Given that the Sport is the low end version, does it even need to be confirmed? The others are stainless steel or gold. They obviously will cost more.
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.
High-End 18-Karat Gold Apple Watch Could Cost Up to $1,200
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Given that the Sport is the low end version, does it even need to be confirmed? The others are stainless steel or gold. They obviously will cost more.
I think Apple usually places the "entry" models left and the high end right. The pricing will be from low to high:
Normal one, sport, edition
You position your reply as though I'm advocating for the Apple Watch when in fact I'm not. They're different beasts for different types of customer or purpose. That doesn't make one "cheap" and the other "high end mature". One is a computing platform, the other is a chronometer.
It generally costs $500-600 at minimum to service a Swiss chronometer.... Not including any parts just your typical overhaul that has to be done to recalibrate, re-seal and re-lubricate a mechanical movement.
I've had the same mechanical wristwatch for 20 years but I'm not under some strange and pompous delusion of what it is.... Yes it's "amazingly accurate" for a mechanical timepiece blah blah etc etc but it's also got 200 moving parts that are fragile, require lots of care and get easily damaged over time. It's not for everyone and it doesn't make me a special little snowflake because I have one and someone else doesn't.
But then you go completely in the opposite direction with the Casio... that's not a smart watch on par with the Apple Watch's functionality either.
A Rolex, Vacheron, Patek, Concord, Panerai, Longines, etc. is just one kind of watch out of many different kinds... and it's in a completely different class of cost, maintenance, etc. that has more to do with branding than anything else, because in today's world of computer-based design, etc. it's actually pretty inexpensive to produce a quality self-winding mechanical movement that's still vastly less accurate than even the cheapest quartz watch.
People don't buy a five or six figure watch just because they just want jewelry or "appreciate fine engineering"... fine engineering is also about solving problems without just throwing gobs more money at them. People buy a Rolex, Vacheron, Patek etc. mostly, overwhelmingly, for the name and the status.
The Edition collection features six uniquely elegant expressions of Apple Watch. Each has a watch case crafted from 18-carat gold that our metallurgists have developed to be up to twice as hard as standard gold. The display is protected by polished sapphire crystal. And an exquisitely designed strap provides a striking complement. - Apple
Every jeweler is familiar with the different types and colors of 18kt gold.
Btw, Apple didn't say it was unique. And when they say "our metallurgists", that can simply mean the experts they paid to cast the case.
They didn't say it was twice as hard as other 18k gold alloys. They compared it to "standard gold", which would indicate 24kt.
Most 18k gold alloys used for jewelry are twice as hard as standard gold.
Exactly. In the US, this is covered by Federal Law, Title 16, CFR 23.4, which points out that if something is plated, it has to say so:
§ 23.4 Misrepresentation as to gold content.
(3) Use of the word “Gold” or any abbreviation to describe all or part of an industry product that is not composed throughout of gold or a gold alloy, but is surface-plated or coated with gold alloy, unless the word “Gold” or its abbreviation is adequately qualified to indicate that the product or part is only surface-plated.
Every jeweler is familiar with the different types and colors of 18kt gold.
Btw, Apple didn't say it was unique. And when they say "our metallurgists", that can simply mean the experts they paid to cast the case.
They didn't say it was twice as hard as other 18k gold alloys. They compared it to "standard gold", which would indicate 24kt.
Most 18k gold alloys used for jewelry are twice as hard as standard gold.
Exactly. In the US, this is covered by Federal Law, Title 16, CFR 23.4, which points out that if something is plated, it has to say so:
§ 23.4 Misrepresentation as to gold content.
(3) Use of the word “Gold” or any abbreviation to describe all or part of an industry product that is not composed throughout of gold or a gold alloy, but is surface-plated or coated with gold alloy, unless the word “Gold” or its abbreviation is adequately qualified to indicate that the product or part is only surface-plated.
I think you better take a step back and watch I'm Gonna Get You Sucka.
Or maybe just take a field trip.
The bigger issue is that future editions are likely to be thinner and get better battery life. I'm guessing Apple has stripped down the SoC to the point where it does exactly what it needs to do and no more (one of the perks of designing your own chips). They'll make further refinements with each edition.
They can improve a lot. S1 isn't really a SoC, it's an MCM (that may contain one or more SoCs). Integration in the future will reduce size, reduce power consumption, and increase capabilities.
My guess is that they aren't going to produce very many of the Edition, and that they might be sold through a non-traditional channel (e.g. Burberry stores or department stores) in addition to Apple's own stores (who may have only a few display units actually on hand). $3,250 seems a bit steep. Remember, if they are going for the "mall watch" crowd who would otherwise get a Tissot or Movado, then $2,000 might fly, but not $3,000.
On another note, the website shows only 6 designs for the Edition. They can always come up with a few more, but it won't be mix-and-match between the bands and the watches (if you look closely, the crown is color-matched to the band). Both the rose gold models are 38mm, and from the bands it appears the target market is women. The closest to a "unisex" model in the edition is the 38mm with the bright red modern buckle. The other designs are a bit more masculine. I'm a bit surprised they didn't make more use of rose gold. It looks good on most skin types, and is common on premium men's watches as well as women's. Or maybe the gallery on the website isn't all inclusive and we'll see more designs once it is actually released.
Now we know why they hired metallurgists. I saw a couple jobs requests on Apple's site earlier this year and wondered what they were for.
I bought a nice looking Burberry watch at an outlet for about $350, as luck would have it, a few years ago. Looks great. I love it, but would buy an Apple watch if I was looking in 2015. At this $350-$1200 (predicted) range, you're not looking at heirloom watches anyway.
Apple is going to be mass producing technology that is far more impressive than what's in even the highest end Swiss watches that everyone is (all of a sudden) super hot over. I think those watches are beautiful. But you know what? We now have watches with better tech than what got us on the moon. Humans couldn't make these watches 3 years ago. It was impossible.
You can over- fetishise $30k watches (and again, they are super impressive) but they're impressive in the same way as a championship horse is. People now buy cars instead of horses. Did you know they come out with new Porsches all the time? People buy them knowing that a better one will come out later.
You wear one watch. You can have one that provides only prestige and time for $10k+ (that's probably the starting price for any kind of prestige). Or you can spend less for a beautiful watch that does a bunch of stuff. Apple's bet is that there will be enough people in the latter group for a viable product line. Many will still buy beautiful expensive classic watches, but not all people will.
People tend to upgrade their phones every two years. This watch is probably intended to be your "between year" apple purchase.
Apple is going to be mass producing technology that is far more impressive than what's in even the highest end Swiss watches that everyone is (all of a sudden) super hot over. I think those watches are beautiful. But you know what? We now have watches with better tech than what got us on the moon. Humans couldn't make these watches 3 years ago. It was impossible.
You can over- fetishise $30k watches (and again, they are super impressive) but they're impressive in the same way as a championship horse is. People now buy cars instead of horses. Did you know they come out with new Porsches all the time? People buy them knowing that a better one will come out later.
You wear one watch. You can have one that provides only prestige and time for $10k+ (that's probably the starting price for any kind of prestige). Or you can spend less for a beautiful watch that does a bunch of stuff. Apple's bet is that there will be enough people in the latter group for a viable product line. Many will still buy beautiful expensive classic watches, but not all people will.
People tend to upgrade their phones every two years. This watch is probably intended to be your "between year" apple purchase.
Its all very un-apple-like. Its a dramatic brand compromise. It also confirms Tim Cook's assertion that the product pipeline is full is bs. Yes they will sell a bizillion iphones--they have bounced back from the 5c debacle. But the watch is a vaporware dud and the coming ipad refresh appears to be uninspiring--leaving the brand chugging water well into 2015.
----------
The demo here trends a little younger than 150 years old.
I don't think Apple follows any particular rule.
For example, while the iPod pages follows your low-left / high-right layout, the iPhone page has the high end on the left. Ditto for the iPad page.
In any case, it makes no sense that the watch model with all of the cheapest materials (aluminum, glass, plastic) would be the middle price.
I would think that the crown must be exchangeable. Don't know how hard it is. You might buy a new band, and they mount it and replace the crown as well. Or it might be designed so that you can wear a different band with matching crown every day of the week.
----------
The sports watches all seem to have plastic armbands, which to me look cheaper. The armbands for the standard watches look definitely more expensive to me, and some look nicer and more expensive than others.
I don't think you'll find solid-gold watches under 8-10k. Gold is expensive.
1.2k is actually a pretty low price for a gold watch.
Heck, i own 5-10k watches made out of steel and the gold version (if available) is at least double in price (were talking 15-20k here).
I have a Royal Oak and i kinda dig the rose gold-black rubber strap look. I hope the apple watch will be available in this combination.
1.2k is actually a pretty low price for a gold watch.
Heck, i own 5-10k watches made out of steel and the gold version (if available) is at least double in price (were talking 15-20k here).
I have a Royal Oak and i kinda dig the rose gold-black rubber strap look. I hope the apple watch will be available in this combination.
I want the rose gold too. I dont care the price, i must get one!
Yeah. I'll probably buy it anyway. I'm just telling myself about how practical I'll be.
----------
Yah. I'm a white gold/platinum/stainless type.
But, that rose gold is choice.
Apple didn't downgrade the whole thing. Companies like Pebble did that. Smartwatches are something that people will either latch on to or they won't. No one is forcing you to want/buy one.
Not everyone buys high quality watches as hand me down air looms, I think companies like Casio, Fossil, and other mediocre watch companies did that a LONG time ago back in the 70's.
Only a small portion of the population gets involved with high end watches classified as air loom quality. People now are more leaning towards either wearing no watch or having some form of tracking our fitness activities, etc. as people become more interested in fitness and health. I can see it as an aid for people that want to be more health/fitness conscious. Pro Athletes would probably very much want to use these to track their activities. So, it's a functional piece of jewelry.
So, it sounds like your own personal biases are at work here. from what I've seen, this watch is a lot higher quality than the other mfg are selling. I don't see a lot of polished stainless steel and gold plated smart watches, most of the others look very similar to your average cheap Casio watch. But I'm sure people will buy these and then trade them in every year or two for a new one. Again, no one is forcing us to buy them, it's just an add on accessory for those that have a desire for this type of product. Consider it a luxury accessory.
There are some small number of people still using an abacus as they got replaced by slide rule and then calculators. Time marches on and technology gets replaced with newer more functional technology.
Last edited:
