Beta
×

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!

Disappointed Woz Sells His "Worthless" Galaxy Gear Watch

timothy posted about 3 months ago | from the get-that-man-a-tricorder dept.

Handhelds 242

curtwoodward (2147628) writes Apple co-founder and legendary nerd Steve Wozniak is a huge gadget enthusiast, often appearing in lines with mere mortals to purchase new Apple products. So you can bet he's tried out most of the smartwatches on the market today. The worst one? By far, the Samsung Galaxy Gear, which The Woz says he sold on eBay after half a day's use. "It was so worthless and did so little that was convenient," Wozniak said at an appearance in Milwaukee. "You had to hold it up to your ear and stuff." So maybe the watch sucked, but just imagine being the one who bought Woz's used Gear---do you think they know?

cancel ×

242 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Legendary nerd? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361381)

He put a bunch of 74ls logic on a PCB, just like everyone else back then did. What else has he done?

Re: Legendary nerd? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361417)

More than you can say about yourself for sure. Your biggest achievement in life is probably this post on Slashdot.

Re: Legendary nerd? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361495)

I, like many engineers, designed plenty of things, but like most people I wasn't lucky enough to design the one right thing at the right time.

Re: Legendary nerd? (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361951)

Attributing it to luck is what losers do.

Re: Legendary nerd? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361989)

I, like many engineers, designed plenty of things, but like most people I wasn't lucky enough to design the one right thing at the right time.

Sometimes it's worth saving your reputation to avoid being associated with some of today's inventions. The "Internet of Things" pretty much sums up the majority of that stupid pointless activity.

No, my toilet does not need a IPv6 connection. I promise you I can still take a shit without it.

Re: Legendary nerd? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362107)

yes but how would your FB followers know how big your shit was and what it looked like.

Re:Legendary nerd? (5, Informative)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 3 months ago | (#47361451)

He invented the universal remote control.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CL_9

Re:Legendary nerd? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361745)

No, one of the earliest programmable controllers and the most capable at the time but by no means the first, an since more technologies than IR were used at the time by no means truly universal

Re:Legendary nerd? (0)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 3 months ago | (#47361807)

He says that at the time he could not find a way to control all of his home entertainment electronics with one device, and money was clearly not an issue for him.

Re:Legendary nerd? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361461)

You mean besides building a disk controller in software that was faster and far more adaptable and reliable than the hardware versions at the time, and cost a tenth as much?

Yeah, I can't figure why that would be important in 1977.

Re:Legendary nerd? (5, Insightful)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 3 months ago | (#47361487)

Don't forget about the resolution he got out of a video controller. Or the way he mercilessly attacked the IC count. Woz is a populist geek hero to anybody who wants to maximize performance while minimizing cost.

The big iron folks always look down their noses at the little people with their little computers, but they don't start any revolutions.

Re:Legendary nerd? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361553)

So was Don Lancaster 5 years before. Where's the collective blowjob for him?

Re:Legendary nerd? (-1, Flamebait)

mindwhip (894744) | about 3 months ago | (#47362333)

Woz is a populist geek hero to anybody who wants to average performance while increasing cost to pay for the 'cool factor'.

Fixed that for you

Re:Legendary nerd? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362709)

I think you got your Steves mixed up.

Re:Legendary nerd? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362449)

LOL the "big iron" people didn't start any revolutions? Like besides computerizing everything from the 1950s onwards? What kind of brain damage have you suffered?

Banks. Insurance companies. Process control. Fly by wire. Missile control. Yeah, no revolutions there. The "big iron" people sure didn't start anything.

You're a fucking idiot and every post you make just adds more evidence.

Seriously, how did you arrive at your moronic conclusion and who are the anencephalic droolers who mod you up?

Re:Legendary nerd? (5, Informative)

iggymanz (596061) | about 3 months ago | (#47361559)

No one else designed the circuits and firmware/software of a 6502 based computer system with output that worked on a home TV.

He holds four patents as sole inventor:
No. 4,136,359: Microcomputer for use with video display
No. 4,210,959: Controller for magnetic disc, recorder, or the like
No. 4,217,604: Apparatus for digitally controlling PAL color display
No. 4,278,972: Digitally-controlled color signal generation means for use with display

Please post link to your major contributions to the field of personal computing, we're looking forward to it. Unless as I suspect your biggest contribution is the dried and crusted mass on the underside of your system's desk

Re:Legendary nerd? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362111)

I thought I was the only one who wiped boogers under my desk.

Re:Legendary nerd? (4, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 3 months ago | (#47362477)

You'd be surprised how many people wipe boogers under your desk!

Re:Legendary nerd? (2)

Dins (2538550) | about 3 months ago | (#47362573)

He holds four patents as sole inventor: No. 4,136,359: Microcomputer for use with video display

So with this patent alone, wouldn't he be able to patent troll the entire computer industry out of existence? I'm only half kidding.

Re:Legendary nerd? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362579)

Oh right, he was the only one back then. No one else designed their own video chips or disks controllers.

Were does the queue form for sucking his dick?

Re:Legendary nerd? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362697)

No one else designed the circuits and firmware/software of a 6502 based computer system with output that worked on a home TV.

Like the BBC Micro?

Did the editor know...this is Google/Android tech? (-1)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 3 months ago | (#47361393)

>> Apple co-founder..."Galaxy Gear...worthless"

Hmmm...I read that as "Apple insider says Google device bad." And...you were expecting?

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361439)

The Woz is too pure to give in to petty brand based allegiances, even if he helped start one of those brands.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361529)

He still carries an iPhone. I'm sure it's not a happy coincidence.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (3, Interesting)

Noah Haders (3621429) | about 3 months ago | (#47361565)

Wiz is an infamous gadget hound. Go to youtube to see clips of him babbling over androids, google glass, whatever.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (1)

electrosoccertux (874415) | about 3 months ago | (#47362007)

he was eternally tormented by the decision to remove user expandability in the Apple2

so, he started the brand and it was pure, and fought it when it became what he hated

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361441)

Hi did you get the newsletter that Woz left Apple like 20 years ago and has nothing to do with the company anymore? And that he's a huge tech/gadget geek and doesn't care if the device is not Apple? And has even publicly spoken out against Apple?

Well now you do.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361585)

Have you heard that Steve Jobs died of ass cancer, and that the Apple fanbois have latched onto Woz as their new savior, evidenced by this very article, and posts like yours?

Well, now you have.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (1, Informative)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 3 months ago | (#47361719)

Jobs died of pancreatic cancer, not anal cancer. Mock him correctly, please. For example, you could remind everyone that he might still be around had he accepted some real treatment from actual doctors as soon as the cancer was diagnosed, rather than delayed for nine months trying some 'alternative medicine' nonsense - he went through several diets, accupuncture, herbal cures and some sort of enema-based detox regime before finally admitting that the cancer wasn't getting better and going for surgery - by which time it was too late.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (4, Insightful)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 3 months ago | (#47362213)

This demonstrates the fact that people who are very smart in one area can mistake themselves for experts in an unrelated area where they're totally incompetent. Jobs over-estimation of his own abilities wound up killing him when he confidently went for fantasy-based fake medicine due to his total lack of expertise regarding medicine.

Re: Did the editor know...this is Google/Android t (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362533)

Although i like a good rant as much as the next nerd, facts are appreciated even more. Jobs lived way past the usual cut+poison expectations and you could easily attribute that to his lifestyle improvements. Conventional treatments for Jobs' cancer are no better than placebo and come with a lot of pain.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (5, Informative)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 3 months ago | (#47362065)

Wozniak is still an Apple employee with a salary of $120k/year and he still has a bunch of stock. I doubt he has much if any involvement in Apple operations, but saying "he has nothing to do with the company" is not true.

You are correct that he calls them like he sees them, regardless of brand. I generally love Samsung and have owned a bunch of their phones, but the Gear has no interest for me for exactly the reasons Woz states.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (0)

christurkel (520220) | about 3 months ago | (#47362181)

Did you get the newsletter that Woz is still an Apple employee with an annual stipend of $120,000 andhe still owns shares in the company?

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362397)

Did you get the newsletter that Woz is still an Apple employee with an annual stipend of $120,000 andhe still owns shares in the company?

Having an employee # and a paycheck would be valid points.

Being a shareholder doesn't mean shit, other than he's just like me and a few other million people who are also invested in a public company.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (2)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 3 months ago | (#47361501)

Apple co-founder..."Galaxy Gear...worthless"

Well, "Apple co-founder buys Galaxy Gear watch" was news that made the Samsungphiles happy, so surely when the same Apple co-founder says the watch is worthless, that's just as newsworthy.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (2)

MozeeToby (1163751) | about 3 months ago | (#47361505)

I won't delve into the details, I'll just say that calling Woz an "Apple insider" is both misguided and unfair. He hasn't been part of the company in almost 3 decades and has many valid criticisms of the company and Jobs in particular.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361539)

Because he's had a history of being critical of Apple as well and does truly come across as non-biased. I read that old Jobs would get on his case about bad publicity for Apples new nick knack. If he always said everything Apple made was great, I'd agree with you, but he's regularly one of their harshest critics.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362103)

i'd expect that you'd not be so easily confused by Google and Samsung.

Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (1, Troll)

icebike (68054) | about 3 months ago | (#47362543)

>> Apple co-founder..."Galaxy Gear...worthless"

Hmmm...I read that as "Apple insider says Google device bad." And...you were expecting?

Wos has used and praised lots of different Android gear.

Still there is something fishy about the whole story.

Multi-billionaire takes the time to sell something on ebay? Really? REALLY?
Even having one of his "people" do that would never pay for itself.
Why would he not just flip it into the trash, or give it to some kid, or donate it
to some museum with a signed letter of gifting, which would quickly raise its worth by a factor of 10 or 100.

He says its worthless, and then proves it isn't, and pockets the money? Really?
The whole story seems unbelievable.

Agreed. (3, Informative)

Lumpy (12016) | about 3 months ago | (#47361413)

I did the same, except I returned to ti Best Buy and got a Pebble instead.

Works a LOT better for what a smart watch is good for, critical Information display.

Re:Agreed. (1, Interesting)

Begemot (38841) | about 3 months ago | (#47361851)

critical information?

How many of us really get critical information?

No text or email crap I'm getting is critical. My wife and the kids can call my mobile.

I don't get the point (1)

sjbe (173966) | about 3 months ago | (#47362301)

Works a LOT better for what a smart watch is good for, critical Information display.

See that's the problem I have with watches generally. 99% of the time they provide me no information that I critically need that I cannot get from my surroundings or my smartphone. I don't need a clock to be available to me at the flip of a wrist except very rarely. My day is not scheduled that tightly and there almost always are at least 2 clocks within eye shot anywhere I usually go. Occasionally they are useful for things like flight navigation or diving where knowing the time immediately is really critical but that's rare for most of us. The most common use is for competitive running where time obviously matters. Furthermore I find wearing one uncomfortable. I don't like them bouncing around on my wrist and if I make it tight enough to avoid that it digs into my skin pretty good which is also uncomfortable.

The only thing I can think of a "smart watch" being useful for in my life would be basically what I could use a fitbit for right now. I really just don't see the point of them.

watches? (-1, Troll)

iggymanz (596061) | about 3 months ago | (#47361423)

people still wear those silly bracelets with clocks on them? why?

Re:watches? (1, Informative)

retchdog (1319261) | about 3 months ago | (#47361485)

they're convenient and unobtrusive, especially at the movies or at dinner with other people. they also look nice; yes, this matters.

Re: watches? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361489)

Because wearing an expensive one helps you get the ladies. Not that you'd know that from living in Mommy's basement.

Re: watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362499)

Maybe if you moved out of Mommy's basement and got married, you wouldn't need to "get the ladies".

Re:watches? (2)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361507)

Convenience. It takes me a second or so to read my watch whereas it takes probably 15 seconds total to take my phone out of my pocket, wake the screen up, tell the time and then put the phone back in my pocket. What's more, a typical wrist watch will keep time for the better part of a decade with a single charge.

Good luck finding a phone that keeps a charge that long.

Re:watches? (0)

MightyYar (622222) | about 3 months ago | (#47361543)

To tell the time?

Re:watches? (0)

iggymanz (596061) | about 3 months ago | (#47361621)

my cell phone does that, don't need a second clock strapped to my wrist, how l 19th and 20th century.

First wristwatch was in 1868, the last one needed was over 20 years ago.

even more clocks are everywhere now, on system desktop, on the land line phone, on my printer.....

Re:watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361705)

So watches are obsolete, but land lines and desktop printers aren't? okay dude.

Re:watches? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 3 months ago | (#47362431)

that's right, VOIP phones we call land line, quite common in offices these days.

printing a requirement of the industry I'm in, bet that's because of the watch wearers

Re:watches? (1, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about 3 months ago | (#47361823)

In an office environment, sure, a wristwatch is superfluous. Doing anything even remotely active, you don't necessarily have your cell phone in a handy spot: jogging, biking, swimming, sailing, fishing, etc. You also can snag a quick look at your watch without getting caught - much harder to do with a smartphone, and much less socially awkward. Smart phones sometimes die - I don't always get a full day out of my battery, but a watch will run essentially forever. Smart phones aren't very durable, even with protective cases - so if you are doing something where the smart phone might get wet or subject to impact, it isn't really an option. Smart phones also aren't very pretty. You can deck them out with fancy cases, but at the end of the day a shiny piece of functional jewelry is still nicer aesthetically. People would probably wear something on their wrist even without the time-telling feature - that is sort of a bonus.

Wristwatches are generally anachronistic (1)

sjbe (173966) | about 3 months ago | (#47362419)

Doing anything even remotely active, you don't necessarily have your cell phone in a handy spot: jogging, biking, swimming, sailing, fishing, etc.

Why would I actually need a wristwatch for any of those activities? Competitive running or navigation on a sailboat out of sight of land maybe but fishing? I don't know where you fish but I don't really want to know the time when I go fishing. The whole point is to not worry about it. My philosophy on fishing is that if you need to bait the hook you are missing the point.

The ONLY thing I can think of that a watch makes sense for is if you need to carry some sensors in a compact way ala fitbit or if you are doing some very niche activities where knowing the time immediately is critical. Otherwise they are simply redundant.

You also can snag a quick look at your watch without getting caught - much harder to do with a smartphone, and much less socially awkward.

As opposed to looking at one of the several clocks that is almost always in view? Hell I have 3 on the dashboard of my truck put there by the manufacturer. As I type this I have 2 on my monitor, one on my smartphone, one on the wall and there is another just around the corner. I cannot fathom why I would bother lugging around yet another redundant device.

Smart phones also aren't very pretty.

Neither are most watches that are actually affordable. Personally I don't really like to brag about the size of my bank account via jewelry but that's just me.

People would probably wear something on their wrist even without the time-telling feature - that is sort of a bonus.

Women maybe. Not most men in this country.

Re:watches? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 3 months ago | (#47362497)

sure, great for some sports and some jobs too. part of the gear. can't see the sense for most people though

funny, the boats I've been on for fishing on Lake Michigan had clocks. and gps, etc.

Re:watches? (1)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 3 months ago | (#47362239)

It turns out that you're way behind the times iggymanz, so it's hilariously ironic that you're talking about watches being part of the past.

Re:watches? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 3 months ago | (#47362357)

they are, no practical need for them in most cases. male jewelry with a timepiece, that's what you're wearing

Re:watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362535)

my cell phone does that, don't need a second clock strapped to my wrist, how l 19th and 20th century.

First wristwatch was in 1868, the last one needed was over 20 years ago.

even more clocks are everywhere now, on system desktop, on the land line phone, on my printer.....

Do you bitch at people who wear belts, too? Surely elastic waistbands are good enough for _anybody_ and that shit has been around for, like ever! Not to mention the tendency of _some_ of us to occasionally venture away from a system desktop, a phone handset, or _gasp_ even a printer and still want to know what time it is.

Re:watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361547)

people still wear those silly bracelets with clocks on them? why?

Useful statistics (such as knowing what time it is) never go out of style. Neither does convenience, and I NEVER have to worry about my watch battery dying, as opposed to smartphones that require constant juicing.

And ironically enough, that "silly bracelet" design you mock so much IS your next-gen smartphone format, so keep on mocking. Perhaps you will be one of the last idiots still digging their watch out of their pocket.

Re:watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361557)

Because in certain jobs an accurate watch is worth a hell of a lot more than a cellphone, such as the marine industry. I have my smartphone and a watch. I look at the watch probably every 5 min on average in my job. Wouldn't want to be pulling my phone out of my pocket to do the same.

Re:watches? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 3 months ago | (#47361695)

yes, I'll agree some jobs require gear to do efficiently. I once had a job where it was beneficial to have gerber multi-tool in a holster, however if most people did that they would just be wearing jewelry.

Re:watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361573)

So YOU"RE the Area Man [theonion.com] .

Re:watches? (1)

jon3k (691256) | about 3 months ago | (#47362115)

Because they are pieces of art. The combination of form, function and movement is inherently beautiful.

Re:watches? (1)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 3 months ago | (#47362231)

For mine, I wear it because it tracks my heartbeat, perspiration, body temp, and activity. Do you have an alternative to a watch that can do all these things?

Re:watches? (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 3 months ago | (#47362597)

so you wear a collection of biometric transducers that also includes a time display. cool.

Re:watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362339)

I bet you don't own a TV either.

All smart watches suck (1, Interesting)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about 3 months ago | (#47361449)

If you aren't happy with the current features of a smart watches then sit down and make your own, that's what I did, so instead of complaining I just solved my own issue.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

Arkh89 (2870391) | about 3 months ago | (#47361523)

Or wait for the one from Microsoft...

// insert laughs here

Re:All smart watches suck (3, Funny)

Jesus_666 (702802) | about 3 months ago | (#47361669)

It'd probably have a 5" display, quadrophonic sound and an octacore CPU and run an unmodified Windows RT. Due to weight concerns most of the battery had to be sacrificed, limiting its life to an etimated fifteen minutes - but no other smartwatch has both Office and HDMI and you can always use the USB port to hook it up to an external power source if you want to use it on the go. You see, Microsoft gets mobile devices.

Or they decide they actually want to make money and release a generic Android-based smartwatch. Their Nokia arm doesn't seem too hung up about reinforcing the Windows hegemony if it gets in the way of business.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about 3 months ago | (#47361783)

So true, if Microsoft actually makes a watch it will be train wreck. They have no concept on slim, power saving designs.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362269)

The smart watch they're talking about releasing looks really good and is supposed to work with platforms other than Windows. Don't limit yourself to information from sites with hate and ignorance problems like this one, and you might learn something.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

suprcvic (684521) | about 3 months ago | (#47361991)

Because, you know, everybody is an engineer.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about 3 months ago | (#47362119)

You don't have to be an engineer to build a basic circuit, or write simple software.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

suprcvic (684521) | about 3 months ago | (#47362399)

No, but I own a small shop with a couple of rental computers and I'm seeing more and more (young) people who don't even know access the web on anything other than their smart phone let alone write software and build a circuit.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about 3 months ago | (#47362469)

Fair enough but I don't think comparing electronically illiterate kids to engineers in fair. This actually backs on to the lack of quality of the school system but I'm going to not even touch that one.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

Nyder (754090) | about 3 months ago | (#47362005)

If you aren't happy with the current features of a smart watches then sit down and make your own, that's what I did, so instead of complaining I just solved my own issue.

I just strap my cellphone onto my wrist.

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 3 months ago | (#47362095)

If you aren't happy with the current features of a smart watches then sit down and make your own, that's what I did, so instead of complaining I just solved my own issue.

That's what I did too, years ago! ... but it really weighs heavily on my neck.

Thanks fans! -- Flava Flav

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

jon3k (691256) | about 3 months ago | (#47362131)

I'd love to see this...

Re:All smart watches suck (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about 3 months ago | (#47362217)

I'd be happy to send you the layout, I'm open sourcing it when I'm done.

hero worship (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361459)

"...but just imagine being the one who bought Woz's used Gear---do you think they know?" ... Who cares? Hero worship of a CTO of a tech company known for it's patent trolling and walled gardens... what is the world coming to? It's not like "The Woz" is comparable to say Ghandi or Mother Theresa or FDR or someone of important. He just made flashy smartphones.

Re:hero worship (1)

SecurityGuy (217807) | about 3 months ago | (#47362155)

Woz gets way more hero worship than I understand, but he left Apple WAY before they made flashy smartphones. Like 20 years before in the Apple II/Macintosh days.

Re:hero worship (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362483)

Woz has zero to with any of that: patent trolling and walled gardens.

OMG WOZ TOUCHED IT. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361497)

"So maybe the watch sucked, but just imagine being the one who bought Woz's used Gear---do you think they know?"

I am guessing we just need to be on the lookout for someone with a 24/7 erection and a sweaty useless smart watch.

Re:OMG WOZ TOUCHED IT. (2)

NixieBunny (859050) | about 3 months ago | (#47362069)

I'm the guy who supplies Woz with his Nixie tube watches. I've had to repair a few of them after too many Segway polo matches. They get just as crusty as anyone else's watch.

I briefly thought about selling the broken parts on eBay, but it seemed a bit too squicky. Although you know the auction would end up on Reddit.

This should interesting. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361515)


Most nerds love Woz but now he's chewing out an Android device.
Popcorn ready!

Lines to purchase new Apple products. (1)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 3 months ago | (#47361525)

Seriously? He cannot get Apple to send him preview builds of their hardware?

Re:Lines to purchase new Apple products. (2, Insightful)

FlyHelicopters (1540845) | about 3 months ago | (#47361671)

Apple does I'm sure... he is still a full time paid employee of Apple, receiving about $120K a year.

He doesn't actually do anything there, he just gets paid... well, because... :)

Woz likes to stand in line with everyone else and buy them because it makes him feel normal. He doesn't have Job's ego, and for that, I applaud him.

Re:Lines to purchase new Apple products. (0)

wisnoskij (1206448) | about 3 months ago | (#47361761)

Standing in line for an Ipad 8.5, while you have a box of unopened ones back at your mansion is not normal. It is just a way of looking for applause from the plebs.

Re:Lines to purchase new Apple products. (2)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 3 months ago | (#47362353)

> It is just a way of looking for applause from the plebs.

That's extremely cynical. Maybe you should talk to your therapist about your negativity, you might get more out of life if you were a less bitter person.

It's more likely that he just likes to spend time in line with tech enthusiasts.

Re:Lines to purchase new Apple products. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362081)

Apple does I'm sure... he is still a full time paid employee of Apple, receiving about $120K a year.

He doesn't actually do anything there, he just gets paid... well, because... :)

Woz likes to stand in line with everyone else and buy them because it makes him feel normal. He doesn't have Job's ego, and for that, I applaud him.

Doesn't have Job's ego? Er, sitting around collecting $120K/year to do basically nothing? Well, I suppose one could argue narcissistic over egotistical...

Re:Lines to purchase new Apple products. (2)

baKanale (830108) | about 3 months ago | (#47362331)

So you're telling me that if somebody gave you a $120,000 yearly salary in return for doing absolutely nothing (or, to look at it another way, whatever you damn well please) you would turn them down? Because only a narcissist would take the money? "Oh, I'm sorry, I'm not a narcissist. I only accept gifts of rainbows, sunshine, and feelgood vibes."

Re:Lines to purchase new Apple products. (1)

Cabriel (803429) | about 3 months ago | (#47362351)

Besides, what better way to make sure you know what the consumers are experiencing by making sure your gear (no pun) is acquired from the same place?

If Apple (or any company) gave him special supplies, maybe they might deliberately make his item somehow superior (whether through special hardware or software options or optimizations that aren't available for the general public)?

Woz is 1000% right... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361551)

Smartwatches are an answer to a problem that simply doesn't exist. Hence they all fail.
This will be true for all brands including Apple.

Galaxy Gear. Not worthless. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361595)

I had Null ROM up & running on my Galaxy Gear in less than half a day and I've been quite amused playing with it. Null probably wasn't available yet when he bought his.

While I don't find the argument for a smartwatch to be compelling, I do enjoy the convenience of reading text messages with the flick of my wrist, and, paired with my Moto X, I use voice commands to wake the phone up while it sits in my pocket, tell it who to dial, and then I can speak to someone Dick Tracy-like. The best Bluetooth hands-free (like the best camera) is the one you have with you and in place to use quickly & easily.

Consumers are fickle (3, Insightful)

Iniamyen (2440798) | about 3 months ago | (#47361675)

Wasn't it only a year or two ago about how we were congratulating ourselves on not having to wear watches, because hey, everyone's got a smart phone and you can just check the time on that.

I don't wear a watch day-to-day. When I do wear one, it's with a suit as a fashion accessory. And I seriously doubt smart watches will ever look classy. Flashy, yes. Classy, no.

It's pretty amazing how short the average consumer's attention span is. I guess I can't blame companies for gettin' while the gettin's good.

Re:Consumers are fickle (2)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 3 months ago | (#47362395)

>Wasn't it only a year or two ago about how we were congratulating ourselves on not having to wear watches, >because hey, everyone's got a smart phone and you can just check the time on that.

That was obviously short-sighted and just plain dumb. And I say that as someone who made that very claim. I just didn't anticipate all the health tracking and messaging functionality that would become available in watches.

>I don't wear a watch day-to-day. When I do wear one, it's with a suit as a fashion accessory. And I seriously doubt smart watches will ever look classy. Flashy, yes. Classy, no.

Smarter people don't really care about a watch looking "classy" since that's just a euphemism for an embarrassing show of wealth. We want functionality that will enhance our lives.

Showing off (1)

sjbe (173966) | about 3 months ago | (#47362501)

And I seriously doubt smart watches will ever look classy.

See I think watches either look anachronistic or make you look like a showoff in most cases. There are a few niche use cases for wearing one but I really don't see the point most of the time. If the watch is expensive enough to be bling (read Rolex) then it isn't really for function - it's jewelry. Whatever function it serves is incidental to its real function of showing off. If the watch is cheap enough to be practical for uses other than showing then there no longer is a point to wearing it most of the time.

It really is worthless. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361713)

This is a guy with a nixie tube watch.

http://static.iphonelife.com/sites/iphonelife.com/files/resize/u31369/WozWatch-695x463.jpg

He should use... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47361737)

...any form of iCrap lately...useless

Woz is not that smart (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#47362257)

It probably would have been easier and gotten him a better deal if he just returned it. For a genius the guy lacks some common sense.

Salesmanship (2)

necro81 (917438) | about 3 months ago | (#47362619)

By far, the Samsung Galaxy Gear, which The Woz says he sold on eBay after half a day's use. "It was so worthless and did so little that was convenient,"

Well jeeze, Woz, with salesmanship like that, I'm surprised you managed to sell it at all!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>