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

Apple Watch 2 Expected to Focus on Internal Upgrades Rather Than External Changes, Launch in Late 2016

Understand the ROI - make money with your watch. Working a 40 hour week in my business, I am netting $.60 per hour. that means I need to save 2 minutes per day with my watch and then I am MAKING money with my apple watch.

Time is money and watch would save me time :D.....and tell time with a cool Mickey watch face :D
 
yaxomoxay said:
Oh Lord, here we go again. A shareholder (especially the sharks) will look into what is MISSING, the negative part of the equation. You can make money but miss a huge opportunity, and fail at that in the long run.
I already explained the possible missing opportunity on R&D for the iPhone. Let me add another layer which hopefully you will understand.
Most of us have a fixed income, and most of us will spend a fixed amount (ceiling) on technology. Agreed?
Ok. iPhone 6S starts at $749. Apple Watch starts at $299. Total = $1048. Suppose that my tech budget is $1,500.
The Apple Watch is 40% of an iPhone. With that fixed income if I buy the 6S + AW, I might decide to skip one or two generations of iPhone which has a higher margin, a higher price, and better market penetration than the AW, because to buy iPhone+AW+the next iteration of iPhone would dramatically increase the cost to the customer. The AW might cause a loss of sale on the second iPhone because it would put me overbudget (2 iPhones: $1498; 1 iPhone+ 1AW = $1048; 2iPhone+1 AW $1797). Potentially the AW might cause a delay in earning the extra $450 from the customer. As a shareholder this is a concern, and that's probably why the AW balance sheet numbers are hidden within other services.



And this is what you don't get.
Click to expand...


Sigh. Do you know what Aspergers is?
 
MaulRx said:
Apple has earned the right to make and support products like TV and Watch based on the success of their other products.
Click to expand...

They certainly have, however the watch is positioned as a 'must succeed' product and is very central to Apple's product portfolio, which sets the level of expectation. The TV was always described as a "hobby" based on Apple not sure where the market was going and they were trying to figure that out and eventually did. Again, Steve is a genius. Let me repeat, Steve is a genius. He positions a product and sucks expectation out - who else could do that? Apple should have taken the same strategy with the watch to allow it to find its level by deflating expectation. This was Tim Cook's biggest Apple mistake to date, IMO.

Under promise but over deliver. Never over promise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
dogslobber said:
They certainly have, however the watch is positioned as a 'must succeed' product and is very central to Apple's product portfolio, which sets the level of expectation. The TV was always described as a "hobby" based on Apple not sure where the market was going and they were trying to figure that out and eventually did. Again, Steve is a genius. Let me repeat, Steve is a genius. He positions a product and sucks expectation out - who else could do that? Apple should have taken the same strategy with the watch to allow it to find its level by deflating expectation. This was Tim Cook's biggest Apple mistake to date, IMO.

Under promise but over deliver. Never over promise.
Click to expand...


What are you basing the "must succeed" on? If it were we would have an android app to sync with. If there is any failing in the Apple Watch it's Apple not promoting it like the killer iPhone accessory it is. Why do we not have a combo pack? An Apple Watch Sport and SE would fly off the shelves.


I think you are having fun with me. Never heard Steve Jobs described as under selling anything.
 
MaulRx said:
How can a product that makes money be an issue for shareholders?
Click to expand...
I hear what you are saying, but you are vastly over simplifying. History is replete with examples of companies that have gotten out of a business line because they weren't making ENOUGH money. See DuPont and Nylon or their dyes business, among others. Likewise, people regularly lose their jobs not because they aren't growing, but because they aren't growing at the rate their leaders demand. Investors are also not a homogeneous lot that see any profit as good. Many want to see A LOT (or whatever they think is appropriate) of profit and if they don't get enough, they get their proxies voted to the board and force out the CEO, or break apart the company. Because greed is good.

None of this, by the way, has anything to do with whether a product is a "success". The success of a product can only be determined by its ability to live up to its purpose in the entire portfolio of products. And we often aren't privy to what that is as that is more often than not a company confidential secret. In the case of the Apple Watch, it could _lose_ money and still be a success. Apple is a hardware, software, and services provider. They go from the desktop, through tablets, phones, and right down to the wrist. All of which allows them to completely vertically integrate their services ad software platforms. That sort of technical hegemony is an enviable position to be in and tells me that if the AW was a drag on their bigger plans they wouldn't be dealing with it. Time will tell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
MacRumors said:
The recent KGI Securities research note directly conflicts with a report from less-reliable Apple analyst Brian White, released last Friday, that predicted the Apple Watch 2 will not only launch in two to three months, but adopt a 40 percent slimmer case design. That launch window would put a reveal by Apple at WWDC in June with a launch following a few weeks later.
Click to expand...
It would be awesome if that was on his business card:

Brian White, Less-Reliable Apple Analyst

Even better if he had staff with titles like "Assistant to the Less-Reliable Apple Analyst".
 
All I want is to see my steps in an easy manner on the face of my watch. How this isn't possible on a watch that promotes health is beyond me. After all this time and not possible is a shame



MacRumors said:



Apple Watch shipments will decline more than 25 percent year-over-year in comparison to 2015, according to a new research note issued by KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. The wearable device sold an estimated 10.6 million units in eight months last year, but Kuo predicts that even with the launch of the Apple Watch 2, and a full twelve months of sales, the device's shipments will still come in at less than 7.5 million units in 2016.

applewatchbuiltinapps-800x217.jpg

The analyst describes an "immature wearable device market" and a few key lacking features of the first-generation Apple Watch -- iPhone independency, no killer app, limited battery life, etc. -- that will contribute to its overall sales decline prior to the launch of the second-generation version. Kuo believes that the Apple Watch 2 will enter mass production in the third quarter of 2016, in line with a fall launch alongside the iPhone 7, so its overall contribution to shipping numbers for the year is predicted to be limited.

Kuo's note also predicts some of the features of the next version of the Apple Watch, which is expected to adopt the same upgrade cycle as the iPhone. In essence, 2016's Apple Watch 2 will see some under-the-hood spec improvements and possibly minor form factor changes, while fans will have to wait until 2017 for a massively redesigned wearable from Apple. The similar design is one of Kuo's biggest reasons for declining Apple Watch shipments in 2016, despite even the uptick in sales the device could have during the holiday season.

The recent KGI Securities research note directly conflicts with a report from less-reliable Apple analyst Brian White, released last Friday, that predicted the Apple Watch 2 will not only launch in two to three months, but adopt a 40 percent slimmer case design. That launch window would put a reveal by Apple at WWDC in June with a launch following a few weeks later.

In either launch scenario, the Apple Watch 2 is rumored to have a bevy of feature improvements over its predecessor, including a FaceTime video camera, an expansion of its Wi-Fi capabilities, and new model tiers. Rumored casings of the next iteration of the device could possibly even incorporate new materials such as titanium, tungsten, palladium or platinum.

Article Link: Apple Watch 2 Expected to Focus on Internal Upgrades Rather Than External Changes, Launch in Late 2016
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: koigirl and Benjamin Frost
Keirasplace said:
Really, an article on this very site, just a few days ago said 2/3 that people that had the AW1, would buy the new one sight unseen and now you say this based on this article. Why pick this one hey as your basis for an opinion? Confirmation bias?
Click to expand...
its just my opinion as an apple watch owner.
 
Tubamajuba said:
There's no guarantee that the Apple Watch will ever become a smash hit, but remember- the iPad didn't really take off until the iPad 2 was released. If the Apple Watch 2 can do the same thing for the Apple Watch, it's going to have a bright future.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think it's only a matter of time before Apple Watch takes off.

This is only the first gen and it's the most polished 1st gen product I ever purchased from Apple. iPhone took 3 gens before it really took off. Same with iPod and Mac. iPad was different since it was just a bigger iPhone without cellular.

Apple Watch is already immensely useful for a lot of people and as Siri improves, the speed improves, it becomes more iPhone-independent and more sensors are added, it will become as indispensable as the iPhone is today for the masses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr.Chroma
Ideally when people spend $300 for a watch, they should keep it for years. Unless Apple is expecting something else from consumers. Even the filthy rich is not gonna spend $10k for the gold edition every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
MaulRx said:
Thank you mom. If you aren't disciplined enough to focus on the road when your watch beeps or vibrates you would likely be distracted by anything. Maybe a bird flying by...
Click to expand...

The OP went through the process of what they do when it beeps, including looking at it and hitting a button.

You can call me "mom" for a laugh, but in local area TV news just 2 days ago, they replayed a video of some idiot driver crashing head-on into a family in an SUV. Luckily no one was hurt, but the video is fresh in my mind.

Son.
 
I enjoy my fair-share of Apple products, from iPods of 4 flavors, iPad Pro, air and 2 laptops - one a Pro Retina. But I only buy a product because it is a great product and among the best in its category. The Apple watch just seems to have really missed the mark on round 1. I bought a Garmin Fenix Sapphire because of what it offers that the Apple watch doesn't; built in GPS and waterproof to a depth of 100m plus countless apps and faces that are customizable and made by the users, and battery life that gives Up to 50 hours in UltraTrac mode; up to 20 hours in full GPS (continuous updating) mode; up to 6 weeks in watch mode with the screen always on. And, like the apple watch, it has Sapphire available, smart notifications, and ability to control my iPhone music. It also tracks so many sports, from Rowing, SUP, cross-country skiing, climbing, swimming (both pool and open water) - to running and triathlons. The only thin it doesn't seem to have is the ability to actually answer my phone - but umm, I don't care to use such a feature.

I'm sorry Apple, but you are not even close. At a minimum, I want a watch to have a week of battery life or better in normal sport use. (I run 6 miles, 3 times a week - my Fenix can track the 3 runs in full GPS with the constant update rate (and give me an awesome map of each run on my iPhone), and do everything else it does, for a full week easily on a single charge. GPS and real waterproof features with a week-long battery needs to be a minimum Apple. Otherwise, you are just making an inconvenient and limited novelty. Not so smart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: koigirl and Benjamin Frost
bking1000 said:
The OP went through the process of what they do when it beeps, including looking at it and hitting a button.

You can call me "mom" for a laugh, but in local area TV news just 2 days ago, they replayed a video of some idiot driver crashing head-on into a family in an SUV. Luckily no one was hurt, but the video is fresh in my mind.

Son.
Click to expand...

Was he\she wearing an Apple Watch? Or were they just born stupid?
 
BlueMoon63 said:
99/100 TV shows and movies have iPhones and Apple Laptops.
Click to expand...

I see a lot of MS Surfaces on TV shows (which is annoying because it is a blatant placement and everyone stops the action to focus attention on the tablet), I don't see a lot of Apple hardware like i did a few years ago. There's still Apple stuff on TV but not like it used to be.
 
DevNull0 said:
I see a lot of MS Surfaces on TV shows (which is annoying because it is a blatant placement and everyone stops the action to focus attention on the tablet), I don't see a lot of Apple hardware like i did a few years ago. There's still Apple stuff on TV but not like it used to be.
Click to expand...

Because apple doesn't need to pay to be an official sponsor ala the nfl
 
MaulRx said:
Was he\she wearing an Apple Watch? Or were they just born stupid?
Click to expand...

I don't know (segment was about distracted driving -- the presumption from witnesses is the driver was "probably texting"), but for those like that, the watch can be catalyst to then look at their phone, start replying, etc.

Any rate, I don't mean to grind an axe. I'm happy disagreeing, and I could be wrong, but I remember when texting became ubiquitous. It took a while for the data to roll in to prove what a nightmare it was. A wearable (any wearable, not just the watch) might not be as bad a phone, but then the OP talked about how easy it was to react to the watch, that made me a bit nervous.

Any rate, I'd be happy to be wrong on all this.

Cheers.
 
Wouldn't it be great if all existing watch owners can get these rumored internal updates coming with the S2 chip similar to how you would go to a watch shop and get a tune-up? Knowing Apple, if they were to go that route it'd be like $49 for Sport, $79 for Steel, and either free or considerably more expensive with the Editions.
 
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