How many are getting an Apple watch?

[Commodus]

The notion that "virtually no one" is talking about the Apple Watch is silly on its face.

Tons of people are talking about it. It's all over the major mainstream press and tech blogs. Apple is running ads all over the place. And as much as some would be loathe to admit it, it's probably going to dominate the tech conversation between April 10th and 24th, and for at least a little while after that. Samsung can usually get some buzz going for Galaxy S launches, but you know it doesn't approach that line-around-the-block fervor in most places.

 

[openwheel]

it is pretty apalling that rolex has gotten away with pitching ~2k worth of parts and labor for 30k plus. its funny that people call them 'timeless' and refer to them as a better long term value, the only reason they last so long is they do so little. if all the apple watch did was tell date and time and look pretty i am sure apple could make it last just as long as rolex. a rolex (using it as typical super-expensive watch) does nothing but tell the time and look pretty, the apple watch does immeasurably more yet costs a fraction of the price. even the expensive edition versions are priced at pretty much low-mid range on rolex-class watches


it is more an inditement of the swiss watch industry and the watch industry in general than any testament to apple giving good value. i hope rolex goes out of business. i dont appreciate hoity-toity pretentious junk that does nothing. if apple is pretentious then rolex is on some new level

This is very typical rant of someone who cannot appreciate high craftsmanship or simply ignorant. Do you want the rotating bezel to actually cut steel? Laser with a turn of the crown?

Fact is, a Rolex is timeless. The same cannot be said about any smart watch. Today's smart watch is the equivalent of dumb flip phones of 2005.

 

[Achtung!]

Perhaps you could contain your S6 enthusiasm to the S6 thread?

~40% of adult iPhone owners interested in the Apple Watch:

http://news.yahoo.com/nearly-40-percent-iphone-owners-interested-apple-watch-184011818--finance.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/13/us-apple-watch-idUSKBN0M92C420150313?irpc=932

Ignore the headlines, and do the math, then take the potential buyers and divide by 10, and you still get massive numbers, and that's only in the US.

(if you don't want to do the math, it's around 6 million sales in the US only, by most counts, that's a massive hit if you factor in overseas sales. It's obvious Apple isn't popular here in the forums, but there's no denying what will likely be some serious numbers of Apple watches getting sold)

Interest to buy is not the same as actual purchases or pre-orders. Also when you go to the front page of news sites like CNN, Fox News or Reuters, there's not a single mention of the Apple Watch. Seriously.

Enough said.

And you still haven't responded to this:

Samsung has a higher number of Google search terms than Apple:

http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=/m/07gv72, /m/0k8z&cmpt=q&tz=

 

[Artdeco]

I'm not going to respond, have a good day

 

[HeXen]

I'm not really a watch person but if it offered something interesting then I might. Perhaps if I could put music on it and bluetooth it to my car stereo automatically linking up when I start my car...that would be handy. Forecast would be nice but I wouldn't pay for a smart phone service just to have internet.

I'm not going to respond, have a good day

Ok. I know I definitely will and you have a good day too.

 

[touchstone]

This is very typical rant of someone who cannot appreciate high craftsmanship or simply ignorant. Do you want the rotating bezel to actually cut steel? Laser with a turn of the crown?

Fact is, a Rolex is timeless. The same cannot be said about any smart watch. Today's smart watch is the equivalent of dumb flip phones of 2005.

it is a typical rant because it is typical for a person to ask 'what does this do for me' when they buy something. when they compare the answer to that question to the price tag on one of these 'high pieces of craftsmanship' there is a typical reaction: 'wtf!'. what exact part of the craftmanship of these watches is so difficult given the massive advancements in electronics, metallurgy, minitureization and materials sciences that have been made over the last few decades? you would think the watches would be cheaper to make, unless they are just doing things slowly and inefficiently to give themselves something to do, right?


please. if anything is ignorant its your half-century old take on what exactly constitutes 'craftsmanship'. for the price of one these garbage watches that cost nothing more than an apple watch to make (probably much less) i can buy a boat. i wonder if you are in charge of your own checkbook or if you are a child/dependent. it is hard for me to take this kind of post seriously it is so ridiculous

you may very well be right about smart watches being worthless but if anything that just makes swiss watches doubly worthless.

 

[WelshBloke]

it is a typical rant because it is typical for a person to ask 'what does this do for me' when they buy something. when they compare the answer to that question to the price tag on one of these 'high pieces of craftsmanship' there is a typical reaction: 'wtf!'. what exact part of the craftmanship of these watches is so difficult given the massive advancements in electronics, metallurgy, minitureization and materials sciences that have been made over the last few decades? you would think the watches would be cheaper to make, unless they are just doing things slowly and inefficiently to give themselves something to do, right?

You would think that if you didnt have the slightest clue what you were talking about yes.

This is a thing of beauty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyexJbX8ppU

Would I buy a high end watch with a tourbillon movement, no. Can I appreciate the beauty and craftsmanship present in making one, absolutely.

Equating a smartwatch with one of those is like equating a digital photo frame with an original Raphael.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Fact is, a Rolex is timeless.

My In-Laws are obsessed with Rolexs, and I can tell you they aren't timeless. Actually they do a way worse job of keeping the time than a digital watch. They are barely functional male arm jewelry. I don't know why a smart watch is even a comparison other than form factor.

 

[Artdeco]

This is very typical rant of someone who cannot appreciate high craftsmanship or simply ignorant. Do you want the rotating bezel to actually cut steel? Laser with a turn of the crown?

Fact is, a Rolex is timeless. The same cannot be said about any smart watch. Today's smart watch is the equivalent of dumb flip phones of 2005.

As a Rolex owner, I gotta tell you they're little more than jewelery, it's easily the least accurate timepiece I've ever owned with a $500 service required every 5 years or so. The "lower end" Rolexes are machine made and mass produced, pass.

 

[touchstone]

You would think that if you didnt have the slightest clue what you were talking about yes.

This is a thing of beauty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyexJbX8ppU

Would I buy a high end watch with a tourbillon movement, no. Can I appreciate the beauty and craftsmanship present in making one, absolutely.

Equating a smartwatch with one of those is like equating a digital photo frame with an original Raphael.

why? did Raphael have a factory producing thousands and thousands of art pieces he never touched once?



i struggle to collimate the various reasons given to me in this thread for the absurd price differential between swiss watches and far more functional smart and digital watches. first it is value and persistence, because 'they're timeless'. then, comparing one to a smartwatch is like comparing some store bought digital crap to a 16th century master painter. at what point do you start making the analogy that these swiss watches are like God creating the heavens and earth, while the apple watch is you spooging on your keyboard? where do the absurd comparisons stop?


fact is nobody in this thread has given me one good reason why a swiss watch, which can do nothing but tell time and look pretty, is a 'masterpiece'... while smartwatches are dime store garbage. i get a lot of weird analogies and talk about 'feelings' and 'beauty' that sounds a whole lot like people making excuses for their own personally held biases

 

[Morbus]

The snob factor?

I don't it goes much beyond that, to be honest. Maybe personal interest, but watches that are not just meant to tell the time are pretty much 100% snob factor-dependent.

And smartwatches are not that. Unless the snob-public thinks they are, in which case they are.

 

[Commodus]

The issue, I think, is the attitude that you somehow "can't" have a good-looking smartwatch that brings meaningful value to the wearer. As if your options were to either get a Moto 360 or jump straight to a TAG Heuer Carrera or Omega Speedmaster.

The reality is that Apple is blurring the lines, and that makes traditionalists uncomfortable. It's not the jewelry you pass on from generation to generation, but I think there's a middle ground where you can have both meaningful functionality and a degree of style. The Watch Edition is overkill (though I could see some wealthy types getting it in place of more audacious mechanicals like Urwerk's), but the aluminum and steel models? I suspect a lot of people won't mind wearing those instead of a lot of similarly priced conventional timepieces, even if the replacement cycle is much shorter.

 

[Artdeco]

Honestly, I'm conflicted, want to pre order, but tempting to hold off and pick up one used later. Am leaning towards the stainless Apple Watch, I think it'll look better over the long run, I'm pretty hard on watches.

As far as functionality, I don't see that much they'll do in the near future as far as changes in new models, and as long as the battery can be replaced, I could rock the same device for 5 years.

 

[Ramses]

Surprisingly little squawk about the apple watch on all the tech news sites I follow. None of them are apple specific but they all usually cover iphones pretty heavy. I think they are a little on the "me too" side at this point. Hope it sells well for them though.

 

[JohnAlmighty]

That's not the right time for that. Wait maybe 1 or 2 years to see where it goes. LG, Moto or Pebble are far better thant the Apple watch.

 

[Artdeco]

That's not the right time for that. Wait maybe 1 or 2 years to see where it goes. LG, Moto or Pebble are far better thant the Apple watch.

The Apple forums are buzzing pretty loud... Everyone's discussing which watch and band they're getting...

 

[openwheel]

Honestly, I'm conflicted, want to pre order, but tempting to hold off and pick up one used later. Am leaning towards the stainless Apple Watch, I think it'll look better over the long run, I'm pretty hard on watches.

As far as functionality, I don't see that much they'll do in the near future as far as changes in new models, and as long as the battery can be replaced, I could rock the same device for 5 years.

I am willing to bet that you wont be wearing that Apple watch 5 years from now for the following reasons.

1. Apple Watch 4 will be out and shoots lazer beams.
2. It wont hold the charge for longer than 3 hours.
3. It wont sync properly with your newest Tesla to play a podcast reliably..

 

[openwheel]

This thread is becoming more comical by the day with all the rant and hate on Swiss mechanical watches.

 

[openwheel]

why? did Raphael have a factory producing thousands and thousands of art pieces he never touched once?



i struggle to collimate the various reasons given to me in this thread for the absurd price differential between swiss watches and far more functional smart and digital watches. first it is value and persistence, because 'they're timeless'. then, comparing one to a smartwatch is like comparing some store bought digital crap to a 16th century master painter. at what point do you start making the analogy that these swiss watches are like God creating the heavens and earth, while the apple watch is you spooging on your keyboard? where do the absurd comparisons stop?


fact is nobody in this thread has given me one good reason why a swiss watch, which can do nothing but tell time and look pretty, is a 'masterpiece'... while smartwatches are dime store garbage. i get a lot of weird analogies and talk about 'feelings' and 'beauty' that sounds a whole lot like people making excuses for their own personally held biases

I would prefer to have a traditional Margherita pizza in the city of Firenze from a hole in the wall made by a short fat guy

You can have your DiGigornos with 7 toppings ordered with an app and delivered by a drone.

 

[openwheel]

My In-Laws are obsessed with Rolexs, and I can tell you they aren't timeless. Actually they do a way worse job of keeping the time than a digital watch. They are barely functional male arm jewelry. I don't know why a smart watch is even a comparison other than form factor.

I would be glad to take your in-laws piece of $hit watches at $3000 each. I don't care if they run 2 minutes slow per day. Seriously, PM me.

 

[Commodus]

Surprisingly little squawk about the apple watch on all the tech news sites I follow. None of them are apple specific but they all usually cover iphones pretty heavy. I think they are a little on the "me too" side at this point. Hope it sells well for them though.

That's because there isn't much news about them at this very moment. A lot of people forget that the news cycle is dictated... well, by what's actually happening on any given day. You're going to see a lot more when April 10th pre-orders roll around, again when the early reviews show up, and again with the Watch launch on the 24th.

 

[touchstone]

I would prefer to have a traditional Margherita pizza in the city of Firenze from a hole in the wall made by a short fat guy

You can have your DiGigornos with 7 toppings ordered with an app and delivered by a drone.

i think the difference is the digorno costs at most a few dollars more than the pizza. if you were to ask me 'would your rather pay thousands of dollars to fly to Firenze to eat a pizza and fly back or just go buy one at the store' i would obviously say buy it at the store. who the hell flys to italy just to eat pizza?



thats what these swiss watches are. flying to italy... just to eat one pizza

 

[Ramses]

Far as I can tell expensive watches are right up there with bald old guys in Ferraris driving slow. Baby boomers gonna croak off eventually, I imagine some modern is gonna start creeping into that sort of thing the same way it has high end cars. Slowly and clunkily, but surely.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I would be glad to take your in-laws piece of $hit watches at $3000 each. I don't care if they run 2 minutes slow per day. Seriously, PM me.

Of course you don't care. Any Rolex fan has given up the hope of having a very functional device on your wrist. As I said its arm jewelry that every now and then will give you the correct time.

Smart watches are the opposite of a Rolex- maybe too much function on your wrist at the cost of aesthetics.

It will take a few years for the two to meet via licensing deals between the jewelry makers and the tech companies. When the $10k Apple Watch is a huge hit it will speed things up though.

 

[Raduque]

Responding to Raduque's questions/concerns from the other thread:



It's more the accessibility and priority than anything. In Android Wear, you have to either speak out the name of your app (which is usually a terrible idea) or scroll all the way to the bottom of a menu before you can even start browsing apps. On an Apple Watch? Tap the crown. Watch apps can only be so sophisticated, but it'd nice to have an OS that actually encourages you to start tasks from your watch instead of Google's "oh, if you must" attitude.

I think it's more that apps are a "side" function for AW vs being a primary function. You're more meant to access apps through their cards, rather than launching apps as you do on a phone. I think Google looks at "Apps" as being little more than a backend info provider for the Cards display system.

On the Apple Watch, a "force touch" (basically, a hard press) brings up a contextual menu for the app at hand. You can tell the music app to stream to your TV, for example. True, Android Wear could get something like this soon... but it doesn't have that now.

As the Apple Watch isn't out yet.... it technically doesn't have that now either.

Software parity is likely coming.

Apple's not asking you to type. If you get a text message on the Watch, you can also use a pre-selected text response (if someone asks "A or B," for example, you can respond with A or B) or record a short voice message. There's also a walkie talkie mode that lets you have a back-and-forth voice chat, although you'll need Apple Watches on both sides for that to work.

I think you can do some of this functionality (minus the walkie-talkie stuff, which honestly sounds pretty cool. Very Dick Tracey-ish) currently with AW and Hangouts, but I don't use Hangouts so I can't do anything but read and dismiss single SMS' from my watch.

That's what the crown is for. You can zoom and scroll in apps without having to put your finger on the screen and obscure what you're looking at.

I disagree that zooming is necessary on a watch, as all content should be readable in a single screen-view "page". Scrolling isn't really needed either, IMO, if you need to read a multi-line SMS or email, you should go to the phone. Keep in mind this is just my opinion, and the way I use my watch.

There's a couple of reasons. First, it allows for high-bandwidth tasks that wouldn't work so well over Bluetooth. I'm not sure how often that'll crop up, but it's there. The more important one is that you're not limited by Bluetooth's 33-foot range -- you could still get data without having to be close to your phone.

Wifi is a significantly higher power-usage tech than BT, isn't it? This is going to be terrible for battery life. What sort of tasks would/could you do on a watch that need more bandwith then BT is capable of? For that matter, will it be a wifi direct connection, or is it simply the phone and watch sharing data over a mutual wifi network? I don't think this is something that is really needed. More of a "throw this in there and think of some usage cases for it, cause TECHNOLOGY!"

This was a specific gripe with the ZenWatch, not Android Wear stuff in general. Although it is true that a lot of Android Wear devices sadly resort to cables and cradles.

#1 reason right here why I own a Moto360. Charging docks with pogo pins are terrible.

The general rule is that you don't want an oversized watch on your wrist -- otherwise, you look like the smartwatch equivalent of Flavor Flav. The real issue, I'd say, is that most of the current Android Wear crop basically doesn't acknowledge that you exist if you either have thin wrists or prefer relatively subtle wristwear. Here's what the smaller 38mm Apple Watch looks like on an average man's arm (via Hodinkee http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review ):

See what I mean? That looks more like a watch and less like a giant screen strapped to your arm. A subtler design like this makes smartwatches more accessible, more socially acceptable.

I still think it's more a subjective thing than anything else. I don't like any square watch, and I don't think they look good on anybody, no matter what. It was because of this that I hadn't considered any smart watch till the M360.