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.
Will Jony Ive get demoted now that the watch is a flop?
- Thread starter yalag
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Good lord, talk about jumping the gun...
Let's be clear shall we, the most negative review I've seen today (that'd be The Verge) gave it a 7/10 while calling it the best smartwatch around. Looking at headlines on Google these are the top five (excluding those that don't pass judgement in the byline) at time of writing:
Telegraph: Object of Desire
Wall Street Journal: The Smartwatch Finally Makes Sense
Bloomberg: You'll want one but you don't need one
New York Times: Bliss, but only after a steep learning curve
Mashable: The best smartwatch on the market.
Business insider is panning it via aggregation but bashing Apple is kinda their schtick these days so no surprises there. But words like 'Desire' and 'Bliss' are hardly those used by reviews that say don't buy it.
Actually the one that gets me is that Bloomberg article as it points to a fundamental disconnect I'm seeing more and more with tech reviews. "You don't need on". Need. I'm sorry but in general terms no-one "needs" any bit of technology. Smartphones? Nope, I know several people that are more than happy with their old Nokia. PC's? Difficult to avoid these days but they're still not (yet) required for modern life. The entire concept of 'needing' a device is silly and tries to put a neat little box around "wanting" a device.
And that's what wearables boil down to. Do you *want* one? Is it something that you can see a use (or many uses for), is the design something you're happy to wear and - when you get right down to it - is it desirable to you. Those questions are baked into the DNA of wearables, hell look at Google Glass for the perfect example. The problem is that doesn't fit some peoples narrow world view so we end up with silliness like this.
Let's be clear shall we, the most negative review I've seen today (that'd be The Verge) gave it a 7/10 while calling it the best smartwatch around. Looking at headlines on Google these are the top five (excluding those that don't pass judgement in the byline) at time of writing:
Telegraph: Object of Desire
Wall Street Journal: The Smartwatch Finally Makes Sense
Bloomberg: You'll want one but you don't need one
New York Times: Bliss, but only after a steep learning curve
Mashable: The best smartwatch on the market.
Business insider is panning it via aggregation but bashing Apple is kinda their schtick these days so no surprises there. But words like 'Desire' and 'Bliss' are hardly those used by reviews that say don't buy it.
Actually the one that gets me is that Bloomberg article as it points to a fundamental disconnect I'm seeing more and more with tech reviews. "You don't need on". Need. I'm sorry but in general terms no-one "needs" any bit of technology. Smartphones? Nope, I know several people that are more than happy with their old Nokia. PC's? Difficult to avoid these days but they're still not (yet) required for modern life. The entire concept of 'needing' a device is silly and tries to put a neat little box around "wanting" a device.
And that's what wearables boil down to. Do you *want* one? Is it something that you can see a use (or many uses for), is the design something you're happy to wear and - when you get right down to it - is it desirable to you. Those questions are baked into the DNA of wearables, hell look at Google Glass for the perfect example. The problem is that doesn't fit some peoples narrow world view so we end up with silliness like this.
I believe they saying it's a great smartwatch but asking if you really need a smartwatch.
I've seen lots of comments like this. I don't really remember reviews of the original iPad, but I definitely remember thinking that if a lot of developers adapt their existing iPhone apps for the iPad it would be a terrific device. I didn't buy one right away, but the appeal of the device was pretty obvious.
With the Watch, in this iteration, I'm left thinking "that's it? that's all it does?" whenever I watch presentations of it.
I'd buy one for $99, or even $199 for the stainless steel edition. But at current prices, I feel it is overpriced for what it does.
Do I think it will flop? I hope not, because I hope Apple keeps working on it to make it a really good product
You couldn't be more right. Only complete morons that need hit in the head with a brick say things like 'do you need it?' 'Is it essential?' 'Can you not live without it, like your phone or tablet?'. Absolutely embarrassing that these are the people that get to review products. Only unintelligent people would attach these types of statements to products they are reviewing. The sad part is that nearly all of them do it. Hence why you can't trust reviewers...they just aren't intelligent enough. First of all, the last thing they should give is their opinions..they should strictly talk about the functions and how it performs.
They have no business asking that question, or giving their opinion. They should strictly discuss what it does, and how well it does it (i.e. how it performs).
It is not a flop until the customer says it is, what the reviews say doesn't matter. like all news stories they are 80% supposition, and is only what the reporter thinks. If it is a flop then it will be the users that will make that decision
While I am certainly an Apple Watch skeptic, this is just a troll trying to stir up trouble. There is no way to know the success of the watch until months after the release. Even if it was a flop, Ive will still be sitting pretty with his track record.
The problem is..........
One could rephrase that and say the Apple watch is the best version of a product it's been shown that no one really is interested in.
That's like me making the worlds best home banana curve testing device.
It shows the most accurate reading of the curve of your banana, far more accurate to 0.1 of a degree than any of the other banana curve testers currently on the market.
(That no one wants)
Yes?
The posters in this thread didn't even read the reviews LMAO
That's the title of a macrumors post this morning!!
David Pogue's line quoted.
You guys aren't even reading the reviews LOL
This man speaks the truth. That's what all the reviewers are saying. He just explained it much better than I did.
It doesn't mean because YOU don't need one that the rest of the world doesn't. You have a very limited view of the world. There is a tons of things in life that were deemed "not needed" that were high commercial success in the past. The Apple Watch will be a commercial success.
There's a difference between want and need. I agree that the Apple Watch is not a need, though I would also argue the iPhone and iPad are not needs as well. But all of those are wants, and there is some want with it, dismissing your first claim.
Plus, it isn't considered a flop until it sells far less than expected, AND IT ISNT ON SALE YET!!! Come back in 6 months and we'll have this discussion again.
I think it's a bit premature to call it a flop, but this is disappointing for Apple. No, Jony Ive isn't going to get demoted, but I think people are going to realize more than ever that Steve Jobs possessed something that the decision makers at Apple right now don't.
They'll refine over time, and make it better, but it'll continue to remain a niche product.
In my opinion, Apple should have geared this mostly towards health and fitness, with the ability to switch out bands so it could be worn outside of health and fitness as well, instead of segmenting things the way they did, and especially with Edition. Time will tell (pun intended), but I don't think this is going to be a major player for them.
They'll refine over time, and make it better, but it'll continue to remain a niche product.
In my opinion, Apple should have geared this mostly towards health and fitness, with the ability to switch out bands so it could be worn outside of health and fitness as well, instead of segmenting things the way they did, and especially with Edition. Time will tell (pun intended), but I don't think this is going to be a major player for them.
Remember no one made you the judge. Calling troll is against forum rules, they do a good job and do have the authority. Be advised before it's you that gets banned.
I've read the reviews, and I'm still buying. That doesn't mean it won't be a flop, I'm only one person, but the reviews don't mean is will be either.
What makes a flop is whether people buy or not. As it isn't even for sale yet, it's premature to label it a flop, or a success.
Other than Gruber's review, it seems like the rest are essentially saying "this device, that does things better than any other device in its class, does not live up to a standard that I invented in my head." It is as if they've already made up their minds what the 3rd generation should be and are docking the current offering as a result.
Thing about reviewers(good reviewers).....when they say something isn't a buy right now, they are giving their honest advice because it's their job.
But at the end of the day just about all of them will buy the watch anyway because it's a really good piece of tech.
Each one of them loved the apple watch. They just couldn't give it a 10. But what first generation product from Apple, let alone any company is ever a 10.
Apple will sell millions of watches because people want one. They aren't buying it because they need it. The word need is used to justify their purchase.
Last edited:
Honestly...........
I really wish Apple had FOCUSED this device into one precise and exact area.
Or..... Their other option would of been to bring out, 2 or 3 watches, each of which are focused, with laser beam accuracy at precise markets.
A dedicated sports watch.
A dedicated everyday watch.
A dedicated high end extravagant dress watch.
An not just tried to make 1 device do everything.
It would be like looking at the car market, seeing all the different types, and Apple thinking.
We are bringing out the "Sports Haulage Pick-Up Race Truck Car Van"
But it will come in 3 colours.
I still think it's a complicated mess.
Vastly more than many people will every need or want.
Not good enough to replace dedicated sports watches.
Not special enough to replace beautiful dress watches.
They should of kept it simple and FOCUS.
Rather than this bucket of random tools thrown in together than NOW is going to need sorting out and clearing up.
I really wish Apple had FOCUSED this device into one precise and exact area.
Or..... Their other option would of been to bring out, 2 or 3 watches, each of which are focused, with laser beam accuracy at precise markets.
A dedicated sports watch.
A dedicated everyday watch.
A dedicated high end extravagant dress watch.
An not just tried to make 1 device do everything.
It would be like looking at the car market, seeing all the different types, and Apple thinking.
We are bringing out the "Sports Haulage Pick-Up Race Truck Car Van"
But it will come in 3 colours.
I still think it's a complicated mess.
Vastly more than many people will every need or want.
Not good enough to replace dedicated sports watches.
Not special enough to replace beautiful dress watches.
They should of kept it simple and FOCUS.
Rather than this bucket of random tools thrown in together than NOW is going to need sorting out and clearing up.
Jony Ive is a watch guy. That's why they did this. I think it will be a reasonable success. It's not the next iPhone, but it doesn't need to be. Apple may well plan to focus on health and fitness, but the technology isn't there yet.
Long term, I think Apple is right to focus on fashion. After all, fashion is about selling things that people don't "need." Most items of technology were "wants" before they became "needs." I remember when only rich people had cell phones. Then they became "wants" for the average person, then "needs." A device with such a small screen will likely never fully replace the modern phone, at least not by itself, even if it might replace certain elements of it (including telephony). But lots of people still wear watches, and others can be convinced to do so.