Why the Apple Watch Edition (and the rest) won't go obsolete.

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by odHbo, Mar 31, 2015.

  1. odHbo macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    #1
    I've read all over the internet that the Apple watch will be obsolete in similar life cycles as the iPhone. Here is why the Apple watch won't go obsolete:

    If it tells time, that's all it needs to do to compete with any precious watch.

    A new battery, like any other watch, will restore it's value.

    Status + Time Keeping = A Good Watch.

    If you offer someone an iPhone 1 or a rotary phone, they'll pick the iPhone and both at this point in time are only good for a phone call in most people's minds. The Apple Watch, like any other watch, just needs to keep telling time and it will forever compete with any other watch. Especially when its made of a precious material.
     
  2. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #2
    You're right, I should dig out my 1st generation 4GB iPhone and slap a new battery on it because it still makes phone calls.
     
  3. ninethirty macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #3
    Keep telling yourself that!

     
  4. BSDanalyst macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2013
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    #4
    You do have a point. But if Apple does successfully revolutionize the smart watch category which they intend to, it will become obsolete.
     
  5. kdarling macrumors demi-god

    kdarling

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    Location:
    First university coding class = 46 years ago
    #5
    You're forgetting that when the battery dies, it loses all track of time, making it useless until it can sync up with an iPhone that knows how to talk to that type of Watch.

    If Bluetooth disappears one day, or your descendants don't use iPhones, it becomes a useless object for telling time, just like many other current smartwatches.

    (Unless it can connect to a time source over WiFi on its own, which is doubtful. Apple likes to make its devices dependent on each other. Hmm. Or if there's a way to set the time onboard the watch itself, which nobody has seen yet.)
     
  6. Ries, Apr 1, 2015
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2015

    Ries macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    #6
    It is a gadget, its worth is solely measured against what other gadgets is out there. In 3 years time it's like iPhone 6 vs iPhone4 right now. You look at the iphone 4 and think, omg is that some outdated tech. Is the iphone 4 working? Yes, would you buy it over current gen? No *1.

    *1 Unless you're one of those running iOS 7.3.2 Beta 4.5 and refuse to update the software due to a perceived better battery life of 0.5 minutes a day.
     
  7. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #7
    As just a watch I have better, more attractive things to put on my wrist. The only reason to buy an AW is for its connectivity. Once Apple EOLs support it's a chunk of metal that tells the time but not really useful for it's truly intended purpose -- just a repurpose.
     
  8. kerosene macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    #8
    Wonderful proposition. Because you have to charge your Rolex, Breitlings, etc. as well every couple of days to tell you the time...

    :eek:
     
  9. KPOM macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #9
    It's slightly different since the original iPhone doesn't support modern mobile networks, and carriers are gradually dismantling. As long as future Apple iPhones (or other products) support pairing with the Apple Watch, it will still be functional, albeit dated. A better analogy may be the iPhone 5. We are likely a decade away from mass deployment of 5G networks (the first won't be deployed until the Winter Olympics in 2018 in Korea). So an iPhone 5 will still be largely functional for years to come.

    ----------

    I'm planning to update the watch body every few years, but reuse the link band.

    It's a bit of a chance with the Space Black Stainless Steel, since Apple doesn't sell any band pairings other than the space black link bracelet for it. However, for all other watches it will likely be possible (until/unless Apple changes the hinge mechanism) to purchase the watch body alone or the Sport Band version in future years.
     
  10. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #10
    This exactly. Think about 10 years ago, 2005, and realize how much the tech world has changed since. In 2025, it is very possible that Apple is in Microsoft's position, cellphones are very different, bluetooth is long gone, etc. That is the real impediment to the :apple:Watch's long term usefulness. It isn't just a gadget, it is a gadget that depends on another gadget. It also likely cannot keep time terribly well on its own, over very long periods, and needs the regular syncing to fix that. I imagine in 10 years, the current :apple:Watch will be in a drawer and nearly unable to do anything with, because of it's reliance on the iPhone.
     
  11. KPOM macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #11
    Technology doesn't always move in a smooth progression. A computer from 2005 might still be running fine on Windows 7. Processor speeds haven't really changed much in the last 3-4 generations as Intel's focus has been on reducing power consumption.
     
  12. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #12
    I suppose that is true, albeit a bit of a stretch. However, that 10 year old computer does not really rely on anything else. The thought that today's current :apple:Watch will still be able to connect to an iPhone, and that Apple will still be replacing the batteries is pretty hopeful. Not impossible, but certainly a "best-case" scenario. I would doubt the watch is useful for much in 10 years, and if I were buying one, I wouldn't expect it to be. What is worse, is it may actually get less capable as the years go on. You can't even really say it will always do what it does today.
     
  13. KPOM macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #13
    I think 10 years is a stretch, but note that the AppleCare+ on the Edition extends coverage for 3 years. Since the functionality is exactly the same between the Edition and the other models, that implies that Apple will support the full functionality of the Apple Watch at least through the iPhone 7S.

    I expect in the future that Apple will update the Watch on the iPhone cadence, since it is viewed as an accessory to the iPhone. We do know that "independent" applications will be coming later this year, so those just require the ability to load them.

    I think it's reasonable to expect to use a watch for 3-5 years before replacing it. The bands are interchangeable, and the link and Milanese loop bands should easily last a decade.
     
  14. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #14
    I agree completely. I think 5 years is a decent expectation for the :apple:Watch, and I think that is totally fine at a price under $500. Once we start talking the prices of the stainless steel, then I think that 5 years is too short of a lifetime for the price of the device.
     
  15. Mildredop macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    #15
    Or, more likely, there'll come a point that Apple's new iPhone will only support "Apple Watch 3 onwards". Suddenly, the moment you buy a new iPhone, your 1st gen Watch becomes obselete.

    ----------

    Apple's entire business model is based on obsolescence. They'll ensure this watch becomes obselete so people have to go and buy a new one.
     
  16. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #16
    $549/599 for the base SS model is less than the base iPhone 6 model bought outright. Is there any reason to expect a longer lifespan for the Watch compared to the iPhone? Remember we're talking about smartwatches.
     
  17. KPOM macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #17
    Not if you can purchase just the watch body for $500 in future years. I think that will be possible.
     
  18. dacreativeguy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    #18
    If you all think Apple put so much effort into every detail, but didn't think about how to keep $17,0000 customers happy after one year... well maybe you'd be happier with a samsung or pebble
     
  19. J4B3 macrumors regular

    J4B3

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Location:
    Gamma Quadrant
    #19
    I'm sorry but the thing isn't even waterproof.

    Replaceable battery or not, the device is intrinsically limited by its silicon and the ability of its transistors to carry a current. A Rolex won't even be able to withstand the test of time without regular maintenance, but in that case it's just the replacement of a gear or tightening of its movement.

    This is a gen 1 product that will take several years of refinement.
     
  20. J4B3 macrumors regular

    J4B3

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Location:
    Gamma Quadrant
    #20
    They'll keep them happy by selling them a $20,000 watch next year.

    You seem to think that the kind of people buying the Edition care about maximizing their dollars. Buying a $17,000 Apple Watch is far, far, more outlandish than buying a $17,000 Rolex. It's about status, and the novelty of owning an Edition. These people aren't going to be putting them up for sale on eBay next year so they can upgrade. The last thing these people would want is to be seen wearing "last year's watch."

    "So much effort..."

    I think that's just the marketing speaking. These aren't handmade Swiss watches. These are assembly line watches made in China. If a small machining firm had the production budget of Apple and delicately described every process and ingot, you too would think you were buying a work of art.
     
  21. hemolyzer macrumors member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2015
    Location:
    ONTARIO CANADA
    #21
    I'm sorry but your whole post sounds like you are 80 years old and don't know how technology works.
     
  22. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #22
    Those $17,000 Edition "nouveau riche" customers will be happy to spend another $17,000 on a new model after one year as nothing screams "I have money!" more than their being obsolete in a few short years.
     
  23. Cashmonee macrumors 6502a

    Cashmonee

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    #23
    Well, is it a smartwatch or a watch? Apple seems to have very deliberately called it a watch, and therefore people have a different set of expectations. As a watch, there is an expectation that it should last a long time, much longer than 10 years at that price point. I don't think there is an argument to be made that this watch will last longer than 10 years. Perhaps in a few generations, but certainly not one dependent on a device that gets updated yearly.

    In comparison to the iPhone, it only has a subset of the features, and requires another device to work. I do not think this device is in any way equivalent to an iPhone, and should be priced accordingly. I don't think an iPhone's lifespan has any bearing on one's expectations of the watch's lifespan.
     
  24. JayLenochiniMac macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2007
    Location:
    New Sanfrakota
    #24
    Apple also avoided calling "iPhone" a smartphone.

    "Apple Reinvents the Phone with iPhone"

    "iPhone is a revolutionary new mobile phone that allows user to make calls by simply pointing at a name or number."


    Really no different from how they're marketing the Watch.
     
  25. chrise2 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    #25
    Apple solved this problem by not making the watch water proof. The odds of not getting water damage on a watch decrease over time. After 5 years, most of these will probably be busted. :)
     

Share This Page