Print 68 comment(s) - last by theapparition.. on Feb 14 at 12:07 PM

The tech giant is already in talks with manufacturer Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. for the new device

It's common for people to carry more than one portable device these days. When we're not glued to our smartphones, we typically have a laptop or tablet nearby for heavier workloads or just the convenience of a bigger screen. But Apple is looking to add another must-have device to our growing collection.

Apple is currently testing designs for a smart watch, which would act like a small-scale iPhone. According to The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, Apple could be using bendable glass (such as that made by Corning) to create a watch that curves with the human body.

The tech giant is already in talks with manufacturer Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. for the new device. Hon Hai has been working on new technologies for wearable devices, such as more efficient displays and chips at that size.

However, Apple has released no design or feature details yet. The device is still in early testing, but it is expected to be very different from current wearable devices. It could have a range of apps available on-the-go as well as features like GPS.

Many popular wearable devices today, such as Jawbone and Nike's FuelBand, are used to keep an eye on physical activity. These devices can be linked to a smartphone to help people keep track of their fitness goals.

Smart watches attempted to make an introduction long before now, but failed. For instance, Microsoft tried out a smart watch concept called SPOT (smart personal objects technology) in 2003, but it didn't go anywhere.

WIMM, a Silicon-Valley based tech company, introduced its WIMM Wearable Platform back in 2011. But again, the idea just didn't seem to take off.

Considering Apple's success in the mobile realm, it'd be no surprise that the Cupertino giant could lead the way to the next evolutionary step in mobile devices: smart technology right on your wrist.

Sources: The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Must have?
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/11/2013 11:55:43 AM , Rating: 5
But Apple is looking to add another must-have device to our growing collection.
Sorry but it's not a "must have" device..

RE: Must have?
By Brandon Hill on 2/11/2013 12:03:07 PM , Rating: 3
I "must have" a watch, but I DO NOT like digital watches. I love the simplicity of my Pulsar solar watch with a minute/second hand and no numbers.

Haven't had to worry about charging it or changing the battery in over 10 years.

RE: Must have?
By Sazabi19 on 2/11/2013 12:06:42 PM , Rating: 3
I love both worlds, my Citizen Skyhawk AT has both analog and digital. Some people may say it's a cluttered watch but I love the way it looks and feels (heavy). Powered by light and radio synced so it should never be off by more than a fraction of a second.

RE: Must have?
By Kurz on 2/11/2013 12:12:54 PM , Rating: 2
I never have to worry about the battery of my watch... I just have to keep wearing it. It's an Automatic Watch.

RE: Must have?
By Samus on 2/11/2013 12:45:48 PM , Rating: 3
Cool, so now I have to charge my iPhone AND my iWatch every 10 hours.

I guess this explains why they went to a new, thinner dock connector.

RE: Must have?
By CaedenV on 2/11/2013 1:46:09 PM , Rating: 5
Rather than actually tracking time the iWatch simply tracks the time until the next needed charge. It then lets the user do the math to figure out the actual time of day.

RE: Must have?
By inighthawki on 2/11/2013 3:50:55 PM , Rating: 2
Sweet, what a perfect way to allow all those young teens to have the most hip gadget AND learn at the same time. Genius!

RE: Must have?
By name99 on 2/11/2013 2:34:29 PM , Rating: 4
For precisely this reason, I expect that in the near term such a device will have very little logic on it --- it will be a satellite of an iPhone, with just a low-power BT radio, a screen, and UI sensors.
If it uses a screen technology like mirasol it can be color, but with very low battery usage (essentially like ePaper, the only energy cost is when the screen is changed).

The ideal would be to augment this with tech that can charge the phone from body motion, but I don't know if that's good enough yet.

RE: Must have?
By theapparition on 2/14/2013 12:01:58 PM , Rating: 2
Citizen already has an iPhone integrated watch in the Proximity series. It syncs with BT to an iPhone for time, and also provides alerts for text messages, email and alarms.

RE: Must have?
By Trisped on 2/11/2013 3:12:31 PM , Rating: 2
It's an Automatic Watch.
Atomic refers to the fact that it can update the time using the radio signal from an atomic clock. My watch, for example, uses the signal from the atomic clock in Colorado.

There are a number of sustainable power systems for watches like thermal, kinetic, and solar.

RE: Must have?
By futrtrubl on 2/11/2013 6:20:59 PM , Rating: 3
He wasn't refering to atomic, he did indeed mean en (dot) wikipedia (dot) org/wiki/Automatic_watch a kinetic winding (not charging) watch. Link was considered spam.

RE: Must have?
By Omega215D on 2/11/2013 2:23:41 PM , Rating: 3
For diving my Armourlite Isobrite is king. Super bright tritium lighting that's pretty visible in the dark, long lasting battery and built like a tank.

The only digital watch that gets my attention would be those from Casio G-shock. Of course in the absence of sunlight the watch can only go for about 6 months on battery power.

RE: Must have?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/11/13, Rating: 0
RE: Must have?
By Omega215D on 2/11/2013 6:18:27 PM , Rating: 2
Phone dies... go back to asking for the time.

In a business meeting... pull out a phone instead of glancing at a watch.

In a work environment where phones aren't allowed (say a lab)...

EMT tending to someone in need... pull out a smartphone instead of using a wristwatch?

RE: Must have?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/11/2013 6:28:19 PM , Rating: 2
yawn. Ok sure whatever. As if professionals and doctors, who wear Rolex or whatever, are going for this thing lol.

RE: Must have?
By txDrum on 2/11/2013 9:58:49 PM , Rating: 3
Runners... college kids taking a test... bikers... even swimmers. An average person walking around the mall who would rather lift his arm than dig a phone out of his jeans. I don't think watches are obsolete. I left mine at my aunt's last time I visited and I can't stand taking my phone out every time I want the time.

RE: Must have?
By Reclaimer77 on 2/12/2013 5:16:55 PM , Rating: 2
Okay this idiotic "gotcha" type of debate needs to stop here.

I make an obvious and true statement, that for the most part, watches are obsolete. It cannot be denied. In the same way that smartphones have marginalized the MP3 player, mobile devices have marginalized the watch. This cannot even be argued with.

So to counter my statement, someone brings up specific examples where a watch is helpful, if not outright required. Does this disprove my opening statement however? No. Because obviously I was making a generalized global statement, which cannot be logically countered with cherry-picked scenarios.

Also why this obsession with needing to know the time constantly? Smartphones marginalize the watch with another feature: set alerts. They can alert you at a specific time, even voice remind you to do things (take medicine, eat snack, set DVR etc etc) so you don't HAVE to constantly check your watch.

RE: Must have?
By theapparition on 2/14/2013 11:59:41 AM , Rating: 2
No. Because obviously I was making a generalized global statement, which cannot be logically countered with cherry-picked scenarios.

While you may consider a watch as a time keeping instrument obsolete (and it is indeed true), what you completely failed to realize is they have become jewelery, and one that is still functional and more practical than other tech. That combination alone renders any argument that you make about watches going away any time soon completely moot.

As for evidence, while low cost digital watches are more accurate, the bulk of watch sales are in higher end quartz (think Citizen, Seiko, Bulova) and even higher end Swiss mechanical watches. Watch prices are through the roof over the last 10 years, which is exactly opposite of what you would think with the rise of the digital culture.

You can rationalize the obsolescence of the wrist watch all you want, but sales data disagrees with you. People are buying watches like mad, and prices have skyrocketed. That is not cherry picking at all. That's fact.

FWIW, I agree with the context of your argument. But also while I type this, I have on my wrist a Patek Phillipe Celestial Grand Complication. And tomorrow, I'll wear one of my other 93 watches.

RE: Must have?
By Wererat on 2/12/2013 12:11:29 PM , Rating: 2
There was a time when pocket watches were de rigeur, too.

Then, a time when a digital watch was a novelty and too cool. One of the then-obvious bonuses was that the pocket watch had to be carried about and pulled out just to know the time; the watch made time (and other things) immediately available.

Now, we're back to pocket-phones that tell time, but we've seen their disadvantages as well: dropped phones, distracted drivers, the need to pull out the phone with each message/tweet/alert/whatever.

The natural size contraction of the pocket watch was the wristwatch; it may be that the pocket phone naturally converts to a wrist phone as the tech improves.

RE: Must have?
By Scoot2000 on 2/11/2013 8:34:44 PM , Rating: 3
My Casio solar G-SHOCK's battery should last at least 10 years according to others with the same watch. It is also fairly indestructible, I saw a watch toughness comparison on YouTube where it even survived someone playing ice hockey with it. Being digital with no moving parts and cushioned by rubber meant it was much more shock-resistant than an analogue watch.

Unlike a simple analogue watch it also shows me the day and date along with the time all in a single glance. It knows the year so it correctly adjusts for leap years. It can receive time updates wirelessly from the military transmitters. It turns the screen off overnight to save power. I can go to an international time of my choice with the press of one button (very useful when travelling). With the press of another button the entire screen glows blue for easy reading in the dark.

Analogue watches have literally no technical advantages that I can see. They are more complex and fragile. They do not keep more accurate time. Most of them lack many of the features that make a watch useful to me (day/date, backlight, etc), not to mention the extra features that are useful occasionally (international time, alarms, stopwatches, etc).

The advantages of analogue are mostly either fashion related or just based on the fact that some people prefer to read time on hands, so far as I can tell. There must be something about them, because analogue watches are far more common than digital.

An Apple watch that needed to be charged more than once a week would seem a bit useless to me. About once a week I could put up with, people used to have to wind up their watches each night. However, I don't really see what it could do that I wouldn't prefer to do on my phone (which is always in my pocket). My current watch has every feature I want and very long battery life.

RE: Must have?
By theapparition on 2/14/2013 12:07:01 PM , Rating: 2
Mechanical movements aren't as durable, require more service, and aren't even that accurate.

But if you don't understand a fine mechanical movement, then you don't understand. Simple as that.

There's a reason a Rolex costs $14k and a GShock costs $250. There's also a reason in 10 years that GShock (which are nice, BTW) will also resell for ~$30 and the Rolex will at least double in value.

RE: Must have?
By inperfectdarkness on 2/12/2013 1:29:54 AM , Rating: 2
Some of us need digital precision in our jobs. Better yet, I like being able to have a light on my watch...rather than simply some glow dots. Glow is ok when you fall asleep, but what about when you need the time at 4:30 in the AM & your eyes aren't fully working (nor your brain).

The world is obsessed with analog--at least judging by how many more styles of those are available than digital. I have no desire to own an iWatch or any other iJunk. That said, I'd swear by a Timex Ironman, anything Suunto, or virtually anything Freestyle.

RE: Must have?
By marvdmartian on 2/12/2013 8:15:56 AM , Rating: 2
Indiglo, FTW! :)

Actually, I find this highly ironic. The trend, in recent years, has been that more and more people are foregoing the wearing of a watch, because their phone would tell them the time, and they could eschew the extra weight/technology/cost of something on their wrist.

Now Apple is going to have them wear a watch again, AND think they're cool for doing it. I hate to admit it, but if it works, it's brilliant!

RE: Must have?
By coondini on 2/11/2013 12:05:41 PM , Rating: 4
Tony Swash will be first in line for it.

RE: Must have?
By Wererat on 2/11/2013 1:51:48 PM , Rating: 2
He may have to be second in line; if it looks like the speculative photo above, I'll join the iHorde (this from someone whose last Apple device was an Apple ][gs).

Why? I don't *need* a watch computer any more than I *need* a thin bar of soap computer, but the watch computer takes up one less hand. You try fiddling with a touchscreen while riding (or even at a stop while riding) and see how that works out for ya. I don't recommend it for those on four wheels, either.

Similarly, how many people annually break their phones because of droppage? I've been careful and broken none myself, but not everyone's so lucky.

OTOH, if it's just a glorified accessory and still requires a whole separate bar of soap computer to function, meh. It's got to *be* the phone or forget it.

RE: Must have?
By Any14Tee on 2/12/2013 8:42:40 AM , Rating: 2
Who's Tony SWATCH!

RE: Must have?
By GotThumbs on 2/11/2013 1:05:28 PM , Rating: 3
I think Apple seems to have overlooked the fact that most of today's youth don't wear watches, but maybe it will change.

While I'm certain if Apple makes it...there will be lines outside every Apple store for those who are desperate to "Be the first" to own whatever it is.

It will be interesting to see how this develops, but there is no way I'd ever own one.

Best wishes,

RE: Must have?
By xti on 2/11/13, Rating: 0
RE: Must have?
By xti on 2/11/2013 11:39:35 PM , Rating: 2
idk why i got rated down, but men especially hit an age and they want a rolex...not an apple watch.

RE: Must have?
By nafhan on 2/11/2013 2:43:34 PM , Rating: 2
In the world of fashion and tech (i.e. where Apple plays), generally "Must have" = "I want".

That said, I'm interested in this type of device. Price and battery life would be my two main concerns.

Concept looks cool...
By tayb on 2/11/2013 12:21:11 PM , Rating: 2
The concept looks really cool. Unfortunately I don't think we have the technology for the transparent display like that. It would be pretty neat though. I also wonder what use the watch would have beyond timekeeping? Perhaps a compass or Nike Fuel Band type of thing.

I would have to see a product before speculating further but I like the idea and not just from Apple. I haven't worn a watch in a long time because it's just a weight on the wrist for me.

RE: Concept looks cool...
By tayb on 2/11/2013 12:29:50 PM , Rating: 2
Upon thinking a bit further I can think of some really neat use cases.

Bluetooth to the phone and get notifications of missed calls, texts, emails, etc. Don't have to pull your phone out to see what you've missed or if you even want to reply. I don't think the device itself would need to have too much horsepower for that.

It's not a new concept but it's a concept that hasn't been executed really well yet and might be interesting.

RE: Concept looks cool...
By cokbun on 2/11/2013 12:56:35 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Concept looks cool...
By retrospooty on 2/11/2013 1:09:26 PM , Rating: 1
Cool.... So Apple will be making yet another iCopy product.

RE: Concept looks cool...
By ilostmypen on 2/11/2013 1:51:33 PM , Rating: 2
Wrong! Apply Thought of it first, you can tell by the patented rounded corners.

RE: Concept looks cool...
By retrospooty on 2/11/2013 2:48:00 PM , Rating: 1
That's what iCopy means... It means they invented it, and patented some trivially different form of it after they copied it. ;)

RE: Concept looks cool...
By Wererat on 2/11/2013 1:56:08 PM , Rating: 2
Not interested; that's just an accessory for someone that already has an Android phone (albeit a nice one). Similarly, not interested if Apple makes a watch-shaped accessory for an iPhone.

OTOH, if it's actually the phone, $#^& yeah.

RE: Concept looks cool...
By tayb on 2/11/2013 2:54:04 PM , Rating: 2
That looks really awesome and the price ($120) is not bad at all! The reviews on Amazon were not overly favorable though and the fact that it can't show Gmail alerts is a deal killer. I stand by the "not executed well" comment.

RE: Concept looks cool...
By Schmide on 2/11/2013 3:35:14 PM , Rating: 2
Post reserved for Apple sues Sony 2013

Who needs a watch?
By CaedenV on 2/11/2013 12:31:23 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe it is just me, but I got my first cell phone back in 2001, and the minute I realized it had a clock on there was the minute I stopped wearing a watch.

Come to think of it, we don't have any clocks in the house... just our phones and computers. Our microwave can't keep time, so that clock is disabled, and our stove has a timer, but no clock. I guess our thermostat has one... but we never look at that. Kinda odd, but I think watches are one thing that people simply do not need more of unless they are using it as jewelry which increases in value (or at least retains value) rather than a wrist computer that is simply going to be worth less and less with each revision that comes out after it.

RE: Who needs a watch?
By ERROR666 on 2/11/2013 1:32:23 PM , Rating: 3
Not true. I definitely need my watch. Searching for cellphone every time you need to know the time is not convenient and you cannot take your cellphone with you for a swim. A good watch on the other side is always with you and can take any beating you can and in many cases much more.

My watch has been with me in saunas, camping trips, beaches and pools, even in the Dead Sea. No cellphone or smart watch would survive this.

RE: Who needs a watch?
By CaedenV on 2/11/2013 1:44:45 PM , Rating: 2
Considering you have been to the Dead Sea I am going to go out on a limb and say you are not an 'average user', and even then you are not going to have a need for an iWatch.

... would an iWatch create customer confusion with appleTV?

RE: Who needs a watch?
By ERROR666 on 2/11/2013 3:15:18 PM , Rating: 2
definitely not an iwatch.. for me watch=Gshock

This has to be a joke
By daveinternets on 2/11/2013 12:21:34 PM , Rating: 1
People still wear watches? Seriously? This has to be a joke....

RE: This has to be a joke
By Dr of crap on 2/11/2013 12:57:06 PM , Rating: 2
You must be under 30!

RE: This has to be a joke
By Omega215D on 2/11/2013 2:20:06 PM , Rating: 2
It's a lot easier to just look at my wrist instead of pulling out a phone. It's also impolite to pull out a phone in the middle of business compared to glancing at a watch.

RE: This has to be a joke
By coondini on 2/11/2013 4:33:08 PM , Rating: 1
I just recently got my $145 large-face Fossil watch as a late Christmas present to myself and I love it. It's more about fashion and style than anything; plus it's a lot easier looking at your wrist for a half second to check the time instead of pulling your phone out. Those Fossil stores ain't there for no reason.

RE: This has to be a joke
By inperfectdarkness on 2/12/2013 8:18:57 AM , Rating: 2
...because putting on your glasses to read the alarm clock in the middle of the night is a PITA.

...because i don't shower with my cell phone.

...because i don't exercise by timing myself with a cell phone.

...because it's much less conspicuous to glance at the time on a watch than dig around for a device in one of your pockets.

No, the real question is, besides people with skin alergies, why AREN'T you wearing a watch?

By mrwassman on 2/11/2013 12:26:52 PM , Rating: 2
Does anyone else think wrapping glass around your wrist is a bad idea? My hobbies wouldn't allow this fragile idea.

RE: Suicide
By daboom06 on 2/11/2013 12:45:08 PM , Rating: 3
always beware of the footnotes.

it's a sports* watch.

*for use while watching sports.

RE: Suicide
By Dr of crap on 2/11/13, Rating: 0
By GulWestfale on 2/11/2013 12:17:29 PM , Rating: 2
what is the point of having apps on my wrist... when i already have them in my palm? with such a tiny screen, and small confines for the CPU/RAM, how useful could this thing possibly be? smart watches have been around for a while (android), but they haven't taken off because they are a novelty item.
even if the watch functions as a second screen to your phone (displaying incoming emails and the like) i still can't see the point. the screen would be too small to be useful (apple is a fan of tiny screens, right, iphone users?), and you'd still have to hold it up to your face to read the email... exactly the same motion you do when reading email on your phone.

given that this thing is an apple, expect metrosexual design, a pricetag of at least 300 dollars, and it'll cost extra if you want it to tell time.

at least it'll be that much easier to tell the fools apart; no longer will you have to wait for them to open their mouths or take out their phones; just look at their wrists.

RE: pointless
By it_guy on 2/11/2013 1:37:43 PM , Rating: 2
As a different poster already indicated, Sony already has a SmartWatch out that connects to any Android device. It gives a pretty good interface to several apps that are on the phone. So you can quickly see who is calling you, check to see what the text message was (or email), and if it is important... all without having to take your phone out of your pocket.

It does have it's uses.. but it's just another attempt of Apple to copy something that already exists, and say that they are innovating.

Knight Rider
By JDHammer on 2/11/2013 12:46:55 PM , Rating: 2
That would be amusing to see ppl talking to their watches like Michael Knight did.

RE: Knight Rider
By maugrimtr on 2/12/2013 9:46:54 AM , Rating: 2
Remember some of the innovations around that concept? Back in the 80s, you could get a radio watch with headphones (the ancient orange cushioned ones made on the cheap).

I suddenly feel very old at 33...

By CarbonJoe on 2/11/2013 2:08:19 PM , Rating: 3
Let me be the first to mention the obvious... You're wearing it wrong.

By Micronite on 2/11/2013 1:05:28 PM , Rating: 2
You can argue the point, but the iPhone really did jump-start the smartphone craze. The iPod kick-started portable media.
Though other similar devices were available before these, the other manufacturers didn't have what Apple has... fans and appeal.
There are just so many people who will adopt whatever Apple sells them regardless of the technical merits of any technology before it. Apple sells enough of it's product for people to realize how useful a technology is and then it's adopted rapidly.

Expect that the iWatch to be a success and for other technology companies (like Samsung) to jump in and create superior products after Apple has jump-started the market.

By Shadowmaster625 on 2/11/2013 1:12:45 PM , Rating: 2
Unless it is powered by the body itself, it goign to be a total fail. Only the dumbest of apple drones will deal with constantly removing the thing just to charge it.

By MDme on 2/11/2013 1:39:16 PM , Rating: 2
the flexible screen technology will probably be made by Samsung. lol. They are the ones with flexible transparent screens at the moment.

By Ammohunt on 2/11/2013 1:41:25 PM , Rating: 2
Trade my Swatch for an apple watch? no thanks!

Seriously though i haven't worn a watch in close to ten years.As long as i have my cell with me(always) i know what time it is.

Watch out!
By hugo_stiglitz on 2/11/2013 1:56:02 PM , Rating: 2
Sony, Pebble, Neptune Pine and other current "smart watch" manufacturers better watch out. One day Apple will be granted the patent for this (if they haven't already) and sue the watches off everyone.

By gmyx on 2/11/2013 3:30:43 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe now they can get January 1st right.

Slap bracelet
By g35fan on 2/11/2013 8:57:48 PM , Rating: 2
It honestly be "cool" if it were in a slap-bracelet type form. You could take it off and it could somehow fold out to have a display and either have all the same features as a smart phone or even fold out completely and be like a 7" tablet.

I mean you could just imagine all of the companies that would make stylish skins for your ibracelet...

Whats the point?
By Any14Tee on 2/12/2013 8:41:39 AM , Rating: 2
Why do I need a watch when I can use my mobile phone?

Noooooo! Tiffany!!
By Ramstark on 2/11/2013 12:06:48 PM , Rating: 1
Sorry, Tiff, I used to like your articles, but now that I realize that you are a Macolyte, I think I would just have to go back to Jason...

Now, really, who need a "Smart Watch"? What else could it do, that nowadays smartphones can? Even those ipod nano watches are totally ridicule, "wait, but I can listen tom my music from my wrist!" Yeah right...

Slave collar
By chmilz on 2/11/2013 1:29:21 PM , Rating: 1
Looks like the tracking/slavery devices used in many 1984-esque films.

I really don't want any more tech who's sole purpose is to track me.

By messele on 2/11/2013 1:34:11 PM , Rating: 1

Usual bullshit conjecture. No research. Nothing to add to a story, no research of their own. Just recycle everybody else's speculative bullshit and watch the revenue roll in.

DailyTurgid is a fucking joke. It's cretinous regulars the punchline.

Kind of surprised
By djc208 on 2/11/13, Rating: -1
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki