Exponent Agree to Disagree -
I think Charlie makes a couple of good points.
Overall it seems that especially the jobsian Apple commentators might need to warm up to the idea that Apple is no longer able to provide the single great WHY each and every time. If we just assume that Apple themselves don’t know the why yet and that the presentation was primarily powered by a ‘googlian’ fascination with doable gimmicks it all just makes sense.
I don’t think that’s a problem for Apple though. The watch simply does not need this one, superawesome feature which answers some universal why to be attractive to consumers. Unlike an iPhone which usually comes with a contract and costs lets say 1,760 over a period of 24 months the watch has a total cost of 350 which is less than 50c per day over the same period. Hence the bar for the watch to become a no-brainer as accessory is actually pretty, pretty low; if it makes you feel good about yourself only once a day (draw and send a heart, feel the pulse, etc.) it’s probably already worth it for many people.
(just on a sidenote: The argument that people will be thoroughly confused and wrongly conditioned forever when finding out that an iPhone 5 or later is required is kinda outlandish as is the idea that people will not be able to understand that a future generation of watches might work standalone)