Gold 'Apple Watch Edition' could cost $1,200, industry insiders say

1246789

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 163
    mr omr o Posts: 1,046member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post





    Siri only? So we say "scroll up"

     

    I'd combine it with a "clickwheel":

     

    direct input = Siri

    control = "clickwheel"

    discrete input = iPhone

     

    The clickwheel is the (outer edge of the) watchface. It is ideal for both left and right handed use.



    Covering the watchface with your hand could be the home button.

  • Reply 62 of 163
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,379moderator
    As Apple only announced an entry-level $349 price tier for its upcoming Apple Watch, speculation on cost continues to run rampant, with the latest report claiming high-end gold models could sell for $1,200 when they launch next year.

    Analysts said the same about the iPad. I imagine people sitting in offices with a derp face just thinking up whatever high price and unit volume they want and getting all excited by how rich they can potentially become by betting on other people's work.

    These Apple watches are mass-produced electronics, everyone will look the same with them. Swatch has something like 1,000 models of watch with different faces, shapes, styles, materials. Apple has different digital faces but the display will be switched off most of the time so you're left with the same body shape in different metals and different straps. If you're going to spend $1200, why would you buy a piece of jewellery that looks almost the same as a $350 model? Not to mention magnetic clasps make them easy grab items.

    It just says 18 Karat rose gold, you can get watches like that on Amazon for ~$100:

    http://www.amazon.com/Invicta-Diver-Chronograph-Yellow-Plated/dp/B00332FH9Q
    http://www.amazon.com/Invicta-Signature-Collection-Russian-Gold-Plated/dp/B001SN7RVS

    I could see some price differentiation with the edition model costing more but I would be very surprised if it was more than $200 over the base model.

    Standard stainless steel ?watch $349
    Aluminium with strengthened glass ?sport $449
    Gold plating + sapphire crystal ?edition $549
  • Reply 63 of 163
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    mr o wrote: »
    I'd combine it with a "clickwheel":

    direct input = Siri
    control = "clickwheel"
    discrete input = iPhone

    The clickwheel is the (outer edge of the) watchface. It is ideal for both left and right handed use.


    Covering the watchface with your hand could be the home button.
    The click wheel is so 2001.
  • Reply 64 of 163
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Mike Elgan wrote an interesting Watch editorial. He says the watch face is ugly (not sure I agree with that) but the fit and finish and bands are really great. But one point he made that I don't see anyone else making is that Apple Watch is meant to be an extension of you which is in contrast to Google's offering which is meant to be an extension of your phone. I agree completely and I think that's what could make this watch successful. It's not just a remote screen to extend phone notifications to. It's a highly personal new way of communication. An easy way for you to express your personality.

    The watch has this big, beautiful retina display and the physics engine makes the OS come to life. And those things being labeled as gimmicks (like digital touch and the animated emoji) I think are the things that will make this watch popular. Android Wear is cold and clinical. Very utilitarian. It's all about extending Google Now to your wrist. Apple Watch is much warmer, has much more personality and is really meant to be an extension of you and your body more than an extension of your phone.

    As far as looks go, it seems the goal was to create something that looked as good as possible for the intended function at this time. The opposite of Moto Almost 360 that mandated from the start the watch face had to be round regardless of functionality (or that stupid black bar at the bottom). There are a number of UI elements in Watch OS that lend themselves to a circular display so I wouldn't be surprised at all to see a future version (or maybe an addition to the collection) slimmed down with a round face. And as someone else pointed out here Apple is now embracing product segmentation something it didn't really do under Jobs. Rather than creating one watch and a couple of bands and slapping a $299 price tag on it Apple created 3 different collections with many different band options and at many different price points. Imagine the increased foot traffic into Apple stores with people wanting to try out these new watches. Experiences created by former luxury fashion executives. None of apples competitors can offer that. Genius.
  • Reply 65 of 163
    Marvin wrote: »
    Analysts said the same about the iPad. I imagine people sitting in offices with a derp face just thinking up whatever high price and unit volume they want and getting all excited by how rich they can potentially become by betting on other people's work.

    These Apple watches are mass-produced electronics, everyone will look the same with them. Swatch has something like 1,000 models of watch with different faces, shapes, styles, materials. Apple has different digital faces but the display will be switched off most of the time so you're left with the same body shape in different metals and different straps. If you're going to spend $1200, why would you buy a piece of jewellery that looks almost the same as a $350 model? Not to mention magnetic clasps make them easy grab items.

    It just says 18 Karat rose gold, you can get watches like that on Amazon for ~$100:

    http://www.amazon.com/Invicta-Diver-Chronograph-Yellow-Plated/dp/B00332FH9Q
    http://www.amazon.com/Invicta-Signature-Collection-Russian-Gold-Plated/dp/B001SN7RVS

    I could see some price differentiation with the edition model costing more but I would be very surprised if it was more than $200 over the base model.

    Standard stainless steel ?watch $349
    Aluminium with strengthened glass ?sport $449
    Gold plating + sapphire crystal ?edition $549

    The sport model will be the base model, but aside from that Apple may use this opportunity to price the gold model way high.

    The gold model may be sold exclusively at jewelry and high end department stores while the other models are sold at electronics stores next to iPhones and iPads.

    That could explain all the retail hires. Apple may want to try to get this watch in places apple products aren't currently sold such as Nordstrom, Nieman Marcus, and banana republic.

    If that's the case a $2000 price makes sense.
  • Reply 66 of 163
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    thrang wrote: »

    They also didn't mention display visibility in bright sunlight. Will be curious to see this.

    Yes, THIS. I can barely see my iPhone in bright sunlight to unlock it. The Sport watch will undoubtably be used outside extensively.

    And while I'm at it, why skimp on the glass for the sport model? They are surely going to sell the majority of those, and that's exactly the model that's going to have the bezel impacted the most.
  • Reply 67 of 163
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    That's it?

    They're missing an opportunity to charge at least $3,500 for the gold model.
  • Reply 68 of 163
    iaeeniaeen Posts: 588member
    mr o wrote: »
    A watch that looks like a mini tablet strapped on your wrist. Shame as its interface could have been revolutionary if it were to be Siri controlled only. The digital crown is a fad. It tries too hard to look like a watch. The original iPhone didn't have a rotary dial either, did it? The iPhone was the Future. One could feel it. I didn't have that feeling with the iWatch. Apple has got a lot of work to do.

    Dumbest post of the thread. Who in their right mind would want a device that could only be interacted with using Siri? How does restricting useability make the product better?

    One of the biggest draws of the Apple Watch for me is to be able to discreetly check, dismiss, and if necessary respond to notifications in situations where pulling out your phone has become taboo (meetings, etc...). How on earth could a person do that if they had to talk to the watch?
    mr o wrote: »
    I'd combine it with a "clickwheel":

    direct input = Siri
    control = "clickwheel"
    discrete input = iPhone

    The clickwheel is the (outer edge of the) watchface. It is ideal for both left and right handed use.


    Covering the watchface with your hand could be the home button.

    Oh, I see. So not really Siri only.

    What you describe sounds like a less polished version of what Apple is, in fact, doing. You've just replaced the word "digital crown" with "clickwheel", moved its location on the watch a little, and removed the usability of the touch screen. Wow, revolutionary indeed¡
  • Reply 69 of 163
    "The supposed price is not set in stone, as questions remain as to whether Apple Watch is made of gold or comes gold plated"

    Yeah, we'll make it out of solid gold, so that it has no internal room and more weight.

    Duh.
  • Reply 70 of 163
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    mr o wrote: »
    People back then (2007) were lusting for a widescreen iPod.

    Apple surprised them by doing the unthinkable. They offered:

    A phone, a widescreen iPod and an internet communicator.


    A phone, an iPod and an internet communicator.


    A phone, an iPod and ... you get it ?


    Its touch based interface was revolutionary as well. Just like the clickwheel was for the original iPod.


    What do we have now?


    A watch that looks like a mini tablet strapped on your wrist. Shame as its interface could have been revolutionary if it were to be Siri controlled only. The digital crown is a fad. It tries too hard to look like a watch. The original iPhone didn't have a rotary dial either, did it? The iPhone was the Future. One could feel it. I didn't have that feeling with the iWatch. Apple has got a lot of work to do.

    Guess there is something wrong with your ability to "get it", as I felt it the moment I saw it. I have a pretty great imagination, and the APPLE watch far exceeded them.

    It seems like there are always people that feel the need to criticize great things just because. Because you didn't think of it first?
  • Reply 71 of 163
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Either way, I'll wait for 2.0, I can't do 1.0 items, they are always test models. 2.0 is when they make big improvements and have the bugs worked out and improved from user feedback. Definitely want one, however.

    There is something immeasurably stupid about this post. Maybe it's the FUD. Maybe it's the arrogance. "I'm so smart...I skip first run products because I know in advance it won't be as good as round two."

    So? Get both. :rolleyes:
  • Reply 72 of 163
    richlrichl Posts: 2,213member
    Apple are becoming Vertu. ;)
  • Reply 73 of 163
    iaeen wrote: »
    On the subject of bands: I hope either Apple or someone else makes lugs that fit the Apple Watch, but take regular spring bars and can be fitted with aftermarket straps.

    Apple should have thought of that - great idea!
  • Reply 74 of 163
    mac_128 wrote: »
    Yes, THIS. I can barely see my iPhone in bright sunlight to unlock it. The Sport watch will undoubtably be used outside extensively.

    And while I'm at it, why skimp on the glass for the sport model? They are surely going to sell the majority of those, and that's exactly the model that's going to have the bezel impacted the most.

    I use my iPhone outside every day and I can read the web or email just fine with sunglasses on. Of course I unlock with TouchID so I don't need to see for that.

    I believe the glass on the sport model (same as on iPhone 6) is used because while less scratch resistant, it is more shatter proof so better able to handle actual blows on the watch face.
  • Reply 75 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post



    One thing—it is laminated to the crystal, so if it is LCD, when the backlight wears out, the whole thing needs to be replaced. What's the half-life on these things, 20,000 hours?

    The term is Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF), not "half-life."

     

    For today's LED backlights, MTBF should be approaching 100,000 hours.

     

    Don't worry about the longevity of the display components. The battery would need replacing long before.

     

    You are fussing over the wrong issues.

  • Reply 76 of 163
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by iaeen View Post



    Who in their right mind would want a device that could only be interacted with using Siri? How does restricting useability make the product better?



    One of the biggest draws of the Apple Watch for me is to be able to discreetly check, dismiss, and if necessary respond to notifications in situations where pulling out your phone has become taboo (meetings, etc...). How on earth could a person do that if they had to talk to the watch?

    Some people in this Q&A forum don't seem to have a good grasp on the usability of consumer electronics by the general populace.

     

    It appears that a fair number of AI commenters have never worked a job in a corporate environment and some don't appear to have travelled outside of their state or been to a large city. With such a limited range of personal experiences, we then witness completely unrealistic hair-brained concepts like this "Siri-only" watch that would be useless in many situations.

  • Reply 77 of 163
    Actually half-life is a perfectly good term for white LEDs - the issue isn't actual failure, the issue is the gradual decrease in brightness caused by heat gradually degrading the components. A typical lifetime is around 30,000 hours for a decrease to 70% of original brightness.

    Since the backlight probably won't run at 100% all the time, I'm sure the watch will be more like 100,000 hours before it's decrease is noticeable.

    And the battery will be a lot cheaper and easier to replace then the screen, so it is worth being concerned about how often screen replacement due to age will be needed.
  • Reply 78 of 163
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,474member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by clexman View Post

     

    I think the pricing is going to be closer to $2000 for the top of the line model.

     

    One thing not mentioned is warranty. A Rolex comes with a 2 year warranty and can tell time indefinitely with maintenance and repairs. Will an Apple Watch made out of solid gold still be compatible with an iPhone 11 in 5 years? Will it just be a gold paperweight or will there be an upgrade/trade-in path?


     

    How about taking it to an Apple Store every year for new "insides" then you always have the latest and greatest.  That service would make a lot of sense for the gold edition.

  • Reply 79 of 163
    mpantone wrote: »
    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">One thing—it</span>
    <em style="line-height:1.4em;">is</em>
    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">laminated to the crystal, so if it is LCD, when the backlight wears out, the whole thing needs to be replaced. What's the half-life on these things, 20,000 hours?</span>
    The term is Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF), not "half-life."

    For today's LED backlights, MTBF should be approaching 100,000 hours.

    Don't worry about the longevity of the display components. The battery would need replacing long before.

    You are fussing over the wrong issues.

    As appreciative as I am of your condescension, you haven't the remotest idea of what you're talking about.

    Admittedly, "half-life" was my own metaphor, but LED lights are rated by the time before the phosphor tires to half the original brightness. The phosphor is pumped by a blue LED, which will probably never "fail", so MTBF, such as you would use for a mechanical part, isn't worth trying to measure.

    Common ratings for "LED" light bulbs is 20,000 hours—again, before brightness decays to half its original value.
  • Reply 80 of 163
    icoco3icoco3 Posts: 1,474member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



    ...



    It just says 18 Karat rose gold, you can get watches like that on Amazon for ~$100:



    http://www.amazon.com/Invicta-Diver-Chronograph-Yellow-Plated/dp/B00332FH9Q

    http://www.amazon.com/Invicta-Signature-Collection-Russian-Gold-Plated/dp/B001SN7RVS



    ...

    If Apple comes out with gold "plated" watches, they will never hear the end of it.  They will be solid gold so will cost more.

Sign In or Register to comment.