Rumor: Gold Apple Watch Edition priced up to $5,000, steel version at $500, will debut on Feb. 14

1246713

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 247
    marvfoxmarvfox Posts: 2,275member

    I will take the Mac Pro over the watch anytime.

  • Reply 62 of 247
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post



    And in 5 years when Apple stops supporting it and the battery won't hold a charge anymore, it will be worth $100.

    It's easily $400 to service a Rolex, needs it every 4 years or so.

    Swapping the battery on an Apple Watch is going to be a lot easier (and cheaper).

    I can see Apple updating the computer+battery for something near the price of the Apple Watch Sport.

    This will be a lot easier and quicker than servicing a Rolex.

    A lot of Apple Watch Edition owners are going to upgrade yearly.

  • Reply 63 of 247
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Crosslad View Post





    When you buy a Rolex though it is for life. The Apple watch will be a purchase for just a couple of years due to the battery and speed that technology becomes outdated. I wouldn't want to spend $5,000 on a watch that will only last two or three years.

    It has the same internals as the $350 Apple Watch Sport.

    The watch will last as long as the newest computer module and battery fit in the older case.

    The cases and modules could be expressly designed for upgradability.

  • Reply 64 of 247
    darkpawdarkpaw Posts: 212member

    So, I'll be okay then, as I'd probably want three straps as I said, but others will have to pay for a strap they may not use? For example, someone buys the stainless steel watch and gets a leather strap with it, but really wants the silicone one you get with the Sport edition?

     

    I think Apple will release the watch without a strap, and let you buy whichever strap you want. If they package them up together, they'll have 10 Sport edition with the blue strap and 10 with the green strap, which is fine for 10 of the 20 people who wanted the blue strap, IYSWIM.

  • Reply 65 of 247
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mpantone View Post

     

    Nah, but I'll look super stylin' in my coffin. ;) 

     

    Besides, square watches = yuck.


    Whatever floats your boat.

    For me, round watches with their gauges and dials?

    Too steampunk.

    Not my thing.

  • Reply 66 of 247
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    darkpaw wrote: »
    ...but others will have to pay for a strap they may not use? For example, someone buys the stainless steel watch and gets a leather strap with it, but really wants the silicone one you get with the Sport edition?

    That's life. Apple is releasing an excessive number of styles right out of the gate, so if they want something atypical then they'll have to either deal with it or pay for something they won't use.
    I think Apple will release the watch without a strap, and let you buy whichever strap you want.

    I'd be very surprised if Apple goes that route because it's not a complete product at that point.
    If they package them up together, they'll have 10 Sport edition with the blue strap and 10 with the green strap, which is fine for 10 of the 20 people who wanted the blue strap, IYSWIM.

    I don't understand that sentence. There are only 10 ?Watch Sport options altogether. They only show 2 ?Watch Sport with the blue strap (38mm and 42mm in silver aluminum), and the same for green, pink and white. For the 5th colour they have a black band, which also comes with the space grey aluminium, instead of silver. That's 10 SKUs in all.

    Now if you want that space grey with a different band you'll have to get a different band, which I assume they'll be selling on day one. If that's an issue for someone they perhaps they shouldn't get the product.
  • Reply 67 of 247
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    Remember that's not an SoC but the entire computer on a chip. CoC? It still needs to connect to the display, buttons, battery, sensors and charging unit, but they may have designed a special interconnect for all that so the CoC can be replaced with relative ease by Apple Store employees or an authorized ?Watch jeweler.

    That I had missed. So in terms of longevity it's not not a total CoC up. Good to know :)
  • Reply 68 of 247
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    marvfox wrote: »
    I will take the Mac Pro over the watch anytime.

    When you make that comparison ... wow ... !

    Can't disagree. I think I'll go for a lowish end one just for ?Pay as I already spent that 5K on a Mac Pro and Screen.

    I was just thinking, remember all those folks getting their Lexus' cars chrome hardware gold plated back during the boom? I can see a new surge in after market cheap gold plating for ?Watches coming.
  • Reply 69 of 247
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    That I had missed. So in terms of longevity it's not not a total CoC up. Good to know :)

    The other components may be upgradable, too, but I think those are far less important YoY, save for the battery being replaced after several years of use. If in 10 years you can still use the same 1st gen ?Watch with the latest S-series CoC, a new battery, but the same display and sensors I don't think that would be an issue for me.

    Now the OLED display may also be upgradable, too, but it's likely laminated to top glass/crystal since it's made to look perfect and it does offer pressure, not just touch, so it would probably require all those components to re changed, which I don't think will be possible, but that likely won't matter since the resolution is fine.

    That leaves the ceramic backing and sensors. The ceramic housing also deals with the induction changing which may need replacing at some point. Since the sensors are in the ceramic housing and that appears to be how one would access the internals my guess is that could very well be replaceable.


    PS: Assuming my hypothesis that Apple design the S-Series CoC to be replaceable for many years of use, I'd like to see Apple offer a certification program for jewelers to have ?Watch updated with the new component(s). That would add a lot of legitimacy to the product by having this be something a jeweler does, not a computer shop.
  • Reply 70 of 247
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    solipsismy wrote: »
    The other components may be upgradable, too, but I think those are far less important YoY, save for the battery being replaced after several years of use. If in 10 years you can still use the same 1st gen ?Watch with the latest S-series CoC, a new battery, but the same display and sensors I don't think that would be an issue for me.

    Now the OLED display may also be upgradable, too, but it's likely laminated to top glass/crystal since it's made to look perfect and it does offer pressure, not just touch, so it would probably require all those components to re changed, which I don't think will be possible, but that likely won't matter since the resolution is fine.

    That leaves the ceramic backing and sensors. The ceramic housing also deals with the induction changing which may need replacing at some point. Since the sensors are in the ceramic housing and that appears to be how one would access the internals my guess is that could very well be replaceable.


    PS: Assuming my hypothesis that Apple design the S-Series CoC to be replaceable for many years of use, I'd like to see Apple offer a certification program for jewelers to have ?Watch updated with the new component(s). That would add a lot of legitimacy to the product by having this be something a jeweler does, not a computer shop.

    That last idea is a neat one. The location of the higher end jewelers is perfect for that image too. However, the down side is they are not buying more Apple equipment while they wait, so service at an Apple Store is probably a wiser move for Apple, that or ship to Apple with fast turn around time.

    p.s. Did you see my Steven Moffat reference explanation?
  • Reply 71 of 247
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post





    Blind Freddy could have told you that $1500 for the dearest watch was laughable. I think their most expensive version will easily top $5000 because Apple has the technology to make individual watches one at a time and I'm sure they will do that too. In fact if you make the Italian chain band out of gold as well, you'd be looking at 20 grand just for the gold.



    I have some gold I would like to sell you.

  • Reply 72 of 247
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,686member
    slurpy wrote: »
    You know, in my experience, when someone buys something they don't really give a shit when it's going to be "outdated". It's not something on most people's minds. They buy based on desire at the time. It's only the tech geeks and are always obsessed about when something will become "obsolete" and resale value. 

    Expensive jewellery of course doesn't go out of date. For many rich people it's a show of status but also a store of wealth. An object really only costs it's depreciation. The rich realise this and buy 25k watches which sell for 25k, or a bit higher or lower. The real cost isn't the 25k but the depreciation. But you need the money to begin with.
    mpantone wrote: »
    Not if you buy a $5000 watch.

    Almost all of those on the market are mechanical watches and incur significant repair/maintenance costs over the long term.

    If you want a stylish watch to last for decades, you're probably better off buying a Seiko quartz model, and just pay for a new $20 battery every 4-5 years.

    Also, leather bands wear out. I have two watches with leather bands and I end up changing them every five years or so. A metal band will outlive me.

    The cost of servicing isn't an issue for mechanical watches however what would matter is if it went out of date technology wise.

    If Apple make the $350 watch in 2017 much better than the 2015 $5000 model that's a problem.
  • Reply 73 of 247
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    That last idea is a neat one. The location of the higher end jewelers is perfect for that image too. However, the down side is they are not buying more Apple equipment while they wait, so service at an Apple Store is probably a wiser move for Apple, that or ship to Apple with fast turn around time.

    1) I could see Apple stores servicing them, too, but I think by themselves Apple Stores aren't sufficient for such upgrades. Plus, if it's limited to the S-Series CoC and battery that shouldn't take very long. How long do jewelers take to replace a traditional watch battery?

    2) I wonder how that ceramic cap comes off.
    p.s. Did you see my Steven Moffat reference explanation?

    Yes, and I replied to your comment. Recap: Your comment was over my head.
  • Reply 74 of 247
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    I love all the freaking out over the alleged price of the edition watch. It brings concern trolling to a new level. :smokey:
  • Reply 75 of 247
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    PS: Assuming my hypothesis that Apple design the S-Series CoC to be replaceable for many years of use, I'd like to see Apple offer a certification program for jewelers to have ?Watch updated with the new component(s). That would add a lot of legitimacy to the product by having this be something a jeweler does, not a computer shop.

    I don't think they will make it that you take in your gold watch and have the electronics replaced but you keep the same gold case. Because like every other Apple product they will want to make it thinner year after year.

     

    I agree with the person who said they will have a trade-in program. There is already precedent for that with iDevices. And it won't be a token trade-in price either, it will have to be at least the market value of the gold melted down, else they would get no takers. You may even be able to trade-in your old gold watch for a new gold one for just the price of the electronics. So it's not $5000 every year, it's like a once off payment and from then on you upgrade for a similar price that everyone else pays.

  • Reply 76 of 247
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    darkpaw wrote: »
    So, I'll be okay then, as I'd probably want three straps as I said, but others will have to pay for a strap they may not use? For example, someone buys the stainless steel watch and gets a leather strap with it, but really wants the silicone one you get with the Sport edition?

    I think Apple will release the watch without a strap, and let you buy whichever strap you want. If they package them up together, they'll have 10 Sport edition with the blue strap and 10 with the green strap, which is fine for 10 of the 20 people who wanted the blue strap, IYSWIM.

    My guess is you will buy the watch with a band but depending on which collection chose you'll have different band options. And not all bands will be available for all collections. The interesting thing will be if Apple opens this up to third parties or keeps it exclusive. My guess is it will be exclusive for a while and if they do open it up it won't be like iPhone cases. There will be a minimum standard required for 3rd party bands.
  • Reply 77 of 247
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    ascii wrote: »
    I don't think they will make it that you take in your gold watch and have the electronics replaced but you keep the same gold case. Because like every other Apple product they will want to make it thinner year after year.

    My comments don't restrict Apple from making it thinner each year.
    I agree with the person who said they will have a trade-in program. […] And it won't be a token trade-in price either, it will have to be at least the market value of the gold melted down, else they would get no takers.

    That would definitely be easier than what i'm proposing, but I'm not sure that's the best route since jewelry is typically collected, not leased on an annual or biennial cycle.
    There is already precedent for that with iDevices.

    ?Watch is breaking a lot of Apple's habits. I had stated for years that Apple won't be able to do a single product when they do release a wrist-worn wearable because of how we perceive fashion and jewelry. I was told that Apple never comes out with a huge number of products for a category. Clearly they are looking at this from a different PoV so I wouldn't hold any previous modus operandi too close to the breast.
    You may even be able to trade-in your old gold watch for a new gold one for just the price of the electronics. So it's not $5000 every year, it's like a once off payment and from then on you upgrade for a similar price that everyone else pays.

    Apple is using a gold alloy that uses 18K gold but that is 2x harder than 18k gold. So how much gold is actually in there and how does affect the value since it's not pure gold?
  • Reply 78 of 247
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    rogifan wrote: »
    My guess is you will buy the watch with a band but depending on which collection chose you'll have different band options. And not all bands will be available for all collections.

    You don't have to guess. They show every combination they plan to sell on their site.
    The interesting thing will be if Apple opens this up to third parties or keeps it exclusive. My guess is it will be exclusive for a while and if they do open it up it won't be like iPhone cases. There will be a minimum standard required for 3rd party bands.

    That would mean licensing the technology that connects the bands to the watch.
  • Reply 79 of 247
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post





    My comments don't restrict Apple from making it thinner each year.

    That would definitely be easier than what i'm proposing, but I'm not sure that's the best route since jewelry is typically collected, not leased on an annual or biennial cycle.

    ?Watch is breaking a lot of Apple's habits. I had stated for years that Apple won't be able to do a single product in two sizes when they do release a wrist-worn wearable because of how we perceive fashion and jewelry. I was told that Apple never comes out with a huge number of products for a category. Clearly they are looking at this from a different PoV so I wouldn't hold any previous modus operandi too close to the breast.

    Apple is using a gold alloy that uses 18K gold but that is 2x harder than 18k gold. So how much gold is actually in there and how does affect the value since it's not pure gold?

    18 karats specifies exactly how pure it is. 24 karats is pure, 18 karats means 18 parts gold to 6 parts something else.

  • Reply 80 of 247
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    That would definitely be easier than what i'm proposing, but I'm not sure that's the best route since jewelry is typically collected, not leased on an annual or biennial cycle.

    ?Watch is breaking a lot of Apple's habits. I had stated for years that Apple won't be able to do a single product in two sizes when they do release a wrist-worn wearable because of how we perceive fashion and jewelry. I was told that Apple never comes out with a huge number of products for a category. Clearly they are looking at this from a different PoV so I wouldn't hold any previous modus operandi too close to the breast.

    Apple is using a gold alloy that uses 18K gold but that is 2x harder than 18k gold. So how much gold is actually in there and how does affect the value since it's not pure gold?

    Yes, that's a good point about the past precedents. They are really taking the jewellery thing to heart, so maybe we should look for norms from the jewellery market. Jewellery is more often a gift than something you buy for yourself, so there is an emotional attachment. But a watch is certainly something you would buy for yourself. But perhaps not a gold one.

     

    I don't know the answer to your metallurgy question.

Sign In or Register to comment.