The latest iWatch rumors make this Apple smart-watch sound like an impending reality, with Bloomberg's two sources "familiar with the company's plains" claiming Apple has a 100-person design team working on a Dick Tracy-style device. But do people really want this thing? Looking back at the gimmicky and failed history of the computer watch, as New York's Kevin Roose did, would suggest not. But, that was then and this is Apple. There's actually plenty of basic evidence from growing niche markets that suggests there might be smart-watch fever after all, or at least one that could use a nice Cupertino finish.
Still others, like The New York Times's Jenna Wortham and David Pogue, haven't quite bought into the trend — in part because of the apps therein. "The corresponding iPhone app has had some work done, too," Pogue wrote of Jawbone. Imagine, then, what would happen if a tech company — the one that happens to create the software that houses those apps — gets into this game. The app problem goes away, and better apps probably arrive very soon. And that would likely be just one of the functions of a potential iWatch.
The basic thinking goes that, well, it's Apple, and whatever Apple makes will be different — and better. "Like other breakthrough Apple products, its value will be underestimated at launch, then grow to have a profound impact on our lives and Apple’s fortunes," wrote former Apple employee Bruce Tognazzini on his blog last week. Apple makes things both pretty and pretty useful, two necessary features for a wearable computer. Many have noted that the iPod Nano makes for a "stylin' watch" — and it's not even supposed to be one.
Dan Wetzel, Ross Dellenger & SI’s Pat Forde react to the huge performance this weekend by Texas QB Arch Manning, Michigan and Notre Dame's spring games, Jaden Rashada entering the transfer portal, and more
Trump is entitled to an additional 36 million shares if the company's share price trades above $17.50 "for twenty out of any thirty trading days" over the next three years.
