Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Expands Apple Watch Marketing Efforts With New Multi-Page Spread in Vogue Magazine

oliversl said:
One of the things I don't like about the iWatch is that it is mainly about fashion. If the entry of Apple to the Fashion world. Fashion is not bad, but it is not tech.
Click to expand...

Also, I think it's a deliberate move by Apple into the fashion world, and one that makes sense. If wearables are the next thing (a big if), then it's important to understand fashion. People don't buy anything wearable solely for functionality (except maybe $20 reading glasses at the drug store).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
topmounter said:
Considering the "fashion focus" of this product, I expect that there will be some sort of rudimentary mode that lets you wear the iWatch and get all the fashion benefits (pretty lights, time and date) without actually having or even owning an iPhone.
Click to expand...

Without having an iPhone on you, yes. Without owning an iPhone is highly unlikely. Almost all of the settings on the watch are controlled from the phone and many think that you will need an iPhone to actually set up the watch. (This is why Apple states "Requires iPhone 5 or later" on the bottom of every page on apple.com/watch.)
 
KPOM said:
Also, I think it's a deliberate move by Apple into the fashion world, and one that makes sense. If wearables are the next thing (a big if), then it's important to understand fashion. People don't buy anything wearable solely for functionality (except maybe $20 reading glasses at the drug store).
Click to expand...

We've heard some griping about how often Tim Cook refers to Apple Watch as "the most intimate product we've ever made." The gripers are missing the point. Successfully convincing people wear tech on their bodies requires more than just functionality, it requires making them feel good about it. Geeky and creepy are big impediments to acceptance. Apple gets that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rogifan said:
Samsung products must really suck then. Microsoft Surface too considering they signed a $400M agreement with the NFL and its sitting as a prop in the booth during PGA events too.
Click to expand...

Actually Samsung spends more than Apple in advertisement....
 
Max(IT) said:
Actually Samsung spends more than Apple in advertisement....
Click to expand...

Exactly. What does that say about their products if they're spending 10x or more than Apple on advertising? And no they're not spending all of that on washing machines and refrigerators.
 
CmdrLaForge said:
I cannot believe that the watch will not work without an iPhone. I would assume it works just fine but with a limited feature set.
Click to expand...

I doubt Apple would say that :apple:watch "Requires iPhone 5 or later" if indeed, it did not require an iPhone. Watch the keynote (its stated at least twice), look at their website. Sure looks to me like you will need an iPhone to change almost all settings for the watch and I believe you will need an iPhone to set the watch up out of the box.
 
IJ Reilly said:
We've heard some griping about how often Tim Cook refers to Apple Watch as "the most intimate product we've ever made." The gripers are missing the point. Successfully convincing people wear tech on their bodies requires more than just functionality, it requires making them feel good about it. Geeky and creepy are big impediments to acceptance. Apple gets that.
Click to expand...

And many people get that Apple is trying to brainwash people into not to seeing it as a mass-market gadget. And that what is important for Apple to provide has been neglected. That's what the gripe is about.
 
Elbon said:
I believe it requires an iPhone 5 or later. I seriously doubt that anyone that is in the market for the Apple Watch (i.e. is willing to pay that much money for it) is still using a 4S or earlier.
Click to expand...

I'm still running two iPhone 4s'

They still function perfectly. Why would I upgrade?

Oh that's right. So I can use the watch.
That is one ugly thing about apple. Don't get me wrong, all my computing, phone, TV streaming stuff is apple. I just resent having to upgrade hardware because of a new iOS feature, or in this case, for this watch.

I'll be keen to buy this watch, but I won't be upgrading my phones.
If I don't get all the features, so be it.

.
 
Seannyb said:
I doubt Apple would say that :apple:watch "Requires iPhone 5 or later" if indeed, it did not require an iPhone. Watch the keynote (its stated at least twice), look at their website. Sure looks to me like you will need an iPhone to change almost all settings for the watch and I believe you will need an iPhone to set the watch up out of the box.
Click to expand...

Sure for the full functionality definitely you need the phone. But that it cannot be used? They might have said it in the keynote and maybe there is a footnote on their homepage somewhere. I know it and most probably people on this forum. But most people won't.
 
gee, I wonder what type of audience they are going for by putting ads in vogue and showcasing this in luxury stores?
 
Glideslope said:
What's with the HUGE marketing push? A little nervous about sales (looks at Citizen Sky Hawk.) ;)
Click to expand...

Long lead up time from announcement to market, months of advertising to convince people they want one. They seem to be going all out, just in case.
 
B-Eugen said:
Apple has lost its way.

Is anyone really, I mean REALLY going to get excited about this? I suppose some, but I don't think that many will.

I use my watch to tell the time, and I have no interest in it doing anything else than telling me that.

Their efforts would be better spent doing the following:

  1. Improve the quality of OS X and iPhone software, both of which have been quality challenged since the releases of Lion and iOS 7
  2. Figure out a way to make lower cost computers so more people will use Macs.
  3. Expand into the enterprise market.

I might add, stay away from cars.
Click to expand...

For me it's all about price, function and then looks. I want a smartwatch first and foremost. If Apple came out and said that there was one watch with different bands at $200 I would be excited. I still find the functionality suspect because it's aiming to do so much. Why not just whip out the phone you have to carry in the first place. The watch should compliment the phone; not try to replace it with 1000's of "complex" apps.
And I don't buy fashion magazines so it's obvious who Apple is trying to target. I'm really digging the new pebble interface but I'm waiting to see the new models in person.
 
uknowimright said:
gee, I wonder what type of audience they are going for by putting ads in vogue and showcasing this in luxury stores?
Click to expand...

Everyday people on tech forums? :eek: :D:D it seems like they are going after a different consumer and that supports the rumors of high prices except for the base model.

----------

And isn't Vogue targeted primarily at women?
 
cube said:
And many people get that Apple is trying to brainwash people into not to seeing it as a mass-market gadget. And that what is important for Apple to provide has been neglected. That's what the gripe is about.
Click to expand...

I don't know about your gripe, but mine is that yours makes no sense whatsoever.
 
I don't think we should wait for the future. You already know Fashion and you already know how your friends react to Fashion.

The Fashion industry will not change because Apple launch 1 item of all the Fashion items of the industry.

But, lets wait and check back in december

KPOM said:
Also, I think it's a deliberate move by Apple into the fashion world, and one that makes sense. If wearables are the next thing (a big if), then it's important to understand fashion. People don't buy anything wearable solely for functionality (except maybe $20 reading glasses at the drug store).
Click to expand...
 
CmdrLaForge said:
Sure for the full functionality definitely you need the phone. But that it cannot be used? They might have said it in the keynote and maybe there is a footnote on their homepage somewhere. I know it and most probably people on this forum. But most people won't.
Click to expand...

I agree that most people won't know that they need an iPhone (and a recent version at that). "Requires" is a pretty strong word to me. The way that they word it says a lot to me. They could have just as easily stated "iPhone required for most features".

Just my opinion but lets hope they release more info sooner than later. I swear I dream about this stupid watch. Apple, SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back