Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The marketing department at apple did choose a rather interesting name for this edition, for sure: the Apple Watch "Watch" edition? Or am I reading that wrong?
 
Can't beat polished stainless steel for me.
I prefer polished titanium. 😉

I just got around to polishing my S7 Natural Ti and it turned out great!

473840BB-D0A8-4EA6-9075-C85B9AC34D4E.jpeg


That was after using nothing but Cape Cod and a Blitz polish cloth. A few days later I used some Morher's Mag & Aluminum polish with a dremel-attached buffer, and it shined up even better:

663841DF-0CA1-49E9-B5E5-4D5B3A288F79.jpeg
 
At what point will apple build at watch that moves beyond the “all day” battery life and gives us a min of 7 days on a single charge?

Garmin can do it, so can others

They can do it because their default "smartwatch mode" has very limited functionality and connectivity that dramatically reduces the power draw to maximize the battery life.

So disable most everything on the watch (like WiFi, Bluetooth, notifications, automatic activity tracking, etc.) and I expect an Apple Watch battery would last multiple days since the SoC would almost always be in low-power mode and the display would always be off or at the lowest refresh setting.
 
Here comes the problem: If I would buy e.g. a Panerai Luminor Marina, I have something that has a real value. Maybe it is worth more money the next year and it won‘t be outdated, for sure.

If I buy an Apple Watch, it's bound to be worth less, weedy and obsolete next year. So it is a waste of money to buy a titanium case.

If the only functionality you utilize is time and date, then your best fiscal move is buy a $30 Timex and invest the rest of the several-thousand dollars Panerai Luminor Marina cost.

Yes, Apple Watches should be viewed as a consumable, as should any technological device, and the value to the owner is from the utility / capability the device provides through it's expected service life. Your statement about "obsolete next year" shows some ignorance of the fact that their useful life can be multiple years though. Just like with phones, new features may draw someone to upgrade more frequently - or even annually - but that is a choice by the owner.

As for the price difference between the stainless steel and titanium cases in prior years, note that the titanium models came with an additional year of warranty and an additional sports band, lessening the actual difference for those for whom those bring benefit.
 
Last edited:
I admit I do not know why someone would spend the money for an Apple Watch with a Stainless Steel or Titanium finish or would buy an Apple Watch Hermès only to replace it every year unless they did not care about the price and the depreciation meant nothing to them.

Both of my Apple Watches had the Stainless Steel finish and I kept both for four generations (S0-S4 and S4-S8) to maximize the value I received from spending the extra for said finish.
I have an Apple Watch 3 space gray and even for me that was an expensive purchase. Which is part of the reason why I have kept it for so long. I recently picked up the Series 7 for my mom and I am going to delay my upgrade until fall next year when the Series 9 is available. At the end of the day? It’s still telling time and most of the other functionality will continue to work.
 
Hmm no thanks on this model. For me I’ve been fine with Aluminum.

I am looking this year to upgrade my series 3 to a series 8.
Considering jumping up to stainless steel this time so I can get a sapphire face and back side to help with micro scratches, particularly the back side.
 
They can do it because their default "smartwatch mode" has very limited functionality and connectivity that dramatically reduces the power draw to maximize the battery life.

So disable most everything on the watch (like WiFi, Bluetooth, notifications, automatic activity tracking, etc.) and I expect an Apple Watch battery would last multiple days since the SoC would almost always be in low-power mode and the display would always be off or at the lowest refresh setting.
I have Epix 2 and AW6 SS side by side, what is exactly disabled on my Epix other than always on screen?

That's two weeks worth of battery life vs 1.5/2 days. Rough on Apple.
 
Am I in the minority of not understanding the use case for a rugged model? Who's doing activities that require safety for their wrists insomuch it'd damage metal? Would you be able to wear a watch in these cases? I can understand for sake of the watch retaining its appearance, no scratching, but the sapphire screen achieves this very well. When I had my SS watch the scratches on the housing were expected, and the screen was pristine. When the device is attached to your body, the durability arguments make no sense to me, you're not dropping your arm on the ground with the watch.
 
Fun Fact: Had you bought the top of the line Apple Watch Edition in April of 2015 and paid $17,000 for a watch that stopped getting updates in October of 2018 (Watch OS 5) and instead purchased Apple Stock:

You'd have been able to purchase (at an average $31 a share) around 550 shares of AAPL.

You could have sold those shares today for for $152 or $83,600. You could have then purchased with those gains of $66,600 150 apple watches or a new one every 2 weeks.

Safe to say the gold Apple Watch was something no one should have purchased.
 
Fun Fact: Had you bought the top of the line Apple Watch Edition in April of 2015 and paid $17,000 for a watch that stopped getting updates in October of 2018 (Watch OS 5) and instead purchased Apple Stock:

You'd have been able to purchase (at an average $31 a share) around 550 shares of AAPL.

You could have sold those shares today for for $152 or $83,600. You could have then purchased with those gains of $66,600 150 apple watches or a new one every 2 weeks.

Safe to say the gold Apple Watch was something no one should have purchased.

The people who bought it either did so out of vanity or they were given one from Apple for PR purposes and therefore didn't pay for it.

The only reason the first Apple Watch Edition existed was as a sop to Ive. I wonder if Steve would have allowed it, but then Steve did allow Ive to make the 20th Anniversary Macintosh and that was about as equally a pointless expression of "because I can" hubris.
 
Last edited:
I can't imagine buying a $10,000 gold watch that would become obsolete within a year.

It would be really cool if they made the watches modular so that you could upgrade the display & chipset easily while still retaining the premium case.
 
It would be really cool if they made the watches modular so that you could upgrade the display & chipset easily while still retaining the premium case.

At the time there was speculation if Apple would allow Edition owners to upgrade the SiP inside them as new versions were released, but that of course never happened for any Watch model.
 
Apple Watch will be a NO until a 7-day battery. 18hrs lol WTF! How can you all be such slaves to the charging brick when alot of android watches are giving you 7-14 days battery. It's truly liberating! Dosnt matter that 10 features are all 10/10 when it is gimped on the most important feature...battery life!
 
Here comes the problem: If I would buy e.g. a Panerai Luminor Marina, I have something that has a real value. Maybe it is worth more money the next year and it won‘t be outdated, for sure.

If I buy an Apple Watch, it's bound to be worth less, weedy and obsolete next year. So it is a waste of money to buy a titanium case.
You don't have to keep it for just a year. I have the Titanium Series 5, this year I'll upgrade it. Wait a few years, and then upgrade that.

Otherwise, "obsolete"? For something to be obsolete it's no longer useable with current technology. Even the first Apple Watch isn't obsolete yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.