I completely agree with you. Those early posts about a new model this fall were ridiculous. It may be several years before a new version. And, as you stated, likely to be more cosmetic changes than anything else. I also liken it to the Apple Tv. Mostly software updates, few hardware changes.
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.
Why is the Apple Watch such a tough sell?
- Thread starter Macwick
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree that the external design will change little, if at all, over the next few years. But I think that internal hardware improvements will come periodically to improve performance and battery life. The current UI lags sometimes. In part, that's related to the AW's dependency on the iPhone, so that should improve with Watch OS 2.0, but there are definitely areas where better hardware will make a significant difference. The recent Anandtech review, which I thought was fair and well-written, makes this point nicely. Having said that, I've very happy with my AW in its current form.
I wouldn't be surprised if they added new material or band options. But no changes to the base design expected until at least middle of next year IMO.
As for the watch being a "tough sell", as a shareholder of Apple I am not worried. I expected this would take time to "sink in" and gain appeal. Like the iPad when it first launched, many people needed to figure out why they wanted another gadget category. The appeal builds over time. Seems like they had a great start.
It will not surprised me there will be a liquidmetal case with price around $4000-$6000 price range, mostly to fill in gap between practical and the rich.
And yes, there will be a lot of people buying it, because it will become one of the kind case, even in normal watch world, other than Omega which only has LM front bezel. Maybe Apple might even release it as limited edition to boost both sales of LM-AW and promote their capability to create one of kind jewelry worth to collect. Even though all Apple product are "limited edition" in some sense.
For anyone think Titanium might be better, read the chart from Liquidmetal Technology website link below.
ML is both stronger and harder than Titanium.
http://liquidmetal.com/properties/properties/
Not so with watch collectors. Many are used to it and some were actually disappointed by how light the Link Bracelet is.
From link here: http://www.differencebetween.net/object/difference-between-steel-and-titanium/
"In unalloyed condition, titanium is 45% lighter, and as strong as steel. We can presume that the same rod of steel will be 5% stronger than titanium, but titanium will be 40% lighter."
So yes, there is possibility to create alloy steel stronger than titanium, which ironically has 56% steel, according to link, but it will likely be heavier.
Also do a google image with "titanium watch", there is page and page of them.
I think the PITA factor would make apple even more likely to do it.
They like doing difficult stuff because:
- They can!
- They like to show off that they can
- They like being the first with unusual materials
- It's hard for less-able competitors to copy.
Nah, we'll see new bands and case materials or surface finishes/colors only.
New variations, not new models is my prediction for the next few years. If the innards get upgraded (and they might) they will be silent upgrades.
There is no such thing as Apple product silent upgrade thanks to ifixit.
Well after having cycled through 6 fitness devices over the last 7 months I finally gave up and bought a watch. I was one of those tough sell guys who didn't want to have to deal with the daily charging and was scared of the water resistance issues, but nothing else seems to work for me so 'twas time to try.
That was one of my holdout reasons. I was a hard sell at first. Then my wife urged me to get one as kind of a gift. A month later I'm using my $600 AW every day all day and still discovering new conveniences. My old $100 watch only told time, and I had to reset it periodically plus spring and fall. My AW does time far better: resets itself, accurate to nearest second, timers, world clock, all Siri-activated -- say $250 value just for that. Then on top of that I can manage most of my text notifications and phone calls without fishing out the iPhone -- add another $200 value. Then on top of that I get all the other conveniences without fishing out the iPhone: appointments, shopping list, map, music, weather, fitness -- easily worth the remaining $150.
That's a good breakdown.
I've got a Garmin that does GPS and HR, and it cost something like $450; but it's thick and ugly, and it can manage just 8 hours at most when GPS and HR are tracking. I've got a Citizen atomic-sync solar watch that cost another $400 and will likely run until cockroaches rule the Earth, but all it does is tell time (even if it looks good in a suit). Already we're approaching the cost of an Apple Watch on the link bracelet, and I haven't yet counted the automatic Seiko diver and solar-atomic G-Shock that I also rotate through, never mind the heirloom 50- and 75-year-old watches parked in my drawer, or the $2K Swiss beauty that my godfather gifted to me this Spring.
I've certainly got an assortment of watches that the AW may never duplicate. But, if it proves useful enough, its utility may trump the fashion and tradition of the others, at least for regular use. I've said elsewhere that I can think of a use for the AW in nearly any circumstance.
Lol good luck with that 60 buck watch. Yes you can buy any priced watch that tells you the time. Quality is probably going to be suspect. Sort of like buying a 100 dollar suit, or a 50 dollar pair of dress shoes...
That's fair, my point is most people this a good watch is 100 or less. Again not knocking those brands, or folks that won't spend on a watch. But a actual mid quality timepiece runs more than people think.
I have one, and do like it.
That said, I can see why not all people are rushing to buy one.
It's a cool piece of tech, but also a tad cheesy.
Sort of like a bluetooth earpiece or a fanny-pack.
That said, I can see why not all people are rushing to buy one.
It's a cool piece of tech, but also a tad cheesy.
Sort of like a bluetooth earpiece or a fanny-pack.
Oh dear lord, I hope not! :-D
I just got my AW, but I'm not sure if my wife will want one. She's got three watches and never wears them. One, a ladies' Rolex handed down from her mother, is arguably the nicest mechanical in the house, but I've only seen her wear it once, to time a college exam.
She just doesn't like wearing anything more substantial than a bracelet on her wrist, and she says (rightly) that her phone has the time when she needs it. She uses her laptop or iPad far more often at home, and she doesn't need to know the time very often anyway.
She may change her mind as I continue finding the pros and cons of mine, but it might be a while. Besides, the plan has been for me to get the AW while we upgrade her to the plus-sized iPhone this Fall.
I think, at least in my opinion, the Apple Watch is well above a fanny pack in terms of style and aesthetics... but the bluetooth earpiece hits close to home. Something that did cross my mind when I pondered buying the watch was the image in my head of a guy wearing a bluetooth earpiece. I really did not want to be that guy. Fortunately wearing something on your wrist doesn't stick out as much as wearing something big and plasticky in your ear.
I don't think that many people even notice I am wearing anything unusual on my wrist. Not that I'm going to sweat it either way. I am willing to take a fashion risk for something so useful, but I drew the line at bluetooth earpieces even before Wired published an issue with Brad Pitt wearing one on the cover and the caption: "Even he can't pull it off, and you're not him."
Sean
I completely agree with you. And I've collected and worn many watches over the years, I've never seen a $60 watch that I would actually wear.
I've seen someone mention before about having to flick your wrist to see the time with an Apple watch. Well unless you have x-ray vision you're going to have to do something with your wrist to see the time on any watch unless you have that rare breed of $60 watch that reads the time to you. The effort required is exactly the same.
And there are multi thousand dollar watches that have to be hand wound each night so how much of an effort is involved in slapping an AW on a charger? For some of us especially those with the 42 it doesn't have to be a daily thing.
I'm amazed at the number of people that are so dissatisfied in their lives that the only therapy they can afford is to come here and rant. If you're simply not interested in a product that's fine, nobody cares.
Yeah exactly and my original point was not saying the Apple Watch is perfect. Everyone is entitled to their opinion about it, and it's really not for everyone. I thought about returning mine early on, but the. I found the couple things that it really did for me personally.
Yeah the raise to view has never been an issue for me, as you have to raise to view any watch. The battery excuse is a weak crutch IMO. The battery on my watch has been fantastic, save the first couple betas of OS 2. But I've worn mine for a 14 hour work day with moderate use and got home with 40% or more.
Mine's still going strong after 26 years. Just a battery change every five years or so.