New Apple Watch models with different casing materials expected to launch this fall

1235711

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 207
    robbyxrobbyx Posts: 479member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy View Post





    that isn't what makes him a troll. his racism does. his calling buyers of the watch fools or idiots does.



    Hmmmm....well, I don't spend a lot of time in any online forum, but I've never run across racist posts from him.  Condescending and judgmental, sure, but I haven't seen anything I'd call racist.  I think racist language would be grounds for banning him, as it should be.  That said, he certainly doesn't hold a monopoly on just being rude.  There are a few Apple-loving blowhards with tens of thousands of posts under their belts on here who are nothing but judgmental and rude.  They're always right.  Everyone else is always wrong.  And their language often borders on insulting.  But no one is calling them trolls.  Why?  Because they worship at the alter of Apple.

     

    The sad reality is, the Internet, social media, and forums like this have made us (humans) less friendly, less willing to hear another point of view, and more determined that our personal opinions are the ONLY right opinions.  We have become increasingly rude as a society and all these quick modes of communication are only exacerbating it.  People sit online and write whatever they want because they aren't dealing with REAL people, just online personalities.  So who cares about manners?  Feelings?  We've all been guilty of it, myself included.

     

    People interact with one another online in ways they'd never EVER do in the real world.  That's just the sad reality of where we're headed.  Our relationships used to be narrow and deep.  We knew and interacted with a few people, but our relationships were built on mutual trust, respect, and understanding earned over time.  Now our relationships are wide and shallow and people are expendable/interchangeable.  So why bother being polite?  We didn't really have "trolls" before the Internet because no one would put up with it in the real world.  And the trolls themselves would be too embarrassed to act the way they do online in front of real people.  And that goes just as much for the Apple-worshipping fanboys with zero social graces as it does for the Apple-hating trolls.

  • Reply 82 of 207
    robbyxrobbyx Posts: 479member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by brucemc View Post

     

    Ben Thompson has (as usual) a very well thought out piece on his blog at Stratechery.  Specifically like his take on why Apple "has to" stress fashion so hard.

     

    http://stratechery.com




    Great read.  Thanks for posting it.  I very much agree with the spirit of his piece.  I'm just not convinced that the Apple Watch (or any smart watch) will be the primary means of interacting with Internet-enabled things.  But perhaps wearables are a necessary step to get us to where we're going?

     

    In my opinion, it's all about voice control.  When I can walk into a room and say "lights at 50%" or "play the new Arctic Monkeys album" or "watch Walking Dead" or "set the oven to 450 degrees", etc., and it knows where I am in the house and which device(s) to control, that will be revolutionary.  Until then, the watch (or iPhone, for that matter) doesn't really add value here.  I'm in the midst of a major home remodel/rebuild and I seriously considered adding "smart home" features like lighting that I could control from my iPhone.  But then I realized how many steps are involved in 1) picking up the iPhone, 2) unlocking it, 3) launching the app, 4) selecting the room, and 5) finally, adjusting my settings.  In that time I can get my lazy *** off the couch, manually adjust my lighting, and sit back down.  

  • Reply 83 of 207
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by robbyx View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by brucemc View Post

     

    Ben Thompson has (as usual) a very well thought out piece on his blog at Stratechery.  Specifically like his take on why Apple "has to" stress fashion so hard.

     

    http://stratechery.com




    Great read.  Thanks for posting it.  I very much agree with the spirit of his piece.  I'm just not convinced that the Apple Watch (or any smart watch) will be the primary means of interacting with Internet-enabled things.  But perhaps wearables are a necessary step to get us to where we're going?

     

    In my opinion, it's all about voice control.  When I can walk into a room and say "lights at 50%" or "play the new Arctic Monkeys album" or "watch Walking Dead" or "set the oven to 450 degrees", etc., and it knows where I am in the house and which device(s) to control, that will be revolutionary.  Until then, the watch (or iPhone, for that matter) doesn't really add value here.  I'm in the midst of a major home remodel/rebuild and I seriously considered adding "smart home" features like lighting that I could control from my iPhone.  But then I realized how many steps are involved in 1) picking up the iPhone, 2) unlocking it, 3) launching the app, 4) selecting the room, and 5) finally, adjusting my settings.  In that time I can get my lazy *** off the couch, manually adjust my lighting, and sit back down.  


     

     

    I disagree with you here.

     

    I think voice is a dead end, and that it will never get adopted in a big way, for simple reasons: you don't use voice in most public places if you can help it, and it doesn't solve a problem that exists. Also, most people find it odd talking to a computer.

  • Reply 84 of 207
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member

    Make the cases out of leftover sapphire blocks.

    Toss in a few gears (made in Switzerland) and a few red/blue/green LEDs to make it look cool...

    They can flash in sync with the “Beats" music in your car… <img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />

  • Reply 85 of 207
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,073member

    Hublot say they won't sell magic gold to anyone. I'd like to see Apple sell a watch made with single isotope Platinum, sort of like a single malt whiskey only rarer.

     

    One thing I can't get my head around with the Apple watch and one area where I think they have miscued badly is that the $17,000 top of the line edition watch is the exact same guts as the $350, you're just paying for the gold and higher quality band. Unlike say other expensive watches. Take Rolex for example you can pay 40 grand for a gold Rolex but the same watch in Stainless Steel is still going to be 10 grand. They aren't going to put a 200 piece of shit, in a gold case. 

     

    You should check out the mechanism video on the Hublot site about halfway down the page, one of the best exploded view videos I've ever seen.

     

    So because it's the same shite $300 internals, that it cannot really pretend to be up there with actual hand crafted watches, so because of that, they should have made the Edition watch just a reflection of the better quality materials and kept the price around say $5,000 tops. I think they could then have sold a lot more and not take the piss as though this really is an object good enough to be handed down to your children. Rather than something you might hand down to your cleaner.

  • Reply 86 of 207

     Which model of Apple Watch do you plan on picking up?

  • Reply 87 of 207

    I didn't know so many of you people, on this tech site, were this much into jewelry. Are you going to start wearing diamond earring now?

  • Reply 88 of 207

    This situation will likely change in the near future; already Apple Insider is reporting that new Apple Watch models with different casing materials are expected to launch this fall.

  • Reply 89 of 207
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    analogjack wrote: »
    One thing I can't get my head around with the Apple watch and one area where I think they have miscued badly is that the $17,000 top of the line edition watch is the exact same guts as the $350, you're just paying for the gold and higher quality band.
    Nope. Most estimates put the gold content at about $2000. You're paying for the privilege to own a limited and exclusive offering, crafted in gold. you're paying for the engineering to create a process that allows Apple to "use as little gold as possible" while still claiming 18k gold. You're paying for the specialized manufacturing process to produce the gold watch and accessories. But most of all you're paying for bragging rights to the most expensive product Apple has ever sold. Unlike the $10,000 20th Anniversary Macintosh which was delivered to your door in a limo and setup by a guy wearing a tux and white gloves, you'll actually have to go into a store to buy it.
  • Reply 90 of 207
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    I didn't know so many of you people, on this tech site, were this much into jewelry. Are you going to start wearing diamond earring now?
    Who says they aren't already? More to the point, apple will eventually need to offer diamond watches to compete on this level. Gold is not enough to distinguish the high end, since they must start offering a mid-priced gold tone model for their customers to accessorize with their MacBooks, iPhones, and iPads.

    700
  • Reply 91 of 207
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post





    Who says they aren't already? More to the point, apple will eventually need to offer diamond watches to compete on this level. Gold is not enough to distinguish the high end, since they must start offering a mid-priced gold tone model for their customers to accessorize with their MacBooks, iPhones, and iPads.




    Maybe they should start making bluetooth connected diamond earrings and necklaces as well. They could have rappers (Dr. Dre?) advertize it in their music videos along with Angela Ahrendts, with her talking about fashion and makeup. Bling Bling!

  • Reply 92 of 207
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AWilliams87 View Post

     

    I didn't know so many of you people, on this tech site, were this much into jewelry. Are you going to start wearing diamond earring now?




    Don't most people wear some sort of Jewellery?  Rings on their fingers, watches, necklaces?  The Apple Watch isn't meant to be jewellery per se.  As I've mentioned before, it's more of a fashion statement, like nice clothing, nice pair of shoes, sun glasses etc.

     

    The Ben Thompson article is very interesting, and certainly my take on most things.

  • Reply 93 of 207
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by davygee View Post

     



    Don't most people wear some sort of Jewellery?  Rings on their fingers, watches, necklaces?  The Apple Watch isn't meant to be jewellery per se.  As I've mentioned before, it's more of a fashion statement, like nice clothing, nice pair of shoes, sun glasses etc.

     

    The Ben Thompson article is very interesting, and certainly my take on most things.


    Watches are fashion accessories, thus considered jewelry.

  • Reply 94 of 207
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

     



    I read it was confirmed that the bands are reversible, that this is Apple's solution to left-handed users. But if I were left handed I might feel a little cheated as the digital crown on the bottom just looks less appealing to me. But to each his own. I just wonder why Apple didn't put it in the middle. And did they really need two buttons?




    Ah, upper left versus upper right?

     

    yes that is a difference and one that I can see having an less effective "look". Perhaps that other button (I forget what it does) being on that same side forced that asymmetry?

     

    Having both buttons on the same side has a certain functionality. When I push a watch button I steady the watch casing with my thumb oppose the push on the other side of the watch: so the same handling would have my thumb hold the watch on the left of the case while I press either button with my forefinger. And then thinking about it the Upper left position would seem to naturally oppose a steadying thumb pressing as it would seem to naturally fall, against the lower right of the case,  better than a lower left where I'd have to turn my wrist.

     

    That said: is handedness recognized in watch lines (not that Apple shouldn't regardless).

  • Reply 95 of 207
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Watches are fashion accessories, thus considered jewelry.
    You mean they are tools that can also be fashionable...
    They are not only fashion accessories.
  • Reply 96 of 207
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AWilliams87 View Post

     

    Watches are fashion accessories, thus considered jewelry.




    And what's your point caller?  If you don't like the idea of the Apple Watch, then fine.  If you don't like that it may be regarded as Jewellery, then fine.  So why remain in this thread?

  • Reply 97 of 207
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member

    "most people find it odd talking to a computer."

     

    That's rather malleable. Take the great scene in one of the Star Treks (partially filmed at the Monterey bay Aquarium, about time travel and whales. When Scotty is trying to sell the transparent aluminum tech to get some panels to create a holding tank on the Warbird and he goes to the Mac Classic and starts to talk to it, then after no response picks up the louse and starts to talk into IT...

     

    Times change: back when anyone I spotted talking "to themselves" on the street was someone to give an extra wide passage just in case; now it's simply some BT earpiece user having a phone conversation. Or so I like to think for my own comfort... But I still don't make eye contact: no need to push the luck. :)

     

    Heck time was being anywhere away from a home, work desk etc. meant being out of touch with everyone. Now that is most definitely NOT the norm.

  • Reply 98 of 207
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AWilliams87 View Post

     

    I didn't know so many of you people, on this tech site, were this much into jewelry. Are you going to start wearing diamond earring now?




    Rather pointless. I've worn a wrist mounted dive computer for decades without ever feeling the urge to start wearing a diamond earring (and given barracuda are attracted to shiny blinking things that's probably prudent...). I choose mountain parkas for their functional attributes, yet clothing as a general area potentially has fashion attributes. Yet again: no urge for a diamond earring.

     

    Functional tools may be wearable. The Apple device falls into that category while having some fashion aspects (though I'd lean more to aesthetic, but that's a personal viewpoint), certainly at the higher end of the offering list. It's certainly not simply an inert bracelet around the wearers wrist. 

     

    BTW: Flinching from a diamond earring is so 50's. Awfully cute too in that sweet, post war naiveté way.  How wide is your tie?

  • Reply 99 of 207
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davygee View Post

     

     The Apple Watch isn't meant to be jewellery per se.  As I've mentioned before, it's more of a fashion statement, like nice clothing, nice pair of shoes, sun glasses etc.


    Perhaps some see it that way. The ones with diamond encrusted watches surely consider it more than a "fashion statement". 

     

    That said, let's say the ?Watch falls squarely (no pun intended) into the latter. If so, it will need to co-ordinate with with a person's jewelry and other fashion "statements". Given that, what is a person to do about buying an Apple watch if all of their jewelry and "fashion statement" items fall into the gold-tone area (i.e. most people), but aren't wealthy enough to afford a $10,000-$17,000 solid gold ?Watch (i.e. most people)? Do you figure they will just chose a silver or black model? Change their gold-tone "fashion statement" to silver, and sell their gold iPhone for a silver one, buy a whole new wardrobe, jewelry, shoes and sunglasses, etc.?

  • Reply 100 of 207
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac_128 View Post

     

    Perhaps some see it that way. The ones with diamond encrusted watches surely consider it more than a "fashion statement". 

     

    That said, let's say the ?Watch falls squarely (no pun intended) into the latter. If so, it will need to co-ordinate with with a person's jewelry and other fashion "statements". Given that, what is a person to do about buying an Apple watch if all of their jewelry and "fashion statement" items fall into the gold-tone area (i.e. most people), but aren't wealthy enough to afford a $10,000-$17,000 solid gold ?Watch (i.e. most people)? Do you figure they will just chose a silver or black model? Change their gold-tone "fashion statement" to silver, and sell their gold iPhone for a silver one, buy a whole new wardrobe, jewelry, shoes and sunglasses, etc.?


     

    Myself... I couldn't give a rat's patootie about wardrobe coordination (... and you'd know that if you saw me).

     

    On the other hand... a few of my male friends and every one of my female friends, including my Wife, would agree with you wholeheartedly... especially if they are going to spend over $300 (or $100 for that matter) on something attached to their wrist.

     

    gold gold gold

Sign In or Register to comment.