Latest Apple Watch estimates: 3M sales, $2B revenue, Apple’s most profitable product ever

[Misanthrope]

I'm just disappointed in the future of asking someone "Hey what time you have?" to have a "Don't know, ran out of battery" answer.

[Misanthrope]

People spend thousands on a watch because they can afford it. The kind of person that can put down 10-20 thousand for a watch, isn't exactly struggling to make a decision. They don't need to think. They just buy. This is the market we are dealing with. 

And it seems to be working not only for AP, Rolex, Tag and Patek; but Apple as well. Do you really think people spend 20,000 on a Royal Oak because of the intricate craftsmanship or how much heart and soul it has? No, they spend it because it has a name. Because its a good looking piece of "I've made it in life". The Edition sends the same message. 

It does take two to quarrel, yet I'm not the one making the same shitposts in every Apple thread about how consumers are sheep, fanboys, idiots or peasants; nor am I digging up the same tired responses about how Apple is overpriced for everything or too stupid or whatever other flavour of bullshit that the kids have this week. 

 

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. If I had my way I'd straight up ban people from my threads. Not people like you, or Pras; you guys often make arguments I can agree and respect. No, I'd ban all the other fucking morons who insist on derailing threads like this with their shitposts, even after people have told them to piss off and stop. 

 

Precisely, or to quote a great movie:

 

"You see this watch? This watch costs more than your car"

 

[MrDynamicMan]

So what about the Pebble Time Steel then? It was $250 on kickstarter -- and no longer available (retail is supposed to be $300) and is much less functional than an Apple watch. So it's just as bad, yet I don't hear many complaining about it.

The new MBP: Because we can. It serves an interesting part of the market -- those that want extreme portability that would normally get a tablet, but now can get something far more useful like a full-fledged laptop. Did they make some mistakes (I think so...they should have added at least one more port), but that's besides the point.

The Time steel has like 9 days of battery life! As far as I know it does the main things you use a smart watch for like notifications and the Time. It is the flagship of pebbles range @$300. Sure it's processing performance isn't as good a apple's. It doesn't need to be, it's a better watch and a better smart watch than the Apple Watch

[79wjd]

Usually I think that things like this is nonsense but with a very high quality watch you are buying it for the looks and feels and brand, but it is a very lovely piece of engineering. All the cogs go so well together and it has a "soul". The Apple Watch is very sterile and lifeless, on top of just being a shit watch. In before certain users attack me for saying the watch is shit and then projects harder than the VPL-GTZ1.

The one flaw with that argument, is that designer watches very often have awful movements -- to the point where a $5 Timex actually has a better one. 

[Guest Generallee]

"oh noes people buying things i cant afford from a company i hate for no reason other than it makes overpriced products while i completely ignore the fact that its luxury and it doesnt need to justify the price, and also i'm writing this from a laptop which design is probably a blatant knockoff of the macbook pro but it's 1000$ less and it's gonna break tomorrow"

 

and blah blah blah 

[79wjd]

I have explained it in the past post , as always its very expensive for what it is.

There are better alternatives , some of which dont even need a android or ios device SPECIFICALLY and can work with both.

You have the moto 360 , the pebble steel and and the lg watch R.

All of them cost less than the apple watch that is 350 dollar for the ENTRY  level.

The 360 and G Watch R are both tied to Android, and the Pebble Time Steel (since that should also be considered) is only $50 cheaper, and is functionally much less useful. 

The Time steel has like 9 days of battery life! As far as I know it does the main things you use a smart watch for like notifications and the Time. It is the flagship of pebbles range @$300. Sure it's processing performance isn't as good a apple's. It doesn't need to be, it's a better watch and a better smart watch than the Apple Watch

I'll give it that it's a better watch due to lasting longer...but it's certainly not a better smartwatch considering the limited functionality compared to that of the Apple Watch. 

[LAwLz]

I'm just disappointed in the future of asking someone "Hey what time you have?" to have a "Don't know, ran out of battery" answer.

You need to change the mentality. Think of it as a feature. When the battery runs out then you know that it's time for a lunch break. Not even a 10,000 dollar traditional watch has that kind of functionality!

[79wjd]

You need to change the mentality. Think of it as a feature. When the battery runs out then you know that it's time for a lunch break. Not even a 10,000 dollar traditional watch has that kind of functionality!

Sarcasm aside, the Apple Watch is targeting the power user -- the one who prefers features to battery life. I honestly see no issue with a watch with mediocre battery life IF it offers something to make up for that poor battery life (i.e. performance). 

 

It's like complaining that a gaming laptop only lasts for a couple hours while some ultra book can last all day. 

[Misanthrope]

You need to change the mentality. Think of it as a feature. When the battery runs out then you know that it's time for a lunch break. Not even a 10,000 dollar traditional watch has that kind of functionality!

 

You jest but couldn't you say the same about phones with really really high resolution displays as well? 

 

[MrDynamicMan]

The 360 and G Watch R are both tied to Android, and the Pebble Time Steel (since that should also be considered) is only $50 cheaper, and is functionally much less useful.

I'll give it that it's a better watch due to lasting longer...but it's certainly not a better smartwatch considering the limited functionality compared to that of the Apple Watch.

Fair enough.

Tbh I dislike all smart watches. They last only a few says and can get broken waaaay to easily. I'm still using my $80 timeX that had a 30 year battery and can go scuba diving with me.

Maybe it's because I don't get many notifications or that I just do see the use in a smart watch,but while I love a lot of new tech things (stuff like VR) I just can't see the appeal.

[79wjd]

Fair enough.

Tbh I dislike all smart watches. They last only a few says and can get broken waaaay to easily. I'm still using my $80 timeX that had a 30 year battery and can go scuba diving with me.

Maybe it's because I don't get many notifications or that I just do see the use in a smart watch,but while I love a lot of new tech things (stuff like VR) I just can't see the appeal.

Yeah, the smart watch market is very niche, although I'm really looking forward to getting my Time Steel. I still don't really know if it's worth the money, but it's just something I'd consider a 'cool' purchase...plus being able to control music play back would be amazingly helpful on my walk to class, since as of now I can't due to my SE215s not having an in-line controller (and being too cheap to spend like $50 on a cable with in-line controls -- and yes, I see the irony there). 

[Victorious Secret]

The one flaw with that argument, is that designer watches very often have awful movements -- to the point where a $5 Timex actually has a better one. 

 

Very true, most people don't realize that most luxury watches have very, very shitty movements that aren't actually that good at the time keeping part. Japanese movements are exceptionally accurate but that doesn't sound as good as "Swiss movement" because, well, its all about the name. 

 

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

Kinda how you say AMD is for poor people and ostracize people that buy AMD gpus .

That sounds very familiar .

You bash AMD to the ground in every post you make , and the people that buy their products and you are surprised people do the same with apple.

Double standards if you ask me .

I have explained it in the past post , as always its very expensive for what it is.

There are better alternatives , some of which dont even need a android or ios device SPECIFICALLY and can work with both.

You have the moto 360 , the pebble steel and and the lg watch R.

All of them cost less than the apple watch that is 350 dollar for the ENTRY level.

 

He is simply explaining that there is some validity to the "form over function" principle, that's it. Some people like the looks of the Apple Watch, and pick it based on aesthetics alone; is there anything wrong with that? There was absolutely no need for you to bring the silly AMD vs NVidia argument here, especially since it shows that you are only able to see these things in a purely black and white perspective.

For a watch, looks are very important. You can have a smart-watch that can create ice cream out of thin air, but it is far too ugly for your liking. Do you really want to buy that? If we are obsessing so much about function over from, then we may as well declare PC cases, consumer-grade RAM, and CPU/GPU cooler designs a sin against humanity. While we are at it, why don't we prohibit the use of any color for anything that is not dim gray? Doesn't sound so great now, does it? You see this as a tech device that operates as a watch, rather than as a watch that has tech functionality in it.

Now let me throw that sorry excuse of a "cult" argument you have out to lunch; read my signature, kiddo! When you are making such a generalized and derogatory claim of a cult of sheeple in the consumer/business field, it is in-fact you who is a member of a cult of sheeple. Your inability to play the devil's advocate simply leaves you to blindly hating decisions that do not comply with your own, and harass people who oppose your rationale. Now I do not like the Apple Watch myself (or rather, ANY smartwatches), and I can barely understand them, but at the very least I can respect those who see value in them. Same for AMD's consumer market; their GPUs remain kings in respect to raw horsepower and their CPU's have their benefits in very specific use case scenarios.

This is the tech forums, Zappian, not high school. There are some social standards here; follow them or beat it.

[Victorious Secret]

Ok

 

Just saying it like it is. Japanese movements don't carry the prestige of the Swiss movements. Even top brands that make in house movements get criticized by watch snobs because they don't use the "established" brands of movements. 

Its the great irony of high end watches that they give so much care to the design of the crowns and face and everything else, then they go shove in a inferior movement all in the name of "tradition" 

 

[MrDynamicMan]

Yeah, the smart watch market is very niche, although I'm really looking forward to getting my Time Steel. I still don't really know if it's worth the money, but it's just something I'd consider a 'cool' purchase...plus being able to control music play back would be amazingly helpful on my walk to class, since as of now I can't due to my SE215s not having an in-line controller (and being too cheap to spend like $50 on a cable with in-line controls -- and yes, I see the irony there).

Yeah, I'm also wanting a time steel, but I know I'll manage to break it.

I managed already to break my first timex, goodness knows how easy it'll be to break

[othertomperson]

The one flaw with that argument, is that designer watches very often have awful movements -- to the point where a $5 Timex actually has a better one. 

 

That's because quartz > mechanical every time. 

[LAwLz]

Sarcasm aside, the Apple Watch is targeting the power user -- the one who prefers features to battery life. I honestly see no issue with a watch with mediocre battery life IF it offers something to make up for that poor battery life (i.e. performance). 

 

It's like complaining that a gaming laptop only lasts for a couple hours while some ultra book can last all day. 

But the Apple Watch lacks features too. Not water resistant, no always-on screen, no sleep tracking, disabled blood oxygen monitor, the list (probably goes on)...

The amount of sales and from looking the tweets of people who have preordered it, it seems like power users are a fairly small minority of buyers.

The Apple Watch is not a "power user device" in my eyes.

 

 

You jest but couldn't you say the same about phones with really really high resolution displays as well? 

Touché

[.spider.]

That's because quartz > mechanical every time.

After an EMP your opinion would change.

[othertomperson]

After an EMP your opinion would change.

 

No, I'd just spend another £5 on a watch that is vastly more accurate. If I'm unlucky enough to be struck by lightning the survival of my watch will be least of my concerns.

[.spider.]

No, I'd just spend another £5 on a watch that is vastly more accurate.

If everything is destroyed your 5£ are nothing worth anymore.

A mechanical clockwork is something special in this electronic world, to me far more special than an apple watch.

[othertomperson]

If everything is destroyed your 5£ are nothing worth anymore.

A mechanical clockwork is something special in this electronic world, to me far more special than an apple watch.

 

Wait, so you aren't talking about localised induction eg a lightning strike, but instead you're justifying spending tens of thousands on a Rolex because it is more likely to work in the event of Nuclear Holocaust!? I'll risk the £5, thanks.

[Thought]

The expensive versions are for rich people. Not for poor people like you. Get over it. This is how luxury goods work. Their is the entry level that is deliberately cheap. There are expensive versions for those who can afford it. Don't act Iike Apple is unique, EVERYONE would try this if they could pull it off.

I would say that's a dangerous opinion to throw around. No matter how correct you are, and in this case you're spot on, it's unpopular for those who oppose.

 

I have to question why everyone is disgracing the Watch simply because it's popular. You buy a car because why? It's popular, because it's a good car. What's the difference here? Nobody here except @eunique has provided any reasoning why they don't like the Watch. It's always been "well it's Apple, I don't like Apple." Congratulations for having an opinion. I don't like apple pie, but I could give you a reason for it.

[79wjd]

I would say that's a dangerous opinion to throw around. No matter how correct you are, and in this case you're spot on, it's unpopular for those who oppose.

 

I have to question why everyone is disgracing the Watch simply because it's popular. You buy a car because why? It's popular, because it's a good car. What's the difference here? Nobody here except @eunique has provided any reasoning why they don't like the Watch. It's always been "well it's Apple, I don't like Apple." Congratulations for having an opinion. I don't like apple pie, but I could give you a reason for it.

The difference here is that Apple is the devil. They kill babies and use their bones to produce the almighty iPhone, their connective tissues to create the MBP, & their blood to support developers. And now with the new Apple Watch, they've started to kill puppies in order to harness the attractive powers that puppies have on society in order to strengthen their grip and trick all these poor idiots to buy their crappy watch. 

[Thought]

The difference here is that Apple is the devil. They kill babies and use their bones to produce the almighty iPhone, their connective tissues to create the MBP, & their blood to support developers. And now with the new Apple Watch, they've started to kill puppies in order to harness the attractive powers that puppies have on society in order to strengthen their grip and trick all these poor idiots to buy their crappy watch. 

Well when you put it that way, they can have all of my money.

[LAwLz]

I would say that's a dangerous opinion to throw around. No matter how correct you are, and in this case you're spot on, it's unpopular for those who oppose.

It's not a "dangerous opinion" as long as you aren't arrogant and belittling when you state it.

 

Here is the same opinion but presented in a nicer way:

The expensive version is for people who don't care about how much things cost, or those who buy it because it is expensive and wants to show off. It's not meant for the average consumer like you and me. A lot of companies does this. They make one "halo" item which a lot of people want, and then they release cheaper versions which seems reasonably priced in comparison.

The point is the same but I don't think even "apple haters" would disagree or get mad at it.

 

 

 

 

Nobody here except @eunique has provided any reasoning why they don't like the Watch. It's always been "well it's Apple, I don't like Apple."

Here are a few reasons I don't like it:

1) It's expensive for what it does. Functionality wise it doesn't really offer that much over the Pebble, which is 1/3 the price.

 

2) The screen is not always on. If I wear a watch then I expect it to at least show the time when I look at it. If I have to do a gesture or press a button I might as well just pick up my phone... which brings me to...

 

3) It doesn't offer any compelling extra functionality. I can already very easily see messages and the time on my phone even when it's in my pocket. Everything shows up on the top so all I have to do is pull it up so the top part of the screen is sticking out of my pocket, press the power button and voila! All of a sudden I got 90% of the functionality of a smartwatch without paying a dime, or have to keep track of an extra battery.

 

4) Terrible battery life. I already have to charge my phone, tablet, laptop and possibly some other device I carry with me (camera, battery bank or whatever). A traditional watch can be over 1000 times better in terms of battery life, and they show the time all the time without any gestures. I just can't take a smartwatch seriously before it gets at least 1 week of battery life. 1 day is absolutely pathetic. Even 2 days WITH the screen on at all time would be really really bad in my eyes.

 

5) The bands are expensive as balls. Want a metal band because the band on the sport edition looks like something Fisher Price designed? That will be an extra 150 dollars (or 450 extra if you want the only other metal band they got). Third party bands are so far non-existing as well because in the traditional Apple fashion they don't use standard bands like basically all other watches use. Gotta reinvent the wheel just for the sake of being different!

 

6) Not water resistant. Yes I have heard that it is but there is no guarantee. If you wash your hands after going to the bathroom and some water enters then Apple will probably tell you to fuck off (and by fuck off I mean "pay us money to fix it or fuck off"). It's not certified so for all we know it might be "water proof" in the same way the S6 apparently is "water proof" (as in, there like a ~10% chance it can survive in water without anything breaking. For the love of God don't drop it into water.).