If they didn't know that before purchasing an electronic watch, then I hope they don't reproduce and taint the gene pool.
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's Record-Breaking Quarter Was Opposite One of Fitbit's 'Largest Declines Ever'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Love my Series 0 I picked up on Black Friday from B&H for $180 shipped. My better half had one prior to that for about a year, I am surprised I held out for so long. Looking forward to Series 3 to come out so I can get a Series 1 or Series 2 depending on price. I don't mind staying a generation or two behind, I mostly use it as a... watch.
You're absolutely correct on both counts!
For day to day use, my
watch does the job, but for nights out on the town, the Breitling, Cartier, Ebel, Omega, Rolex, or TAG Heuer has the elegance factor in it. I'm not at the Ulysse Nardin level yet...
LMAO at this, I guess you could also argue that a very basic land-line telephone will last 50 years too, as compared to an iPhone that is only "good" for 1-3 years.
But I do have an original "Series 0" tucked away in sealed packaging, I am hoping in 9 years some idiot will pay WAY more than I did for it on eBay.
Well it is a complete solution for the Apple base. But the potential base for the Apple Watch is almost a billion customers. If Apple's selling 4 million units a quarter (best case scenario), then they've only sold to around 32 million customers to date, assuming every single watch was a unique purchase and not an upgrade. Obviously that's not the case, and 32 million is an exceedingly generous figure. Either way, while the watch is a successful category for Apple in terms of revenue, and it's doing well against the competition -- the fact that the Apple Watch only accounts for less than a .03% of the potential customer base, show just how much further Apple has to go to make this device a significant category of Apple's product offerings, and by comparison, just how far the smart watch has to go to be a major product category in general.
Typical spin. Did anyone actually look at the numbers? Apparently not.
CYOY, Apple share is down, shipments are down. Fibit loss share, but ended up shipping more. Apparently you people are so obsessed with worshiping of Apple that you can't even see the real numbers. Don't pay attention to a single quarter. Let's see what CY17 brings.
CYOY, Apple share is down, shipments are down. Fibit loss share, but ended up shipping more. Apparently you people are so obsessed with worshiping of Apple that you can't even see the real numbers. Don't pay attention to a single quarter. Let's see what CY17 brings.
It looks like Apple is the only one on the chart that had a decline from 2015 shipments to 2016 shipments. They are down almost a million units.
Also, didn't the AW only sell for 8 months in 2015?
Also, didn't the AW only sell for 8 months in 2015?
You'll be labeled an Apple "h8tr" for actually looking at the numbers and pointing out the obvious while headlines here, 9to5 and a few other are praising apple for "record breaking quarter". Yup, because 1 quarter, new release & holiday one at that, is what matters apparently.
On your points...
Yes, the
Watch is another screen for notifications, but it does what I like... it saves time. I keep my phone in my shirt pocket 90% of the day, and when I get a call, I just look at my wrist to see who is calling, and press the bluetooth answer, if I want to talk, or press the red, defer to voice mail if I don't want to talk. It's now more fluid than when I first got it. That's the thing with the Watch: It saves 3-12 seconds per interaction, and those add up to about 10-15 minutes per day. My favorite time savings is my bank. I have to put in a 6 number PIN when I log in, and having the PIN on my watch, rather than change apps to do banking on my iPhone saves about 20-30 seconds of flipping between apps. (The PIN is the one of those SecureID things - changes each minute)As for cameras and doing the Dick Tracy thing, that just isn't ergonomic for me. I don't like speakerphone conversations, or having phone conversations with people when there are others around me (I did like phone booths back in the day...), so that's a bit of a non-starter for me, but others like it.
True. I think the excitement is just due to the quarter's upward trend/momentum.
If a series 3 is unveiled, and series 2's are marked down, I'm guess CY17 will be pretty impressive.
They would also need to match on battery. Higher end athletic watches don't care so much about the display, as they don't really need to, their user base probably wants nice things but discrete controls and battery life are areas that don't lend themselves to compromise and at this point, don't share a common intersection with the Apple Watch. The market is probably more niche than what Apple is shooing for with the watch. Apple may lose a little with higher end fitness watches that overlap in features just enough with the Apple Watch but I don't think it's enough to deter future growth in any kind of a meaningful way.
Also, weight, some Polars, Garmins, etc. are heavy but I don't think any are as heavy as a SS Apple Watch (not 100% off the top of my head).
I think the Apple Watch is great for weekend warrior types, and probably has more use cases than I can think of with fitness but for my needs it's not quite there yet. I'm not sure it ever will be with a touch screen, a dial and one button. The screen isn't great and sweaty fingers don't make for a good experience.
Personally, I compared some Garmin watches and opted for the Apple Watch at release, I ended up augmenting my wearables a few times over since then, still with the same Apple Watch tough. I tried to use it for activity tracking but initially it was a nightmare, the apps were all not finished and it was easier to just launch the Nike App on the phone and go. As I progressed in my training and needs, I ended up with a Polar M400 (before series 2), a separate heart rate strap, a running metrics sensor, and an iPod shuffle - that all do what I want better than what I can from the Apple Watch (and cheaper at the time). I have tried it a few times since then (it's been awhile!) but it's never quite been as easy as the other stuff.
If they ever released a different version with real controls, some type of better screen, lighter, longer battery life, apps that can run on the watch and connect to 3rd party sensors (cycling speed/cadence, running pods, lumo run and/or garmin HRM-Tri strap, etc.) I'd absolutely consider it, for now though the other options have had years of refinement in their interfaces, a pretty dedicated user base and are expanding on meaningful features for their users - things I think Apple does as well but for a different set of use cases. That being said, I love the health app, I view the watch as more of an extension of that, which it excels at and has helped me plenty. The health app is the perfect nexus for all of this stuff and it's amazing. I've got a bluetooth scale, thermometer, blood pressure meter, sleep tracker, apple watch and fitness heart rate tracking and having it all rolled up in once place is incredible - I think that's the real gold here as this all progresses.
I'm usually half good at reading and understanding stats/figures.
But isnt the title of this article is factually wrong?
looking at the charts provided, Fitbit didn't lose sales. they grew sales by .5m over this point last year. 22.5 v 22.0
What they shrank was market share. What this indicates is that the wearables market is growing as a whole instead of shrinking, and that Apple and other manufacturers market shares increased by rapid increase to sales. Where fitbit sales remained mostly static. They are still the #1 seller on the market selling over 22 million units to Apples.
what this article is claiming does NOT match up to the facts and numbers.
So the text of this article does NOT match the data.
mac rumours.... editors. what say you? how do you jive this disconnect in your article and subject versus the provided data tables?
But isnt the title of this article is factually wrong?
looking at the charts provided, Fitbit didn't lose sales. they grew sales by .5m over this point last year. 22.5 v 22.0
What they shrank was market share. What this indicates is that the wearables market is growing as a whole instead of shrinking, and that Apple and other manufacturers market shares increased by rapid increase to sales. Where fitbit sales remained mostly static. They are still the #1 seller on the market selling over 22 million units to Apples.
what this article is claiming does NOT match up to the facts and numbers.
So the text of this article does NOT match the data.
mac rumours.... editors. what say you? how do you jive this disconnect in your article and subject versus the provided data tables?
Very much agreed.
[doublepost=1488481183][/doublepost]
I'm usually half good at reading and understanding stats/figures.
But isnt the title of this article is factually wrong?
looking at the charts provided, Fitbit didn't lose sales. they grew sales by .5m over this point last year. 22.5 v 22.0
What they shrank was market share. What this indicates is that the wearables market is growing as a whole instead of shrinking, and that Apple and other manufacturers market shares increased by rapid increase to sales. Where fitbit sales remained mostly static. They are still the #1 seller on the market selling over 22 million units to Apples.
what this article is claiming does NOT match up to the facts and numbers.
So the text of this article does NOT match the data.
mac rumours.... editors. what say you? how do you jive this disconnect in your article and subject versus the provided data tables?
Macrumors along with other sites reporting this are being intellectually dishonest with their headlines. The headlines state Q416, but the numbers for the whole year show a very different picture. Technically they are right, but intellectually dishonest.
What margin of error are we talking here? This thread will soon be full of people quoting these numbers as facts.....
And this is possibly why Apple moved its marketing emphasis from fashion to utility.
Not all good watches are timeless pieces of jewelry. Some are highly functional, durable tools that take a lot of day-to-day abuse. Others are fragile bits of jewelry that include timekeeping as a side benefit. And there's a wide spectrum between those extremes. Some will be cherished by their owners, whose personal habits are subtly modified to protect the device. Others let the scratches fall where they may.
Meantime... Perhaps the Watch can't satisfy either the high end or low end of the fitness market. The high end is a niche, occupied by those who suit up for their activity in the latest, high tech gear. The low end... well, that's not Apple's business in any category. Apple can happily take the middle - those who are perfectly happy with somewhat less than top-end fitness features and will wear the Watch all day long for the various other things it can do that the fitness tracker does not.
Love my Apple Watch, but I do not see it as exactly the same as FitBit's wearables, even though the two share many features and capabilities. Fitbits are geared towards the more fitness-minded users with more intense needs (like 5+ day battery life). The AW is geared as more all-around smartwatch.
It's like needing a truck, but wanting a car, so you get an SUV/crossover in order to have the best of both worlds. The AW is the SUV/crossover.
It's like needing a truck, but wanting a car, so you get an SUV/crossover in order to have the best of both worlds. The AW is the SUV/crossover.
I'm an analyst by nature, when I see such disconnect between article and provided facts, my B.S. alarm goes full tilt.
and there's a LOT of B.S. in this post by M.R. (unless they want to actually provide the real numbers they're using to base their claim on)
I'm usually half good at reading and understanding stats/figures.
But isnt the title of this article is factually wrong?
looking at the charts provided, Fitbit didn't lose sales. they grew sales by .5m over this point last year. 22.5 v 22.0
What they shrank was market share. What this indicates is that the wearables market is growing as a whole instead of shrinking, and that Apple and other manufacturers market shares increased by rapid increase to sales. Where fitbit sales remained mostly static. They are still the #1 seller on the market selling over 22 million units to Apples.
what this article is claiming does NOT match up to the facts and numbers.
So the text of this article does NOT match the data.
mac rumours.... editors. what say you? how do you jive this disconnect in your article and subject versus the provided data tables?
The article is not wrong (but incomplete), but your analysis isn't entirely correct either.
Aboveavalon did a rather in depth analysis on the troubles Fitbit is facing, though it is locked behind a paywall. I will reproduce this much though. If you want to know more, I highly recommended signing up for a membership. It's really informative and thought provoking.
https://www.aboveavalon.com/dailypr...ater-fitbit-is-in-denial-garmin-4q16-earnings
TL;DR - Fitbit is screwed.
I was just noting something that I noticed on the chart.
About being labeled, it happens often to me. I regularly get called both an Apple fanboy, an Apple Hater, or something like that. Sometimes I get called both within the same thread.
I have not done a complete analysis since the data for such is missing from this article. hence my question about the disconnect.
As for FitBit, I think they've hit market saturation on pure sports bands. Their last year or two of products have been pretty much simple refreshes without the ability to take the next step into the more advanced wearables (like an actual smart watch v fitness tracker).
as mentioned, this means FitBit is competing against, not only products of the same category, but products that are completely different category and offer the same features. when there's only 1 spot on most peoples wrists for a device, now that smartwatches are slowly becoming more mainstream, fitbit will find themselves either relegated to workout times, or off of wrists
However, I'm not sure fitbit doesn't see this coming. They did just recently purchase Pebble and all it's assets, giving them an entry and technologies into the standard wearable smartwatch market, isntead of the saturated fitness band market
So Fit bit is NOT screwed. While this quarter was allegedly worse than the same quarter last year, their Y-O-Y volumes are still up. They still sold more devices this year than they did last year. (22.5 v 22.0)
The main issue is that sales from august to December 2016 has apparently been falling (a period you would expect to be at its highest, due to holiday shopping period and all). We will need to see their 2017 data to be sure though.
I am sure Fitbit is aware of the issue they are facing. Question is whether they can pivot in time. Pebble wasn't doing so hot itself at the time of being acquired, so I wonder if Fitbit can run it any differently.
Oh, i'm not saying all is rosy. But the narrative of the article don't match the facts provided in the article.
Quarterly decline also could just be temporary dip. The only thing we can do is look and monitor them. Heck, even Apple has had quarters in the last year where they were lower sales than before and the forums went into a tizzy thinking "DOOOM!". wasn't doom for Apple. And until we see how FitBit pivots, we won't know what 1 weak quarter means.
Given the actual numbers I'd say the smartwatch concept is still a bubble. I have had my Series 2 since September and kind of wish I could go back in time and unbuy. It's fine for what it is but it's a solution in search of real problems. It's chunky, Siri is annoyingly implemented, and I haven't found much about it that I can't do somewhere else. I've mostly kept it for the health stuff and the fact I bought it. But it's probably my last.
I'll be interested to see if the sales trends continue to go down. Will the majority of people who buy any smartwatch buy another one when the time comes? That is the real indicator that smartwatches aren't a fad/bubble.
I'll be interested to see if the sales trends continue to go down. Will the majority of people who buy any smartwatch buy another one when the time comes? That is the real indicator that smartwatches aren't a fad/bubble.