I know that. What I'm referring to is the assembly process. I should have been more clear I guess. It is especially the machining and designing progress that are responsible for the giant leap in watch technology of the past 20 years.
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.
TAG Heuer Sales Director Patrick Pruniaux Joins Apple in Run-Up to iWatch Launch [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I know that. What I'm referring to is the assembly process. I should have been more clear I guess. It is especially the machining and designing progress that are responsible for the giant leap in watch technology of the past 20 years.
Very true. Not to mention that we have no clue if this thing will be anything more than a very fancy Pebble merged with a Fuelband. We could be looking at something in the $299 range. Which is not affordable for perhaps the average person but definitely for the average iPhone customer. After all they pop $199 plus tax without a thought.
----------
Technically no one KNOWS that this product exists. it's possible that he was hired, like Angela, because he's familiar with dealing with luxury brands. That it happens to be a watch company could be just a coincidence.
Its also possible that all the patents are because they have done prototypes, perhaps originally to produce, perhaps just to better understand how they can better support their partners like Nike. Who knows if production will actually happen. There have been several products that Apple has researched and decided against.
----------
Apple does what Apple wants. So yeah, they might.
----------
Actually it would have more hardware than an iPod Touch. If it is anything like the rumors.
The rumors suggest a device that is part Pebble (i.e., screen to see your notifications without removing phone from pocket) and part health band. So you are looking at a processor, perhaps a small amount of memory, motion processor, some level of graphics, bluetooth if not also wifi and maybe 3g. AND everything from a pulse monitor to oxygen monitor etc, gps, a mic for triggering siri. and battery, perhaps also a headphone port (somehow I doubt a speaker but who knows).
And making something smaller is actually more expensive.
----------
I disagree. The iWatch might be pricey because of the tech, not the brands that Apple has pulled talent from. The brands merely suggest that Apple wants the best and perhaps a desire for folks to feel like they are getting a little luxury enough though the products barely qualify compared to say a Tag Heuer, etc. And that's an attitude we've seen from apple for a while with how Jony loves to wax very poetic, even borderline orgasmic over things like the diamond chambered edges.
And my argument is that if the iWatch is compelling enough, it will even take timeshare away from "true" high end watches.
I get your argument and I don't disagree completely, I just think it's naive to think there is 100% no chance that people who wear luxury watches will find no compelling reason to wear an iWatch sometimes.
Just because I own a $100k Patek Phillipe doesn't mean I will wear it like my life depends on it. There is a time and place.
Long story short, yes the iWatch will bring competition down on ALL segments of the watch industry, if it truly is a "watch" to begin with.
Apple is NOT going after the watch industry. There is nothing Apple can or will do to even put a dent into watch industry. Watches are not phones, there is a reason why most bought and most respected watches are still analog and most buyers stick to one brand for their entire lives. If by watch industry you mean $100 watches, sure. If you mean $1000+ watches, good luck.
Let's forget for the moment the possibility that Apple will release a "watch" or a band that costs more than $1000 and instead suppose that the product will be priced somewhere below 1000.
Although we can divide the 1000 dollar segment further, that would be a very small segment so let's just keep it below 1000.
Most watches under the 1000 dollar segment are fashion watches (Michael Kors, Diesel, Hugo Boss, Gucci, Dolce and Gabbana, Swatch etc) and utility watches (GPS watches for various outdoor activities, heart rate monitor workout watches, Casio G-shocks, Seiko and Swiss Army for the mechanical watch crowd on a tight budget, etc).
If this iWatch is rugged enough, it could really disrupt the utility watch market.
If it is stylish enough, it could be a big player in the fashion watches but I don't think it can satisfy the fashionistas' whims, especially both females and males, entirely.
Thus it is more likely that the focus will be on the utility watch market, which has a lower price than the fashion watch market.
So my prediction is that it will probably be aimed at disrupting the under 1000 dollar segment and recruiting people who currently do not wear watches to wear them, which could be accomplished by its health functions.
Ultimately the under the 1000 dollar watch market is probably not a big enough pie for Apple.
Its success will probably depend on its ability to recruit non-watch wearing public.
Although we can divide the 1000 dollar segment further, that would be a very small segment so let's just keep it below 1000.
Most watches under the 1000 dollar segment are fashion watches (Michael Kors, Diesel, Hugo Boss, Gucci, Dolce and Gabbana, Swatch etc) and utility watches (GPS watches for various outdoor activities, heart rate monitor workout watches, Casio G-shocks, Seiko and Swiss Army for the mechanical watch crowd on a tight budget, etc).
If this iWatch is rugged enough, it could really disrupt the utility watch market.
If it is stylish enough, it could be a big player in the fashion watches but I don't think it can satisfy the fashionistas' whims, especially both females and males, entirely.
Thus it is more likely that the focus will be on the utility watch market, which has a lower price than the fashion watch market.
So my prediction is that it will probably be aimed at disrupting the under 1000 dollar segment and recruiting people who currently do not wear watches to wear them, which could be accomplished by its health functions.
Ultimately the under the 1000 dollar watch market is probably not a big enough pie for Apple.
Its success will probably depend on its ability to recruit non-watch wearing public.
In order to replace my G-Shock(s), it would need to be weather sealed and water resistant at least to 150M pressures. I would also need to be able to use the controls of the watch while wearing gloves.
I don't think gshocks are going away but a rugged smart watch could take some of its sales.
Also you don't need 150m.
Nobody needs 150m.
And you must've missed all my other posts because I said the iWatch can be an ADDITION to high end collectors. I never said it's either wear the iWatch or luxury watch only. I'm trying to explain and help those understand that the high end luxury watch market is bigger and more diverse than they think.
A Rolex for office wear and and iWatch for the weekends or casual wear. Some here are saying its game over for the watch industry once the iWatch comes out. Please.
Please read the entire scope of the thread before calling someone naive.
I don't think any rational person is expecting Apple to set up shop in the Vallée de Joux under the brand Montres Pomme and start to make minute repeaters, tourbillons and rattrapante's...
You are right but some of these post I'm reading are bordering on being ridiculous. As if the premise is the high end Swiss will live or die if they don't embrace these changes. Some of these ( I assume very young and naive) posters are spelling the death of Rolex, Patek in the next 10 years.
As if Apple will annihilate/decimate the traditional Swiss manufactures.
Actually, you will most likely want at least a rating of 150M water resistance because pressure on the watch is not just based on how deep in a body of water you are, but also the movement of that water against the seals of that watch.
http://www.ablogtowatch.com/ask-watch-experts/explaining-watch-water-resistance-ratings-mean/
After surviving the Quartz scare of the 70's, nothing is going to shock the market like that again; well except if everyone stops wearing watches.
I think i can wave goodbye to the idea this will be a band (i already have a watch thank you apple), and that it will be remotely affordable.
----------
Because in this case Apple is not going to be a direct competitor to a Tag Heuer watch!
----------
Because in this case Apple is not going to be a direct competitor to a Tag Heuer watch!
Apple will target NOT the watch segment but for your left hand, Apple is too cleaver to say that are targeting all the watches..but when you target your left hand for a more use and purpose.
----------
Even the believes that GOD exist changed over the time. And you think what a process or a history that last through non-technology time will last without making any at least minor changing is so fanatic or obsess thinking. Our young generation who buy luxury watch, they buy them only from 2 reasons: 1 are collectors or 2) just to show off and number 3) that appreciate and buy them for pleasure and for normal use-situation that I'm in and most of the oldest person will be gone through time
----------
We all argue or talking to an Apple dedicated forum and not on a rolex one. Think about it
----------
Even the believes that GOD exist changed over the time. And you think what a process or a history that last through non-technology time will last without making any at least minor changing is so fanatic or obsess thinking. Our young generation who buy luxury watch, they buy them only from 2 reasons: 1 are collectors or 2) just to show off and number 3) that appreciate and buy them for pleasure and for normal use-situation that I'm in and most of the oldest person will be gone through time
----------
We all argue or talking to an Apple dedicated forum and not on a rolex one. Think about it
You are missing one of the most important reasons people buy luxury watches, investment. These watches do not depreciate in value. They actually go up in value over the years. Partly due to the manufacturing techniques that are still appreciated by people who love precise, intricate work. They also increase in value due to limited quantities. A SmartWatch will never meet either of these conditions, and I doubt (no, in fact, I'm sure) Apple doesn't intent for it to. Once again, an Apple-produced SmartWatch will be mass produced on a production line. They will endeavor to produce as many as the market will bear. The tech and capabilities will be obsolete within 2 years at a minimum. Great for Apple (and any other SmartWatch manufacturer) because people will update to the 'latest and greatest'.
Some sort of SmartWatch may be somewhat disruptive to the mass of human population (I'm not sure this will be so but let's say it is). So what? Either it is adopted by the 'masses' or it becomes exclusive. It can't be both and frankly Apple would much rather it be adopted by the masses.
The luxury SmartWatch industry has nothing to worry about and I'm sure they know it.
Yea try to sell your watch 20 years from now..with more value
) Everything but land, yea maybe your children can sell your watch because in 100 years will become an art and a better value. But you can't tell me that i buy a watch now and a week or year or 5 years from now has a better value.----------
And people buy watch for investment? what a thinking..i was hopping for pleasure and for perfection...
----------
I buy these Longines watches just for personal use and for pleasure, i am not a collector or watch industry is not my life. I rather send a part of my profit to charity
I agree and that is why I put in my post that only in very few markets are quartz Rolexes sold, as elsewhere they just would not sell. Just think back as to how brief the fashion for high end watch makers to make digital watches was and how little the few that remain working, are worth nowadays.
Yea try to sell your watch 20 years from now..with more value
----------
And people buy watch for investment? what a thinking..i was hopping for pleasure and for perfection...
----------
I buy these Longines watches just for personal use and for pleasure, i am not a collector or watch industry is not my life. I rather send a part of my profit to charity
The fact that you refuse to think that high-end watches do not appreciate in value tells me that you are probably young and don't have much experience with investments in art, jewelry or any collector-type items. I'm 63 and I can tell you from personal experience with my grandfather's watches you are simply wrong.
It seems you refuse to believe the many posters that have tried to explain these things to you. That's ok, perhaps in 20 years or so you'll think back and realize how naive you were. All in all it doesn't matter. Apple will most likely make a smart watch. It will probably be rather successful. Only time will tell how successful. Whatever happens it will be interesting.
Yea try to sell your watch 20 years from now..with more value
----------
And people buy watch for investment? what a thinking..i was hopping for pleasure and for perfection...
----------
I buy these Longines watches just for personal use and for pleasure, i am not a collector or watch industry is not my life. I rather send a part of my profit to charity
I would say a Rolex 16610lv, a Panerai 000 and 111
I have 35 year old, i own an construction company , i own 4 beautiful Longines watch, last year i bought this one http://www.longines.com/watches/the-longines-master-collection/L2.739.4.71.3
But if you think that i can sold easily a Rolex or my Longines 20 years from know..i am thinking that you are living under a rock. Now, every young rich kids who can afford luxury will buy or collect cars or houses. They don't see anymore the NEED for an luxury watch that does nothing. You will be able to sell your watch with more than you pay for maybe 100 years from now (when a specific model will not be still on the market) or only at a selected auction house in London for example. The way are these watches are made loss that value. I have a painting that i look how much value has and all the auction and professional people who gave me even the passport for this told me if the web was manual crafted it would start the auction from 15mil $ but because is from 150 to 200 years and NOT from 500 years ago it will start from 300.000$. Learn to respect the time and people who actually has an expertise of running a company and knowing how youngest generation evolve and want or will want
----------
http://www.bobswatches.com/models/rolex-16610
----------
No offense but your grandfather was living in different decades and time. And now a luxury watch is still respected by my generation, but the generations behind me....so sorry but not a chance
----------
And the fact that an 63 year old man is arguing with (in your personal perspective) 35 year kid on this forum shows me how mature is the thinking.
----------
And trust me sir, your life was an classic one and a beautiful one. But today nothing is appreciate. Everything can be replaced, even a life(human) nowadays unfortunately