A Unity ID allows you to buy and/or subscribe to Unity products and services, shop in the Asset Store and participate
in the Unity community.
Discussion in 'iOS and tvOS' started by fmarkus, Sep 9, 2014.
Will Unity be able to export to the Apple Watch?
We are 'looking into it'
in the meantime, you listen to some U2!
I'm just kidding. You don't have to do that.
It's just an hour ago. lol
There is going to be a gold rush and I want to be in it.
lol its pretty lame
what time is it? BUT DON'T LOOK AT YOUR PHONE TO TELL YOU!... use that spiffy thing called a watch.
.. you have got to be kidding me. pathetic.
The watch that requires a smartphone...................and it starts at $350...
Are people really too lazy to use their smartphone that they need this extra mini screen tethered to your wrist?
Gonna flop, big time..
wooooww i didnt even know it was that lame... i was thinking it was as good as a smartphone on your watch... which is dumb cause i want a bigger screen if anything...
now... thats just stuuuppiidd... i hope it flops... i hope people arent that stupid lol
The Watch is like a really expensive, extremely tiny remote display for an iPhone. Remote in the arm's length sense. I'm not sure the intent is to even allow apps ON the watch, only iPhone apps which communicate with it.
that already exists doesnt it? , just not made by apple...
Yeah, honestly not seeing it take off. Perhaps if they were able to make it separate from the iPhone, people would care about it, but the fact thats its dependent on the iPhone – just don't see how it warrants any attention. And its bulky, who wants to show off something so bulky to the public? Doesn't really make sense. But we'll see what happens, people said the same thing about the iPhone and the iPad (even the internet a long time ago!) But this watch is really pushing it...
So wait, does the watch require an iPhone to function? What specific functionality has that dependency?
It's a glorified bluetooth accessory, like most "smart" watches.
The OS design looks terribly fiddly, they should have stuck to some design principles, anything would have done like simplicity and useability rather than allowing them to use quick API test demos for the finished apps and functionality. Static quadrants at most on a screen that size, and only flicks and touches, no panning or tiny moving buttons. To be honest it feels like Apple & Motorola have switched places. But maybe it's great in person and not a CASIO.
One thing you have to wonder, if the apps are more persistent and the battery life is a lot less, resource management, minimizing code and CPU/GPU (if there is one) overhead is going to be a major priority, third party solutions such as Unity may have a hard time there.
Honestly, it looks horrible. The Moto 360 is stylish and has a nice feature set as well. Apple isnt really revolutionizing with this watch... so why even jump in the market when there are many products better?
EDIT: And cheaper?!
Yes, it requires an iPhone 5 or up.
The watch gets nearly all of its information (internet, gps, etc) via bluetooth from the phone, so it wouldn't be able to do much without one.
Wow, that's an epic fail
I would still prefer a Rolex
This puzzles me too. I mean, I get that much like smartphones aren't used like traditional phones before them, this probably won't be used like a traditional watch. But... the advent of everyone carrying around a mobile phone killed watches as anything but a fashion accessory. And now it's phones that are trying to bring it back...
I'll try to think of some use cases where the extra screen/input might be handy.
To be honest, I think it might be mostly just tighter integration between a person and their phone. I have a friend who used to joke that while we're not there yet, smartphones are one crude step in the direction of Deux Ex-style augmentations - they help us do a lot of things that we couldn't without them, they go with us everywhere, and they directly extend the ways we interact with the world and other people. The watch thing seems to be one more step in that same direction, as it gives you another, more subtle, more closely integrated way to interact (and be interacted with) via your phone.
Wow. This thread. Is amazing.
....ly full of crap.
You know, what I really want is a watch that lasts for 3 hours by running its own wifi, GPS, and LTE. That's useful.
Yes, it's a Bluetooth accessory. I like how you added "glorified" to it as if that somehow diminishes its value.
Isn't "revolutionizing"? So haptic feedback, that new touch chatting thing, heart rate, and motion sensors (that is, built-in Fitbit and then some) are what, chopped liver? I'm not saying that those features are going to be relevant to everyone, and if they aren't for you, then by all means don't factor them in when deciding whether to buy one. (As someone who bikes a lot, this device is a no brainer for me, but I'm not dense enough to believe that it's going to fit into everyone's life as well as it will mine.) But so many people are saying that it offers nothing new or has no features over a $200 AW device, and that's just bullshit.
There is nothing less predictable in the world than everyone in the world claiming that a new Apple device does nothing to change the industry right before it changes the industry. Go to the Wayback Machine on the day after the iPod, iPhone, and iPad announcements, and read the comments. Everyone poo-poohs every little feature of the new thing until it's released and the rest of the world loves the new thing. And each one has been bigger than the one before.
I've been watching Apple long enough to know when their tech and marketing are on point for a given gadget, and I will bet large amounts of money that this thing is going to sell like F***ing hotcakes. Even if I didn't want one myself (and I do), as a mobile game developer, that alone is worth a lot to me.
When I was growing up in the 80s, game watches were all the rage.
I had several.
I'd love to make game for a watch, just for the nostalgia.
I could imagine a little Tetris clone doing well on a watch. Or 2048!
But the best uses of Unity on a watch will be as an accessory to your main game. Especially if the SDK allows developers to create watch faces. Your RPG's character with all your gear, and his hands are the clock hands. The car from your racing game running in a circle around the clock, which looks like a racetrack. And on and on. For a creative developer, the possibilities are endless.
All those features already exist in competitors products. It's not that apple haven't come in to and won out in markets that are already flooded, the iPod and iPhone are great examples of that, but it's only when they've had serious or unique value proposition.
All of Samsung's Galaxy Gear stuff, the Pebble Steel, Motorola's various smart watches including the Moto360... the list goes on and on. They all have the same capabilities as the Apple Watch. HRM, motion sensors etc, the Moto even has the magnetic dock. What's worse is they have more, cameras, waterproofing, better design. The only new thing on there is the haptic feedback, which is when it comes down to it just a vibrational motor with a stepper instead of a standard DC motor that the other watches all, you guessed it, have. And they're all considerably cheaper.
Now I'm not saying that the Apple Watch wont be a success, I may even get one myself, it's a part of a pre-existing ecosystem. But it's also not something that's either above criticism or worthy of praise simply for existing and having an Apple logo.
Bro, Im sorry to break it to you but all these features already exist in my phone. It's not like putting in a watch is revolutionary cause that watch is the same exact thing as a phone. Yes hepatic feedback is cool and all but that isn't the main selling point anyways. Nothing new. The moto 360 looks better, probably has a longer battery life, does everything the Apple watch does and more, and its also cheaper. That apple watch looks like a mess and a waste of space.
But they do have a serious or unique value proposition. This thing natively integrates with iPhone. Technologically that's not a big deal, but practically it might mean that more people make more stuff for it. In other words, it might be able to reach the critical mass that competing products have so far failed to amass. You even touched on this yourself:
An ecosystem with many users, many developers and - currently - little or no fragmentation in the watch department.
Honestly, a lot of the naysaying here is based on features, which is missing the point. The point isn't the features of the device, it's how people use it.
I'm skeptical I'd ever wear a watch again but I have no doubt this will do much better than it's android counterparts. Walking around the office today heard at least 10 people say they were going to get one, anecdotal as it is Apple has a lot of clout in the gadget space.
Apple has never been the first to introduce something, iPod,iPhone, iPad, etc. But, when they do it's always like "Hey, this is what it's supposed to look like and this is how it fulfills a need." Everyone else follows suit after it makes a killing. They long ago became the R&D department for every other tech company in existence.
Yeah, there are obvious issues and problems, but I would not underestimate Apple. The tech in this device is way more interesting than anything I've seen from Samsung. It will be interesting to see if this is another major product that makes their past products obsolete.
The thing is going to end up like every apple product. The first release is missing a bunch of features then the following releases, they are going to release features that were supposed to be in the first model and they call it revolutionary. *ahem ipad ahem*
Yeah, people forget the iPhone was actually a pretty crappy phone, with poor reception. Still.... look what happened.
I'll be buying an iWatch for the health features alone. As someone in a primarily desk-based career (health is a concern), and whose primary phone happens to be an iPhone, it makes sense.
That said, the integration possibilities are quite interesting from a dev perspective - which is less about the Watch specifically and more about Continuity. Imagine playing a game on your Apple TV when your character gets a phone call - don't pop up a GUI box on-screen, send it to your iPhone. Minimap on your Watch. Watch vibrates when you walk into an electric force force field.
At the end of the day, it comes down to execution - if Apple has executed well and gets it into customers' hands, the potential is endless - if not, it's just another failure on the road to humans becoming cyborgs. Given Apple's track record though, these are exciting times.
My boss is going to love it, he hates to pullout his iphone for everything. He ripped his pocket once, I got him a belt clip on, complains about poking him in his fat gut. The watch will cut down atleast half if not more of his uses. He'll be able to quickly make/answer calls(hopefully with paired headset too) and quickly view his email/text.
Shouldn't be hard to convince him, hopefully I'll have a new toy to play around with soon. Sales guys will probably want them too for the same reasons.
So ignoring the important discussion of who's opinion is better than who's for second, answering the original question:
From day one, you should be able to extend the Xcode project generated by Unity to take advantage of the Watch Kit. And presumably Xcode will be shipping with a simulator soonish. If you're not interested in doing the integration yourself, you can bet that someone else will and that they will push that integration to the asset store.
I'm getting an Apple Watch, and I expect all of you to come up with some insane game mechanics that involve it, you have until early 2015.
I've had an LG G Watch with Android Wear for about a month now and I love it. I can only imagine that an Apple Watch is almost as good.
I guess people haven't read well enough about Android watches either, pretty much all of em need phone next to them (limited support) and for the referred Motorola 360 the battery lasts less than a day when you have more than basic stuff running . All these smart watches use BLE with phone because its not realistic to one have GPS, WIFI or 3G/4G on them.
And for the watch usage, I guess you people don't know how popular the activity bands are or how many people jog/run with their phone. Also it was said to be payment method among other stuff they showed. I'm not probably getting one for any phone but I can see several good use cases for them and would not call buyers stupid.
The screen is turned off all the time, which makes the watch absolutely useless...no one will see how "cool" your clock theme is or what your "desktop" watch background looks like, it will just be a black square ugly piece of sh*t, if the screen was turned on ALL the time it could be relevant, but the fact that the screen only activates when you lift up your wrist makes it useless.
I was expecting Apple to actually change the watch/wearable industry, turns out they are only playing catch up.
What are you talking about? you can see the screen when you actually look at it, works pretty much like in all of the others. Who they need to catch up? I haven't seen any watch yet that has screen on whole day and has decent feature set?
I don't think its even technically possible to do it without massive cost in battery life. You either dumb it down or use smart display behavior or manual activation like most watches out there.
The livestream kept cutting out for me, so I don't know if I missed something, but I believe the app interaction has limits. Notifications, etc.
I don't think you will be able to wave the watch around as a virtual joystick, with the digital crown as the fire button.
how much Koolaid do you need to drink to actually believe that?
Please guys, make sure you don't make any games for it if you don't like it. It will give the other ones more chances to cash on it.
I heard the same stuff when the Nintendo DS came out, the Wii, the iPhone, the iPad and so on. Software is what matters. The blend between software and hardware is what matters.
If you lack the vision to see the ways the Apple Watch can be used for games, then how are you making games?
Did someone say what time it is?
It's HAMMER TIME!
You guys need a more open mind, you're game developers, well supposed to be. I think some of you are whiny keyboard warriors with no other place to go. lol
Doing cardio is boring i think it will be easy to gamify the experience, making more of an audio experience then a visual one -- your not going to be looking at your watch while running.
Most of you bash the watch.
But I like it.
I think it's stylish and can be my another gold pot.
Pop culture is what important in our industry.
Make use of it.
Give the consumers what they want, not what you want.
p/s: Look at Beats. I don't even own one but I'm making money by selling it last time. :O
On second thought I'll admit I see more potential tie ins to everyday life than I had seen at first glance. Still, I'm extremely curious as to whether it will have the necessary popular aesthetic approval of the masses to really get it onto every person's wrist. Personally, I don't think they will quite be able to sway the majority just quite yet, but I have high hopes for the next generation. So far, every one of apple's second generation devices have been significantly better than their first and I would expect the same in regards to their watch.
I have similar thoughts. I'm going to pick up v1, but I'm not sure everyone will. I think it will make pretty good penetration into very particular parts of the market (e.g. fitness types). I suspect that it will be thinner, better, faster, stronger in v2, and will pick up a lot more steam then.
It cost more than $300.
It's not cheap, so people will brag about it.
It designed based on famous (though I don't know) Italian design.
It will be like wearing a designer handbag or shoe.
It will be another state of life status for the wearer.
And don't forget, Apple products have long been classified as "classy" products (for classy people).
And (this is obviously something of a stretch) if the Watch does actually encourage people to exercise more in their day to day lives, the people wearing the watch will be in better shape - it's like Apple is creating models to show off their new product! (I don't think there's actually going to be a noticeable impact of this, but it's kind of a funny thought.)
My money's on flop, or at least a niche for the total apple ecosystem people. I just do not understand why most people would want to carry more on them just to save some energy to avoid pulling out their phone all the time. Add in that it's one more device to recharge, and I don't imagine most people really finding it worth it in a month or two of use.
I like the idea here, but I don't think the default watch goals would be quite rigorous enough to create models . However, what we could hope for though is that the goals are set high enough that people begin to understand how awesome exercising can be and would stimulate these people to voluntarily raise the goals. In which case the watch could actually physically change people. If America's obesity rate begins to suddenly decline next year, we'll all know what happened!
I'm curious, where do you come from? This is perhaps the one reason I will be unlikely to pick one up as in wearing it – people will immediately know I have money to drop on extremely unnecessary things. Its mostly the reason why I haven't been able to convince myself to upgrade my iPad 2 as much as I want to – I get hate from my peers when I use it in public as it is. Maybe I'm simply letting others control my life too much or perhaps I come from one of the few places in the world where modesty is highly valued, but theres no way the social cost of wearing this watch would be worth the technological benefits.