Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 27th Dec 2012 15:50 UTC
Permalink for comment 546504
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-06-10
I agree with you about the usage you could make with such a watch but want to answer your "Apple haters" comment.
First there is prior art for "smart watches" and not only in TV shows. If Apples implementation differs a bit it's not a revolution... It's simply a new implementation... Nothing more.
I think in this kind of situation Apple fanboys (And Apple itself) are worse as they will claim it's Apples invention and that everybody else who makes a watch that works with electricity copied them (The proof is there... Look at the patent XXXX where Apple "invented" the usage of electricity to accomplish intelligent tasks in a device attached to a body)
As always... Sorry for my English... It's really not my first language :-)
Edited 2012-12-28 12:38 UTC