The Apple Watch is Broken: A Look at the Hardware

What is it about macworld.co.uk? 
http://www.macworld.co.uk/opinion/apple/getting-your-kicks-in-gotta-complain-about-the-apple-watch-before-monday-3600849/


http://www.macworld.co.uk/opinion/apple/flop-flap-apple-watch-comes-pre-flopped-3600648/
They seem to need to point out all the issues with the apple watch including reports of only 3 hours of on screen time telling and painfully slow charging and then suggest its acceptable.  They write about how they think it may be a flop that will change the world.




Let's call a spade a spade, the apple watch won't replace a watch for the purposes of telling time in real life. I get on a plane or go out for the night, the apple watch isn't coming because in its current form it fails as a useful life tool.


Here's a what's wrong with the apple watch:

1. The architecture is borderline stupid
1. I don't know who thought not having a ninja core was smart
1. Running the S1 is a battery draining configuration with little thought to power saving whilst being used for its intended purposes.
1. You can't replace a watch if you can't tell time.
2. It would have been very easy to have a separate watch IC and low power negative LCD screen on-top of the black screen
1. It would allow you to tell time for more than a few hours and save the battery for high compute tasks
2. It would also make the black screen look less stupid.
2. The screen apparently takes a lot of battery
1. but why?
2. its just 17% more resolution than the LG G watch, but only has 1/10 of the battery life. 
3. Apparently Apple thinks people want to wear blank screens
1. Personally I think wearables are meant to be worn, not having the screen on all the time will look, black, and not Rolex Submariner black, iphone screen off black...
1. Is this what the fuck apple thinks "form" is? 
1. Go back and study tiffany's more.
4. Apple attempted to innovate and failed
1. Many of the top design features of the watch will not even make it to market in the stock skihill form 
2. They focused on things that weren't needed and then failed to implement them
3. You're paying for failed R&D
5. Apple failed to innovate where it mattered
1. Instead of featuring a new way to combat the battery life issue they sucked when they had to innovate
6. The battery life makes it unreliable as a tool
1. Who in their right mind would leave their keys at home if their apple watch may not unlock their hotel rooms or etc because it is dead.
1. e.g. you still need to carry cash or credit cards, and can't just use apple pay via apple watch
2. If you can't rely on the apple watch it isn't indispensable is it?

Things the apple watch should have had:

1. Ninja Core
1. The S1 doesn't do a good job at offering low power performance a second fail safe timing system could or should have been employed.
1. People may need to tell the time for more than 3 hours.  
2. People may have wanted to wear their apple watch for a day and night on the town. 
3. The structure is basically not designed in an innovative way, i.e. splitting out the low power task to low power components.
2. Ninja Screen
1. A second low power screen could have been layered on top of the "incredible apple watch display" used for time telling. 
2. seriously it isn't difficult to layer a simple negative LCD on top of the full color screen, you'd have let people tell time for months at a time, versus hours. 
3. A fully discrete time telling system, which would run the low power applications that a watch needs, telling time!
1. Again I would have argued for a separate time telling system with dedicate IC, power and screen.
2. keeping the watch separate would have enabled sufficient battery life. 
4. Hybrid Power
1. The battery life is unacceptable, heck I'd argue 2 weeks is likely unacceptably low. but combined with proprietary slow charging and a 3-4 hour screen time low compute is stupid and needed to be addressed.
2. Apple should have used caps for quick charges
3. Apple should have used a separate battery for timing
4. Apple should have introduced an interesting way to recharge
1. Rolex and Seiko recharges based on movement
2. Citizen and Casio recharges on sunlight
3. Apple should have recharged using mid-range wireless charging. 
1. Either way a 3-4 hour battery life is significantly less than their competitors, not to mention actual watches. 
5. Should be water proof
1. Rolex figured it out quickly watches need to be perpetual and they need to be waterproof.
2. I just don't see how living with this watch makes sense.  It won't replace a watch or a set of keys.