Apple Watch Launching in 'Spring' According to Apple Retail Chief Angela Ahrendts

[samcraig]

Yeah, we know how poorly that darn ugly Iphone did; real poorly, nobody bought it. Also, you should compare it to watches actually wear, not just phones.

Actually, the original iPhone took a long time to get off the ground in far as amazing sales. Some people either choose to forget that, don't remember or what have you.

As for the latter point - I agree. The thought process, requirements and "fashionability" of a watch is far different that a phone.

 

[Piggie]

I find it hard to believe that Apple would sell a $5000 version of their watch, even the gold one. Who in their right mind would pay 14 times the price on the base model for gold when it will do exactly the same thing.

IMO the top gold model will be $999, no more.

Is the case is the thickness of gold I think it will be, from a sensible viewpoint, then I would still stick to a figure of around $1500.

That would be the price it's worth from a piece of tech standpoint.

Apple could however, simply raise the price of it from a fashion point of view beyond it's tech price.

 

[diamond.g]

Sooooooo Spring in Apple world typically means June right? Maybe they are on the verge of a battery breakthrough that allows the watchface to stay on all day, you know like their competitors...

Google's approach seems to be shrinking the phone interface down.

Where does this observation come from (honest question, you aren't the first to say it).

 

[WrQth]

I suspect that the components in Apple Watch may be upgradable. Recall that the system on a chip is in one encapsulated module. An Apple Technician should hopefully be able to replace it (along with the sensors, battery and screen) with a more up to date revision. This is how many watch battery are replaced at the end of their life, so Apple doing this wouldn't be unprecedented.

Also I have a hard time believing that Apple is selling a $5,000 watch that has no way to replace battery or other components

I was thinking the same thing the other day. It would be great if even just the S1 module and battery could be upgraded with a new versions leaving the screen as one of the selling points for buying a whole new Watch.

 

[samcraig]

I was thinking the same thing the other day. It would be great if even just the S1 module and battery could be upgraded with a new versions leaving the screen as one of the selling points for buying a whole new Watch.

Historically speaking, this does not sound like Apple's product roadmap.

 

[Vasilioskn]

Hmmm I have very low interest for this watch but I would like to see how it operates in real life. I'm sure it will be great , but not really seeing the need for it at this point.

 

[TouchMint.com]

This month.

https://www.macrumors.com/2014/10/16/watchkit-november-apple-watch-sdk/

Ahh sweet!

 

[Rogifan]

Don't make such big assumptions. I, for one, took Tim Cook at his word that when he said "early," he meant it. Maybe not January, but certainly by end of Feb. Otherwise he should have just said "1st half," which is what this is really coming to be it looks like. Winter is "early" in the year. Spring is not.

As I said in an earlier post, Apple shouldn't force it out on a phony time schedule. It needs to work 99% perfect right out of the gate. Cook didn't do the team any favors announcing an overly optimistic release time frame, even a loose one, if there was doubt Apple couldn't meet it.

So why did they bother announcing it so soon? Tim Cook's ego? It certainly didn't stave off buyers from the competition. Seems Apple would have been better off to announce this during or right after CES for a spring launch... like the original iPad. That would have given them more time to get their "s" together, which they clearly need it seems, and still given Ive time to promote it ahead of the launch.

----------



Silly why? I agree it has flaws like not being a stand alone product or having GPS, but conceptually why is it a silly product?

We still don't have a date. Angela Ahrendts saying "spring" in a retail video is not a firm date. I doubt she sets the date anyway. I think Apple announced it early because they didn't want leaks and to give developers time to create apps for it. Remember the iPhone was announced 6 months before launch and that didn't even have an AppStore.

 

[5232152]

God damn it's bulky...

 

[MasterRyu2011]

Wow. This is very unlike Apple. They announce something, and usually they come out right away. I can understand, January of 2015, but damn spring. Their vagueness could be mean as late as June.

 

[doelcm82]

Wow. This is very unlike Apple. They announce something, and usually they come out right away. I can understand, January of 2015, but damn spring. Their vagueness could be mean as late as June.

When they announce a dramatically new product, there is a delay (original iPhone, original iPad, nMP). So this is exactly par for the course.

 

[NDM2015]

Winter doesn't look good for the watch

It might not be the only or main reason for the push, but I can't help to think that Apple thought (a bit too late) that a winter launch for the watch would really not help sell the product and show it in a good way.

Think about it.

First, everybody will be wearing a coat with long sleeves, so nothing to help show or use the watch here.

Second, everybody will be wearing gloves, making the touch experience impossible or clunky, and making the crown difficult or impossible to use.

All this to say that winter really is not a good fit to release a product like a touch watch. This kind of product really shines at his best during summer and since this launch will be the first one, Apple wants the watch to be shown the best it could.

I know you can still use this inside, but starting the life of a product by cutting the possibility to use it 50% of the time is not a good thing.

So forget a winter launch.

 

[Karma*Police]

And people here will claim they copied Apple.

Well, everything that's been released is nothing more than an uninspiring collection of Apple patents and what the Apple Watch has been rumored to have for the past 3 years; not to mention, the smartwatch craze really caught on when Apple added watch faces to the nano... So in a way, they did copy Apple.

 

[proline]

I'm pretty sure that those things are just written to try to start a flame bait. Not even you can believe such nonsense.

What exactly are you denying?

1) That Android Wear has existed less than 3 years
2) That Android Wear is laughable, and has failed to produce a single successful product
3) That Android Wear lacks any vision of its own, and is little more than a piss poor pre-emptive strike against the iWatch rumors

 

[bbeagle]

How does the country you're in (assuming they're in the same hemisphere) determine when Spring begins? Are there official terms for when each season starts and finishes? I always thought it was vague and kinda up to the flowers.

Spring is officially defined as beginning with the vernal equinox - when the sun crosses the equator making equal day and night at the equator. An 'equinox' happens two times - in March and in September. Those two times are the start of Spring and Fall in the northern hemisphere.

It doesn't matter what country you live in, spring is officially from March 20 to June 20 in 2015. Flowers blooming, birds coming back, snow going away, etc. might be earlier or later, but it's still officially 'spring' on March 20.

And anything before June 30 is technically 'early' 2015. Anything after June 30 is technically 'late' 2015.

 

[peterdevries]

the smartwatch craze really caught on when Apple added watch faces to the nano... So in a way, they did copy Apple.

Sorry Karma, but inventing a causal reationship there seems to me very far fetched.

 

[CJM]

You just know Apple has a 'projected designs' board sitting in an office somewhere, with iterations of the Apple Watch, each progressively thinner and each with a smaller bezel.

 

[cocky jeremy]

My phone has the time on it. All I need. Never worn a watch. No need.

 

[Karma*Police]

Technically, spring starts in March so Apple can ship late March or even April and still be meet their "early 2015" promise. I think May would be pushing it as that would be more "mid 2015".

 

[bbeagle]

Wow. This is very unlike Apple. They announce something, and usually they come out right away. I can understand, January of 2015, but damn spring. Their vagueness could be mean as late as June.

No - it's very LIKE Apple to do this.

Any NEW product has been announced and released 2-6 months later. See iPhone, iPad, Mac Pro.

iPhone announced - January 9, 2008. Released - June 29, 2008 (5 1/2 months)
iPad announced - January 27, 2010. Released - April 3, 2010. (2 months)
Mac Pro announced - June 10, 2013. Released - December 19, 2013. (6 months)
Apple watch announced - September 9, 2014. Released - in March 2015 will be on target with others.

 

[bmunge]

The fakes are coming, whether Apple likes it or not. Indeed, I expect that the first set of fake watches have already been made and await only software modifications to match further imagery to be released by Apple.

Since the only moving piece in the crown, the fake Apple watches should be more reliable than fakes of purely mechanical watches. If an electronic fake runs once, it will probably keep running. The manufacturers will use the time saved on mechanical details to further perfect the appearance of the case and display.

I predict that the fakes will become widely available before Apple ships its watch. And I'll bet that most of the fakes will run for much longer between recharging than will the real thing.

Caveat emptor: Apple packaging can be faked as well; so avoid buying an Apple Watch from a third party even though the watch and the box appear authentic. No doubt that the online auction sites will be soon loaded with such offerings.

Maybe the fake Apple Watches will become a fad among school kids, just like fake designer sneakers. You could be sitting in your favorite coffee shop when a troop of teenagers wanders in, each with a $20 fake that looks identical to your $1,000 real Apple Design. You'll then have to pull out your iPhone 6/7/8/whatever to prove your social worth.

You are way off base. Do you see people running around everywhere with fake iphones? No. People want the products for the functionality. The watch will be no different.

 

[doelcm82]

You just know Apple has a 'projected designs' board sitting in an office somewhere, with iterations of the Apple Watch, each progressively thinner and each with a smaller bezel.

Yes. And they also have engineers who will tell the designers what effect their future designs will have on price, performance, and battery life. And they have marketing pros who will tell them whether the watch will sell at that price.

The end result is that the gen 2 Apple Watch won't be quite as thin, or have quite the display that the designers (and the MacRumors commentariat) predict.

Because, real world.

 

[RulinSmoove]

No - it's very LIKE Apple to do this.

Any NEW product has been announced and released 2-6 months later. See iPhone, iPad, Mac Pro.

iPhone announced - January 9, 2008. Released - June 29, 2008 (5 1/2 months)
iPad announced - January 27, 2010. Released - April 3, 2010. (2 months)
Mac Pro announced - June 10, 2013. Released - December 19, 2013. (6 months)
Apple watch announced - September 9, 2014. Released - in March 2015 will be on target with others.

You mean 2007

 

[heeloliver]

For me, I enjoy the new hardware design of the iPhone 6 and Apple Watch. Seamless surfaces with curved glass and aluminum is very sexy.

 

[iSee]

I can not imagine what segment of users will buy this. For folks who wear watches as an accessory... they aren't going to move away from their Rolexes. For folks who want health related stuff tracked, there are cheaper options available. There simply can't be a value that the watch will provide being a part of an ecosystem that's worth 350 bucks.

Edit - But then hey... Apple knows what I want better than I do I guess

Well,

(1) Folks who wear watches as an accessory often have a collection of them... some quite pricey, others less so. And they definitely aren't all Rolexes. I don't know if the Apple Watch will catch on with that crowd, but the fact that it isn't a Rolex isn't going to stop it.

(2) Folks who track health and fitness won't blink at $350. Yes, there are cheaper options (when has that ever held Apple back???) There are also more expensive options. There's all kinds of stuff at all kinds of price points in health and fitness gadgets. It's a lifestyle, so there's no particular price point. Again, I don't know if it will catch on in that area, $350 won't be what prevents it.

(3) I'm pretty sure Apple is aiming a lot higher than just at these relatively small niches. I don't know exactly how high they are aiming. Clearly, the wrist-watch-as-tech-gadget market can't be as large as the phone market. It doesn't seem to have as many obvious use cases as a tablet, so I don't see it as large as the tablet market. Maybe they want to sell 10 million a year? (I'm talking the relative shot term here. Longer term, who knows. Probably the most optimistic scenario for watches long-term is that they take over as the communications hub, essentially replacing cell phones.)

----------

No - it's very LIKE Apple to do this.

Any NEW product has been announced and released 2-6 months later. See iPhone, iPad, Mac Pro.

iPhone announced - January 9, 2008. Released - June 29, 2008 (5 1/2 months)
iPad announced - January 27, 2010. Released - April 3, 2010. (2 months)
Mac Pro announced - June 10, 2013. Released - December 19, 2013. (6 months)
Apple watch announced - September 9, 2014. Released - in March 2015 will be on target with others.

Yes. I think the reason they normally avoid pre-announcing products is to minimize the number of people who are ready to buy but are waiting for the next version to become available.

Obviously, for a new product line, there's no danger of that. (The new Mac Pro was so different from the old one that it seems to qualify.)