tjwolf

The 'P' in P/E ratio stands for 'P'rice not profit.  It's hard to take anything you wrote seriously when you can't get that basic fact straight.

adm1 said:

I don't really think the fitbit line is comparable to the apple watch, maybe the Blaze is the closest thing since it can do some phone notifications but I doubt any apple watch buyers would have otherwise went for a fitbit had the apple watch not been released.

What makes you say that?  I would think the opposite - if I (and most of the people I know) hadn't been aware of the upcoming Apple Watch, I would have definitely bought a Fitbit (or other fitness tracker).  The problem for Fitbit is that smartwatches do more than Fitness trackers (the obvious analogy here is that smartphones did more than  flip phones in 2007).  Most folks prefer to wear just one thing on their wrist, so might as well make it the more capable thing (never mind that most folks would prefer charging one thing vs. two).  In my opinion, fitness trackers' days are numbered - they simply can't compete with the much larger set of capabilities unlocked by wearing a smartwatch. 

Pundits keep harping on the lack of cellular as if it's a "must have" in a smart watch.  I couldn't disagree more.  While I see its desirability for emergencies while out exercising, it seems to me a fringe use-case - i.e. a selling point to a small minority of Apple Watch users.  Apple might consider making a more expensive version that has it, but I doubt the "base" Apple Watch will see something like this.

Making/taking calls on the watch is just not that comfortable!  You have to hold your arm up and, in noisy environment, it's difficult to hear the other side from the speakers.  Sure, Bluetooth headphones would ameliorate this, but not that many folks have or carry those around either.

blastdoor said:

This market will eventually be huge and Apple is well positioned to dominate it.

However, to realize its potential Apple will need to simultaneously move several wearable product lines forward at once. It can't be just Watch. It needs to be Watch plus AirPods plus maybe a half dozen other things. Apple has to figure out how to do that. 

I can't even imagine half a dozen other things, much less think Apple needs them to dominate the wearable space.  I think, aside from the Airpods, they need only one more crucial wearable: an AR device - i.e. either cool glasses or contacts.

When a person makes the decision of whether or not to buy an iPhone, they must consider Apple's closed app store policy!  If they don't like it, they should not buy an iPhone!  It's really that simple.

I really don't see on what basis these iPhone customers can sue Apple.  Sure, if Apple were forced to allow apps to be sold outside the app store, apps might be cheaper - but those apps would also more likely result in more malware making it into the Apple ecosystem and harm Apple's security or at least its security reputation.  And, of course, they'd forego the 30% cut.  Of course Apple wouldn't do that!  And why should they have to?  It's not like Apple suddenly changed to this policy, forcing existing customers into it because they had already made the investment - every iPhone owner knew, upfront, that this is how it is.