Hacker News Reader

Comment by unclebunkers | Hacker News Reader

It will be the most used feature by young lovers everywhere...

Perhaps, but it is a five minute app. For Apple to spend minutes on the concept of communicating via finger drawings on a tiny screen borders on bizarre. I will say that if Samsung or LG demoed something like this, they would be widely and rightfully mocked. I'm not saying that in a polarizing "camps" perspective, but that people are often surprisingly uncritical of Apple.

I wonder if it was the way it was presented? That one weird Samsung S3 (?) release presentation was odd and strange, and weird. I said weird twice.

With Apple, they appear to present things differently. Perhaps it is because you can't hear Jony Ive smiling when he talks? He sounds like a robot, so it must be a logical thing to do?

Please, make it so.

Maybe they will start using Watches instead of doing this:

https://www.google.es/search?q=bridge+padlocks&newwindow=1&h...

Seriously, I can see it being used, but it's still very gimmicky.

> It will be the most used feature by _rich_ young lovers everywhere...

FIFY. At $349 a pop, I doubt you want to cruise in college with this on the wrist.

A $350 watch is a too expensive, but $325 beats headphones are chill? When I walk through the seedier parts of town where most of the rent is paid in food stamps and wishes, I still see beats headphones.

Beats headphones are really heavily counterfeited at a tenth the price or less. I expect a lot of the ones you saw were fake.

Do they also counterfeit the ridiculous bass response in them? Or do they put decent drivers in them, like Beyerdynamic DT 770s with Beats logos on them? That'd be funny.

Watches are a fashion accessory and have a very wide price range. I consider watches under $150 to be low end, under $400 to be middle end and above that to be high end.

Headphones are different because (until Beats) they were mostly about function and not form. You can get very good sounding headphones for under $100, which is why people whine about Beats being so expensive. Beats's innovation wasn't making good headphones, it was making headphones into a fashion (so they could charge a lot).

Seriously?

MP3 Players are different because (until Apple iPod) they were mostly about function and not form.

Phones are different because (until Apple iPhone) they were mostly about function and not form.

Tablets are different because (until Apple iPad) they were mostly about function and not form.

Smart watches are different because (until Apple Watch) they were mostly about function and not form.

It's not hyperbolic to say that the company redefines categories.

Yes, seriously. Beats headphones didn't add anything new to headphones except looking cool (and mostly because of the brand name and not because they look particularly good). None of the Apple products you mentioned were like that—they all added significant innovative features in addition to having a beautiful form. The hipness of the brand followed that instead of leading it.

Most people's phones are more expensive, and IIRC back when people still wore wristwatches they were just as, if not more expensive than that.

In the first two weeks of their relation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com