|
Honestly I don't think there is any reason to believe the Apple Watch isn't going to be great. Pebble has shown that watch notifications can be user friendly, powerful and useful, Fitbit has shown that fitness and HR tracking can be user-friendly and intuitive, Google has made some half developed strides in tying both together and making them arguably more powerful, everything is there to make the Apple Watch great, it just doesn't exist together which is why I wear a Fitbit and a Pebble/Android Wear device every day, also track my runs outside with my phone in a completely separate app for GPS. If anyone can make this work it is Apple, I'm cautiously very excited. Three Olives fucked around with this message at 02:00 on Feb 27, 2015 |
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
Apparently Snapchat has a thing where if you take a screen shot of a chat it gives you a big black mark forever even thought it still works. That should be a thing with sending your heart beat on the Apple Watch, you can use the feature but you are forever publicly marked as one of "them"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
I'm going to buck the trend and say under $2000 with almost all of the margin on the watch and not the gold. The $5,000+ figures are based on jeweler/watch maker markups, Apple will make it up on volume and I think that is why it is freaking the high end watch makers out, Apple is going to disrupt the high end watch market.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
SIR FAT JONY IVES posted:I think this is true, but really when you get a high end watch, you have it for the rest of your life. How long can you really expect the Apple Watch model you buy to last? Platforms change so quick, iOS updates will eventually EOF your model. Then what do you do? Not to mention the battery won't last more than a few years with out losing most of it's capacity? This isn't like an "Apple is doomed post", I'm just legit curious how they will handle those items. I think that is the point, technology has long passed the mechanical watch, Apple will argue that it should be something replaced every few years, pricing will reflect that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:You're trying to rationalize the same behavior of buying a Ferrari. At some point you just have enough money that you don't think about purchases and just say "eh gently caress it." The Apple Watch Edition is not a Ferrari, it's a Lexus. It's a status symbol with slightly better materials but it is ultimately a Toyota, pricing will reflect that. Luxury good is the wrong way to look at it, gold is a commodity, all the technology inside is basically commodity, if you take it apart an Apple Watch Sport and an Apple Watch edition are the same watch, I just can't imagine them taking much of a margin on the gold and by all accounts there is $1,200 worth of gold in it at absolute most, probably significantly less. Three Olives fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Apple's never been known to operate on a thin margin. There will be fat margins on the watch guts, I just don't see them taking heavy margins on gold. But say they do, $1,200 in gold max, say they take 30%, that's $1,500+$350, max. I just don't see them taking luxury good margins of 100s% Three Olives fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Feb 27, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
japtor posted:That's a uh, "Watch" one (without suffix) I guess? No clue on price since they've only mentioned $349 for the aluminum Sport models. Only thing I've seen is people speculating that the steel one would be around $1000 but nothing on the bands themselves. Steel will be under $800, closer to $500 and probably the best selling model. Bands will be upgrades up to a few hundred.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
hotsauce posted:Right. Do people really yearn to sleep with their watch on? I never understood the flip out reaction about nightly charging I guess. I'm not wearing a bulky watch to sleep. Not even a Rolex. May as well plop it on the Qi charger (360) as your head hits the pillow. The Apple watch will have a Qi charger, right? (zero interest in iOS, just curious)  I refuse to believe this is an actual problem, I go to bed and take my watch off and stick it on it's charger. I sleep with my Fitbit but like Karki pointed out if sleep tracking is really important to you there are dedicated devices. As long as the battery lasts all day and it has a really, really good automatic wake feature charging it every night is going to be no big deal.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
gerrps posted:Yes. Fitbit has a silent alarm feature that wakes you up with vibrations. I can't handle waking up to blaring alarms anymore. It would be a nice app to have on Apple Watch but it's not a deal breaker if I can't wear one to bed. I wear my Fitbit to bed, occasionally I will pass out with my Wear or Pebble on but end up getting up in the night and taking it off. I just can't see people sleeping with something bigger than the Charge nor wanting to.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:The reviews I've read of the various fitibit wrist straps (that have bothered to check. Hilarious number of "reviews" don't even check) have shown them to be accurate to within 10% for steps. It's -/+ like <5% for walking for me but way, way, way off for running. You can adjust the stride length but I haven't bothered to see how accurate it is since I always track my runs with GPS/Treadmill. I didn't really notice at all before the Charge HR because you couldn't set a workout but I run 5k+ a day and I'm lucky if it counts 2 miles of it, probably not even close to that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
Thermopyle posted:Are you saying that it's off on step counting for running or just distance measurement? I have no idea if the steps are off or not, if I knew how many steps I had in a mile I would have set the stride length months ago. But yeah, distance is definitely off by a lot on runs, miles.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2015 02:06
|
|
|
quote:Tim Cook and Jony Ive have both spoken numerous times about the Apple Watch Edition being more scratch-resistant than standard 18-karat gold, describing it as ‘twice as hard’ as standard gold but but without explaining how. A patent application (via Leancrew) appears to explain this–and shows that Apple saves money on the gold into the bargain. Yep, I'm sticking with my prediction that the gold Apple Watch is a lot less expensive that people are predicting, that would put the max gold content at closer to $800, likely closer to $500 which means Apple could sell it for $1000-$1200 and still pull off insane margins. Not fashion luxury insane margins but still high even for Apple. The whole argument for the insane $5-10k+ price range has been that is what other 18k Gold watches cost, do you really think that argument would fly if it was known that Apple was using a 3rd less gold in their watches? Three Olives fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
Paul Allen posted:The $10k or even $20k ideas just amaze me. Apple is a company that's all about the bottom line and making products people want because it's trendy, cool, etc., but those prices are just ridiculous. I'm with Three Olives on this. I would go with $999 for the Edition, maybe $1,299 but these $5k figures are ridiculous. Another thing I find interesting is a lot of this speculation seems to going back to John Gruber who is saying stuff like this: quote:Technically that’s possible, but it doesn’t make any sense to me strategically or in terms of operational efficiency. With storage tiers in iOS devices, the only difference is the capacity of the flash memory chip. That’s it. All the other components, and the machining and tooling required to produce them, are the same. With Sport and steel Apple Watches, everything you can see or touch is different. Different metal (aluminum vs. steel), different finishes (matte vs. highly-polished), different displays (glass vs. sapphire), different case backs (plastic vs. ceramic and sapphire). If the marketing argument doesn’t persuade you, the operations angle should. I just don’t see why Apple would bother with all this if the starting price for steel Apple Watch wasn’t at least around double that of Sport. Really? Apple was seriously considering using sapphire for the entire phone screen, there are non-insanely expensive phones out now that use sapphire for the screens. Yes it will be appealing but the marginal cost of a sapphire display over a glass display can't be more than $10-20 and steel is an appealing material but they make soup cans out of steel and aluminium, we aren't talking an inherently luxury material here. Why is everyone assuming that Apple is going to go from very healthy margins to like Gucci margins because they decided to make a watch? That is insane.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:I don't like the look of gold so anything that pushes the stainless steel down in price works for me. This is part of the reason I don't believe there is going to be an astronomical price point for the gold watch, it's going to have limited appeal even as the ultra-luxury watch. I don't like the look of gold on me, even if I could spend $10k on a gold Apple Watch like it was nothing I would go for the stainless steel. It's absolutely going to be a premium over the steel but I don't see an OMG premium and the steel is probably going to be the most popular device by far. By charging an OMG premium on a watch that many potential buyers wouldn't buy for style reasons I think the risk alienating top end customers. Obviously they are going to have to charge a premium for gold but not such a difference that steel buyers are afraid it is going to look like they cheaped out for not getting gold. Sport will be the watch teenagers get from Mom & Dad for their birthday.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
http://p.events-delivery.apple.com.edgesuite.net/1503ohibasdvoihbasfdv/m3u8/atv_mvp.m3u8 If anyone else is going to be watching this on VLC...
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
Endless Mike posted:I hope we get to see the truck's schedule again. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
Electric Bugaloo posted:
Wasn't there stuff from way back about how Tim was basically just as crazy as Steve and would routinely expect his top brass to respond to emails at like 3AM that involved running numbers and stuff?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 17:44
|
|
Oh Timb....
|
Now Trending on Google: How do I give myself Parkinsons?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
MAGIC MOUSE UPDATES NOW TIM
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
Gold Macbook priced at $34,000.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Did we already forget why Magsafe was loving awesome?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
Paul Allen posted:So what's the price? $1200? $1500? MacBook Sport $999, MacBook $1599, MacBook Edition $46,000.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Can't wait to track my standing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Super model completes first half-marathon in impoverished Africa with Apple Watch.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Thank you so much for Christie for riding the Apple private jet stuffed with cash back to California from impoverished Africa to appear at our event, it's been a true privilege.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:No seriously, how does it track distance and stuff without being tethered to a phone? IF it can do that accurately (using cadence sensors, etc) I would buy one, but I'm not running with my 6+. If it has to be tethered I'll stick to my garmin. They announced it has GPS at the first show.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Stickers, are we 5?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
Bow Wow Meow? Seriously this seriously marketed towards 5 year olds?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Serious Post: Why can't they put a HID emulator in these things so I don't have to keep a keycard/fob with me?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Curated.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:ok come the gently caress on that garage door thing is loving awesome, jesus christ this is tomorrowland poo poo. That's off the shelf stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
fordan posted:Because then people would have to accept that keycards can be duplicated. Can't they? I always assumed all the security of keycards was that you could deactivate them and the serials were impossible to guess.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
$50 more for mens size is bullshit, Jesus.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
gently caress this, I was going to consider moving back to the iPhone + Apple Watch steel but not for this pricing bullshit. Guess it's time to upgrade my Android Wear.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
smackfu posted:I don't much care about the gold price, but making the base one that fits me be $399 is rough.  This costs $200. Get it together with Wear Google, I expect some good poo poo very soon.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
I'm right some of the time. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
RVProfootballer posted:um... steel is expensive?? Which is why they make soup cans out of it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 19:55
|
|
not sure where the disconnect here. steel is expensive
|
Has there been any mention of the display? OLED seemed likely except it would be unusable for the sports stuff they are pushing, LCD would only be slightly better but would hurt the aesthetics, transflective would be ideal for sports but look kind of lovely otherwise.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 11:48 |
|
|
I wonder how water damage warranty claims would work with a device that is supposed to be somewhat water proof.
Three Olives fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2015 23:22
|
|