Right. "Phone" was the thing the iPhone did worst of all.
When I got my first iPhone (after a Blackberry Curve), one thing I noticed: everything my Curve did, it did better than the iPhone. It was a better phone, it was better for email, it was better for texting. (Ok, it technically had "apps", but they were so bad I never used any).
But my iPhone did a million things that my Blackberry didn't do (via apps).
Was it a worse phone? Absolutely. Did I love it much, much more than I ever loved my Blackberry? Absolutely.
That's my main concern about WATCH. The apps for it don't exist yet, and it's possible they never will.
A pocket computer with a touch screen is a general computing device. But there's very little anyone can do with a watch-sized consumer product - especially if it lacks extras like really good fitness and health hardware.
I totally get the potential of haptic wearables, but WATCH seems like a 0.5 product with some eccentric design choices that's still on the wrong side of industrial practicality - not like a product with enough awesome to appeal outside the fan/early adopter crowd.
I'm sure Cook & Co are thinking of it as a beach head, not a finished battle. But even so - it has to entice a critical mass of consumers or there will be no follow-ups.
When I got my first iPhone (after a Blackberry Curve), one thing I noticed: everything my Curve did, it did better than the iPhone. It was a better phone, it was better for email, it was better for texting. (Ok, it technically had "apps", but they were so bad I never used any).
But my iPhone did a million things that my Blackberry didn't do (via apps).
Was it a worse phone? Absolutely. Did I love it much, much more than I ever loved my Blackberry? Absolutely.
Don't think of this as a "watch."
[slight edit for clarity]