|
It basically acts as a remote control for your iphone. Instead of pulling out your phone every time you receive a notification, you can now read them on your wrist. There's also an watch to watch scribble feature where you can draw on your watch and it will send the drawing to the other person.
It also has some basic pulse rate monitoring and movement tracking so you can see how active you are. It was mentioned that it requires an iPhone, and the health monitoring and tracking appeared to be done from the iphone itself.
The part I was most interested in was glossed over at the very end of the presentation. They mentioned that the apple watch works with the iPhone 5 and up. The iPhone 6 and 6+ have NFC payment options (I think they call their service apple pay) available. They use a special chip to create the payments.
Tim said that the apple watch had everything in it to use apple pay. I wanted to know if users of an iPhone 5 or 5s will be able to use apple pay with an apple watch.
|
|
|
|
|
Offhand it looks rather cool. I don't actually need one, of course, but it would make an interesting addition to my collection!
|
|
|
|
|
Viewed the Apple Pay site after I got home and it says it is compatible with an iPhone 5 AND an Apple Watch (In store only) so that answers that question. Now to figure out if $349 is worth NFC payments and the health tracking apps.
|
|
|
|
|
What kills me is that they are making a bling version with a solid gold case. Seriously? The thing will be obsolete within a year, leaving you with a gold-cased piece of junk! Gold cases are for real watches that last for generations, not disposable tech trash.
|
|
|
|
|
Yesterday I ordered this item on Amazon[^], because I am reading a fantastic book on AVR Programming (using Atmel chips).
Now, today I am seeing this interesting ad* at the top and thinking, "Hmm... how did it know I was interested in this type of thing all of a sudden?"
*http://newtonsaber.com/images/codeproj/cptrackcookies.png[^]
Tracking Cookies? I guess.
Can someone explain how that works? I'm curious about it. Tracking Cookies, I mean. What do they write and read? Maybe a good article on these might be nice, eh?
|
|
|
|
|
There's a lot more than just tracking cookies. Flash cookies. Pixel beacons.
Then, when you learn what the above do, and that the data is agglomerated in a few central repositories to enhance the profile of you, they soon know more about you than you do.
Or, you could block all of the s^&t, at least in Mozilla browsers (FireFox, SeaMonkey).
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Did you say, Pixel BACON?!
Click on a pixel and get BACON?!
I'm in! 
|
|
|
|
|
newton.saber wrote: Did you say, Pixel BACON?!
ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY UNEQUIVOCALLY CATAGORICALLY NO !
Such an idea would never cross my lips - literally or figuratively.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah - I probably should give a rundown of behavioural tracking technologies. I'm sure it would general quite a nice debate!
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
newton.saber wrote: Yesterday I ordered this item on Amazon[^], because I am reading a fantastic book on AVR Programming (using Atmel chips).
Incredible chips and a hell of a lot of fun. Look at Atmel Studio[^] if you haven't already.
New version: WinHeist Version 2.1.0 Beta
Have you ever just looked at someone and knew the wheel was turning but the hamster was dead?
Trying to understand the behavior of some people is like trying to smell the color 9.
I'm not crazy, my reality is just different than yours!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and thanks to Pete O'Hanlon[^] I see Justin Blieber guitars evrywhere I go. I should go to sugs and bugs and ask if Chris can have these particular ones removed.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
Is that really true about the Justin B[l]ieber guitars? That would be terrible.
The reason I'm wondering is because there was one particular ad that had a face of some smiling guy -- supposed to be a dev, very unrealistic with him smiling and all -- and I was really getting annoyed seeing that guy's face next to every article I was reading, so I did another search and hoped it would start showing me new ads.
Yes, seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems only the ads that annoy you follow you around. The one ad that you are mildly interested in is only shown once.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
S Houghtelin wrote: It seems only the ads that annoy you follow you around.
This made me LOL!
And then I noticed that is basically how real life works too and I cried. 
I don't know whether to laugh or cry so I'm just sitting here staring. 
|
|
|
|
|
You should definitely go through with opting out of all that - it works, but you probably have to do it for each of the browser/device you use.
There are different services and some of them have slightly different steps. Here is how to opt out of the Google Ads stuff:
- Click on the AdChoice icon on one of the ads (it's kind of an arrow looking icon |>, that expands the word AdChoice when you hover the mouse cursor over it).
- A new page is loaded with a lot of text (designed to make you give up and close the page, I believe).
- Locate the link "Ads Settings" and click on it.
- On the new page you will see two columns "Ads on Google" and "Google ads across the web".
- At the bottom row, there are choices for opting out. Click to opt out on both of them.
As I recall, that is what I did. My paranoia level is much lower and I only see relevant ads on CodeProject now.
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the very good info, I've always instinctively avoided clicking any ad to avoid malware and the other various pains that come from clicking ads..
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
You are welcome  . Yes, I always tried to avoid it too. I got into it by accident as I was trying to report an add here on CodeProject and instead ended up on an opt-out page from the Ghostery service - http://www.codeproject.com/Messages/4886807/Re-So-many-off-topic-ads.aspx[^]
Soren Madsen
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly" - Jase #DuckDynasty
|
|
|
|
|
No, not food. Silicon.
I find it interesting that Apple has just announced their A8 20nm chips, yet intel announced their 14nm chips.
There's been occasional talk of intel being behind when it comes to new technology, yet here we have Apple announcing what seems fairly pedestrian specs.
What's your call here? Is it more than transistor size? Is it more your the ecosystem? Is it more than marketing buzz (or is that all it ever is?). Who's doing the most innovation here? Or is there real innovation here or just a gradual, predictable progression?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Intel needs to create a generic CPU for all kind of hardware and software applications.
Apple need to create a specialized CPU to work within its ecosystem (and I have no doubt the ecosystem is well aware of that!)
Multicore CPU changed the way we should look at the hardware itself; speed does not matter as much as it used to , transistor size is not as important.
Personally, I don't really care about CPU.
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
Maximilien wrote: speed does not matter as much as it used to , transistor size is not as important
One of the most important visions Intel talking about is using these technologies in health-care systems...Imagine how important size and speed can be if we talking about a life saving chip implanted into the skull of a cardiac...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: A8 20nm chips, yet intel announced their 14nm chips
Maybe there were other trade-offs that the Apple on wins with? Maybe it runs cooler or something, or lower power consumption, less cost, etc.?
Of course the consumer won't care, as long as the iphone does what they want and looks and feels sleek. I think it really does come down to the product that is built around the chip. So, Intel wins one with the geeks, but Apple cries their way all the way to the bank.
Besides, I'm very interested in what products can be built with the least hardware, chips, transistors, etc.
I believe that is what Woz would say too. He's a minimalist. Read his great book,
iWoz: Computer Geek to Cult Icon[^]
Yes, I know he's not really involved with Apple any longer. Just sayin'.
|
|
|
|
|
What I liked about it that from the speaker point of view 14nm wasn't the big deal, but the fact that they look for 10nm and beyond!
Did you saw that nice 3D show with the out-of-lab computer, running a 10nm CPU? And he told it will be here in the second half of 2015...
And I heard already about the 5nm that they working on already...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
|
|
|
|
|
Smaller transistors equal higher speeds, less heat, and so less power - so a 14nm chip should perform better in a system than a 20nm one.
But...that's ivory tower stuff: the chip architecture has a lot of influence. IIRC, ARM used to do a demo where they ran an ARM processor off the waste heat from a Pentium chip and still outperformed it: RISC vs CISC makes a big difference!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apple isn't really an individual spec type of company. That's more Wintel. Apple is about "the entire experience" sort of thing. So, saying they aren't progressing because of 6nm isn't really a fair statement, unless you're talking about tech so small you can embed it in your body, nobody will notice that size difference much.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
