Some people might prefer this than SmartPhone, just so it hold value better as world's 1st mobile phone
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 vs Rolex
- Thread starter r0k
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Some people might prefer this than SmartPhone, just so it hold value better as world's 1st mobile phone
A device doesn't have to be a "watch" to replace a watch. I stopped wearing watches when the iPhone came out. It's conceivable that some form of wearable tech that isn't a "watch" but shows time could cause some people to stop wearing Rolexes.
You are still comparing functionality though. Do you think the majority of Rolex owners own their pieces because of the function it brings? I'm pretty sure most people who own Subs are not deep sea divers but own one because it's a lovely watch. If they wanted it for function they could buy a diamond encrusted Casio G-Shock or if they were needing accuracy they would be buying Quartz watches even now.
If today's young are only interested in status, sure they can buy a smart watch that has been dipped in gold to attract their money. If they want a piece of horological history however, then they might look at luxury mechanicals that deliver craftsmanship and value long term. It all depends if 'smart' is in the eye of the beholder too.
I am sure smart watches are here to stay, but I think it's a hell of a claim to declare they will do what previous watches that bring function have failed to. That is shrink the luxury market.
Interesting though is this type of thread. Ask this question on WUS with a watch lovers audience and they will laugh at the prospect of the Apple Watch replacing a Rolex. Ask the question on a tech lovers site like Mac Rumors and naturally you'll get the opposite prediction. It's probably not a fair contest though as WUS dwarfs this place by quite a considerable margin in terms of posters and perhaps more people own mechanical watches at this moment in time than those who own both iPhones and Apple watches. It's far too early for definitive answers.
This is the present. We're talking about the future, which will change this equation by a considerable margin.
No, I don't. But I also think the majority of Rolex owners won't wear two watches at once. So if a significant number of Rolex owners start getting Apple watch and likes the functionality, then their Rolex would end up sitting in drawers, and that's got to impact sales of Rolex at some point.
Whether such a switch would ever happen, I agree is too early to tell. I do think if smartwatches become the hub for interconnected technology, like Apple Pay, using watch as boarding passes and theater tickets, controlling smart home devices, etc, then that could make them must-have devices, like the smartphone is today.
I doubt it. There have long been many watches that are more durable, more accurate, and have many more functions than high end mechanical watches and cost tiny fractions of the price. Yet, people continue to buy expensive mechanical watches and with good reason. The appeal is totally different.
Saying smartwatches will replace Rolexes and other similar watches is like saying photographs of water lilies will replace Monet paintings of them.
So in that scenario are we also heading towards the iPhone being redundant with everybody wanting a 2 inch screen on their wrist instead? You have a point not wanting to wear 2 watches so why would I carry a phone when a smart watch does everything too? It's an extension of s phone at present but that may not be necessary either in the future.
The difference is all of them have been dumbwatches. Rolex et al. will likely acquire the same status as pocketwatch manufacturers, and people still collect pocket watches.
Last edited:
Didn't say smartwatches will ever do everything, just that they will do much more than they do today. For instance, a smartwatch screen will always be too small to allow comfortable reading and browsing the web. For that, we will always need a smartphone or tablet sized device. But perhaps instead of smartphones, we will eventually carry mini tablets, and the smartwatch will be our "phones." I would love it if that happened, because there are times when I don't want a phone in my pocket, and it will be very freeing to just walk around with a watch on my wrist and still be connected.
People have 2 wrists too so perhaps it's not inconceivable to wear a nice watch on one wrist and a smart watch on the other. We just don't know what trends people will follow I suppose. I know one thing though, i'll never buy a smart watch as I have no use for one and can't see that changing in the near to distant future.
After playing with the Apple watch at the weekend, owned by a friend, I was so disappointed with it. I expected to be interested in what it could do but as I have an iPhone, nothing really stood out as different. Maybe the next one will be the proper one?
Precisely so it'll be one or the other which is not an easy trade off when there are so many nice watches already available.
What sort of update could make it 'better' though? That's quite a claim and something massive to live up to.
How could these updates attract watch enthusiasts the world over who love mechanical movements and Swiss engineering?
Yep.
Some current Rolex owners are so accustomed to wearing a Rolex that they'll likely never consider ditching it.
Some are afraid to get the Apple Watch because they know their Rolexes would be relegated forever to the drawer.
Some have already ditched them and never looking back (we've heard from quite a few such members in this thread).
The future, however, presents a grave danger to the luxury mechanical watch industry when today's young people who start with the smartwatch will likely only consider a more expensive, luxury smartwatch (like the Edition) later in life when they're well able to afford it. That's the harsh prospective reality of it.
I don't think 'luxury' smart watches will ever gain momentum simply because they have such a short shelf life. Intelligent young professionals (in any great number) are not going to spend £10k on a smart watch that has a 3 to 4 year life span. Maybe a £500 smart watch or something comparable in price to a mobile phone but I can't see hugely overpriced smart watches becoming popular to the degree luxury mechanicals are. You simply don't get enough for your money IMO.
Smart watches will have the greatest impact in the budget market -£1000 if they do start taking sales off the likes of Seiko and Citizen etc.
Smart watches will have the greatest impact in the budget market -£1000 if they do start taking sales off the likes of Seiko and Citizen etc.
Last edited:
People have 2 wrists too so perhaps it's not inconceivable to wear a nice watch on one wrist and a smart watch on the other. We just don't know what trends people will follow I suppose. I know one thing though, i'll never buy a smart watch as I have no use for one and can't see that changing in the near to distant future.
After playing with the Apple watch at the weekend, owned by a friend, I was so disappointed with it. I expected to be interested in what it could do but as I have an iPhone, nothing really stood out as different. Maybe the next one will be the proper one?
You might not ever buy a smart watch, but as Jay pointed out, the real problem facing the mechanical watch industry is not current mechanical watch owners switching away, but younger generations never getting into the habit of buying mechanical watches.
As for what the watch does different from the iPhone, well, the main point is, it does the same things as your phone, but you don't have to drag out your phone from the bottom of your purse to do them. Maybe this is something that women appreciate more than men?
And then there are connected devices. For example, we need to get new locks for our doors, and now that I have an Apple watch, I'm considering getting a smartlock. With a phone, smartlocks didn't seem so convenient, because, to unlock door, take phone out of your pocket, that's the same effort as taking the keys out of your pocket (or digging them out from the bottom of my purse -- ugh). With Apple watch, it's raise watch, tap a few times, and door is unlocked.
I own a stainless AW and a 15 year old Rolex Submariner Deep Sea. I really enjoy my AW except for 2 things. Apple's non commitment to water proofing the AW and the big one, you have to plug it into the wall every night. When the apocalypse comes and the electricity is gone, at least my Rolex will let me know the date and the time of day...
I find it strange that I'm more paranoid about wearing my AW and getting it wet or smacking it than I am about my Rolex, which has been through a war, countless dives and still operates at COSC levels.
I find it strange that I'm more paranoid about wearing my AW and getting it wet or smacking it than I am about my Rolex, which has been through a war, countless dives and still operates at COSC levels.
I think if I was worried about not wanting to get my phone out of my pocket or out the bottom of a bag, I wouldn't have paid nearly £1000 for it in the first place. I can see the convenience side of things, although I think the screens need to be perhaps at least double the present size for a watch like this to be worth it as a replacement for an iPhone.You might not ever buy a smart watch, but as Jay pointed out, the real problem facing the mechanical watch industry is not current mechanical watch owners switching away, but younger generations never getting into the habit of buying mechanical watches.
As for what the watch does different from the iPhone, well, the main point is, it does the same things as your phone, but you don't have to drag out your phone from the bottom of your purse to do them. Maybe this is something that women appreciate more than men?
And then there are connected devices. For example, we need to get new locks for our doors, and now that I have an Apple watch, I'm considering getting a smartlock. With a phone, smartlocks didn't seem so convenient, because, to unlock door, take phone out of your pocket, that's the same effort as taking the keys out of your pocket (or digging them out from the bottom of my purse -- ugh). With Apple watch, it's raise watch, tap a few times, and door is unlocked.
The door unlock is innovative but I'm the type of person that still has my car and house keys in my hand by the time I leave my car and arrive at my front door. When time is precious, putting my keys away to then have the inconvenience of not having them in my hand is a waste of time. Fingerprint locks have been around for over a decade yet I never invested regardless of how many seconds it could save me.
It's rated IPX7 (waterproof to 1 meter for 30 minutes), which is plenty good enough for a first-generation product, but Apple has never stated they won't increase this in a future iteration. However, it's actually more robust than the advertised rating because many members have taken it swimming, surfing, diving, etc. with no ill effect.
People also derided the iPhone and other smartphones back then for requiring a nightly charge when their dumbphones held many days of charge. They'll get over it too.
Last edited:
Intelligent young professionals already see that it can be a similar price over the course of a lifetime to buy the latest and greatest new smartwatch every year or so versus buying an expensive new mechanical. Intelligent young professionals don't need the status symbols of earlier generations; they're abandoning car ownership, living more densely, and spending more money on experiences instead of objects. A smartwatch fits into this constantly-connected, social lifestyle better. Sure, it'll take a number of iterations to get the kinks out, but there's definitely a future in devices on the wrist.
Don't get me wrong. I love mechanicals. For fun, I design and build watches and put mechanical movements in them. And there will always be a group of people who will love a trusty mechanical over a smartwatch, but the trend among people my age (mid-20s) is definitely towards smartwatches.
What???? No, not worried about taking it out, why would you think that? I was talking purely about the inconvenience of digging through my purse to locate my phone.
The door unlock is innovative but I'm the type of person that still has my car and house keys in my hand by the time I leave my car and arrive at my front door. When time is precious, putting my keys away to then have the inconvenience of not having them in my hand is a waste of time. Fingerprint locks have been around for over a decade yet I never invested regardless of how many seconds it could save me.
Well, it's great that you are so super organized, but not everyone is so organized, and even if I were, I don't drive. I commute via public transportation, so when is a good time for me to fish out my keys? I don't want to take them out in the subway or bus, then walk several blocks to my home with the keys in my hand!
I hadn't thought about fingerprint locks. Maybe I should look into that...
I didn't think that. I was referring to convenience in my response.What???? No, not worried about taking it out, why would you think that? I was talking purely about the inconvenience of digging through my purse to locate my phone.
Well, it's great that you are so super organized, but not everyone is so organized, and even if I were, I don't drive. I commute via public transportation, so when is a good time for me to fish out my keys? I don't want to take them out in the subway or bus, then walk several blocks to my home with the keys in my hand!
I hadn't thought about fingerprint locks. Maybe I should look into that...
Not super organised just natural to have my keys in my hand after stepping out of a car and locking it. I wasn't criticising your use for unlocking your home with a smart watch, it's just not a need for me but more like a cool gimmick.