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

Jony Ive On iWatch: Switzerland is in Trouble

Why not just say "****ed"? How many three year olds do you think read Macrumors, and we all know that's what you're saying anyway.

and further why censor my comment? it's the internet nobody gives a **** about swearing...
 
iwayne said:
If Johnny Ive thinks that people buy high end watches aka
"Switzerland" are going to stop buying Rolexes, Breitlings or even Tag-Heuer for a iWatch then he's in trouble. People don't buy those watches for function. I think Apple may be clueless on this one. How many women wear smart-watches?
Click to expand...

I don't think Ive said this at all. It's either pure marketing hype or, what I personally suspect, completely made up by someone.
 
philipk said:
Traditional watch makers are already hurting. Have you seen the prices of used Rolexes or Omega's?

I own one of each and while I don't regret buying them some 16 and 20 years ago, I wouldn't buy them today. (I am 57).
Click to expand...

I own two Breathings and a Rolex. All have gone up in value considerably since their purchase. Demand outstrips supply by quite some margin. How does that mean traditional watch makers are hurting?

The introduction of an iWatch or development of the smartwatch sector will only hurt the lower to lower-mid segments. Everything upwards of 2000 euros will be absolutely fine as that's the territory where watches are not bought for their electronical functionality but for their emotional, mechanical and material value. No electronic product that will be subject to obsolescence will be able to go around that.
 
SHNXX said:
lol.

This is good marketing.


But he and everyone knows that Rolex, Patek, AP, Richard Mille, etc will be fine.
Click to expand...

If in time the idea of the smart watch actually does take off (which, personally, I don't think they ever will), I can see these brands bringing out their own Android Wear watches.
 
proline said:
There was an interview with one of the BlackBerry phone vendors CEO back when the first smart phones came out in the 00's. The interviewer asked about the threatening competition from smart phones, and the CEO gave back the answer "We're not in the phone business. We're in the pager-phone business."

The BlackBerry makers have nothing to worry about.
Click to expand...

This comparison does not make any sense if you think about it a bit longer than 0.5 seconds.
 
The only way I see Swiss watches being in trouble is if this iWatch is "Automatic" so that it can recharge automatically when in use.
Then of course the "hardware" design and software.

We will see.
 
moderately said:
Of course not. But instead of buying another mechanical watch, how about some trifle for the gym, or something that makes life easier at work. I would be surprized if a lot of people with high end watch boxes don't pick up a comparatively cheap iWatch. "It will never replace my Rolex of course, but I find it amusing."
Click to expand...

You are absolutely right and you are describing me quite accurately. I would buy an Apple iWatch if it comes out, but it will not replace any of my other luxury watches. It's an addition and it will not delay the purpose of a new luxury watch by any margin.

Example: I'm saving up for a Rolex from my birth-year. If and when an iWatch comes out, the purchase of the Rolex will not be delayed at all by the purchase of an iWatch. I would wear the iWatch for sports and leisure depending on its functionality.
 
It's got to be liquidmetal and sapphire if he's speaking about it like this. Only way it could compete in the high end watch market is if it had materials like this. It would justify Eddy Cue's "best in 25 years" hype as well. Other than that, it'd be interesting to see the feature set involved. I'm guessing a lot of location based proximity automation and right integration. We'll see though. It'd be funny though, as soon as Samsung finally gets a metal band Apple leapfrogs with these new materials.
 
Karma*Police said:
If smart watches become indispensable (a real possibility), then I can't imagine even the super rich spending $10,000 on a "dumb" watch. Case in point, those Verdu phones... are they even around anymore? The rich can always find other ways to stand out from the crowd, like buying an Aston Martin DB9 like my neighbor, or buying $400 Chuck Taylor's from LV.
Click to expand...

Vertu phones are amazingly still very successful and their stores are expanding. I'm surprised about this too, because they are heavy and hideous. But the example is not very well chosen. Vert phones are essentially the same as a regular android phone with just some shiny bis on the top.

A luxury watch is not necessarily dumb. There are very sophisticated models that are mechanically among the most sophisticated miniaturised contraptions on the planet.

What people are assuming is that the iWatch will make luxury watches obsolete in the same way that iOS dit Blackberry. But that is incorrect. Although an iWatch would sit on the same wrist as a Rolex or a Patek or Panerai, it is very unlikely that customers of these brands will abandon or delay their luxury purchases for digital functionality. If people think that is the case than they don't own any luxury watch and/or do not understand the luxury watch segment.

Furthermore, watch manufacturers don't have the technological know-how nor the capital to keep pace with the likes of Apple, Microsoft and Samsung. So yes, it's a very real possibility that they will soon make the endangered species list and eventually become extinct.
Click to expand...

Indeed they don't have the digital electronics know-how, but they don't need to have that. Again, luxury watch customers do not look for functionality but mechanical, emotional and material value. Two of these are hard for a digital product to provide.

An example of emotional value: The slogan of Patek Philippe: "You don't own a Patek Phillipe, you merely look after it for the next generation". Do you see an iWatch that you bought today staying relevant and working for more than 100 years?
 
The article makes no sense. The NY Times gets someone in the actual wearables division of Apple to go on/off the record and that person gives them an Ive quote? "I'm a designer working on this thing but let me give you a quote from someone else"...
 
iwayne said:
If Johnny Ive thinks that people buy high end watches aka
"Switzerland" are going to stop buying Rolexes, Breitlings or even Tag-Heuer for a iWatch then he's in trouble. People don't buy those watches for function. I think Apple may be clueless on this one. How many women wear smart-watches?
Click to expand...

He's joking: it's just a British sense of humour. But Apple (and Samsung) have already screwed the Finnish economy, so it's not *completely* far-fetched (Finland used to be mobile phones and paper…).
 
Put your money where your mouth is, Ive. If it's anything like iOS7 then YOU'RE the one that's in trouble. That is, IF you said this and it's not something made up.
 
iWatch

"While part leaks for the device have been nonexistent and solid information about the device's capabilities have been hard to come by"

It's because there isn't one...

Apple notoriously can't release more than one/two major products at a time. iOS8, iPhone 6 and Yosemite updates. Expect no more
 
Keirasplace said:
And get what? Its Intel dragging their feet, not Apple. Maybe you should take it with them.
Click to expand...

Apple could easily upgrade the Mac Mini with more powerful chips...Intel may be slow but the GPUs in the "new" MacBook Pro is garbage as are the integrated GPUs in the Mac Mini. CPU-wise, they are solid still, but it's the GPUs that suck.
 
jbachandouris said:
That's just crazy talk. I personally wouldn't consider over $500 for either an iWatch or a 'fancy' watch. Ideally, I'd like to have both.
Click to expand...

Sure you wont. Just curios if you said so about the 850$ phone you own or the 600$ tablet you have, or the 2500$ you spent on macs.

I think 379$ for example is a great price for the iWatch considering that its just 100$ more than what other brands are charging you for their premium smart watches.

And for the rest of the people who commented on the topic, just wanted to mention that 90% of the people I know where watches and not because they show you the time, but because they are beautiful piece of jewery, and thats what the Swiss brands are selling you - timepieces that have great value if you are able to apreciate their beauty. A Rolex is not just a watch, the same way the iPhone is not just a phone - its much more than that. Im sure the iWatch would be much more than a watch that show you the time and the notification that arrive on your phone. And im sure because Apple has showed us that they can merge great technology and art in a way that nobody can. Thats my expectation.

p.s. Samsung has delivered 6 smart watches in one year. Apple has been working on the iWatch for a 4 years by now and they have spent enormous amount of money in development and research, so im confident that something rly nice is coming next week.
 
cdmoore74 said:
Rolex is operating out of Switzerland so we are positively screwed price wise. Would have felt better if he said Casio and Rolex are screwed.
And what's stopping Rolex (and others) from making a Android Wear smartwatch? Apple best "watch" its step!
Click to expand...

I was also thinking that maybe we eventually will see smart watches not made by Apple but still fairly deeply integrated with iPhones (i.e. more than just notifications over Bluetooth), if Apple allows and opens iOS sufficiently of course. Healthbook for instance seem to integrate with many devices, so what's stopping any other manufacturer from making a watch for iPhone taking advantage of that?

I guess it will come down to a strategic decision by Apple how deep integration to allow. But if the smart watch market really takes off, it would be a bit limiting if iPhone owners would only be able to use Apple watches. I mean, not that I would want a Samsung one, but maybe one made by a traditional watch company could be interesting, like a Smart Rolex or even Smart Swatch.
 
As people have realised: hardly anyone wears a watch anymore. Most people just use their phone. If you can give most of this crowd a smart watch, would you have dominant market share?
 
CairnsRock said:
People who own $10,000 watches will also own an iWatch. Just wear them at different occasions, lots of people have more than one watch. I have a nice watch which I enjoy wearing. I can also see owning an iWatch if it provides function that's useful to me at different times of the day or on different days of the week.
It doesn't have to be all or nothing on one device.
Click to expand...

Of course no one is expecting people who own luxury watches to throw them in the trash or never wear them, but having a smart watch that one wears daily could be the difference between that person having one or two luxury watches for special occasions, versus having 4 or 5 of them to switch out daily.
 
gavroche said:
Am I alone in being bothered by the iWatch being referred to as an accessory? This to me implies very limited functionality, and subservience to whatever device for which it is an accessory.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, but I might agree. Think Disney magic band, but then on steroids. Pay with the wristband in stead of phone. Much easier as you don't have to pull it out of your pocket. Plus health monitor. Plus watch. I can see a market. And with all the fashion individuals they have hired, this can be marketed right.
But what concerns me is the short-lived life cycle. It all feels too close to Swatch. Great in the 80's. Exchangeable bands in many colors, targeted on a younger generation. And while they still exist, they have become a shadow of their old days. This feels the same. Great product with a clear audience. But what is the real roadmap? A watch+ is a watch+ is a watch+. And + is not indefinitely expandable.
 
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