Titanium case + sapphire, please
AFAIK, titanium is lighter than stainless steel, but not stronger. It's actually easier to scratch a titanium watch.
Yes. Anyone I see with the Sport version, I just think how little they make yet still desperate to look cool.
This has to be a joke? An extra $200 is chump change. Most Sport owners went with that model because they didn't want to spend a lot on a first generation product.
Then the same could be said of SS owners. Whenever I see someone with a SS, I think how little they must make. They are peasants if they cannot afford the Edition.
Not on a Gen 1 device. Let's all remember this is a mark 1 apple product. If you ware going to early adopt buy the cheap one as it will be eclipsed badly by the next model.
iphone
ipad
etc.
I think if you get one get the sport the cheap one in 12 months there will be a longer term apple watch to buy that has more features last longer and will be so much better
There is a lot of stress about the price difference on these forums, and the fact the product might be refreshed every year. I personally don't think the situation is as drammatic as people are making it. When the next generation comes out, you only need to buy the body you want and the cheapest band available -- Apple would be insane if they changed the band clips each generation.
So the price difference is $200 at the current tiers... $350 for sport and $550 for SS. I get that everyone has a different budget, but if $350 is within your yearly discretional spending, what's another $200? One night when you stay home and cook for the wife instead of going to a nice restaurant?
Seems to me, if you can afford the watch at all, the only deciding factors should be preference, as the price is really not significantly different in the way so many people are implying (edition obviously excluded), nor is the yearly refresh.
I really don't understand drop tests for a watch. A phone, sure, but this thing is strapped to your wrist 99% of the time you are using it.
...
I'm not trying to criticise your post, but to base a purchase decision on a drop test for a watch is a little daft.
Yes and it's that 1% that you need the drop test for.
If you've been reading these forums, many have been discussing how putting on the Sport watch is awkward, and takes some getting used to. One guy said he intended to only put on or take off the watch over his bed, just in case he drops it while putting it on. The modern buckle has had the same criticisms. And this is not unusual. The reason I went with a link bracelet over a traditional buckle is because I have dropped a watch this way myself in the past fumbling with the buckle. With a link, you slip your hand through the band and fasten it. But still, I have dropped my watch accidentally taking it off.
And then there's actual accidents. Taking a watch off to give your kid a bath and accidentally knocking it off the sink onto the hard tile floor when reaching for a towel, etc. I've accidentally knocked my watch into the toilet before, so thank goodness for the minimal IPX7 water rating.
So there's nothing daft about it. All it takes is one accidental drop and the glass of your Sport watch will be shattered. The sapphire should survive drop after drop. I know mine have, but none of the cheap glass or mineral crystals I've had have.
I really don't understand drop tests for a watch. A phone, sure, but this thing is strapped to your wrist 99% of the time you are using it.
It's not drops. It's slamming your wrist against stuff. If you've worn a watch for more than a month or two, you're well aware that you occassionaly will bang the whole thing (usually crystal first) into a hard door or wall. Been wearing watches for 40 years, and I still (2 or 3 times/year) really bang the nuts out of a watch, most often by hitting a door with a hinge to my left. I did shatter a crystal on a watch like this about 20 years ago.
I really don't understand drop tests for a watch. A phone, sure, but this thing is strapped to your wrist 99% of the time you are using it.
I also find things like CNet's torture test video really unhelpful. If you're going to destroy a watch, don't take a knife to it or crush it under a skillet. How often is that going to happen in real life?! I'd much rather see things like it being scraped against a wall, bashed into countertops etc. Something that's actually useful.
I'm not trying to criticize your post, but to base a purchase decision on a drop test for a watch is a little daft.
+1 - never dropped a watch. Test results are of no interest to me.
Here's a really good article on titanium as a watch-case material: http://www.ablogtowatch.com/watch-case-materials-explained-titanium/
Anyway, the physics says Sapphire is more brittle than glass. If drops are really an issue, everyone should be buying the Sport.
It seems that I found my answer there. As the article points out, "The hardness of titanium is lower than some steels, so it scratches easier than most steel.", however, "Coatings can improve the hardness of titanium". So, it's all about the coating.
AFAIK, titanium is lighter than stainless steel, but not stronger. It's actually easier to scratch a titanium watch.
funny went to my Company's quarterly presentation today where our CEO gave a talk towards the end. In the end he showed he had a new[/COLOR]
100%. I originally had an SS ordered but canned it because I didn't want to wait and I wasn't sure of my use case for a watch so I didn't think $800 was worth it. Ended up getting a sport. If I like it and use it it's a no brainer to get a SS gen 2.
I'll assume the original poster making comments about someone's income with relation to a watch is probably just a moron.
to be honest, no its not worth the $250. The novelty of the Apple Watch will pass quickly. it took 2days for me, its a fitness watch with notifications. we pay the premium because of the Apple name. is it really worth it in the end, no cause the Apps available and that will be built are pretty pointless. the watch is not doing anything that can't be done with your phone that will probably be in your pocket or close by.
if you're not into fitness or already have a watch... then you just spent and extra $250 for redundant notifications
On the other hand, you could argue that the functionality of the Apple watch is so much more then a Swiss watch which would be anything from the same to quadruple the price, still in stainless steel.
Anyone who buys decent watches knows that the apple watch doesn't cost more then a service for the average mechanical watch.
In terms of the billionaire company CEO, so what. I see middle management with £10k watches and senior managers with casios. Each to his own
Notifications of texts and emails when the phone isn't on you (but on the same wifi network) is a killer feature. If you are having dinner, having a conversation, in a meeting , etc.
There are so many features, even with the current app list, that could be very useful to someone.
Apple is no doubt combining electronics and jewellery, but that's what it does best ...
don't get me wrong, i love the apple watch but it really is just a fitness tracker and a watch... everything else is just connivence. your phone has to be within range for calls, messages, emails, etc... which is like 100m (330ft). For myself a person who really loves gadget the WOW factor wore off in 2day. Its just time/fitness for me. my phone is on me 95% of the time, not going to start leaving it around to get stolen.
I think it hit me when I went to a vending machine at work and pause for a second to think what method to pay with (Watch, Phone, Card or Cash) I opted for my Watch to try it out and it was faster by maybe 3-4secs over pulling out my phone.
the people paying 1000-1200$ to get the Apple Watch now on ebay are going to be in for a real shocker.