So how long before the pass new laws that you can't use one while driving?
Well you can't use one while swimming. Damn I didn't think about all these people playing with their watch while driving. Maybe we will get lucky and everyone will keep them in the box and never use them. You know I have heard they are going to be worth 40,000,000 times as much 20 years from now.
I had posted on this idea of obsolescence months earlier...it may not be as much of an issue as many are opining.
First, the Watch is designed to leverage the power of the iPhone...so unless the current watch is "slow" transferring the required data back and forth to the iPhone, which I doubt, or unless the screen is inferior in some way (which I doubt), much of the improvement of the experience, if any is to be had, would likely come when you buy a new iPhone. Fairly brilliant actually.
The other area will be sensor technology. Are there new sensors that are required beyond what the watch can do know? It won't prick your skin for a blood sample, and it will never weigh you...so likely, the sensors that are there now will serve for some time into the future. Further it is not know how these sensors are designed, and what can be changed with firmware updates over time. Further, the back sensor are new
We are already in the space where newer tech is less and less required, as most everything we do is far exceeded by current technological performance, and other levels of quality (screen, manufacturing, etc).
More than anything, there perhaps will certainly be new styles, but that's the same issue that faces any watch buyer
I would not be surprised if Apple offered upgrades of the Edition at a price equal to a brand new bottom-of-the-line Sport. How to upgrade the sensors? Replace the back cover. How to upgrade the circuitry? The case, digital crown and button geometry will be carved in stone and every SoC, and screen that Apple makes for the AppleWatch will fit every AppleWatch Edition ever made.
What if Apple wants to make the AppleWatch thinner and sleeker? Introduce a new model. Is more than one model unheard of for watchmakers, or even (gulp) Apple?
It is so easy to solve this supposed upgradeability conundrum and I am sure they have thought of this and a thousand other ideas. Including "the customers we seek are the ones who don't really care about upgradeability". We'll find out what they decide is good business for them and no matter how smart we all think we are, I'd say they know their business far, far better than anyone of us.
If you are a multimillionaire you won't even think twice about buying this model. There are a lot of nouveaux riche in China and I'm sure they'll love them. It's not a coincidence that the first video shown was of a Chinese store.
That's what they make you think. 60 years ago, that would be mostly true. Today, your Rolex is all CNC micromachined, even movement parts. The cheaper ones are laser cut, or chem-milled. Then somebody screws the pieces together, and watch finished. No different at all from a MacBook.
Rolex? Who's talking Rolex? Seriously?
Ever heard of Patek Philippe? Jaeger le Coultre? Blancpain? Vacheron Constantin? ...
Apple, the most successful company on the face of the earth today, is so stupid that they will build a gold watch that will be obsolete in anywhere from one to three years, price it at $10K, and hope to attract heirloom watch buyers to it.
This is what a lot of people seem to be posting. There's some stupid thinking going on all right but I don't think it's emanating from Cupertino.
Apple, the most successful company on the face of the earth today, is so stupid that they will build a gold watch that will be obsolete in anywhere from one to three years, price it at $10K, and hope to attract heirloom watch buyers to it.
This is what a lot of people seem to be posting. There's some stupid thinking going on all right but I don't think it's emanating from Cupertino.
If Charlie Sheen can spend $30K in an entire weekend for hookers, then plenty of people will spend $10K for a Watch Edition.
10,000 freaking dollars for something that will be useless in less than three years. One has to be REALLY an idiot to buy it, quite frankly. Now where are those geniuses who said that Apple would sell one for less USD 3,000 given its massive economies of scale? Of course not, since gold is a very scarce resource, pundits.
Today's best announcement by far: the new MacBooks - all the rest is irrelevant.
Now my question to Ben Frost: are you gonna buy an "Apple Watch Edition"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
Those who want the best might still prefer old school mechanical Swiss watch. They come with tradition and craftsmanship that goes well beyond the nice casing. Electronic watches never reached this price level, to my knowledge.
If anyone can pull digital watch at this price level, I'd say Apple can... but I'm not convinced it is really possible. We'll see...
I'd say that these will be snapped up in China or wherever understated ostentation is admired.
Apple, the most successful company on the face of the earth today, is so stupid that they will build a gold watch that will be obsolete in anywhere from one to three years, price it at $10K, and hope to attract heirloom watch buyers to it.
This is what a lot of people seem to be posting. There's some stupid thinking going on all right but I don't think it's emanating from Cupertino.
What if you found out that the stock of Edition watches was limited to 10,000? You should consider that for a select crowd of Apple fans, money is no object and opinions to the contrary are useless.
At $15K that is enough to buy 13 oz / of Gold. If gold is going to appreciate you would be a bit better off with 13 oz of gold rather than the watch which won't have 13oz of gold in it..
Why buy a car, it loses value the moment you drive it off the lot.
Thats the offer price. Does not mean it will sell at that price. And what is 20 years of inflation, plus cost of repairs and maintence you won't be making much at all. It really isn't an investment.
Actually there has been a bit of a resurgence in the used watch market, especially among rarer collectable models.
It is still more of a hobby than something to invest in hoping for a good return on investment.
I don't see why these Apple watches couldn't be updated and rebuilt in future, we'd have to wait for a tear down to see what's inside.
I get a lot about what you're saying and as an investor, I hope your sentiments are more correct than mine. This is the first Apple product I've had doubts about since the HiFi. Seriously.
Hey, can't win them all. People dismissd the iPod and iPad in huge numbers and they turned out OK.
But I disagree on you saying checking your phone for the time is stupid. Millions upon millions of people do this.
Heh - that thing my mom usd to tell me about people and bridges comes to mind. I think lots of people use phones because it's convenient and most watches suck unless you are going more towards the jewlery side of things. I get it. Heck, I have prominant birthmarks a watch hides rathe nicely and I still don't wear one because time alone isn't very compelling - but again I'm escstatic about the prospects presented by the Apple watch.
That's not to say I'm resistant to change! But, at the moment, I can't see myself paying $900 for that and its other functions. <span style="line-height:1.4em;">I'm always on vibrate so I can't say anything about people keeping their ringers on.</span>
Fair enough. Again, they don't have to have everyone at launch - just enough people to ignite the developers. And the iOS ecosystem is large enough to where that is absolutely not an issue. As for ringers, I hear enough of them going off around me that they are speaking about their social ineptness on a constant basis. If the Apple watch and wearables in general does nothing else than dramatically reduce the amount of audio clutter I'll be very, very happy.
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">Upgrading... Stay with me here a moment. Again, I'm going to hold off on judgement here. I'd like to buy my girlfriend a SS 38mm one but the photos I've seen posted make the watch look too big and clunky... I'll have to gauge her reaction in-store before buying it. That being said, this thing is going to get thinner/faster/better. If she's wanting it for, lets say, 50% function 50% style, its bulk will play a big factor... ie- let's wait for it to get smaller.</span>
Again, how is that unique to the Apple watch? Also, I wouldn't get my hopes up about it getting significantly thinner any time soon. Not that I wouldn't want it too - but they are at the maximum of the constraints imposed by todays tech. Of any company on the planet, no one knows more about making portable battery powered electronic devices. No one. Untill there is a fundimental change or massive breakthrough in battery technology, we are going to be stuck with the basic form factor.
Unless they did something crazy like mold a flexible battery into the band. Which is kind of what I was expecting and rather disappointed they either didn't try it or couldn't figure out how to pull it off. The big constraint on the current size is current battery technology.
And as I said, from a functonality standpoint most of the brawn/umph is in the phone it's tethered to, so the typical cycles we see with other devices really don't apply to watch. The watch is more analogous to an external monitor than it is to a self-contained device like an iMac, iPhone, iPad, etc.
I hope people buy the sh*t out of it. I'm not a troll and I'm enough of a believer in Apple to own nearly 2k shares. This product just hasn't resonated with me yet.
People will buy the sh*t out of it. Your not a troll, just someone for whom it hasn't resonated yet. That's perfectly OK. It may never resonate with you. That's OK too If anything the andrioid marketshare silliness should have made abundantly clear by now is you can do perfectly all right with a minority market share. Well enough to be the largest company ever as far as public valuation goes, anyway. Not sure what else really matters, frankly. That Apple also constantly moves the bar with things like Health Kit and Research Kit is just icing on the cake IMNSHO.
Considering Apple will only support iOS 8 back to the iPhone 4s it's a fairly safe bet five years from now the first generation watch will not be supported by Apple or be able to interact with the current OS five years from now.
No, that's not a reasonable assumption at all. The Apple Watch has a fraction of functionality as the iPhone. It's more akin to the monitor on your desk and all I will say about that is VGA is still running around out there.
People freaking out about obsolesense on this thing are beyond hilarious...
It's reasonable to assume the iWatch won't even need an iPhone at some point.
Another unreasonable assumption. The single biggest thing that will prevent the iPhone to migrating into something as small as the Apple Watch is battery tech. Unless there is something that is not on the radar at all cooking away in someone's lab somewhere, we are going to be stuck with the pairing of the watch and phone for some time.
Think I'm over exaggerating? Go watch todays stream and pay attention to how much time they talk about sculpting the batteries to the new MacBook. Pay attention to the talk about rectangles. There ae very specific reasons that have to do with physics and chemistry. Power densisities on chemical batteris are pretty poor and it's going to take something like carbon nanotube capacitors or something else entirely new to really move the needle at this point.
As much as I would love to see this thing shrink as fast as the iPhone did from launch to today, that's just not going to happen in all reality. The volume of the Apple watch is miniscule compared to an iPhone, even witout having to worry about power thirsty things like cellular radios. Battery tech has just about bottomed out with todays chemestry, and Apple probalby knows more than any other company about battery tech for pocket sized devices.
The biggest power consumer in the watch - the screen - is already being made fun of for spending much of it's life off in this thread. But it's off for a very practical reason, and also why Apple makes such a fuss about turning on when you raise it and of automatically again - battery and power is the primary constraint.
I'm saying in 40 years no one with HALF a brain will expect the AppleWatch1 to have much functionality compared to AppleWatch40. But it does not matter. It will still tell time JUST LIKE A ROLEX as long as you have a fresh battery.
Its just like a classic car. You down own a classic car for practical reasons. You won't be driving your 57 chevy classic to work every day. Same with the AppleWatch in 2060. You won't wear it every day, but treat it like the collectors item it is and wear it on special occassions.
Again the Rolex will tell time in 40 years and you will spend close to $6000 maintaining it.
The AppleWatch will tell time in 40 years and you will spend less than $2000 buying new batteries.
Kind of ironic. I had a nicer Casio solar watch from the 80's. Worked great for years, but you know what you can't get a battery for it anymore. A regular battery doesn't work because it can't keep getting charged. They don't make that kind of battery anymore. So the wind up Rolex might well work but there's a good chance you won't even be able to get a battery for your ancient Apple watch
In 20 years it won't be working because it won't be compatible with anything. Instead of having to pair with an iPhone it will most likely be a standalone unit. Bluetooth will be so outdated it won't meet the standard of current BT 20 years from now. This is wearable technology, anything can be called luxury, so the gold version is the luxury edition but it's still a watch that can't do much of anything without an iPhone.
lol - if only the computer industry was as progressive as you think they are. My work provided Windows laptop still has a VGA port on it! People still think that's valuable! The only reason we aren't still dealing with serial and parallel ports is because Apple shipped the iMac with USB and USB only.
I just love all the Apple Angst that appear whenever they announce something new. Warms the cockles of my heart.
lol - if only the computer industry was as progressive as you think they are. My work provided Windows laptop still has a VGA port on it! People still think that's valuable! The only reason we aren't still dealing with serial and parallel ports is because Apple shipped the iMac with USB and USB only.
I just love all the Apple Angst that appear whenever they announce something new. Warms the cockles of my heart.
I know it's valuable. I work for IBM and have used a workstation W series laptop for a very long time.
No, that's not a reasonable assumption at all. The Apple Watch has a fraction of functionality as the iPhone. It's more akin to the monitor on your desk and all I will say about that is VGA is still running around out there.
People freaking out about obsolesense on this thing are beyond hilarious...
Another unreasonable assumption. The single biggest thing that will prevent the iPhone to migrating into something as small as the Apple Watch is battery tech. Unless there is something that is not on the radar at all cooking away in someone's lab somewhere, we are going to be stuck with the pairing of the watch and phone for some time.
Think I'm over exaggerating? Go watch todays stream and pay attention to how much time they talk about sculpting the batteries to the new MacBook. Pay attention to the talk about rectangles. There ae very specific reasons that have to do with physics and chemistry. Power densisities on chemical batteris are pretty poor and it's going to take something like carbon nanotube capacitors or something else entirely new to really move the needle at this point.
As much as I would love to see this thing shrink as fast as the iPhone did from launch to today, that's just not going to happen in all reality. The volume of the Apple watch is miniscule compared to an iPhone, even witout having to worry about power thirsty things like cellular radios. Battery tech has just about bottomed out with todays chemestry, and Apple probalby knows more than any other company about battery tech for pocket sized devices.
The biggest power consumer in the watch - the screen - is already being made fun of for spending much of it's life off in this thread. But it's off for a very practical reason, and also why Apple makes such a fuss about turning on when you raise it and of automatically again - battery and power is the primary constraint.
Both are reasonable unless you can provide any real information showing Apple provides decades of support for any give model of anything they produce. It's funny the people that talk about Apple needing to make money by selling products at a high margin are now the ones saying the watch will still work in 20 years.
Comments
So how long before the pass new laws that you can't use one while driving?
Well you can't use one while swimming. Damn I didn't think about all these people playing with their watch while driving. Maybe we will get lucky and everyone will keep them in the box and never use them. You know I have heard they are going to be worth 40,000,000 times as much 20 years from now.
I had posted on this idea of obsolescence months earlier...it may not be as much of an issue as many are opining.
First, the Watch is designed to leverage the power of the iPhone...so unless the current watch is "slow" transferring the required data back and forth to the iPhone, which I doubt, or unless the screen is inferior in some way (which I doubt), much of the improvement of the experience, if any is to be had, would likely come when you buy a new iPhone. Fairly brilliant actually.
The other area will be sensor technology. Are there new sensors that are required beyond what the watch can do know? It won't prick your skin for a blood sample, and it will never weigh you...so likely, the sensors that are there now will serve for some time into the future. Further it is not know how these sensors are designed, and what can be changed with firmware updates over time. Further, the back sensor are new
We are already in the space where newer tech is less and less required, as most everything we do is far exceeded by current technological performance, and other levels of quality (screen, manufacturing, etc).
More than anything, there perhaps will certainly be new styles, but that's the same issue that faces any watch buyer
I would not be surprised if Apple offered upgrades of the Edition at a price equal to a brand new bottom-of-the-line Sport. How to upgrade the sensors? Replace the back cover. How to upgrade the circuitry? The case, digital crown and button geometry will be carved in stone and every SoC, and screen that Apple makes for the AppleWatch will fit every AppleWatch Edition ever made.
What if Apple wants to make the AppleWatch thinner and sleeker? Introduce a new model. Is more than one model unheard of for watchmakers, or even (gulp) Apple?
It is so easy to solve this supposed upgradeability conundrum and I am sure they have thought of this and a thousand other ideas. Including "the customers we seek are the ones who don't really care about upgradeability". We'll find out what they decide is good business for them and no matter how smart we all think we are, I'd say they know their business far, far better than anyone of us.
That's what they make you think. 60 years ago, that would be mostly true. Today, your Rolex is all CNC micromachined, even movement parts. The cheaper ones are laser cut, or chem-milled. Then somebody screws the pieces together, and watch finished. No different at all from a MacBook.
Rolex? Who's talking Rolex? Seriously?
Ever heard of Patek Philippe? Jaeger le Coultre? Blancpain? Vacheron Constantin? ...
Those names aren't well known to the general public. Btw I have a Le Coultre (pre Jaeger) from the 60s that runs like new.
Apple, the most successful company on the face of the earth today, is so stupid that they will build a gold watch that will be obsolete in anywhere from one to three years, price it at $10K, and hope to attract heirloom watch buyers to it.
This is what a lot of people seem to be posting. There's some stupid thinking going on all right but I don't think it's emanating from Cupertino.
If Charlie Sheen can spend $30K in an entire weekend for hookers, then plenty of people will spend $10K for a Watch Edition.
10,000 freaking dollars for something that will be useless in less than three years. One has to be REALLY an idiot to buy it, quite frankly. Now where are those geniuses who said that Apple would sell one for less USD 3,000 given its massive economies of scale? Of course not, since gold is a very scarce resource, pundits.
Today's best announcement by far: the new MacBooks - all the rest is irrelevant.
Now my question to Ben Frost: are you gonna buy an "Apple Watch Edition"?
Those who want the best might still prefer old school mechanical Swiss watch. They come with tradition and craftsmanship that goes well beyond the nice casing. Electronic watches never reached this price level, to my knowledge.
If anyone can pull digital watch at this price level, I'd say Apple can... but I'm not convinced it is really possible. We'll see...
I'd say that these will be snapped up in China or wherever understated ostentation is admired.
Apple, the most successful company on the face of the earth today, is so stupid that they will build a gold watch that will be obsolete in anywhere from one to three years, price it at $10K, and hope to attract heirloom watch buyers to it.
This is what a lot of people seem to be posting. There's some stupid thinking going on all right but I don't think it's emanating from Cupertino.
What if you found out that the stock of Edition watches was limited to 10,000? You should consider that for a select crowd of Apple fans, money is no object and opinions to the contrary are useless.
Why buy a car, it loses value the moment you drive it off the lot.
Nope. I wonder if Mercedes owners get a new engine and technology package every 5 years for free.
Thats the offer price. Does not mean it will sell at that price. And what is 20 years of inflation, plus cost of repairs and maintence you won't be making much at all. It really isn't an investment.
Actually there has been a bit of a resurgence in the used watch market, especially among rarer collectable models.
It is still more of a hobby than something to invest in hoping for a good return on investment.
I don't see why these Apple watches couldn't be updated and rebuilt in future, we'd have to wait for a tear down to see what's inside.
Hey, can't win them all. People dismissd the iPod and iPad in huge numbers and they turned out OK.
Heh - that thing my mom usd to tell me about people and bridges comes to mind. I think lots of people use phones because it's convenient and most watches suck unless you are going more towards the jewlery side of things. I get it. Heck, I have prominant birthmarks a watch hides rathe nicely and I still don't wear one because time alone isn't very compelling - but again I'm escstatic about the prospects presented by the Apple watch.
Fair enough. Again, they don't have to have everyone at launch - just enough people to ignite the developers. And the iOS ecosystem is large enough to where that is absolutely not an issue. As for ringers, I hear enough of them going off around me that they are speaking about their social ineptness on a constant basis. If the Apple watch and wearables in general does nothing else than dramatically reduce the amount of audio clutter I'll be very, very happy.
Again, how is that unique to the Apple watch? Also, I wouldn't get my hopes up about it getting significantly thinner any time soon. Not that I wouldn't want it too - but they are at the maximum of the constraints imposed by todays tech. Of any company on the planet, no one knows more about making portable battery powered electronic devices. No one. Untill there is a fundimental change or massive breakthrough in battery technology, we are going to be stuck with the basic form factor.
Unless they did something crazy like mold a flexible battery into the band. Which is kind of what I was expecting and rather disappointed they either didn't try it or couldn't figure out how to pull it off. The big constraint on the current size is current battery technology.
And as I said, from a functonality standpoint most of the brawn/umph is in the phone it's tethered to, so the typical cycles we see with other devices really don't apply to watch. The watch is more analogous to an external monitor than it is to a self-contained device like an iMac, iPhone, iPad, etc.
People will buy the sh*t out of it. Your not a troll, just someone for whom it hasn't resonated yet. That's perfectly OK. It may never resonate with you. That's OK too
If Charlie Sheen can spend $30K in an entire weekend for hookers, then plenty of people will spend $10K for a Watch Edition.
Charlie Sheen has a very nice collection of vintage Pateks.
This picture he posted on Twitter is a $700,000 watch.
On one of his weekends he is rumoured to have lost one worth $150,000.
No, that's not a reasonable assumption at all. The Apple Watch has a fraction of functionality as the iPhone. It's more akin to the monitor on your desk and all I will say about that is VGA is still running around out there.
People freaking out about obsolesense on this thing are beyond hilarious...
Another unreasonable assumption. The single biggest thing that will prevent the iPhone to migrating into something as small as the Apple Watch is battery tech. Unless there is something that is not on the radar at all cooking away in someone's lab somewhere, we are going to be stuck with the pairing of the watch and phone for some time.
Think I'm over exaggerating? Go watch todays stream and pay attention to how much time they talk about sculpting the batteries to the new MacBook. Pay attention to the talk about rectangles. There ae very specific reasons that have to do with physics and chemistry. Power densisities on chemical batteris are pretty poor and it's going to take something like carbon nanotube capacitors or something else entirely new to really move the needle at this point.
As much as I would love to see this thing shrink as fast as the iPhone did from launch to today, that's just not going to happen in all reality. The volume of the Apple watch is miniscule compared to an iPhone, even witout having to worry about power thirsty things like cellular radios. Battery tech has just about bottomed out with todays chemestry, and Apple probalby knows more than any other company about battery tech for pocket sized devices.
The biggest power consumer in the watch - the screen - is already being made fun of for spending much of it's life off in this thread. But it's off for a very practical reason, and also why Apple makes such a fuss about turning on when you raise it and of automatically again - battery and power is the primary constraint.
Kind of ironic. I had a nicer Casio solar watch from the 80's. Worked great for years, but you know what you can't get a battery for it anymore. A regular battery doesn't work because it can't keep getting charged. They don't make that kind of battery anymore. So the wind up Rolex might well work but there's a good chance you won't even be able to get a battery for your ancient Apple watch
Just curious how such all you clarvoiant prognosticators are so sure that it's "soon-to-be-obsolete" with such concrete clarity?
I love it - nothing attracts experts like Apple! Too bad so few of them turn out to be experts in the long run.
lol - if only the computer industry was as progressive as you think they are. My work provided Windows laptop still has a VGA port on it! People still think that's valuable! The only reason we aren't still dealing with serial and parallel ports is because Apple shipped the iMac with USB and USB only.
I just love all the Apple Angst that appear whenever they announce something new. Warms the cockles of my heart.
lol - if only the computer industry was as progressive as you think they are. My work provided Windows laptop still has a VGA port on it! People still think that's valuable! The only reason we aren't still dealing with serial and parallel ports is because Apple shipped the iMac with USB and USB only.
I just love all the Apple Angst that appear whenever they announce something new. Warms the cockles of my heart.
I know it's valuable. I work for IBM and have used a workstation W series laptop for a very long time.
No, that's not a reasonable assumption at all. The Apple Watch has a fraction of functionality as the iPhone. It's more akin to the monitor on your desk and all I will say about that is VGA is still running around out there.
People freaking out about obsolesense on this thing are beyond hilarious...
Another unreasonable assumption. The single biggest thing that will prevent the iPhone to migrating into something as small as the Apple Watch is battery tech. Unless there is something that is not on the radar at all cooking away in someone's lab somewhere, we are going to be stuck with the pairing of the watch and phone for some time.
Think I'm over exaggerating? Go watch todays stream and pay attention to how much time they talk about sculpting the batteries to the new MacBook. Pay attention to the talk about rectangles. There ae very specific reasons that have to do with physics and chemistry. Power densisities on chemical batteris are pretty poor and it's going to take something like carbon nanotube capacitors or something else entirely new to really move the needle at this point.
As much as I would love to see this thing shrink as fast as the iPhone did from launch to today, that's just not going to happen in all reality. The volume of the Apple watch is miniscule compared to an iPhone, even witout having to worry about power thirsty things like cellular radios. Battery tech has just about bottomed out with todays chemestry, and Apple probalby knows more than any other company about battery tech for pocket sized devices.
The biggest power consumer in the watch - the screen - is already being made fun of for spending much of it's life off in this thread. But it's off for a very practical reason, and also why Apple makes such a fuss about turning on when you raise it and of automatically again - battery and power is the primary constraint.
Both are reasonable unless you can provide any real information showing Apple provides decades of support for any give model of anything they produce. It's funny the people that talk about Apple needing to make money by selling products at a high margin are now the ones saying the watch will still work in 20 years.
Just curious how such all you clarvoiant prognosticators are so sure that it's "soon-to-be-obsolete" with such concrete clarity?
I love it - nothing attracts experts like Apple! Too bad so few of them turn out to be experts in the long run.
I'm sure Apple will take advantage of the Swiss watch model, drop your watch in for service every few years and pocket a a few hundred in fees.
One thing they can definitely improve is the turn around time, getting a Swiss watch serviced can take months.