Convince me please: Does the sport look cheap? is $200 extra really worth it?

[rhyme]

Having now seen them in person, the Sports and SS both look equally good.

 

[anitasanger]

There are two things here:

1. I don't think the photographs on Apple's website do any of the models justice, especially the Sport. Many reviewers have commented on this and said that you'll be blown away when you see/wear one in person.

2. My take on the Sport is not that it looks cheap, but that it looks more utilitarian for an active lifestyle. It is the opposite of the fashion-forward flashiness of the Watch and Edition models. Depending on your taste and needs, one may serve you better.

I'm not buying a Sport because I can't afford the SS, I'm buying it because it fits my desired aesthetic and usage needs. For many people, a look that says "I'm active, fit, and healthy" is worth more than whatever the SS says about you, even if it is cheaper at the time of purchase.

If aluminum and plastic equates to fit and healthy, I don't want to live on earth anymore.

 

[JoeG4]

It looks like a $350-400 apple watch.

hehe.

If it was the only watch Apple was making, I don't think ya'll would be so dang snobby about it. Let's not forget that these days it's cool NOT to wear a watch, and rolexes are seen as something for guidos.

*runs*

 

[boy-better-know]

I am getting the steel watch but I think the space black sport looks amazing.

Whatever works for your budget.

 

[capitanbuzo]

This is the way I look at it. Yes, $200 more expensive but if you were planning on getting generation 2, then it will probably hold $100 premium over the sport, bring the premium to $100. Either way I'd buy the stainless steel but that thinking might help.