1) That's right, just claim that all the effort to make a quality device that is useful were all pointless additions.
2) Your constant trolling needed? F. no.
Dude, get your head clear all the sh.t. I don't troll Apple. In fact, I have more Apple products in my house than any of you and also hold 500 shares of AAPL. So, stfu. I'm justifying the price for the benefit it brings. That's all I do. In fact, I was the one in here praising Apple Watch against any negative comment from you guys beside Sog35.
In fact, I have more Apple products in my house than any of you.
1) How does having more Apple products in your home than anyone else make your comments automatically more reasonable than others?
2) Would you mind explaining how that is in any way a factual statement? You'd first have to know how many Apple products I have in my home in which to compare to your collection. In fact, I don't even know how many Apple products I have without spending a couple minutes counting them up, and even then I don't know what would count as a product in this wonky comparison you've invented. For example, do I count my Ethernet-to-Thunderbolt adapter as a product? It certainly has a SKU and is sold separately from my MBP, but it's for my MBP. In fact, we'd have to have a discussion to establish these boundaries.
I'll be waiting patiently for you to tell me how many Apple products I have in my home...
It's not! If you want a shitty steel watch from another vendor then buy it, or you can spend about as much for a brilliantly milled aluminium ?Watch from Apple. If you don't care about the features, fit and finish, usability, or anything else they've added then don't buy the fucking watch. Clearly it's not for you. I'm still not sold on it but you don't see me making stupid comments about Pebble having a steel watch at a lower price with a shitty display and no biometrics features that Apple should makes one that directly completes with their low-grade offering.
I don't look at any other watch to buy, but Apple watch. You may be a fucking smart one, I assume and will have your justification as well, right? That's why we have debates here. No right or wrong, just personal opinion. It may or may not for me? No one even fucking knows but myself.
1) How does having more Apple products in your home than anyone else make your comments automatically more reasonable than others?
2) Would you mind explaining how that is in any way a factual statement? You'd first have to know how many Apple products I have in my home in which to compare to your collection. In fact, I don't even know how many Apple products I have without spending a couple minutes counting them up, and even then I don't know what would count as a product in this wonky comparison you've invented. For example, do I count my Ethernet-to-Thunderbolt adapter as a product? It certainly has a SKU and is sold separately from my MBP, but it's for my MBP. In fact, we'd have to have a discussion to establish these boundaries.
I'll be waiting patiently for you to tell me how many Apple products I have in my home...
1) Did I say mine was more reasonable than others? Your ass put those words in my mouth. I just stated my opinion.
2) You kid need to grow up a bit and take people's opinion a little bit less offending. I just stated that fact because I loved Apple products and never troll them. My fucking studio are full of Apple products. I bought both Apple software and hardware in fact.
1) Did I say mine was more reasonable than others? Your ass put those words in my mouth. I just stated my opinion.
2) You kid need to grow up a bit and take people's opinion a little bit less offending. I just stated that fact because I loved Apple products and never troll them. My fucking studio are full of Apple products. I bought both Apple software and hardware in fact.
Conversation ended.
It's hard to interpret your words any other way, especially when you state as fact that you own more Apple products than anyone else here.
Including NFC isn't the sole solution, indeed many have included NFC for years now.
No one is going to use it if it's too hard to load on your room key or bank details. (Plus authentication for bank card use also seems to be a question mark here.)
The beauty of the apple ecosystem is that once you get your ticket, it's in your passbook and immediately available on your watch. In time it may be as simple as a single passbook document containing all your tickets and room keys.
You are better off with wearing 2 watches ( 1 standard, 1 smart or fitbit) then a combo analog/digital.
When in the history of tech has a combo of digital and analog make any sense?
While I'm not sure if I'd be fond of wearing two watches, I do agree that the mix of analog and digital can be a bit silly at times. I can see smartwatches becoming competition for your everyday, more budget oriented, watch, but I can't see it competing with higher-end analog wrist watches.
Style aside, there is always the test of time that these watches will have to face. Technology moves too fast for something like a smartwatch to become a "timeless" wrist worn device. The advancements in battery, displays, processors, manufacturing techniques, etc., all of these will change the landscape of the smartwatch market in a short amount of time.
The Apple Watch is not the threat. Mobile phones were. That's when people stopped wearing watches altogether.
The Watch is unlikely to convert a lot of wearers of traditional watches, and instead appeal to those that dropped wearing a watch and used their mobiles. Those people can now wear their mobile phones on their wrists (whether an Apple Watch or a simpler "notifications only" hybrid).
The Apple Watch is not the threat. Mobile phones were. That's when people stopped wearing watches altogether.
The Watch is unlikely to convert a lot of wearers of traditional watches, and instead appeal to those that dropped wearing a watch and used their mobiles. Those people can now wear their mobile phones on their wrists (whether an Apple Watch or a simpler "notifications only" hybrid).
Wrist watch sales have been rising, generate a huge amount of revenue and profit, and there was a reported 1.2 billions sold in 2014, compared to the 1.3 billion handset — not just smartphones — sold in the same timeframe.
There's a fundamental difference between luxury watches and Apple products. Luxury watches go up in value as they get older. Apple products go out of support.
Wrist watch sales have been rising, generate a huge amount of revenue and profit, and there was a reported 1.2 billions sold in 2014, compared to the 1.3 billion handset — not just smartphones — sold in the same timeframe.
That's an interesting statement. It would be interesting to understand the breakdown of that revenue increase and which market segment generated it. but this does seem to indicate, that the watch industry has been successful at placing watches as a fashion accessory, rather than a practical use. which leads me to believe that the Apple Watch can take a small market share from this fashion accessory Industry, but unlikely to dominate it.
That's an interesting statement. It would be interesting to understand the breakdown of that revenue increase and which market segment generated it. but this does seem to indicate, that the watch industry has been successful at placing watches as a fashion accessory, rather than a practical use. which leads me to believe that the Apple Watch can take a small market share from this fashion accessory Industry, but unlikely to dominate it.
Define dominate? Apple hasn't ever been the dominate handset maker in terms of units and yet they quickly dominated the revenue and profits of that market segment, even as Blackberry were seeing more sales from the smartphone interest spill over.
I think Apple is set to dominate the smart wrist-worn device market segment in terms of unit sales, revenue and profit. I think it's possible that entire Android Wear devices could dominate over the smart wrist worn devices in unit sales, but no single vendor is likely to be higher than Apple is terms of units, unless they can pull what Samsung did with smartphones.
I'd have to see numbers of the traditional watch market, but I think that could be dug in well to prevent even a company like Apple shake it up with the same ease they've done with CE companies. I don't think it's so much fashion that makes that an issue — fashion is fickle and constantly moving — but whatever psychology makes someone think that $10K to millions of dollars for a traditional watch that pretty much only tells time is something worth buying. Those watches can be very fashionable but I think they offer something else more important to the buyer and wearer. Status, sentimentality, and sophistication come to mind but I don't think any one of those words accurately sum up the reason to buy something mechanical that does very little that you can wear for a lifetime and then let your kids wear.
Define dominate? Apple hasn't ever been the dominate handset maker in terms of units and yet they quickly dominated the revenue and profits of that market segment, even as Blackberry were seeing more sales from the smartphone interest spill over.
Define "that market segment." If you're talking about all smartphone users, then yeah, your statement would be true. But a more accurate appraisal should distinguish the users who are just interested in calling/texting/emailing/using maps from those looking to play high-end games or use other computationally intensive activities that call on the power of flagships. The first group of users aren't in the market for an iPhone or an Android flagship since just about any smartphone would meet their needs. If you compare apples to apples and look solely at the market for flagships, then Apple's profit share would actually correspond to a proportionally large marketshare.
Define "that market segment." If you're talking about all smartphone users, then yeah, your statement would be true. But a more accurate appraisal should distinguish the users who are just interested in calling/texting/emailing/using maps from those looking to play high-end games or use other computationally intensive activities that call on the power of flagships. The first group of users aren't in the market for an iPhone or an Android flagship since just about any smartphone would meet their needs. If you compare apples to apples and look solely at the market for flagships, then Apple's profit share would actually correspond to a proportionally large marketshare.
I beg to differ. That first group is probably the biggest group that buys flagship phones.
Define "that market segment." If you're talking about all smartphone users, then yeah, your statement would be true. But a more accurate appraisal should distinguish the users who are just interested in calling/texting/emailing/using maps from those looking to play high-end games or use other computationally intensive activities that call on the power of flagships. The first group of users aren't in the market for an iPhone or an Android flagship since just about any smartphone would meet their needs. If you compare apples to apples and look solely at the market for flagships, then Apple's profit share would actually correspond to a proportionally large marketshare.
I actually wrote the wrong term there. I meant to write market, not market segment, to indicate all handsets. But either way Apple quickly become the company with the highest profits. I think by the Summer quality of 2008 that happened, if memory serves.
Define dominate? Apple hasn't ever been the dominate handset maker in terms of units and yet they quickly dominated the revenue and profits of that market segment, even as Blackberry were seeing more sales from the smartphone interest spill over.
I think Apple is set to dominate the smart wrist-worn device market segment in terms of unit sales, revenue and profit. I think it's possible that entire Android Wear devices could dominate over the smart wrist worn devices in unit sales, but no single vendor is likely to be higher than Apple is terms of units, unless they can pull what Samsung did with smartphones.
I'd have to see numbers of the traditional watch market, but I think that could be dug in well to prevent even a company like Apple shake it up with the same ease they've done with CE companies. I don't think it's so much fashion that makes that an issue — fashion is fickle and constantly moving — but whatever psychology makes someone think that $10K to millions of dollars for a traditional watch that pretty much only tells time is something worth buying. Those watches can be very fashionable but I think they offer something else more important to the buyer and wearer. Status, sentimentality, and sophistication come to mind but I don't think any one of those words accurately sum up the reason to buy something mechanical that does very little that you can wear for a lifetime and then let your kids wear.
Well, this thread is primarily around the potential Swatch watch.
I think one can safely say that the only relevant market sector for the Apple Watch are users of smartphones. Within this group, the ones most likely to buy a smart watch are those that have forgone a normal watch in the past few years but now see a value-add in a smartwatch. Very few people in this segment would go for a barebones smart watch like the one proposed by Swatch. Apple Watch rules among these guys, rightly so.
But among people that own a smartphone but wear a traditional watch today (and there a few), I would venture that functionality is not high on their reasons for wearing a watch, and I think you agree with this view. I further venture that these types of people would not want to look like a geek with a mini phone on the wrist. so they may very well be intrigued by a barebones Swatch/Omega /Tissot smartwatch that gives them what they get today, but on top of that, some added features such as NFC/payments and notifications.
Comments
1) That's right, just claim that all the effort to make a quality device that is useful were all pointless additions.
2) Your constant trolling needed? F. no.
Dude, get your head clear all the sh.t. I don't troll Apple. In fact, I have more Apple products in my house than any of you and also hold 500 shares of AAPL. So, stfu. I'm justifying the price for the benefit it brings. That's all I do. In fact, I was the one in here praising Apple Watch against any negative comment from you guys beside Sog35.
1) How does having more Apple products in your home than anyone else make your comments automatically more reasonable than others?
2) Would you mind explaining how that is in any way a factual statement? You'd first have to know how many Apple products I have in my home in which to compare to your collection. In fact, I don't even know how many Apple products I have without spending a couple minutes counting them up, and even then I don't know what would count as a product in this wonky comparison you've invented. For example, do I count my Ethernet-to-Thunderbolt adapter as a product? It certainly has a SKU and is sold separately from my MBP, but it's for my MBP. In fact, we'd have to have a discussion to establish these boundaries.
I'll be waiting patiently for you to tell me how many Apple products I have in my home...
It's not! If you want a shitty steel watch from another vendor then buy it, or you can spend about as much for a brilliantly milled aluminium ?Watch from Apple. If you don't care about the features, fit and finish, usability, or anything else they've added then don't buy the fucking watch. Clearly it's not for you. I'm still not sold on it but you don't see me making stupid comments about Pebble having a steel watch at a lower price with a shitty display and no biometrics features that Apple should makes one that directly completes with their low-grade offering.
I don't look at any other watch to buy, but Apple watch. You may be a fucking smart one, I assume and will have your justification as well, right? That's why we have debates here. No right or wrong, just personal opinion. It may or may not for me? No one even fucking knows but myself.
1) How does having more Apple products in your home than anyone else make your comments automatically more reasonable than others?
2) Would you mind explaining how that is in any way a factual statement? You'd first have to know how many Apple products I have in my home in which to compare to your collection. In fact, I don't even know how many Apple products I have without spending a couple minutes counting them up, and even then I don't know what would count as a product in this wonky comparison you've invented. For example, do I count my Ethernet-to-Thunderbolt adapter as a product? It certainly has a SKU and is sold separately from my MBP, but it's for my MBP. In fact, we'd have to have a discussion to establish these boundaries.
I'll be waiting patiently for you to tell me how many Apple products I have in my home...
1) Did I say mine was more reasonable than others? Your ass put those words in my mouth. I just stated my opinion.
2) You kid need to grow up a bit and take people's opinion a little bit less offending. I just stated that fact because I loved Apple products and never troll them. My fucking studio are full of Apple products. I bought both Apple software and hardware in fact.
Conversation ended.
It's hard to interpret your words any other way, especially when you state as fact that you own more Apple products than anyone else here.
Hayek's stance sounds very similar to Lazaridis, BlackBerry's CEO from back when the iPhone was shook the mobile world.
Could Swatch be following in BlackBerry's footsteps?
For all you people that think Swatch only makes cheap plastic watches:
Swatch Group brands
Breguet, Harry Winston, Blancpain, Glashütte Original, Jaquet Droz, Léon Hatot, Omega,Longines, Rado, Union Glashütte, Tissot, Balmain, Certina, Mido, Hamilton, Calvin Klein watches + jewelry, Swatch, Flik Flak.
Swatch Group production companies
ETA, Nivarox-FAR, François Golay, Comadur, Rubattel et Weyermann, MOM Le Prélet, Universo, Manufacture Ruedin, Simon Et Membrez, Lascor, Novi, Swatch Group Assembly, DYB, EM Microelectronic, Renata, Micro Crystal and Swiss Timing.
Group revenue
The Swatch Group AG had revenues for the full year 2014 of US$8.71bn. This was 2.99% above the prior year's results.
BLANCPAIN LE BRASSUS TOURBILLON CARROUSEL
PRICE: $3.85 MILLION
Including NFC isn't the sole solution, indeed many have included NFC for years now.
No one is going to use it if it's too hard to load on your room key or bank details. (Plus authentication for bank card use also seems to be a question mark here.)
The beauty of the apple ecosystem is that once you get your ticket, it's in your passbook and immediately available on your watch. In time it may be as simple as a single passbook document containing all your tickets and room keys.
IMO this is a terrible idea.
You are better off with wearing 2 watches ( 1 standard, 1 smart or fitbit) then a combo analog/digital.
When in the history of tech has a combo of digital and analog make any sense?
While I'm not sure if I'd be fond of wearing two watches, I do agree that the mix of analog and digital can be a bit silly at times. I can see smartwatches becoming competition for your everyday, more budget oriented, watch, but I can't see it competing with higher-end analog wrist watches.
Style aside, there is always the test of time that these watches will have to face. Technology moves too fast for something like a smartwatch to become a "timeless" wrist worn device. The advancements in battery, displays, processors, manufacturing techniques, etc., all of these will change the landscape of the smartwatch market in a short amount of time.
The Apple Watch is not the threat. Mobile phones were. That's when people stopped wearing watches altogether.
The Watch is unlikely to convert a lot of wearers of traditional watches, and instead appeal to those that dropped wearing a watch and used their mobiles. Those people can now wear their mobile phones on their wrists (whether an Apple Watch or a simpler "notifications only" hybrid).
Wrist watch sales have been rising, generate a huge amount of revenue and profit, and there was a reported 1.2 billions sold in 2014, compared to the 1.3 billion handset — not just smartphones — sold in the same timeframe.
That's an interesting statement. It would be interesting to understand the breakdown of that revenue increase and which market segment generated it. but this does seem to indicate, that the watch industry has been successful at placing watches as a fashion accessory, rather than a practical use. which leads me to believe that the Apple Watch can take a small market share from this fashion accessory Industry, but unlikely to dominate it.
Define dominate? Apple hasn't ever been the dominate handset maker in terms of units and yet they quickly dominated the revenue and profits of that market segment, even as Blackberry were seeing more sales from the smartphone interest spill over.
I think Apple is set to dominate the smart wrist-worn device market segment in terms of unit sales, revenue and profit. I think it's possible that entire Android Wear devices could dominate over the smart wrist worn devices in unit sales, but no single vendor is likely to be higher than Apple is terms of units, unless they can pull what Samsung did with smartphones.
I'd have to see numbers of the traditional watch market, but I think that could be dug in well to prevent even a company like Apple shake it up with the same ease they've done with CE companies. I don't think it's so much fashion that makes that an issue — fashion is fickle and constantly moving — but whatever psychology makes someone think that $10K to millions of dollars for a traditional watch that pretty much only tells time is something worth buying. Those watches can be very fashionable but I think they offer something else more important to the buyer and wearer. Status, sentimentality, and sophistication come to mind but I don't think any one of those words accurately sum up the reason to buy something mechanical that does very little that you can wear for a lifetime and then let your kids wear.
Define dominate? Apple hasn't ever been the dominate handset maker in terms of units and yet they quickly dominated the revenue and profits of that market segment, even as Blackberry were seeing more sales from the smartphone interest spill over.
Define "that market segment." If you're talking about all smartphone users, then yeah, your statement would be true. But a more accurate appraisal should distinguish the users who are just interested in calling/texting/emailing/using maps from those looking to play high-end games or use other computationally intensive activities that call on the power of flagships. The first group of users aren't in the market for an iPhone or an Android flagship since just about any smartphone would meet their needs. If you compare apples to apples and look solely at the market for flagships, then Apple's profit share would actually correspond to a proportionally large marketshare.
I beg to differ. That first group is probably the biggest group that buys flagship phones.
I actually wrote the wrong term there. I meant to write market, not market segment, to indicate all handsets. But either way Apple quickly become the company with the highest profits. I think by the Summer quality of 2008 that happened, if memory serves.
Well, this thread is primarily around the potential Swatch watch.
I think one can safely say that the only relevant market sector for the Apple Watch are users of smartphones. Within this group, the ones most likely to buy a smart watch are those that have forgone a normal watch in the past few years but now see a value-add in a smartwatch. Very few people in this segment would go for a barebones smart watch like the one proposed by Swatch. Apple Watch rules among these guys, rightly so.
But among people that own a smartphone but wear a traditional watch today (and there a few), I would venture that functionality is not high on their reasons for wearing a watch, and I think you agree with this view. I further venture that these types of people would not want to look like a geek with a mini phone on the wrist. so they may very well be intrigued by a barebones Swatch/Omega /Tissot smartwatch that gives them what they get today, but on top of that, some added features such as NFC/payments and notifications.
.