Apple Announces Apple Watch, Available in Early 2015 From $349

[firewood]

$350 for a sport watch is a lot for most people to pay.

For most. But Apple caters to the minority of customers who have money to spend, and lets Dell and HTC makes roughly zero profit selling laptops and phones to the rest.

Most scarfs in the Burberry store are above that price. And that Burberry store had customers in it buying stuff (granted, less than in the nearby Apple store, but more so than in the nearby Microsoft store .

Also, my Garmin GPS watch originally cost more than $350 (including heart monitor strap). So that price is not out of line for someone who doesn't buy wearables just for fashion.

 

[Gasu E.]

It. Should. Have. Been. Round.

What an awful concept-- it would be a terribly inefficient shape for displaying alphanumeric information.

 

[Antgb84]

Who can guess how much the premium version of the watch will cost?? Also how da hell are you going to update the thing?

 

[Arndroid]

Am I the only one severely underwhelmed by the design of the Apple Watch? It looks like a toy...

Image

Wow you picked one out of the 82 combinations to compare it to a device that has no options. Put it up with the example edition model.

Although the white apple watch is a good looking device in its own right. Just much different. That apple is able it get such a significant variety of aesthetics from just varying several components is pretty impressive.

 

[Gasu E.]

I'm sure both Tag Heur and Swatch are panicking!

(that's sarcasm by the way!)

They would be wise to. The Swiss watch industry failed to panic in the 1970s and severely contracted as a result in the 1980s. In fact, the only thing that saved them as an industry was establishment of the Swatch brand. Look up the "Quartz Crisis". I'm sure the Swiss remember their own recent history, even if you were unaware of it.

 

[jouster]

Who can guess how much the premium version of the watch will cost?? Also how da hell are you going to update the thing?

Via your iPhone, I imagine.

 

[Keirasplace]

I've seen the Apple Watch and the design quality is abysmal. If it survives a year it will be a miracle.

Bladers, you'Re so god damn funny. When motos little round face is dinged to death while Apple's watch face is stay crystal clear, don't go crying to me.

 

[SuperCachetes]

Yes, absolutely

http://www.panerai.com/en/collections/watch-collection/luminor/34-luminor-base-left-handed-pam00219

Correction: Traditional, mainstream watches that people have heard of.

Panerai watches are not nearly in the same price range as the Watch.


On an unrelated note - as a self-professed "optimistic" shareholder, I feel I need to point out that Apple sold zero watches in 2014 - but will sell "some" in 2015. Furthermore, the Watch will not cannibalize iPhone sales one bit. You can figure out for yourselves what these facts will do for gross revenue.

 

[Keirasplace]

They would be wise to. The Swiss watch industry failed to panic in the 1970s and severely contracted as a result in the 1980s. In fact, the only thing that saved them as an industry was establishment of the Swatch brand. Look up the "Quartz Crisis". I'm sure the Swiss remember their own recent history, even if you were unaware of it.

The Swatch group basically bought a whole bunch of high end shop which would have otherwise closed without them. People have very short memories indeed.

 

[kajpin]

Also, my Garmin GPS watch originally cost more than $350 (including heart monitor strap). So that price is not out of line for someone who doesn't buy wearables just for fashion.

The key word there is GPS...I would have gladly dropped 350 for an integrated apple watch that fulfilled my need (running/biking watch) along with all the other fluff.

Instead I'll have to drop even more for a functional but single purpose garmin forerunner.

 

[firewood]

On an unrelated note - as a self-professed "optimistic" shareholder, I feel I need to point out that Apple sold zero watches in 2014 - but will sell "some" in 2015. Furthermore, the Watch will not cannibalize iPhone sales one bit.

In fact there is a possibility that some number of more affluent Android users will switch and buy iPhones because, to them, this Watch is better than any competing Android Wear... more so than those who go the opposite direction. Small effect, but still in the same direction in terms of influencing the financials.

 

[Tanegashima]

It's hideous!

Good for you.

You can't pair it with your Samsung Galaxy Note 4, can you?

I loved it, wow! Not only it's feature rich, but it's simply drop-dead gorgeous, and for $349? I would expect a good watch like this for $1000, much less for that price, even if it's the alu version with rubber strap (which is excellent as a sports watch)

 

[samcraig]

For most. But Apple caters to the minority of customers who have money to spend, and lets Dell and HTC makes roughly zero profit selling laptops and phones to the rest.

Also, my Garmin GPS watch originally cost more than $350 (including heart monitor strap). So that price is not out of line for someone who doesn't buy wearables just for fashion.

A couple of things.

Apple caters to the minority of customers? Oh really? And only those that have money to spend. That must make justifying the 5C really hard for you. And all the price points for various versions of the iPhone now to ensure there's everything from a free option all the way up...

Apple only catering to the minority of customers who have money to spend isn't exactly correct. If it were - their products wouldn't be at Walmart, etc.

As to your Garmin GPS watch. Last I checked it could work as intended as a standalone device. My "complaint" if you even call it that is the dependency on a phone to be present. I understand it (I have a pebble) but you can't exactly compare the Pebble (which I think nailed the notification thing while being smart with display and battery life) vs ALL of the other smart watch offerings from Apple, LG, Samsung, Moto, etc...

 

[Keirasplace]

LOL - that is nothing but rhetoric.



I believe these watch makers are more interested in locking someone in to their ecosystem then trying to make a stand-alone product.

Battery life will be an issue for awhile. Apple will come up with some great reasons why charging every night is no big deal - but it is - if this becomes your "only" watch that now requires you to travel with a charger and/or run out of battery because you're in a 24 hour black out.

Relying on bluetooth or wifi (adhoc or otherwise) is a battery drainer. I would have thought they might rely more heavily on NFC with the ability to just tap to download the data (IE - take the watch out for a run and it stores everything) and then tap to transfer. However - it doesn't look like the watch has a built in GPS to handle that (or did I miss it).

It's a big "ask" for a "slave" device.

It has as much independent function (and actually significantly more except camera) than an Ipod. The main thing it doesn't have is GPS and LTE/3G (so communicaiton and satellite). Though if it can connect the internet through Wifi it has as much function as many Ipads and Ipods with no LTE/3G. So, you could easily use it for exercise and such. GPS and LTE/3G is the biggest battery burners on a phone, so it explains why they wouldn't be on a smart watch.

 

[samcraig]

It has as much independent function (and actually significantly more except camera) than an Ipod. The main thing it doesn't have is GPS and LTE/3G (so communicaiton and satellite). Though if it can connect the internet through Wifi it has as much function as many Ipads and Ipods with no LTE/3G. So, you could easily use it for exercise and such. GPS and LTE/3G is the biggest battery burners on a phone, so it explains why they wouldn't be on a smart watch.

I don't understand your point. If the excitement over wearing one of these is all of the fun things it can do - but that to do them, you need it paired with your phone, then it's not the same as an iPod. Do you mean iPod touch? Again - iPod touch's have gps in them, no? camera and wifi for facetime, etc?

What can you do with the watch besides tell time, date and some basic functions that makes it comparable?

 

[dcorban]

Wow, this thread has brought out the worst in people. It's okay. The words written will still be around in two years when everyone is here discussing the latest apple watch to be released. The same cycle happened with the iPad.

 

[iososx]

Apple is sure to turn their watch into a massive profit center as they've done with the iPhone.

Just wait and see.

 

[Keirasplace]

While the official promotional renders look great I have to say that real photos of the actual devices (taken at the event) do not give the same flawless and smooth impression:

Image

The people who actually had it in their hands on it were very impressed by their build and finish. So, maybe its the lighting at the event that produced not so impressive looks.

 

[samcraig]

Wow, this thread has brought out the worst in people. It's okay. The words written will still be around in two years when everyone is here discussing the latest apple watch to be released. The same cycle happened with the iPad.

I think those being completely dismissive in a hyperbolic manner will come off looking silly - however I don't suspect they will care much.

However - there are plenty of people who have made valid comments, concerns, etc who should really have no problem looking back at this thread and owning up to what they wrote if/when they have a change in mind.

I spoke pretty negatively of the original iPad after the keynote. But I actually purchased one on launch day (and still have it) and was more than happy to own up to my own negativity. Some of it was (and still) accurate for my use cases and others became less important.

 

[kdarling]

I'm not disagreeing with you, just the way they have them shown on the page I assumed cheapest to most expensive.

Ah, I see. But the leftmost has sapphire and the middle doesn't. That's what I'm going by: the materials.

The key question is now. How effective is Apple's branding and retail distribution strategy. The Fashion blogger invites today is a real sign of them being serious.

Reading fanboy banter/responses on Engdadget, the Verge and here are no longer the barometer of this success. You'll need to go to Fashion blogs and TMZ.

I see what you're saying. Hmm. Do you think that all the models count towards this fashion strategy? Or only the gold versions?

As an aside, I was watching CNet's coverage today, and the young woman there said it looked like an "old lady's watch" and she wouldn't get one.

Off to check the fashion blogs Thanks!

 

[Keirasplace]

I don't understand your point. If the excitement over wearing one of these is all of the fun things it can do - but that to do them, you need it paired with your phone, then it's not the same as an iPod. Do you mean iPod touch? Again - iPod touch's have gps in them, no? camera and wifi for facetime, etc?

What can you do with the watch besides tell time, date and some basic functions that makes it comparable?

If it plays music, videos, runs apps, has sensors, etc. Its pretty close to an Self contained Ipod, a touch without WIFI and only blue tooth. It has an independent life, but not as a communication device, although since it uses Blue tooth, I'm guessing it could connect to other blue tooth devices than the phone.

 

[samcraig]

If it plays music, videos, runs apps, has sensors, etc. Its pretty close to an Self contained Ipod, a touch without WIFI and only blue tooth. It has an independent life, but not as a communication device, although since it uses Blue tooth, I'm guessing it could connect to other blue tooth devices than the phone.

What apps will it run that don't require a connection to wifi? Does the watch play videos? How much on board storage does it have? Given its size, playing videos on that vs a touch is pretty significant. Also - what good are the sensors if it's "dumb" without connecting to the iPhone.

I don't see the comparison valid personally.

 

[iZac]

It looks like the Karim Rashid watch that I got rid of a decade ago.

 

[Keirasplace]

This x100 and bolded. I'd like to go running with the sport watch while listening to music via BT and tracking my mileage on a map, ala Runkeeper. I can't do this on the watch alone. I also need to haul along the iPhone. (Unless I've got that somehow wrong?) That's just plain silly if true. So the watch is a very nice looking, secondary display for the iPhone. Until it has more standalone functionality I'll pass.

The phone can store music and has blue tooth, so why can't you use it to listen to music?

From my own experience, GPS tracking of mileage is not exact at all, so not sure why you'd use it. Its OK if you do so much distance that it doesn't matter, but precision is not great. I know it isn'T because there are several spots I know the exact distance they are from my house. I use runKeeper too.

I run with my iphone strapped (like holding a camera) to my hand. Biggest watch ever ;-).

----------

What apps will it run that don't require a connection to wifi? Does the watch play videos? How much on board storage does it have? Given its size, playing videos on that vs a touch is pretty significant. Also - what good are the sensors if it's "dumb" without connecting to the iPhone.

I don't see the comparison valid personally.

It plainly says it plays music independently on the web site, so playing video is a given (really crappy players with almost no storage 10 years ago played videos...). Don't know how much storage it has, but I'm guessing 4G would be an absolute minimum. It can collect data and then sync to the phone. Why would it be dumb, its still a small computer?

 

[Arndroid]

Dear Apple,

Please be more obnoxiously, defiantly mum about the battery life of this thing. Because it's such a great sign that the bleeding obvious first question on everyone's mind is the one question you're not touching with a 50 ft pole.

Also, please make many more (and LONGER) videos where Jony Ive tilts his head and passionately recites long lists of four syllable adjectives, obscure materials and manufacturing processes like he was a chef on some food porn network.

Clearly they continue to work on battery time. Rumors are they wanted 3-4 days but were only able to get 1-2 days. (Which still puts them in front of all the competition not using e-ink). That is why they did not say, because they hope and intend to make it even longer in the next 5-6 months.

----------

If this turns out useful, I would have to wear a watch on each hand.
A nice one on my left and a practical on my right ;-)
I understand they make it turn "off" when you are not looking at it, but I didn't like the look of the black screen on Tim's wrist.
I'd much rather it was "on" all the time, much better looking, but it would probably only last until lunch....

I agree that an always on time display would be my preference as well