|
My wrists are very effeminate, thin, and hairless, so I am incredibly happy Apple made a child-sized version. I would probably have difficulty lifting my wrist if I had the Moto 360 strapped to it.
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:18 |
|
|
Reverse Centaur posted:My watch is bigger than the 360 and it would look silly if it was any smaller. People are different sizes and I'm not especially huge. I just took this pic
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:52
|
|
Whirlwind Jones posted:Not trying to poo poo on you or anything but I can't help but lol at the bezel on that thing every time I see it. Hey man sometimes I forget where the 45 minute mark is ok
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
Spatule posted:I agree with nearly everything you said (No GPS on the first iPhone, what the gently caress), at this point Apple could poo poo in most people's mouth and they would say it tastes like chocolate (see, the new macbook). You sure do get angry about a company who puts out products that people seem to like. Maybe you need a vacation or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
GATOS Y VATOS posted:You sure do get angry about a company who puts out products that people seem to like. Maybe you need a vacation or something. lol, you really showed that guy that posted 10 days ago about how he likes the watch bands Apple is making
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
If apple honestly gave a poo poo about their customers their "sport" model wouldn't be of less quality than their standard model. Of all the models that should be the "toughest," shouldn't the sport be the most rugged and able to hold up to abuse? But no, they decided to make it from lesser materials and water resistant and oh need to be tethered to your phone to do anything sporty. Enjoy your swim!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
y'all are seriously being a bunch of fuckboys about this watch. they fuckin' you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:If apple honestly gave a poo poo about their customers their "sport" model wouldn't be of less quality than their standard model. Of all the models that should be the "toughest," shouldn't the sport be the most rugged and able to hold up to abuse? But no, they decided to make it from lesser materials and water resistant and oh need to be tethered to your phone to do anything sporty. Enjoy your swim! It's less sport as in "I kill mountain lions with my bare hands for sport" and more "hey there sport, want a lollipop?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:y'all are seriously being a bunch of fuckboys about this watch. they fuckin' you. You are hilarious. Please tell me what other consumer electronics get your panties in a bunch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
guys, I'm right there with you. I've had the apple kool aid. I've had an iPhone since the 1st one. The difference is I learned my lesson. My eyes are open and I'm seeing critically. Apple is not giving you all they could. I think they even just released a statement saying that next year App developers will be able to make apps that work without the phone. They are basically blatantly telling you this generation isn't all it could be, even when it could. They purposely hinder their devices so they can premiere a "Better and Bigger than Ever!" the year after. Wake up. This isn't Steve's Apple. This is Tim's.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Appleghazi 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:guys, I'm right there with you. I've had the apple kool aid. I've had an iPhone since the 1st one. The difference is I learned my lesson. My eyes are open and I'm seeing critically. Apple is not giving you all they could. I think they even just released a statement saying that next year App developers will be able to make apps that work without the phone. They are basically blatantly telling you this generation isn't all it could be, even when it could. They purposely hinder their devices so they can premiere a "Better and Bigger than Ever!" the year after. Wake up. I'm not buying one in any case, but you seem to not understand that next year will always be better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:guys, I'm right there with you. I've had the apple kool aid. I've had an iPhone since the 1st one. The difference is I learned my lesson. My eyes are open and I'm seeing critically. Apple is not giving you all they could. I think they even just released a statement saying that next year App developers will be able to make apps that work without the phone. They are basically blatantly telling you this generation isn't all it could be, even when it could. They purposely hinder their devices so they can premiere a "Better and Bigger than Ever!" the year after. Wake up. Steve's Apple: the Apple that put every feature in the first year (regardless of the steady advance of technology) and then never updated anything. I still remember there only being a single iPhone model available until Steve died. Then Tim "Put out new models to improve our products for our customers" Cook took over and started screwing us over by releasing a better phone every year. I bet they'll release a better watch at some point too!! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
I feel like you people are purposefully ignoring what I'm saying. I'm saying Apple is purposefully holding features back and short changing their customers, MOST glaringly with this Watch. There are features they could very easily put in right now, but are holding back for later models, which pretty much means they're ripping you off. And if that's a company you want to keep supporting, that's fine, but as technology gets cheaper and cheaper, they will have competitors that challenge them and not be too far off, which hasn't been the case in the past. Why is the Sport the least sporty? Why is the battery life a joke? Why is the base model as much as unlocked iPhone? Why do I have to use their straps? Because they a bunch of assholes and you a bunch a fuckboys. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Endless Mike posted:Are you seriously angry that Apple releases a newer, better device year over year? Did you know? The third Apple Watch will be better than the one next year! Unless you buy an HTC phone 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:I feel like you people are purposefully ignoring what I'm saying. I'm saying Apple is purposefully holding features back and short changing their customers, MOST glaringly with this Watch. I'm ignoring what you're saying because your either an immature troll or someone who is needlessly and embarrassingly wrapped up in what other people buy. I don't know which is worse, but either way you aren't contributing anything to this thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
rear end Catchcum posted:I feel like you people are purposefully ignoring what I'm saying. I'm saying Apple is purposefully holding features back and short changing their customers, MOST glaringly with this Watch. The sport model is the cheapest and therefore the best model for people who want it exclusively as a fitness tracker. It's not marketed as "rugged" and definitely not as a swimming watch, so I'm not really sure what you're rambling about. The battery lasts a day. It's relatively short because the watch is so small compared to a phone, and it does a lot more than any other "smart" watch released so far can so it uses more battery. The next model they release will most likely have better battery life because of advances in battery technology and because of the other components getting smaller, allowing a slightly bigger battery. The standard model is expensive because it's a high end product made of premium materials aimed at people who can afford it. If you can't then get the entry level Sporr model. Or whine here like a little girl endlessly. There are already third party straps available, you don't have to use their straps. Seriously it's kinda sad how much you're angry about this. I can't wait to preorder mine in a week or so. I'm getting the black leather loop and ordering a green sports strap for when I exercise too 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
monkeu posted:The standard model is expensive because it's a high end product made of premium materials Actually 316l steel is normal for most watches, and sapphire really isn't that uncommon in low/mid range watches starting around 400-500ish. The standard model is made from pretty standard materials in all reality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Everyone needs to stop responding to him or ignore his posts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
monkeu posted:The sport model is the cheapest and therefore the best model for people who want it exclusively as a fitness tracker. It's not marketed as "rugged" and definitely not as a swimming watch, so I'm not really sure what you're rambling about. Sports generally require a certain level of "ruggedness", so it probably shouldn't have the word sport attached to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
blugu64 posted:Actually 316l steel is normal for most watches, and sapphire really isn't that uncommon in low/mid range watches starting around 400-500ish. The same stuff Tag Heurs or whatever are made out of? Super Dude posted:Sports generally require a certain level of "ruggedness", so it probably shouldn't have the word sport attached to it. Someone should let Fitbit know. Their fitness trackers are made out of plastic or some poo poo. I'm pretty sure aluminum is a bit harder than that 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
monkeu posted:The same stuff Tag Heurs or whatever are made out of? I'd be surprised if they sold any watches that weren't available with 316l and sapphire, with the exception of precious metals or vintage style watches. However you don't even have to go that far up market, there are Seikos with sapphire and 316l for around 400-500.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
blugu64 posted:I'd be surprised if they sold any watches that weren't available with 316l and sapphire, with the exception of precious metals or vintage style watches. However you don't even have to go that far up market, there are Seikos with sapphire and 316l for around 400-500. Yeah I'm wearing a stainless steel and sapphire Seiko right now that cost more than the Apple Watch I'll be ordering next week. And it doesn't do poo poo except tell the time!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
On the other hand, I'm wearing a Titanium, Sapphire, Atomic, Perpetual Calendar Citizen watch that is solar powered and won't need a battery replacement for a decade or longer. It cost me $299!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:34
|
|
|
bobfather posted:On the other hand, I'm wearing a Titanium, Sapphire, Atomic, Perpetual Calendar Citizen watch that is solar powered and won't need a battery replacement for a decade or longer. It cost me $299! I guess there's more to the cost of something than just the straight value of its materials then. Hmmm. At the end of the day if you can't afford a premium product then Apple products in general probably aren't for you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
monkeu posted:The same stuff Tag Heurs or whatever are made out of?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
monkeu posted:The same stuff Tag Heurs or whatever are made out of? Plastics in many many many situations are better for durability than aluminum. blugu64 posted:Actually 316l steel is normal for most watches, and sapphire really isn't that uncommon in low/mid range watches starting around 400-500ish. Anymore you can get "premium" watch materials in watches in the $150+ range. The Apple Watch may well be a fine device, but Apple is putting an unusually large number of screws to the wallet this time. monkeu posted:At the end of the day if you can't afford a premium product then Apple products in general probably aren't for you. That just explained a lot!
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
Hahah so I'm going to assume you're posting from a netbook running Linux and wearing a piece of rope for a belt, since apparently paying more for superior user experience, features, build quality and aesthetic design is a weird concept for you 
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
IuniusBrutus fucked around with this message at 00:16 on Apr 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
IuniusBrutus posted:No, but if you equate "I don't think this is a good value/they should be giving more" with "I can't afford this" then it sounds like something else is afoot. Of course something else is afoot, and it's funny to watch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
if you want a nice smart watch but don't care about fashion, buy the sport if you want a nice smart watch and like fashion and fancy looking things, buy the regular. the fact that fashion/jewelry pricing had zero basis on actual worth of the time/materials in the product is not news. if you don't like apple and are going to poo poo on anything apple related, why the gently caress are you in this thread? this thread sucks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
monkeu posted:I guess there's more to the cost of something than just the straight value of its materials then. Hmmm. Where's the guy who was insisting half a dozen posts up that the reason the Apple Watch was priced the way it was because of its expensive premium materials? Is he tied up in the closet right now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
zen death robot posted:Smart Watches are a dumb idea really
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
IuniusBrutus posted:you can get "premium" watch materials in watches in the $150+ range. Yeah that's all I was pointing out, they're not bad materials, they're just not anything special either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Where's the guy who was insisting half a dozen posts up that the reason the Apple Watch was priced the way it was because of its expensive premium materials? Is he tied up in the closet right now? My actual words were "it's a high end product made of premium materials aimed at people who can afford it" and I was talking specifically about the price of the regular edition compared to the Sport. So yes, in that situation obviously the materials are a factor in the price difference. You have trouble with reading comprehension huh?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:53
|
|
|
monkeu posted:My actual words were "it's a high end product made of premium materials aimed at people who can afford it" and I was talking specifically about the price of the regular edition compared to the Sport. So yes, in that situation obviously the materials are a factor in the price difference. You have trouble with reading comprehension huh? The regular edition? Isn't that the $10k one?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
RVProfootballer posted:The regular edition? Isn't that the $10k one?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Yeah sorry, I meant the regular version. Poor choice of words.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
monkeu posted:Yeah sorry, I meant the regular version. Poor choice of words. Not by you though, haha 
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:18 |
|
|
Totally new product lineup by apple looking to take over the industry - turns out to be expensive off the bat - news at 11 Anyone remember the iPod? IPhone? Par for the course you morons
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 03:32
|
|