how the hell your camera's specs fulfilled all requirements 2 years ago but now?
It has some improved features that I want. Since I have the funds why not??? Same with the iPhone, I had a 5S, before it was a year old it was replaced with a 6 Plus. I'm happy, and so is my daughter since she inherited the 5S.
Granny is the perfect candidate!!! Think "I've fallen and I can't get up".
Or even, ... "Hello. This is Mrs Smith's ?Watch. She has fallen, she is unconscious here are her vitals. Send help now to the following address or use iLocate to find my position via her iPhone which is close by "
Or,,, Siri with the voice of Fester: "Mr. Dillion ... Mr. Dillon ... It's Doc ... Doc ... He's lyin' in the street, with an arrah clean through his neck .... Mr Dillon ..."
In all seriousness ... A few years ago, a scenario, similar to that which you describe, could have prevented a death in my family ... It really makes you think!
People, in theory at least, don't need to get a new iPhone as often as they do. The thing about Apple's user base, or a large percentage of it, is they WE just lust after a new iPhone ... or iPad or whatever Apple make. That's where trying to use logic on all of this falls down. So I suspect using the 'what people need' argument isn't a good metric for potential sales of the ?Watch. I also predict that even those that buy one will get a new one every couple of years as new features come out, even though they sure as heck won't need one. I have used the 'we can pass it on' excuse so many times when buying the latest iPhone yet I still have every model ever made in a cupboard along with iPads and iPods, Macs and ACDs.
As to the step up from $300 to $500 being an impediment, sales of mid and high end iDevices surely show that to not be a barrier.
I have no idea how well it will sell, I can only hope it does very well as an AAPL share holder.
Well I did need a new iPhone upgrade with my iPhone 4 being 4+ years old and slow as hell. many times just wanting to throw it against the wall it was that bad!!! I plan to keep this iPhone 6 maybe as long once again. The longer I can hold onto it, the more I save. A watch is not like a Smart phone. yes I would assume people would want to hold onto it longer. Instead of 2 years like a iPhone normally, maybe 4 years with the watch normally. Some people will try to go longer. But remember, the tech is moving fast. In 4 years the Apple Watch may seem pretty LAME, primitive, etc. Much longer then that and you start getting into batter issues and as far as I know, won't be a simple job to replace if at all. You're lucky to get a day out of it with a good battery and it'll get worse over time. I have my nice Fancy watch I've had for 20+ years and it still works and I still wear it. If I could get 20+ years out of a Smart Watch, I'd pay $500 for it no problem. That'll NEVER happen. I see 5 years MAX before you just have to replace it, it's just to outdated.
I don't even wear watches anymore and haven't since I started using Cell phones. They have a clock, why have another on me? I'm just not that lazy. Maybe cheap that I don't want to fork out $350+ for a Watch I might get 5 years out of that really doesn't do much extra that the phone doesn't already do. A phone you really still need on you to use the watch. There's no built in GPS in the thing for example, so that screws up GPS tracking of where you ran if you didn't have your phone on you. The watch market has been dying. I don't see Smart Watches turning that around. With all the Smart Watches released the last couple years and not really selling, I don't see Apple changing this. Most everyone I know has iPhones and iPads, etc and yet not a one has said they want to get a Apple Watch. This isn't like the market when the iPhone launched or even the iPad. Those weren't dying markets, there was no market really to begin with.
Comparing an Apple Watch with a regular watch is like comparing an iPhone with a regular phone ...
An Apple Watch can do so much more -- quickly and conveniently.
I suspect that we'll se a lot of tie-in promotions by carriers, banks/credit card companies and phone retailers.
What can it do that you're iPhone can't? Why fork out $350+ for a device you'll be lucky to get 5 years out of? I couldn't wear a watch at work if I wanted to and I don't. I stopped wearing watches after I got my first cell phone. I don't need two clocks on me. The watch doesn't have built in GPS, that means even for fitness, you need your phone on you and the iPhone has it's own sensors already other then Heart Rate.
I'm just fine using my phone to pay for things, I don't need to spend $350+ because I'm so lazy and just want to reach out with my wrist and pay that way. It's once thing to spend +/- $100 on some type of fitness band. You're not out a lot of money if it gets damaged or outdated and battery life is generally days. No Smart Watch is flying off the shelf yet. Pebble has been doing pretty good. But even them I don't think have hit a million in sales. Maybe in the Hundred thousands. Samscum released 6 this year alone and none have done all that good. The Moto360 has gotten some sales, but even that hasn't been huge. How is the Apple Watch going to change any of that??? Where's the market??? I sure havn't seen a Smart Watch market. I've seen a dying watch market that's been going on for many years.
I'll wait for that rumored 12" iPad and get that. The Apple Watch, HAHAHA No sale here or from anyone else I know and most all of them have iPhones and iPads also!!! Here's a idea, do something with AppleTV as it's been getting outdated and passed over by pretty much everyone else. What's it's been now, 3 years. I know I got my first one before I got my house and that's been over 2 years now, so ya, I think it's been 3 years and Apple is being passed up in that area. A area with real growth!!! It's not watches, it's streaming content!!!
Except it's not as a phone connotes a full communication devise whereas a watch will only let you gaze at it for the hour at hand.
Very boring to say the least.
Comparing an Apple Watch with a regular watch is like comparing an iPhone with a regular phone ...
An Apple Watch can do so much more -- quickly and conveniently.
I suspect that we'll se a lot of tie-in promotions by carriers, banks/credit card companies and phone retailers.
What can it do that you're iPhone can't? Why fork out $350+ for a device you'll be lucky to get 5 years out of? I couldn't wear a watch at work if I wanted to and I don't. I stopped wearing watches after I got my first cell phone. I don't need two clocks on me. The watch doesn't have built in GPS, that means even for fitness, you need your phone on you and the iPhone has it's own sensors already other then Heart Rate.
I tried to answer this question -- 2 before this post of yours ...
"In all seriousness ... A few years ago, a scenario, similar to that which you describe, could have prevented a death in my family ... It really makes you think!"
Soon, the grandkids will all be driving ... What's it worth to be able to check the vitals of a loved one or to be alerted when they are in a state of danger ... It's worth everything!
I concur with digitalclips on this. History suggests this can work for Apple. Pundits questioned whether people would want a $599 smartphone when the iPhone was introduced. Or any smartphone. The smartphone business wasn't nearly as big when Apple got into it. Some people even questioned whether the iPhone even qualified as a smartphone. Also consider that before the smartphone really took off with the iPhone, there wasn't so much impetus for upgrading a phone, but rapidly changing technology has changed that.
The watch market is apparently quite large and it will become larger when people who haven't worn a watch in years (or ever) get into the market. I haven't worn a watch in 20 years and back then never had one that cost more than $30, and I'm looking forward to this. I've read similar accounts from others. I am not getting the Apple watch to know the time, but for all the other useful stuff it will do. The technology will improve rapidly, and we'll be buying the 2nd or 3rd gen models too. Maybe not replaced as often phones are now, but more often than many people currently buy watches.
I concur with both you and digitalclips, but I think you have a flaw in your argument. When the iPhone was initially launched, it was not subsidized, and sales were relatively ho-hum. This prompted Apple to reduce the price a bit, and sales improved modestly. It wasn't until carrier subsidies hit with the iPhone 3G that sales really started taking off. It turns out that there is a huge difference between paying $600 up front versus $200, even if you end up paying the difference in your contract later. In other words, the pundits you mentioned were right, in a broad market sense.
Looking around the world today, we see the same thing: sales of iPhones in regions that subsidize drastically outperform sales in regions that don't. While most people want an iPhone, many people balk at the $600 price and settle for a cheap Android instead. The take away is this: a $600 purchase price for an iPhone is a deal-breaker for a large fraction of folks. And even though I would be willing and able to pay $600 for an iPhone (if subsidies were not available) I certainly wouldn't do it every year, like I do now. (My family has 4 iPhone contracts, and at least one is always eligible for a subsidy each year. Guess who gets the new phone? Dad.) This Spring, when I hold out my iPhone 6 and use Touch ID to get an Apple Watch, I imagine that paying the $349 dollars for this device will feel, to me, a lot like paying $600 for an iPhone (which is a more capable device). That is, I will do it with joy, but with a tad bit more trepidation than my annual iPhone purchase. The trepidation I feel will most likely translate into resistance for people of lesser means.
Breaking all of this down, I would say that the answer is somewhere in the middle: a whole bunch of people will in fact get the Apple Watch because they want it and can afford it. But they are a much smaller fraction of society than the iPhone-purchasing market is, and they won't be buying a new watch as often (kind of like the iPad). It's all about the purchase price. But I do agree that enough people will purchase these watches to make it a solid hit for Apple and its shareholders. It just won't be any where near as eye-popping as iPhone... at least not until the apps and use cases start to expand and make it seemingly indispensable. That day will eventually come. And if Apple can find a business case that includes subsidies... look out!
Comparing an Apple Watch with a regular watch is like comparing an iPhone with a regular phone ...
An Apple Watch can do so much more -- quickly and conveniently.
I suspect that we'll se a lot of tie-in promotions by carriers, banks/credit card companies and phone retailers.
What can it do that you're iPhone can't? Why fork out $350+ for a device you'll be lucky to get 5 years out of? I couldn't wear a watch at work if I wanted to and I don't. I stopped wearing watches after I got my first cell phone. I don't need two clocks on me. The watch doesn't have built in GPS, that means even for fitness, you need your phone on you and the iPhone has it's own sensors already other then Heart Rate.
Have a look at this:
Reaction from a healthcare innovator
The Apple Watch introduction was also being closely followed by people looking to improve healthcare. “We’re suffering a tsunami of chronic disease,” says Joseph Smith, chief medical and science officer for West Health. “We spend 80 percent of every healthcare dollar managing people with chronic conditions. It would be great if Apple would get into that system and make it work better; with their amazing sense of what works for the customer they could clearly do that.”
The Apple Watch will be a highly versatile platform which may hold promise for applications to help as we transform healthcare to be more automatic, coordinated, and connected.
Smith appears to be cautiously optimistic about the Apple watch. On one hand, he says, “it doesn’t look like their transformational entry into the serious part of healthcare, it’s more of a best of breed of gadget rather than a new breed.”
However, he says, Apple today made it clear that the Apple Watch “will be a highly versatile platform which may hold promise for applications to help as we transform healthcare to be more automatic, coordinated, and connected.”
With all the sensors on the watch and smart developers bringing together information from multiple sensors, he says, we might get some surprises, say, monitoring tissue hydration using the available IR and natural light sensors on the watch.
Smith continues, “It remains to be seen whether Apple will transcend from the wearable gadget space to becoming a serious participant in healthcare.”
So ...The Apple Watch is a $350 device which can monitor some basic vitals, that you wear on your wrist. When paired with an iPhone running HealthKit apps (on your person, or within BLE/WiFi range) it can monitor/log/retain/analyze/give an alert of health conditions (as well as fitness).
When will additional sensors be added to the watch ... to the band ...
When will other. similar, wearables laden with other sensors follow -- to provide additional healthcare assistance ... through a readily-available, inexpensive platform -- the iPhone and its ecosystem ...
I'm reminded of when the iPad 2 was announced: I said I would buy one (and did) just to get the Smart Cover :}
Or more on point, buying a [then] $500 iPad, in order to be able to run the [then] $200 Proloquo2go app -- to give voice and mobility to one who can't speak * -- replacing $2,000-$5,000 worth of bulky, awkward, stationary hardware. http://www.assistiveware.com/product/proloquo2go
* to be able to order in a restaurant ... or ask to go to the bathroom ...
Who will be the firs to receive a prescription for an Apple Watch and iPhone in order to run the healthcare apps and accessories ...
Well I did need a new iPhone upgrade with my iPhone 4 being 4+ years old and slow as hell. many times just wanting to throw it against the wall it was that bad!!! I plan to keep this iPhone 6 maybe as long once again. The longer I can hold onto it, the more I save. A watch is not like a Smart phone. yes I would assume people would want to hold onto it longer. Instead of 2 years like a iPhone normally, maybe 4 years with the watch normally. Some people will try to go longer. But remember, the tech is moving fast. In 4 years the Apple Watch may seem pretty LAME, primitive, etc. Much longer then that and you start getting into batter issues and as far as I know, won't be a simple job to replace if at all. You're lucky to get a day out of it with a good battery and it'll get worse over time. I have my nice Fancy watch I've had for 20+ years and it still works and I still wear it. If I could get 20+ years out of a Smart Watch, I'd pay $500 for it no problem. That'll NEVER happen. I see 5 years MAX before you just have to replace it, it's just to outdated.
I don't even wear watches anymore and haven't since I started using Cell phones. They have a clock, why have another on me? I'm just not that lazy. Maybe cheap that I don't want to fork out $350+ for a Watch I might get 5 years out of that really doesn't do much extra that the phone doesn't already do. A phone you really still need on you to use the watch. There's no built in GPS in the thing for example, so that screws up GPS tracking of where you ran if you didn't have your phone on you. The watch market has been dying. I don't see Smart Watches turning that around. With all the Smart Watches released the last couple years and not really selling, I don't see Apple changing this. Most everyone I know has iPhones and iPads, etc and yet not a one has said they want to get a Apple Watch. This isn't like the market when the iPhone launched or even the iPad. Those weren't dying markets, there was no market really to begin with.
Let's check back in 12 months .. Hopefully you are being over pessimistic.
Or,,, Siri with the voice of Fester: "Mr. Dillion ... Mr. Dillon ... It's Doc ... Doc ... He's lyin' in the street, with an arrah clean through his neck .... Mr Dillon ..."
In all seriousness ... A few years ago, a scenario, similar to that which you describe, could have prevented a death in my family ... It really makes you think!
Indeed. Just before Christmas a dear old friend of ours who was 92 fell in his garage, breaking a hip and gashing his head. His wife, being dotty, sat with him but didn't call 911. Almost a day later after a neighbor called in he was rushed to ICU and sadly died a week later. Such a gizmo would have more than likely saved him too.
I mean come on. Has any Smart Watch even sold 1 million up to this point? If you combine them all together will you get 1 million?
The same sentiment has been expressed about tablet computers before the iPad came out. Bottomline, we just don't know how the AppleWatch will do. Just like nobody really knew how the iPad would be received by the market. Not even Apple.
We do know how it will do.
It will fail. The first big failure from Apple in the 21st century.
I concur with digitalclips on this. History suggests this can work for Apple. Pundits questioned whether people would want a $599 smartphone when the iPhone was introduced. Or any smartphone. The smartphone business wasn't nearly as big when Apple got into it. Some people even questioned whether the iPhone even qualified as a smartphone. Also consider that before the smartphone really took off with the iPhone, there wasn't so much impetus for upgrading a phone, but rapidly changing technology has changed that.
The watch market is apparently quite large and it will become larger when people who haven't worn a watch in years (or ever) get into the market. I haven't worn a watch in 20 years and back then never had one that cost more than $30, and I'm looking forward to this. I've read similar accounts from others. I am not getting the Apple watch to know the time, but for all the other useful stuff it will do. The technology will improve rapidly, and we'll be buying the 2nd or 3rd gen models too. Maybe not replaced as often phones are now, but more often than many people currently buy watches.
I concur with both you and digitalclips, but I think you have a flaw in your argument. When the iPhone was initially launched, it was not subsidized, and sales were relatively ho-hum. This prompted Apple to reduce the price a bit, and sales improved modestly. It wasn't until carrier subsidies hit with the iPhone 3G that sales really started taking off. It turns out that there is a huge difference between paying $600 up front versus $200, even if you end up paying the difference in your contract later. In other words, the pundits you mentioned were right, in a broad market sense.
Looking around the world today, we see the same thing: sales of iPhones in regions that subsidize drastically outperform sales in regions that don't. While most people want an iPhone, many people balk at the $600 price and settle for a cheap Android instead. The take away is this: a $600 purchase price for an iPhone is a deal-breaker for a large fraction of folks. And even though I would be willing and able to pay $600 for an iPhone (if subsidies were not available) I certainly wouldn't do it every year, like I do now. (My family has 4 iPhone contracts, and at least one is always eligible for a subsidy each year. Guess who gets the new phone? Dad.) This Spring, when I hold out my iPhone 6 and use Touch ID to get an Apple Watch, I imagine that paying the $349 dollars for this device will feel, to me, a lot like paying $600 for an iPhone (which is a more capable device). That is, I will do it with joy, but with a tad bit more trepidation than my annual iPhone purchase. The trepidation I feel will most likely translate into resistance for people of lesser means.
Breaking all of this down, I would say that the answer is somewhere in the middle: a whole bunch of people will in fact get the Apple Watch because they want it and can afford it. But they are a much smaller fraction of society than the iPhone-purchasing market is, and they won't be buying a new watch as often (kind of like the iPad). It's all about the purchase price. But I do agree that enough people will purchase these watches to make it a solid hit for Apple and its shareholders. It just won't be any where near as eye-popping as iPhone... at least not until the apps and use cases start to expand and make it seemingly indispensable. That day will eventually come. And if Apple can find a business case that includes subsidies... look out!
Thompson
This is a good and reasoned post!
Especially the last paragraph with which, I generally agree ... or at least would have agreed, had I not read:
Granny is the perfect candidate!!! Think "I've fallen and I can't get up".
Or even, ... "Hello. This is Mrs Smith's ?Watch. She has fallen, she is unconscious here are her vitals. Send help now to the following address or use iLocate to find my position via her iPhone which is close by "
Suddenly the scales began to fall from my eyes ...
People will not only buy a watch because they want to --- but because they need to ...
Let me try and explain! The Apple Watch is an accessory to the iPhone ... But, the Apple Watch can also use the iPhone as an accessory -- as in @Digi's example.
What makes this practical is the hardware, systems software, apps, developers and ecosystem that are in place around iOS devices.
For the moment, put aside that the Apple Watch can tell time -- rather, consider it a healthcare monitoring device (pulse, and maybe a few other vitals). This [relatively] semi-intelligent healthcare monitoring device has the capability to invoke and exploit all the capabilities of a paired [relatively] nearby [very powerful] iPhone.
What if this is a prototype solution for a whole series of [relatively] semi-intelligent healthcare monitoring devices — say respiration, glucose, EKG …
Here’s an article that lists some of the wearable semi-intelligent healthcare monitoring devices coming to market:
10 Wearable Health Tech Devices To Watch
Wearable medical technology is becoming a hot commodity. As these devices come to market, they have the potential to help both patients and clinicians monitor vital signs and symptoms.
1 of 11
Wearable health technology is drawing serious attention in the press and for good reason. Such devices will likely transform medical care in unimagined ways, turning science fiction in science fact. The latest wearable health gadgets sport new capabilities and sleekness. From headsets that measure brainwaves to clothes that incorporate sensing devices, personal health monitoring is the wave of the future.
ABI Research has projected that by 2016, wearable wireless medical device sales will reach more than 100 million devices annually. The market for wearable sports and fitness-related monitoring devices is projected to grow as well, reaching 80 million device sales by 2016.
Be sure and click through the 10 slides for a cross section of the possibilitiesQ
While these devices will target most mobile platforms, I suspect that the robust iDevice iOS ecosystem will be the platform of choice — especially if you consider the partnership with IBM as an entree into the enterprise and institutional healthcare systems.
Finally, it is unlikely, that a healthcare patient would need more than 2 or 3 of these [relatively] semi-intelligent healthcare monitoring devices — but the need for any one of them may be critical — and easily a justification for whatever capabilities (iPhone, apps, services, etc.) to provide the required outcome.
People, in theory at least, don't need to get a new iPhone as often as they do. The thing about Apple's user base, or a large percentage of it, is they WE just lust after a new iPhone ... or iPad or whatever Apple make. That's where trying to use logic on all of this falls down. So I suspect using the 'what people need' argument isn't a good metric for potential sales of the ?Watch. I also predict that even those that buy one will get a new one every couple of years as new features come out, even though they sure as heck won't need one. I have used the 'we can pass it on' excuse so many times when buying the latest iPhone yet I still have every model ever made in a cupboard along with iPads and iPods, Macs and ACDs.
As to the step up from $300 to $500 being an impediment, sales of mid and high end iDevices surely show that to not be a barrier.
I have no idea how well it will sell, I can only hope it does very well as an AAPL share holder.
Well I did need a new iPhone upgrade with my iPhone 4 being 4+ years old and slow as hell. many times just wanting to throw it against the wall it was that bad!!! I plan to keep this iPhone 6 maybe as long once again. The longer I can hold onto it, the more I save. A watch is not like a Smart phone. yes I would assume people would want to hold onto it longer. Instead of 2 years like a iPhone normally, maybe 4 years with the watch normally. Some people will try to go longer. But remember, the tech is moving fast. In 4 years the Apple Watch may seem pretty LAME, primitive, etc. Much longer then that and you start getting into batter issues and as far as I know, won't be a simple job to replace if at all. You're lucky to get a day out of it with a good battery and it'll get worse over time. I have my nice Fancy watch I've had for 20+ years and it still works and I still wear it. If I could get 20+ years out of a Smart Watch, I'd pay $500 for it no problem. That'll NEVER happen. I see 5 years MAX before you just have to replace it, it's just to outdated.
I don't even wear watches anymore and haven't since I started using Cell phones. They have a clock, why have another on me? I'm just not that lazy. Maybe cheap that I don't want to fork out $350+ for a Watch I might get 5 years out of that really doesn't do much extra that the phone doesn't already do. A phone you really still need on you to use the watch. There's no built in GPS in the thing for example, so that screws up GPS tracking of where you ran if you didn't have your phone on you. The watch market has been dying. I don't see Smart Watches turning that around. With all the Smart Watches released the last couple years and not really selling, I don't see Apple changing this. Most everyone I know has iPhones and iPads, etc and yet not a one has said they want to get a Apple Watch. This isn't like the market when the iPhone launched or even the iPad. Those weren't dying markets, there was no market really to begin with.
Great posts from you. You have your finger on the pulse.
Why do you need a watch in your pocket as well as one on your wrist? Imagine if when wrist watches were invented, the inventor said, "You must also carry around a pocket watch in your pocket in order to be able to use the wrist watch." I don't think the wrist watch would have taken off.
So it is with the Apple Watch and the iPhone. Apple, in their daftness, decided that one must carry two watches around in order to use the one on your wrist. Looney!
Too many watches spoil the broth.
If Cook's not watchful, he's going to need two watches on his person in order to juggle the moonlighting job that he'll need to earn a crust when he gets kicked out of Apple.
It has some improved features that I want. Since I have the funds why not??? Same with the iPhone, I had a 5S, before it was a year old it was replaced with a 6 Plus. I'm happy, and so is my daughter since she inherited the 5S.
Understand Want > Need. Just like me, my iPhone 5 served me okay and I really didn't need iPhone 6+, but what the hell, life is too short...why do I want to be miserably looking in a tiny 4" screen? So I upgraded to 6+ and never look back.
Comments
how the hell your camera's specs fulfilled all requirements 2 years ago but now?
It has some improved features that I want. Since I have the funds why not??? Same with the iPhone, I had a 5S, before it was a year old it was replaced with a 6 Plus. I'm happy, and so is my daughter since she inherited the 5S.
Or,,, Siri with the voice of Fester: "Mr. Dillion ... Mr. Dillon ... It's Doc ... Doc ... He's lyin' in the street, with an arrah clean through his neck .... Mr Dillon ..."
In all seriousness ... A few years ago, a scenario, similar to that which you describe, could have prevented a death in my family ... It really makes you think!
People, in theory at least, don't need to get a new iPhone as often as they do. The thing about Apple's user base, or a large percentage of it, is they WE just lust after a new iPhone ... or iPad or whatever Apple make. That's where trying to use logic on all of this falls down. So I suspect using the 'what people need' argument isn't a good metric for potential sales of the ?Watch. I also predict that even those that buy one will get a new one every couple of years as new features come out, even though they sure as heck won't need one. I have used the 'we can pass it on' excuse so many times when buying the latest iPhone yet I still have every model ever made in a cupboard along with iPads and iPods, Macs and ACDs.
As to the step up from $300 to $500 being an impediment, sales of mid and high end iDevices surely show that to not be a barrier.
I have no idea how well it will sell, I can only hope it does very well as an AAPL share holder.
Well I did need a new iPhone upgrade with my iPhone 4 being 4+ years old and slow as hell. many times just wanting to throw it against the wall it was that bad!!! I plan to keep this iPhone 6 maybe as long once again. The longer I can hold onto it, the more I save. A watch is not like a Smart phone. yes I would assume people would want to hold onto it longer. Instead of 2 years like a iPhone normally, maybe 4 years with the watch normally. Some people will try to go longer. But remember, the tech is moving fast. In 4 years the Apple Watch may seem pretty LAME, primitive, etc. Much longer then that and you start getting into batter issues and as far as I know, won't be a simple job to replace if at all. You're lucky to get a day out of it with a good battery and it'll get worse over time. I have my nice Fancy watch I've had for 20+ years and it still works and I still wear it. If I could get 20+ years out of a Smart Watch, I'd pay $500 for it no problem. That'll NEVER happen. I see 5 years MAX before you just have to replace it, it's just to outdated.
I don't even wear watches anymore and haven't since I started using Cell phones. They have a clock, why have another on me? I'm just not that lazy. Maybe cheap that I don't want to fork out $350+ for a Watch I might get 5 years out of that really doesn't do much extra that the phone doesn't already do. A phone you really still need on you to use the watch. There's no built in GPS in the thing for example, so that screws up GPS tracking of where you ran if you didn't have your phone on you. The watch market has been dying. I don't see Smart Watches turning that around. With all the Smart Watches released the last couple years and not really selling, I don't see Apple changing this. Most everyone I know has iPhones and iPads, etc and yet not a one has said they want to get a Apple Watch. This isn't like the market when the iPhone launched or even the iPad. Those weren't dying markets, there was no market really to begin with.
Comparing an Apple Watch with a regular watch is like comparing an iPhone with a regular phone ...
An Apple Watch can do so much more -- quickly and conveniently.
I suspect that we'll se a lot of tie-in promotions by carriers, banks/credit card companies and phone retailers.
What can it do that you're iPhone can't? Why fork out $350+ for a device you'll be lucky to get 5 years out of? I couldn't wear a watch at work if I wanted to and I don't. I stopped wearing watches after I got my first cell phone. I don't need two clocks on me. The watch doesn't have built in GPS, that means even for fitness, you need your phone on you and the iPhone has it's own sensors already other then Heart Rate.
I'm just fine using my phone to pay for things, I don't need to spend $350+ because I'm so lazy and just want to reach out with my wrist and pay that way. It's once thing to spend +/- $100 on some type of fitness band. You're not out a lot of money if it gets damaged or outdated and battery life is generally days. No Smart Watch is flying off the shelf yet. Pebble has been doing pretty good. But even them I don't think have hit a million in sales. Maybe in the Hundred thousands. Samscum released 6 this year alone and none have done all that good. The Moto360 has gotten some sales, but even that hasn't been huge. How is the Apple Watch going to change any of that??? Where's the market??? I sure havn't seen a Smart Watch market. I've seen a dying watch market that's been going on for many years.
I'll wait for that rumored 12" iPad and get that. The Apple Watch, HAHAHA No sale here or from anyone else I know and most all of them have iPhones and iPads also!!! Here's a idea, do something with AppleTV as it's been getting outdated and passed over by pretty much everyone else. What's it's been now, 3 years. I know I got my first one before I got my house and that's been over 2 years now, so ya, I think it's been 3 years and Apple is being passed up in that area. A area with real growth!!! It's not watches, it's streaming content!!!
Except it's not as a phone connotes a full communication devise whereas a watch will only let you gaze at it for the hour at hand.
Very boring to say the least.
But nice try.
No, a phone connotes a phone. YOU try again.
I tried to answer this question -- 2 before this post of yours ...
"In all seriousness ... A few years ago, a scenario, similar to that which you describe, could have prevented a death in my family ... It really makes you think!"
Soon, the grandkids will all be driving ... What's it worth to be able to check the vitals of a loved one or to be alerted when they are in a state of danger ... It's worth everything!
So Phones don't facilitate communication? hahaha maybe not YOURS.
I concur with digitalclips on this. History suggests this can work for Apple. Pundits questioned whether people would want a $599 smartphone when the iPhone was introduced. Or any smartphone. The smartphone business wasn't nearly as big when Apple got into it. Some people even questioned whether the iPhone even qualified as a smartphone. Also consider that before the smartphone really took off with the iPhone, there wasn't so much impetus for upgrading a phone, but rapidly changing technology has changed that.
The watch market is apparently quite large and it will become larger when people who haven't worn a watch in years (or ever) get into the market. I haven't worn a watch in 20 years and back then never had one that cost more than $30, and I'm looking forward to this. I've read similar accounts from others. I am not getting the Apple watch to know the time, but for all the other useful stuff it will do. The technology will improve rapidly, and we'll be buying the 2nd or 3rd gen models too. Maybe not replaced as often phones are now, but more often than many people currently buy watches.
I concur with both you and digitalclips, but I think you have a flaw in your argument. When the iPhone was initially launched, it was not subsidized, and sales were relatively ho-hum. This prompted Apple to reduce the price a bit, and sales improved modestly. It wasn't until carrier subsidies hit with the iPhone 3G that sales really started taking off. It turns out that there is a huge difference between paying $600 up front versus $200, even if you end up paying the difference in your contract later. In other words, the pundits you mentioned were right, in a broad market sense.
Looking around the world today, we see the same thing: sales of iPhones in regions that subsidize drastically outperform sales in regions that don't. While most people want an iPhone, many people balk at the $600 price and settle for a cheap Android instead. The take away is this: a $600 purchase price for an iPhone is a deal-breaker for a large fraction of folks. And even though I would be willing and able to pay $600 for an iPhone (if subsidies were not available) I certainly wouldn't do it every year, like I do now. (My family has 4 iPhone contracts, and at least one is always eligible for a subsidy each year. Guess who gets the new phone? Dad.) This Spring, when I hold out my iPhone 6 and use Touch ID to get an Apple Watch, I imagine that paying the $349 dollars for this device will feel, to me, a lot like paying $600 for an iPhone (which is a more capable device). That is, I will do it with joy, but with a tad bit more trepidation than my annual iPhone purchase. The trepidation I feel will most likely translate into resistance for people of lesser means.
Breaking all of this down, I would say that the answer is somewhere in the middle: a whole bunch of people will in fact get the Apple Watch because they want it and can afford it. But they are a much smaller fraction of society than the iPhone-purchasing market is, and they won't be buying a new watch as often (kind of like the iPad). It's all about the purchase price. But I do agree that enough people will purchase these watches to make it a solid hit for Apple and its shareholders. It just won't be any where near as eye-popping as iPhone... at least not until the apps and use cases start to expand and make it seemingly indispensable. That day will eventually come. And if Apple can find a business case that includes subsidies... look out!
Thompson
Great job showing everyone just how intelligent you are.
Have a look at this:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/view-from-the-valley/consumer-electronics/portable-devices/apple-watchs-wristful-of-sensors-and-mems
So ...The Apple Watch is a $350 device which can monitor some basic vitals, that you wear on your wrist. When paired with an iPhone running HealthKit apps (on your person, or within BLE/WiFi range) it can monitor/log/retain/analyze/give an alert of health conditions (as well as fitness).
When will additional sensors be added to the watch ... to the band ...
When will other. similar, wearables laden with other sensors follow -- to provide additional healthcare assistance ... through a readily-available, inexpensive platform -- the iPhone and its ecosystem ...
I'm reminded of when the iPad 2 was announced: I said I would buy one (and did) just to get the Smart Cover :}
Or more on point, buying a [then] $500 iPad, in order to be able to run the [then] $200 Proloquo2go app -- to give voice and mobility to one who can't speak * -- replacing $2,000-$5,000 worth of bulky, awkward, stationary hardware. http://www.assistiveware.com/product/proloquo2go
* to be able to order in a restaurant ... or ask to go to the bathroom ...
Who will be the firs to receive a prescription for an Apple Watch and iPhone in order to run the healthcare apps and accessories ...
This could be really, really big!
Let's check back in 12 months .. Hopefully you are being over pessimistic.
Indeed. Just before Christmas a dear old friend of ours who was 92 fell in his garage, breaking a hip and gashing his head. His wife, being dotty, sat with him but didn't call 911. Almost a day later after a neighbor called in he was rushed to ICU and sadly died a week later. Such a gizmo would have more than likely saved him too.
We do know how it will do.
It will fail. The first big failure from Apple in the 21st century.
He was actually referring to the Apple Watch, not the iPhone.
The iPhone is a good name. The Apple Watch? Not so much.
This is a good and reasoned post!
Especially the last paragraph with which, I generally agree ... or at least would have agreed, had I not read:
Suddenly the scales began to fall from my eyes ...
People will not only buy a watch because they want to --- but because they need to ...
Let me try and explain! The Apple Watch is an accessory to the iPhone ... But, the Apple Watch can also use the iPhone as an accessory -- as in @Digi's example.
What makes this practical is the hardware, systems software, apps, developers and ecosystem that are in place around iOS devices.
For the moment, put aside that the Apple Watch can tell time -- rather, consider it a healthcare monitoring device (pulse, and maybe a few other vitals). This [relatively] semi-intelligent healthcare monitoring device has the capability to invoke and exploit all the capabilities of a paired [relatively] nearby [very powerful] iPhone.
What if this is a prototype solution for a whole series of [relatively] semi-intelligent healthcare monitoring devices — say respiration, glucose, EKG …
Here’s an article that lists some of the wearable semi-intelligent healthcare monitoring devices coming to market:
Be sure and click through the 10 slides for a cross section of the possibilitiesQ
http://www.informationweek.com/mobile/10-wearable-health-tech-devices-to-watch/d/d-id/1107148
While these devices will target most mobile platforms, I suspect that the robust iDevice iOS ecosystem will be the platform of choice — especially if you consider the partnership with IBM as an entree into the enterprise and institutional healthcare systems.
Finally, it is unlikely, that a healthcare patient would need more than 2 or 3 of these [relatively] semi-intelligent healthcare monitoring devices — but the need for any one of them may be critical — and easily a justification for whatever capabilities (iPhone, apps, services, etc.) to provide the required outcome.
Totally disagree!
IMO, the two biggest [long term] announcements this year were ?Pay and ?Watch -- and the branding was deliberate genius!
How are you so sure. It may not be a home run but a double or triple is still pretty good. Oh and the iPod HiFi failed first.
Great posts from you. You have your finger on the pulse.
Why do you need a watch in your pocket as well as one on your wrist? Imagine if when wrist watches were invented, the inventor said, "You must also carry around a pocket watch in your pocket in order to be able to use the wrist watch." I don't think the wrist watch would have taken off.
So it is with the Apple Watch and the iPhone. Apple, in their daftness, decided that one must carry two watches around in order to use the one on your wrist. Looney!
Too many watches spoil the broth.
If Cook's not watchful, he's going to need two watches on his person in order to juggle the moonlighting job that he'll need to earn a crust when he gets kicked out of Apple.
It has some improved features that I want. Since I have the funds why not??? Same with the iPhone, I had a 5S, before it was a year old it was replaced with a 6 Plus. I'm happy, and so is my daughter since she inherited the 5S.
Understand Want > Need. Just like me, my iPhone 5 served me okay and I really didn't need iPhone 6+, but what the hell, life is too short...why do I want to be miserably looking in a tiny 4" screen? So I upgraded to 6+ and never look back.