Disadvantages of iWatch, Essay Example

In the contemporary information society, technology became a crucial element of our everyday life. Like never before, people are driven by technologies and their constant upgrade. With each stage of technological advancement, modernisation of applications and devices becomes faster and more sophisticated. In this regard, previously ordinary purchase of new technological marvels turns into sales campaign of anticipation and pre-sale booking of purchases in advance in order to have a new device before anyone else. The convenience that communication devices were meant to provide turned into fashion and another way of demonstrating success and popularity. The long-anticipated release of Apple iWatch is not an exception from this trend but rather its confirmation. The main aim of this essay is to demonstrate arguments suggesting that this piece of technology should be used, and is actually of little essential relevance for a user.

The proponents of the iWatch often argue that it is a next step in communication technologies, and it is aimed at improving the convenience of one’s life (Dreyer and White 65). In this regard, the primary problem is that except for being Apple’s new marvel the watch is not such an exceptional technology. Although it has numerous apps and distinctive features like warning its owner if he watches TV more than two hours and vibrates to suggest that stretching is required, these characteristics are not revolutionary for one’s lifestyle. In fact, although these features are installed into the iWatch, it does not necessity change one’s behaviour or guarantee that a user is going to use it at all (Calo 1014).

One of the crucial disadvantages of the iWatch is that it is not independent in use. It can only function in combination with iPhone and the framework of Apple ecosystem (Mishra). In this case, the purchase of iWatch for its own technological characteristics is virtually impossible. It works only with iPhone, and it is aimed at making the experience from using iPhone even more impressive. Furthermore, it can be used with other Apple gadgets like Apple’s Smart TV and in order to control other devices (Dreyer and White 87). The problem is that all these devices are created to function in system, so that if the customer buys a single product, in order to get further improvement or another feature, he has to buy another product exactly from Apple, since the initial device will not be compatible with the Apple platform. In other words, one’s freedom of choice in the variety of information technologies becomes limited to a single choice because of technological reasons rather than personal preferences (Dreyer and White 93). In other words, the process of manipulation of freedom of choice occurs.

Another argument against purchasing and using this device is that only because it is said to be advanced and upgraded, it does not necessarily meet that it is upgraded that way. Apple is being famous of the history of altering upgrades through psychological means rather than technological ones. For instance:

“Researchers showed how an “upgrade” to the Apple operating system changed the appearance of the download progress bar to create the impression that downloading was occurring more quickly. Similarly, faced with complaints about cell service coverage in a  previous version of the popular iPhone, Apple reportedly changed the size of the signal bars so that one bar of coverage in the new interface appeared similar in overall size to two bars in the old one” (Calo 1006).

Thus, one again the very notion of upgrade and improvement is a very vague and arguable issue. The same is the case with the new devices that are aimed to create a new experience. The notion of experience and it characteristic of novelty are very vague notions and depend on an individual perception and previous experience of using various devices both of Apple and other brands.

Another argument of proponents of this device is that it has distinctive features for controlling one’s health. In this regard, iWatch includes such features is checking one’s heart rate, blood pressure, calculating calories and sending notifications whether one’s lifestyle is being active or lazy one. In this regard, scientists unite with doctors suggesting that constant use of these features could accumulate relevant long-term data about one’s health. It is argued:

“experience with these mobile and health technologies is early, yet we are catalysing a multidimensional and relational collaborative care ecosystem; we are giving engaging patients, caregivers, and families as equal partners within the care team, at not only the health home but also where they work and live” (Sengstack and Boicey 380).

This argument suggests that there is nothing new in the use of healthcare apps in the medical practice, which means that widely advertised healthcare apps of iWatch are quite ordinary and are already functional on other devices (Mishra). Another aspect in this case is the accuracy of that information and the constancy of its receiving. In other words, there is no one to monitor which other factors can affect the received data and how accurately it can be transferred. Thus, still traditional medical devices aimed at received health data are more accurate and trustworthy (Sengstack and Boicey 387).

Another argument against this iWatch is that although it has access to numerous applications they are particular features by their connection to Apple instead of being diversified by one’s preferences. In this regard, one’s freedom of choice and individual preferences are being limited by what Apple considers to be the most relevant and applications that stimulate Apple ecosystem. In the academic context, this phenomenon of promoting one content over the other is one of the aspects of market manipulations. It is stated:

“After all, the digital content giant Apple does not travel to a website the consumer designed from scratch to sell music. In their discussion of market manipulation, Hanson and Kysar at one point refer to the resources firms pour into “atmospherics,” meaning the layout and representation of retail space” (Calo 1004).

Strictly from a technological point of view, the battery life of iWatch is very short. In this regard, users will have to charge iWatch batteries on a daily basis. It will have to be recharged every night for the ordinary use, and even longer for the sports purposes and health care tracking (Mishra). Thus, this is a great disadvantage especially since there are such devices like Pebble that can function for a week without a recharge. Another technological minus is that the camera is located in such a way that when the iWatch is on charging or not on one’s wrist, it land on the lens, which can destroy its long-term functionality and damage advantageous precision.

Overall, from all mentioned above it can be concluded that the purchase of iWatch irrespective of its advertised benefits and seemingly advantageous characteristics is a waste of money. iWatch just as many devices of  Apple are aimed at tying customers to Apple brand and its ecosystem. It does not feature any incredible novelties. It is one of those devices that even the most advanced technology geek can live without.

Works Cited

Calo, R. “Digital Market Manipulations.” The George Washington Law Review, 82.4(2014): 995-1051. Print.

Dreyer,A. and White, K. Managing Apple devices: Deploying and Maintaining iOS 7 and OS X Mavericks Devices. New York, NY: Peachpit Press.

Mishra, A. What are the pros and cons of Apple iWatch? Techrasta, 1 Mar. 2015. Web. 20 Apr. 2015.

Sengstack, P. and Boicey, C. Mastering Informatics: A Healthcare Handbook for Success. Indianapolis, IN: Sigma Theta Tau International. 2015. Print.