×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Files Trademark For "iWatch" In Japan

samzenpus posted about 10 months ago | from the its-i-time dept.

Apple 82

An anonymous reader writes "Apple has filed a trademark application for 'iwatch' in Japan. 'The maker of iPhones is seeking protection for the name which is categorized as being for products including a handheld computer or watch device, according to a June 3 filing with the Japan Patent Office that was made public last week. Takashi Takebayashi, a Tokyo-based spokesman for Apple, didn’t respond to a message left at his office seeking comment on the application.' Rumors suggest that the new iWatch is expected to sport a 1.5-inch OLED screen."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

82 comments

Will suck. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44152733)

Have you ever tried multitouch on a 1.5" device?
  Much less touch?

Unless they use leap motion to generate some sort of virtual 4" pad to use.

Re:Will suck. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44152759)

Pretty much goes for any device in this category

Re:Will suck. (1, Funny)

Cryacin (657549) | about 10 months ago | (#44153017)

Hey Crapple. Dick Tracy called, and he wants his watch back.

Re:Will suck. (1)

noh8rz9 (2716595) | about 10 months ago | (#44155715)

I don't understand what' sso bad about touch for an iWatch. you just poke it and swipe it. seems to be very intuitive! I agree about multitouch, but tap and swipe I don't see a problem with.

Re:Will suck. (2)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 10 months ago | (#44152871)

Have you ever tried multitouch on a 1.5" device?

It will come with an iMonkey accessory to work the screen with its tiny fingers.

Re:Will suck. (3, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 10 months ago | (#44152943)

Multitouch is useful for rotation and scaling in a fairly small space. Compare multitouch touchpads on netbooks. Some of them aren't much bigger than 1.5".

Re:Will suck. (3, Insightful)

Tukz (664339) | about 10 months ago | (#44152945)

Where does it says it will be Multitouch?
Or even Touch for that matter.

Lets Speculate (2)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 10 months ago | (#44152963)

Have you ever tried multitouch on a 1.5" device? Much less touch?

Why do you need to (multi) touch a watch? Voice and Various Gestures...or simple swipe and touch on a watch covers most of what you want from a device on your wrist if it is connected to a smartphone elsewhere.

Although there is no reason why the 1.5" watch couldn't be 9" Wide :)

Re:Lets Speculate (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 10 months ago | (#44154089)

Because he expects to use it the same as a tablet. Lots of very wierd people with uneducated expectations in the tech world today.

I dont want ANY touch on it at all. give me 4 buttons two on each side.

Re:Lets Speculate (3, Informative)

Dusty101 (765661) | about 10 months ago | (#44154535)

A touch control with buttons can work quite well.

I have a Garmin sports watch that has the usual complement of buttons, but also makes use of the round bezel (not the screen, mind) in a similar way to a 5th-generation iPod: sliding the finger one way scrolls down the menus, sliding it the other scrolls up. Touching it in two places simultaneously toggles the backlight. It locks/unlocks by pressing two of the buttons together, so accidental selections are avoided. It works rather well, actually.

Re:Will suck. (1)

jellomizer (103300) | about 10 months ago | (#44153109)

OH NO. NEW TECHNOLOGY IS BAD!

Yes it is a small screen, you wont be clicking all around the screen. It would probably be closer to the iPod Nano, 4 buttons, Swipe, perhaps a pinch zoom.

But compared to trying to use the old Watch Calculators or Watch Games, a touch display would be welcomed. Or even those painful little buttons on Digital watches that leave an impression of the button for a few minutes on your finger.

New Technology? (0)

fibonacci8 (260615) | about 10 months ago | (#44153201)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Tracy [wikipedia.org] 1946 called, on their technology.

Re:New Technology? (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 10 months ago | (#44154691)

He was a fictional character with a fictional watch. People dreamed of flying for a long time, too.

Re:Will suck. (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 10 months ago | (#44153947)

Have you ever tried multitouch on a 1.5" device?
Much less touch?

Touch, yes, on the iPod Nano 6th gen, and it's surprisingly good. You can get watch straps [apple.com] for these little square nanos.

Re:Will suck. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44155229)

It's an Apple product. People will spill their load over its alleged awesomeness any way.

Re:Will suck. (1)

camperdave (969942) | about 10 months ago | (#44157739)

Forget multi-touch. Talk to me about battery life. My watch lasts for years before needing another battery. I actually wear through straps more often. What's going to be the battery life of this device? Years? Months? Days? Hours? I think I'll stick with my Timex, thank you very much.

iWatch? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44152739)

Is this an NSA only product?

Re:iWatch? (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 10 months ago | (#44153059)

Is this an NSA only product?

That would be theyWatch, wouldn't it?

Re:iWatch? (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 10 months ago | (#44153127)

Is this an NSA only product?

Absolutely. Unlike Samsung's new sWatch, which sends all your data to the NSA, Google, and Samsung headquarters.

Re:iWatch? (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 10 months ago | (#44158825)

No. It's "everyone but NSA" product, because no one who's in the NSA will want one. Even though they are the ones who are referenced by the name.

I'd consider a nano (4, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 10 months ago | (#44152755)

I'd consider just using a nano on a band if they made a waterproof model. They have that spray now, but I'm hesitant to try self-applied. And the professional waterproofing services cost too much.

Re:I'd consider a nano (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44152861)

The battery life for the nano is terrible. LCD is a nonstarter for a smartwatch IMO, it uses way too much power! Even with the fact it goes into standby all the time. I have a nano with the wrist strap and I gave up on it because I just didn't care much for the constant charging. And the constant going on standby when the screen turns off means I have to click on it to see the actual time. And the face will turn itself off when you are playing music, so you will have to do some fiddling just to get the time!

Unless they have some sort of no hassle wireless charging, it will just become another device you have to make sure you plug in. Phone is already a hassle in of itself. Adding another gadget to your routine is just not an improvement. My current wrist occupant doesn't need batteries changed for over a year. Why would I replace it with something that requires daily attention? A smartwatch that only needs a weekly recharge would be a start.

Another downside of the nano it's HUGE. Some of us do not have wrists so big to ascetically accommodate such a big face. Not to mention the ridiculous size of the two jacks on it, the headphones and the charging port. It is dated technology, and there is definitely room for improvement.

Re:I'd consider a nano (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 10 months ago | (#44152933)

Another downside of the nano it's HUGE. Some of us do not have wrists so big to ascetically accommodate such a big face.

Well, I am two meters tall and have wrists like many other people's ankles, so that's not a big problem for me.

It is dated technology, and there is definitely room for improvement.

I guess I should have said "I had already considered..."

A spiritual point of view (1)

sjbe (173966) | about 10 months ago | (#44152991)

Some of us do not have wrists so big to ascetically accommodate such a big face

That's a very spiritual [wikipedia.org] outlook. Most people would be concerned with worldly matters such as asthetics [wikipedia.org] . Bravo for rejecting worldly pleasures.

Re:A spiritual point of view (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44153029)

Yes. But it is my spellchecker that rejects worldly pleasures. I simply cannot be bothered to spell properly.

Re:A spiritual point of view (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44154453)

Don't worry, sjbe couldn't be bothered either: it's "aesthetics".

Re:A spiritual point of view (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44155463)

The period goes inside the quotation marks.

Re: A spiritual point of view (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44155653)

depends on what country you're from, jackass

Re: A spiritual point of view (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44156515)

IMO, and I say this as an American, you yanks are off your rocker with the whole periods always inside the quotation marks thing. The Brits have it right. Punctuation should follow the same rule with quotes as it does with parentheses—if it's a sentence inside the quotes, or if it is being used to set off part of a sentence from a dialogue tag (because the two quotation blocks combined form a complete sentence), then the comma goes inside; otherwise, it goes outside.

For example, "scare quotes", quotes used solely for emphasis or to surround a nonstandard term, should never have a comma inside them. This takes some getting used to, but it is more logical than the American scheme, which appears to be solely an aesthetically driven decision.

Re:A spiritual point of view (1)

camperdave (969942) | about 10 months ago | (#44157379)

The only punctuation that goes inside the quotation marks is the punctuation belonging to the quotation:

Did she say "What a rush.", or did she say "What a rush!"?
For the last time, he said "What time is it?"!

It's the only thing that makes sense.

Re:I'd consider a nano (1)

Misagon (1135) | about 10 months ago | (#44153335)

The current 7th gen iPod Nano that came last year is too big to use as a watch.
Lots of people are using the 6th gen iPod Nano as a watch, but it doesn't have any features that a true "smartwatch" should have and you can't install apps on it.

Personally, I think that a smartwatch should be designed as a "dumb" terminal to a smartphone, although maybe with an interactive display so that you could move between pages of notifications/time/calendar from different apps.
In other words, it should be an accessory to the phone. You should only need to install apps on the phone and those apps would push data to the watch whenever there is an update.
Such a smartwatch would have a low-power screen and would sleep most of the time to conserve battery. The iPod Nano can't do that.

Re:I'd consider a nano (1)

Trogre (513942) | about 10 months ago | (#44161527)

Personally, I think that a smartwatch should be designed as a "dumb" terminal to a smartphone, although maybe with an interactive display so that you could move between pages of notifications/time/calendar from different apps.

You mean like this [amazon.com] ?

Don't assume this is a watch sized iPod... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44152939)

Alternative products:

-NSA sponsored surveillance cameras
-Electronic binoculars targeted at stalkers and peeping toms
-Apple competitor for Google Glass

Re:Don't assume this is a watch sized iPod... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44155205)

Apple takes 100% care of users' privacy. Please mod parent down.

they already passed on this (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44152959)

They already passed on this when they didnt market the nano as a watch.

iwatch with my little eye (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44152981)

a clock telling a hipster the time

Re:iwatch with my little eye (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44153231)

iRonically of course

Skeptical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44153031)

What would an iWatch be?

My watch tells time. It does that very, very well. If that's all an iWatch does, I'll pass, because Apple isn't going to make a watch better than (say) Movado.

For anything else I need I have my phone. I don't wear my phone on my arm, even though I could.

So, I guess an iWatch would be a bluetooth device which can connect to my phone. Basically a second screen for my phone that allows me to not have to take my phone out of my pocket for texting or email. But that idea doesn't really thrill me. I'd at least want it to be a color e-ink screen. And I choose my watches carefully and it is doubtful Apple is going to hit with the design, since it seems more important to them that all their products look about the same.

Re:Skeptical (1)

ciderbrew (1860166) | about 10 months ago | (#44153239)

Yes; but they are going to patent the hands of a clock on a mobile device and or phone on strap and somehow get away with doing it.

iWatch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44153205)

Apple stealthily unveils their new tv system: iWatch

Trademark this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44153243)

iReallyDontCare.

I beat them to the punch for iDiaper! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44153467)

I filed a trademark for iDiaper... a smart diaper that sends a text message when your kid poops in it!

Pebble watch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44153635)

A nice set of Bluetooth earbuds and a pebble watch (http://getpebble.com/) make a nice Wearable computing" combination.

NSA already have that trademark... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44153867)

n/t

Wearable technology is the next evolution (5, Insightful)

the computer guy nex (916959) | about 10 months ago | (#44153969)

Countless times per day I'm removing my smartphone from my pocket simply to check today's calendar, today's to-dos, weather, latest emails, latest calls/sms, latest notifications, and of course the time. Quick access to your ecosystem would be a tremendous convenience.

The other big opportunity is sensors. Fitness and health are the obvious ones, but it could even branch into creative uses of an accelerometer.

The key here is the hardware engineering, where Apple has the big advantage. This thing needs to have multi-day battery life with the screen on continuously. It needs to utilize Bluetooth 4/BLE to reduce battery impact to your tablet/smartphone. The screen needs to have more brightness than the typical junk AMOLED. The microphone needs to be sensitive enough to operate at a distance farther than the typical smartphone.

My bet is Apple has a wealth of ideas, but they are still nailing down the hardware engineering aspect. Now that they are custom-designing their own SoCs, I believe this should be sooner than later.

Re:Wearable technology is the next evolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44154019)

Sounds like you're living for your phone. Simplifyyyyyyyyyyyy, man!

Re:Wearable technology is the next evolution (1)

the computer guy nex (916959) | about 10 months ago | (#44154075)

Sounds like you're living for your phone. Simplifyyyyyyyyyyyy, man!

I would argue my phone lives for me, but it could be a distinction without a difference.

Re:Wearable technology is the next evolution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44173741)

http://25.media.tumblr.com/adbd7cd40753d3013d546cf08bea2740/tumblr_mgaslyvJGL1rs8nl1o1_500.png

Re:Wearable technology is the next evolution (0, Flamebait)

csumpi (2258986) | about 10 months ago | (#44154815)

"Countless times per day I'm removing my smartphone from my pocket simply to check..."

So now you'll strap an indicator to your wrist that notifies you _every time_ you get a text or email, which will require you removing your phone from your pocket _every time_ to read such message (unless you are going to do so on a 1.5" display) and to eventually reply such message. So instead of removing your phone once every hour,you'll do so _every time_ such indicator goes off.

On top of it you'll be recharging such indicator once every couple of days.

I'm sorry, but that just sounds silly and counter productive.

"My bet is Apple has a wealth of ideas..."

I'm pretty sure, as there are several such devices on the market already.

Re:Wearable technology is the next evolution (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 10 months ago | (#44156529)

you're going to think they'll go all dick tracy on it? as if.

now amoled they need in order to show the time while the rest of the screen is sleeping(one of the best features of my 808 is the amoled screen.. you don't need to open keylock to check time, or pick it up even -it's showing the missed call notifications and time+date constantly - and no, it doesn't need charging every day despite keeping that option on, because it's from a company that had a big hw advantage in regards of practical carry electronics.. and still do in their lower end hw, sadly on their higher end they went MS so even if you leave it offline at work desk with full charge on friday it's not on when you get back on monday). so either amoled or eink.

the real problem is making it useful at all. and battery life, which despite your misunderstanding isn't actually apples strong point in any way.

Brightness? (1)

jeffb (2.718) (1189693) | about 10 months ago | (#44161875)

I don't think you'll ever get any sort of light-emitting element, be it AMOLED or whatever, that's compatible with good battery life. It's going to have to be some sort of reflective LCD.

Well, actually, given another twenty years or so of progress on low-power, high-res cameras and ultra-low-power processors, I suppose you could save power by having a display that only emits light when someone's looking at it. But I think that would be just a bit too creepy for words.

Apple and iWatch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44154679)

Funny, I used iWatch years ago - that was a database product - owned by the people who own TOAD; but I must be mistaken, as only Apple are allowed i.... names aren't they ?

Re: Apple and iWatch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44155689)

no. not even apple can file a trademark on "any product name that begins with i followed by a capital letter. that's why you see products like the iHome stereo. apple has to file individual trademarks on all their i-stuff.

Re: Apple and iWatch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44157145)

no. not even apple can file a trademark on "any product name that begins with i followed by a capital letter. that's why you see products like the iHome stereo. apple has to file individual trademarks on all their i-stuff.

I agree.

iAnonymous Coward

Well this is interesting... (1)

FSWKU (551325) | about 10 months ago | (#44155635)

I seem to remember the idea of such a thing being laughed at not too long ago. Actually, it was in one of the Pebble threads where an iDrone specifically proclaimed "If a connected watch were a good idea, Apple would have done it years ago!"

But now that such a device is already on the market (that seems to be more practical and will have much better battery life due to e-ink vs OLED), Apple decides they can't let that stand. To not be filling every little mobile device niche is tantamount to admitting failure, even if their device turns out to be crap. But wait! You might be able to control this one by TOUCH! Well, that makes all the difference in the world!

I'm waiting for this iWatch thingie to be more about flair and eye candy than functionality, and for Apple to market it like the idea wasn't even possible until they came along. Then they'll likely sue Pebble for some sort of copyright infringement despite Apple being late to a party that someone else started.

"The all-new iMeToo: Designed by Apple in California"

Is this thing all voice? (1)

Kuukai (865890) | about 10 months ago | (#44155683)

1.5" seems awfully small for touch, but I don't want to live in a world where every jackass on the train is shouting at their wrist.

Re:Is this thing all voice? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44157075)

in Japan, 1.5" is perfectly respectable size

Lets cut to the chase (1)

scollard (1610757) | about 10 months ago | (#44159779)

Apple is not making a watch. Just because it can keep track of time don't call it a watch. Just because you wear it on your wrist, don't call it a watch. And don't ever call a "digital watch" a watch. It's an abomination. Noted exception is the mechanical digital watch. Very cool, but I don't think there has been one made in the last 100 years.

Re:Lets cut to the chase (1)

GrahamCox (741991) | about 10 months ago | (#44160871)

Yeah, let's face it, the human race is so amazingly backward, they still think that digital watches area pretty neat idea.

iWatch (1)

Trogre (513942) | about 10 months ago | (#44160589)

I thought that Apple already used name for their daemon that spys on its customers.

I'm more interested in the SmartWatch [wikipedia.org] , which can be had right now for less than US$100.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...