Yeah, so that was a bummer.
I don't know about you, but with all the hype over the past year -- especially about Apple's health-related hires -- I expected, I don't know, something...innovative.
Instead, we got Jony Ive talking about watch bands.
Now, I'm sure that Apple is proud of its watch band design, but I have to tell you (as the son of a New York jeweler) that the watch industry has done watch bands. They discovered magnets a long time ago, they discovered quilted leather a long time ago, and they've made different sizes and clasps since, well, there were watches.
So what else did we get? I'm going to put it right out there: it's a thick, ugly clunker. If you put the Apple watch side-by-side with the Moto 360 or even the Samsung Gear, you'll notice a few things.
First, you'll notice that Apple's is blingier. Yes, there's even a 16ct gold version.
But then you'll notice that it sure seems like Apple's watch is thicker, and looks a lot like Apple stuck an iPhone 1 in the wash and it shrunk. There's a lot of curviness where there doesn't need to be, and a big, bulbous bottom where your wrist meets the phone.
This thing can't be all that comfortable to wear.
And then we get to the advanced biometric features we were expecting: zip. Oh, yeah, sure it can tell your heartbeat. But so can the Galaxy Gear, and by the time the Apple Watch ships, Samsung will be in its fifth or six generation of that technology.
So what else new-fangled stuff can the Apple watch do? It has some sort of weird tap-tech, so that if you and a "friend" both have the watch, you can send your heartbeat to your friend. Seriously. Not as medical data, but as taps on your friend's wrist.
Or, as the demo showed, if you want to go out to lunch, you can rub three little circles on the screen and your buddy will feel those three little circles rubbed on his or her wrist.
Does that sound creepy to you? Sure does to me. Besides, what ever happened to the age-old classic of texting "Lunch?" and getting back "Sure? Sushi?" Do we really need our co-workers electronically rubbing our wrists? I think not.
What about user interface? Did you see the launch screen that Apple showed? It's a screen filled with like 20 tiny, tiny circles representing apps. Imagine the typical iPhone app folder (you know, where the icons are so small you can't see them). Now imagine there's a lot more of them, they're on your screen, and you somehow have to get your big ol' adult-sized finger to choose the right one.
I'm telling you this: I ain't buyin' no watch where I have to use part of my pinky to launch apps. It just ain't happenin'.
So, what didn't we get? We didn't get a watch that gathers complex health biometrics automatically. We didn't get a watch that can track calorie intake. We didn't get a watch designed for helping to get a better night's sleep. We didn't even get a watch that can keep track of the number of reps done with that 40 pound dumbbell.
No. Instead, we got a watch Justin Bieber would wear.
When Apple showed the original iPhone, it was truly revolutionary. When Apple showed the original iPad, even though tablets had been done before, Apple's rendition changed the game with exceptional attention to feature and function.
Now that Apple has showed us their first watch, all I can think of is that someone sacrificed useful function to bling. Internet-based wrist-rubbing? Somehow, I can't see Steve Jobs allowing that.