Let's put the apple watch price in perspective...
- Thread starter Appl3FTW
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Armen
macrumors 604
The Fitbit Surge is $250.00, doesn't look as good, doesn't do as much. the Apple watch is priced right but then again you're notorious for starting debate threads and then vanishing off the forums for weeks at a time and then popping up again.
hayden1250
macrumors regular
Purchased a SS model. Have no regrets what so ever.
PS: That Rolex is hideous.
PS: That Rolex is hideous.
iPhysicist
macrumors 65816
In 'the old days' it was expensive to miniaturize things. Maybe the people just don't know that anymore.
The smaller it is the more expensive it gets (that's the point why analogue watches can get pricey).
The smaller it is the more expensive it gets (that's the point why analogue watches can get pricey).
NovemberWhiskey
macrumors 68040
Before the Apple Watch, I remember a lot of people on various forums mentioning the brand, Hamilton, as their go-to everyday watch for a "reasonable" price. That price was ~$700-$1000.
The link below shows some of their models, and they are all well over the price of the aluminum and base SS models.
So put into perspective, the Apple Watch seems like a bargain imo.
https://www.google.com/search?q=ham...&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8#q=hamilton+watch&tbm=shop
But yes, compared to what else you can get in the Apple lineup, the price can get up there.
The link below shows some of their models, and they are all well over the price of the aluminum and base SS models.
So put into perspective, the Apple Watch seems like a bargain imo.
https://www.google.com/search?q=ham...&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8#q=hamilton+watch&tbm=shop
But yes, compared to what else you can get in the Apple lineup, the price can get up there.
Newtons Apple
Suspended
Flunkyturtle
macrumors 6502
You clearly earn too much money lol
Not a fan of the rolex though.
I have a few tag's and tissots that have been relegated to the watch box though
dotnet
macrumors 68000
And that trademark Patek porthole design is getting really long in the tooth, too.
douglasf13
macrumors 68000
Not as long as you may think. My Rolex watches require a $700-$1000'ish service every 5-10 years in order to keep running smoothly. It's basically like buying a classic car and saying it will last forever, without considering maintenance.
BlueMoon63
macrumors 68020
all of my traditional watches from Seiko died around 8-10 years. These were the $350-$500 models with kinetic. If all you want is a watch, I wouldn't get the Apple Watch or any smartwatch. Fortunately for me, I've always worn a watch and the Apple Watch looks good and I would upgrade but probably every other version unless they blow me away with changes and it wouldn't be longer battery life.
I think the price is fair but also agree that a minor drop in price would be ok. Maybe $499 for SS with sport band and $299 for Sport but I doubt that will happen until version 2 is announced.
If I had a really good looking Rolex, I wouldn't own an Apple Watch.
I also have a Tag diving watch which needs to be pressure sealed after every servicing; and I've paid more to have it serviced every few years in total than the price of my Apple Sport Watch.
Armen
macrumors 604
You know the OP does this on purpose right? I don't think he even owns an Apple watch. He just comes on here and drops a debate bomb and watches people get all bent out of shape.
exxxviii
macrumors 65816
I saw your earlier post, but I wondered if you had mistaken the OP for someone else. He has been pretty engaged in this and other threads. And, it looks like he has owned a watch from pretty early on.
douglasf13
macrumors 68000
all of my traditional watches from Seiko died around 8-10 years. These were the $350-$500 models with kinetic. If all you want is a watch, I wouldn't get the Apple Watch or any smartwatch. Fortunately for me, I've always worn a watch and the Apple Watch looks good and I would upgrade but probably every other version unless they blow me away with changes and it wouldn't be longer battery life.
I think the price is fair but also agree that a minor drop in price would be ok. Maybe $499 for SS with sport band and $299 for Sport but I doubt that will happen until version 2 is announced.
If I had a really good looking Rolex, I wouldn't own an Apple Watch.
I have a G-Shock that's solar powered and hooks to the atomic clock, and it doesn't really get more durable and accurate than that for only $100, but, like you say, the Apple Watch is way more functional and looks good enough.
I have some nice Omega, Rolex, etc., watches, but, the thing is, now that the Apple Watch's functionality has become so useful to me, I can't go back. It's kind of like being interested in really nice, expensive typewriters, and then suddenly buying a Macbook. For a guy into mechanical things like I am, you loose a little bit of intrigue and "coolness," but the functionality of the Macbook pushes it over the edge. I may start collecting desk clocks or something, since mechanical watches just don't have room on my arm, anymore, despite my interest in horology.
Armen
macrumors 604
Let's just say he went from loving Apple to having a nerd rage fit over the Apple watch delivery ( forgot what thread it was) and the went into an Apple hate mode in which he kept questioning everything about it and comparing it to other watches and here we are again at the pricing months later. every time I call him out he doesn't reply to me or he does without quoting so I don't get alerted to it.
Brien
macrumors 68040
Appl3FTW
macrumors 603
Well that's because fitbits are cheaper.
Four oF NINE
macrumors 68000
That's one ugly a$$ watch yo!... Looks like a 1975 Seiko.
______________________________________________________________________________
Apple Watch is very good for what it does, but I don't expect it to last as long as my Subby.
Appl3FTW
macrumors 603
Haha no comment