Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Reportedly Weighing $400 Price Range for Upcoming Wearable Device
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I suspect margin is somewhere near iPhone range. Multiply cost of material and assembly by 3 or 4.
If watch cost $400, material + assembly cost should be somewhere between $100 to $133.
Nice controlled leak Apple.
"Apple might be positioning the device as an iPhone accessory by announcing it with iPhone, earlier than originally planned. "
So, if they're trying to lower expectations Flint Center with its significance + all that hype, the construction etc. is not helping at all. Most of the Apple watchers are expecting this thing to change the world again and want to see and introduction like; "This is a day I've been waiting for a long time."
Besides, remember Steve Ballmer laughing at the first iPhone's price and thinking that "nobody would buy it" I already can't wait for iWatch 2.
"Apple might be positioning the device as an iPhone accessory by announcing it with iPhone, earlier than originally planned. "
So, if they're trying to lower expectations Flint Center with its significance + all that hype, the construction etc. is not helping at all. Most of the Apple watchers are expecting this thing to change the world again and want to see and introduction like; "This is a day I've been waiting for a long time."
Besides, remember Steve Ballmer laughing at the first iPhone's price and thinking that "nobody would buy it" I already can't wait for iWatch 2.
I think that whatever wearable Apple releases will be more of a luxury high fashion item unlike ANY of the wearables we've seen so far. Something that you'll want to wear before you even know what it does.
More like a piece of Jewellery.
I love my watches. I have a always worn high priced watches like Breathing, Bvlgari etc. So if apple wants to replace these babies it had better well come up with something very sexy that will suit every occasion and look good on both a male or female's wrist.
I just don't know how they can do that. Im hoping they can of course.
More like a piece of Jewellery.
I love my watches. I have a always worn high priced watches like Breathing, Bvlgari etc. So if apple wants to replace these babies it had better well come up with something very sexy that will suit every occasion and look good on both a male or female's wrist.
I just don't know how they can do that. Im hoping they can of course.
To be honest, 400$ was my guess. I would pay up to 349$ I think. Therefore the iWatch has to be a rocket with a beautiful design.
Same here. Especially if one of the images as shown in this article would be close to the actually look and feel of the new device. It's to much like an iPod nano that comes along with a band to hold the device on it's place.
But all that comes with a big if. It's pure speculation at this time. But if the iWatch would truly comes with a prize tag of $400,- then Apple should come up with a truly great device.
By the way, if it will cost $400,- then it will automatically be more expensive in my country The Netherlands where Apple only changing the $ into €.
To give you an idea, $400,- would be €304,- Euro's normally here when looking at the current rate, but in reality it will cost €400,- as well. Meaning, Americans pay $400,- and we in Holland will pay $520,- That a big difference.
To be honest, although very unlikely, the iWatch that would be the best for me would go like this;
- Just a band, unpretentious with no screen, lightweight and laying low. Not screaming to people's faces "Hey I am wearing an expensive Apple accessory look at me!" Something that is at most as pretentious as one of those balance bracelets.
- I should have it on my wrist for days, At least 3 straight days of battery life.
- Tracks all kinds of data ranging from fitness to sleeping to vitals. I can check on them using iOS 8 health kit on my iPhone.
If it is something like a galaxy gear with a giant touchscreen for notifications etc it will be difficult to wear it all the time for data collection. The feature I'm looking forward for the most is actually sleep tracking. If it is bulk and heavy it won't be comfortable to wear in bed.
We'll just wait and see.
- Just a band, unpretentious with no screen, lightweight and laying low. Not screaming to people's faces "Hey I am wearing an expensive Apple accessory look at me!" Something that is at most as pretentious as one of those balance bracelets.
- I should have it on my wrist for days, At least 3 straight days of battery life.
- Tracks all kinds of data ranging from fitness to sleeping to vitals. I can check on them using iOS 8 health kit on my iPhone.
If it is something like a galaxy gear with a giant touchscreen for notifications etc it will be difficult to wear it all the time for data collection. The feature I'm looking forward for the most is actually sleep tracking. If it is bulk and heavy it won't be comfortable to wear in bed.
We'll just wait and see.
If you look at the differences between the iPad 1 and iPad Air then it's worth to wait some years, I agree. I think this iWatch would be a nice start and if it's not a huge failure then new models will probably be thinner, lighter, even made out of some new materials and probably equipped with a new type of battery that last for more then a weak. Scientist all ready made some huge progress in building new types of batteries that last twice as long or often even longer then that.
For me, it's more interesting if the new iWatch will revolutionize the industry or not. If it becomes just a accessory used among a small group of people then it's just a nice gadget among so many other nice gadgets but nothing a serious device one need to have.
That's why I was surprised hearing that Apple was in talks with insurance companies. At this point it's all highly speculative, but there are signs that Apple is trying to make something more out of this iWatch then just a watch. Not even just a heart reader but something significant more. That's why i'm very interested in what the device actually will be able to do.
Apple themselves raised the bar of expectations and the consumers actually are counting on a device that will blow away it's competitors. That's all together some expectations there. The chance of a huge disappointment is therefor big.
But only time can tell.
Never liked watches in the first place. Never liked that feeling. It can cost 5 bucks for all I care I'm not puting it on my wrist.
P.s. And it's not faster to look at your watch compared to iPhone.
P.s. And it's not faster to look at your watch compared to iPhone.
People who pay $400 for a watch don't buy one every three years either. They buy them to last 10 years.
If they claim it's due to the Saphire display then they are talking out there arse. watches in the $100 - $150 price range already come with such displays.
Tim Cook, is a penny pinching sod but I din't think even he could justify $400 for nothing more than a glorified Beeper.
This.
I'd be interested if Apple's device range, if there is one at all, included one or two models which competed at the mid-range of the "luxury" watch market, say around the Tag level or at the top end of the "designer" watch market, say around the Armani level, which starts at about £400 here in the UK.
I expect there are many potential buyers at a sub-£200 level for a device that looks like a device (or at least a Swatch) rather than a "luxury" watch and who wouldn't mind replacing it every couple of years as the hardware improves.
Personally, and preference is, of course, entirely subjective, I'm not one of them. I like watches and I have a small collection of mid-to-high-end watches and I'd simply not be interested in a gadget-like timepiece, I'd never wear it so it'd be a waste of money, for me, regardless of its functions.
It'd be important to me that the hardware didn't need to be upgraded every year or so - that'd make it just a device rather than a piece of jewellery which has electronics in it.
Perhaps Ive and his team have been able to design a case which lasts, competes in the jewellery-level market and has a replaceable electronics module? Now, that'd be cool
It depends on their design aims - are they just going to go one better than the Nike/Jawbone bands or do they want to compete in the jewellery market too? It'll be interesting to find out.
Either way the iWatch is no sale for me - I got a watch build-in to the phone ... its been like over 6 years now .. that i haven't worn a "watch" on my wrist. I have my phone on me ..
because iWatch is definitely a product for checking the time of the day.
1. The fact it's at the Flint Center is coincidence at this point. Apple has neither implicitly nor explicitly made any significance of the location except to say that is where it will be held.
2. There is nothing to suggest the construction is exclusively for the "iWatch." Apple has other technologies to display like Homekit & other products to demo. The construction may well be just a hands-on center for attendees for everything Apple announces on the 9th b/c adequate space wasn't available elsewhere on campus.
3. I think your expectations are way out of proportions. The iWatch may rock the smart watch category but it's not going to change the world, not v.1 at least. Get that out of your head and you won't feel let down on the 9th. It's not going to eclipse the iPhone itself.
4. Balmer was wrong about the iPhone & Microsoft never caught up because of his lack of vision. Who has Windows phones today. They are a rare bird. It's a iOS vs Android world. Why quote Balmer here?
if it is made of nice materials and can do a lot of nifty things, I would sure pay $400. Heck, I would pay $500.
If it does a lot of health monitoring as well as alarms, that's plenty good enough for me. Unlike many people here, I think this works only if it positions itself as a fashion accessory. If it functions like typical Sony/Samsung smartwatches, this will only be a short term success as it would be viewed as more of gimmick.
I personally don't understand why people want this to take calls and read emails. Do you really wanna look like a fool and talk on the wrist? do you really want this to become a street hazard by people sticking their retina into their wrist to read all these small fonts (and get run over by vehicles?)
In short, iWatch should be focused on functions that is difficult for smartphones to handle. If you wanna read emails and take calls, taking phones out of pocket is not that big of a chore.
If it does a lot of health monitoring as well as alarms, that's plenty good enough for me. Unlike many people here, I think this works only if it positions itself as a fashion accessory. If it functions like typical Sony/Samsung smartwatches, this will only be a short term success as it would be viewed as more of gimmick.
I personally don't understand why people want this to take calls and read emails. Do you really wanna look like a fool and talk on the wrist? do you really want this to become a street hazard by people sticking their retina into their wrist to read all these small fonts (and get run over by vehicles?)
In short, iWatch should be focused on functions that is difficult for smartphones to handle. If you wanna read emails and take calls, taking phones out of pocket is not that big of a chore.
If you could read, you would have learned that Apple performs 1$-1 exchange rate, not 1$-1£.
Disagree by about a year or two. It's a wearable computer, not a piece of jewelry. A jewelry watch you keep forever -- not that $400 would buy much watch. A computer you upgrade every 4-5 years.
I'm one of those people that has paid $400 for a GPS running watch. I get a new one every 4-5 years as the tech progresses and new features interest me. I wouldn't want to keep it 10 years anymore than any other tech gear I own.
I would say 400 is rather cheap - I doubt this could be a luxury product for that price. I mean, buying a regular watch, 400 is the low end models. But of course , 400 is also enough that apple can actually produce a decent product....If we only get a "nike fuelband" kind of product for 400, its gonna flop like never before.
For me the bigger issue than price is how often is it updated.
If it has a yearly product cycle I know I'm gonna want to replace it probably every other year.
$529 is a lot of it only lasts 2 years before lusting for the "new shiny" takes over. (I'm in the UK so that what I'll have to pay if it is $400 - count yourself lucky)
It's not so bad if it isn't updated frequently as it will be less time before it seems outdated.
Can't imagine it won't be updated frequently though, it's not like it won't face competition from samsung, LG etc.
If it has a yearly product cycle I know I'm gonna want to replace it probably every other year.
$529 is a lot of it only lasts 2 years before lusting for the "new shiny" takes over. (I'm in the UK so that what I'll have to pay if it is $400 - count yourself lucky)
It's not so bad if it isn't updated frequently as it will be less time before it seems outdated.
Can't imagine it won't be updated frequently though, it's not like it won't face competition from samsung, LG etc.
Anyone else remember the rumors circulating that Apple's as-yet unreleased tablet was going to run about $999 to $1299? IIRC, there were similar rumors about iPhone and AppleTV, both wildly overestimating the cost.
Seems to me this is part of the cycle for rumored products. I'm betting Apple will release a few different models ranging from $99-199. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
Seems to me this is part of the cycle for rumored products. I'm betting Apple will release a few different models ranging from $99-199. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
That's not what happens in countries like Spain or France. If an Apple product has a $399 price tag in the USA, they sell it with a 399 price tag in Spain.
----------
I remember what you say and perhaps is Apple who wants us to believe this rumor in order to unveil a cheaper smarwatch. I think it will cost $250-300. In terms of marketing strategies, this product must be cheaper than the cheapest iPhone out there (iPhone 4S).
----------
What makes you think it won't have apps? Of course it will! The AppStore is one of the reasons Apple is getting those figures. Come on, even the Apple TV has apps.
I'm really hoping Apple don't get greedy on the pricing for the iWatch (or indeed the iPhone). The iWatch needs to be between £150 and £200 to make it a feasible product which will sell well. Apple have all the money in the world, I think they can start to lower prices now.
Either they are ********ting us or they are leaking confidential information and Apple certainly would not want leaked. Either way it's very wrong. Zero respect for Apple they have.
And it's not one of those unofficial statements Apple let them have as we all know what they are like.
here's my take in the iwatch. feedback welcome.
I think most people have got it wrong. Just like Apple revolutionized phones, I think they are looking to revolutionize watches. think of it as the next generation of watches.
phones always existed but the difference was what an iPhone enabled you to do. most watches thus far tell time and measurements. that's all. it's a niche market that's completely untapped. 'wearables' is the wrong approach b/c no one wants an accessory for their phone. it's not practical. your phone should be a standalone complete device.
so if done right, they will have a gold mine. obviously part of the success will be how apple markets it. quality watches as we know sell for few hundred to thousands of dollars. this will be no different. apple wouldn't want to go into watch making since its not their expertise so they'll prob partner with Swiss watchmakers. think Rolex with Apple software for the high end.
now the only issue with this is watchmakers pride themselves on their mechanical expertise so I'm not sure how willing they'd be to go digital.
that's it!
I think most people have got it wrong. Just like Apple revolutionized phones, I think they are looking to revolutionize watches. think of it as the next generation of watches.
phones always existed but the difference was what an iPhone enabled you to do. most watches thus far tell time and measurements. that's all. it's a niche market that's completely untapped. 'wearables' is the wrong approach b/c no one wants an accessory for their phone. it's not practical. your phone should be a standalone complete device.
so if done right, they will have a gold mine. obviously part of the success will be how apple markets it. quality watches as we know sell for few hundred to thousands of dollars. this will be no different. apple wouldn't want to go into watch making since its not their expertise so they'll prob partner with Swiss watchmakers. think Rolex with Apple software for the high end.
now the only issue with this is watchmakers pride themselves on their mechanical expertise so I'm not sure how willing they'd be to go digital.
that's it!
I never liked the idea of smart watch to begin with.
I think it's unnecessary and just a money making gimmick for manufacturer with no real purpose and specific and unique function.
and no matter what,$400 is way too much for such product.
they should price it similar to an ipod.
I think it's unnecessary and just a money making gimmick for manufacturer with no real purpose and specific and unique function.
and no matter what,$400 is way too much for such product.
they should price it similar to an ipod.