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
It will be interesting to see where they go price wise with this. I'm not too convinced with some of the predictions though. Before the first iPad came out, everyone expected it to be a $999 device but Apple came in way under this surprising everyone (though the hardware didn't live up those original expectations either!).
Well the big story tomorrow will be the composition of Apple's gold and how wrong "experts" were with the outlandish price points.
Apple composite gold is supposed to have many great properties including scratch resistance, but also contain less gold per volume in the device body.
Apple composite gold is supposed to have many great properties including scratch resistance, but also contain less gold per volume in the device body.
Oh thank you lord. Here I was thinking, that I was the only one who's jimmies were getting rustled by the constant click bait to normative articles written by fat dudes in their parents basement. I wonder if there is any ad revenue for the authors of these articles. Just do a Google search and you'll find 100s of similar links.
I agree with you to the max, macrumors need to revisit their mission statement or risk losing their position in the community to other competiting sites b
Unless you're keeping your 1st Gen watch in pristine condition.
New 1st Gen iPhones are now collector items (although the iPhone WAS something special for Apple - smart watch...eh)
What makes your guess about what women will do more accurate than hers?
I am a woman. I will be buying the
Watch.
Pricing thoughts
What I question , is why would an accessory to the iPhone , that otherwise completely depends on it for most of its functionality will cost more than the actual phone ? I understand the reasoning behind the fashion accessory and the higher prices for the Watch and Gold Edition , but , Apple needs to sell these new toys , question is , how much will people be willing to pay for the most appealing looking SS , the Gold is obviously not for everyone .I think the Watch edition most likely be around 550 to 600 dollars and the real catch will be the bands and that pricing will be determined according to the material you choose. For the entry level, compare it to the Nike Sport watch , it has been around for a long time , it looks nice on your wrist and it has GPS , of course it does not have all the extras that the Apple Watch and is priced at 150 dollars, plus if you need heart monitoring you need an extra strap and a sensor to be worn while you exercise . So , 350 is not a bad choice for what the Apple Watch brings to the table in extras features besides the fitness applications. I was hoping to get the SS edition and combine two different bands ,a plastic and a metal one , but , if the prices are as high as suggested I will opt for the entry level since I dont justify the expense on the SS , besides looking more like a real dressy watch. So for the fashion conscious , get your wallets ready ... I hope Apple keeps in mind the reality of its broad base , and makes the right decision on how to price the Watch SS watches ....
What I question , is why would an accessory to the iPhone , that otherwise completely depends on it for most of its functionality will cost more than the actual phone ? I understand the reasoning behind the fashion accessory and the higher prices for the Watch and Gold Edition , but , Apple needs to sell these new toys , question is , how much will people be willing to pay for the most appealing looking SS , the Gold is obviously not for everyone .I think the Watch edition most likely be around 550 to 600 dollars and the real catch will be the bands and that pricing will be determined according to the material you choose. For the entry level, compare it to the Nike Sport watch , it has been around for a long time , it looks nice on your wrist and it has GPS , of course it does not have all the extras that the Apple Watch and is priced at 150 dollars, plus if you need heart monitoring you need an extra strap and a sensor to be worn while you exercise . So , 350 is not a bad choice for what the Apple Watch brings to the table in extras features besides the fitness applications. I was hoping to get the SS edition and combine two different bands ,a plastic and a metal one , but , if the prices are as high as suggested I will opt for the entry level since I dont justify the expense on the SS , besides looking more like a real dressy watch. So for the fashion conscious , get your wallets ready ... I hope Apple keeps in mind the reality of its broad base , and makes the right decision on how to price the Watch SS watches ....
I just want to point out that all of Apple's first generation devices are never the best. The first iPhone was great at the time, but it didn't even have 3G...the first iPad was fantastic, but Apple stopped updating that thing long ago, yet the iPad 2 is still receiving updates...I am guessing we will see the same for the Apple Watch. The first generation will be great, but the second generation is going to be the one everyone wants.
I was making a facetious reference to the Nano watch bands that likely prompted Apple to consider the watch market in the first place.
I can't stand the sound quality of wireless earbuds. I have a pair of on-the-ear BT headphones that are just this side of acceptable, but I'd rather use my phone for music and podcasts.
I'm a real fan of Matthew Panzarino @ Tech Crunch. He just put up a great article about Apple, wesrables and Apple retail. I especially like the passage below:
http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/08/selling-a-wearable-apple/
http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/08/selling-a-wearable-apple/
This is the first product of Tim Cook's Apple so lets see what happens, it really depends on what they're targeting. Normal prices would be $350 for the Apple Watch Sport, $500 -$1000 for the Apple Watch, and $1000-$2000 for the Apple Watch Edition. But if Apple is really going to try to make this a luxury item then all bets are off. You could easily see them pricing the watch in the $10,000-$20,000 range.
I believe Apple is way over pricing these watches...I don't feel like any watch they have right now is worth more than $2000. I think Apple may be getting a little ahead of them selves when it comes to new market territory.
What I question , is why would an accessory to the iPhone , that otherwise completely depends on it for most of its functionality will cost more than the actual phone ? I understand the reasoning behind the fashion accessory and the higher prices for the Watch and Gold Edition , but , Apple needs to sell these new toys , question is , how much will people be willing to pay for the most appealing looking SS , the Gold is obviously not for everyone .I think the Watch edition most likely be around 550 to 600 dollars and the real catch will be the bands and that pricing will be determined according to the material you choose. For the entry level, compare it to the Nike Sport watch , it has been around for a long time , it looks nice on your wrist and it has GPS , of course it does not have all the extras that the Apple Watch and is priced at 150 dollars, plus if you need heart monitoring you need an extra strap and a sensor to be worn while you exercise . So , 350 is not a bad choice for what the Apple Watch brings to the table in extras features besides the fitness applications. I was hoping to get the SS edition and combine two different bands ,a plastic and a metal one , but , if the prices are as high as suggested I will opt for the entry level since I dont justify the expense on the SS , besides looking more like a real dressy watch. So for the fashion conscious , get your wallets ready ... I hope Apple keeps in mind the reality of its broad base , and makes the right decision on how to price the Watch SS watches ....
There's no way the Apple Watch Edition will be around that price, the gold alone costs more than that.
My statement was specific and accurate, based on personal observation. Your in denial.
I'm out...
The max I would pay for a device like this is $299. I like the idea, but just couldn't justify paying more than that for something I don't really need that will be obsolete pretty quickly (unlike an expensive analog watch -- which can last a lifetime and still be a functional and useful device, and even be passed down).
I have a clear need for a phone and for a tablet, but not a watch like this. I might think differently if it could do all of its functions without a phone near by.
Personally I think Apple would have been smart to start a bit lower on price to get the watch off to a fast start. More people like me who don't see the need for one but think it would be kind of neat to have would pick one up. It would help the momentum. But perhaps there are enough people who will buy anyway at the higher prices...we'll see.
The max I would pay for a device like this is $299. I like the idea, but just couldn't justify paying more than that for something I don't really need that will be obsolete pretty quickly (unlike an expensive analog watch -- which can last a lifetime and still be a functional and useful device, and even be passed down).
I have a clear need for a phone and for a tablet, but not a watch like this. I might think differently if it could do all of its functions without a phone near by.
Personally I think Apple would have been smart to start a bit lower on price to get the watch off to a fast start. More people like me who don't see the need for one but think it would be kind of neat to have would pick one up. It would help the momentum. But perhaps there are enough people who will buy anyway at the higher prices...we'll see.
Last edited:
I love Apple stuff and will be watching tomorrow's event with interest. However, cannot see myself buying any Apple watch from what I have seen of it.
Got a 1974 Rolex which I hardly wear and don't own an iphone so I guess the watch is not for me.
It might sell very well in certain markets but I struggle to see it as a big hit Worldwide but who knows it may get people interested in wearing watches again. Doubt it!!
Got a 1974 Rolex which I hardly wear and don't own an iphone so I guess the watch is not for me.
It might sell very well in certain markets but I struggle to see it as a big hit Worldwide but who knows it may get people interested in wearing watches again. Doubt it!!
The USA isn't really a beta test, the only reason it isn't elsewhere is because Apple never made any deals with banks etc in time.
People really overthink this. Having dealt with watch collectors on a daily basis for a couple of years, I can speak from experience.
There are two reasons people would pay a premium for gold (and to a lesser extent stainless steel): (1) some people can afford iteasilyand (2) customers who only wear gold watches want gold watches. They're not deliberating over the long term value proposition, handwringing over obsolescence or worrying about whether gold watches appear ostentatious to strangers. They see a nice looking watch, they want it, they buy it, and when the next model comes out, they'll drop the same amount of cash for that one.
10 years ago I think I paid an extra $300 for a black MacBook because I wanted black. Granted, that's not in the same league as paying a premium in the thousands, but it's the same in principle. People want what they want, and if they can afford it they'll buy it.
i hope it flops, hard. at least the more expensive editions.
i'd really love to have a nice smartwatch, but i'm not going to buy the aluminium/plastic version that's going to put me in a lower class than those who can afford or want to shell out more for the steel version with better looking bands (don't get me started on the "crazy dictator"-gold-edition) and i'm also not going to spend hundreds more for a nicer casing for a 1st generation-throwaway-iphone accessoire.
sure, there will be some people willing to pay premium for a status symbol - i just hope they won't be enough to make it worth for apple.
a luxury edition is lightyears away from the "computer for the masses" dogma from 1984, and while it fits the lifestyle and mindset of some of apple's designers ( just read this: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/23/shape-things-come ), it deserves every sh**storm it is hopefully going to get.
i'd really love to have a nice smartwatch, but i'm not going to buy the aluminium/plastic version that's going to put me in a lower class than those who can afford or want to shell out more for the steel version with better looking bands (don't get me started on the "crazy dictator"-gold-edition) and i'm also not going to spend hundreds more for a nicer casing for a 1st generation-throwaway-iphone accessoire.
sure, there will be some people willing to pay premium for a status symbol - i just hope they won't be enough to make it worth for apple.
a luxury edition is lightyears away from the "computer for the masses" dogma from 1984, and while it fits the lifestyle and mindset of some of apple's designers ( just read this: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/23/shape-things-come ), it deserves every sh**storm it is hopefully going to get.
Last edited:
Revisionist? You seem to forget the four-month window between the iPad's announcement and its release. Allow the Engadget staff to refresh your memory on how the announcement was received:
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/27/editorial-engadget-on-the-ipad/