The Apple Watch might have been four years in the making and the most Jony Ive-centric Apple product yet — but the company didn’t get everything it was wishing for from the device.
According to a new report from The Wall Street Journal, Apple originally wanted its smartwatch to focus far more prominently on health-related innovations, only to be forced to go in another direction midway through the project.
If Apple had had its way, the Apple Watch would have boasted smart sensors capable of tracking blood pressure, heart rate and even stress levels — but despite hiring top people from the biosensor industry, the technology didn’t work quite as well as had been hoped.
Problems were apparently posed by Apple Watch wearers with hairy arms and dry skin, with sensor results also varying depending on how loosely or tightly the watch is worn. Despite a heavy drain on Apple resources, engineers were unable to create a suitable solution in time for the company to reveal the device.
As a result, the Apple Watch shipping in April will be far more of an iPhone accessory/companion than had originally been planned, which is no doubt useful for growing Apple’s interlocking ecosystem but is less good in other ways. Although Apple has the luxury of taking its time with products, yesterday’s New Yorker story reveals how much pressure there was to announce a new category of device post-Steve Jobs.
While there’s still a lot to be excited for, the health-tracking applications of the Apple Watch were ones that people are very excited about. Apple has already had success introducing HealthKit into top hospitals, and a medically approved wearable could potentially help grow relations between Apple and the healthcare industry.
In a recent interview, Steve Wozniak discussed health-tracking as one of the most potentially exciting features of the Apple Watch. Cult of Mac has also written about the potential of the Apple Watch becoming your “digital doctor.”
Sadly, it seems we’re going to have to wait at least a couple of generations before the technology can live up to that billing.
Luke Dormehl is a U.K.-based journalist and author, with a background working in documentary film for Channel 4 and the BBC. He is the author of The Apple Revolution and The Formula: How Algorithms Solve All Our Problems … and Create More, both published by Penguin/Random House. His tech writing has also appeared in Wired, Fast Company, Techmeme and other publications.
10 responses to “Apple Watch won’t be the digital doctor it could have been”
They will still sell in droves.
I think that Apple should focus on making the Apple Watch be a good watch, rather than a doctor on our wrist. Take a look at what the Pebble currently does. Its a great watch, that also allows important notifications and some other useful things.
Battery life should be job #1 though. The Smart Watch industry won’t survive unless battery life is measured in weeks, not single days.
Sorry…I’ve got to take issue with the idea that it will need a battery life of “weeks” to survive. I remember the same complaints about smartphones. People coming from feature phones were up in arms that they would only last a day without a recharge, yet they adapted to charging their phones every night. They finally realized that their paradigm was all wrong. A smartphone isn’t really a “phone” – it’s a computer in your pocket. Just as the smartwatch isn’t a “watch” – it’s a computer on the wrist. It will never have weeks worth of battery life.
Even my real automatic watch won’t run for more than 2 days off my wrist without my taking some action to recharge it through movement.
My Mechanical Self-Winding watch lasts 36 hours without movement before it dies. People who love watches are perfectly ok to attending to their energy store on the order of days. Again, the lack of understanding of the people who will wear it is what separates Apple from the wannabes.
If not I don’t see the problem with putting the watch on it’s charger next to your nightstand while you sleep. Do people actually wear their watches to bed?
If you are forgetful, isn’t that what a smart watch is for? it will remind you to charge it.
I’ll wait for the 2nd edition to come out when they get all this fixed.
This is just the first version. Apple couldn’t risk a signature feature being unusable. The failure of handwriting recognition killed the Newton, for example. Even though the rest of it worked quite well.
So they stick with things they believe will work for now. Nothing stops them or third parties from tackling these other ideas later.
Battery power will be important. People will not trust a watch they have to baby to get through a day or two. It may not quite be there in version 1, but longer life will come soon enough.
It’s still a little thick too. A thinner watch will be significantly more attractive. I suspect they’ll get there too in a few more years.
A real killer though is that you cannot swim or shower with an Apple watch. I’m not sure I”ll be able to remember to take mine off before jumping into the shower.
I don’t understand why the Apple watch can’t be at least IP67 like the Moto 360. I expected more from Apple in that regard.
Surprises me as well.
May not have been able to accommodate a few of the features and still be waterproof.
Apple is notorious for leaving out obvious upgrades to give themselves an easy path to a new version next year.