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 Supplier Numbers Suggest Apple Watch Sales Are Below Analyst Expectations
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm likely buying the watch for this reasons
Can check texts
Notifications
Track my fitness
Actually use apps
These are big and from somebody who had a gear S it will be alot better.
I'm getting the 6 plus S so there will be times when I can't keep getting my phone out my pocket for every little text or notification
Can check texts
Notifications
Track my fitness
Actually use apps
These are big and from somebody who had a gear S it will be alot better.
I'm getting the 6 plus S so there will be times when I can't keep getting my phone out my pocket for every little text or notification
I don't think it's very nice looking but then I've never been a fan of digital watches.
Ah one of those posts.
Its like when I refer to the SF Giants. I say "We need a new starter" and someone always says "WE!? You play for the Giants?" No. But saying We refers to my team. Some people are extremely loyal to Apple....hence the "We" part.
To be honest, that is probably the most reasonable response to the watch I've heard. If people just said that then I'd get it. That's how we judge watches in the real world. Do we like how they look?
Watches are not "reasonable" purchases in 2015. They are items of jewellery. A Rolex or Omega is no more "useful" than a $100 swatch. We should use the same logic to buy or not buy the apple watch.
I agree totally. This is iPhone vs iPad all over again. Some people feel the need to criticise anything new with a rhetoric that "it needs to solve a problem that is specific to them". It is a ridiculous discussion in a world where everything is convenienced to the max and in addition it shows a narcissist tendency to assume that is shouldn't exist if one cannot see a use case for themselves in it.
I don't agree with this. I have a Rolex (and wear it), but think the Apple Watch is overpriced considering the current functionality. This has nothing to do with a comparison between a Rolex and a smartwatch because I buy each for different reasons. I visited an Apple Store last weekend and held the watch myself for the first time. I have to admit that I was underwhelmed by the functionality and would like to wait until it gets better. I did like the look and feel though.
No, what smartwatches are trying to do is to bring utility to your wrist and that goes far beyond being just juwellery. Apple and Samsung would have stayed out of the business if your post would have been correct.
What Apple is doing differently is making the connection between utility and jewellery by focusing on the outward appearance (edition and multiple bands) more than its competitors and by acknowledging that buyer experience is a factor, hence the expansion of points of sale to renowned fashion houses.
That’s the issue. You are buying the Rolex for different reasons than the apple watch. It’s jewellery in the same way an engagement ring is jewellery. It has an emotional and visual connection. A Rolex has connotations that can’t be easily replicated. It means precision engineering, historical relevance. A representation of what the best engineering humans can build by hand. That’s what the luxury watch market is selling. I suppose you could say that these properties are the "functionality" of the Rolex. The Apple watch "functionality" is purely what it can do rather than what it means (as with luxury watches). I think that's why it is a confusing product to sell to consumers.
Apple is just another machine made product and doesn't have any of those connotations to draw on. Perhaps Apple’s problem is that they are not known for luxury, rather the brand is very utilitarian. Maybe this is working against them in this case. I think they have tried with the edition to show they can produce luxury. I’m not sure if the world truly believes in Apple as a luxury brand yet.
Unless something extraordinary happens "we" will be seeing more of the same. Maybe "we" should be running Apple by committee because it's obvious Timmy is not doing a proper job.
Well put.
I feel that Cook is being duplicitous with us. That betrays the lack of confidence he has in the product.
The great question is: will Apple go down the pan without Jobs? The agony of that searing question is fearfully upon us. Yes.
Steve Jobs has shown that he was irreplaceable. Cook has brought Apple's profits to all-time highs, but all on Jobs's babies. This feels like the swansong of Apple. Rather like in the 90s, when Apple made record profits even when their product line was falling apart, once again we see the last hurrah of the money machine.
But Apple needs a Steve Jobs to save them; we have no Steve Jobs to save them.
I agree it does feel very much like we are regressing back to the Apple of the post Jobs I Era. I don't think Apple needs a Jobs to "save" it -- otherwise Apple would be doomed because Jobs was a once-in-a-lifetime individual. His closest rival was Bill Gates, who in the scheme of tech revolutions was a one-hit wonder -- but a colossal world-changing hit it was. The iPhone will rain money over Cupertino until another company develops something to upstage it as the iPhone did to the BB.
What Apple desperately needs is a leader, not a caretaker. What it has now is typical "design by committee" and that never produces good product. And we see the results with Cooks pockmarked tenure littered with misjudgments, mea culpas, but no clear successes.
The AW is a good concept, and could even develop into an outstanding product, but it was stymied by a protracted launch time frame tease (early 2015 became 2015 as calendar 1Q slipped away) followed by an awkward launch with marginal product availability (no in-store sales and back ordered for anyone who didn't order in the first 2 minutes online.) Hard to get that "word-of-mouth buzz" going when no one can get their hands on the product. Then there is the issue with marketing, which use to be Apple's genius. Every AW I've seen is trite and confusing. If you take a look a the early iPhone and iPad ads they explain what the device is, why its different, and why you want it. The AW ads show pictures of the watch and some apps and an Apple logo -- like that's suppose to be a Bat signal to consumers to buy.
Advanced Semiconductor failing to produce a "break even" 2m chips. last quarter doesn't take a stock analyst to understand that means AW demand likely didn't just flatten after the early adopters buy-in, but that it cratered. I don't think that says as much about the AW as Cook's inability to sell and market product. And he hides AW sales numbers like a kid with a bad report card.
Last edited:
There are other possible reasons for them failing to produce the projected numbers. Apple doesn't order those chips week by week, they would have ordered a large agreed quantity when awarding those contracts. The ASE proclamation sounds more like they failed to meet Apple's demand, probably due to technical difficulties in making the S1. In this case Apple would have diverted some of the contracted capacity to a different supplier, which would have been extremely disappointing to ASE.
almost every post from this person is been an Apple FanBoy. To truly analyze then you must state the pros and cons. For example when you read Consumer Reports, they state the pros and cons. No product is perfect and no product has everything that every single soul likes either
and your comment is also dumb, your both just guessing so you can't state yours is more true than the other person.
That may be but it still reflects on low "second adopter" AW demand. AW availability reached the no waiting level a couple months ago. Pair that with ASE disclosing their production has not been robust, and even if it was because of their own production issues, it tells us demand is weak for AW. Fewer chips available + moderate demand should see some shipping delay, even if its just a few days. But there are fewer chips available and same day shipping and availability.
Here is the difference: Your example is an anonymous "according to" supposition and data point in today's paper is a fact stated during a financial conference call to investors. One has no legal foundation, the other is a function of corporate governance and transparency rules, and has legal implication.
Since you want to compare Apples and Grapes literally. A $20,000 Rolex watch in 10 years will still be worth as much if not more than the original price $20,000. If you take a $500, $2,000, or even a $20,000 Apple watch...how much you think it will be worth in 10 years? Each watch has its uniqueness...but one have to compare similarities and not dissimilarities.
Also as you are saying that his comment is silly saying it's an overprice notification band, that's his opinion which he has every right as in yours saying something totally different. Neither of you are right or wrong, but its funny how folks think their "opinion" is more right than the others. This just shows the person is insure about themselves...
Seems like a lot of guesswork. Only Apple knows how many were sold and if the sales met expectations. It may be different as far as reporting numbers once the Apple watch hits best buy.
Sure. You make my point. We only have 3rd party data points because Apple is playing "hide the ball" with the numbers. For more on this look at my original post here.
Yep, they are; I made that point in the first page. Of course Apple said that a year ago; so why this is a surprise to anybody has me scratching my head.
But we are sitting here making judgments based on nothing as if we could have done a better job
than the Apple management team; that's what I find amusing.
Last I checked the iPhone on contract is $199 and I've seen it sold for $99 on sale a few times. That's far cheaper than the cheapest watch.
And I would have no problem paying for it if the technology would be around for longer than 2-3 years, heck, I paid over $1500 for a watch. The problem is price-to-EOL.
Technology changes so fast. How can I be sure the money I spend on Apple Watch is going to last me 10, 20, 30 years? My father passed down watches made from the early 1900's that still work.
You have to consider these watches have the same lifespan of a flat panel TV. My Samsung TV that I bought 1.5 years ago is outdated, just like my iPhone 5s. Not to say it's not functional, but a lot of tech gear including phones gets obsoleted very fast.
But I'm still struggling what to do with my surge and if I should augment it with an apple watch.
Let's talk cars and antiques. Do you think anyone will care about a garden variety electric car of today in a few decades? Oh but that older Porsche....
Last edited:
Tim Cook has chosen to withhold the truth. We have no sales figures.
He has chosen deception.