2) I agree that something will fail, and that it's most likely the Swiss watch makers. Not that luxury and collector watches will die, or that cheap watches from China in the 100s of millions won't still be commonplace, but that the bulk of the revenue and profits will likely be had by Apple within in 5-10 years, no matter what they do.
Strangely enough, I don't think they'll be doing that badly, because Apple will expand greatly the high end watch market and those buying those top end watches don't buy it for function anyway. Its basically a bracelet. My feeling is that everything $300 to 2K will be wiped out by Apple and the top end will survive with slightly less revenues, but not a collapse. Their share of the top end though will be lower. They will have a smaller share of a much bigger market.
We've told you before that Apple said in the fall no numbers will be released. Why don't you understand that fact.
Actually Cook doesn't give a shit about analysts.
I understand it. I also understand its a failure on the part of Cook. To allow analysts and the markets to speculate sales numbers on a product that was hyped this much is idiotic.
Maybe you didn't actually read what I posted. I never said Cook lied or even attempted to lie, he simply refuses to release numbers instead he lumps them in with "other products". Some on this forum will try to justify any excuse to defy any reasonable logic the numbers just aren't there.
The pre market push on this watch was one of the largest I've seen Apple do ever. An announcement followed six months later by an event, articles, magazine covers, before it was release high profile people wearing them, clearly given to them before launch. All this to group it with other products? Yeah that's logical.
Apple created this monster with their own hype.
1) You continue to ignore the fact that this was set before Watch was ever demoed nearly a year ago. Are you saying that Cook decided to launch and market a product he knew would be a "failure"? Come on!
2) You keep ignoring the fact that Apple TV was demoed twice (even going so far as to not even have a proper name the first time) with a simpler lead time between coming to market, and has yet to ever be broken out on their SEC filings.
You people keep missing the point. The WSJ purposefully has misinterpreted what this guy said. He wasn't talking about demand for his product, he was talking about the company's ability to produce enough of the product to "break even", almost certainly because of production issues. Why almost certainly? Because ther's no way he could know that six months from now they still wouldn't be able to "break even" UNLESS it were a production problem!
Think, people!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismY
I have to assume we're all aware that WSJ, NYT and most everyone else will purposely spin a story into a negative if it's about Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sacto Joe
We may be, at least in part. But what about the average consumer? This is clearly targeted at convincing the average consumer that the Apple Watch is undesirable. It is our job to wake people up to the reality that this is, pure and simple, propaganda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismY
We don't need to do anything, at least anything because of the WSJ. If Watch is desirable then it will catch on like every desirable Apple product before it.
Has anyone asked you about your Watch? I've received innummerbale questions and my honest answer is that it's unnecessary yet indispensable. That seemingly contradictory response often leads to a follow up request for an explanation at which point I explain what I mean. If they are a Watch owner asking me how I feel about it they know exactly what I mean by my succient answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sacto Joe
Fine. You can choose to sit back and let the propaganda win. I can't. When I see something that gets my dander up, I'm the type that writes my congressman or at least pens a letter to the editor. I at least make an effort to educate people to the wool being pulled over their eyes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismY
Be careful of your agenda. You may end up reaffirming their preconceptions and getting them to hate Apple and their products as a result. Haven't you ever heard that the worst thing about Apple are their customers?
I much prefer letting the market decide and never tell people why they should do when it comes to CE. "Get the product that best suits your needs," is what I typically say. May I suggest simply talking up the features you like when asked and how it benefits your needs? I find it best when people come to their own conclusions instead of feeling like they have to do something or else be shunned by community.
I will say this: The limiter might be some indispensable part for the watch that this assembler needs. But that still doesn’t make it possible to say “ASE’s numbers suggest that the watch is not selling nearly as well as some analysts expected” without lying through your teeth.
I live in Denmark, and the Apple Watch is still unavailable here as in many other countries. If Apple was able to produce more watches than they have at the moment, how come they don't introduce it in as many countries as possible to increase sales?
I will say this: The limiter might be some indispensable part for the watch that this assembler needs. But that still doesn’t make it possible to say “ASE’s numbers suggest that the watch is not selling nearly as well as some analysts expected” without lying through your teeth.
Apple has a long history since Steve returned of having demand beat their suppliers and assembly partners abilities but that isn't a bad thing so long as they can keep increasing their numbers. I will be shocked if we find out Apple Watch did less than the iPhone for its first year — 6.7 million, right? — and that product has been and continues to be phenomenal in so many ways despite that mediocre start when compared to the iPad. Anecdotally, I feel like I've seen more people with Apple Watch than the iPhone for being just 3 months into sales, which is more difficult to spot simply because of size, look and usage variances.
If we look at the numbers, there were 1 billion handsets sold in 2006 (or maybe it was projected for 2007) and there were 1.2 billion watches sold in 2014. That's pretty good. Now lets look at Jobs' ambiguous comment about 1%. If we talk about the full fiscal year, first full calendar year, or first 4 complete quarters*, they do make the 1% by exceeding 10 million based on that 1 billion estimate (no idea how many handsets actually sold in 2007). If that's the case and we use 1.2 billion units for watches then Apple needs to sell 12 million watches starting from the September quarter in a month for a year, from the January quarter for a year, or starting from the June quarter for a year, to equal that 1% of watches sold. That seems laughably doable to me and yet the analysts would tell you that it would be a failure if they did that.
It's also a very different market for watches than it is for handset, even going by 2007 standards. A cheap watch, the ones that are made en masse in China and Tiawan, can be had for practically nothing, even when comparing to the contract-free cheapest handsets of 2007 and 2008. And then you have watches that far exceed any handset even the jewel encrusted crap from Vertu. I see no reason for Apple to dominate this market.
PS: I would much rather see fitness trackers included than cheap watches, but I would accept that they should be included in with the watch category for this metric as a wrist-worn utility market. I'm not sure how many fitness trackers were sold last year but I'd be surprised if it exceeded 100 million, so lets say 13 million Watches need to be sold the first "year" to get to 1%.
* I'm not 100% sure on the first 4 full quarters equaling more than 10 million units.
GG is on my block list so I don't see his posts unless someone quotes him.
As to his comments highlighted above:
So, the person who wears a luxury watch doesn't want a computer on his wrist???
Just what tech will they add to provide payments, notifications and fitness?
It seems to me that those few features require Storage, RAM, CPU, Communications, Battery -- isn't that what a we call a computer these days?
And, just who are they going to get notifications from? Notifications of what?
Where will the fitness data be held, analyzed, processed and presented?
What payment service will they use??? Will they roll their own with the CC companies or use the Wal-mart, CVS offering?
C'mon!
Heh, his argument amounts to "but don't you think that... ???" (which is basically proof by "I think it so, therefore it is.")
There was another story about Old World, heritage watchmakers who are trying to carve out a profitable niche stuffing tiny fitness monitors into their mechanical time pieces. The idea itself strikes me as odd, like some steampunk tech from an alternate universe. Swiss gears circa 1843 sharing space with modern Chinese microchips and source code. Profitable? Maybe. Niche? As niche as they already are. Franken? Stein. Mainstream? If Apple manages to change what people expect from a wristwatch, then no. The heirloom time pieces will still be precious to dinosaurs, but not mainstream consumer products, and that is entirely what Apple is after.
It's funny: the trolls on these forums have argued vociferously for years that Apple was late on its regularly scheduled industry disruption, and therefore doomed. Now Apple wants to disrupt the fossilized watch industry, and the trolling is against Apple for trying to compete, and they're cheering on Apple to lose.
No complaints -- but that may be bacuse of the extra chargers.
Well I broke down and bought one this afternoon. Two reasons: one, I had a $350 gift card from work burning a hole in my pocket. Two, as I was out running errands I had the latest iMore podcast on and they were giving their impressions of the watch 3 months in. Everyone on the show had mostly positive things to say, especially around fitness and activity apps. Jim Dalrymple talked about how the Watch is on his wrist every day and has helped him lose weight. And Jim's not just some blind Apple fanboy that can't be critical; he's been very critical of Apple Music and still has no plans to use it until Apple fixes all the problems. So I trust he's being honest about ?Watch.
I ordered the watch online for in store pickup and less than an hour later I was out the door with a 38mm silver Sport with white band. The store wasn't too busy (there was someone looking at the Watch!) and the process couldn't have been any smoother. They scanned my barcode, asked me if I wanted help setting it up (I said no thanks) and less than 5 minutes later I walked out of the store with my Watch in a really nice bag with pink handles. The process was so smooth and so simple. Exactly how shopping should be! Now to set this puppy up...
GG is on my block list so I don't see his posts unless someone quotes him.
I don't get why GG gets so much hate.
So, the person who wears a luxury watch doesn't want a computer on his wrist???
At this point in time, not likely. Dick, you are an anomaly in this world. A good anomaly and one that I think we all should strive for, but you have to know that your interest and aptitude with modern technology is highly atypical for your age group.
Just what tech will they add to provide payments, notifications and fitness?
I'd say it's moot to the average person who both can afford and who chooses to wear a luxury watch. It's the people that can afford a luxury watch but who rarely wear the ones they have or who are pragmatic enough to not want any standard watch because it doesn't nothing that their smartphone can do are the ones that would be more likely to want Apple Watch.
It seems to me that those few features require Storage, RAM, CPU, Communications, Battery -- isn't that what a we call a computer these days?
Again, the point is moot because these people probably never considered using their watch for payments or notifications of any sort. It told them the time and the day of the month, and even within those people a subset was probably only concerned about the luxury aspect, and not even that "old world" utility.
You make it sound like plastic cards vanished as soon as Apple Pay came into existence. I'd even say the people who are mostly likely buying luxury watches are likely the ones that still have check books and landlines in their home.
And, just who are they going to get notifications from? Notifications of what?
Again, moot, but now it's getting silly. If notifications were good enough on their phone or not all with their luxury watch, why would all of a sudden have a problem now? These people wouldn't. These people would probably find Apple Watch too confusing, or in the case of why father not have a smartphone, tablet, a traditional "PC", an email address, or do any sort of online footprint. They are the definition of old school and to ignore that aspect just sets your argument up for failure.
Where will the fitness data be held, analyzed, processed and presented? What payment service will they use??? Will they roll their own with the CC companies or use the Wal-mart, CVS offering?
GG is on my block list so I don't see his posts unless someone quotes him.
I don't get why GG gets so much hate.
So, the person who wears a luxury watch doesn't want a computer on his wrist???
At this point in time, not likely. Dick, you are an anomaly in this world. A good anomaly and one that I think we all should strive for, but you have to know that your interest and aptitude with modern technology is highly atypical for your age group.
Just what tech will they add to provide payments, notifications and fitness?
I'd say it's moot to the average person who both can afford and who chooses to wear a luxury watch. It's the people that can afford a luxury watch but who rarely wear the ones they have or who are pragmatic enough to not want any standard watch because it doesn't nothing that their smartphone can do are the ones that would be more likely to want Apple Watch.
It seems to me that those few features require Storage, RAM, CPU, Communications, Battery -- isn't that what a we call a computer these days?
Again, the point is moot because these people probably never considered using their watch for payments or notifications of any sort. It told them the time and the day of the month, and even within those people a subset was probably only concerned about the luxury aspect, and not even that "old world" utility.
You make it sound like plastic cards vanished as soon as Apple Pay came into existence. I'd even say the people who are mostly likely buying luxury watches are likely the ones that still have check books and landlines in their home.
And, just who are they going to get notifications from? Notifications of what?
Again, moot, but now it's getting silly. If notifications were good enough on their phone or not all with their luxury watch, why would all of a sudden have a problem now? These people wouldn't. These people would probably find Apple Watch too confusing, or in the case of why father not have a smartphone, tablet, a traditional "PC", an email address, or do any sort of online footprint. They are the definition of old school and to ignore that aspect just sets your argument up for failure.
Where will the fitness data be held, analyzed, processed and presented? What payment service will they use??? Will they roll their own with the CC companies or use the Wal-mart, CVS offering?
:facepalm:
C'mon
C'mon, indeed.
Thanks for some nice thoughts about me!
Though, I don't think that I'm an anomaly.
Long story, long:
My Dad worked hard all his life -- he and Mom raised 3 kids & all the hassle/expense. After the kids were married, he worked hard, made good money, saved, paid off his mortgage early, and invested.
They lived a pretty good life and started to enjoy themselves, travel -- bought expensive clothes, etc. ... Mainly my Dad liked lightweight comfortable shoes and thin high quality watches -- I have a safe full of them -- all very expensive ... It is interesting that he also has several gimmick expensive watches -- like an HP Calculator Watch with tiny buttons and a stylus ... A tiny stylus ...
He and Mom loved to dance and frequented piano/organ bars with dance floors in the area. He made friends with Sal Cordero, an organist, about my Dad's age, who as a day job managed the Hammond Organ studio in Pasadena. As a side line, Sal took on the Apple ][ -- in mid 1978, I think. *
Anyway, Sal convinced Dad to buy an Apple ][ -- supposedly to do important stuff like keep track of his business contacts -- but, really to tinker.
This was all unbeknownst to me. I had bought an Apple ][ and was busy, with two others, trying to get together enough money ( $60,000) to open an Apple dealership in Sunnyvale. When I told my Dad, he knew exactly what I was about -- he had bought his Apple ][ before me. Because of his personal experience with Apple, and mine -- Later, Dad invested in AAPL and did quite well (years before I did).
* After 11 years in business, ours was the oldest surviving Apple dealership in Silicon Valley (outlasting ComputerLand, BusinessLand, and several other chains) -- but, Sal's dealership always had us beat as the earliest -- and still survives today as the oldest Apple Dealership in Pasadena:
My point to all this is: I think you do the [affluent] elderly a disservice -- if you create something that interests them, they can get their juices running with a zest and persistence that might surprise you. I think Sal and Dad are the rule rather than the exception
This quote, sometimes attributed to Mark Twain sums it up:
When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.
Yeah, C'mon -- let's not underestimate the selective, mature buyer with taste (who could also be an investor).
How many septuagenarians have studied and programmed Swift with it over the past year? How many denarians, vicenarians tricenarians did the same? Let's say we exclude those that took Swift in school because they had to? Do you think that your interests, IQ, and penchant for modern technology mirror the average person in your age group? I don't. I would say that your interest in new technology is more inline with today's youth. Mine too.
I would love for more people or all age groups to be genuinely intrigued by new innovations but my experience is that as we get older — I don't mean old, just older — we tend to solidify our interests into something less experimental and instead stick to what is more familiar. A great example of this is music.
Anyway, Sal convinced Dad to buy an Apple ][ -- supposedly to do important stuff like keep track of his business contacts -- but, really to tinker.
No one he's bigoted. I would be too if I had been bought and sold. ba-da-bum
We may be, at least in part. But what about the average consumer? This is clearly targeted at convincing the average consumer that the Apple Watch is undesirable. It is our job to wake people up to the reality that this is, pure and simple, propaganda.
Our job? Then the pay is lousy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Everybody is going to die not just 'these people'. Smartwatch wears will die too, and maybe their kids will see it as an old world relic.
So why did you call it ironic? Where's the irony in Steve Jobs dying?
How many septuagenarians have studied and programmed Swift with it over the past year? How many denarians, vicenarians tricenarians did the same? Let's say we exclude those that took Swift in school because they had to? Do you think that your interests, IQ, and penchant for modern technology mirror the average person in your age group? I don't. I would say that your interest in new technology is more inline with today's youth. Mine too.
I would love for more people or all age groups to be genuinely intrigued by new innovations but my experience is that as we get older — I don't mean old, just older — we tend to solidify our interests into something less experimental and instead stick to what is more familiar. A great example of this is music.
Maybe the secret to not getting older is to be open to new ideas and experiences while you are able -- being sedentary can be as much a mental state as a physical one.
Anyway, Sal convinced Dad to buy an Apple ][ -- supposedly to do important stuff like keep track of his business contacts -- but, really to tinker.
No one he's bigoted. I would be too if I had been bought and sold. ba-da-bum
We may be, at least in part. But what about the average consumer? This is clearly targeted at convincing the average consumer that the Apple Watch is undesirable. It is our job to wake people up to the reality that this is, pure and simple, propaganda.
Comments
1) Yeah, I didn't catch any sarcasm.
2) I agree that something will fail, and that it's most likely the Swiss watch makers. Not that luxury and collector watches will die, or that cheap watches from China in the 100s of millions won't still be commonplace, but that the bulk of the revenue and profits will likely be had by Apple within in 5-10 years, no matter what they do.
Strangely enough, I don't think they'll be doing that badly, because Apple will expand greatly the high end watch market and those buying those top end watches don't buy it for function anyway. Its basically a bracelet. My feeling is that everything $300 to 2K will be wiped out by Apple and the top end will survive with slightly less revenues, but not a collapse. Their share of the top end though will be lower. They will have a smaller share of a much bigger market.
We've told you before that Apple said in the fall no numbers will be released. Why don't you understand that fact.
Actually Cook doesn't give a shit about analysts.
I understand it. I also understand its a failure on the part of Cook. To allow analysts and the markets to speculate sales numbers on a product that was hyped this much is idiotic.
1) You continue to ignore the fact that this was set before Watch was ever demoed nearly a year ago. Are you saying that Cook decided to launch and market a product he knew would be a "failure"? Come on!
2) You keep ignoring the fact that Apple TV was demoed twice (even going so far as to not even have a proper name the first time) with a simpler lead time between coming to market, and has yet to ever be broken out on their SEC filings.
You people keep missing the point. The WSJ purposefully has misinterpreted what this guy said. He wasn't talking about demand for his product, he was talking about the company's ability to produce enough of the product to "break even", almost certainly because of production issues. Why almost certainly? Because ther's no way he could know that six months from now they still wouldn't be able to "break even" UNLESS it were a production problem!
Think, people!
I have to assume we're all aware that WSJ, NYT and most everyone else will purposely spin a story into a negative if it's about Apple.
We may be, at least in part. But what about the average consumer? This is clearly targeted at convincing the average consumer that the Apple Watch is undesirable. It is our job to wake people up to the reality that this is, pure and simple, propaganda.
We don't need to do anything, at least anything because of the WSJ. If Watch is desirable then it will catch on like every desirable Apple product before it.
Has anyone asked you about your Watch? I've received innummerbale questions and my honest answer is that it's unnecessary yet indispensable. That seemingly contradictory response often leads to a follow up request for an explanation at which point I explain what I mean. If they are a Watch owner asking me how I feel about it they know exactly what I mean by my succient answer.
Fine. You can choose to sit back and let the propaganda win. I can't. When I see something that gets my dander up, I'm the type that writes my congressman or at least pens a letter to the editor. I at least make an effort to educate people to the wool being pulled over their eyes.
Be careful of your agenda. You may end up reaffirming their preconceptions and getting them to hate Apple and their products as a result. Haven't you ever heard that the worst thing about Apple are their customers?
I much prefer letting the market decide and never tell people why they should do when it comes to CE. "Get the product that best suits your needs," is what I typically say. May I suggest simply talking up the features you like when asked and how it benefits your needs? I find it best when people come to their own conclusions instead of feeling like they have to do something or else be shunned by community.
I will say this: The limiter might be some indispensable part for the watch that this assembler needs. But that still doesn’t make it possible to say “ASE’s numbers suggest that the watch is not selling nearly as well as some analysts expected” without lying through your teeth.
That's classic coming from a guy that died before 'these people' did. Oh the irony.
If Apple was able to produce more watches than they have at the moment, how come they don't introduce it in as many countries as possible to increase sales?
Apple has a long history since Steve returned of having demand beat their suppliers and assembly partners abilities but that isn't a bad thing so long as they can keep increasing their numbers. I will be shocked if we find out Apple Watch did less than the iPhone for its first year — 6.7 million, right? — and that product has been and continues to be phenomenal in so many ways despite that mediocre start when compared to the iPad. Anecdotally, I feel like I've seen more people with Apple Watch than the iPhone for being just 3 months into sales, which is more difficult to spot simply because of size, look and usage variances.
If we look at the numbers, there were 1 billion handsets sold in 2006 (or maybe it was projected for 2007) and there were 1.2 billion watches sold in 2014. That's pretty good. Now lets look at Jobs' ambiguous comment about 1%. If we talk about the full fiscal year, first full calendar year, or first 4 complete quarters*, they do make the 1% by exceeding 10 million based on that 1 billion estimate (no idea how many handsets actually sold in 2007). If that's the case and we use 1.2 billion units for watches then Apple needs to sell 12 million watches starting from the September quarter in a month for a year, from the January quarter for a year, or starting from the June quarter for a year, to equal that 1% of watches sold. That seems laughably doable to me and yet the analysts would tell you that it would be a failure if they did that.
It's also a very different market for watches than it is for handset, even going by 2007 standards. A cheap watch, the ones that are made en masse in China and Tiawan, can be had for practically nothing, even when comparing to the contract-free cheapest handsets of 2007 and 2008. And then you have watches that far exceed any handset even the jewel encrusted crap from Vertu. I see no reason for Apple to dominate this market.
PS: I would much rather see fitness trackers included than cheap watches, but I would accept that they should be included in with the watch category for this metric as a wrist-worn utility market. I'm not sure how many fitness trackers were sold last year but I'd be surprised if it exceeded 100 million, so lets say 13 million Watches need to be sold the first "year" to get to 1%.
* I'm not 100% sure on the first 4 full quarters equaling more than 10 million units.
GG is on my block list so I don't see his posts unless someone quotes him.
As to his comments highlighted above:
So, the person who wears a luxury watch doesn't want a computer on his wrist???
Just what tech will they add to provide payments, notifications and fitness?
It seems to me that those few features require Storage, RAM, CPU, Communications, Battery -- isn't that what a we call a computer these days?
And, just who are they going to get notifications from? Notifications of what?
Where will the fitness data be held, analyzed, processed and presented?
What payment service will they use??? Will they roll their own with the CC companies or use the Wal-mart, CVS offering?
C'mon!
Heh, his argument amounts to "but don't you think that... ???" (which is basically proof by "I think it so, therefore it is.")
There was another story about Old World, heritage watchmakers who are trying to carve out a profitable niche stuffing tiny fitness monitors into their mechanical time pieces. The idea itself strikes me as odd, like some steampunk tech from an alternate universe. Swiss gears circa 1843 sharing space with modern Chinese microchips and source code. Profitable? Maybe. Niche? As niche as they already are. Franken? Stein. Mainstream? If Apple manages to change what people expect from a wristwatch, then no. The heirloom time pieces will still be precious to dinosaurs, but not mainstream consumer products, and that is entirely what Apple is after.
It's funny: the trolls on these forums have argued vociferously for years that Apple was late on its regularly scheduled industry disruption, and therefore doomed. Now Apple wants to disrupt the fossilized watch industry, and the trolling is against Apple for trying to compete, and they're cheering on Apple to lose.
That's classic coming from a guy that died before 'these people' did. Oh the irony.
It's not ironic because he wasn't saying he would personally outlive "these people". You just took it to mean that.
Everybody is going to die not just 'these people'. Smartwatch wears will die too, and maybe their kids will see it as an old world relic.
Do tell us how you like it, and why. Seriously.
I still marvel at mine every single day.
I don't get why GG gets so much hate.
At this point in time, not likely. Dick, you are an anomaly in this world. A good anomaly and one that I think we all should strive for, but you have to know that your interest and aptitude with modern technology is highly atypical for your age group.
I'd say it's moot to the average person who both can afford and who chooses to wear a luxury watch. It's the people that can afford a luxury watch but who rarely wear the ones they have or who are pragmatic enough to not want any standard watch because it doesn't nothing that their smartphone can do are the ones that would be more likely to want Apple Watch.
Again, the point is moot because these people probably never considered using their watch for payments or notifications of any sort. It told them the time and the day of the month, and even within those people a subset was probably only concerned about the luxury aspect, and not even that "old world" utility.
You make it sound like plastic cards vanished as soon as Apple Pay came into existence. I'd even say the people who are mostly likely buying luxury watches are likely the ones that still have check books and landlines in their home.
Again, moot, but now it's getting silly. If notifications were good enough on their phone or not all with their luxury watch, why would all of a sudden have a problem now? These people wouldn't. These people would probably find Apple Watch too confusing, or in the case of why father not have a smartphone, tablet, a traditional "PC", an email address, or do any sort of online footprint. They are the definition of old school and to ignore that aspect just sets your argument up for failure.
:facepalm:
C'mon, indeed.
Thanks for some nice thoughts about me!
Though, I don't think that I'm an anomaly.
Long story, long:
My Dad worked hard all his life -- he and Mom raised 3 kids & all the hassle/expense. After the kids were married, he worked hard, made good money, saved, paid off his mortgage early, and invested.
They lived a pretty good life and started to enjoy themselves, travel -- bought expensive clothes, etc. ... Mainly my Dad liked lightweight comfortable shoes and thin high quality watches -- I have a safe full of them -- all very expensive ... It is interesting that he also has several gimmick expensive watches -- like an HP Calculator Watch with tiny buttons and a stylus ... A tiny stylus ...
He and Mom loved to dance and frequented piano/organ bars with dance floors in the area. He made friends with Sal Cordero, an organist, about my Dad's age, who as a day job managed the Hammond Organ studio in Pasadena. As a side line, Sal took on the Apple ][ -- in mid 1978, I think. *
Anyway, Sal convinced Dad to buy an Apple ][ -- supposedly to do important stuff like keep track of his business contacts -- but, really to tinker.
This was all unbeknownst to me. I had bought an Apple ][ and was busy, with two others, trying to get together enough money ( $60,000) to open an Apple dealership in Sunnyvale. When I told my Dad, he knew exactly what I was about -- he had bought his Apple ][ before me. Because of his personal experience with Apple, and mine -- Later, Dad invested in AAPL and did quite well (years before I did).
* After 11 years in business, ours was the oldest surviving Apple dealership in Silicon Valley (outlasting ComputerLand, BusinessLand, and several other chains) -- but, Sal's dealership always had us beat as the earliest -- and still survives today as the oldest Apple Dealership in Pasadena:
http://di-no.com
https://local.yahoo.com/info-20612726-dino-computers-pasadena
My point to all this is: I think you do the [affluent] elderly a disservice -- if you create something that interests them, they can get their juices running with a zest and persistence that might surprise you. I think Sal and Dad are the rule rather than the exception
This quote, sometimes attributed to Mark Twain sums it up:
When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years.
Yeah, C'mon -- let's not underestimate the selective, mature buyer with taste (who could also be an investor).
How many septuagenarians have studied and programmed Swift with it over the past year? How many denarians, vicenarians tricenarians did the same? Let's say we exclude those that took Swift in school because they had to? Do you think that your interests, IQ, and penchant for modern technology mirror the average person in your age group? I don't. I would say that your interest in new technology is more inline with today's youth. Mine too.
I would love for more people or all age groups to be genuinely intrigued by new innovations but my experience is that as we get older — I don't mean old, just older — we tend to solidify our interests into something less experimental and instead stick to what is more familiar. A great example of this is music.
No one he's bigoted. I would be too if I had been bought and sold. ba-da-bum
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/61432/width/350/height/700[/IMG] [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/61433/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/61434/width/350/height/700[/IMG] [IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/61435/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
[B][SIZE=4]THE BRITAIN ICON CHECK LIMITED EDITION BBY2008 45MM MANUAL WINDING
$17,500
Item 39829111
COLOUR: BLACK[/SIZE][/B]
[URL=https://us.burberry.com/the-britain-icon-check-limited-edition-bby2008-45mm-manual-winding-p39829111]https://us.burberry.com/the-britain-icon-check-limited-edition-bby2008-45mm-manual-winding-p39829111[/URL]
We may be, at least in part. But what about the average consumer? This is clearly targeted at convincing the average consumer that the Apple Watch is undesirable. It is our job to wake people up to the reality that this is, pure and simple, propaganda.
Our job? Then the pay is lousy.
Everybody is going to die not just 'these people'. Smartwatch wears will die too, and maybe their kids will see it as an old world relic.
So why did you call it ironic? Where's the irony in Steve Jobs dying?
Maybe the secret to not getting older is to be open to new ideas and experiences while you are able -- being sedentary can be as much a mental state as a physical one.
I don't understand this last comment -- bigoted?
Lest we underestimate what Apple is about -- 1 example:
THE BRITAIN ICON CHECK LIMITED EDITION BBY2008 45MM MANUAL WINDING
$17,500
Item 39829111
COLOUR: BLACK
https://us.burberry.com/the-britain-icon-check-limited-edition-bby2008-45mm-manual-winding-p39829111
Watches like your example are for people that really want one of these;
It's a Pratt and Whitney R4360 Radial Engine, the peak, or near the peak anyway, of piston engined aviation.
http://www.enginehistory.org/r-4360.shtml
That he would live to see those 'those people' die. Instead they saw him die. That my friend is irony.
Again, not ironic because Jobs never said he would see them die.