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

Apple Watch May Gain Additional Casing Material Options Later This Year

It's the Apple Watch Ivory™

"We've created a whole new type of Elefant™"
 
Big Dave said:
This is just one of the issues I have with the Apple watch. You drop a minimum of $350 on a watch that has a lifespan of at most 2 years before it is obsolete.
Click to expand...

I find it odd that a forum who argues that iPad sales have dropped because people keep them for a long period of time ('my iPad 2 is still going strong and I have no reason to upgrade') also believe the Apple Watch will be *obsolete* in 2 years.

I really doubt in 2017 we'll view the first gen Apple Watch like we now view floppy disks. People are over using the word obsolete.

We have no idea what the future of the watch is. Will it require faster processors like the iPhone or not like the Apple TV? Will it get thinner or will they improve the battery?
 
i have a titanium watch (citizen) from the 90s and love it till this day. very lightweight.

not sure if an applewatch in Ti would look good tough.
 
I wonder what the three would be?

1. Platinum
2. Titanium
3. Liquidmetal
4. Unapologetic plastic?

???

----------
Big Dave said:
This is just one of the issues I have with the Apple watch. You drop a minimum of $350 on a watch that has a lifespan of at most 2 years before it is obsolete. If you were to drop the same $350 on a traditional watch, you could pass it down to the next generation. Granted the Apple watch is more than a timepiece.
Click to expand...

People drop hundreds (on up to 1K) on phones, tablets, laptops, shoes, etc. that will be obsolete in roughly the same time frame. Shoot, people will drop $350 on a night out... which is "obsolete" by the time you pay the check.

I just don't see this as any kind of issue for the Watch. I don't know if it will fail or not, but if it does I don't think a 2-3 year lifespan will be the issue.
 
Ries said:
Maybe they are pulling an "ipad 4". 6 months down the road, the new improved apple watch, the S2 :)
Click to expand...

That's what concerns me- they'll release a revised version 6 months after I buy my stainless steel.

If they do release additional case materials later this year, of course the watch in those versions will be a bit tweaked.

Nevertheless, I shall persevere and give them my money ;-) Let's just hope those $400+ watch bands stay compatible with the upgraded watch bodies for years.
 
OldSchoolMacGuy said:
Platinum will make it really expensive. Bring on the complaints.
Click to expand...

Well though traditionally a more expensive metal, today Platinum is trading for as much as $50 less an ounce so cost wise it shouldnt be a huge difference, depending on what alloy of platinum they are using. But people have got to stop thinking that the price of gold is what is making the expensive watches cost that much, its not. My gold rolex, with gold bracelet is less then 6 ounces of 18K gold, at 1200 an ounce (or 900 for 18K), that 5400 worth of pure gold, the difference between the 10K and 17K watch is a leather band with a gold buckle that doesnt weigh anywhere near the same weight as an entire gold rolex with gold bracelet. Thats true for all the Apple watches, a Gold Rolex has alot more gold in them then the Apple watch and even they have only 3-6K worth of gold depending on the model.
-Tig
 
Klae17 said:
In what market? Cars are like that. They become obsolete very soon. Still usable, but obsolete when a new model comes out.
Click to expand...

You can't compare this to cars though.

Example I have an old Benz at home. It has built in Motorola phone. Car is still runs but the Phone tech is no longer usable. The resale value of my car on the used market isn't brought down by the tech because the main point is whether the car runs and how well. Plus the tech in the car can be upgraded. Also the engine, interior and exterior can be upgraded to increase usability and value for resale.

The usability of the apple watch is the tech and value is based on the casing & band material. Value and usibility are split.

Once the tech becomes obsolete and functionality is margiinalized by newer watches the only value in the Apple watch is in the casing and band unless it is for a collectors item.

We need to know how long Apple will support old apple watches on newer phones.

I think a better comparison would be to the Nokia 8850.

I have loads of unusable tech at my house that cost me a ton of money. None of it can be upgraded and none of it is usable which drags down resale. Now just imagine if my Nokia 8850 was solid gold?
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    19 KB · Views: 306
Last edited:
MacRumors said:
Kuo points out that the Apple Watch's sale momentum could stall entering the fourth quarter of the year, and thinks the release of new casing options for the device could reinvigorate it
Click to expand...

So, the watch isn't even out yet, and we're already seeing rumors speculating on ways to re-invigorate sales momentum? Sounds like we're in for quite an exciting ride here... :rolleyes:
 
Big Dave said:
This is just one of the issues I have with the Apple watch. You drop a minimum of $350 on a watch that has a lifespan of at most 2 years before it is obsolete. If you were to drop the same $350 on a traditional watch, you could pass it down to the next generation. Granted the Apple watch is more than a timepiece.
Click to expand...

lol. What kind of $350 watch is worth passing down a generation?
 
bluespark said:
You're correct that people generally are resigned to continually upgrading (and continually paying for) their cars, but do you think many people want another product in that category? I think one of the main appeals of high-end watches (which for most people, includes $1000 watches) traditionally has been their timelessness -- they aren't like cars or computers, but rather like jewelry that we could pass down to our kids if we want to. This is just about the opposite of that.
Click to expand...

I don't think apple is planning on selling too many of these. They are in limited numbers and limited stores. They definitely know what they are doing and marketing it as fashion. The edition hyped up the watch even more and makes the 349 watch even more appealing and solidifies Apple as the luxury brand Among computer brands.
 
nagromme said:
Platinum wouldn't reinvigorate anything. I can see maybe some anodized aluminum colors (pink, green, project RED, even "gold"). Or 5C-style sturdy plastic for a lower entry price.
Click to expand...

My hunch is early adopters are bankrolling R&D, and we'll see Platinum take the top spot along with a price drop on the gold models (although probably not by much). Apple would then presumably also add the anodized colors (if they choose to), plus any hardware upgrades.

My guess is a $299 start price, the stainless would probably stay at $500-600, and the gold moves down to $6/7k, with the Platinum watch starting around $10-15k. There's only about $2k worth of gold in the case (maybe less), so there is a ton of profit margin in those Edition models.
 
My guess is they will anodize the existing aluminum models and sell them in a variety of colors that match the current bands. That's certainly the easiest way to spiff things up without actually doing a whole lot.

Titanium would be a cool possibility, and is a logical choice. It is very popular right now in watches. It would cost more than the current stainless models, and my guess is it would push it to $1850 USD or so for the titanium case with matching titanium bracelet. Still, they might do it. It would make someone a really nice Christmas present!

Platinum is a reasonable guess for the Edition line. I know many folks who dislike yellow gold (I generally fall into that category myself), and platinum is a great alternative to gold on the high end.
 
Big Dave said:
This is just one of the issues I have with the Apple watch. You drop a minimum of $350 on a watch that has a lifespan of at most 2 years before it is obsolete. If you were to drop the same $350 on a traditional watch, you could pass it down to the next generation. Granted the Apple watch is more than a timepiece.
Click to expand...

Only the $350 traditionell watch nobody wants to have-don't insult the next generation:D
 
Waterproof Dive APPLEwatch

I stopped buying watches that aren't waterproof 15 years ago
The apple watch should sense when underwater and become a dive watch. The display would be highly visible underwater. Touch sensitivity should adapt to the depth. Wireless connection to air supply is already an off the shelf technology. Also should take calls from diver to diver with today's specialized masks. This is just the kind of technical challenge Apple specializes in.
Priced at $500.00 - $600.00, THEY WOULD SELL MILLIONS! :)
 
ampm99 said:
I stopped buying watches that aren't waterproof 15 years ago
The apple watch should sense when underwater and become a dive watch. The display would be highly visible underwater. Touch sensitivity should adapt to the depth. Wireless connection to air supply is already an off the shelf technology. Also should take calls from diver to diver with today's specialized masks. This is just the kind of technical challenge Apple specializes in.
Priced at $500.00 - $600.00, THEY WOULD SELL MILLIONS! :)
Click to expand...

Sadly Bluetooth range under water is about 3cm :(
 
leeds utd fc said:
Actually, Richard Mille do a watch with a sapphire case. And as much as I love watches, that thing, IMO, is horrible...looks like plastic. Somewhere north of a million dollars too :eek:
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't know - it doesn't look too bad. It could work on an Apple Watch. Apple have gone in that direction before.

Richard-Mille-RM-56-02-Sapphire-Tourbillon-Dial-620x623.jpg


imac_graphite_2001.jpg
g4cube.jpg
 
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