Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Is sapphire worth the $250 premium?

I have now read about 20 users saying they got a tiny or big scratch on their Sport. How do you even do it? it sounds like you bump in to a feather and voilá you have a scratch.
 
For me it's strictly a durability question. This is a watch, it WILL bump into things no matter how safe you think you are. There are so many minute activities you don't notice that when you do them, they can introduce a scratch. That's why I sent sapphire.
 
j0han said:
I have now read about 20 users saying they got a tiny or big scratch on their Sport. How do you even do it? it sounds like you bump in to a feather and voilá you have a scratch.
Click to expand...

I don't know. I got mine early Friday morning and I haven't gotten any scratches or dents. I accidentally hit it against a cabinet yesterday but nothing happened to it.
 
not putting scratch resistant sapphire glass on the sport model is poor and someone at apple needs a slap back to reality.

I'd be happy to do it :)
 
I'm from Sweden, so we have to wait until 'late june' as Tim adressed. I'm going to take Sport w/ WSB just because i cant justify the SS price for first gen. I will surely take SS next year when gen 2 arrives.
 
IMO, no... not for a 1st gen.

i personally don't like shiny... i prefer brushed or matte finishes.... so i was turned off the SS for being shiny....

i may end up making a different choice for AW2 depending on how the aluminum and ionX perform..... but for now, the $250 was not worth having to weary shiny just to get the sapphire....
 
Is sapphire worth $200? Here's a replacement sapphire crystal on eBay. Under $10. I imagine you'd get a bulk discount if you're buying millions like Apple.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Replacement...ss-Sapphire-Crystals-Round-Flat-/311141142362

So no, it doesn't seem worth it to me. The whole sapphire/ceramic thing sounds like gross over engineering of an essentially disposable product. Maybe if it was a $30 premium (or just included as standard)?
 
mavis said:
Right, certainly no one would choose the Sport for any other reason than to 'look cool!' /s

I can think of plenty of reasons to choose the Sport over the SS. Maybe you're really active and want something lighter. Maybe you like the way the aluminum finish matches your iPhone 6/6+. Maybe you spend a lot of time outdoors and want the anti-reflective qualities of the Ion-X glass. Maybe you're anticipating Apple Watch 2 being released soon, and don't see the point of spending so much money on a watch that will essentially be obsolete in 12 months.
Click to expand...

This is true. I think the sport is great for the fitness people, and for those who are very active and would rather not have a flashier SS while on the run/in the gym. A SS watch in the gym would seem kind of tacky if you ask me.

With that said, i'm a bodybuilder and went with the SS. Because I don't plan to use my watch in the gym, but instead, use it for everyday activities. I don't run, or do extensive cardio either. Its all who are you and what you want the watch for.
 
Is the $250 difference in Canadian dollars? (it's $200 difference in the US). There's also a difference in the price of AppleCare.

I learned interesting facts about stainless steel on the thread ➔ Advice from a longtime watch owner
Also iMore.com has a great article ➔ Apple Watch and durability: How tough are Apple's finishes?

Personally, I preferred the dark, matte finish of the space gray sports watch — however any scratches its case gets are probably more noticeable. Stainless steel is probably the better choice if you're worried about scratches. Sapphire is harder to scratch, but more likely to shatter — I haven't scratched the glass on the iPhone, so I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it won't be too bad on the sports watch.
 
Last edited:
I think it's worth it. After seeing the videos for sure.

Also just the feel of the SS vs the Aluminum. I have had a lot of people ask me this question and I have compared it to wearing a (non smart) sport watch vs a nice watch. The aluminum looked and felt great on me but it felt like a sport watch. Something maybe I would wear everyday and for fitness but I would take off for nice occasions. I don't feel that with the SS even with the sport band.
 
---Drop Test---

I'm going to choose the Stainless Steel for this reason alone.


Sports Watch
 
I think it is. Wearing it for less than a day, I could definitely see myself accidentally hitting the face of the watch on surfaces as I walk/move around. Knowing that it will hold up to that, is worth it.
 
How many Sport users are going to apply a screen protector? Seems silly normally for a watch but this is an apple product
 
Joe1602 said:
Not worth it to me. Not even close. I'm a techie, so this watch is replacing my $25 timex expedition from target. I don't care what it looks like - it is still vastly more functional than a gold, diamond-encrusted Rolex.

I could never imagine paying $150+ for a watch band. That's just ridiculous to me.
Click to expand...

Bigboiiiii said:
what do you guys think, is the sapphire display alone worth the premium over the sport model? (I don't really care about the whole stainless steel vs aluminum thing).
Click to expand...

As someone who has worn watches with sapphire crystals vs. glass crystals, I appreciate how scratch-proof a sapphire crystal is. If you plan to replace the watch every year or two, it probably doesn't matter as much, but if you plan to keep it for longer the sapphire may be the better choice. You can have it for 10 years and likely the crystal will look like new, no matter how scratched up the body of the watch is.
 
Last edited:
KPOM said:
As someone who has worn watches with sapphire crystals vs. glass crystals, I appreciate how scratch-proof a sapphire crystal is. If you plan to replace the watch every year or two, it probably doesn't matter as much, but if you plan to keep it for longer the sapphire may be the better choice. You can have it for 10 years and likely the crystal will look like new, no matter how scratched up the body of the watch is.

The fact that it took Apple to use sapphire is quite telling. They "get it" as far as watch design is concerned.
Click to expand...

This makes sense to me. I have had a sapphire watch for literally 20 years with not a single scratch on it. I have had watches with mineral glass become scratched within weeks, months (and certainly years), though occasionally they have remained unscathed.

I'm assuming there will be an Apple Watch 2 in a year and so SS just wasn't worth it to me (though I have some small regret).
 
iWot said:
I'm assuming there will be an Apple Watch 2 in a year and so SS just wasn't worth it to me (though I have some small regret).
Click to expand...

I hear you. In the end, for me it comes down to the fact that the stainless steel "looks" more like a regular watch, particularly when paired with any of the leather or metal bands. People will knock Apple for going with a rectangular design while Android Wear OEMs (and apparently Samsung, if the rumors are to be believed) are going with round displays. But the finish of the stainless steel makes it look like a nice tank-style watch, particularly when paired with a black band.
 
KPOM said:
But the finish of the stainless steel makes it look like a nice tank-style watch, particularly when paired with a black band.
Click to expand...

I agree - this is the source of my current regret. We will see how long I can hold out with my Sport SG being delivered today. I have an SS WSB on order for June delivery with the plan to add a 3rd party leather band.
 
I had a look in the shop

1. Watch sport – aluminium case and strengthened glass – from £339
  • Incredibly light
  • Shiny silver case with a choice of coloured plastic straps OR one model which is a black anodised case and a black strap (the most boring but also the most unnoticeable)
  • The plastic straps are extremely tactile to hold, in fact apple has thought through the quality and feel of this device very well
  • Straps are available to buy. The plastic coloured ones just £39, so fine to buy a few perhaps
  • The black strap will go with the silver case, but the black case will not go with any other coloured strap except black
  • There are some lovely steel straps to buy, but none of them go with the Watch sport as they are stainless steel (duller). So don’t think you can cheap out on a the Watch Sport and then buy a stainless steel strap to give the impression you could afford the Watch

2. Watch – stainless steel case and sapphire crystal glass – from £519
  • 30% heavier then the Watch sport, but still very light IMHO, especially after a swiss watch
  • Looks noticeably nicer and more like jewellery when held next to the watch sport. A duller more sophisticated sparkle. Not that the Watch sport is not nice, just the Watch is nicer ….
  • Plastic strap version at £519 but stainless steel straps and coloured straps all look good with the stainless steel
3. Watch Edition – starts at £8,000 upwards, forget it ….

I am afraid the stainless steel looks and feels so much nicer and the sapphire crystal screen is a nice feeling to have

...... its now just a question of when it will be delivered to me ;)
 
j0han said:
I have now read about 20 users saying they got a tiny or big scratch on their Sport. How do you even do it? it sounds like you bump in to a feather and voilá you have a scratch.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not quite that easy to scratch but it seems it's easier than many of us thought it would be. Many of us have used our iPhones and iPads for years with no screen protectors and have had nary a scratch, but wearing something on your wrist is a whole other animal. A watch is far more likely to be banged against hard surfaces. Having a sapphire crystal is a must for me.
 
Tortri said:
---Drop Test---

I'm going to choose the Stainless Steel for this reason alone.


Sports Watch
YouTube: video

Stainless Steel
YouTube: video
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Those were not controlled tests. Sapphire is much more brittle than glass. Sapphire is actually more likely to break in a drop test.

Time did a good article of the differences back in 2014: http://time.com/3377972/why-apple-didnt-use-sapphire-iphone-screens/

Time said:
Durability

This is by far the most promoted benefit of sapphire, and perhaps the most misunderstood. This is the area I got tripped up by assuming too much from Apple’s investment in GT Advanced. Sapphire is extremely hard, which is to say highly scratch resistant. That is why it is found on products such as luxury watches. It is largely untested on phone screens, though. In fact, sapphire is a crystal that is very hard, but inflexible and extremely brittle. Sapphire’s inherent structure makes it susceptible to flaws that can occur along the crystal plane. I was told by multiple sources that various field tests subjected sapphire to scratch and break tests against strengthened glass. It performs better on scratch resistance, but when you drop it, it is more likely than glass to break. Glass actually flexes and can absorb the shock of a drop more successfully than sapphire. Sapphire is prevalent on luxury watches and other products that don’t experience the same drop risk as smartphones.
Click to expand...

Sapphire will resist light surface scratches better (I have a pristine sapphire watch I've worn daily for almost 3 decades), but that's all. It's of questionable value on a watch with perhaps a 4 year lifespan - certainly at the $200 premium Apple is asking.
 
LiemTa said:
Yes. Anyone I see with the Sport version, I just think how little they make yet still desperate to look cool.
Click to expand...

Reading through your posts I can see you like to talk about how much money people earn. Which seems kinda strange. Are you a poor person stuck inside an angry person?
 
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