Some of these comments point up why Apple wasn't more daring in its design. Because of the big sales numbers the watch must generate the design had to be more inoffensive than bold. So,e of these people have no clue about materials, cost of design or what they sell in Bergdorf Goodman. The brought Angela in from Burberry for a reason. I, for one, am sort of surprised at the reasonable price of the stainless version. I have. Cartier stainless Tank Americain, had the stainless Pasha both costing over $3,000 albeit with a stainless bracelet. I expected $1,000 on a leather strap. I just want the Milanese loop to work on the black sport watch. That will be wicked.
People who buy $800 shoes rarely have much sense when it comes to style.
Since the bands offer the only fashionable expression for the bland featureless watch itself, I would expect they will be quite popular.
I recall in the 80s I was part of the fad of swappable grosgrain watchbands in a wide variety of patterns. The could cost as much as $30 and I owned maybe 10 of them, which I enjoyed because I had a very cheap and plain looking Seiko watch face. But after a few years, I got really bored of the whole thing and bought a Citizen chronograph which I wore until I bought an iPhone.
The thing about the watch-wearing world is that people buy dozens of watches, new ones every year as styles and fads change and then mix and match them with outfits. Swatch made an entire industry out of this. So I would expect this is the one area where Apple got it right. Since the watch its;f is so boring, the only way to make a fashion statement is with the bands.
And this is also a fad that will likely fade. Which brings up another point I have been making -- Apple hopes to compete in the watch market on the fashion level. In order to do that their static product cycles of a 2 years or more won't work. They will have to continue to offer different designs every year, and NOT just the bands if they want to stay relevant in the fashion world. I fully expect to see a round watch face by year 3 at the latest.
Wow, Apple is taking the piss with these crazy expensive watch straps.
No-one with any sense is going to buy one.
If you see a watch as solely a utility, then you're correct. If you see a watch as a status and fashion statement, as many people do (otherwise there would be no luxury watch business), then the accessory bands for the lower-priced lines aren't expensive at all. Think about women who spend $150 on a handbag and have different ones depending on what they choose to wear. This is the market for selling multiple watch bands.
These watches are not for people who wear $19 Casio watches.
I'm sure Apple is going to take a lot of heat for the $10,000 versions for the 1% by the press. The press will concentrate on this and choose to ignore that the watch prices start at $349, which I think is relatively reasonable for a watch with all this functionality. Having said that, I'm not personally a customer for this watch, but I think that especially at the low end, they're going to sell like hotcakes.
And at the $10,000 high end, I don't think Apple has to worry too much about the watches being available in "limited quantities", but if that's actually the case, I think it will create even more demand for them by the 1%. It's common for fashion companies to have very high end products to establish branding and then have consumer products at the low end that are actually garbage (and is usually not even made by the original company, but is licensed out), but carry the image of the high end. In Apple's case, the watch itself is just as high quality and has the same functionality at both the low and high end, so it works even better.
IMO, Apple has been losing their original image as a luxury brand by selling their products in Walmart and other such places. Having a $10,000 watch in the line will restore that image, even though those high-end watches probably will not be sold in the Apple stores or online, if I interpreted the presentation correctly. (It sounded to me like the $10,000 watches will be sold only in third party luxury retailers.)
IMO the watch will not be as big as the iPhone, but it will still be an enormous revenue opportunity for Apple and the margins on the bands are probably ridiculously high - almost as high as Apple's cables and converters. And anyone who wants the watch will have to use an iPhone, so it's probably going to mean conversions from Android phones back to Apple.
Has anyone else noticed that the "what's in the box" for the Apple Watch Sport says there are two straps in the box?
Yes, it says two bands when buying the whole watch. If u go to the bands and accessory section on the Apple Store app, it breaks the sport band down further. One fits small-medium, the other is medium-large. I also noticed on some of the other bands a choice of small, medium or large. There are descriptors that detail what each size is in mm.
I tried out Android Wear and found it be be nearly pointless, and in watching WWDC 2014 and the Spring Forward event, I don't see a whole lot different in terms of function from AW. I am not bashing anyone here, but if you find the Apple Watch to be awesome, why is that? Thanks!
If you see a watch as solely a utility, then you're correct. If you see a watch as a status and fashion statement, as many people do (otherwise there would be no luxury watch business), then the accessory bands for the lower-priced lines aren't expensive at all. Think about women who spend $150 on a handbag and have different ones depending on what they choose to wear. This is the market for selling multiple watch bands.
Is it a big deal to you because it's annoying? It certainly can't be the actual $10 if you're going to spend at least $400 for a watch, plus, most likely, taxes on the sale. It just seems to me that a company has a choice to make. Average out the pricing, which some companies do, with the lower priced product priced higher, and the higher priced one priced lower. Then there won't be those people who carp at the higher pricing on one. Other companies price the individual products separately. If it costs more to make, they charge more.
And ALL companies expect to make a higher profit on accessories. This is for all of you guys here who are bothered by this. The first Thunderbolt cable from Apple was thought to be too expensive, and a typical Apple pricing situation, until Intel came out with theirs, which was priced $10 more than Apple's. Then Belkin came out with one that was also $10 more than Apple's.
I think the article is wrong. The $39 charger is 2m long, while the $29 charger is 1m long. It says nothing in the product description for these chargers that indicates that they only work with either the 38mm or 42mm watch.
I think the article is wrong. The $39 charger is 2m long, while the $29 charger is 1m long. It says nothing in the product description for these chargers that indicates that they only work with either the 38mm or 42mm watch.
Now u r catching on! I am suggesting that the article poster incorrectly interpreted the price difference. I based my comment on what I actually read from official Apple Store app (which is subject to change), states cord length, not watch size. It is my opinion that just because the watch faces are less than 4mm in size difference, that actually the rear sensor package and thus charging connector are the same size on all models.
I read what the Apple retail store app says. Perhaps that all that Apple will be selling. But perhaps AI has other information. We don't know that yet. They could also be wrong. I wonder where they got those numbers from? Did someone from Apple, at the event, tell them that?
i'm not clear. what do you get for the basic $349 model? doesn't a charger come with it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuarayer
Hahaha omg. Apple has never ripped people off more than now if people actually pay this kind of money just for a band
From Apple site (it comes with a band and charger, but like the iPhone/iPod -- if you want an additional charger or accessories they cost separately). @joshuarayer try to not be an uninformed jerk:
I tried out Android Wear and found it be be nearly pointless, and in watching WWDC 2014 and the Spring Forward event, I don't see a whole lot different in terms of function from AW. I am not bashing anyone here, but if you find the Apple Watch to be awesome, why is that? Thanks!
This already does a lot more than Androidwear watches do, or Samsung's Tizen watch. As Cook said, there are already thousands of apps submitted to the App Store. How many are there for AndroidWear, that's been out for more than a few months? Did you really see the watch presentation? It was awesome!
Also, every Androidwear watch I've seen so far looks cheap. Even the newest ones. One may not like Apple's styling, but that means little, as there are thousands of expensive watches out there, and we would dislike most of them. But Apple watch doesn't look cheap and chinsy, though the usual Apple haters will say that just to get people ticked (sic) off.
From what I see, the "model options" you speak of arethe default size/color combinations that you can buy off the rack and don't relate to buying separate bands...
Otherwise, why would the Apple Watch Sport and Apple Watch, which both come standard with the rubber straps, have different connectors for attaching to the casing?
I don't agree. Since they sell that band in two sizes, it will fit. There is no indication from Apple that the mounting mechanism for the sport model is any different than these for the SS and gold versions.
From what I see, the "model options" you speak of arethe default size/color combinations that you can buy off the rack and don't relate to buying separate bands...
Otherwise, why would the Apple Watch Sport and Apple Watch, which both come standard with the rubber straps, have different connectors for attaching to the casing?
Or maybe I'm looking at it wrong...
Or maybe I am... but for Sport they only list 10 options and those 10 options none show leather or other bands. While the 20 options for the regular watch they show the leather and Milanese. I don't know, guess we have to wait till they are released and in stores to ask.
I don't agree. Since they sell that band in two sizes, it will fit. There is no indication from Apple that the mounting mechanism for the sport model is any different than these for the SS and gold versions.
That's what I'm thinking. An Apple Watch Sport with a Blue Leather Loop would look pretty sharp. Probably moreso than the other band options like the Milanese because the band is all one color rather than having a steel connector which would clash with the aluminum body.
Comments
Some of these comments point up why Apple wasn't more daring in its design. Because of the big sales numbers the watch must generate the design had to be more inoffensive than bold. So,e of these people have no clue about materials, cost of design or what they sell in Bergdorf Goodman. The brought Angela in from Burberry for a reason. I, for one, am sort of surprised at the reasonable price of the stainless version. I have. Cartier stainless Tank Americain, had the stainless Pasha both costing over $3,000 albeit with a stainless bracelet. I expected $1,000 on a leather strap. I just want the Milanese loop to work on the black sport watch. That will be wicked.
That's exactly the combo I'm leaning towards.
No-one with any sense is going to buy one.
People who buy $800 shoes rarely have much sense when it comes to style.
Since the bands offer the only fashionable expression for the bland featureless watch itself, I would expect they will be quite popular.
I recall in the 80s I was part of the fad of swappable grosgrain watchbands in a wide variety of patterns. The could cost as much as $30 and I owned maybe 10 of them, which I enjoyed because I had a very cheap and plain looking Seiko watch face. But after a few years, I got really bored of the whole thing and bought a Citizen chronograph which I wore until I bought an iPhone.
The thing about the watch-wearing world is that people buy dozens of watches, new ones every year as styles and fads change and then mix and match them with outfits. Swatch made an entire industry out of this. So I would expect this is the one area where Apple got it right. Since the watch its;f is so boring, the only way to make a fashion statement is with the bands.
And this is also a fad that will likely fade. Which brings up another point I have been making -- Apple hopes to compete in the watch market on the fashion level. In order to do that their static product cycles of a 2 years or more won't work. They will have to continue to offer different designs every year, and NOT just the bands if they want to stay relevant in the fashion world. I fully expect to see a round watch face by year 3 at the latest.
The cool kids will have new toys to play with. Can't see Samsung ever competing with this.
Apple will be in it for the long haul. They'll sell like mad in Hollywood and Asia.
Wow, Apple is taking the piss with these crazy expensive watch straps.
No-one with any sense is going to buy one.
If you see a watch as solely a utility, then you're correct. If you see a watch as a status and fashion statement, as many people do (otherwise there would be no luxury watch business), then the accessory bands for the lower-priced lines aren't expensive at all. Think about women who spend $150 on a handbag and have different ones depending on what they choose to wear. This is the market for selling multiple watch bands.
These watches are not for people who wear $19 Casio watches.
I'm sure Apple is going to take a lot of heat for the $10,000 versions for the 1% by the press. The press will concentrate on this and choose to ignore that the watch prices start at $349, which I think is relatively reasonable for a watch with all this functionality. Having said that, I'm not personally a customer for this watch, but I think that especially at the low end, they're going to sell like hotcakes.
And at the $10,000 high end, I don't think Apple has to worry too much about the watches being available in "limited quantities", but if that's actually the case, I think it will create even more demand for them by the 1%. It's common for fashion companies to have very high end products to establish branding and then have consumer products at the low end that are actually garbage (and is usually not even made by the original company, but is licensed out), but carry the image of the high end. In Apple's case, the watch itself is just as high quality and has the same functionality at both the low and high end, so it works even better.
IMO, Apple has been losing their original image as a luxury brand by selling their products in Walmart and other such places. Having a $10,000 watch in the line will restore that image, even though those high-end watches probably will not be sold in the Apple stores or online, if I interpreted the presentation correctly. (It sounded to me like the $10,000 watches will be sold only in third party luxury retailers.)
IMO the watch will not be as big as the iPhone, but it will still be an enormous revenue opportunity for Apple and the margins on the bands are probably ridiculously high - almost as high as Apple's cables and converters. And anyone who wants the watch will have to use an iPhone, so it's probably going to mean conversions from Android phones back to Apple.
Yes, it says two bands when buying the whole watch. If u go to the bands and accessory section on the Apple Store app, it breaks the sport band down further. One fits small-medium, the other is medium-large. I also noticed on some of the other bands a choice of small, medium or large. There are descriptors that detail what each size is in mm.
If you see a watch as solely a utility, then you're correct. If you see a watch as a status and fashion statement, as many people do (otherwise there would be no luxury watch business), then the accessory bands for the lower-priced lines aren't expensive at all. Think about women who spend $150 on a handbag and have different ones depending on what they choose to wear. This is the market for selling multiple watch bands.
$150?! An Hermes bag can run $6,000 or more.
Yes, really. $10 is important to me.
If you need to choose between eating or buying a watch, then you really should not buy a watch.
I read what the Apple retail store app says. Perhaps that all that Apple will be selling. But perhaps AI has other information. We don't know that yet. They could also be wrong. I wonder where they got those numbers from? Did someone from Apple, at the event, tell them that?
Eating Spam sandwiches is a great way to save money.
i'm not clear. what do you get for the basic $349 model? doesn't a charger come with it?
Hahaha omg. Apple has never ripped people off more than now if people actually pay this kind of money just for a band
From Apple site (it comes with a band and charger, but like the iPhone/iPod -- if you want an additional charger or accessories they cost separately). @joshuarayer try to not be an uninformed jerk:
What’s in the box
Would I be able to use a Milanese or leather band on the Apple Watch Sport?
According to the model options on the site -- No.
This already does a lot more than Androidwear watches do, or Samsung's Tizen watch. As Cook said, there are already thousands of apps submitted to the App Store. How many are there for AndroidWear, that's been out for more than a few months? Did you really see the watch presentation? It was awesome!
Also, every Androidwear watch I've seen so far looks cheap. Even the newest ones. One may not like Apple's styling, but that means little, as there are thousands of expensive watches out there, and we would dislike most of them. But Apple watch doesn't look cheap and chinsy, though the usual Apple haters will say that just to get people ticked (sic) off.
From what I see, the "model options" you speak of arethe default size/color combinations that you can buy off the rack and don't relate to buying separate bands...
Otherwise, why would the Apple Watch Sport and Apple Watch, which both come standard with the rubber straps, have different connectors for attaching to the casing?
Or maybe I'm looking at it wrong...
I don't agree. Since they sell that band in two sizes, it will fit. There is no indication from Apple that the mounting mechanism for the sport model is any different than these for the SS and gold versions.
From what I see, the "model options" you speak of arethe default size/color combinations that you can buy off the rack and don't relate to buying separate bands...
Otherwise, why would the Apple Watch Sport and Apple Watch, which both come standard with the rubber straps, have different connectors for attaching to the casing?
Or maybe I'm looking at it wrong...
Or maybe I am... but for Sport they only list 10 options and those 10 options none show leather or other bands. While the 20 options for the regular watch they show the leather and Milanese. I don't know, guess we have to wait till they are released and in stores to ask.
That's what I'm thinking. An Apple Watch Sport with a Blue Leather Loop would look pretty sharp. Probably moreso than the other band options like the Milanese because the band is all one color rather than having a steel connector which would clash with the aluminum body.