own. Reminiscent of how the iPod first required iTunes and a computer until it evolved into the iPhone and iTouch.

My biggest doubt for the success of the Apple Watch stems from the replacement cycle. How often does Apple want consumers to upgrade their Apple Watch? Why would a high-end consumer spend over $1,000 on an $18k Apple Watch if its technology will be outdated within two years?

But Nicolas Schobinger brings up an interesting idea:

How often does one need to buy an ‘eternal’ product? How often would you buy ‘ephemeral’? Look at iPod, iPhone, and even computers in general. Technology advancements and rapid innovation cycles make you lust for the newest gadget. And that’s just it: Ephemeral product lures customers to the next best thing.

I can easily imagine, that Apple could extract a higher lifetime customer value with its iWatch Edition, than the ‘eternal’ brands of Swiss watchmaking.

I could imagine that the Apple iWatch Edition will generate a lot of repeat buyers. A good trade-in program would recycle your precious metal and refund that to you. You could keep the straps. The price for your repeat purchase could be then a fraction of your initial buy. You could constantly renew your statement with the Edition line and stay current. Ephemeral disrupting Eternal.

Now this would be an awesome strategy for disrupting the timepiece industry.

In my mind, I've been telling myself that I won't spend over $400 on a first-gen Apple Watch, no matter how badly I want the polished stainless steel model on black leather. But if Apple can guarantee some sort of trade-in program that'll make it easy to upgrade, hell yes, I'll consider spending over $500 on launch day.

Depending on how techie you are, Apple's WWDC announcements last week left you with one of these impressions:

• “No new iPhone?! LAME.”
• “PATHETIC. Android has had all of that for years!”
• "HOLY. SHIT. MINDBLOWN."

If you're in the first group, you're most likely a consumer and not a developer. We have to remember, WWDC — short for World Wide Developer Conference — is a developer conference. For developers. Not consumers.

If you're in the second group, I got news for you: everyone copies. That's how technology moves forward. The best ideas are copied, remixed, refined, and evolve. As long as consumers win, why do we still need to argue about this?

If you're in the last group, you are either an iOS developer or an Apple enthusiast, and have a solid understanding/appreciation of how Apple does things.

As a developer and user experience designer, my job entails identifying specific user problems, researching/testing the right solutions, and delivering them to the right people at the right time. My passion lies in finding what makes new technology meaningful to real people, not just early adopting techies like me.

With that said, I'll try to break down all the developer stuff into real world examples for you.

Read More

Buzz around the fabled "iWatch" has really hit fever-pitch levels since 9to5Mac's big scoop. Here's an overview of everything that we know, what we should expect, and what I think could happen.

Read More