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

1235789

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 163
    icoco3 wrote: »
    Marvin wrote: »
    ...


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

    [URL=http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8
    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.

    And if Apple comes out with solid gold watches, they'll never hear the end of it from the "Apple is overpriced crap" crowd and the cheap-ass Fandroid trolls—so...might as well go for broke if you can't win either way!
  • Reply 82 of 163
    We will likely also see a change in update strategy. People do not buy a new gold watch every year or two. The whole point of gold is that it is timeless and always valuable. A good watch is deemed to be timeless. So I expect that the ?Watch formfactor will only change every five years or so, even if the insides may get updated every year or two. Get used to the thickness!
  • Reply 83 of 163

    I fully agree! The gold with the red band ... take my money now.. LOL

  • Reply 84 of 163
    sflagel wrote: »
    We will likely also see a change in update strategy. People do not buy a new gold watch every year or two. The whole point of gold is that it is timeless and always valuable. A good watch is deemed to be timeless. So I expect that the ?Watch for factor will only change every five years or so, even if the insides may get updated every year or two. Get used to the thickness!

    Very true. And as I said upstairs, the electronics will undoubtedly be as easy to replace (in the store) as the battery. I'm sure you could update your watch to the latest technology every year or two, but the case will still be worn by your grandchildren.
  • Reply 85 of 163

    This is all just my opinion based on these comments and articles about Apple and Apple Watch:

     

    1. Apple is being very deliberate about making Apple Watch in many different configurations and price points. The entry level $349 price one will almost for sure do everything one costing at least $1000. So...you get to choose. This is no different that any other tech. How many times did the word "personal" come up in the keynote? I love my Macbook Air; I can't stand the windows crap my employer makes me use. The former is a personal choice; the latter is forced on me. Pretty sure Apple knows this is how many people think. And they don't chase after product lines that are racing to the bottom of prices. I really can't see Apple making a TV. That product is headed no where but cheaper.

     

    2. I'm still a little fuzzy on how Apple Watch actually works. That said, I've seen enough to know that it represents value to me, and I'll get one. I like the Apple Pay system it offers. I also like the way it would help me communicate. There are many times I'd want to leave my phone in my pocket, and at a glance (!) tell if I need to do something. It's just my style.

     

    3. My 5'4" wife often wears a iPod Nano (the little square one) on her wrist when she wants to listen to music. She doesn't wear it all the time not because of the size, but because generally that is all it does. She doesn't wear a watch for timekeeping. The jewelry size issue won't concern her at all. In fact, I expect her to consider the larger Apple Watch. She is interested in function. The BT headphones will really be something she will like.

     

    4. I think the timing of the Apple Watch (!) release is very deliberate. The device has been finalized (perhaps fairly recently) and now the work must start on mass production. There's no way they can avoid leaks, and Apple is surely very adept at marketing and controlling new technology releases. (Think the new MacPro.) It still remains how they are going to make these, just how many of each type, what the prices will be and oddly, all those bands are just as hard to do.I am impressed with the savvy on how to roll this out. "Early 2015" makes it somehow alluring and mysterious at this point. And I suspect many people sitting the fence will put off holiday buying to get one. Here's something of a bold prediction - Apple may offer "gift cards" for this. Maybe a discount, or a simple printing on a card with an Apple Watch image. 

     

    5. The Apple Pay thing is very well timed too. Security issues are forcing merchants to do something, and I think there is a change is US law on the issue imminent. I haven't shopped at Target since their major fukkup; except for one largish transaction (a TV) that I conducted wholly in cash. That said, retail is undergoing a huge change in the US. Gone are Sears, Radio Shack, JCPenny and the likes. Amazon's model is killing them. Of course, Wal-Mart will be the stalwart, and that is solely because their volume can support competitive pricing against even online retail with free ship and no tax (and I think the latter will be up for some change, good or bad, appropriate or fair, I don't know.) Sure, there are plenty of things that don;t fit that model, but I wonder what retail in the US will look like in 50 years? 50 years ago, credit cards were rare. Now I often go for weeks, or even months, without cash in my possession.

     

    6. Something Tim Cook said recently really resonated true to me: Apple's products have transformed my life. Oh, I know I'm gonna get a lotta smirking for saying that, but I use their products everyday, and they help me do things. Tim's recent comments about TV is spot on - except for sports, there is little I use my TV for anymore (having just bought one at Target for sports.) My Apple products both entertain me and help me be productive and organized. I find satisfaction in that, and it represent value. This might sound odd, but an Apple product is like McDonalds. They are predictable and comforting. (although fairly, I eat at MickyDs perhaps a few times a decade. But you get the idea.)

     

    Sorry about the long blog post. But you guys/gals got me thinking. I do that different now. Thanks Steve, thanks Tim.

  • Reply 86 of 163

    "Industry insiders"???

    It's like reality TV shows labeling their hosts as "Bigfoot expert."

    Self-acceditation = appeal to auto-authority.

  • Reply 87 of 163
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by eightzero View Post

     

    The entry level $349 price one will almost for sure do everything one costing at least $1000. So...you get to choose. 


     

    No, it's all about screen size.

    The 44mm will be more elite than the 38mm.

    It will have more specs. MORE SPECS. Like more mm.

    It will be the benchmarkyest.

    Anandtech will run the all important Call of Duty 8x FSAA HD framerate test on it, because it's a watch.

  • Reply 88 of 163
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

     

     

    No, it's all about screen size.

    The 44mm will be more elite than the 38mm.

    It will have more specs. MORE SPECS. Like more mm.

    It will be the benchmarkyest.

    Anandtech will run the all important Call of Duty 8x FSAA HD framerate test on it, because it's a watch.


    Respectfully disagree. The basic capabilities will all be the same. 

  • Reply 89 of 163
    I find it a little silly to make an expensive gold version of such an ephemeral product. This watch is like a cell phone, and doesn't really have a life expectancy of more than three years. I suspect it exists not so much to be sold, but more to validate the idea of this watch as a luxury product, in effect making the steel or aluminum version also look like luxury products by association. But then again, I'm sure it will find buyers, too.
  • Reply 90 of 163
    dave k.dave k. Posts: 1,306member
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post



    It's the software. That interface is way too busy and complex, both in the number of ways to manipulate it and in the size of the icons and the text. It needs to be much simpler. The knob is a kludge that needs to go. It reminds me of those little levers you used to get on smartphones pre-iPhone.

     

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mr O View Post

     

     

    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.


     

    Am I the only one who thinks the interface shown was simply a place-holder interface that resembles the current iOS platform.  With a device not even shipping for at least 3+ months, that is a lot of time for the copy cats to hack together a very similar looking interface in that time.    I think the interface shipping on the final product will be considerably different.

  • Reply 91 of 163
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,778member
    eightzero wrote: »
    Respectfully disagree. The basic capabilities will all be the same. 

    Dude he was kidding. :D
  • Reply 92 of 163
    Is that all? $1200 I want to be able to show off one costing at least $5000 and I will buy one as soon as it is available
  • Reply 93 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kimberly View Post

     

    It's a nice looking phone in my opinion but yeah, I spent a few years working on an Aid Project in a third world country where the concept of time is different to western culture.  I went there wearing a watch and left not wearing a watch and haven't since.  Like you, I just look at my iPhone or the computer screen if I need the time.  I currently wear a chest strap for heart rate bpm when training but it won't be long before the sensors are woven into the fabric threads.


    I'm older now, and I'm a lazy mofo. I can't read the time on my iPhone without glasses, well I can if its the splash screen but not the small text at the top. I hate having to pull out my phone find my glasses every time I want the time. I would prefer a watch. I will be buying the gold one to show it off to all my superficial sailing buddies like me and because I have more money than sense.

  • Reply 94 of 163
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post





    Dude he was kidding. image

    Oh. Well... double dumbass on me.

  • Reply 95 of 163
    ibeamibeam Posts: 322member

    Gold at least is recyclable, but 18k is what they sell at Target. Shouldn't it be 24k?

     

    Personally I find the design too geeky. Even Casio G-Shock watches look better in my opinion, for sport. For elegance the Apple watch gets an F in my book. I really don't understand how Apple thinks a sport watch without lugs to protect the crown will ever work. That will break right away.

  • Reply 96 of 163
    Originally Posted by ibeam View Post

    Shouldn't it be 24k?



    Too soft.

  • Reply 97 of 163
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post



    How long is it going to last? I have a LeCoultre from the 1950's that runs just fine.

     

    If it's priced like jewelry, then it'd better be infinitely upgradable.

    Otherwise, I'm going to cringe when Phil Schiller brags about its recyclability.

    Jewelry doesn't lose it's value the way normal consumer electronics do for technology reasons.

  • Reply 98 of 163
    If it's priced like jewelry, then it'd better be infinitely upgradable.
    Otherwise, I'm going to cringe when Phil Schiller brags about its recyclability.
    Jewelry doesn't lose it's value the way normal consumer electronics do for technology reasons.

    I can understand making it look like jewelry, but using real gold on a device whose lifetime is no more than a few years doesn’t make sense to me.
  • Reply 99 of 163
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    I can understand making it look like jewelry, but using real gold on a device whose lifetime is no more than a few years doesn’t make sense to me.

     

    The gold model wasn't made for the middle class.

     

    It was made for people that can afford to buy a new $2000 watch every year. Apple made the regular and sport versions for middle class consumers.

     

    I don't think the short the technological shelf life of the device is going to be a problem.

  • Reply 100 of 163
    blackbook wrote: »
    The gold model wasn't made for the middle class.

    It was made for people that can afford to buy a new $2000 watch every year. Apple made the regular and sport versions for middle class consumers.

    I don't think the short the technological shelf life of the device is going to be a problem.

    Rich people have a funny way about being cheap for certain things.
Sign In or Register to comment.