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

Apple Watch First Impressions From Watch Experts, Fashion Sites

SpectatorHere said:
I keep on seeing posts like this and wonder if it's viral marketing. (Please don't take this personally, I assume your post is genuine, but I've seen quite a few in the past few days like yours.)


Most people don't even have a watch, and they certainly don't see 300 dollars as a small purchase. I'm happy for people who have this sort of disposable income, but how out of touch do you have to be to fail to realize how small a portion of the world population would consider a 300 dollar watch affordable or a deal in any way? It's so unlikely that someone is this naive that it really makes me question if it's not part of a sophisticated marketing scheme to change the way people think of watches, and their value as symbols of conspicuous consumption.
Click to expand...

Ha, I assure you I'm not part of a marketing scheme (although I do do marketing as a profession)...

Anywho, I consider a watch like me a luxury item don't get me wrong. A $5 Casio will do the same, but I also consider my iPhone a luxury phone considering my phone company will be me one for even less than that Casio.

There are huge amounts of people who won't prioritize or simply cannot afford an iPhone and I feel the same way about a watch.

There is a case to be made that watches aren't required but phones are, but purely objectively approached on pricing, it's not a huge leap from the lowest end iphone. Heck, one could easily say that if you wanted the watch bad enough, just pick up the free iphone on contract next cycle and put that money towards the watch for the additional functionary or convenience.
 
FreeState said:
What I want to know is does "Sports Addition" mean it's a sports look or is it actually different because it's intended purpose it to be used during sports? If not, will the other versions be durable enough to use for sporting purposes? (distance runner here)
Click to expand...

It's called Watch Sport because that sounded better than Watch Cheap. In terms of functionality for sports, there's nothing to differentiate it from the non-sport "Watch".
 
cube said:
I still have to watch the keynote, so I did not know $349 only bought you a plastic watch.

That's no go from the start.
Click to expand...

There is no plastic version. The three versions are: aluminum and special glass, steel and safire, gold and safire.
 
I can't believe this thing will be sold in special kiosks inside upscale department stores. There is no way this bulbous monstrosity should be besides hi-end Rolex watches. However I definitely see potential at Office Max.

Hopefully the Microsoft smartband is totally orthogonal to the Moto 360(Traditional watch shape) or iWatch(Ipod Nano on a strap) and totally carves out a nice market niche by being:

1. distinctive from current smartwatch designs
2. Works with all smartphone platforms
3. Super-focused UI, something like Android Wear
4. Best battery life
 
MarkusL said:
Why would the middle tier not have sapphire, if the cheap one does?
Click to expand...

The middle tier is the sports watch, made to be slightly more durable. I know this sounds weird BUT:

Sapphire is more scratch proof than glass.

Glass bends more than sapphire.

The glass version will scratch more easily than the sapphire, but it is more flexible and more likely to bend or flex upon a direct impact, rather than shatter, like sapphire would.

Sapphire is such a "hard" material that it has very little flexibility and more prone to shattering. But it is very difficult to scratch. Nothing in this world can be perfect.
 
rocksyoursock said:
The middle tier is the sports watch, made to be slightly more durable. I know this sounds weird BUT:

Sapphire is more scratch proof than glass.

Glass bends more than sapphire.

The glass version will scratch more easily than the sapphire, but it is more flexible and more likely to bend or flex upon a direct impact, rather than shatter, like sapphire would.

Sapphire is such a "hard" material that it has very little flexibility and more prone to shattering. But it is very difficult to scratch. Nothing in this world can be perfect.
Click to expand...

I think most people think the Sports version will be the entry level because the materials used in it are all cheaper than those used in the standard watch version.
 
I might get one after checking them out in stores. If I do get one I'll sell my watch I bought 6 years ago for $1,500 that I rarely wear since these days I'm more broke than not (going back to college at 40 makes you poor.) I'm thinking the :apple:WATCH 2 will be the one to get although after so many years of buying Revision A products why stop now. I bought Rev A of all these mostly on release day: iMac G4; iMac G5; MacPro 1,1; MacBook Air 1,1; Mac Pro 6,1, iPod 1, iPod shuffle 1, iPod nano 1, iPhone 1, iPad 1. :eek::eek: Oh well, back to doing more Calculus problems.
 
Technarchy said:
Makes about as much sense as comparing this

Image

to this

Image
Click to expand...

You totally went off-point with that one. You're basically saying that people will, in 10 years time, all ditch traditional swiss watches for electronic Apple/Samsung/LG watches? Because of what? heart-rate monitor andcolored screen?
You do know that the main point of a traditional watch is not what it can do, but it's the overall design, quality and precision of the internal mechanism. That is what sets the price and quality of a watch, and not the ability to see SMS on your watch because you're too lazy to reach into your pocket.

And as i said it, Apple will sell millions of these, but so did the company selling crocs shoes.
 
rocksyoursock said:
The middle tier is the sports watch, made to be slightly more durable. I know this sounds weird BUT:

Sapphire is more scratch proof than glass.

Glass bends more than sapphire.

The glass version will scratch more easily than the sapphire, but it is more flexible and more likely to bend or flex upon a direct impact, rather than shatter, like sapphire would.

Sapphire is such a "hard" material that it has very little flexibility and more prone to shattering. But it is very difficult to scratch. Nothing in this world can be perfect.
Click to expand...

Oh, sapphire shatters, does it now? That's news to me and my sapphire watch that over the past ten years has taken many hits that glass can only dream of surviving.
 
For me, the reveal was annoying because it produced as many questions as it answered, and it doesn't seem like those answers will be coming any time soon from Apple (at least not officially). Since they said "early 2015" release, that means a minimum of 4 months and potentially up to 10 months away.
 
I will get one. There is no doubt about that. My main problem is to decide which one.

----------
akb said:
Not for me, not yet.

I'll look again when I can button my shirt cuff over it.
Click to expand...

Your opinion is perfectly accepted. I on the other hand think that a real mans watch has to cast a shadow.
 
Apple Watch First Impressions From Watch Experts, Fashion Sites

The more I look at this watch, the more I like the look of it. We've got at least 4 months before it's released, though.
 
I've never been an early adapter and even haven't worn a watch in 6.5 years, although I have some fine luxury watches...
yet, for the first time since my switch to Apple in 2011, I'm really having to control an urge to get the :apple:Watch.

Can't believe it, but this could be the item that will make me wear watches again.
Now let's see if I can control the "need" enough to wait for version 2 or that I'm for forking up the money in "early 2014".
 
MarkusL said:
Oh, sapphire shatters, does it now? That's news to me and my sapphire watch that over the past ten years has taken many hits that glass can only dream of surviving.
Click to expand...

Your sapphire watch likely only has a small surface area and isn't prone to shattering regardless.

Sapphire is harder, but more brittle than most glass. That's just a chemical fact.
 
The Phazer said:
Your sapphire watch likely only has a small surface area and isn't prone to shattering regardless.

Sapphire is harder, but more brittle than most glass. That's just a chemical fact.
Click to expand...

The sapphire is about 30mm in diameter. Oh, and it's solid sapphire and not just a paper-thin sapphire layer on top of a soft polymer substrate or something like that. Maybe that's what's causing the confusion?
 

Attachments

  • 02e7e527759dc334fa000000.pdf
    606.6 KB · Views: 5,241
Last edited:
This is a device nobody needed, and nobody asked for. Pretty much like the iPad. And it is likely to be a huge success, despite some people already hating it.
 
skaertus said:
This is a device nobody needed, and nobody asked for. Pretty much like the iPad. And it is likely to be a huge success, despite some people already hating it.
Click to expand...

I cannot see how this posting helps to know more about the Apple Watch ?
 
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