Apple product ownership is about both for many, loyalty and image.
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 to Sell Hermès Apple Watch Collection Online Starting Friday
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple product ownership is about both for many, loyalty and image.
Save your money and buy a vintage/pre-owned watch (not tech that will be useless in 5 years).
No poop it will be more powerful. Not at all what I was saying. But, Apple is not a fashion company. They are a tech company that makes very nice looking hardware. Not fashion. And, it's great they allow other companies to make bands. Even luxury brands. But, Apple seems too involved with the fashion part. Leave that up to Hermès and other brands. Use the wide selection of bands as a selling point for the watch. But, stick with the watch and let customers buy a Hermès band by itself. Maybe someone wants a space black or gold watch with a Hermès band. And yes, that may happen someday. But, why not now? Because Apple is too involved with the fashion side.But Apple is a master at changing the world. So the world you are describing will no longer exist in 5 years. The Apple Watch will also be 10x more powerful by then, too.
Just give it some "time" and you will see.
I bought a knock off double tour band from Amazon, for I think around $30. My wife, now with this band, wears her Apple Watch, (38 mm SS) and as an accessory item. She couldn't care less about the functionality of the watch.
I think the watch face's first impression is what makes it either look like a toy or a time piece.
Question is would somebody really wear a Micky Mouse watch (put in whatever face) every day?
Being able to change the face is probably welcome by today's ADD generation.
I can see how there is a split in usership with many people wanting iPhone functionality on their wrist and fashionistas (Who, as we know have better choices lookswise, except the tech in the Awatch is pretty good)
As people are getting used to the looks and more of them are around this will eventually become an accepted product.
For now it's 1st gen and too much money for users being beta testers. Apple will do the usual thing and make it better with each issue, probably every 2 years. The only way to get around this being perceived as "expensive" is to call it a fashion piece.
We all know tech is obsolete as soon as it is even shown and being made available.
I bought my girl friend an Awatch for her birthday and she loves all the functions and what she can do with it.
The best feature for her is that she doesn't have to use the phone much for what she does.
It just stays close by.
She was always a watch wearer, so no issue like some others who don't want to wear anything jewelry like on their body.
Last edited:
Yup, that's just you, and you're wrong. Why would Hermès participate at all if it thought that the Apple Watch was a mere gadget?
How about you stop worrying about what other people will do with their own money?
For someone who's rich, it's like £1.20 to them instead of £1200.
It WOULD be nonsensical to buy another watch to get a Hermès band. That is why Apple should just stick to the watch and let Hermès sell the band on its own (or in the Apple Store). But, the Apple Watch just isn't a Rolex. I think they should sell the watch for what it is, and let their customers make it be what they want it to be. Just like Apple does with their other products. There are plenty of high end accessories for iPhone, iPad, etc. And that's great.
I'm sure the people who would buy this watch would be astounded that anyone would stand in line for hours and hours to watch Star Wars, or spend countless hours wasting their lives playing video games. One mans trash is another mans treasure.
I am enticed to buy an Apple Watch, but I prefer to see it mature a bit, so not probably until Apple Watch 3 or 4 will I think about it. I didn't get my first iPod until the iPod Touch 3rd generation. Factors include: price, its first gen, performance, needs to a bit thinner.
Wait. These are written by people? I assumed they were mostly written by bots, considering the nonsensical grammatical and syntax errors that abound.
This ^^^
No matter how good Apple Watches get, how many bells and whistles get stuck on them, or whoever they partner up with next, I will never move away from my swiss made automatic...which never needs charging, and always shows the time on it's face!
Last edited:
Tell me that it's difficult to get a leather craftsman to make a watch band that suits you perfectly for equal to or much less than, $1,100.00.
Give it a time you'll get a copied version and you can't hardly tell which one is genuine. They're 100% leather too and the only thing you're missing is the brand name.
Do let me know when you find one, I'd like to get one.
The Apple Watch 2 will be identical in density to the first effort. The thinking behind this is that rather than dispose of first purchase, hence losing £££s. You keep it. Place it on the opposite side to the newer one ... Et Voila! Dual wrist weights! Not only will you be able to know (without taking your own manually, or looking downwards) what your pulse and walking speed is ... you'll get an extra built in workout for your arms too! And let's admit it, readers. When it comes to wrist strength, smartwatch owners probably value this more than most!
To those with an Apple watch, it might be good enough. An Hermes watch might be silly.
To those with a perfectly good Timex, an Apple Watch might be silly.
To those living in poverty, a Timex might seem silly.
Those calling the Hermes Apple Watch silly, by virtue of having the luxury of sitting in a climate controlled room, at a computer, to type your opinion, your entire existence, in the eyes of millions, is completely silly.
To those with a perfectly good Timex, an Apple Watch might be silly.
To those living in poverty, a Timex might seem silly.
Those calling the Hermes Apple Watch silly, by virtue of having the luxury of sitting in a climate controlled room, at a computer, to type your opinion, your entire existence, in the eyes of millions, is completely silly.
Alternatively, one could buy the inevitable Chinese knock-off on ebay for a few dollars and no one would be the wiser.
Since Apple is sponsoring the Met Gala this year I wouldn't be surprised if we see another big name collaboration maybe in time for that event (which is in May).
I'll never understand why people care what other people do with their money.
I'll never understand why people care what other people do with their money.
I have to agree with the idea that Apple overshot their expectations of how customers would react to this product. I think Apple clearly thought this was a fashion and prestige piece and something on par of usurping high end Swiss watch produced (they even boasted about how the Swiss watchmakers should be worried in their pre-release rhetoric about the Apple Watch). The reality is Apple is more a Timex/Casio and not a Rolex competitor, and most consumers are intelligent enough to know the difference, which is why the only models that are selling well comparatively are then $350 models.
There is a reason why companies like Timex and Casio don't make a $10,000 gold watch or offer $1000 watch bands for their products because they understand their place in the watch kingdom and know nobody is going to mistake a digital watch as a prestige piece. The ultimate destiny of EVERY first generation Apple Watch is to end up in a junk drawer as your first Timex Ironman, something that you hold on to for nostalgia, but will never put on your wrist in a functioning state again.
I am not saying there is no place for the Apple Watch, but I think we don't need to see Apple Watches cost more than $500, and that is only because of the "TECHNOLOGY" that is in it, not because of the material or band you wrap around a digital screen. Apple thinks too highly of themselves and they failed to offer a product that replaces a high-end Swiss watch, not on design and form and certainly not on prestige.
The only people that don't agree are hipsters that think putting a $10,000 gold plated Timex on their wrist sets them further apart from the average consumer, which it does, but purely on lack of having common sense. Putting a $350 micro-iPad into $500 worth of gold does not make it worth $10,000, ever.
There is a reason why companies like Timex and Casio don't make a $10,000 gold watch or offer $1000 watch bands for their products because they understand their place in the watch kingdom and know nobody is going to mistake a digital watch as a prestige piece. The ultimate destiny of EVERY first generation Apple Watch is to end up in a junk drawer as your first Timex Ironman, something that you hold on to for nostalgia, but will never put on your wrist in a functioning state again.
I am not saying there is no place for the Apple Watch, but I think we don't need to see Apple Watches cost more than $500, and that is only because of the "TECHNOLOGY" that is in it, not because of the material or band you wrap around a digital screen. Apple thinks too highly of themselves and they failed to offer a product that replaces a high-end Swiss watch, not on design and form and certainly not on prestige.
The only people that don't agree are hipsters that think putting a $10,000 gold plated Timex on their wrist sets them further apart from the average consumer, which it does, but purely on lack of having common sense. Putting a $350 micro-iPad into $500 worth of gold does not make it worth $10,000, ever.