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 Watch Drops to Just 5% Share of Wearables Market as Basic Fitness Trackers 'Reign Supreme'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A gadget made in Taiwan that can be had at 50% discount after a year is more like the old 90s Chrysler’s TC by Maserati before a Ferrari. Expensive crap for people who have no idea what makes something valuable.
Your point is spot on, but don't fall for this click bait. By every estimate, and that's what these are since Apple isn't releasing AW sales, Apple Watch has sold more than every other smart watch combined and owns the market.
I want Apple to have competition, since we all benefit, but remember the stark facts, Pebble is giving up the ghost and Lenovo just announced they don't have enough demand to come out with a new model of the Moto.
https://9to5google.com/2016/12/01/motorola-moto-smartwatches-giving-up/
Both good models, but not in the same league as Apple Watch and its ecosystem. Apple is also spending many millions on its health lab for the AW, something that other companies won't/can't put this scale of R and D into.
PS Exciting health developments rumored for WWDC! Remember that all Apple Watches have have an as yet unused pulse oximeter built in. If Apple can overcome whatever challenges, regulatory, accuracy, etc., are causing them to hold back on activating, it will be a game changer since it has so much to do with health awareness, especially now that Apple's heart rate monitoring was recently determined to be the most accurate in JAMA clinical test.
Last edited:
There isn't that big of a difference between what most of the devices can do, time, activity, notifications. Apps on the watch are probably the least used function.
Getting higher elevation?
The overall category is wearables. Fitness trackers are a type of wearable. Smartwatches are a type wearable. The report is about the overall category.
Because...IDC. They'll twist the data any way possible to make Apple look bad. They've been doing it for years.
Receiving today my AW Nike+. I want to track swimming and running and while I was originally looking at the Fitbit Flex 2, I hear a lot of negative reviews in terms of accuracy. We'll see, I will give Apple a shot but not holding my breath. I would love if Apple had a band tracker instead of a watch. I love my Omega Seamaster. I am having a hard time putting it aside.
Apple spent so much energy talking about how the Apple Watch was in tune with the fashion market, yet all they provided was one basic case design (in a few colors) and a handful of watch bands. For a lot of people, a watch is worn as a reflection of who you are or who you want to be perceived as. That's why there are vast numbers of watch case designs and band options. So Apple talked the game, got those people who buy based upon fashion to buy the first Watch, then they were effectively done because there have been nothing but technical upgrades made in two years.
I think what Apple should be doing for the wearables market, is to follow the path they took with the iPod, by offering a much broader collection of Watches, from a small screen-less "tracker" device to several shapes of screened Watches, including a round shape.
Apple, of all the companies out there offering wearables, has the money to focus and conquer the market, but they're seemingly just playing around instead.
I think what Apple should be doing for the wearables market, is to follow the path they took with the iPod, by offering a much broader collection of Watches, from a small screen-less "tracker" device to several shapes of screened Watches, including a round shape.
Apple, of all the companies out there offering wearables, has the money to focus and conquer the market, but they're seemingly just playing around instead.
I think what doomed the Apple Watch was Jony Ive's obsession with the classic watch.
He violated his own rule, which is when you develop something, be careful what you call it in development because it can influence your design decisions. It is clear that from the start it was a "watch" to Jony.
If they had thought about it as a wearable computing device with sensors, we would have had a very different device.
I have no need for a "watch" no matter how beautiful the face or accurate the time. I would like a wrist-worn device to track a multitude of physiological functions and work independently of a phone.
While I would like an attractive strap on it, I don't want it as a fashion accessory, but that is what we ended up with.
All this was influenced by the fact that Jony loves watches.
What I was hoping for was another Jobsian moment where they made something that I didn't know that I needed and afterward couldn't imagine doing without. The Apple Watch wasn't that, and still isn't.
He violated his own rule, which is when you develop something, be careful what you call it in development because it can influence your design decisions. It is clear that from the start it was a "watch" to Jony.
If they had thought about it as a wearable computing device with sensors, we would have had a very different device.
I have no need for a "watch" no matter how beautiful the face or accurate the time. I would like a wrist-worn device to track a multitude of physiological functions and work independently of a phone.
While I would like an attractive strap on it, I don't want it as a fashion accessory, but that is what we ended up with.
All this was influenced by the fact that Jony loves watches.
What I was hoping for was another Jobsian moment where they made something that I didn't know that I needed and afterward couldn't imagine doing without. The Apple Watch wasn't that, and still isn't.
Laughing at some of the apologist comments here.
The truth is Apple is finding out the same thing that they have with the iPad, it just does not offer enough value for most people to justify the price tag. People can get most of the functionality of an iPad from a smartphone and the market reflects that. People can get most of the functionality they need from a fitness tracker from a $150 fitbit, the market reflects that too.
So the Watch sales are a bust, iPad headed the same way, new Macs are a bit of mess. Hope for Timmys sake the iPhone keeps flying off the shelves.
The truth is Apple is finding out the same thing that they have with the iPad, it just does not offer enough value for most people to justify the price tag. People can get most of the functionality of an iPad from a smartphone and the market reflects that. People can get most of the functionality they need from a fitness tracker from a $150 fitbit, the market reflects that too.
So the Watch sales are a bust, iPad headed the same way, new Macs are a bit of mess. Hope for Timmys sake the iPhone keeps flying off the shelves.
I don't understand why they lump the Apple Watch with anything else at all, since it's only made to work well with iPhones.
Now, if Apple opened their secret APIs up so that other smartwatch makers could access all the same functionality, THEN it would make sense to compare Apple Watch sales with other watches.
(Of course, Apple would never do that. Less expensive and/or round watches would sell like crazy to iPhone owners.)
Can't be that bad, since Apple often quotes IDC in their quarterly calls.
Last edited:
One could now say this of every Apple product line. None of their recent products even seem to be entirely finished. From the iPhone's tardy portrait mode to the buggy low battery life MBP, they just don't meet the concise design and attention to detail that were the mark of Steve Jobs's Apple.
I think you're right, this shouldn't have been called a watch. Everything you mention not being important to you, like attractive faces and bands, IS important to us who do like watches.
Because Apple highlight it's abilities as a fitness tracker?
Garmin's smartwatches are also lump in with these statistics, which are definitely fitness trackers too - but do much more than a basic $99 fitness band.
There are many category segments to what a product belongs to.
Garmin's smartwatches are also lump in with these statistics, which are definitely fitness trackers too - but do much more than a basic $99 fitness band.
There are many category segments to what a product belongs to.
I hear you on giving up on a conventional watch - my Seiko Automatic, now 12 years old, still gets compliments and has never let me down, including scuba diving (shallow ocean depths). I just can't see giving up wearing it, even if I do recognize the benefits of the Watch.
While the Apple Watch remains the world's best selling smartwatch, the latest data from market research firm IDC reveals basic wearables "reign supreme" as consumers gravitate towards simple, dedicated fitness devices--which also typically cost less than the Apple Watch and other smartwatches.
Shipments in millions (Source: IDC)
Basic wearables accounted for 85% of the market and experienced double-digit growth in the third quarter, according to IDC. Fitbit remained the leader with 23% market share, up from 21.4% a year ago, on the strength of its new Charge 2 fitness tracker. Fitbit shipped an estimated 5.3 million wearables in the quarter.
Xiaomi trailed in second as its $14.99 Mi Band is priced well below any competing wearables, allowing the Chinese company to capture 16.5% market share based on an estimated 3.8 million shipments in the quarter. Xiaomi's market share remained virtually unchanged from 16.4% a year ago.
Meanwhile, the Apple Watch captured just a 4.9% share of the broader wearables market in the quarter based on an estimated 1.1 million shipments, according to IDC. Comparatively, in the year-ago quarter, Apple had an estimated 3.9 million Apple Watch shipments for a much higher 17.5% market share.IDC attributed Apple's decline in the third quarter to an "aging lineup" and an "unintuitive user interface." Apple addressed those concerns with Apple Watch Series 2, but the second-generation models launched in mid-September and therefore did not have a full impact on the third quarter.
Apple does not officially disclose Apple Watch sales, instead grouping the device under its "Other Products" category in earnings results.
Article Link: Apple Watch Drops to Just 5% Share of Wearables Market as Basic Fitness Trackers 'Reign Supreme'
On other news Pears now represent less than 0.1% of the Apple market.
I have maintained from the beginning - ultimately, most people don't want a computer on their wrist. They want a more simple device for notifications and/or activity tracking. And they certainly don't want to pay hundreds to wear them. I know a lot of people who love their Apple Watch. I don't discount the value it brings to the market - esp for those in the ecosystem. But is anyone really surprised at the marketshare? (I know - but the PROFITS!!!!)
That's why I was amazed when they announced the ridiculously expensive versions of the watch. I know people who have Rolex watches and they keep them for decades and maybe even generations. Tech goes out of date in months. Why would someone invest in something that is obsolete a year later?
I have a polar HRM (with chest strap) for occasional monitoring during a run. It's somewhat sad and worrying that we as a population need to gamify basic fitness, and moreover there isn't even really a consensus on what counts as a healthy level of fitness (look how many long distance runners cause way too much stress on their bodies). I occasionally fall for the allure of the quantified self, but I think that just trains us to be better consumers, rather than healthier individuals that actually listen to our bodies, rather than collect stats and hope to ascribe meaning to them...