Singh knew what he preferred.
"I'd personally advocate the standalone approach, but it's a more difficult road for sure," said Singh in a follow-up email interview this week. "Even a successful launch with that approach isn't likely to give Apple's revenue growth much of a short-term boost."
He also thought he knew which way Apple would jump.
"[That's] why I think the accessory approach is more likely," Singh said. "I also think that Apple from five years ago would have approached this problem differently. A smaller company is more likely to put more focus on a potentially disruptive idea, because the scale of immediate benefits are more attractive on a relative basis."
What he left unsaid was that Jobs -- the font of products Apple is still introducing -- no long leads the company.
A just-published patent application bolstered Singh's belief that Apple would aim the iWatch -- again, assuming it does one -- at the iPhone/iPad accessory market.
That patent application, first reported by the AppleInsider blog today and analyzed in detail by another blog, Patently Apple, describes a bracelet-style device with a flexible display that connects to other devices via Wi-Fi or Bluetooth.
But questions remain, said Singh. "The bigger short-term problem, apart from the interface, is really product positioning. How do you get low-end buyers to look at this as a replacement for a low-end smartphone purchase? Can you push this in emerging markets as an alternative to a cheap iPhone?"
Sign up for Computerworld eNewsletters.