Just wait two years when the hardware is obsolete, and QVC The Shopping Network is selling these with deep discounts on their cable channel. /s
With the exception of the battery that can wear out over time... I don't see how the first-gen Apple Watch will be "obsolete" in two years.
It's basically a 2nd screen for an iPhone... there's not a lot of stuff happening on the watch itself.
Apple may add new sensors and features to future Apple watches... but the first Apple Watch will continue to do what it is supposed to do: notifications, Siri, health measurements, etc.
Since the guts of the ?Watch is totally contained in one module, I'm guessing Apple will keep the watch up to date with a swap out of the guts. Of course, if the dial (screen), or the sensors are updated, then my guess wouldn't apply. But you are correct, even not updates, the ?Watch hasn't lost any of its original utility or design elegance.
Since the guts of the ?Watch is totally contained in one module, I'm guessing Apple will keep the watch up to date with a swap out of the guts. Of course, if the dial (screen), or the sensors are updated, then my guess wouldn't apply. But you are correct, even not updates, the ?Watch hasn't lost any of its original utility or design elegance.
I was thinking that too, I wonder if the parts will be upgradeable , but hey it's there first shot at a wrist worn device.
That's 6.124 million, and covers five quarters in total (I think the iPhone was released towards the end of Q3 2007, which is why the numbers weren't given until Q4).
That's 6.124 million, and covers five quarters in total (I think the iPhone was released towards the end of Q3 2007, which is why the numbers weren't given until Q4).
^ I know, it was in the Q4 press release (but not the Q3). I'm sure it was in the detailed Q3 report but damned if I'm putting in even more effort to prove someone else's point. Doesn't make a difference to the result anyway, still less than 10 million even if you're generous and count five quarters.
Q2 2010 release didn't mention the iPad so I assume it either didn't release until Q3, or was so late in Q2 that it didn't warrant mentioning: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/04/20Apple-Reports-Second-Quarter-Results.html In any case, Apple sold pretty close to 15 million iPads for just the three quarters Q3 2010 through Q1 2011, so it's largely moot. They beat 15 million for the first full year, no doubt about it.
That's 6.124 million, and covers five quarters in total (I think the iPhone was released towards the end of Q3 2007, which is why the numbers weren't given until Q4).
Thanks for the correction.
I hadn't realised first year sales of the iPhone were so low. I remember the poor sales initially due to the high price, but I thought they picked up more. I think they beat 10 million by the end of calendar year 2008, which you could say is the first full calendar year of sales.
But yes, it was will be a high target to beat the iPad.
How does staring at the watch increase battery consumption?
The announced applications don't offer enough advantage for me to be ready to charge it every day.
Listening to the rumors the field of applications for the first iteration could be smaller than anticipated.
Presumably one stares at a Apple Watch with the screen active. That draws more power (probably most of the power the device uses.) I suppose you could stare at Apple Watch with the screen blank/off. Perhaps Edition owners will do that just to admire its looks.
It is really hard to tell at this point what the capabilities will be on launch day. I expect a very thorough (and big) media event shortly before the device is ready for sale and delivery. The event will detail many apps ready to go, likely with several key demos. It will be a media circus. And I will watch it live with cash in hand.
Remember that iPhone had no 3rd party apps on it for some time after launch. I keep hearing Jony's voice from the reveal movie: "I think we are at a *compelling beginning...*" When I saw my first iPhone, I though "meh. Too expensive." It got better. It is now an indisposable device for me. A huge selling point for me is Apple Pay compatible with my 5s. I'm skipping the iPhone 6 cycle (I skipped several iterations before.)
The in-home use for me is also a huge selling point. I can put my iPhone on the charger/dock at home. If I actually get a call (and for you kids out there, you can actually have real time voice communications!) I will be able to hear it anywhere in the house - via Apple Watch.
I discount the battery life issues. A full day of normal use will be plenty, particularly if the recharge cycle is 20 minutes. Put it on the charger when you take a shower. And of course, third parties will make all kinds of battery solutions, from docks to little pocket power bricks for emergencies, to cigarette lighter docks for the car, to solar solutions.
But fairly, you original point about battery life is the long pole for the device's ultimate capability. When it can get to your iPhone (or mac?) via cell or wifi independently, we will really have a killer device no one will want to be without. A killer feature would be being able to make a 911 call without iPhone nearby, and relay the GPS coordinates of the user. A lo-jack for your kid?
In a previous comment I even brought up Jobs original comment about what he meant by wanting 1% in the first year of handset sales. Jobs mentioned that handset sales had reached 1 billion so 1% would be 10 million, but did he mean the first 4 quarters on the market (5.407MM) , first full four quarters on the market (5.854MM), first full fiscal year on the market (11.627MM), first full calendar year on the market (13.675MM), some combination of all of them up through 2008 either fiscal (13.016MM) or calendar (17.379MM) or something else entirely?
Some of those latter options seem dubious and we know the iPhone went through some radical marketing changes that first year*. From the price drop, to the rebate, to the capacity drop, to the capacity increase, and then followed up by about 1.5 quarters with pretty much no iPhone sales during it's 5th quarter on the market which results in only 717k units being sold as they had completely stopped production on that first design.
To me, all that points to a lot of missteps by Apple for the original iPhone. It's arguably their best product ever and they built well enough that it could easily overcome those issues, but we can't look back with rose coloured glasses, especially when we have the first truly different product category HW from Apple since the iPhone, which very well may have similar growing pains. Apple isn't infallible so there will probably be a lot of changes during that first year.
Frankly, I don't want to hear BF and his ilk reading an unsubstantiated negative rumour about ?Watch so he can say "he told us so" when there were more than there fair share of negative press about the iPod, iPhone and iPad when they first hit the market, despite their massive success. I come here to be illuminated, not irritated.
* I didn't include the profit-sharing change over to the substation model, because I am not a fan of the subsidized model. It's a bias, for sure, and certainly should be added to that list of major changes that first year, but keep it as an addendum for this post.
In a previous comment I even brought up Jobs original comment about what he meant by wanting 1% in the first year of handset sales. Jobs mentioned that handset sales had reached 1 billion so 1% would be 10 million, but did he mean the first 4 quarters on the market (5.407MM) , first full four quarters on the market (5.854MM), first full fiscal year on the market (11.627MM), first full calendar year on the market (13.675MM), some combination of all of them up through 2008 either fiscal (13.016MM) or calendar (17.379MM) or something else entirely?
Some of those latter options seem dubious and we know the iPhone went through some radical marketing changes that first year*. From the price drop, to the rebate, to the capacity drop, to the capacity increase, and then followed up by about 1.5 quarters with pretty much no iPhone sales during it's 5th quarter on the market which results in only 717k units being sold as they had completely stopped production on that first design.
To me, all that points to a lot of missteps by Apple for the original iPhone. It's arguably their best product ever and they built well enough that it could easily overcome those issues, but we can't look back with rose coloured glasses, especially when we have the first truly different product category HW from Apple since the iPhone, which very well may have similar growing pains. Apple isn't infallible so there will probably be a lot of changes during that first year.
Frankly, I don't want to hear BF and his ilk reading an unsubstantiated negative rumour about ?Watch so he can say "he told us so" when there were more than there fair share of negative press about the iPod, iPhone and iPad when they first hit the market, despite their massive success. I come here to be illuminated, not irritated.
* I didn't include the profit-sharing change over to the substation model, because I am not a fan of the subsidized model. It's a bias, for sure, and certainly should be added to that list of major changes that first year, but keep it as an addendum for this post.
Ah, so the iPhone did sell over 10 million for the first fiscal year, which is the metric that would be used by Apple.
If that's what you'd claimed, you'd be right. Didn't though, did you? And my point was never about you being right or wrong, but that you lack any intellectual rigour. Source your claims, and don't just pull numbers out of your ass.
If you'd sourced it correctly, then you might have got the claim right.
If that's what you'd claimed, you'd be right. Didn't though, did you? And my point was never about you being right or wrong, but that you lack any intellectual rigour. Source your claims, and don't just pull numbers out of your ass.
If you'd sourced it correctly, then you might have got the claim right.
In a previous comment I even brought up Jobs original comment about what he meant by wanting 1% in the first year of handset sales. Jobs mentioned that handset sales had reached 1 billion so 1% would be 10 million, but did he mean the first 4 quarters on the market (5.407MM) , first full four quarters on the market (5.854MM), first full fiscal year on the market (11.627MM), first full calendar year on the market (13.675MM), some combination of all of them up through 2008 either fiscal (13.016MM) or calendar (17.379MM) or something else entirely?]
That article seems to indictate the first 18 months. That's 50% longer than any of the one year claims previously claimed in this thread. It also means that those claiming Apple sold more than 10MM iPhones in the first year are inarguably wrong.
That article seems to indictate the first 18 months. That's 50% longer than any of the one year claims previously claimed in this thread. It also means that those claiming Apple sold more than 10MM iPhones in the first year are inarguably wrong.
Sorry, wrong article to link to. But I remember the confusion and understood afterwards he meant calendar 2008. Here's a 'better' link:
Nice find, but that ultimately means nothing when we're talking about the first year since the start of the iPhone going on sale. Jobs clearly qualified his statement to mean the calandra year 2008, excluding the first 3 quarters in which it was on sale, but no one else in this thrad has done any such thing, nor have they made any salient argument as to why a partial calendar years should be excluded from any count of a new product. It's simply BS that the troll is saying Apple sold over 10MM in its first year sinxe going on sale and then saying, "oh, I didn't mean to include any numbers from 2007 in that count." It's back peddling and it's pathetic.
Comments
Just wait two years when the hardware is obsolete, and QVC The Shopping Network is selling these with deep discounts on their cable channel. /s
With the exception of the battery that can wear out over time... I don't see how the first-gen Apple Watch will be "obsolete" in two years.
It's basically a 2nd screen for an iPhone... there's not a lot of stuff happening on the watch itself.
Apple may add new sensors and features to future Apple watches... but the first Apple Watch will continue to do what it is supposed to do: notifications, Siri, health measurements, etc.
Since the guts of the ?Watch is totally contained in one module, I'm guessing Apple will keep the watch up to date with a swap out of the guts. Of course, if the dial (screen), or the sensors are updated, then my guess wouldn't apply. But you are correct, even not updates, the ?Watch hasn't lost any of its original utility or design elegance.
Since the guts of the ?Watch is totally contained in one module, I'm guessing Apple will keep the watch up to date with a swap out of the guts. Of course, if the dial (screen), or the sensors are updated, then my guess wouldn't apply. But you are correct, even not updates, the ?Watch hasn't lost any of its original utility or design elegance.
I was thinking that too, I wonder if the parts will be upgradeable , but hey it's there first shot at a wrist worn device.
No.
The iPad sold over 15 million units in its first year.
You're right, but if you're making claims about figures you should source them.
Q3 2010: 3.27 million
Q4 2010: 4.19 million
Q1 2011: 7.11 million
Q2 2011: 4.69 million
19.26 million total for the first full year.
No.
The iPhone sold over 10 million units in its first year.
Wrong, and again, source your figures (if you have any).
Q4 2007: 1.389 million (includes Q3)
Q1 2008: 2.315 milllion
Q2 2008: 1.703 million
Q3 2008: 0.717 million
That's 6.124 million, and covers five quarters in total (I think the iPhone was released towards the end of Q3 2007, which is why the numbers weren't given until Q4).
Why ignore the quarter it was launched?
They released the numbers. It was 270k.
I know, it was in the Q4 press release (but not the Q3). I'm sure it was in the detailed Q3 report but damned if I'm putting in even more effort to prove someone else's point. Doesn't make a difference to the result anyway, still less than 10 million even if you're generous and count five quarters.
Q2 2010 release didn't mention the iPad so I assume it either didn't release until Q3, or was so late in Q2 that it didn't warrant mentioning: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/04/20Apple-Reports-Second-Quarter-Results.html
In any case, Apple sold pretty close to 15 million iPads for just the three quarters Q3 2010 through Q1 2011, so it's largely moot. They beat 15 million for the first full year, no doubt about it.
You stare at your watch for seven straight days?
...How does staring at the watch increase battery consumption?
The announced applications don't offer enough advantage for me to be ready to charge it every day.
Listening to the rumors the field of applications for the first iteration could be smaller than anticipated.
Thanks for the correction.
I hadn't realised first year sales of the iPhone were so low. I remember the poor sales initially due to the high price, but I thought they picked up more. I think they beat 10 million by the end of calendar year 2008, which you could say is the first full calendar year of sales.
But yes, it was will be a high target to beat the iPad.
The figures are publicly available and not hard to find. Stop with the guessing.
He wasn't guessing, he was trolling. He's been informed and given the quarters and results multiple times before you had given it to him.
How does staring at the watch increase battery consumption?
The announced applications don't offer enough advantage for me to be ready to charge it every day.
Listening to the rumors the field of applications for the first iteration could be smaller than anticipated.
Presumably one stares at a Apple Watch with the screen active. That draws more power (probably most of the power the device uses.) I suppose you could stare at Apple Watch with the screen blank/off. Perhaps Edition owners will do that just to admire its looks.
It is really hard to tell at this point what the capabilities will be on launch day. I expect a very thorough (and big) media event shortly before the device is ready for sale and delivery. The event will detail many apps ready to go, likely with several key demos. It will be a media circus. And I will watch it live with cash in hand.
Remember that iPhone had no 3rd party apps on it for some time after launch. I keep hearing Jony's voice from the reveal movie: "I think we are at a *compelling beginning...*" When I saw my first iPhone, I though "meh. Too expensive." It got better. It is now an indisposable device for me. A huge selling point for me is Apple Pay compatible with my 5s. I'm skipping the iPhone 6 cycle (I skipped several iterations before.)
The in-home use for me is also a huge selling point. I can put my iPhone on the charger/dock at home. If I actually get a call (and for you kids out there, you can actually have real time voice communications!) I will be able to hear it anywhere in the house - via Apple Watch.
I discount the battery life issues. A full day of normal use will be plenty, particularly if the recharge cycle is 20 minutes. Put it on the charger when you take a shower. And of course, third parties will make all kinds of battery solutions, from docks to little pocket power bricks for emergencies, to cigarette lighter docks for the car, to solar solutions.
But fairly, you original point about battery life is the long pole for the device's ultimate capability. When it can get to your iPhone (or mac?) via cell or wifi independently, we will really have a killer device no one will want to be without. A killer feature would be being able to make a 911 call without iPhone nearby, and relay the GPS coordinates of the user. A lo-jack for your kid?
In a previous comment I even brought up Jobs original comment about what he meant by wanting 1% in the first year of handset sales. Jobs mentioned that handset sales had reached 1 billion so 1% would be 10 million, but did he mean the first 4 quarters on the market (5.407MM) , first full four quarters on the market (5.854MM), first full fiscal year on the market (11.627MM), first full calendar year on the market (13.675MM), some combination of all of them up through 2008 either fiscal (13.016MM) or calendar (17.379MM) or something else entirely?
Some of those latter options seem dubious and we know the iPhone went through some radical marketing changes that first year*. From the price drop, to the rebate, to the capacity drop, to the capacity increase, and then followed up by about 1.5 quarters with pretty much no iPhone sales during it's 5th quarter on the market which results in only 717k units being sold as they had completely stopped production on that first design.
To me, all that points to a lot of missteps by Apple for the original iPhone. It's arguably their best product ever and they built well enough that it could easily overcome those issues, but we can't look back with rose coloured glasses, especially when we have the first truly different product category HW from Apple since the iPhone, which very well may have similar growing pains. Apple isn't infallible so there will probably be a lot of changes during that first year.
Frankly, I don't want to hear BF and his ilk reading an unsubstantiated negative rumour about ?Watch so he can say "he told us so" when there were more than there fair share of negative press about the iPod, iPhone and iPad when they first hit the market, despite their massive success. I come here to be illuminated, not irritated.
* I didn't include the profit-sharing change over to the substation model, because I am not a fan of the subsidized model. It's a bias, for sure, and certainly should be added to that list of major changes that first year, but keep it as an addendum for this post.
Ah, so the iPhone did sell over 10 million for the first fiscal year, which is the metric that would be used by Apple.
I was right all along, as I suspected.
Time to eat crow, Crowley.
If that's what you'd claimed, you'd be right. Didn't though, did you? And my point was never about you being right or wrong, but that you lack any intellectual rigour. Source your claims, and don't just pull numbers out of your ass.
If you'd sourced it correctly, then you might have got the claim right.
:???:
Hmm?
He meant in calendar 2008:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/phones/2007-06-28-iphone-launch_N.htm
That article seems to indictate the first 18 months. That's 50% longer than any of the one year claims previously claimed in this thread. It also means that those claiming Apple sold more than 10MM iPhones in the first year are inarguably wrong.
Sorry, wrong article to link to. But I remember the confusion and understood afterwards he meant calendar 2008. Here's a 'better' link:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/09/live-from-macworld-2007-steve-jobs-keynote/
Nice find, but that ultimately means nothing when we're talking about the first year since the start of the iPhone going on sale. Jobs clearly qualified his statement to mean the calandra year 2008, excluding the first 3 quarters in which it was on sale, but no one else in this thrad has done any such thing, nor have they made any salient argument as to why a partial calendar years should be excluded from any count of a new product. It's simply BS that the troll is saying Apple sold over 10MM in its first year sinxe going on sale and then saying, "oh, I didn't mean to include any numbers from 2007 in that count." It's back peddling and it's pathetic.