The merged "I returned/sold my Apple Watch because..." thread

[bbeagle]

You could have sold the watch for an extra $100-$200 easily

It's not that easy.

A $650 watch will cost about $710 after taxes.
You probably will be scammed on Craigslist... so...
Ebay will want 10%....

Sell the watch at $1,000 - after Ebay fees you're down to $900.
That's still not even a $200 profit - only $190.

Someone is going to buy a watch with $350 markup?

 

[8a22a]

I didn't mind paying less than 2 weeks wage for the SS 42mm. I've wasted a lot more money on car insurance etc.

 

[John6Plus]

I'm guessing the people complaining that the watch is big and bulky have never worn real mechanical watches.

And they would probably think "real" mechanical watches feel bulky too. He had it long enough to get used to it, I think.

Kudos to the OP for such a level headed, non-flame-baity post. I'm expecting my watch today (38mm SG) so I like reading the good and bad. Some of what was said I have to say I expect. I've heard terrible things about most 3rd party apps, but even just watching the update descriptions on my phone, most of it just seems like shovelware that's pretty useless on a wrist. I expect that'll get better - unless there are serious hardware limitations, then it will be the Watch 2 that will have to fix them.

I too am concerned with the fitness aspect of things; I have a Fitbit Charge HR right now (it has a 24/7 photo heart rate monitor and lasts 5 days on one charge), and I'm really hoping the Watch is good enough for me to sell it or give it to someone. It looks like an area where software updates could improve it significantly.

 

[tknice]

We don't know what's coming. We can only hope for performance improvements. We as in watch watchers in general.

I also disagree with your use of "pending". There's no evidence that any improvements are pending. Sure it'd make sense, but that's all. Don't buy something hoping it'll get better. That adds nothing to the pro column.

There's plenty of evidence that improvements, updates, or whatever you want to call them are "pending". Apple has a very long track record of supporting their products and you can bet that a v1 device in a new category will receive many enhancements and bug fixes moving forward. There's a whole API and architecture in place for 3rd party developers to take advantage of it's capabilities. Should I come back here in a month and say "I told you so"?

Let's please be reasonable about what's inevitable based on their history.

 

[rocknblogger]

A spinny wheel seems to annoy people. If you launch a 3rd party app on the watch is asks the phone to launch it. Nobody seems to complain that launching the Nike Running app on the phone results in a loading screen, with some promo photo of models wearing Nike trainers, followed by a home screen which is blank until the app connects to the Nike server and updates your stats. All this takes about 6-8 seconds, which is why the watch is displaying a spinning wheel.

I'm sure all this will be history with iOS 9 and watch kit. Presumably 3rd party apps will behave similarly to the native ones.

Yes but first of all you're talking about one single app. On the Apple Watch I think the expectation is for apps to load quickly otherwise it becomes faster just using the phone. Also there's an expectation that the watch is supposed to show you what you need to see as soon as you turn on the screen or app. The point is that on the watch you want to see the information instantly or at most within a second or two.

I believe that native watch apps will solve most of those problems. Now whether Apple will allow native apps on the current Apple Watch remains to be seen. If not then the performance you're getting now is the best it'll be and you may have to wait for the next version to get the performance you expect. (You, as in the general "you")

----------

There's plenty of evidence that improvements, updates, or whatever you want to call them are "pending". Apple has a very long track record of supporting their products and you can bet that a v1 device in a new category will receive many enhancements and bug fixes moving forward. There's a whole API and architecture in place for 3rd party developers to take advantage of it's capabilities. Should I come back here in a month and say "I told you so"?

Let's please be reasonable about what's inevitable based on their history.

True but in the case of third party apps, as long as they have to pull/push info to/from the phone is not going to change much.

 

[tylerdw89]

Just out of curiosity, to return the watch do you have to ship it back or can you just take it to the Apple Store?

 

[Arran]

...One of the first things Steve Job's did when he came back to Apple was to consolidate the many Mac models. He believed, correctly, that it created consumer confusion and indecision on what to buy so they ended up pushing off the purchase, eventually permanently...

Excellent point.

Out of the gate, my wife really wanted the SS soft pink, but felt $750 was too much for a 1st gen "unknown". $150 for the band alone seemed excessive to her. So she wisely decided on the 38mm sport for $350. Best balance of cost vs risk.

I, OTOH, didn't want an Apple watch.

Now, seeing hers, I'm quite liking the idea of one for myself. So here's my dilemma:

1. Do I surprise wife with the 38mm $750 SS soft pink she really wanted (and I'll just take her 38mm silver sport and buy myself a black band.)
2. Do I just buy myself a black 38mm sport for another $350?
3. Do I buy the 42mm sport for myself? (but then if one of us ever buys a link or milanese bracelet there will be no sharing because of different widths.)
4. Do I buy myself the 38mm steel and leave wifey as is (I couldn't do that, TBH)
5. Or, with the wife perfectly happy as she is right now, do I just leave well enough alone and spend no more money?

There are other options too, but just thinking about them makes my head hurt. A good example of your (and Steve's) original point.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Excellent point.

Out of the gate, my wife really wanted the SS soft pink, but felt $750 was too much for a 1st gen "unknown". $150 for the band alone seemed excessive to her. So she wisely decided on the 38mm sport for $350. Best balance of cost vs risk.

I, OTOH, didn't want an Apple watch.

Now, seeing hers, I'm quite liking the idea of one for myself. So here's my dilemma:

1. Do I surprise wife with the 38mm $750 SS soft pink she really wanted (and I'll just take her 38mm silver sport and buy myself a black band.)
2. Do I just buy myself a black 38mm sport for another $350?
3. Do I buy the 42mm sport for myself? (but then if one of us ever buys a link or milanese bracelet there will be no sharing because of different widths.)
4. Do I buy myself the 38mm steel and leave wifey as is (I couldn't do that, TBH)
5. Or, with the wife perfectly happy as she is right now, do I just leave well enough alone and spend no more money?

There are other options too, but just thinking about them makes my head hurt. A good example of your (and Steve's) original point.

Your wife and I are of the same mindset. $350 is plenty enough, especially for a very much Gen 1 product. I haven't had mine 24hrs but it's doing what I thought it would do mostly. I'm not sure it's going to replace my running watch but it will replace my everyday watch. Happy with the $350 purchase and the SG BSB looks "professional," not toy-like for the price. If I'd spent more I'd probably feel very guilty and $ wasteful though.

 

[jbachandouris]

I received by SS with classic buckle yesterday. The watch I like, the band I don't. There is NO way this is a 'premium' band. It feels and looks like cardboard.

I'm either switching bands or returning it.

 

[RickInHouston]

There's plenty of evidence that improvements, updates, or whatever you want to call them are "pending". Apple has a very long track record of supporting their products and you can bet that a v1 device in a new category will receive many enhancements and bug fixes moving forward. There's a whole API and architecture in place for 3rd party developers to take advantage of it's capabilities. Should I come back here in a month and say "I told you so"?

Let's please be reasonable about what's inevitable based on their history.

Apple has a long track record of supporting their products? Really? They drop legacy hardware like no other. Two year old phones get no love. They usually get updated to laggy upgrades (that's why I left). Laptops that can't upgrade software. Desktops that have two year old chips in them?

Whatever. Keep drinking.

 

[hemon]

I sold my Apple Watch because I think I don't need it:

– neither at home, because I have my iPhone on the desk.
– neither at the gym, because my Polar RCX3 works easier for the time and HR isn't accurate at all. For the music I have an iPod.
– neither on the way, because several interaction with notifications needs the iPhone which I take in 2 seconds out of the pocket.

– and I HATE it that the iPhone battery drops down when AW is connected!

It was just "cool" as watch, good too see.. but I don't use/need a watch at all.. 650€ isn't worth.
(sorry for the "denglisch" )

 

[ohwevad]

There's plenty of evidence that improvements, updates, or whatever you want to call them are "pending". Apple has a very long track record of supporting their products and you can bet that a v1 device in a new category will receive many enhancements and bug fixes moving forward. There's a whole API and architecture in place for 3rd party developers to take advantage of it's capabilities. Should I come back here in a month and say "I told you so"?

Let's please be reasonable about what's inevitable based on their history.

Where is the evidence of application speed improvements? This is pure speculation. Maybe educated speculation, but not based in actual evidence.

As I said, it is a losing battle to work with something you're unhappy with because you expect it to get better in the future.

If you made predictions and came back to say "I told you so", sure, but you're making claims, not predictions.

 

[djransom]

I keep hearing everyone saying 2nd gen as if they're sure they will be one every year. The AW could very well be similar to ATV with a refresh every couple of years with software updates in between.

 

[lchlch]

I received by SS with classic buckle yesterday. The watch I like, the band I don't. There is NO way this is a 'premium' band. It feels and looks like cardboard.

I'm either switching bands or returning it.

Wear it for a while before returning. Leather tends to takes some time to soften.

 

[jbachandouris]

Wear it for a while before returning. Leather tends to takes some time to soften.

I am aware of that, but it's still not worth the extra $100 for the 'premium' band. I'll give it a few days (12 left), but value-wise, I think a Citizen might be a better choice. If I were using more of the features, maybe I'd feel better about it.

 

[anez]

I feel like a greater proportion of SS purchasers have been disappointed enough to return/resell than Sport purchasers. For the extra money, they expected more than they got, and their expectations were not met.

I initially expected that the SS would outsell the Sport for Gen 2 because of the sapphire, but now I'm not so sure. From what I've read here, I think it will take until Gen 3 for people to be happy with shelling out the extra cash. I suspect the Gen 1 complaints and unhappiness will push people towards the cheaper Sport for Gen 2, and the overall satisfaction Gen 2 will (I hope) encourage people to consider the more expensive SS for Gen 3.

I'm glad the OP was able to return his Watch if it wasn't for him, but I agree he would have had greater satisfaction and been less likely to return if he had opted for the Sport instead. I can live with the various bumps and glitches when I consider what I spent on my Sport, but if I had gone for the SS, I think I too would have expected more.

 

[lchlch]

I am aware of that, but it's still not worth the extra $100 for the 'premium' band. I'll give it a few days (12 left), but value-wise, I think a Citizen might be a better choice. If I were using more of the features, maybe I'd feel better about it.

Well that is something only you can decide.

I think it's wrong to measure the watch by the time you spend using it. A better measure would be how much more "present" you are doing everyday activities. But I digress.

 

[Cory Bauer]

I feel like a greater proportion of SS purchasers have been disappointed enough to return/resell than Sport purchasers. For the extra money, they expected more than they got, and their expectations were not met.

Stainless Steel owner, expectations met and exceeded. In my opinion after living with it, the watch does more than enough to justify spending $549-$599. There's room for improvement but it's a great product out the gate.

 

[Kyone]

OP makes great points. I only just received my 38 SG BSB, but enjoying it so far. It's everything I thought it would be -- but I didn't have high expectations. I always thought it would be mostly a "mirror" of my iPhone.

Completely understand the buyer's remorse. I could not have spent what some are spending for an AW. 100% not worth it IMHO. $350 is the right price and something I can live w/ while accepting any 1st gen bugginess.

One of the first things Steve Job's did when he came back to Apple was to consolidate the many Mac models. He believed, correctly, that it created consumer confusion and indecision on what to buy so they ended up pushing off the purchase, eventually permanently.

I have to wonder if Apple offering so many models at so many price points, none of which are really functionally distinctive from one another, is going to end up biting Apple just like it did back in the mid-90s. The AW is arguably the least intuitive device its offered in quite some time. It seems it may have been a better route to use the iPhone model of 2-3 color choices in 2 sizes, respectively at the same $350/399 price point. Then offer a la carte bands.

As the AW gains traction going into the 2nd gen, then maybe add some "limited" higher end SS and 18K gold model. It just seems Apple might be getting ahead of itself here. I can see a lot of SS buyers like OP getting buyers remorse. The average return rate for a consumer product is 15% and 27% of that number is due to buyer's remorse. It's a lot more likely to feel remorseful about buying a 2/3rd baked $500+ device than it is a $350 one. One could buy the $350 model, but many consumers ego will not permit them buying the bottom of the the line. When you make just one line that's not a problem.

Where do you get those return rate figures? I'm just being curious, it's interesting. I really want to know what could be the AW return rate.

I think people will be less forgiving with the watch since they had / have to wait a long time to get one.

Just like you, I ordered the sport version since the standard one seems way too expensive for what it offers. I mean this is an Apple device and I don't want it to get obsolete next year. Moreover it's a first gen product so it's prone to malfunction and bugs.

 

[mattopotamus]

I have the 38 mm and it doesn't feel bulky at all. It looks and feels amazing.

Also, the third party apps may be slow and awkward to use now, but it will get better in the next few months.

The difference in weight between the 38mm and 42mm is pretty shocking at first. I agree about the 38mm feeling light though. Many of the 38mm SS actually weigh less than the 42mm aluminum with sport band.

 

[Symtex]

I think it's unfair to critic the OP. He has the right to not like a product. If you are only receiving small amount of notification or if you are not into fitness, the apple watch can be a novelty item to you.

I received hundreds of email a day. There is days where I go from meeting to meeting. The watch is very useful to me. Taking the phone out of my pocket an hundred times a day is not convenient. I didn't have expectation of the watch replacing a phone. I understood that it was a companion. It was meant to complement the iphone experience. I personally think the watch does that very well. I know it will only get better from here.

 

[KPOM]

One of the first things Steve Job's did when he came back to Apple was to consolidate the many Mac models. He believed, correctly, that it created consumer confusion and indecision on what to buy so they ended up pushing off the purchase, eventually permanently.

I have to wonder if Apple offering so many models at so many price points, none of which are really functionally distinctive from one another, is going to end up biting Apple just like it did back in the mid-90s. The AW is arguably the least intuitive device its offered in quite some time. It seems it may have been a better route to use the iPhone model of 2-3 color choices in 2 sizes, respectively at the same $350/399 price point. Then offer a la carte bands.

Wearables are different. Clothing and jewelry are things that aren't purchased primarily for rational reasons. Samsung, Motorola, Pebble, and others tried a one-size-fits-all approach to watches. It doesn't work. People don't mind having the same phone or Mac as everyone else, but they don't want everyone wearing the same thing as they do. I don't like the Sport Band, and wouldn't buy the Apple Watch Sport for myself, even if it were half the price. But spending $650 for a stainless steel watch is fine with me, and about the same as a nice regular watch will cost. Sure, it's a gen 1 product, but how much evolution do we really expect? Battery life will get better, maybe the bezel will get a little smaller, and maybe it will get a little thinner. But it will always be a small screen with limited functionality. This is one product where more choice makes it easier. Get the one that looks the best, mix and match bands, and get on with it.

I do agree that Apple is no longer so clearly defined by the Pro/Consumer/Portable/Desktop quadrant that Steve Jobs introduced in 1997, and that they are at risk of product creep, but that's partly because the market has changed. The "pro" market is less important than the consumer market, and consumer devices are so powerful now, not as many people need or even want the "pro" devices anymore. iPhone is simply offered in large vs. medium, with older devices kept around to hit price points. Essentially that's the same with the iPad, though Apple probably should cull the product line somewhat (drop the original iPad mini and perhaps all but the cheapest iPad 2 and iPad Air in favor of the iPad mini 3 and iPad Air 2).

But with watches, they absolutely need to offer lots of band options. The core technology is the same, whether you spend $350, $1100, or $17,000. Again, buying jewelry and clothing is not primarily a rational decision.

 

[ToroidalZeus]

Thats a claim you'll need to back up. What exactly makes you think this was a design choice, or that it's even actually a thing?

I don't have ANY slow-loading apps, and one of the apps I use is 3rd party (Wunderlist), so I'm disinclined to believe you.

A spinny wheel seems to annoy people. If you launch a 3rd party app on the watch is asks the phone to launch it. Nobody seems to complain that launching the Nike Running app on the phone results in a loading screen, with some promo photo of models wearing Nike trainers, followed by a home screen which is blank until the app connects to the Nike server and updates your stats. All this takes about 6-8 seconds, which is why the watch is displaying a spinning wheel.

I'm sure all this will be history with iOS 9 and watch kit. Presumably 3rd party apps will behave similarly to the native ones.

Apple isn't stupid. They wouldn't have the app run on the phone and stream to the watch for no reason. Having the phone run the app has 2 big effects. First it allows the phone's cpu which has access to the phones larger battery to run the task. Second it means the watch's cpu doesn't need to process the data thus it can be clocked lower.

You can see other examples of Apple's commitment to battery life in that the watch is always off until you bring your wrist up or in the lack of sensors that would enable the watch be a standalone device.

I see a lot of people throwing out the term 'gen 1' to describe the AW's shortcomings. However I do not think this is accurate. The AW has been in development since after Steve Jobs died so 2-3.5 years and the galexy gear a year and a half ago; so a lot of what you see now is really design choices to deal with the constraints of a smart watch. Hence I don't believe we'll see much improvement down the road.

 

[profmjh]

My 42mm SS WSB is boxed up and ready to be collected by the courier on Friday. Kudos to Apple for making it so easy.

One of my motivations for buying an AW, and the SS in particular, was that I wanted a piece of jewellery. Indeed, Apple is clearly marketing the SS as that.

Now, I bought the WSB because I didn't want to go to an Apple Store and I wasn't certain which of the other bands I'd like. My plan was to see if I liked the WSB and, if not, to trade up to either the leather loop or the Milanese.

My initial impression of the WSB was that it was pretty nice. But after a few days it seemed to just cheapen the overall look. Plus I found it pinched my arm hair. So I ordered two new bands. And got "for July delivery". WTF? Seriously? Your supply is that disorganised?

Another motivation for buying the AW was that I wanted a watch. I'm one of those people who likes larger watches: my current, clockwork, watch is 42mm. But that's side-to-side. And almost all of that is clock face. The 42mm is narrower than 42mm side to side, and the image of the clock face actually comes out at about 24mm. It's really very small. And it doesn't stay on the screen the whole time. Sometime it disappeared before I'd finished taking it all in. True, it almost always turned on when I wanted it to, but there was often a split-second delay. Normal watches just don't do that.

I thought I'd love the notifications. I didn't. I hated them. I get pestered by my iPhone enough as it is. Now I've got someone tugging on my sleeve all the time saying, "YOU'VE GOT A MESSAGE!". Ugh.

So I resolved to send the thing back. (I didn't seriously consider selling it. Too complicated. Too fraught with the potential for something to go wrong. And I don't want to rip anyone off. Much simpler to send it back.)

The next day, I wondered whether I should buy a Sports. (I guess I had "returners remorse"!) The SS cost me £519, which is about a week's income, after tax. The Sports is £349, which is about two-thirds of the cost. If I recalibrate my expectations of the device as a piece of tech and not a piece of jewellery, the Sports starts to make a bit of sense. But the only Sports I'd want would be the silver with black band and, of course, you can't have that without paying £39 more. That's not such a great deal and feels a bit like a rip-off. Besides, you can't have till July.

So I'm back to my clockwork watch. Big, clear, easy to read. Feels like jewellery. And, actually, only cost as much as a Sports.

If they bring out an Apple Watch Plus, and if the updates to the OS solve the problems the watch has, then I might be back in the market.

 

[ToroidalZeus]

Wearables are different. Clothing and jewelry are things that aren't purchased primarily for rational reasons. Samsung, Motorola, Pebble, and others tried a one-size-fits-all approach to watches. It doesn't work. People don't mind having the same phone or Mac as everyone else, but they don't want everyone wearing the same thing as they do. I don't like the Sport Band, and wouldn't buy the Apple Watch Sport for myself, even if it were half the price. But spending $650 for a stainless steel watch is fine with me, and about the same as a nice regular watch will cost. Sure, it's a gen 1 product, but how much evolution do we really expect? Battery life will get better, maybe the bezel will get a little smaller, and maybe it will get a little thinner. But it will always be a small screen with limited functionality. This is one product where more choice makes it easier. Get the one that looks the best, mix and match bands, and get on with it.

I do agree that Apple is no longer so clearly defined by the Pro/Consumer/Portable/Desktop quadrant that Steve Jobs introduced in 1997, and that they are at risk of product creep, but that's partly because the market has changed. The "pro" market is less important than the consumer market, and consumer devices are so powerful now, not as many people need or even want the "pro" devices anymore. iPhone is simply offered in large vs. medium, with older devices kept around to hit price points. Essentially that's the same with the iPad, though Apple probably should cull the product line somewhat (drop the original iPad mini and perhaps all but the cheapest iPad 2 and iPad Air in favor of the iPad mini 3 and iPad Air 2).

But with watches, they absolutely need to offer lots of band options. The core technology is the same, whether you spend $350, $1100, or $17,000. Again, buying jewelry and clothing is not primarily a rational decision.

Well that's why Rolex's revenue is 7 billion while Apple's is 183 billion.
The market you are talking about is very limited compared to the typical Apple product.

----------

The difference in weight between the 38mm and 42mm is pretty shocking at first. I agree about the 38mm feeling light though. Many of the 38mm SS actually weigh less than the 42mm aluminum with sport band.

Leverage works against you the further something is from your elbow and closer toward your fingers. In other words it multiplies the weight and makes it heavier than it would otherwise appear.