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

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.

"I'd be pissed too, but you didn't have to go all Minority Report on his ass!" -- Jon Stewart on police raiding Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's home
Related Articles

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