Print 41 comment(s) - last by poohbear.. on Mar 10 at 12:59 AM

Bloomberg said it could be more profitable than the TV

Apple fans rejoice: the next addition to your iCollection -- the so-called "iWatch" -- will reportedly be available later this year.

Apple has been testing designs for a smart watch, which would act like a small-scale iPhone. According to Bloomberg, the wearable device will be available later this year and will run iOS.

Apple is currently tweaking certain features, such as increasing battery life to last four or five days (it currently only lasts a couple of days) and working on the iPhone's iOS so it can support the device. Apple also wants to build the watch's iOS from the ground up instead of starting with the iPod nano's touch operating system (which has a screen about the size of a watch).

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

[Image Source: Lunatic]

Last month, a patent application for a "Bi-stable spring with flexible display" was filed by Apple in 2011. It described a bi-stable spring that would be made out of thin steel and wrapped in fabric covering, then heat-sealed. The display would be located on one side of the bracelet (overlaid with an adhesive) and the logic board and battery would be placed on the other side. It also showed a universal fit, a plethora of onboard sensors, wireless charging, etc.

No matter what the end result is, Bloomberg believes Apple could rake in the cash on this new venture. In fact, the report stated that the iWatch could be more profitable than the TV it's been working on.

According to Bloomberg, the global watch industry will generate over $60 billion in sales in 2013, where gross margins are about 60 percent. The TV industry will generate about $119 billion in sales this year, but with gross margins about four times less than watches. If Apple were to take a 10 percent share in each market, it'd be a gross profit of $3.6 billion for watches and $1.79 billion for TVs.

Sources: The Verge, Bloomberg

Comments     Threshold

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

Someone please explain to me
By cknobman on 3/4/2013 1:55:17 PM , Rating: 2
why on earth would this be a big hit?

I just dont see that many people wanting to wear a big watch on their wrist all the time especially when its functionality largely mimics what their smartphone already does.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By foolonthehill on 3/4/2013 2:33:04 PM , Rating: 3
I don't either, watches have gone out of style. But, it'll have an Apple logo on it, and that means people will stand in line for hours for the privilege of buying one.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Motoman on 3/4/2013 2:39:31 PM , Rating: 5
It's primary function will be in aiding in the identification of dipsh1ts. It'll save a lot of time in personal interaction..."Say, I was wondering if you could give your opinion on...oh, sorry, didn't see the iWatch. Nevermind."

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Samus on 3/5/2013 12:40:46 AM , Rating: 4
One thing is certain, and that is if Apple is now getting their "next-gen" ideas from Kickstarter campaigns, they are completely out of magic.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By inperfectdarkness on 3/6/2013 2:34:35 AM , Rating: 3
"...out of style"? Since when? I don't see jewelery stores liquidating their chronograph offerings. Breitling, Tag Heuer and Zephyr haven't gone out of business.

I suspect that hipster-ism and its commensurate smartphone addiction has convinced some people that watches are passe and outdated.

I, on the other hand, will never exercise by lugging around a smartphone to check my stats. Nor will I ever be allowed to carry a phone of any type inside a secured classified location. You'll see all cars stop being offered with analog gauges WELL before watches stop being useful or go out of style.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Skywalker123 on 3/6/2013 5:22:11 AM , Rating: 2
Only hi line models are selling. Your too weak to "lug" around a smart phone when u exerise? How many people go inside these sites you mention? Wathes are already out of style but for the high dollar models aforementioned

By inperfectdarkness on 3/6/2013 12:32:51 PM , Rating: 2
When I'm doing squat-thrusts, I really don't feel like I need a smartphone. Same goes for bench-press, tread-climber, etc.

Even if I'm running cross-country, a smartphone/mp3 player would be strapped to my arm, not readily visible to read. Smartphones are also NOT waterproof--eliminating their usefulness for doing laps in the pool.

I also call BS on "only hi-line models are selling." Timex Ironman is a perennial best-seller, and the Casio G-Shock is wildly popular. Hard-core outdoors types swear by brands like Suunto--and even the top-of-the-line Suunto's are still priced about where the cheapest Tag-Heuer begins.

Watches are NOT out of style. You need to get around more. WORKING types almost always carry them. You know...the kind who don't sit behind a desk & don't have that nifty system clock in on the lower-right taskbar.

By marvdmartian on 3/4/2013 2:58:35 PM , Rating: 5
It won't matter. It'll be made by Apple, so people will stand in line to buy it, regardless of the price.

Silly thing will likely do everything but tell you the time!

RE: Someone please explain to me
By UpSpin on 3/4/2013 3:54:29 PM , Rating: 2
How do you know that it's just a big smartphone watch?

In the past, mobile phone era, people also preferred to use a Nokia phone with buttons which was durable and easy and fast to operate, instead of a more expensive, much larger, Palm with tiny little buttons, resitive touchscreen, short battery life, ... Yet, with the use of a capactive screen and finger friendly UI Apple managed to show the opposite and scored a huge success.

Maybe they'll do the same with this watch.

Let's just wait and see.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By RufusM on 3/4/2013 4:55:21 PM , Rating: 2
At that point in time, the real barrier was mobile data. It was expensive and slow. I had a great smartphone at the time, but data was very slow and almost worthless, except for WAP and text emails.

Fast forward to today and the touchscreen smartphone is a great form factor for sending and receiving data. I don't see what a smartwatch could do better than a smartphone other than same me a couple seconds of time that I would otherwise spend pulling my phone out to check.

Maybe I just don't get it, but I don't see the value proposition.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By TSS on 3/4/2013 10:11:05 PM , Rating: 2
Cause it's very simple. Apple had 1 big hit with the Ipod. when the screen on it started to be able to do more, they looked at the PDA market, the phone market and simply asked, why can't these things call people?

So they gave an Ipod Toutch a GSM chip and called it a Iphone. Later when sales started to slump a bit they made it bigger and called it an Ipad.

Logically, now they'll just shrink the thing into an iWatch. Wether they rebuild the OS or not it'll just have the same functions - again.

I hear the next thing is a iHeadband so you can update your twitter and watch your facebook on another person's forehead as you're talking to them in real life.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By TakinYourPoints on 3/5/2013 3:54:52 AM , Rating: 2
Apple had 1 big hit with the Ipod.

The strange thing about your argument is that the iPod was always the least successful product line Apple had. It dominated the media player market but it was never objectively big for Apple in terms of revenue.

The iPod never made more money than the Mac, and its sales began to taper off with the rise of the smartphone. The iPhone continues to sell more units year over year and its revenue far exceeds the iPad's, which itself makes more than the Mac and other PC OEMs. The iPhone by itself makes more than higher margin blockbuster products like Windows and Office, which says a lot about how big it is.

The iPad being motivated by the "slumping" iPhone doesn't reflect reality, its a weird argument. Its all about increasing processing power getting more portable, that's it.

The main thing is that that Apple has been focused on mobile devices for the last decade, whether it is music players, smartphones, or laptops. I don't know whether an iWatch or an iHeadband or whatever is a good idea. I don't have much interest in one. Hell, I only owned a single iPod ever, but Apple is going to keep on developing new mobile devices.

Everybody else is focused on mobile devices for that matter, just look at things like Google Glass. Mobile is going to stay on the bleeding edge of new products as processing power gets smaller and more power efficient.

We'll see what succeeds though. Wearable computing needs to be discreet. Bluetooth headsets look ridiculous, and things like Glass and an iWatch or whatever seem like they'd be even more obnoxious.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/5/2013 3:14:37 PM , Rating: 2
...the iPod was always the least successful product line Apple was never objectively big for Apple in terms of revenue...

These statements are false.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Cheesew1z69 on 3/6/2013 8:23:14 AM , Rating: 2
Him? Spread false statements? I don't believe it!

Oh wait, yes I do, it is Takin we are talking about after all.

By TakinYourPoints on 3/8/2013 5:38:06 AM , Rating: 2
What false statement, the chart backs up my post. The iPod never made more than the Mac and its sales have steadily declined over time against the Mac, the iPhone, and the iPad.

I know you're simpleminded but even I'm surprised that you can't understand a simple picture.

By TakinYourPoints on 3/8/2013 5:35:31 AM , Rating: 2
The chart you linked backs up my point, the iPod never made more than the Mac did.

It made more than iTunes, but I should have made clear that I was talking about hardware and not services. iTunes makes nothing really, but nobody makes money being a middleman for music, apps, and movies. It is there to provide value to hardware, which is where the money is.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By UpSpin on 3/5/2013 4:32:56 AM , Rating: 1
Why did Palm went bankrupt. They already had touchscreen devices, shouldn't it have been easy for them to remain competive if Apple just added GSM to an iPod touch? (btw. the iPod touch was released half a year AFTER the iPhone)
Why was MS forced to rewrite their mobile OS from scratch, had no alternative to iOS for several years and lost almost all of their market share?
Why was Nokia forced to kill ALL of their mobile operating systems and beg MS for help to stay alive?

Why became tablets succesful once Apple build one? They could have build a tablet like others did in the past with Windows on it. But they weren't successful!
Why did it take several years for Google to release a competive tablet version of Android (no Honeycomb wasn't competive, it was rushed out). According to you they just had to (as Apple did according to you) load Android 2.3 on a tablet. Why has Google released Honeycomb in the first place? What was their problem?

It looks simple for narrowed minded people like you, but it isn't at all (the largest companies fell and struggle to do what you call simple). Apple introduced completely new devices with a completely new interface. Apple hasn't invented the underlying technology, but Apple combined the right parts, which is what every inventor in every domain does.

In ten years you'll say: electric cars were simple. Tesla Motors just added a battery, e-Motor and that's it. Nothing special. Everyone could have done it. People bought Tesla (instead of non-existent competition), because of good marketing.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By ritualm on 3/5/2013 2:21:05 PM , Rating: 2
Apple invents a lot

Apple hasn't invented the underlying technology

Congratulations, you contradicted yourself in less than 24 hours.

You're not very bright. Also, people aren't buying Tesla because of marketing, they're buying them because their cars don't kick the bucket on their own i.e Fisker Karma.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By ssnova703 on 3/4/2013 5:13:38 PM , Rating: 2
I could see potential in this, and I hate that Apple is getting the credit to respawn a "smart" watch, when years ago casio made one with a cellphone built in(perhaps ahead of its time and without the "style" factor of Apple).

I would imagine this is like their ipod nano with a full touch screen.... and I hate to say what I will say... but can you imagine if this was a phone that relied more on bluetooth. Yes, you would always have to wear a headset to get the full use of it, but think about it... the way we're headed, we have to drive "hands free" in the U.S. anyways, and how many people jog while using a smartphone device.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By augiem on 3/4/2013 7:38:03 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Someone please explain to me
By augiem on 3/4/2013 7:39:18 PM , Rating: 1
Does require an Android smart phone. No word yet on whether Apple's will be self-contained or not. Obviously, Dick Tracy is the first thing that comes to mind.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Uncle on 3/5/2013 1:21:37 PM , Rating: 1
Dick Tracy also come to mind. Prime example of apple grabbing something from the past and calling it new.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Reclaimer77 on 3/4/2013 6:05:47 PM , Rating: 3
why on earth would this be a big hit?

Because it's from Apple, and millions of insecure 'hipsters' need more self-affirmation.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Tony Swash on 3/5/2013 10:55:37 AM , Rating: 3
Because it's from Apple, and millions of insecure 'hipsters' need more self-affirmation.

I can't imagine what sort of person really uses a word like 'hipsters', it's so archaic, why not use the more up to date 'hepcat'

RE: Someone please explain to me
By JediJeb on 3/5/2013 8:41:44 PM , Rating: 2
I can't imagine what sort of person really uses a word like 'hipsters', it's so archaic, why not use the more up to date 'hepcat'

Must be a term Apple owners use. Never heard hepcat used before this, sounds more like a term for a feline vampire.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Landoman on 3/5/2013 1:32:57 PM , Rating: 2
It's about time a watch did more than tell the time! Why do we still have to pull something out of our pocket/purse? I think looking at your watch once in a while is cooler (less-douchy) than pulling out a big ol' phone. Oooh, look at my big screen, oooh, look at me holding this piece of plastic up to my head... ancient history. Get with it troglodytes!

RE: Someone please explain to me
By JediJeb on 3/5/2013 8:43:43 PM , Rating: 2
I prefer my pocket watch made in 1886. It actually keeps better time than my cell phone does and never needs batteries, just wind it each night.

RE: Someone please explain to me
By Trisped on 3/5/2013 2:41:38 PM , Rating: 2
Not sure where you live, but large watches are in. Especial if they are name brand, like Fossil.

Of course these watches are mostly for looks, they come in a variety of colors, styles, and materials. Often they only have a few key features like date, time, self powered, auto-setting, etc. I consider them to be more an expensive bracelet that tells time then a watch.

Apple is not releasing a product to that market, nor are they targeting the $5-$25 market. They are basically putting the iPod touch on your wrist with a smaller screen.

Does Apple think there is a market for this device? Or are they planning on making their own market? I know watch computers have been a big idea for a while, but with smart phones (which are almost a need) who would need a smart watch?

RE: Someone please explain to me
By poohbear on 3/10/2013 12:59:46 AM , Rating: 2
People said the same thing about tablets.... they all said Apple would bomb big time! Now its there biggest market!

"We basically took a look at this situation and said, this is bullshit." -- Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng's take on patent troll Soverain
Related Articles

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