This makes the Amazon Fire Phone look like a good idea...<p>The amount of hurdles this needs to overcome to be purchased include:<p>-Willing to sign up for a cellular plan with AT&T<p>-Being Female and also thinking Intel is a fashionable company<p>-Willing to spend $500 on a fashion product from a company who mainly sells computer chips<p>-Find the design appealing, I have a strong hunch that this won't appeal to everyone from 13-90.<p>-Can stop in to one of these 2 "exclusive" stores to actually see what this thing is<p>-Accept the many limitations vs competitors (no voice input nor keyboard?)<p>-Actually believe this software/hardware will be upgraded ever again<p>-Willing to accept its lifespan is 2 years before you have to start paying a monthly fee to use it<p>Well, that's about the first quarter of my list but I've run out of time..
I... I'm confused but I just don't know. There's a bit more info on the product in the video (note, the comments for the video are disabled, which is telling) [1], but the use cases aren't very compelling. It provides slightly less functionality than other smart watches, but does so in a 'pretty' package (I admit I can't tell if people would find this aesthetically pleasing or not).<p>The device comes with AT&T mobile service "for free" with purchase and this might be a slightly more seamless experience for people (e.g. leave your phone at home). However... I don't know if people really would leave their phone at home unless they're out of the house for a brief time, like for a run.<p>I guess I get the philosophy: stop making smart watches look dorky, but I feel like the this goal is impossible because the phone has a display which feels... dorky.<p>Sidenote, what does the app development look like for this? Is someone like Yelp using specific internal resources to get the graphics to look right on the screen? Is the company just approving an app that someone else develops?<p>[1] <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr9vLoK0_w0" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr9vLoK0_w0</a>
Looks interesting except for:<p>"MICA is connected by AT&T’s mobile broadband network and includes two years of wireless service with the device purchase."<p>Well that's horrible. You need to pay for two cell phone bills with this? And you are locked in with AT&T?<p>(And did anyone else find "Opening Ceremony" to be a really confusing name? I initially thought, is that like some variation on designed by committee?)<p>Also, don't bracelets rotate? Won't the screen randomly be in different positions?
$500, Chunky looking bracelet that can barely go for a couple of days with its battery, tied to AT&T and no Health tracking to speak of.<p>This is a Clumsy attempt at differentiation - DOA.
Dear Intel: Stick to CPUs, GPUs, chipsets and NUCs. Pretty please. Unless of course you are counting on AMD for the next advance in processing - a bad idea at this point.<p>Easy talk aside it really is going to be tough for Intel to figure out the next.
So... some exec woke up and thought "we should be in the smartwatch business"? Then 1 000 engineers were mobilized, based on a whim, and built a product with no vision whatsoever.<p>Sounds like every big-corp "me-too" product.
That video was awkward as hell. I feel like creating these "me too" products makes these big companies seem weaker rather than stronger. Maybe there's some financial reason for doing it, but I don't get it.
I know a certain[1] art and design school that probably won't be too happy about the name of this clunky looking thing.<p>[1]<a href="http://www.mica.edu/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mica.edu/</a>
I'm calling DOA...<p>Maybe I'm biased but I feel like they're a little late to the party and this just isn't up to par. Too many restrictions, no ecosystem, weird design...
Beauty? I don't see any of that... unless these are sold at Claire's (yes, I do have daughters and I don't allow them in that junkyard).