Until around 1900, wristwatches were most popular among women. Men preferred pocket watches.
(Presumably, women didn’t carry pocket watches because their garments didn’t have pockets.)
When time-keeping technology improved, male consumers slowly saw how much quicker it was to glance at their left wrist to check the time than to reach into their pockets.
Apple made a similar pitch when it launched Apple Watch.
Wouldn’t it be so much more convenient to check your texts, e-mails, or weather, on the go, if you didn’t have to fish out your smartphone from your pocket every time?
That’s what I thought. And that’s why I’d have bought it. Besides, it’s a more tactile product than the other Apple offerings as it has retained some of the features of the rotary watch.
The face of the watch—which, in this case, is its home page—has a platter of bubbles, each enclosing an app.
You tap one to enter one. But as the face can sense pressure, you can also press it. It has a “crown,” the nub you once twisted to wind a timepiece. In the Apple Watch, turning it lets you zoom in and out of whatever it is that you’re looking at.
Below it, is a button. Pushing it pulls up your Rolodex, your list of contacts.
Nifty as these are, what dissuades me is that it wouldn’t work without a smartphone. What this means is that it’d add one more device to the growing tangle, not replace one.
This is not unlike selling someone a wristwatch that requires a pocket watch to work.
h/t: THE ECONOMIST