The over-the-cuff thing was mostly in jest, but if the smartwatch is big and needs to be accessed promptly then there may be a rationale.
Will Apple's iWatch turn us all into Agnelli-esque over-the-cuff watch wearers? - Page 2
Styleforum Top Picks
If you are a blind, thoughtless sheep, then sure.
So, probably for many/most.
You think a watch that requires you to carry the phone for all its input is a revelation?
Well, like a famous man once said,................
Why would you need to wear it over your shirt, anyway?
If they make one that attaches to the band of underwear, then I will be in. I want to peak under my pants often and justify it to all parties around me.
What do I do when going commando?
Dissed and dismissed.
If it is a typical useless meeting, then who cares what you do? Or are you in one where everyone is pretending the time you are wasting is important and justifies your jobs? Heaven forbid you actually do some work. If it is a meeting where there is actual thought and importance, then you should not be thinking about what your idiot friend texted you.
And, honestly, I have better treasures and dreams to wish for than the latest text/call/email from whomever.I find it pathetic to be interested to such an extreme by such trivialities. I should hope you would too. That is what I expect out of 13 yr old girls.
Although perhaps I am wrong. Your dreams will be fulfilled with the arrival of a watch that beams the info of your phone in your pants pocket to your wrist. Actually, I envy being able to be sated so easily though I don't find that this attribute is very good in creating a society of quality, useful persons. But you do not think or care about this issue.
The smartwatch may be uber successful but I also know that out of all the people who might have one, it will never NEED to be accessed promptly. Most people do nothing that is so important or time sensitive. In fact, it is usually not important on any time scale. I find that those who are so slave to it are those who have the least important messages and info coming in to them.
I got that there was a bit of jest in the over the cuff talk but I also think you take it seriously for the most part, ie, you thought this was how it would be worn or still might think and/or do so.
Which is fine, there will probably be others waiting outside the Apple store doing the same.
Actually, it isn't fine.
OH NO! While I was writing this, someone called and I MISSED IT! I am sure it was vital information that would have improved my life by 10 levels if only I had known about it at the moment. If I only had a watch that had alerted me, the world would be a much better place.
Garbage idea that was cool in the 1980s when we had calculators on our watches. And besides, Dick Tracy got there first. :p
The good-for-looking-in-meetings thing doesn't fly with me. Either everyone is basically intellectually asleep anyway, in which case no-one really cares whether you look at an existing phone. Or if it's one of those rare genuinely important meeting, you already don't sneak a peek at your current watch to check the time (whether worn above or beneath cuff), so you wouldn't sneak a peek at a wrist screen either, for the same basic reason: it's bloody obvious what you're doing to anyone who happens to be watching you at that instant and so comes off as very rude. And of course, you certainly couldn't do it in a one-to-one setting with someone you don't know well (assuming their opinion of you matters).
I suppose you might want to wear it as a watch if you don't have any pockets in what you're wearing, or if you like having your phone on you while exercising. Apart from those settings - neither of which apply personally to me, but I'm sure will to some - I think most people will prefer to keep their phone in a pocket even if it's technically also wearable.
Now, having said all that, I do think foldable screens are ABSOLUTELY the way forward for mobile devices and I've been waiting for them for a decade, and following the development of the tech behind them in anticipation of such a device. Bendable/curved screens are a start, but what's needed are fully foldable ones. Apple is fairly late to this game in many respects, but as usual will buy up the various elements for cheap, package everything up in a pretty white ikea-esque package and happily sell it at for about a third more than everyone else does. But I suspect that very, very few people will want to actually wear them as a watch, after the initial novelty/hype wears off. Most will just be delighted to have a device that can be folded out to the size of a proper screen while being able to fold it into a small rectangle to carry in a pocket when they're not looking at it. That's the real utility of being able to fold something: packing it away to carry in a pocket and then being able to open it up to see everything clearly, like we used to do with paper maps for example. No need for separate phones, laptops and tablets with truly foldable screens; maybe even no real need for TVs or monitors either, depending on how much folding can be done.
Samsung showed off a flexible OLED screen at this year's CES which demonstrates that they're getting very close... only bendable/rollable at this stage, but almost foldable. This sort of screen will surely be what Apple will need to buy to use in their watch. Flexible OLED is the tech I mentioned in my earlier post that I've been waiting for since I first heard of OLED technology.
(edit: bendy batteries will be a problem, but I just noticed this on the BBC today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21585817 ... progress, incrementally...)
Edited by Holdfast - 2/26/13 at 10:35am