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 Losing Ground to 'Basic Wearables' Like Fitbit Ahead of New Models
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Couple of things, at least for me.
Drop the price $100
Make it waterproof.
If not, I am seriously looking at the Fitbit Flax 2. I need something to track swimming and that looks promising. I don't mind keeping my Omega and ad the band but if the AW is improved big time, waterproof and swimming app tracking I can seriously consider shelving my Omega and get it instead.
Drop the price $100
Make it waterproof.
If not, I am seriously looking at the Fitbit Flax 2. I need something to track swimming and that looks promising. I don't mind keeping my Omega and ad the band but if the AW is improved big time, waterproof and swimming app tracking I can seriously consider shelving my Omega and get it instead.
The issue that the article is pointing out is that Fitbits are selling more and Apple Watch is stagnant. This is because of the watch is a luxury over a Fitbit, most people will get the lower cost. I'm not saying there isn't a market for Apple Watch. Just that if it is to compete with Fitbits, it's got to have a model that can compete on price as well as provide enough features that can't be found on a Fitbit. But even still, many people don't need a device that does all that the Watch does and so the Fitbit market is likely to continue to "steal" watch customers with their platform compatibilities, features and price.
Volkswagen makes more money than Ferrari, iPhone 3G made more money than the original, sometimes to expensive might the downfall to a great product
I do like to own a Gear S3 or an Apple Watch..but I'm not sure if is worth it to pay $400 for a smartwatch without a camera
I heard the iWatch bends and can't get a wi-if connection if you wear it a certain way
Interesting analysis. Have to disagree as the evidence, IMO, is that the AW took over the smart watch market completely in just its first year, outselling all others combined. To call it stagnant seems a stretch in such a short period of time, especially with many waiting for the second generation as most are not early adopters. It also seems more likely that the smart watch, from all brands, has such an inherent advantage for its current and ultimate capabilities that the future of "basics" such as the Fitbit is not very bright.The smart watch category can address the health and fitness category and so much more.I'd analogize it to point and shoot cameras being displaced by smart phones, or GPS devices for the car. Why buy and have to wear a Fitbit type device if you can get so much more with a SmartWatch, and at a decreasing price spread.
Even if the Watch sold $20 million units, which is far from confirmed anywhere, that's still just $10 million watches a year out of a potential 200 million, or so iPhone's sold. That's less than 5% of the potential market, which is a staggeringly low number. So unless Apple iPhone users are only using Watches (which of course is not the case), then there must be a reason that they would buy a fitbit over the Watch. What else could that be but paying more for features they don't perceive they need?
Wouldn't that mean they are making the same amount of money? And then add in more software being sold and other Apple devices now being pushed would mean more profit.
Bingo - no only that - just browse the android store - all except 1 model is selling for less than the AW - so why would apple try to compete on price? https://store.google.com/category/android_wear
Having said that, I only bought it when I catch a $ 199 sale on ebay - to me that's a fair price and make $ 249-299 when the add LTE
Fair enough, but it's very rarely good for the consumer when the company is the highest profiting.
For example, VW became the highest profiting auto manufacturer because they cut costs massively on their products while still charging premium prices. They moved production to inexpensive countries, brought back a 20 year old motor (8 valve 2.0), got rid of excessive parts like multiple horns and light bulbs, armrests, went back to drum brakes and torsion beam rear suspension, etc etc etc.
None of this is good for the consumer.
With Apple, they profit so much because they generally sell yesterday's tech at more than tomorrow's prices. Id rather see them have lower profits and either lower the prices or provide a better product.
I knew it. You know your going to order a Gen 2 Watch when it releases for preorder. I know you want one.
Until Apple Watch 2 is released, sales are kinda flat. Plus, let's assume the first gen watch gets a price reduction and stays on market at $250 (100 less than launch). That's still $100 more than the most popular Fitbits.
Sure. Apple Watch is THE smart watch and hardly any other company can come close to the Apple Watches sell-through. That said; people aren't getting Fitbits because they need a watch. They need something to track steps/miles/km, check heart rate, quick glance time, and notify them of calls/texts. Everything the Apple Watch does beyond that is luxury that people don't see a need or desire to pay extra for. As time goes on Apple Watches will come down to compete but Fitvits will also progressively improve.
There's 2 different demographics of needs to be satisfied and while Apple Watch fulfills both sides, it's not desirable to everyone. Especially when it's not very useful without an iPhone.
Is the Apple Wath smarter and more capable? Sure.
Is the Apple Watch better? Well that depends on who's buying and who it's for.
I stopped wearing a watch, when I got my first iPhone. I don't need a bunch of gadgets to be happy. I need time, reminders, and a phone. My iPhone does these exceedingly well. i will always only carry one electronic device on my person. So I will consider a smart watch when the smart watch does everything I need, and not sooner.
Nope. Fitbit is successful and very popular with consumers because it follows Apple creed: keep it simple and have it just work. Apple Watch is not as successful because it doesn't follow that creed because it throws in everything but the kitchen sink and requires an iPhone.
The point is that it is premature to say Apple has not been successful with the AW, especially when they have become the dominant smart watch manufacturer in just their first year.
New data from market research firm IDC shows a split in the wearables market, with "basic wearables" (Fitbit) gaining popularity, and "smart wearables" (Apple Watch) seeing stalled growth. Despite a portion of the market stalling out, the overall wearable device market grew 26.1 percent in comparison to the year ago quarter, suggesting the burgeoning technology is gaining traction among consumers.
IDC specifically categorizes basic wearables as those devices without third party application support and smart wearables as any device with support for third party applications. Comparing each section's growth from last year, the research firm said that the two categories "traveled at different speeds and directions" in 2016, with basic wearables up 48.8 percent from 2015, and smart wearables down 27.2 percent year-over-year. In total, basic wearables represented 82.8 percent of every wrist-worn device shipped during the quarter.
Apple, representing the smart wearables section of the market, was the only company among the leaders in the wearable market to post a year-over-year decline in shipment volumes, which IDC ascribes mainly to the lack of a second generation Apple Watch on the first generation's anniversary last March. Specifically, Apple again finished third in the overall wearables market with a 7 percent market share and 1.6 million units shipped. In the first quarter of the year, Apple had a 7.5 percent market share and approximately 1.5 million sales for the Apple Watch.
As the Apple Watch stalls, Fitbit has grown, with a 25.4 percent share of the market and 5.7 million units shipped in the second quarter, compared to a 24.5 percent share and 4.8 million units in the first quarter. Because the company's name remains "synonymous with fitness bands," IDC believes its reign will continue in the wearables market. Until smart wearables with various functionalities can justify higher prices to consumers, a more affordable wearable with "a clear value proposition," i.e. fitness-focused features, will help Fitbit remain on top of the market, according to the firm.
Any slowdown in market share of the Apple Watch could also be attributed to prospective buyers holding out for the second generation device, now expected to be announced during Apple's media event set for tomorrow, September 7. In addition to a thinner display and larger battery, the Apple Watch 2 is believed to include GPS, an improved processor, and better waterproofing.
Article Link: Apple Watch Losing Ground to 'Basic Wearables' Like Fitbit Ahead of New Models
Not everybody has an iPhone
I think being "generation 1" product is the biggest hold back. People got burnt on several Apple's gen 1 products, most recently the original iPad.
The price is obviously a factor too. Bring the cost of 42mm sport watch to $199 and $399 for the regular watch and people will buy them - myself included.
The price is obviously a factor too. Bring the cost of 42mm sport watch to $199 and $399 for the regular watch and people will buy them - myself included.
The biggest issue for me is battery life. Daily charging for a watch just isn't practical.
Otherwise I'm very happy with my Apple Watch. Fitbit was never considered.
Otherwise I'm very happy with my Apple Watch. Fitbit was never considered.
The Apple Tax is holding Apple back. Apple could have great products in more hands. On a related note, Apple should be paying more tax. 0.0005% -- pathetic...
Anecdotal evidence. How would you know what the Apple Watch 2 offers until the Keynote arrives? The Apple Watch 2 is reported to offer a larger battery, GPS, S2 processor, all coupled with Watch OS3. For some, this is a huge upgrade. Not to mention any other upgrades not announced until tomorrow.
If the Watch offers speed with the S2 chip and a larger battery, that alone is enough for myself and others who are a Gen 1 owner.
Their fitness stuff is ok. But geesh, they should give us "step count" as an option for complications. Not those silly circles that Apple thinks is better for us. Too many taps & screens just to see step count, that's where most fitness wearables are much better & let you see them quickly in a glance.
As someone who runs long distance a GPS enabled watch like Fitbit or Garmin is preferred since it's much more accurate than a pedometer based watch like the Apple Watch so not having GPS is a detriment along higher cost and lack of cellular option for stand-alone mode untethered from iPhone when compared to other smartwatches from LG, Samsung, etc.