Verge: Apple iWatch models to hit 400 USD

[Bateluer]

http://www.theverge.com/2014/8/30/6...-might-have-multiple-models-up-to-400-dollars

Unidentified sources now tell Recode that there won't be a single Apple wearable device — or "iWatch" as many observers have decided to call it — but rather multiple models at different price points. According to the report, executives have discussed offering a model for as much as $400 — significantly more than the competition. LG's and Samsung's Android Wear-powered models cost $199.99 and $229 respectively. Samsung's Gear 2 costs $299.99.

It's not clear how many models will be available, but it wouldn't be surprising to see less expensive versions of the device with different screen sizes, or perhaps less-impressive specifications. A Wall Street Journal report from this past June suggested that Apple would be able to hit multiple prices by offering models with different size screens. Today's Recode report adds that it's not clear that Apple has settled on a price yet, and it's possible that the company will not reveal how much the wearable (or wearables) will cost until a later date. A separate rumor earlier suggested that any forthcoming "iWatch" would not be available until next year.

Launching multiple skus with varying specs is a big departure from Apple's typical business strategy. But 400 dollars for a smartwatch . . . I think they're a tough sell at even 200-250.

 

[RossMAN]

Personally I'm going to wait until version 2 of any smart watch unless a killer BF/CM deal is offered by Moto or Apple.

 

[vi edit]

Yeah, even at $250 something desirable like the Moto 360 isn't going to exactly set sales records. I don't know how offering "different sizes" is really a good way to go about it. There's only so much wiggle room in size before a wearable is either too small to be useful or too big to be wearable.

Not quite seeing what would be such a big sales motivator to move a $400 smart watch.

 

[Bateluer]

Personally I'm going to wait until version 2 of any smart watch unless a killer BF/CM deal is offered by Moto or Apple.

If you're interested, BB is selling the LG G Watch for 50 bucks off, 179 total.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/lg-g-wat...w7FzMy_0_MLS7Q

 

[Mopetar]

Unless it has some features that surpass the rumors and blow away expectations, $400 is going to be a non-starter and anything above $200 is too high in my opinion.

Then again, Apple might be trying to get people to speculate that the price will be higher than what they actually release at. I remember some thinking that the iPad would debut at $1000, so when Apple came out at $500, people were pleasantly surprised.

 

[roguerower]

Never under estimate the stupidity of the masses. There will still be hipster douchebags that buy it.

That said, I'm one of those people who just don't see a need for a "smart" watch.

 

[Red Storm]

I'd rather buy an iPad for that much money.

$400 is too much no matter who's making it.

 

[vi edit]

I'd rather buy an iPad for that much money.

$400 is too much no matter who's making it.

LOL. Surprised I haven't seen some inventive photos out of there with somebody that converted an iPad mini into a watch and wearing it.

 

[ponyo]

You have people buying $200 jeans. Apple could easily sell $400 watch and have people lining up to buy.

$400 is nothing for fashion and downright bargain compared to dorky $1,500 Google Glass.

Look at the success of Beats headphones. Who thought $200-300 headphones would sell as fashion item?

 

[Kaido]

It all depends on the value it offers.

I personally hate wearing jewelry, which includes watches. I've been considering a FitBit-esqe devices because I like the whole health & fitness scene, but only the Jawbone UP24 has really caught my eye. But at $150 (Bluetooth model), I'll hold off to see what Apple offers before investing in anything. They've done well with the whole Nike+ integration, so I'm very interested to see what they've got up their sleeves with a smartwatch, especially what value it would offer outside of health tracking.

 

[ponyo]

iWatch is basically fashion/jewelry. Apple has the option and the luxury to price their watch at 2-3 times the price of their competitors. People will buy it because of the brand and status symbol. It will be a mistake to price their watch similar to Android offerings. All it does is to lower their value and even the playing field. Let Android manufacturers compete with each other on price and value on the lower end on the watches. Apple can cleanup the lucrative high end. You don't see Louis Vuitton and Chanel lowering their prices to compete with Coach and Burberry on the low end.

Watches are not phones. It's not needed so low price and value are less important.

 

[dawheat]

I've used smart watches for a while - Pebble, Gear 1 and now the Gear Fit. One thing I've found is that they take a daily beating far more than my phone. Whether it be dragging against my desk or accidentally swinging against the wall or some object, they definitely take some wear.

- I think putting a case on a watch is stupid
- However without one, they're going to get pretty beat in a year unless all the materials are super resistant to wear (e.g. stainless steel, sapphire crystal like real watches). So while it's easy for me to keep my smartphone looking brand new after a year, my smart watches all have looked beat up.
- With wearable technology advancing so quickly right now, I'd hesitate to buy the 'best' $400 device, knowing that next year there will be a substantially better one. Might be a better idea for the technology to plateau a bit like smartphones have.

 

[PowerYoga]

I'd rather buy an iPad for that much money.

$400 is too much no matter who's making it.

people will line up just to say they have a new iproduct. People will buy one just because its a new ithing, not because they need it.

 

[zerogear]

I'm sorry, for $400, I'll go for a Citizens watch or something of similar quality. Not a tacky digital watch.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

I'm sorry, for $400, I'll go for a Citizens watch or something of similar quality. Not a tacky digital watch.

Tech people aren't usually the most fashion forward.

 

[luv2liv]

i rather they make a 3.5inch phone. super slim, dont need horse power for intense gaming. then have a nice wrist strap to optionally dock the phone onto. i cant find the link to the company . but theres a company that actually do this for iphone4s

http://livingwithdisability.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/04ec017b42a0056705bbe110.L.jpg

 

[cmdrdredd]

I'm sorry, for $400, I'll go for a Citizens watch or something of similar quality. Not a tacky digital watch.

Yep, I'm either getting a Moto 360 or if there is some deal breaker that I find I'm going to be buying a mechanical watch. I actually own a citizen now going on 10 years old and have been looking at those along with Luminox, Reactor, and a few others that are suitable for scuba diving and other outdoor activities. I'd like a smart watch, not for outdoors activity but to be an alternative to my mechanical watch. I like what Android Wear can do with Google Now, but I'm not prepared to pay over $300. At that point I'm going to spend more and just get an actual watch.

 

[s44]

$400 is nothing for fashion and downright bargain compared to dorky $1,500 Google Glass.

That's a paid alpha/beta, not an actual consumer price.

 

[PowerYoga]

I'm sorry, for $400, I'll go for a Citizens watch or something of similar quality. Not a tacky digital watch.

its not an iThing so its not fashionable and hipster enough.

 

[mmntech]

I'm sorry, for $400, I'll go for a Citizens watch or something of similar quality. Not a tacky digital watch.

This times a million.

 

[Kaido]

I've used smart watches for a while - Pebble, Gear 1 and now the Gear Fit. One thing I've found is that they take a daily beating far more than my phone. Whether it be dragging against my desk or accidentally swinging against the wall or some object, they definitely take some wear.

- I think putting a case on a watch is stupid
- However without one, they're going to get pretty beat in a year unless all the materials are super resistant to wear (e.g. stainless steel, sapphire crystal like real watches). So while it's easy for me to keep my smartphone looking brand new after a year, my smart watches all have looked beat up.
- With wearable technology advancing so quickly right now, I'd hesitate to buy the 'best' $400 device, knowing that next year there will be a substantially better one. Might be a better idea for the technology to plateau a bit like smartphones have.

What is your general take on smartwatches, having used multiple models personally? What features do you tend to use the most on them?

I'm really curious to what the primary selling factors will be of the iWatch...Spritz speed reading? Super auto-predict texting? Really advanced health & fitness monitoring?

 

[Lyfer]

iWatch is basically fashion/jewelry. Apple has the option and the luxury to price their watch at 2-3 times the price of their competitors. People will buy it because of the brand and status symbol. It will be a mistake to price their watch similar to Android offerings. All it does is to lower their value and even the playing field. Let Android manufacturers compete with each other on price and value on the lower end on the watches. Apple can cleanup the lucrative high end. You don't see Louis Vuitton and Chanel lowering their prices to compete with Coach and Burberry on the low end.

Watches are not phones. It's not needed so low price and value are less important.

Agreed.

 

[Commodus]

Read the article carefully:

"Sources say consumers should expect a range of prices for different models including lower-priced versions."

In other words, $400 may be the ceiling rather than the going rate. I wouldn't rule out that as the 'normal' price, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a $300 or $350 model instead.

As it stands, I'm not sure if citing current prices is a good thing... the G Watch and Gear Live are pretty cheap-feeling and barely last a day on battery. I'd rather pay more (within reason) to get something that at least looks nicer, and possibly runs better. Watches are fashion items, not just tools, and I'd like to have something that looks a bit better than a cheap sports watch.

 

[Crono]

I doubt the iWatch will be just a fashion piece, it looks like from everything we've heard that it's going to focus as much on health and fitness features, picking up the mantle from Fuelband but with a lot more software/apps and health tracking built in. Notifications is a given, but Android Wear probably does that as well or better given how much Google has developed Google Now thus far.

It's still going to be more of a niche product than the iPad and iPhone no matter what they do, at least with this first generation, but with a broader customer base than products like the Mac Pro or the Apple TV.

I'm very interested in seeing the iWatch, even though I'm not a typical Apple fan. The last product that had me this intrigued before launch was the iPad.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Read the article carefully:

"Sources say consumers should expect a range of prices for different models including lower-priced versions."

In other words, $400 may be the ceiling rather than the going rate. I wouldn't rule out that as the 'normal' price, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's a $300 or $350 model instead.

As it stands, I'm not sure if citing current prices is a good thing... the G Watch and Gear Live are pretty cheap-feeling and barely last a day on battery. I'd rather pay more (within reason) to get something that at least looks nicer, and possibly runs better. Watches are fashion items, not just tools, and I'd like to have something that looks a bit better than a cheap sports watch.

Many people I know who wear watches daily have different ones for different purposes. I know very few people with only one if they wear a watch regularly. I suspect that many buying a smart watch aren't going to have it as their one and only watch. They'll wear it when appropriate and then wear something else when it's not.