Tag Heuer Partnering With Google and Intel to Build Connected Smartwatch

[kdarling]

As far as my knowledge goes, traditional mechanical watchmakers are not at all frightened by the apple watch to take on their 10000€ and above market.

But the Quartz- watchmakers do fear the competition because the much lower price point of roughly 1000€ and below. Maybe TAG Heuer sees a new opportunity to spread its brand name.

This is what most watch people are saying, that it's the lower priced watches that might feel the pinch.

Or not, since I would be surprised if many iPhone owners were buying under $1000 watches before. So perhaps there's little previous market to lose in the first place.

Tag doesn't have the engineering prowess to come anywhere near the size of Apple's 38mm watch with comparable features. I don't think people here appreciate just how amazing an engineering feat the Apple Watch is.

If you compare it to the Moto 360, for example, it has a lot more functionality and much better battery life in a far smaller package.

Note that such comments about Moto 360 battery life are way out of date. It got a software update that was widely reviewed as increasing runtime from short of a day, to between a day and two days.

My own experience has been 24-36 hours between charges.

Other than that, carry on

 

[AppleScruff1]

She's a beauty diamete? Uboats are usually too big for my liking 44-45 is the sweet spot for me

I think that one is 50mm. Some of them come in 45mm. IMO, they have some sharp looking models.

 

[ninethirty]

He is serious. They're all blind.

You can't be serious with this? No innovation outside of Apple? I thought I had seen it all. You certainly take the cake on this one.

 

[AlecZ]

I don't know about this one but every other android wear looked great as renderings but crappy in real life photos (except maybe the moto 360).

The Moto 360 looked great in real life photos but not so good in real life. I didn't realize how thick it was until I saw my friend wearing it. Also looks a little dull.

 

[chris975d]

He is serious. They're all blind.

Well, you've got a lot of people talking about an industry (luxury watches) that they have zero experience in. I've seen all kinds of incorrect stereotypes....that we watch enthusiasts buy expensive watches blindly 'cause they are gold...that we put no thought into why we are buying them, under pure impulse, etc. They have no idea that the VAST majority of expensive watch enthusiasts buy watches because we appreciate the heritage, connect with the brand in some way, or scrutinize every little detail about a watch.

 

[apolloa]

"The difference between the TAG Heuer watch and the Apple Watch is very important," Biver said. "That one is called Apple and this one is called TAG Heuer."


Hahahahahaha. Wow. If that's all Biver has to say, they're in trouble.

If you knew ANYTHING about watches and the watch market, you would know where he was coming from and he is right too.
But don't let me be the one to stop you dreaming that Apple has made a luxury watch that is going to destroy the mid to high end Swiss watch market.

Patek Philippe who?????

 

[Mildredop]

Don't think rich folks would like Google tracking their every move.

"Rich guys" already own Android phones.

A very nice looking watch with a very crappy operating system is still a piece of crap in my book. Apple's software is what will make all the difference.

Android was quite crappy at first. It got better.

Apple's Watch OS hasn't been used in anger yet, so that may also be a bit crappy (agreed, it's unlikely, but it is almost certainly going to be more limited than people want as that is Apple's way)

 

[ninethirty]

Well, I made that comment in regards to someone who questioned why there's no innovation outside of Apple, and then credited Apple for inventing every type of technology out there

But, I do agree with you. I can't emphasize enough how big of a fan of Apple I am. I think my friends would assume I'm like the guy I referenced above, in love with Apple no matter what; that they could do no wrong. But I'm not sold on the watch, for a number of reasons, but the biggest might be for everything you described. I LOVE watches, and I spend an insane amount of time researching them, drooling over other people's photos and stories, and trying to decide which one I'll purchase next.

You hit the nail on the head though about how people around here view others with money. They're all stupid apparently and rush out to buy anything shiny and new so they can say they were the first to have it. I don't doubt for a second that there are obnoxiously rich people out there who act like that, but it's not enough to build a market around, and even if they could, would Apple really want that? It'd be the Burberry/Chav thing all over again.

Apple isn't competing with Rolex or Patek Philippe. They're not even competing with Omega or Tag. They've built a smartwatch which was a natural extension for them, to connect with other Apple products and allow you to further your experience inside an ecosystem they've curated for quite a long time. But it isn't a luxury purchase, it's not fine jewelry, it's a very Apple like product, somewhat expensive in nature, but like other Apple products, it has a shelf life. It's designed to be replaced when the newer model comes out. Fine timepieces almost work in the opposite way. The older it gets, the better it is, and more sought after it'll be.

You get it - these guys don't. For them, they need to think that Apple stormed the gates of luxury timepiece/jewelry market and that somehow they've made fools out of everyone with money to spend, but also that they've been gracious enough to have given these people something new to lust over and spend their millions on, and they will, right? Because that's what people with money do. They don't think or care about their purchases at all, they just throw away money because they've got so much of it!

Well, you've got a lot of people talking about an industry (luxury watches) that they have zero experience in. I've seen all kinds of incorrect stereotypes....that we watch enthusiasts buy expensive watches blindly 'cause they are gold...that we put no thought into why we are buying them, under pure impulse, etc. They have no idea that the VAST majority of expensive watch enthusiasts buy watches because we appreciate the heritage, connect with the brand in some way, or scrutinize every little detail about a watch.

 

[SirCheese]

He is serious. They're all blind.

Oh I know he was. I was just....yea, nevermind

 

[apolloa]

Tag doesn't have the engineering prowess to come anywhere near the size of Apple's 38mm watch with comparable features. I don't think people here appreciate just how amazing an engineering feat the Apple Watch is.

If you compare it to the Moto 360, for example, it has a lot more functionality and much better battery life in a far smaller package. And when you're talking about small tech gadgets like this, a square mm is like giving a large warehouse to an engineer. And the Moto 360 is a whopping 46mm, which even by traditional watch standards is huge.

Even against all other Android watches, Apple's relatively diminutive watches are far more capable:
http://www.t-gaap.com/2015/3/17/10-apple-watch-technologies-that-crush-android-wear-1

Hahahahahahaha what a utterly ridiculous comment!

Its pretty obvious you have no idea what your saying. Tags engineering skills far supersede anything Apple has.

 

[apolloa]

Well, I made that comment in regards to someone who questioned why there's no innovation outside of Apple, and then credited Apple for inventing every type of technology out there

But, I do agree with you. I can't emphasize enough how big of a fan of Apple I am. I think my friends would assume I'm like the guy I referenced above, in love with Apple no matter what; that they could do no wrong. But I'm not sold on the watch, for a number of reasons, but the biggest might be for everything you described. I LOVE watches, and I spend an insane amount of time researching them, drooling over other people's photos and stories, and trying to decide which one I'll purchase next.

You hit the nail on the head though about how people around here view others with money. They're all stupid apparently and rush out to buy anything shiny and new so they can say they were the first to have it. I don't doubt for a second that there are obnoxiously rich people out there who act like that, but it's not enough to build a market around, and even if they could, would Apple really want that? It'd be the Burberry/Chav thing all over again.

Apple isn't competing with Rolex or Patek Philippe. They're not even competing with Omega or Tag. They've built a smartwatch which was a natural extension for them, to connect with other Apple products and allow you to further your experience inside an ecosystem they've curated for quite a long time. But it isn't a luxury purchase, it's not fine jewelry, it's a very Apple like product, somewhat expensive in nature, but like other Apple products, it has a shelf life. It's designed to be replaced when the newer model comes out. Fine timepieces almost work in the opposite way. The older it gets, the better it is, and more sought after it'll be.

You get it - these guys don't. For them, they need to think that Apple stormed the gates of luxury timepiece/jewelry market and that somehow they've made fools out of everyone with money to spend, but also that they've been gracious enough to have given these people something new to lust over and spend their millions on, and they will, right? Because that's what people with money do. They don't think or care about their purchases at all, they just throw away money because they've got so much of it!

Probably the best post in this entire thread... I would also argue everyone who buys the higher end Apple watch will be a collector and have several other very expensive watches already.

 

[eoblaed]

If you knew ANYTHING about watches and the watch market, you would know where he was coming from and he is right too.
But don't let me be the one to stop you dreaming that Apple has made a luxury watch that is going to destroy the mid to high end Swiss watch market.

Patek Philippe who?????

I know the names. I know their branding.

I don't see Apple Watch as something that's going after the high end swiss watch market. This guy, however, does, and thinks that people that are going for a smart watch are going to be swayed away from a device that integrates cleanly and superbly with the rest of their gear by something else simply because it sas Tag Heuer on it.

ie. I don't see a direct competition (eg. I don't wear a watch currently ... only reason I'm getting this one is because of the convenience it'll afford me in many areas of life by working with my iPhone ... something that Tag or Patek simply won't do), but Biver does. If he feels like he needs to pull people away from Apple, he needs to do something significantly more compelling than saying 'Ours says Tag Heuer'.

 

[bozzykid]

If you are a current Android smartwatch manufacturer, how does it make you feel to have Google run off and play around with Tag Heuer?

Huh? I think it is completely expected since anyone can produce Android Wear watches.

 

[chris975d]

Well, I made that comment in regards to someone who questioned why there's no innovation outside of Apple, and then credited Apple for inventing every type of technology out there

But, I do agree with you. I can't emphasize enough how big of a fan of Apple I am. I think my friends would assume I'm like the guy I referenced above, in love with Apple no matter what; that they could do no wrong. But I'm not sold on the watch, for a number of reasons, but the biggest might be for everything you described. I LOVE watches, and I spend an insane amount of time researching them, drooling over other people's photos and stories, and trying to decide which one I'll purchase next.

You hit the nail on the head though about how people around here view others with money. They're all stupid apparently and rush out to buy anything shiny and new so they can say they were the first to have it. I don't doubt for a second that there are obnoxiously rich people out there who act like that, but it's not enough to build a market around, and even if they could, would Apple really want that? It'd be the Burberry/Chav thing all over again.

Apple isn't competing with Rolex or Patek Philippe. They're not even competing with Omega or Tag. They've built a smartwatch which was a natural extension for them, to connect with other Apple products and allow you to further your experience inside an ecosystem they've curated for quite a long time. But it isn't a luxury purchase, it's not fine jewelry, it's a very Apple like product, somewhat expensive in nature, but like other Apple products, it has a shelf life. It's designed to be replaced when the newer model comes out. Fine timepieces almost work in the opposite way. The older it gets, the better it is, and more sought after it'll be.

You get it - these guys don't. For them, they need to think that Apple stormed the gates of luxury timepiece/jewelry market and that somehow they've made fools out of everyone with money to spend, but also that they've been gracious enough to have given these people something new to lust over and spend their millions on, and they will, right? Because that's what people with money do. They don't think or care about their purchases at all, they just throw away money because they've got so much of it!

YOU hit the nail on the head, my friend. Apple has built a disposable gadget. Maybe a nice one, maybe not. But...it's a gadget. It is designed to become obsolete, by its very nature. Cannot be a "luxury watch", and I think it's crazy that Apple thinks they can just waltz into that market.

The most desirable timepieces become desirable (ones with staying power, not flash in the pan Hublots, etc) because they have heritage. Look at PP's Calatrava, AP's Royal Oak, Blancpains Fifty Fathoms, Rolex's Sub, GMT, DateJust, DayDate. All have heritage. They've been around for 30, 40, 50+ years. Apple doesn't have this, and they can't with a disposable gadget.

I'm fine with Apple making a $350-600 smartwatch/gadget. But I still, for the life of me, can't figure out how they think they could (if that even is their intent) jump in and pretend that they are a "luxury watch maker" or can even compete in that arena. I'm not sure they even understand the mindset of the customers that they will need to win over.

 

[bozzykid]

Risky strategy if they only intend to focus on Android!

Clearly Android Wear is coming to iOS sometime this year based on this announcement. There have already been rumors it was coming at Google I/O for a few months now.

----------

A very nice looking watch with a very crappy operating system is still a piece of crap in my book. Apple's software is what will make all the difference.

Apples software is what has caused such a tepid response. They have yet to show why anyone needs one. Honestly the only compelling feature on any smart watch I have seen is Android Wear's support of Google Now. Even that is not a enough to convince me. But to say Android Wear is using a price of crap software is not much of an endorsement of Apple's version which doesn't look that interesting.

 

[Karma*Police]

This could be a valid concern...IF smartwatches take off. But, that's a long time from now. Very few people in the foreseeable future are going to take of a Rolex, shelve it, and wear an Apple watch instead full time. Watch enthusiasts already have multiple watches they own that have to compete for wrist time, and those owners (myself included) rotate them based on event/occasion/activity. And who's to say that the smartwatch doesn't remain in the realm of workout-related gear, anyway?

The big Swiss companies have weathered attacks before that "experts" thought would surely do them in...namely the Quartz revolution in the '70s-'80s. Cheap, accurate watches that people were saying made mechanical watches obsolete. What happened? The best mechanical companies weathered the storm. Heck, Rolex even introduced a battery powered, quartz movement OysterQuartz watch, and produced it up until the early 2000s (most people don't even know they made that). But, Rolex has always been more cutting edge than people realize. They started on quartz tech in the '50's, and developed several patents long before quartz actually even became commonplace.

So don't think that these big Swiss companies aren't keeping an eye on trends and can't/couldn't adapt if they saw an oncoming threat. Companies like Rolex aren't stupid. Rolex is one of the most advanced companies in R&D/manufacturing out there. Who's to say the wheels aren't already turning on a way to merge their mechanical heritage with the digital age? Can you imagine a Rolex (or insert your favorite Swiss company), using their auto-winding/self powering expertise, making a mechanical/digital hybrid that charged itself on the movement of your body?

You make some good points but I think this threat is very different. It's much more than just a better or cheaper way to do the same thing. It's about ecosystems, SDK's, electronics, software, services, design, manufacturing, etc. However good you think Rolex's R&D is, they can't compete with the likes of Apple, Google and MS on all these fronts.

The Swiss (at least Tag, but I expect others to follow) have already lost control of their destiny now that they've outsourced the core technology to Google and Intel; they've become just another OEM. In my view, that doesn't bode well judging by how windows and Android OEMs have fared over the years.

And I think the smartwatch's capability will grow a lot faster than you think. Just look at how quickly mobile technology has come in 7 years. It's phenomenal.

 

[AleXXXa]

But, but... I thought there "wasn't a market for a high-end luxury smartwatch."

TAG is not high end. It will probably cost a few Ks, which is nothing compared to what high end brands (Patek, JLC, Lange, Vacheron) charge.

 

[chris975d]

Tag Heuer Partnering With Google and Intel to Build Connected Smartwatch

You make some good points but I think this threat is very different. It's much more than just a better or cheaper way to do the same thing. It's about ecosystems, SDK's, electronics, software, services, design, manufacturing, etc. However good you think Rolex's R&D is, they can't compete with the likes of Apple, Google and MS on all these fronts.



The Swiss (at least Tag, but I expect others to follow) have already lost control of their destiny now that they've outsourced the core technology to Google and Intel; they've become just another OEM. In my view, that doesn't bode well judging by how windows and Android OEMs have fared over the years.



And I think the smartwatch's capability will grow a lot faster than you think. Just look at how quickly mobile technology has come in 7 years. It's phenomenal.

But, in 7 years, I SERIOUSLY don't see all the people that own a Rolex et all putting them down and switching over to smart watches. Rolex alone manufactures (and sells, with waiting lists) almost 1 million watches per year. And that number continues to grow. That's just their Rolex brand alone, not to mention how fast their Tudor brand is growing over the past 3 years with Rolexes renewed focus on pushing Tudor in the US. So how is Apple going to hurt that market? Those people(me included) paying $8000+ per watch, and often owning more than one...I don't see us dropping our Rolexes, Pateks, for an Apple watch/smart watch. So, again, for the foreseeable future, I don't see Apple hurting the true luxury/high end market. Even if Apple gets people who've never worn a watch to wear one, that doesn't hurt Rolex's (I use them a lot because I know a lot of their sales numbers) market at all. The vast majority of Rolex customers are repeat customers. Same with the other companies even more prestigious than Rolex.

 

[Karma*Police]

Hahahahahahaha what a utterly ridiculous comment!

Its pretty obvious you have no idea what your saying. Tags engineering skills far supersede anything Apple has.

Sorry, I didn't know that Tag could create their own processors... let alone miniaturize an entire computer architecture onto a single chip... Or create their own SDK for smartwatches... Or develop their own programming language... Or create a Siri-like service... or create an App Store... or improve the durability of stainless steel and gold... Or invent link bracelets that don't require tools and a clasp that's nearly flush with the band itself. I guess it's Apple that should be worried. My bad.

----------

But, in 7 years, I SERIOUSLY don't see all the people that own a Rolex et all putting them down and switching over to smart watches. Rolex alone manufactures (and sells, with waiting lists) almost 1 million watches per year. And that number continues to grow. That's just their Rolex brand alone, not to mention how fast their Tudor brand is growing over the past 3 years with Rolexes renewed focus on pushing Tudor in the US. So how is Apple going to hurt that market? Those people(me included) paying $8000+ per watch, and often owning more than one...I don't see us dropping our Rolexes, Pateks, for an Apple watch/smart watch. So, again, for the foreseeable future, I don't see Apple hurting the true luxury/high end market. Even if Apple gets people who've never worn a watch to wear one, that doesn't hurt Rolex's (I use them a lot because I know a lot of their sales numbers) market at all. The vast majority of Rolex customers are repeat customers. Same with the other companies even more prestigious than Rolex.

Like I said, it's about competing for limited space on people's wrists and why I brought up the pocket watch. People thought it was absurd that a wrist watch could replace something so beautiful and timeless back then too. And the last time I saw a pocket watch? In a movie. We'll see... As always, time will tell.

 

[apolloa]

Sorry, I didn't know that Tag could create their own processors... let alone miniaturize an entire computer architecture onto a single chip... Or create their own SDK for smartwatches... Or develop their own programming language... Or create a Siri-like service... or create an App Store... or improve the durability of stainless steel and gold... Or invent link bracelets that don't require tools and a clasp that's nearly flush with the band itself. I guess it's Apple that should be worried. My bad.

As I said, you have no idea what you are talking about. Apple has never made a watch mechanism using rubber bands and a tiny ingot weight and ruby bearings and cogs etc.
And seeing as Intel are making the chips, do you include them in the comment that they cannot match Apple's engineering skills, and by the way, Apple does NOT make any chips itself and it never has, someone else does that for them. Intel DOES make it's own chips.
And Google are making the OS, so they can make an SDK and Siri like service and their own programming language etc etc

Apple has not invented a link bracelet or a flush clasp either, it has made one.

 

[69650]

Big fan of TAG watches. If they're as gorgeous as their other watches I would definitely buy one to sit alongside my Apple Watch as a nice watch is the only jewellery I ever wear. I hope they don't require a paired android smartphone to work.

 

[apolloa]

I know the names. I know their branding.

I don't see Apple Watch as something that's going after the high end swiss watch market. This guy, however, does, and thinks that people that are going for a smart watch are going to be swayed away from a device that integrates cleanly and superbly with the rest of their gear by something else simply because it sas Tag Heuer on it.

ie. I don't see a direct competition (eg. I don't wear a watch currently ... only reason I'm getting this one is because of the convenience it'll afford me in many areas of life by working with my iPhone ... something that Tag or Patek simply won't do), but Biver does. If he feels like he needs to pull people away from Apple, he needs to do something significantly more compelling than saying 'Ours says Tag Heuer'.

If Apple are not going after the high end Swiss market, then why has it priced the Apple Watch as a direct competitor to the pricing of the Swiss high end watch market? It has named the device 'Watch' and it has priced it at the high end of the market, it is competing with them.

 

[chris975d]

Sorry, I didn't know that Tag could create their own processors... let alone miniaturize an entire computer architecture onto a single chip... Or create their own SDK for smartwatches... Or develop their own programming language... Or create a Siri-like service... or create an App Store... or improve the durability of stainless steel and gold... Or invent link bracelets that don't require tools and a clasp that's nearly flush with the band itself. I guess it's Apple that should be worried. My bad.

----------





Like I said, it's about competing for limited space on people's wrists and why I brought up the pocket watch. People thought it was absurd that a wrist watch could replace something so beautiful and timeless back then too. And the last time I saw a pocket watch? In a movie. We'll see... As always, time will tell.

I understand what you're saying. But what I'm not sure you're getting is that there has always (in my lifetime at least) been a competition for wrist space. We don't pick and buy $10,000 watches cause they are the "best at what they do"...hell, there are $30 Quartz watches that tell time, date, day of the week far more accurately than the Sub I have on right now. So we aren't buying them solely for their "utility" anyway. So that point is relatively moot.

And as it stands right now, and for years to come, a smart watch isn't a necessity. Hell, the Apple watch barely works unless you have an iPhone on your person. So it has no added utility over the iPhone. So the ONLY threat I see to the Rolexes and more premium watches is IF the watch ever completely replaced the phone. And that's not going to happen. People are going to browse the web or compose work emails on their wrist.

So again, the upper crust of the Swiss watch world is ok for the foreseeable future. Those watches aren't bought for their utility anyway. They are bought for totally different reasons. I've bought about $60,000 in watches in the past 12 months. Not a single one of them does more than tell the time and maybe the date. And at no point in time would an Apple watch, if it was on the market then, have entered into my buying decision. I have an iPhone in my pocket than can do everything that watch can do, BETTER than the watch can do it.

 

[thekeyring]

You're right. Apple doesn't always invent something. But Apple Pay is a perfect example of how they took something that wasn't really working and made it work. There are many more.

Exactly. If implementation doesn't matter, then even Google Wallet was a me-too product, coming second to the first person who put their credit card next to their smart phone in their phone case.

 

[Karma*Police]

As I said, you have no idea what you are talking about. Apple has never made a watch mechanism using rubber bands and a tiny ingot weight and ruby bearings and cogs etc.
And seeing as Intel are making the chips, do you include them in the comment that they cannot match Apple's engineering skills, and by the way, Apple does NOT make any chips itself and it never has, someone else does that for them. Intel DOES make it's own chips.
And Google are making the OS, so they can make an SDK and Siri like service and their own programming language etc etc

Apple has not invented a link bracelet or a flush clasp either

No, what you don't understand is that Apple doesn't care about making a mechanical watch. Why would they? The fact that Tag has outsourced all tech to Intel and Google essentially makes them just another OEM which proves my original point that they can't compete from an engineering standpoint.

And Apple doesn't have to create the chips. The IP is in the design, not manufacturing. And judging by how badly Intel is losing the mobile chip war, no I don't think they have the same level of engineering talent that Apple has acquired.

I didn't say Apple invented the link bracelet or a flush clasp but that combo and the ability to add/remove individual links is to my knowledge a first.

----------

I understand what you're saying. But what I'm not sure you're getting is that there has always (in my lifetime at least) been a competition for wrist space. We don't pick and buy $10,000 watches cause they are the "best at what they do"...hell, there are $30 Quartz watches that tell time, date, day of the week far more accurately than the Sub I have on right now. So we aren't buying them solely for their "utility" anyway. So that point is relatively moot.

And as it stands right now, and for years to come, a smart watch isn't a necessity. Hell, the Apple watch barely works unless you have an iPhone on your person. So it has no added utility over the iPhone. So the ONLY threat I see to the Rolexes and more premium watches is IF the watch ever completely replaced the phone. And that's not going to happen. People are going to browse the web or compose work emails on their wrist.

So again, the upper crust of the Swiss watch world is ok for the foreseeable future. Those watches aren't bought for their utility anyway. They are bought for totally different reasons. I've bought about $60,000 in watches in the past 12 months. Not a single one of them does more than tell the time and maybe the date. And at no point in time would an Apple watch, if it was on the market then, have entered into my buying decision. I have an iPhone in my pocket than can do everything that watch can do, BETTER than the watch can do it.

I get that luxury watches aren't bought for utility and I agree the current Apple Watch isn't for everyone, especially people like yourself. But I've no doubt that the smart watch will eventually replace the iPhone and the iPhone will become an iPod touch for those times you might need a bigger screen. To me, that much is a given. The only question is when. And when that happens, I think even people such as yourself may have to find new expensive toys to buy. Maybe it'll be a $20,000 Apple Watch!