What percentage of the market do you think shares your views on how to select which watch to wear on a daily basis? I'm sure there are people out there that also own a collection of watches and decide each day which one best goes with their outfit or planned activities for that day - but I don't know any of them. My feeling is that users that are as selective as you, would make up a very small percentage of the overall watch owners - and also that users who own a "fleet" of wrist timepieces would very likely welcome an Apple Watch into their arsenal.
To answer that question I did a round on watch collectors fora. Most people there have the same attitude. Some are even changing straps according to the weather. (NATO style for summer, leather and metal for winter.) The resistance to the Apple Watch is greater (almost 100%) on the fora dealing with mechanical watches than it is on the ones also dealing with quartz powered watches.
I found a few comments where people are actually willing to wear the Watch simultaneously with their mechanical.
A quick round of calls to 6 friends that I know own 3 or more watches and own an iPhone led to even more surprising answers. Two of them will "most definitely" buy one. One "would never wear it, just needs to be in my collection". The other "might sometimes wear it".
Then there was a maybe. "Seems great for running. I don't think it will replace my Rolexes for the rest of the day."
The remaining three would definitely not buy it. "Pointless", "Ugly" and "Ugly"
I am not alone. And eventually I might get one. But first I am saving up for some variation of a Meistersinger Einzeiger.
It's just another thing you have to plug in each night and whether it costs pennies a year or not, it's an extra cost. People who buy mechanical watches of course don't do so to save the cost of electricity. That wasn't my point.
you made it sound like your point by mentioning the cost of the electricity.
as for the hassle factor of daily charging -- if the watch is an accessory to the phone, and you already charge the phone daily...then what is the additional hassle? i have a neat stand next to my bed that holds it as i sleep. i wake up and its charged. like magic. after dressing i put it on my wrist and begin my day w/o another thought.
I think that's it's far easier to acquire fashion know-how than it is to acquire technology that would rival what's inside iOS and you're smart enough to know that...what gives? Trolling?
yep, it's his game -- he trolls the AW at every chance he can get, has for months. now he claims to have bought a few to sell for profit on eBay, but he's failed to show any screenshots of his supposed sales.
My automatic watch hasn't gone out of true in more than a decade of everyday use, including some significant hard physical abuse. It's remained water resistant through lake and ocean swimming and diving, whitewater rafting and other severe duty things like chopping wood, working on the car, and other construction projects.
And as far as technology goes, the Apple Watch, may be pushing the envelope for digital tech, but I'll take a mechanical watch and its ability to keep and tell time using mechanics as opposed to just the shrinking tech in your phone so it fits on your wrist. I believe there is an inherent beauty in mechanical processes that just can not exist with digital only devices. Steve Jobs tried to bring some of that beauty into Apple from the beginning by designing the circuit boards so they looked good, when there was no technical reason to do so.
For those that have never owned a mechanical or automatic watch, you'll likely not understand the attraction. It's much the same when comparing cars or motorcycles or even fighter planes of today versus those from the past. I'm one to lust after an air cooled 911, a 1970 Triumph Bonneville and a Mustang P-51 more than a 2015 McLaren, Ducati Superleggera or F22 Raptor, exactly because of the more pure mechanical quality of the older products.
Are the people arguing against me owners of automatic/mechanical watches? You should ask them that as well.
What a dumb question. It's more likely than not that they are. In any event, I do own both an AppleWatch and mechanical watches (a number of them, ranging from a $100 Swatches to the fairly high end), and I can tell you that your posts don't hold any water.
I think the problem is they need to let people play with them more.
Hmm.... don't they have a number of them on display where you can actually touch, feel, and use one, and explore all of its functionality (although, you cannot put in on your wrist)? My Apple Store had at least a half dozen of those speed out around the store, and people were crowding around them.
Why does your post start with the word "No". Your answer should have been yes based on your explanation. It essentially works exactly as the original poster asked.
Perhaps you didn't understand what he was saying, or what I was saying, or how interest rates work and for whom.
If you think -- read his original post again -- you or I (or he) can borrow at negative interest rates, you're mistaken.
What a dumb question. It's more likely than not that they are. In any event, I do own both an AppleWatch and mechanical watches (a number of them, ranging from a $100 Swatches to the fairly high end), and I can tell you that your posts don't hold any water.
Do try out one before pontificating.
So how can anyone predict the demise of something they nothing of?
Now that ?WATCH is making it out to more people, and Apple Store employees are starting to show off theirs, I've had the opportunity to see this product used in real-world scenarios, and it just makes my mouth water even more for when my SS ML arrives in June!
While I currently own an "automatic" mechanical watch by Seiko (no, not as good as Rolex, but holds time better than most of my friends who own Rolex's), and have always been fascinated by the mechanical components, I think their time has come and gone (pardon the pun), and it's time for the ?WATCH. The sheer versatility and utility this one device offers over ANY current mechanical watch outweighs any disadvantage it may have such as short battery life.
People here taking the proverbial dump on ?WATCH without either owning one, or even understanding what it's about or what it can do really shouldn't be commenting, as you make yourselves look foolish and short-sighted.
I take approx 20K pictures a year. How many with my phone? Zero. My phone is mostly used for making phone calls. Strange that.
I use a DSLR and a Mirrorless compact camera. The latter is almost in my pocket.
No Phone camera can even begin to take some of the pictures I shoot. I don't take 'selfies' but I do have some of my pictures published in magazines. None of my pictures are on photos sharing sites or any social media sites for that matter.
I take approx 20K pictures a year. How many with my phone? Zero. My phone is mostly used for making phone calls. Strange that.
I use a DSLR and a Mirrorless compact camera. The latter is almost in my pocket.
No Phone camera can even begin to take some of the pictures I shoot. I don't take 'selfies' but I do have some of my pictures published in magazines. None of my pictures are on photos sharing sites or any social media sites for that matter.
Each to their own desires though.
a phone camera today can begin to take pictures like the ones you shoot on your compact. for most people most of the time, a modern cellphone camera has replaced using a dedicated point and shoot.
People will continue to buy high and mid-level Swiss automatic timepieces because they are singularly focused. I'll also suggest that cheaper electronic / mechanical watches will also continue to sell, regardless of what Apple does, because people want choices for what they wear (when a watch is looked at like a piece of jewelry).
As a mechanical timepiece made to exacting standards in small volumes the Swiss watch market brings man (and woman) back to a time when the watch was one, if not the only, piece of technology we could own, and one that helped guide our lives.
Just compare the traditional watch to vinyl records. Vinyl's history took it from the only game in town to something less than an afterthought, but the past few years, there has been a revival of vinyl as people look for something more - a connection to the past or a way to question whether what we have now really is the best way to deliver sound. The same could be said for high end tube amplifiers. For those that have a McIntosh, or pine after one (like me), settling for a cheap modern Sony or the like amplifier will never be acceptable.
I pulled my grandfather's Elgin pocket watch out a few weeks ago and simply marvel at the technology that went into making a mechanical watch of such precision given the technology available in the 1920's. Unscrewing the finely machined and polished back to expose the mechanism itself, doing something I know my grandfather did countless times, to see the gears working, is something Watch will never be able to offer.
I know that Apple is pushing this thing about the Watch being their most personal of devices, but just like the iPhone, we're really not owning a Watch, but rather borrowing it from Apple for a period of time (really until the next better version comes out).
I think about exactly this point each time I've had to take my iPhone in for repair / replacement. There is nothing that makes "my" iPhone, my iPhone. It's a vessel, a piece of technology, that today with iCloud, it could be replaced every day with a new version and we would not see any difference, because the device itself is simply a clone of itself.
So when this most personal of devices has an issue, you take it to Apple and they're just as likely to give you a new one than "fix" it, and it will sync up with your iPhone and once you put your bands on it, it will be as if it was "your" Watch. With mechanical watches, if there is a problem, they don't just replace the unit, like Apple will, but rather fix whatever needs to be fixed (new springs, gears, etc.). What you get back is your watch, not some replaceable vessel that holds the magic somewhere between your iPhone and the cloud.
then, there's this:
"File Under: "It's GREAT to be Rich" .... 'cause Carmelo Anthony just strapped on a brand new watch ... worth $565,000!!!!!!
Melo just posted the timepiece on Instagram ... and now, we've learned why -- it's a super limited Greubel Forsey ... one of the most popular brands with hardcore watch collectors.
So, why's the watch so valuable? It's not loaded with gold or diamonds ... it's what's under the hood -- precision mechanics. Plus, the 3D globe on the watch took the company 18 months to develop. "
a phone camera today can begin to take pictures like the ones you shoot on your compact. for most people most of the time, a modern cellphone camera has replaced using a dedicated point and shoot.
That may be true but as I shoot only in RAW then for me the point about the camera's phone is moot.
The DSLR and the Compact are set to underexpose by 2/3rds of a stop to stop the whites from burning out. I never use Auto ISO and most of the time I set the exposure and aperture manually.
How easy is that to do on a camera phone (if at all possible...)?
As I said, each to their own style but please don't think that the Wildlife Photographer of the Year winner will be using a camera phone anytime soon unless they are incredibly lucky and most of us mere mortals are not like that.
That may be true but as I shoot only in RAW then for me the point about the camera's phone is moot.
The DSLR and the Compact are set to underexpose by 2/3rds of a stop to stop the whites from burning out. I never use Auto ISO and most of the time I set the exposure and aperture manually.
How easy is that to do on a camera phone (if at all possible...)?
As I said, each to their own style but please don't think that the Wildlife Photographer of the Year winner will be using a camera phone anytime soon unless they are incredibly lucky and most of us mere mortals are not like that.
When did this camera topic become about you? As NolaMacGuy stated "for MOST people, MOST of the time", smartphone cameras have replaced dedicated cameras. This has been a huge hit to the digital camera industry.
It seems to me like you just wanted a platform to "brag?" about yourself and your camera equipment. I'm not sure why you thought that AppleInsider was a good place to do that but my guess is that the photography enthusiast sites you normally frequent have all gotten tired of you and your pompous arrogance. Your comments on this thread bring no value to this discussion and none of us are impressed (or even care) that you personally think you need a better camera than the one inside your smartphone.
My automatic watch hasn't gone out of true in more than a decade of everyday use, including some significant hard physical abuse. It's remained water resistant through lake and ocean swimming and diving, whitewater rafting and other severe duty things like chopping wood, working on the car, and other construction projects.
And as far as technology goes, the Apple Watch, may be pushing the envelope for digital tech, but I'll take a mechanical watch and its ability to keep and tell time using mechanics as opposed to just the shrinking tech in your phone so it fits on your wrist. I believe there is an inherent beauty in mechanical processes that just can not exist with digital only devices. Steve Jobs tried to bring some of that beauty into Apple from the beginning by designing the circuit boards so they looked good, when there was no technical reason to do so.
For those that have never owned a mechanical or automatic watch, you'll likely not understand the attraction. It's much the same when comparing cars or motorcycles or even fighter planes of today versus those from the past. I'm one to lust after an air cooled 911, a 1970 Triumph Bonneville and a Mustang P-51 more than a 2015 McLaren, Ducati Superleggera or F22 Raptor, exactly because of the more pure mechanical quality of the older products.
You're obviously not part of the target demographic for Apple and their watch and it seems like you should know that. So then - what makes you think that anyone reading Apple Insider would want to read about - or care even a little bit about - your opinions on the watch or all of the reasons the product isn't a fit for you? If Apple doesn't care about you - why would we? Do you frequent enthusiast sites for other products and post on their message boards, all of the reasons why the product they are enthusiastic about will never work for you and your lifestyle? LOL - if not - why are we so lucky? Don't answer. My questions are all rhetorical. I don't want to waste another minute of my life reading any more of the crap you're posting here. Move on to a parachuting club website and join their forums to tell everybody how dangerous parachuting is and how you personally have far too much to live for to ever even consider skydiving. Be sure to give lots of examples! I'm sure they'll love you for it! lol
LOL. You are in as much denial as the watch makers.
Bottom line is people only wear 1 watch at a time so the AppleWatch is a massive threat.
You sound like the Nokia/Blackberry guys in 2007 who talked trash about the iPhone.
I don't think the "watch industry" is endangered. The 200-1000€ industry is. Someone who can and does afford a 20 000€ watch is looking at exclusivity and possibly investment value, two things the Apple Watch does not deliver. I foresee a lot of captor-insertion, the Withings way
Comments
What percentage of the market do you think shares your views on how to select which watch to wear on a daily basis? I'm sure there are people out there that also own a collection of watches and decide each day which one best goes with their outfit or planned activities for that day - but I don't know any of them. My feeling is that users that are as selective as you, would make up a very small percentage of the overall watch owners - and also that users who own a "fleet" of wrist timepieces would very likely welcome an Apple Watch into their arsenal.
To answer that question I did a round on watch collectors fora. Most people there have the same attitude. Some are even changing straps according to the weather. (NATO style for summer, leather and metal for winter.) The resistance to the Apple Watch is greater (almost 100%) on the fora dealing with mechanical watches than it is on the ones also dealing with quartz powered watches.
I found a few comments where people are actually willing to wear the Watch simultaneously with their mechanical.
A quick round of calls to 6 friends that I know own 3 or more watches and own an iPhone led to even more surprising answers. Two of them will "most definitely" buy one. One "would never wear it, just needs to be in my collection". The other "might sometimes wear it".
Then there was a maybe. "Seems great for running. I don't think it will replace my Rolexes for the rest of the day."
The remaining three would definitely not buy it. "Pointless", "Ugly" and "Ugly"
I am not alone. And eventually I might get one. But first I am saving up for some variation of a Meistersinger Einzeiger.
you made it sound like your point by mentioning the cost of the electricity.
as for the hassle factor of daily charging -- if the watch is an accessory to the phone, and you already charge the phone daily...then what is the additional hassle? i have a neat stand next to my bed that holds it as i sleep. i wake up and its charged. like magic. after dressing i put it on my wrist and begin my day w/o another thought.
yep, it's his game -- he trolls the AW at every chance he can get, has for months. now he claims to have bought a few to sell for profit on eBay, but he's failed to show any screenshots of his supposed sales.
troll is as troll does.
And as far as technology goes, the Apple Watch, may be pushing the envelope for digital tech, but I'll take a mechanical watch and its ability to keep and tell time using mechanics as opposed to just the shrinking tech in your phone so it fits on your wrist. I believe there is an inherent beauty in mechanical processes that just can not exist with digital only devices. Steve Jobs tried to bring some of that beauty into Apple from the beginning by designing the circuit boards so they looked good, when there was no technical reason to do so.
For those that have never owned a mechanical or automatic watch, you'll likely not understand the attraction. It's much the same when comparing cars or motorcycles or even fighter planes of today versus those from the past. I'm one to lust after an air cooled 911, a 1970 Triumph Bonneville and a Mustang P-51 more than a 2015 McLaren, Ducati Superleggera or F22 Raptor, exactly because of the more pure mechanical quality of the older products.
Are the people arguing against me owners of automatic/mechanical watches? You should ask them that as well.
What a dumb question. It's more likely than not that they are. In any event, I do own both an AppleWatch and mechanical watches (a number of them, ranging from a $100 Swatches to the fairly high end), and I can tell you that your posts don't hold any water.
Do try out one before pontificating.
I think the problem is they need to let people play with them more.
Hmm.... don't they have a number of them on display where you can actually touch, feel, and use one, and explore all of its functionality (although, you cannot put in on your wrist)? My Apple Store had at least a half dozen of those speed out around the store, and people were crowding around them.
Why does your post start with the word "No". Your answer should have been yes based on your explanation. It essentially works exactly as the original poster asked.
Perhaps you didn't understand what he was saying, or what I was saying, or how interest rates work and for whom.
If you think -- read his original post again -- you or I (or he) can borrow at negative interest rates, you're mistaken.
(Changed wording).
Yes, I forgot about that! They would actually let you try one on our wrist (and that did not require a 15-minute appointment).
So how can anyone predict the demise of something they nothing of?
Now that ?WATCH is making it out to more people, and Apple Store employees are starting to show off theirs, I've had the opportunity to see this product used in real-world scenarios, and it just makes my mouth water even more for when my SS ML arrives in June!
While I currently own an "automatic" mechanical watch by Seiko (no, not as good as Rolex, but holds time better than most of my friends who own Rolex's), and have always been fascinated by the mechanical components, I think their time has come and gone (pardon the pun), and it's time for the ?WATCH. The sheer versatility and utility this one device offers over ANY current mechanical watch outweighs any disadvantage it may have such as short battery life.
People here taking the proverbial dump on ?WATCH without either owning one, or even understanding what it's about or what it can do really shouldn't be commenting, as you make yourselves look foolish and short-sighted.
I take approx 20K pictures a year. How many with my phone? Zero. My phone is mostly used for making phone calls. Strange that.
I use a DSLR and a Mirrorless compact camera. The latter is almost in my pocket.
No Phone camera can even begin to take some of the pictures I shoot. I don't take 'selfies' but I do have some of my pictures published in magazines. None of my pictures are on photos sharing sites or any social media sites for that matter.
Each to their own desires though.
if true this is atypical. as the lubricant dries up mechanical watches begin to loose accuracy until serviced. every couple years is normal.
a phone camera today can begin to take pictures like the ones you shoot on your compact. for most people most of the time, a modern cellphone camera has replaced using a dedicated point and shoot.
I think it's called 'hedging'...
People will continue to buy high and mid-level Swiss automatic timepieces because they are singularly focused. I'll also suggest that cheaper electronic / mechanical watches will also continue to sell, regardless of what Apple does, because people want choices for what they wear (when a watch is looked at like a piece of jewelry).
As a mechanical timepiece made to exacting standards in small volumes the Swiss watch market brings man (and woman) back to a time when the watch was one, if not the only, piece of technology we could own, and one that helped guide our lives.
Just compare the traditional watch to vinyl records. Vinyl's history took it from the only game in town to something less than an afterthought, but the past few years, there has been a revival of vinyl as people look for something more - a connection to the past or a way to question whether what we have now really is the best way to deliver sound. The same could be said for high end tube amplifiers. For those that have a McIntosh, or pine after one (like me), settling for a cheap modern Sony or the like amplifier will never be acceptable.
I pulled my grandfather's Elgin pocket watch out a few weeks ago and simply marvel at the technology that went into making a mechanical watch of such precision given the technology available in the 1920's. Unscrewing the finely machined and polished back to expose the mechanism itself, doing something I know my grandfather did countless times, to see the gears working, is something Watch will never be able to offer.
I know that Apple is pushing this thing about the Watch being their most personal of devices, but just like the iPhone, we're really not owning a Watch, but rather borrowing it from Apple for a period of time (really until the next better version comes out).
I think about exactly this point each time I've had to take my iPhone in for repair / replacement. There is nothing that makes "my" iPhone, my iPhone. It's a vessel, a piece of technology, that today with iCloud, it could be replaced every day with a new version and we would not see any difference, because the device itself is simply a clone of itself.
So when this most personal of devices has an issue, you take it to Apple and they're just as likely to give you a new one than "fix" it, and it will sync up with your iPhone and once you put your bands on it, it will be as if it was "your" Watch. With mechanical watches, if there is a problem, they don't just replace the unit, like Apple will, but rather fix whatever needs to be fixed (new springs, gears, etc.). What you get back is your watch, not some replaceable vessel that holds the magic somewhere between your iPhone and the cloud.
then, there's this:
"File Under: "It's GREAT to be Rich" .... 'cause Carmelo Anthony just strapped on a brand new watch ... worth $565,000!!!!!!
Melo just posted the timepiece on Instagram ... and now, we've learned why -- it's a super limited Greubel Forsey ... one of the most popular brands with hardcore watch collectors.
So, why's the watch so valuable? It's not loaded with gold or diamonds ... it's what's under the hood -- precision mechanics. Plus, the 3D globe on the watch took the company 18 months to develop. "
http://www.tmz.com/2015/05/08/carmelo-anthony-565000-watch-greubel-forsey
a phone camera today can begin to take pictures like the ones you shoot on your compact. for most people most of the time, a modern cellphone camera has replaced using a dedicated point and shoot.
That may be true but as I shoot only in RAW then for me the point about the camera's phone is moot.
The DSLR and the Compact are set to underexpose by 2/3rds of a stop to stop the whites from burning out. I never use Auto ISO and most of the time I set the exposure and aperture manually.
How easy is that to do on a camera phone (if at all possible...)?
As I said, each to their own style but please don't think that the Wildlife Photographer of the Year winner will be using a camera phone anytime soon unless they are incredibly lucky and most of us mere mortals are not like that.
When did this camera topic become about you? As NolaMacGuy stated "for MOST people, MOST of the time", smartphone cameras have replaced dedicated cameras. This has been a huge hit to the digital camera industry.
It seems to me like you just wanted a platform to "brag?" about yourself and your camera equipment. I'm not sure why you thought that AppleInsider was a good place to do that but my guess is that the photography enthusiast sites you normally frequent have all gotten tired of you and your pompous arrogance. Your comments on this thread bring no value to this discussion and none of us are impressed (or even care) that you personally think you need a better camera than the one inside your smartphone.
You're obviously not part of the target demographic for Apple and their watch and it seems like you should know that. So then - what makes you think that anyone reading Apple Insider would want to read about - or care even a little bit about - your opinions on the watch or all of the reasons the product isn't a fit for you? If Apple doesn't care about you - why would we? Do you frequent enthusiast sites for other products and post on their message boards, all of the reasons why the product they are enthusiastic about will never work for you and your lifestyle? LOL - if not - why are we so lucky? Don't answer. My questions are all rhetorical. I don't want to waste another minute of my life reading any more of the crap you're posting here. Move on to a parachuting club website and join their forums to tell everybody how dangerous parachuting is and how you personally have far too much to live for to ever even consider skydiving. Be sure to give lots of examples! I'm sure they'll love you for it! lol
I don't think the "watch industry" is endangered. The 200-1000€ industry is. Someone who can and does afford a 20 000€ watch is looking at exclusivity and possibly investment value, two things the Apple Watch does not deliver. I foresee a lot of captor-insertion, the Withings way