Welcome to MacTalk Australia

the largest Australian community for Apple discussions and topics

Join the discussions, Register Now!
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 246

Thread: Apple Watch

  1. #61

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    To be honest, bit of a major let down. Battery life projected to be about a day? There is a reason samsung attacks apple on battery life.

    $349 for a sports watch that is an accelerometer and a heart beat monitor......Thats it! It doesn't do sleep, because the batter is that bad. Doesn't do sweat, or skin heat or anything else! Its a rip off!

    My basis health tracker watch, has a four day battery life, has an accelerometer and gyoscope, has a heart beat sensor, has a sweat sensor, and a body heat sensor. Can track your sleep and automatically tells if you are walking, running or cycling without a click of a button. Oh and it also tells the time! And it also costs $200 LESS than the apple watch. A whole $200 less!

    Why should I pay $200 more for the entry level model of a watch that does far less? Why pay more for a payment technology that wont work in this country for years to come? The only benefit is so I can feel a bump on my wrist a moment after I feel a buzz in my pocket? Totally worth $200 more....not!

    I think Ill wait for the 3rd or 4th generation....maybe.
    Sick of Bullshit? Go here
    www.youngausskeptics.com

    iBook 14'' 1GB Ram, MBP(santa) 15" 4GB ram, iPod Nano(3G) 4gb, iPod shuffle 512mb, iPod Touch 8gb.

  2. #62

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Fluffy Duck View Post
    To be honest, bit of a major let down. Battery life projected to be about a day? There is a reason samsung attacks apple on battery life.
    Can you point me to articles that report that battery life of Android Wear is any better?

  3. #63

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    I don't think battery life can be commented on until the production model comes out... who knows what it will be.

    I wonder if they considered using any of the bands for extra batteries?
    Plus, IIci, IIsi, LC, LCII, LC III, CC, LC475, LC630, Centris650, 6100, 8100, 5260, 7220, 7600. PB: 100, 150, 160, 165, 540, 190, 5300, 1400. Lombard, iMacG3, iBookG3, iBookG4, PBG4, eMac, iMac G4, PMG4, MiniG4, iMacG5

  4. #64

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kerr View Post
    Can you point me to articles that report that battery life of Android Wear is any better?
    Oh and I wouldn't buy that for the same reason. They need more range on the inductive charging, like a meter or so, so you can ware it in bed or at the office and have it charge. Then the day battery life wouldn't be an issue.
    Sick of Bullshit? Go here
    www.youngausskeptics.com

    iBook 14'' 1GB Ram, MBP(santa) 15" 4GB ram, iPod Nano(3G) 4gb, iPod shuffle 512mb, iPod Touch 8gb.

  5. #65

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    This is why the whole "RADIO WAVES CAUSE CANCER ERRRMAGUUUURD!!!" Thing is total BS! Stand back for a science lesson.

    1) Cancer is damage to DNA that repairs itself incorrectly creating a rogue cell, its more complicated than that, but thats the gist. DNA damage occurs when bonds between the neculobases (information bit) are broken. These nucleotides are held together by hydrogen bonds with the average energy of 5 jk/mol. So using avagadros number to get a ball park figure as to energy in a single hydrogen bond that needs to be overcome to break it is 8.30*10^-21 J.

    2) Bluetooth a common radio standard operates at 2.4 Ghz. What you may have forgoten is this radiation is actually light, no diffrent than what comes out of well.....er... a light. Using the equation E=h*n Where E is the energy in Joules, h is planks constant (6.626*10^-34) and n is the frequency in hertz, the energy of a single photon is 1.49*10^-24 J.

    3) So to break a hydrogen bond in DNA and cause cancer, we need to overcome 8.30*10^21 J, but that bond is taking it like a boss and shrugging of those piss-weak bluetooth photons who can only muster a puny 1.49*10^-24 J.

    4) In other words the energy in a bluetooth photon is 0.019 % as strong as required to break even the weakest of bonds in DNA. Now this is a back of the envelope equation but it should give you some idea why......

    5) Cancer from radio waves, is up way up there with such ideas as wind farms giving people headaches, and aliens flying halfway across the galaxy to probe red-necks bottoms.
    Sick of Bullshit? Go here
    www.youngausskeptics.com

    iBook 14'' 1GB Ram, MBP(santa) 15" 4GB ram, iPod Nano(3G) 4gb, iPod shuffle 512mb, iPod Touch 8gb.

  6. #66

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    WHO have proven that usage of mobile phones leads to heating and that heating may be doing the damage.

    Considering WHO haven't made their minds up on the issue, its not up there with wind farms and aliens flying....
    Plus, IIci, IIsi, LC, LCII, LC III, CC, LC475, LC630, Centris650, 6100, 8100, 5260, 7220, 7600. PB: 100, 150, 160, 165, 540, 190, 5300, 1400. Lombard, iMacG3, iBookG3, iBookG4, PBG4, eMac, iMac G4, PMG4, MiniG4, iMacG5

  7. #67

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Castlemaine area.
    Posts
    3,109

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Fluffy Duck View Post
    5) Cancer from radio waves, is up way up there with such ideas as wind farms giving people headaches, and aliens flying halfway across the galaxy to probe red-necks bottoms.
    Whilst it's true that Cancer from radio waves is simply not true it's also not true to say that radio waves are totally risk free, there are a variety of tissue damage issues that can occur at medium levels of RF exposure (ignoring for the moment direct RF burns which can and do happen with high levels of RF power).

    For example at home I have (amongst other radios) a 144-148MHz radio with an output of 100 watts fed into a yagi antenna with a gain of approx 10db.

    That's over a kilowatt of RF if you're standing in front of it and it would exceed RF safety limits for distances of up to 10 metres.

    http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rps/rps3.pdf

    http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rps/rps3_errata.pdf
    iPad Mini 4 128Gb 4G | iPhone 6 64GB | MacBook Pro 13" i5 2.4GHz Retina | Mac Mini i5 | Apple TV 3 |

  8. #68

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldmacs View Post
    WHO have proven that usage of mobile phones leads to heating and that heating may be doing the damage.
    *facepalm*

    As a confession to physics, all things transfer heat. In this case all 1.49*10-24 J of it. A fly landing on me would transfer more heat....... that sounds fun.

    Lets take a blow fly around ~50 mg which is 5.0*10^5 kg traveling at its top speed of 7.2 km/hr or 0.272 m/s. Using the equation E=1/2*m*v^2 where E is the kinetic energy in joules. m is the mass in kg and v is the velocity in m/s. And assuming a perfect system with 100% of the energy of this blow fly colission is converted to heat. A blow fly will impart 1.9*10^-6 J of heat into my skin.....giving me cancer :P

    Heat alone dose not cause cancer. Its DNA damage.

    Sorry but I actually read and understood that article, it says time after time that there is no evidence that EM in the ranges used by consumer devices causes cancer. If everything was bumped up to UV light, then yes, there would be enough energy to damage cells and cause cancer.......and the battery life of said devices would be as bad as samsung makes out it is :P But the SAME science that explains why UV light causes cancer ALSO tells us we don't get cancer from low energy devices.

    edit: Clarification
    Last edited by The Fluffy Duck; 15th September 2014 at 05:31 PM.
    Sick of Bullshit? Go here
    www.youngausskeptics.com

    iBook 14'' 1GB Ram, MBP(santa) 15" 4GB ram, iPod Nano(3G) 4gb, iPod shuffle 512mb, iPod Touch 8gb.

  9. #69

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff3DMN View Post
    Whilst it's true that Cancer from radio waves is simply not true it's also not true to say that radio waves are totally risk free, there are a variety of tissue damage issues that can occur at medium levels of RF exposure (ignoring for the moment direct RF burns which can and do happen with high levels of RF power).

    For example at home I have (amongst other radios) a 144-148MHz radio with an output of 100 watts fed into a yagi antenna with a gain of approx 10db.

    That's over a kilowatt of RF if you're standing in front of it and it would exceed RF safety limits for distances of up to 10 metres.

    http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rps/rps3.pdf

    http://www.arpansa.gov.au/pubs/rps/rps3_errata.pdf

    Yes you are right, heat damage is of course a problem. Perhaps I should say "from consumer electronics" is a better analogy. Heat damage from EM, is way different that DNA damage (ie cancer). If it was then standing infront of a radiator (inferred light) should be lining up the cancer wards. But they are not.

    What I was trying to demonstrate to our friend, is that the same science that tells us why UV light causes cancer also tells us why we don't get damage from consumer electronics.
    Sick of Bullshit? Go here
    www.youngausskeptics.com

    iBook 14'' 1GB Ram, MBP(santa) 15" 4GB ram, iPod Nano(3G) 4gb, iPod shuffle 512mb, iPod Touch 8gb.

  10. #70

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Fluffy Duck View Post
    *facepalm*

    As a confession to physics, all things transfer heat. In this case all 1.49*10-24 J of it. A fly landing on me would transfer more heat....... that sounds fun.

    Lets take a blow fly around ~50 mg which is 5.0*10^5 kg traveling at its top speed of 7.2 km/hr or 0.272 m/s. Using the equation E=1/2*m*v^2 where E is the kinetic energy in joules. m is the mass in kg and v is the velocity in m/s. And assuming a perfect system with 100% of the energy of this blow fly colission is converted to heat. A blow fly will impart 1.9*10^-6 J of heat into my skin.....giving me cancer :P

    Heat alone dose not cause cancer. Its DNA damage.

    Sorry but I actually read and understood that article, it says time after time that there is no evidence that EM in the ranges used by consumer devices causes cancer. If everything was bumped up to UV light, then yes, there would be enough energy to damage cells and cause cancer.......and the battery life of said devices would be as bad as samsung makes out it is :P But the SAME science that explains why UV light causes cancer ALSO tells us we don't get cancer from low energy devices.

    edit: Clarification
    Until the WHO can prove heating of the brain from mobile phone usage CAN DEFINITELY NOT cause damage, then I will continue to be wary.

    Based largely on these data, IARC has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), a category used when a causal association is considered credible, but when chance, bias or confounding cannot be ruled out with reasonable confidence.
    Plus, IIci, IIsi, LC, LCII, LC III, CC, LC475, LC630, Centris650, 6100, 8100, 5260, 7220, 7600. PB: 100, 150, 160, 165, 540, 190, 5300, 1400. Lombard, iMacG3, iBookG3, iBookG4, PBG4, eMac, iMac G4, PMG4, MiniG4, iMacG5

  11. #71

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldmacs View Post
    Until the WHO can prove heating of the brain from mobile phone usage CAN DEFINITELY NOT cause damage, then I will continue to be wary.

    Based largely on these data, IARC has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), a category used when a causal association is considered credible, but when chance, bias or confounding cannot be ruled out with reasonable confidence.
    Ooooh "Definite" is such a touchy word for science. I am guessing you are also applying this "definite" clause to other aspects of your life like driving, flying in planes, headache tablets, eating vegetables grown in the ground etc. And my favourite; Breathing a corrosive, oxidising, explosive gas called oxygen just to survive. Oxygen does more damage to your DNA than a mobile phone or an Apple watcher ever will!

    Be reasonable.
    Sick of Bullshit? Go here
    www.youngausskeptics.com

    iBook 14'' 1GB Ram, MBP(santa) 15" 4GB ram, iPod Nano(3G) 4gb, iPod shuffle 512mb, iPod Touch 8gb.

  12. #72

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Fluffy Duck View Post
    Ooooh "Definite" is such a touchy word for science. I am guessing you are also applying this "definite" clause to other aspects of your life like driving, flying in planes, headache tablets, eating vegetables grown in the ground etc. And my favourite; Breathing a corrosive, oxidising, explosive gas called oxygen just to survive. Oxygen does more damage to your DNA than a mobile phone or an Apple watcher ever will!

    Be reasonable.
    God, its like insulted you personally or something...

    I guess definite is a stupid word to use.. nothing can really be proved definitely. I guess I see it as a possible risk and one that doesn't mean going out of my way to prevent possible ill effects. Its not hurting me or anyone else to do so.
    Plus, IIci, IIsi, LC, LCII, LC III, CC, LC475, LC630, Centris650, 6100, 8100, 5260, 7220, 7600. PB: 100, 150, 160, 165, 540, 190, 5300, 1400. Lombard, iMacG3, iBookG3, iBookG4, PBG4, eMac, iMac G4, PMG4, MiniG4, iMacG5

  13. #73

    Default

    The point is that with all the uninformed scares about RF and EM radiation, people overreact relative to the other health risk factors they encounter every day. Be alert, not alarmed!

    Now, back to the Apple Watch...

  14. #74

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    771

    Default

    Is anyone paying attention around here?

    http://www.mactalk.com.au/9/118333-f...ple-watch.html
    Late 2015 - 4.7" iPhone 6s (Silver), 1.8 GHz 16nm TSMC A9, 128GB, iOS 9.2
    Late 2013 - 13" rMBP 2.6GHz Intel 4th-gen i5, 22nm Haswell, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD, OS X 10.11.2

  15. #75

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    5,616

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Fluffy Duck View Post

    My basis health tracker watch, has a four day battery life, has an accelerometer and gyoscope, has a heart beat sensor, has a sweat sensor, and a body heat sensor. Can track your sleep and automatically tells if you are walking, running or cycling without a click of a button. Oh and it also tells the time!
    Fluffy, which watch? I'm using fitbit flex to track my sleep but it doesnt tell me the time... and if I have to wear something on my wrist, I really wouldnt mind if it did that.

  16. #76

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    771

    Default

    I'm not convinced at this stage that an Apple Watch will be a better investment than a Polar HRM.

  17. #77

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Newcastle
    Posts
    5,616

    Default

    I'm convinced it wont be. Well.. Polar whatever or anything. I'm afraid with the premium its going to cost, plus battery issues, its just not even on my radar. Its a product for dedicated fans with money to burn. Seems to me that Apple has completely lost interest in Joe Average. The share price and future success of the company will depend on them regaining that. Steve Jobs brought them back last time... that option is no longer available to them. They need to wake up

  18. #78

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyte View Post
    They need to wake up
    Pretty sure the Apple Watch has an alarm function
    Late 2015 - 4.7" iPhone 6s (Silver), 1.8 GHz 16nm TSMC A9, 128GB, iOS 9.2
    Late 2013 - 13" rMBP 2.6GHz Intel 4th-gen i5, 22nm Haswell, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD, OS X 10.11.2

  19. #79

    Default

    It's too early to judge. Part of me is negative -- I can't really see the use-case; but the other part is positive -- Apple does have an uncanny ability to create delight about a previously, fairly boring product. Battery life remains to be seen, but I suspect as long as it is >20hrs, it will not be the barrier many predict.

  20. #80

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    melbourne
    Posts
    1,033

    Default

    I was out having lunch with some friends that I hadn't seen for a while two days after the 'watch' keynote and my friends kept pulling out their phone and checking it to the point of distraction.. it was then that it struck me how less distracting to our lunch it would be if one could just glance at their wrist rather than pull out their phone.

    I left there thinking I could see the benefit of the apple watch in a social lunch setting or in a meeting environment.

    I'm looking forward to trying it out for a few weeks and seeing how it fits into daily life.
    Last edited by james the 2nd; 23rd September 2014 at 09:40 AM.
    --------------------
    macbook pro, mirror door g4, ipod shuffle, ipod 5g
    passion: music

Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •