$12.80, and a million have already shipped
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Xiaom...months_id63386

Near the same but in sterling if you want to buy one. I'd suggest dx.com

Like I mentioned about chip prices, Xiaomi will still make a decent profit, the gubbins now getting about as simple as a 99p watch.

Well the RRP is normally 35USD down to 20 (according to Xiaomi’s own website). Available from Amazon for 20GBP which is pretty good value, but still not $10.

Nope, usual lies, rrp is £8. If it stays as is then that will be £10 inc vat. U sure that was their web site.www.mi.com/en/miband#10
Neatly presented, cannot find any price/rise

3rd party Amazon sellers? I'd rather use a reputable official seller at a 3rd less

[quote=zapod;76753268........but still not $10.[/QUOTE]
Got announced at $13.

No one in their right mind pays rrp. Hoever this looks an exception

Its true - three names. I suppose that means the iPod actually as 68 names given all the variations over the tears.

With the watch, its just a hard sell really. Its difficult to get much on a screen that size, and its difficult to come up with something that looks nice on the wrist whilst at the same time having to have a screen which is big enough to be useful.

I've used the phone quite a lot for tracking and exercise, but I'm thinking of getting one of the new fitbit trackers rather than a smart watch.

What watches are these? My watches dont need winding everyday.

Moto 360 and Android wear reporting is unmothballed by Ars, (like many, the tone is anti Google)

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/...other-watches/

"No wearable is going to hit iPhone-level (or even iPad- or Mac-level) sales right out of the gate, but these figures tell us what "success" looks like for a smartwatch."

I always think that saying what you disagree with, and why, would be more constructive than dismissing something as "anti" this or "anti" that.

I have done a couple of times.

Their 360 review headline was 'Beautiful Outside, Ugly Inside'.
It was the headline writers who really zoomed in on battery life.
Yet, it was only the media who found the battery life inadequate. The vast majority get 1 day life, 1.5 days looking an average.

That onslaught about the battery was fun while it lasted.

I think the Guardian outdid Ars. As well as the 'woeful battery' , they added a 'Flat-tyre screen'.

It is a pretty pointless article to be honest.

Comparing smartwatches to phones is like comparing cars to the space shuttle...

High end mechanical hand wound swiss watches will certainly cost thousands.

I have an Omega Speedmaster professional ( the watch they took to the moon ) which needs to be hand wound.

Only just seen this post.

I currently own a number of vintage IWC which are all mechanical wound watches. In fairness, everyday is a little inaccurate because I think they would last about a day and half if fully wound.

One interesting thing I noticed about that Moto 360 was the fact that it came with bog standard wireless charging.
Obviously,you just plonking the thing on the bedside table at night.There is nothing to do, if you just have the wireless charger left on.

That would at least put some balance in the reviewers' preferred headline of 'another failed watch'. Apple will have their own Qi proprietary charging system because proprietary is what they do.

It is going to be interesting how they go about comparing the Apple watch to the market and fashion leaders.

i cannot work out why you are being so selective with the reviews you reference. There are loads of good reviews in the press so I'm really struggling to understand what agenda you have.

So link to one.

If you google "moto 360 review" every result on the first page has a good reviews.

Now, how many reviews can you link to the has the headline "another failed watch"

I do not quite see the point you to this device

Apple have the solution to the low lifespan.
They seem to want their screen to be turned on for only 10 seconds at a time.
http://www.theguardian.com/technolog...developers-say

A heck of a bit different from Smartwatch 3, the 100% on watch and still gets 2 days use.
That one is £170, I think.

Apple users are used to be bossed around, so it will be okay It does not have to be on when nobody's looking, but it looks like 70s and LED watches are back.

Consumers need retraining about the iWatch.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...-10082483.html

The Apple Watch can’t connect to the internet. Instead, it connects to the iPhone, borrowing its connection to serve up its notifications and information.

Well, that sounds like an iPod to me but obviously I'm not quite suited to the retraining.
Some people even use the Nano as a smartwatch so really this is like a massively updated iPod Nano, but obviously without the music.

It must have been tricky to take that photo of the model with the iWatch when you only have 10 seconds with the display on.

Those photos are so bad I can't help but think we are due a more pleasant surprise on launch day. Press releases do take more than 10 seconds of thinking time though that one begs to differ.


If they have played down the battery life, a transflective display option would go down a treat too. Maybe they simply want to quantify sales better before iWatch 2 or 3 heads that way.

It's amazing how much gets written out there about a device where few details have been provided, let alone confirmed.

For example according to some sources out there apparently it does have some music capability and even bluetooth headset connectivity. I'm guessing it has very little capacity so maybe acts more of a buffer. Anyway we'll find out on Monday.

Yes, quick, before something terrible happens But it shows how people, that are not pulling somebody's leg, are paying attention to this iWatch.