The one i'd want is absurdly expensive. Base price is about my limit on a wearable with how fast they'll go obsolete. Should have picked up one of the $88 android watches this xmas.
I just don't see how the Apple Watch is that much better than what we already have on the market? It's not like it even looks better than what we already have.
A few things Apple is counting on:
...
Some geeks are blanching at the prices, but they forget: polished stainless steel costs money. Gold costs money. Soft leather costs money.
A few things Apple is counting on:
Materials and design. There are a couple of reasonably nice-looking smartwatches out there right now, and more on the way (Moto 360, Watch Urbane, Huawei Watch), but a lot of smartwatches merely make vague gestures toward quality rather than following up. Some geeks are blanching at the prices, but they forget: polished stainless steel costs money. Gold costs money. Soft leather costs money. Apple's aiming at the people who wouldn't be caught dead wearing an eyesore like the Sony Smartwatch 3 (in standard trim, anyway) or Samsung Gear S.
Apps, apps, apps. Ever tried to use apps on an Android Wear or Pebble watch? To be blunt, it's a pain in the ass. They're buried away and seldom sophisticated. Apple, meanwhile, is making them a core part of the experience. They're much easier to find and get much more attention than they seem to get elsewhere, both in capability and discovery. Apple will have a dedicated store for watch-friendly apps, for example -- Google is mostly hoping you'll find Android Wear content by dumb luck.
Input. People forget how important this is. Android Wear is inherently limited by its dependence on basic touch for almost everything -- you can't have contextual menus, and it's a pain to scroll through large lists. Apple seems to have solved those with Force Touch and the crown. You can have genuinely broad interface features and long lists without cluttering things up.
Apple watches STILL look ugly even in gold.
Did people really think apple can wave its magic wand and sprinkle some pixie dust and have week long battery life?
Absolutely zero desire for a smart watch at this point.
A week? No. More than a day? Maybe even two days? Not this year and probably not next year, but hopefully after that. I am frequently nowhere near a power outlet for extended periods so I need it to last more than 18 hours. I'm in no hurry to get a smartwatch, so I'll just sit and watch and wait.
Also, if a company says it has an 18 hour life than it usually means it has a 16-17 battery life when its new but which drops to 12 hours in a few months.
Apple watches STILL look ugly even in gold. They didn't do anything differently, just offered some exotic fancy sounding bracelet and coated it with gold so they can charge $17k for it. It's still square.
No matter what else Apple claims they are trying to do, your other points will always be ignored because they charge too much for an ugly watch that can't last more than a day. People willing to spend that much on a watch will have a Rolex or Breitling. People who are looking for a smart watch probably aren't going to be willing to spend what Apple is asking.
if i had an iphone i would totally get the sports version, would be great to have all the features they showed and it would encourage me to run and go to the gym more. but i don't have an iphone... i do have an ipad though. I wonder if you can pair the watch with an ipad?
Keep looking at your phone in a meeting and you're going to get some pointed questions asking if you have somewhere more important to be.
at the gold watch price. Shows money can't buy taste.
definitely be interesting to look back on this thread 1 quarter/1 year after release to see how foretelling this might be.
Apple watches STILL look ugly even in gold. They didn't do anything differently, just offered some exotic fancy sounding bracelet and coated it with gold so they can charge $17k for it. It's still square.
No matter what else Apple claims they are trying to do, your other points will always be ignored because they charge too much for an ugly watch that can't last more than a day. People willing to spend that much on a watch will have a Rolex or Breitling. People who are looking for a smart watch probably aren't going to be willing to spend what Apple is asking.
Watches IMO are for fashion. Smart Watches are not that for me. If I had the money I would get a Rolex or a Piquet.
You're making a couple of sketchy assumptions here: first, that most people would find it ugly, and next that people looking for a smartwatch wouldn't spend what Apple is asking.
Some of the best-known watches (like the Cartier Tank) are square, and I think it has a certain minimalist appeal. Certainly beats most of what's out there for smartwatches right now. As for price? Well, if pricing were the big factor, the market would be flooded with Pebbles and Android Wear devices... but it's not (720,000 Android Wear watches in 9 months, 1m Pebbles in a year). As much as some folks may loathe to admit it, Apple will probably sell more watches in one weekend than some of its larger competitors have managed in their entire histories.
I do agree that Apple faces an uphill battle courting the super-luxury crowd, but I suspect it'll find enough of them for a small-quantity product like this. When you can afford to drop $10,000 on any watch, you probably don't mind replacing or supplementing what you have (this is my weekend watch, this is my formal occasion watch...).