The first ipad was $499. The problem with the watch is not the price, but the value. Its an ugly clunky product that offers little functionality.
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.
What to Expect at Apple's 'Spring Forward' Media Event
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The first ipad was $499. The problem with the watch is not the price, but the value. Its an ugly clunky product that offers little functionality.
No it won't unless you're not used to buying anything Apple and don't really want/need it.
Buying a $3500 computer in 1985 ($7K now) is expensive, this is nothing to most Apple owners that actually care for it... Seemingly not you.
I seriously doubt that the sizes will have a price difference. These are meant to be fitment choices and encourage people to buy the bigger watch if they are comfortable wearing it. The gold watch will even be priced appropriately to cover both sizes at one price point.
So, my predictions, based on more time spent in the watch industry than with computers. My father was a watch repairman, I sat on his lap and watched him fix watches when I was a kid, and I've always been a fan and had a collection of timepieces.
Sport: $349 with a colorful sport band. Either aluminum color.
Watch: $499, but justified with the inclusion of a $80-$100 band option. So, essentially, it's not a significant change in price as the Sport + an upgraded band would be able the same. This watch just isn't available with the sport band out of the box so the price of admission is higher. Either steel color.
Edition: $7,999 in your choice of yellow or rose. Possibly not sold without an appointment, and frankly - hard to picture anyone picking it up at an Apple store. Maybe a partner jeweler will be announced.
Bands, cheapest to most expensive
Sport Band $50ish
Leather Loop $80ish
Classic Buckle $100ish
Modern Buckle (non-gold) $150ish
Link Bracelet $200ish
Milanese Loop (this is going to be pricier than you expect) $250ish, maybe $300ish.
Modern Buckle (yellow or rose gold) included with edition, not available seperately, replacements only available to owners of the watch at an undisclosed price.
I'm suspecting I'd be spending around $800 on launch day for a steel watch with something leather and a link or milanese bracelet especially because I'm fond of 'beads of rice' bracelets, which is echoed a bit in the Milanese loop design. I like to have a summer and winter strap or bracelet options for watches where changing it is practical.
That being said, I'm surprised no one has yet echoed the purpose of a multi-thousand dollar gold watch - so you can buy a watch for a few hundred and say 'this is the same watch people are paying x thousand for' - that watch existing in the product line makes your inexpensive model have more perceived value.
Having a 'cheap' version of a exclusive watch in most luxury brands would be a disaster - a platinum whatever on a bracelet for $50,000 would take a hit in status and sales if a steel 'version' that looked 90% the same at a discount. In this case, the purpose of building the gold watch is to actually legitimize the cost of the lower model and Apple doesn't care how many they will sell.
There's my guess - I'm excited to see how it all pans out.
So, my predictions, based on more time spent in the watch industry than with computers. My father was a watch repairman, I sat on his lap and watched him fix watches when I was a kid, and I've always been a fan and had a collection of timepieces.
Sport: $349 with a colorful sport band. Either aluminum color.
Watch: $499, but justified with the inclusion of a $80-$100 band option. So, essentially, it's not a significant change in price as the Sport + an upgraded band would be able the same. This watch just isn't available with the sport band out of the box so the price of admission is higher. Either steel color.
Edition: $7,999 in your choice of yellow or rose. Possibly not sold without an appointment, and frankly - hard to picture anyone picking it up at an Apple store. Maybe a partner jeweler will be announced.
Bands, cheapest to most expensive
Sport Band $50ish
Leather Loop $80ish
Classic Buckle $100ish
Modern Buckle (non-gold) $150ish
Link Bracelet $200ish
Milanese Loop (this is going to be pricier than you expect) $250ish, maybe $300ish.
Modern Buckle (yellow or rose gold) included with edition, not available seperately, replacements only available to owners of the watch at an undisclosed price.
I'm suspecting I'd be spending around $800 on launch day for a steel watch with something leather and a link or milanese bracelet especially because I'm fond of 'beads of rice' bracelets, which is echoed a bit in the Milanese loop design. I like to have a summer and winter strap or bracelet options for watches where changing it is practical.
That being said, I'm surprised no one has yet echoed the purpose of a multi-thousand dollar gold watch - so you can buy a watch for a few hundred and say 'this is the same watch people are paying x thousand for' - that watch existing in the product line makes your inexpensive model have more perceived value.
Having a 'cheap' version of a exclusive watch in most luxury brands would be a disaster - a platinum whatever on a bracelet for $50,000 would take a hit in status and sales if a steel 'version' that looked 90% the same at a discount. In this case, the purpose of building the gold watch is to actually legitimize the cost of the lower model and Apple doesn't care how many they will sell.
There's my guess - I'm excited to see how it all pans out.
The original Macintosh cost more than $5000 (in today's dollars). In my Commodore 64 club, we all agreed that the Mac was the computer we really wanted, but none of us could afford it.
No way the elastomer straps are more expensive than the leather ones. Seems to me the only reason the Edition collection doesn't have metal straps is it would drive the cost up way too much.
Walt's review is from the eve of the iPad's release, based on spending substantial time with a review unit. The Engadget article is comprosed half a dozen different writers' responses on the day of the initial announcement. They each only got to spend a few minutes with the device. There were three months of negative press leading up to the release.
If you wanted a watch that acts like a smartphone, why not just get a smartphone?
----------
It hasn't been released yet.
material diff
In the past, the more expensive Apple products generally represented increased functionality/power (even if the Apple tax added a bit). But if their gold watch costs 7500, Apple will have simply given more bling to the 1% (who really do need more bling in their lives, right?). It's a sort of sad day, I think.
It will be amusing to see somebody compare how much it costs Apple to manufacture the watch with that much [read, little] aluminum, steel, or gold. Ha!
In the past, the more expensive Apple products generally represented increased functionality/power (even if the Apple tax added a bit). But if their gold watch costs 7500, Apple will have simply given more bling to the 1% (who really do need more bling in their lives, right?). It's a sort of sad day, I think.
It will be amusing to see somebody compare how much it costs Apple to manufacture the watch with that much [read, little] aluminum, steel, or gold. Ha!
Tech is minimalist. A gold smartwatch is like a station wagon with wooden sideboards--it is a design anachorism. Everyone laughs at the diamond studded gold watch--but the gold watch suffers from the same problems in principle.
Also, Panzarro is borrowing heavily here from Andy Warhol, who observed that rich and poor drink the same Coke in 'A to B and back again`
Personally I think the gold model is more about fashion and trying to market to women than anything else.
yup!
----------
Difference here is that Apple is now making both the gold goblets and the glass tumbler.
What does that mean? You haven't seen pictures of the device? You haven't seen the device demonstrated?
Tech is minimalist says who? Is there some written rule out there that says tech can't be fashionable? Why then did Samsung ditch plastic and removeable battery for a glass back phone? Why does Motorola's Moto Maker exist?
Source: apple.com/watch/overview
Edit: no, you can't send texts, but the watch will function.
Attachments
Last edited:
I, for one, am hoping they slip a nice little iPod Touch update into the mix. A6 or A7 powered, plus some more RAM would be quite nice. A 128GB+ option would be even nicer. ^_^
I think it was put best by Kirk McElhearn:
"The Apple Watch Edition is not a luxury watch; it’s just a gold-cased version of the cheaper watch. There’s nothing exclusive about it, nothing special."
A sane man that *actually* understands Apple.
He's *slightly* off base here (it comes in a much nicer box) but overall he's on point.
The watch has *less* 18K Gold by volume than anything in that size class due to Apple's patented process using a ceramic instead of another metal, so it doesn't have "nearly One Troy Ounce" of gold in it as other's have opined based off cad drawings and the like - these people didn't account for that.
"Switzerland should be worried" - That's why. Apple can make 18K gold for half the cost and bring it to "the masses" due to their process.
The Watch Edition is being targeted for/at/made for Apple's "wealthy" middle class customers...it is NOT being targeted at the "luxury" buyer. At all. It is simply showing up in places people *assume* are for that reason to heighten the profile and appearance for Apple's target market. It will be mass produced by machines. It isn't a "luxury" item any more than an iPhone is.
I think people *want* it to be insane for their own reasons...Fabulous by Association...Anything But Apple Confirmation Bias...but the reality is it is *more* in line with Apple's history and "DNA" to make a 'luxury-quality consumer electronic device for millions' than a "luxury device for 100,000"...they have the skill, engineering know-how and operations chops to be able to actually do it.
There is nothing *innovative* at all about a $7K-$10K gold watch. Apple's entire business model is based on product innovation, with a bit of invention sprinkled in here and there.
Of course, if you are Apple and you have warehouses full of money, you can just throw it at the problem. You hire TAG guys *not to become them* but to learn from them how to "TAG" at Apple's scale. You hire Burberry to learn how to "Burberry" at scale, Nike for the same reason.
Apple is going to always be Apple. The trick is how to move into new markets to grab more "wealthy" Middle Class aspirational dollars without looking "phony" (Hi Samsung).
This is what Apple is doing.
The problem is, people are constantly accusing Apple of being all looks and no brains so they discount all of these things, drop their own biases in, and you end up with people actually convincing themselves that *Apple* is trying to be Cartier
-K
"The Apple Watch Edition is not a luxury watch; it’s just a gold-cased version of the cheaper watch. There’s nothing exclusive about it, nothing special."
A sane man that *actually* understands Apple.
He's *slightly* off base here (it comes in a much nicer box) but overall he's on point.
The watch has *less* 18K Gold by volume than anything in that size class due to Apple's patented process using a ceramic instead of another metal, so it doesn't have "nearly One Troy Ounce" of gold in it as other's have opined based off cad drawings and the like - these people didn't account for that.
"Switzerland should be worried" - That's why. Apple can make 18K gold for half the cost and bring it to "the masses" due to their process.
The Watch Edition is being targeted for/at/made for Apple's "wealthy" middle class customers...it is NOT being targeted at the "luxury" buyer. At all. It is simply showing up in places people *assume* are for that reason to heighten the profile and appearance for Apple's target market. It will be mass produced by machines. It isn't a "luxury" item any more than an iPhone is.
I think people *want* it to be insane for their own reasons...Fabulous by Association...Anything But Apple Confirmation Bias...but the reality is it is *more* in line with Apple's history and "DNA" to make a 'luxury-quality consumer electronic device for millions' than a "luxury device for 100,000"...they have the skill, engineering know-how and operations chops to be able to actually do it.
There is nothing *innovative* at all about a $7K-$10K gold watch. Apple's entire business model is based on product innovation, with a bit of invention sprinkled in here and there.
Of course, if you are Apple and you have warehouses full of money, you can just throw it at the problem. You hire TAG guys *not to become them* but to learn from them how to "TAG" at Apple's scale. You hire Burberry to learn how to "Burberry" at scale, Nike for the same reason.
Apple is going to always be Apple. The trick is how to move into new markets to grab more "wealthy" Middle Class aspirational dollars without looking "phony" (Hi Samsung).
This is what Apple is doing.
The problem is, people are constantly accusing Apple of being all looks and no brains so they discount all of these things, drop their own biases in, and you end up with people actually convincing themselves that *Apple* is trying to be Cartier
-K
Considering the whole steampunk genre of well, not minimalistic tech... Turned into a whole look, I find that whole thing about tech being so called minimal very funny.
I think tech as minimalism as more to do with cheapness and the limits of large scale manufacturing limits of 1960-1990s than anything else. With 3D printing coming of age (even for metals) and IOT, tech / design will leave the world of cheap beige pablum for fashion like personalization of countless bits of wearable tech.
Cars were the initial tech for the masses and nobody would mistake any of the beautiful ones with anything minimal, and like fashion people wore their car as a statement of their identity.
If they dont upgrade the screen, then the new processors should help battery life considerably.
But once you get past 10 hours of battery life, how could you really need anything more? I mean even if you do a 15 hour flight, you will spend some time sleeping, eating, talking to others or something. You couldn't possibly run through your entire battery in one flight.
And if you are the rare type that has to work onsite, then get on the plane and fligh a long distnace, then throw an iPad into your kit bag.
Basically it seems to me that laptops have reached the level of battery life where there is almost no benefit to extending beyond here.
I'm with you and from my circle of tech friends who are not paid Apple shills, I'm getting the same message. Most of them have left MR years ago for varied reasons, I held on out of habit, but the forums are no longer helpful and discussions have taken on a more ferocious and hateful nature.
The problem with MR these days unlike back in 2002, it has too many entrenched resident fanboys. Dissent will not be tolerated and ridicule heaped upon those not happy with the direction Apple is taking on nearly every front.
I've used Apple products since the 80s but would not blindly follow every product they've released. I guess there are two camps these days, the one that like what Tim Cook is doing and the other are Steve Jobs loyalists, even though he's had plenty of missteps himself.
It's always the same 8-10 people on here that attack any voice critical of Apple.
You blind faithful don't seem to realize that your "resistance-is-futile" approach is driving people away.
I for one am NOT rooting for the Apple watch to fail, but am skeptical for similar reasons DFS describes and disappointed that the focus is off products I DO care about.
So you know the pricing already and you are an expert in watch pricing and marketing?
There's an example of a product I do care about. Fat chance we'll see one. I think Apple wants you to buy a full on 5K 27" iMac and use it as a monitor for your more powerful MacPro, seeing that the Sharp 4K option on their shop page costs $1000 more than the base 5K iMac.
He's right...
Look, the narrative being put forth isn't Apple's narrative. Now, if tomorrow, Apple trots out at the YBG and starts on some "thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars" row then fine...but there is no evidence, historical or otherwise, to support this.
Over $2.4K for the Apple Watch Edition *as it exists* (same as Apple Watch/but gold-encased and nicer box that doubles as a charge stand) would simply not make any kind of sense *for Apple* and it doesn't offer any value as neither a "smartwatch" (tho as a dev, I can tell you it is far, far, FAR more capable than Wear and Pebble, as you will learn tomorrow) or a piece of jewelry (not enough gold) to make it workable outside of "false scarcity" but it isn't being positioned as an "exclusive" item at all in ANYTHING coming out of Cupertino Proper. People just *assume* this because daily, folks sit around waiting for Apple to "lose their goddamned minds"
He doesn't have to be an expert on watch pricing or marketing. It isn't even being *marketed as a luxury item*...everywhere there has been marketing, even Vogue, has been the whole line.
So yeah. Maybe you've worked yourself into a hand-wringing frenzy based on guesses from people *hoping* Apple isn't going for their throats...the watch industry that sells to the affluent Middle Class. This thing isn't remotely a "luxury" item, Apple has never said it was and the only people that have seem to be doing so based on a fundamental lack of understanding of Apple's business model(s)
-K
Look, the narrative being put forth isn't Apple's narrative. Now, if tomorrow, Apple trots out at the YBG and starts on some "thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars" row then fine...but there is no evidence, historical or otherwise, to support this.
Over $2.4K for the Apple Watch Edition *as it exists* (same as Apple Watch/but gold-encased and nicer box that doubles as a charge stand) would simply not make any kind of sense *for Apple* and it doesn't offer any value as neither a "smartwatch" (tho as a dev, I can tell you it is far, far, FAR more capable than Wear and Pebble, as you will learn tomorrow) or a piece of jewelry (not enough gold) to make it workable outside of "false scarcity" but it isn't being positioned as an "exclusive" item at all in ANYTHING coming out of Cupertino Proper. People just *assume* this because daily, folks sit around waiting for Apple to "lose their goddamned minds"
He doesn't have to be an expert on watch pricing or marketing. It isn't even being *marketed as a luxury item*...everywhere there has been marketing, even Vogue, has been the whole line.
So yeah. Maybe you've worked yourself into a hand-wringing frenzy based on guesses from people *hoping* Apple isn't going for their throats...the watch industry that sells to the affluent Middle Class. This thing isn't remotely a "luxury" item, Apple has never said it was and the only people that have seem to be doing so based on a fundamental lack of understanding of Apple's business model(s)
-K