Sidebar Sidebar
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'

hwilson39 said:
Just wait until people realize that these watches last 3 years, not 50 years like other watches
Click to expand...

I just feel like the transformation of watches is pretty interesting. Breitling now sells a watch with smart capability, and I'm sure it won't last nearly as long as other Breitling watches, but the price point is the same.

I agree people know it won't last that long when they buy it, I just don't know if I'd be willing to shell up for a new watch each three years. Telling time is enough for me and then I can reach into my pocket for my phone if I need more than that.
 
IJ Reilly said:
This can't be right. Nobody will buy Apple Watch, because it isn't round.
Click to expand...

Is that what everyone is saying? If so, I haven't heard that. But, I would certainly argue more people might buy and Apple Watch if it were also available in round. The fact is, there's a potential installed user base of almost a billion customers. The reality is that less than .03% of that base has purchased an Apple Watch to date. Some likely have chosen not to do it because they don't like the way it looks, which includes the fact that it only comes in a rectangle.
[doublepost=1488486760][/doublepost]
hwilson39 said:
I just feel like the transformation of watches is pretty interesting. Breitling now sells a watch with smart capability, and I'm sure it won't last nearly as long as other Breitling watches, but the price point is the same.

I agree people know it won't last that long when they buy it, I just don't know if I'd be willing to shell up for a new watch each three years. Telling time is enough for me and then I can reach into my pocket for my phone if I need more than that.
Click to expand...

And that's exactly what Jony Ive is on record as saying -- the watch was designed for glances, anything more a person should pull out their phone.

The reality is, I'd be much more interested in a hybrid traditional watch for the way I use the Apple Watch. A secure enclave chip to enable Apple Pay, and notification light, or better yet, an LCD window behind the face which could display a name or number would be all I would need. Such a watch could be outfit with health sensors which would download into my phone for critical analysis and take care of most if not all the needs I have for a smart watch in most circumstances. If I needed something more, then I'd have another watch for that, just like I have my entire life before smart watches.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: OllyW
Moorepheus said:
Articles like this a totally meaningless. W/out the release of real numbers from APPLE or anyone else, I don't believe them.
Click to expand...

I believe these numbers but only Apple numbers can give us true reference of sales and growth. But I don't think it would be far off to suggest AW's on sale for $199/249 do take sales away from Fitbit.

Also the basic Fitbits really have peaked. Either they helped users get so motivated they outgrew it or they thought the Fitbit didn't mean they still had to exercise and eventually abandoned it. But that decline says more about Fitbit than AW. I don't think you can make a coorelation between the rise of one and the fall of the other.
[doublepost=1488488483][/doublepost]
hwilson39 said:
Just wait until people realize that these watches last 3 years, not 50 years like other watches
Click to expand...

Pretty sure people understand that. No one is mistaking an AW for a fine watch. It's a throw-a-way just like any other $300 watch. But people spend more on phones, tablets, and computer and don't expect them to last forever either.
 
Who buys a $300-$700 watch that lasts for 50 years? Answer: rich men.

Who expects something that costs $300-$700 to last for 50 years? Answer: internet commenters.
 
badNameErr said:
Yes, in hindsight, marketing the Apple watch as a fashion item was a bit of a blunder.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Even though the stainless has its appeal and can appear formal. The Apple Watch Edition was dead in the water to begin with. When you're considering a market for a $10,000 – $17,000 Apple Watch, I'm not surewhere Apple was going with this. I believe Angela Ahrendts was behind the Apple Watch Edition, which I ultimately flopped and never should have happened in the first place.

It amazes me how the Apple Watch Edition went from a $17,000 watch to $1200 ceramic Watch Edition.
 
I would have purchased another pebble when my old one bricked, but you killed it and its support. I have working 10+ yo hardware laying around the house, so it wasn't a hard decision to get the Series 1.

Also, every place I went to (including various Apple stores) they had been completely hammered (post-Xmas).
 
Chupa Chupa said:
Well I'm probably much older than you so it's probably not an issue of who is doing better. It's all relative. I cut my teeth a long time ago. You'll get there.
Click to expand...

Can't wait till my mortgage is paid off and I can consider $300 "throw away". But I do get it.

it gets easier as you clear off debt. When my car payments were done, That extra money in my bank every month felt amazing.... so I upped my mortgage payments the difference. The faster I can get rid of it, the better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WatchFromAfar
Still wearing my Series 0 Launch Day Sport. Still love it as much as day one, and every day it improves thanks to new apps being developed and Apple updating watchOS with awesome new features (Scribble, Revamped Dock, Time Travel). Easily worth the price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xDKP
jdillings said:
Once again, you're comparing apples to oranges. A Fitbit is not a smart watch.
Click to expand...

Most people, and most technology sites and commentators, lump Fitbit in with smart watches. And when there are comparisons, the things that Fitbit can't do when compared to any smart watch is counted against it even if those abilities are beyond what Fitbit was truly designed to do.

It's going to be a marketing fact that Fitbit will have to address if it wants to continue.
 
WatchFromAfar said:
Oh wow, nice of you to say, I almost expected insults
Click to expand...

$300 is a lot even if you have money, in watches don't expect much for $300 is I believe what he was saying. That's why most won't spend that anyhow it's sort of a very redundant thing.

Not sure the $800 phone plus $300 accessory at $1100 is a great value play, with family of 4 outfitted yup $4400 wow so save $1200 on accessories is solid financial planning
 
  • Like
Reactions: WatchFromAfar
I've said it before and I'll say it again, and will need a fitness band to compete. More battery, smaller form factor (god knows we need this one apple product to be thinner) more battery, focused on fitness without all the apps, lower price point. Boom! Way more market share.
 
musio said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, and will need a fitness band to compete. More battery, smaller form factor (god knows we need this one apple product to be thinner) more battery, focused on fitness without all the apps, lower price point. Boom! Way more market share.
Click to expand...

Compare the thickness of the Apple Watch to other "luxury" watches. It's not thick. And you can't have a thinner Apple Watch with more battery. It's impossible with current tech.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xDKP
I mean Nike fuel band or Fitbit charge 2 competitor. Thin. Small. I don't want a smart Watch. I want a fitness band.
 
Mac 128 said:
Is that what everyone is saying? If so, I haven't heard that. But, I would certainly argue more people might buy and Apple Watch if it were also available in round. The fact is, there's a potential installed user base of almost a billion customers. The reality is that less than .03% of that base has purchased an Apple Watch to date. Some likely have chosen not to do it because they don't like the way it looks, which includes the fact that it only comes in a rectangle.
Click to expand...

Not everyone, obviously, but for a long time it seemed like every thread on an article about Apple Watch included that comment at least once before the first page was full. Often these comments included predictions of the product's imminent failure on that account alone. I mention this more for old time's sake, not to restart that debate (please, god, no), but also to make the point that the product seems to be doing quite well with the form factor Apple chose for it. Some of us are less surprised than others. Just put it that way.
 
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