One of many iWatch concepts.

Reuters is out with a report today that claims the iWatch is going into production this month for a launch in October. The device is reportedly expecting to hit 50 million units produced in its first year.

The source said Apple expects to ship 50 million units within the first year of the product’s release, although these types of initial estimates can be subject to change. The watch is currently in trial production at Quanta, which will be the main manufacturer, accounting for at least 70 percent of final assembly, the source said.

Seeing that Apple sold 71 million iPads in the entirety of 2013, 50 million units sounds aggressive. The site also shares some features that it has learned about the device:

Apple will introduce a smartwatch with a display that likely measures 2.5 inches diagonally and is slightly rectangular, one of the sources said. The source added that the watch face will protrude slightly from the band, creating an arched shape, and will feature a touch interface and wireless charging capabilities.

Many of these features, including the wireless charging and the beyond obvious touch interface, have been earlier reported. Additionally, the report says to expect that the device will have sensors capable of measuring a user’s pulse. We have been reporting since last year that Apple is working on a smart watch/fitness band that packs sensors such as a pulse reader.

The 2.5-inch screen size is interesting as that size is a large departure from the ~1.5-inch figures indicated in several iWatch-related reports from over the past year. That screen size is the same as the screen on the current-generation iPod nano, while the earlier rumored size is the same as the screen on the watch-like 6th-generation iPod nano.

The iWatch will ship alongside iOS 8 and around the same time as new iPhones, and iPads. We previously detailed how iOS 8 could play heavily into the feature-set of a wearable device. It is highly likely that the iWatch will integrate heavily into Apple’s new health-tracking software in iOS 8. 

A report from earlier this week claimed that Apple is having some production problems with the iWatch’s OLED display, but that the screen issues were likely to be resolved. That same report is expecting a price point of approximately $350, but some analysts have been predicting price points in the range closer to thousands of dollars. Apple has been rumored to be working on multiple iWatch sizes, but there have not been any recent indications of that.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

53 Responses to “Reuters: iWatch to hit in October with wireless charging, 2.5-inch screen, pulse sensor”

    • Eli Matar says:

      Thats the problem. The iWant now thinking. When we buy anything they make. I used to be like that, maybe I am still a little. But, don’t you think we make them feel too comfortable when they know that there is a huge group of loyal costumers who’d buy their product no matter what?
      Could this be the reason for the slow introduction of new technologies? Or rolling out unfinished product like Maps? Maybe they will capitalize slowly but surely on us who buy absolutely anything they introduce??


  1. Ross Gemuend says:

    Forgive my ignorance, but does wireless charging imply that one wouldn’t need to remove it from their wrist to charge it or simply that there would be a surface one could rest it on for charging?


  2. khaledzeidiyeh says:

    Who wants to charge a watch?!


  3. The depiction in this article is awful big for wrist jewelry or adornment. Unless the iWatch becomes the new fashion statement I can’t imagine people wanting to wear such an object on their wrists except during exercise.


    • Have you seen the people walking around with those contraptions on their face (Google Glass?) OK, so not really socially acceptable yet, but I see it occasionally being in such close proximity to Google.
      Back in 2006 People made fun of me for my huge phone (Windows Phone) that was a little smaller than the iPhone (but thicker) yet it did all of the smartphone things and more than the original iPhone (albeit iPhone had a 1000x better UI.) Today a Galaxy Note isn’t considered ridiculous anymore.

      My point (if I have one) is that if the utility is there, people will tolerate and even come to accept or like these new things. One reason people bag on smart watches is because they’re ugly and don’t to much yet. *IF* this is really THAT useful, people will give it a shot and 6 months later it won’t be considered a big ugly joke on the wrist.

      I don’t outright disagree with you. I’m just saying perceptions change when people find a use for something. How useful the “iWatch” is remains to be seen.


  4. david0296 says:

    “…but some analysts have been predicting price points in the range closer to thousands of dollars.”

    Apple isn’t going to price a consumer watch at $1,000. Whoever these analysts are, they aren’t very smart.


    • jrox16 says:



    • right? especially if theyre expecting them to sell 50 million+ in the first quarter. to me that would make me think it would be a lower-than-expected price.


    • prices may range from $360 and higherfor bigger models


    • Jason Piebes says:

      The entire “watch” thing is ridiculous. From the stories on pricing, to the screen types and sizes, to ideas of answering phone calls on their wrist, it’s clear the general tech-journo lacks any ability in critical thinking. It all started from the very first story when that half-wit decided to call the product a “watch”. From that point on, simply by suggesting a wrist watch, all predictions center around a traditional time telling piece with a face/screen in spite of all evidence pointing to something completely different.

      Perhaps tech journos don’t exercise and never played sports. Walk through a gym and take note how many people in there have a bulky watch on their wrist… Let’s take note on how many people wear a bulky watch, period.

      Trying to find credible, thoughtful, journalism in the tech industry is getting real difficult. I understand creating insightful and intelligent material is not easy, but filling empty space with junk like this is a real turn off.


  5. 2.5″ watch face? I have a pretty big wrist and that would be massive even on me. Doesn’t make sense.


    • jrox16 says:

      It might be 2.5″ rectangular like the iPod mentioned on the article. It’ll be curved along the length of the band. It won’t be a 2.5″ face square or round obviously, that would be silly. If the thing even exists…


      • I totally get that. I’m sure it could be possible, just in some way nobody has imagined yet. I just think it would be weird in that form factor. My wife has TINY wrists… like… guiness record small… and if this iPod nano sized screen would look big on a 6′ tall guys wrist, how would it sit on someone smaller in stature?

        Either way, I’m pumped to see what they come up with. It’s been, what, over a year of speculation at this point? After all the build up, it’ll almost be a disappointment if this thing isn’t a unicorn that vomits ice cream.


      • Also, I’m hoping it DOESN’T look like a “regular” watch because I have watches that I love to wear everyday, and I would look super crazy with a regular watch on each wrist haha.


    • frankman91 says:

      Agreed, something is off with that number. That is SUPER big. Even with no bezels….



  6. My predictions:
    It will be completely wirelessly charged, from a distance up to a meter (allowing you to sleep with the device charging on your wrist), there may also be kinetic charging. The display will look like this: ( ) and be curved to slightly wrap around the wrist. The entire display will be slightly arched off the wristband and act as the home button itself, or the lower half will depress slightly to act as the home button (think the trackpad button). The device will unlock not using a fingerprint, but an individual’s unique heartbeat.


  7. Sebastian Rasch says:

    Utter nonsense. It’s gonna be round or it’s gonna be a flop and 2,5” diameter is too big.


    • andreww500 says:

      Personally, I would probably rather it was not round unless they did some amazing UI design. Round screens just aren’t nearly as space efficient as square/rectangular screens.


      • Sebastian Rasch says:

        Absolutely, I agree with the efficiency and usability. It is possible though to make a good UI that works in round shape (see Motorola 360 for example). A round design resembles a real watch just so much more, it is a design you’re used to wear on your wrist and personally, I want something good looking on my wrist since a watch is something personal, an expression of style and taste, much more than a phone is.


  8. charismatron says:

    Regardless of the iWatch’s currentsize, in 20 years we’ll all have flexible iPads wrapped around our entire forearm and be loving every minute of it.


  9. Looks extraordinarily clunky. I can’t see Apple even considering anything like the illustrations. I certainly would’t wear it; my Nike FuelBand already gives me time and activity information and looks cool unlike these clunkers.


  10. It won’t have a $350 price point. Try somewhere between $199 and $299, especially if they plan to sell 50 million units.


  11. Alex Court says:

    If they truly want it to be a smart watch they should just lose the screen, go for style but have all the sensors and stuff that can interact with the iPhone, there does not need to be a screen on it, I do not need a device on my wrist that just displays my texts because I’m too lazy to pull my phone out! A smart watch in my eyes should be discreet, not distracting and should just work!

    I don’t think I would buy one if it had display unless it was ground breaking


  12. confluxnz says:

    2.5″? Can’t see that working unless the display is quite curved… Sticking something as big as an iPod Nano on my wrist doesn’t sound too appealing either. Although, gotta remember that this is Apple and they’ll probably execute the product beautifully in a way which the majority of us couldn’t have imagined.


  13. montefuego says:

    My bet is that the rumorist got mixed up on measurement systems: 2.5 cm (about an inch) is actually useful and great..That my bet, that the chartist or writer may have made that error…


  14. Paul Kerr says:

    This sounds like an iPod-based “iFit” device, with an iWatch wrist band as an available accessory. Perhaps the band makes it easy to pop the iFit off to lay on the charger at night, and triggers an alert if it moves too far away from it so you don’t forget to reattach it in the morning.

    While the iFit could serve as a mini-me for the iPhone, a la Samsung, more likely it is focused on and optimized for its use case, the quantified self/health motivated person.

    Make it a remote for my TV, lights, and thermostat and I’d be interested.


  15. Robert Dufly says:

    people dont wear watches so often. 50 million sounds huge to me. 5 million would be good. sure this may be a nice wearable, but I will go out on a limb and predict slow adoption.


  16. I hope Apple does not sell this at a very high price. And I think they won’t. My feel is they’ll go for something at a comfier price spot that will make the watch available to “most” people. If you look at the sorts of people they use in their marketing campaigns, it’s not people in suits and tuxes. It’s young, creative and stylish people, with an average-or-higher income.

    So, a $1000 iWatch does not fit in with the rest of their marketing. More likely we’ll see things in the 250-600 range.

    I hope they release a device (assuming they’ll release more than one) with a good set of features and good styling below the $400 price point (personally, although I wear a steel watch, I won’t mind a stylish plastic one, assuming it is done right).


  17. I actually think smart watches are a cool concept, BUT they need to be useful and have features my phone can’t do. Until then, i am gonna stick to my iPhone.


  18. I wear a Pebble Steel most days – the biggest smart watch which looks OK on my rather small wrist – so a reported 2.5 inch item is just not my size.


  19. confluxnz says:

    So it appears the Samsung Gear Fit has a 1.84″ screen. Using that as a reference point, a 2.5″ iWatch screen doesnt seem so far fetched. I’d imagine the iWatch would be of similar dimensions to a Gear Fit length wise, but possibly be a little wider to make up the 0.66″ difference.


  20. Are there any plans to develop an iRing that can be a fashion statement when worn on the back side of the hand, and a tool when it’s turned around and held in the palm? Personally, I’d rather have one of those than the watch, but in the meantime, the iWatch will do.


  21. I will only buy it if it has Infinity Blade 4 on it. :)

    But seriously. It really has to have possibilities that I cannot think of for me to wear such a device. I am not a person who wears jewelry except for a watch. For me to trade in a nice, classic looking watch for a display on my wrist it needs to be mind blowingly awesome and I kind of doubt it.


  22. I hear ya. I think the watch will exist, but this size is just strange.

    Also – Being an analyst is an awesome job. If I was wrong 95% at work I’d be homeless.