Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Are You Getting The Apple Watch?

  • Yes, I'm Getting One

    Votes: 46 40.4%
  • No, I'm Not Getting One

    Votes: 42 36.8%
  • I Like Turtles

    Votes: 26 22.8%

  • Total voters
    114

rui no onna

Contributor
Oct 25, 2013
14,904
13,229
Depending on battery life (I don't want yet another device that I have to charge every night), I think I might get a couple (mom and myself). We have Pebbles and my mom's been complaining about hers disconnecting frequently.
 

swedefish

macrumors 6502
Feb 12, 2008
387
41
Honestly... the price is near on insanity. The masses are not looking for a high-end watch. They are looking for a nice, functional, but AFFORDABLE watch.

The masses can use an ugly android watch then. Do you think they brought in executives from leading luxury brands to sell this to the masses? They're aiming for a different segment.
 

MTL18

macrumors regular
Jan 25, 2013
205
72
I will wait for the reviews, the apps, and the durability (drop) tests.

$350 for a watch is by no means expensive. I'm also curious how long it will last. Apple outdates iPhones in 3 years (4S is incompatible now), but iPods can be had for a decade. Wonder which time course this watch will take.
 

Stuke00

macrumors 68000
Oct 11, 2011
1,674
74
Collinsville,IL
When was the last time a company provided more than a few years support for a tech device? Plus it is in Apple's best interest to keep people buying new models, so I highly doubt you will be able to still be using this watch in even ten years which an expensive regular watch would last much longer than that.

What makes the most sense is the bands is what costs the most. Thousand dollars for the band. The next editions of the iWatch will sell as replacements or upgrades for a lot less and you can use your current band.
 

taptic

macrumors 65816
Dec 5, 2012
1,341
437
California
The masses can use an ugly android watch then. Do you think they brought in executives from leading luxury brands to sell this to the masses? They're aiming for a different segment.

Um, no. They're not. Apple is selling to the masses, bud.
 

swedefish

macrumors 6502
Feb 12, 2008
387
41
Um, no. They're not. Apple is selling to the masses, bud.

They're selling luxury items in massive quantities, yes. This is firmly a luxury product. Do you think they brought in Burberry's CEO to sell gimmicky watches to tech nerds? No.
 

rengb6

macrumors newbie
Aug 18, 2013
17
0
I like the way the watch looks. But I'm a girl with a wrist that measures less than 5.25 inches and 38mm will probably be huge on me. I'd want to get the 18kt gold watch but I can't see myself spending the thousands of dollars it'll probably cost, just to want/need to upgrade in the next 2-3 years. I'll wait for gen. 2 and then reassess.

I can't see many girls buying this.
 

Izauze

macrumors 6502
Oct 13, 2013
431
303
Guessing they were going for the Christmas window but missed it. The price doesn't scare me, the size does. Seems geared towards men who like those big ugly watches.

Did you go to the bathroom during the part where they showed two different sizes?
 

pooleman

Suspended
Jan 11, 2012
1,769
425
Eastern CT
The sport version is suppose to be stronger glass. It will probably cost $100 more though.

Be that as it may I will not be getting one. I can get a $100 GShock that's waterproof and has a tin of functions and can be severly abused. I'm gonna wait on the watch since I'm sprining for the iPhone 6 plus.
 

Izauze

macrumors 6502
Oct 13, 2013
431
303
$350 is actually better than I expected. Hell, it's really not that much more than the thing I wear to just track my freaking steps each day.
 

taptic

macrumors 65816
Dec 5, 2012
1,341
437
California
Oh I am. But seriously, what did you expect? I thought it'd be at least $500.

At most, I expected $250. I thought $150 or $200 would have been much more appropriate.

What on earth made you think they'd charge an iPads worth for a watch?
 

swedefish

macrumors 6502
Feb 12, 2008
387
41
At most, I expected $250. I thought $150 or $200 would have been much more appropriate.

What on earth made you think they'd charge an iPads worth for a watch?

Because many people will buy a luxury fashion item for that money. Again, why do you think they hired Angela Ahrendts?
 

douglasf13

macrumors 68000
Jul 2, 2010
1,782
1,083
The cost of watches varies dramatically. $30 is a cheap Timex, $500 is an okay Hamilton, $3K is a standard Tag Heuer, $8K is an average Rolex, $15K barely gets you into a Patek Phillipe, etc.

$350 is not even close to a luxury watch price. I'm pleasantly surprised at the cost. When Apple started mentioning the gold model, I was worried the cost of the steel models would be much higher.
 

swedefish

macrumors 6502
Feb 12, 2008
387
41
Because she knows fashion, and fashion is different from luxury.

You've never been to a Burberry store, have you? Also, basically all fashions comes out of luxury brands before they trickle down to high street retailers.
 

SHNXX

macrumors 68000
Oct 2, 2013
1,901
663
it's a cheap digital watch from apple that looks like a cheap digital watch from samsung.

no thanks.

----------

...as I said. Have fun in your little world.

Burberry is neither fashion nor luxury.

Luxury retailers: Hermes, Kiton, Dior, Prada, Chanel, Balmain, Givenchy, etc.
Mass market fashion retailers: Zara, Michael Kors, etc.

Burberry is sort of pseudo-luxury with tradition but not really trend-setting fashion.

This is a pretty nice exhaustive list although it lists some non high-end brands.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:High_fashion_brands
 

2SwiFt29

macrumors regular
Oct 13, 2008
162
27
I think people were excited to finally hear about a watch from Apple but I think jaws dropped in disbelief when they announced the starting price of $349. Because of that, I'm not too excited anymore. Ridiculous starting price IMO :eek:
 

iBook_Clamshell

macrumors member
Aug 27, 2013
84
4
Wisconsin
The Apple Watch does rely heavily on the iPhone and does not function as a standalone device.
This counts me out. I'm not going to buy a iPhone+spend $350. I wonder why they call it the Watch. Maybe it's because they want to make a stand-alone smartwatch and call it the iWatch, so they have to use a different name for this. They don't consider the Watch an iDevice because it's not really a computer.
 

ANTAWNM26

macrumors 65816
Jun 14, 2009
1,008
263
Way to expensive point blank

----------

Because the masses helped apple out over the past 5 years. They now know that marketing strategy has paid off in that they can ask the hiked up prices and it will be paid... Lol
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.