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.
Jony Ive On iWatch: Switzerland is in Trouble
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's actually 800,000 a year, which is pretty impressive considering the price range of their watches.
I agree 100%. As a WIS myself focussing my collection on the mid-range boutique brands (Steinhart in particular), then the so-called fashion brands are most at risk. This is probably a good thing as they sell in the $3-400 price range and are typically just shiney, shiney with cheapo quartz movements.
The worldwide watch industry I recall reading recently is worth circa $7,000,000,000 so plenty for Apple to take a bite out of.
Maybe it's true that he said this. Maybe this will be as amazing as the original iPhone reveal and everyone will immediately want to wear watches again.
Or, maybe it's BS and the Apple wearable will be another Apple TV level product that has some appeal but is secondary at best. We'll find out soon enough (or not?).
Or, maybe it's BS and the Apple wearable will be another Apple TV level product that has some appeal but is secondary at best. We'll find out soon enough (or not?).
Jony, maybe you should just stick to the product introduction videos with that sexy voice of yours and just skip the interviews so you don't embarrass yourself?
The Roger Moore-era Bonds wore Seikos.
The Pierce Brosnan-era Bonds drove BMWs.
Wasn't Q using prominently-branded Lenovos in the last film?
I wouldn't be surprised if Bond has worn something other than Savile Row suits.
If a brand like Apple wanted to pay the Broccolis for product placement in the films, I don't think they'd object.
Bond films are no different than any others in that respect.
Got a chuckle out of those who think the Rolex club is "exclusive."
For a luxury brand, they're practically mass-produced in terms of volume. Fine watches, but they're an almost too obvious part of the uniform.
Maybe I'm not getting the intention of your post right, but are you stating that iPhone sales have anything to do with the sales of Leica cameras???
If so, I think you are mistaking Leica with any brand that produces point and shoot cameras...Leica on the other hand plays in a VERY different league...no, scratch that, it's not even the same sport...
Most under 25s don't wear watches these days, they're fairly redundant in what they do. The notion that the elitists and vanity brigade are going to pawn their multi-thousand $ Rolex's for Apple's $400 aluminium and plastic is just ludicrous.
As many have mentioned above, they're not going to clash because they're not chasing the same market. Every kid in every classroom in the West is going to be wearing one of these things.
As many have mentioned above, they're not going to clash because they're not chasing the same market. Every kid in every classroom in the West is going to be wearing one of these things.
Didn't know there was a watch market to begin with
For real I can see this though I mean now that we have cellphones how many people really have home phones...
Sorry, but only n e r d s would use these smartwatches as a everyday gadget. And thats not ment as an insult. But true. Most people wear watches as jewelry ... It looks good and often it's a statement. I bet people in my clinics, will keep wearing watches and not some gadget.
I would buy (probaly get for free) the iWatch. But use it, more than for fun? I don't think so.
Watches are here to stay.
While I have a lot of respect for this guy, this is total ********.
With the greatest of respect, an iWatch is a piece of junk gadgetry. As is my iPhone at the end of the day, with a 2-3 year expiry date. It's made to throw away and there is nothing "beautiful" about how it's made.
A Swiss watch, and now we're talking of the kind with mechanical movements is a work of art and an elegant piece of jewellery. Hand assembled by watch masters and each piece of made and mostly assembled by hand by a small team of craftsmen.
You simply cannot compare the two and I will not be replacing my stunning limited edition Jack Heuer 81 watch. Nor will it ever replace my lowly TH 2000 series quartz watch.
I have enough information in my life without some ridiculous blinking display on my wrist. When I put my phone in my pocket, it's there for a reason.
Withings are the only one who have managed a concept that I can get my head around. Analogue and quite beautiful.
While I may very well be wrong, I think the idea of an iWatch will be a short term fad, fed by "Hipsters" and gadget geeks.
----------
You nailed it.
People who don't understand real watches simply don't get this.
The choice of watch on a persons wrist is often judged by those around them.
Spoil yourself with this quickly google'd article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabethdoerr/2014/01/08/top-20-watches-of-2013/
With the greatest of respect, an iWatch is a piece of junk gadgetry. As is my iPhone at the end of the day, with a 2-3 year expiry date. It's made to throw away and there is nothing "beautiful" about how it's made.
A Swiss watch, and now we're talking of the kind with mechanical movements is a work of art and an elegant piece of jewellery. Hand assembled by watch masters and each piece of made and mostly assembled by hand by a small team of craftsmen.
You simply cannot compare the two and I will not be replacing my stunning limited edition Jack Heuer 81 watch. Nor will it ever replace my lowly TH 2000 series quartz watch.
I have enough information in my life without some ridiculous blinking display on my wrist. When I put my phone in my pocket, it's there for a reason.
Withings are the only one who have managed a concept that I can get my head around. Analogue and quite beautiful.
While I may very well be wrong, I think the idea of an iWatch will be a short term fad, fed by "Hipsters" and gadget geeks.
----------
You nailed it.
People who don't understand real watches simply don't get this.
The choice of watch on a persons wrist is often judged by those around them.
Spoil yourself with this quickly google'd article:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/elizabethdoerr/2014/01/08/top-20-watches-of-2013/
Of course it's a joke he's British and that means almost everything that comes out his mouth is said with sarcasm or irony. I should know I'm
British and it's not something we can control!
British and it's not something we can control!
Like I said "The notion that the elitists and vanity brigade are going to pawn their multi-thousand $ Rolex's for Apple's $400 aluminium and plastic is just ludicrous."
Though I think you're overstating the importance of watch manufacturing. Why should the process be any less 'beautiful' simply because its not hand made.
Do people really believe Ive was serious and he really thinks the iwatch is going to upset the designer watch industry? Just curious if people actually think that he wasnt speaking tongue in cheek. Trying to understand the mentality of some who post here...
I'm working my way through some of the comments.
I don't think you are right. Why would the general public ever want to buy $2k watch (which is cheap in the watch market), for an item that will be obsolete in just a couple of years?
Yes, you have the likes of Vertu and TH creating vulgar phones, covered in jewellery but ultimately their market is miniscule and I don't think Apple want that slice of the share. They need something that will sell to the masses, so it'll be made of cheap aluminium, plastic and the most expensive component may be a sapphire glass display.
Furthermore, if we suppose $400 turns out to be the actual price point of this thing, then which one is really the more expensive watch? A disposable $400 watch with maybe a three-year lifetime, or a $4000 Rolex that lasts your lifetime? Okay, so maybe a steel Rolex doesn't cost just $4000 anymore, I haven't kept up with it. What is it now, $8000? Well, it's going to last the lifetime of your grandchild as well.
We will see how good Apple is at obsoleting these things quickly. That and the selling price will determine what it costs per month or however we want to count.
Like many people, I also stopped using a watch after getting my first mobile phone, an Ericsson GH688, in the nineties. The mobile phones then even turned itself on for the alarm sound, a feature I miss in smartphones.
Personally I'll eventually get a smartwatch for sport usage since it is much more convenient than carrying a phone. However, current models are very unimpressive, only the Sony Smartwatch 3 (presented yesterday) look mature enough.
However, I think we generally underestimate the range of possible uses when having access to dynamic information and a control panel, more quickly accessible than reaching in the pocket for the smartphone.
provided the watch has NFC and GPS, the watch can be used for (on the top of my head):
verification in electronic door locks
Payments
TV/camera/mediaplayer-remote
sound recording
Handsfree phone use
As others have pointed out, the real threat of other watchmakers is of course not that the Iwatch (or wathever smartwatch brand) will beat the design of other watchmakers. The threat is that this device will be used to such an extent that there will be few occasion the average user will want to miss out on these features by putting on a traditional watch.
Personally I'll eventually get a smartwatch for sport usage since it is much more convenient than carrying a phone. However, current models are very unimpressive, only the Sony Smartwatch 3 (presented yesterday) look mature enough.
However, I think we generally underestimate the range of possible uses when having access to dynamic information and a control panel, more quickly accessible than reaching in the pocket for the smartphone.
provided the watch has NFC and GPS, the watch can be used for (on the top of my head):
verification in electronic door locks
Payments
TV/camera/mediaplayer-remote
sound recording
Handsfree phone use
As others have pointed out, the real threat of other watchmakers is of course not that the Iwatch (or wathever smartwatch brand) will beat the design of other watchmakers. The threat is that this device will be used to such an extent that there will be few occasion the average user will want to miss out on these features by putting on a traditional watch.
It is most worrying that the majority of people fail to see that he made a joke through exaggeration. Is this joke, really, too intellectual for most people to get ?
FWIW, though, I also think this gadget will be hardly useful at all. Unless apple surprises everyone with something.
FWIW, though, I also think this gadget will be hardly useful at all. Unless apple surprises everyone with something.
Not quite sure if I'm feeling this comment from Ive - doubt the iWatch will rival either the high-end or the low-end of the Swiss watch market. From what I can tell - and what I'm personally hoping for - the iWatch's main focus is on health metrics. Obviously there'll be some interplay there with Apple's other offerings, too. It'll also retail for under 500$, if the rumours are to be believed.
In the face of all of this, there's little to no overlap there on the Venn diagram for people who'd buy an iWatch and people who buy high-end watches. There seem to be completely different motivations at work when making the purchasing decision. I'm not going to decide to eff it and buy a Breitling when I'd actually been looking for a device that tracks my steps and heart rate, and I presume that people's motivation for sticking with buying a Breitling vs. an iWatch would be exactly as obvious.
In fact, they don't even rival the low-end of Swiss production such as Swatch, because Swatch has a significantly lower price point. Assuming the iWatch retails for 400$, you could get up to 5 Swatch watches for that money.
In the face of all of this, there's little to no overlap there on the Venn diagram for people who'd buy an iWatch and people who buy high-end watches. There seem to be completely different motivations at work when making the purchasing decision. I'm not going to decide to eff it and buy a Breitling when I'd actually been looking for a device that tracks my steps and heart rate, and I presume that people's motivation for sticking with buying a Breitling vs. an iWatch would be exactly as obvious.
In fact, they don't even rival the low-end of Swiss production such as Swatch, because Swatch has a significantly lower price point. Assuming the iWatch retails for 400$, you could get up to 5 Swatch watches for that money.