The Apple Watch

The Bowling Alley

Coming early 2015 they say...probably march.

What I'm wondering is, where will it be sold in Ireland? Do you think it will be an online only thing for the first while? No reason why the phone shops should be the only ones selling it.

Creamy Goodness

It will be Store both online and in Belfast for starters, with CompuB coming on when stock levels normalise.

I'll be queuing up in Belfast that's for sure :pac:

Zcott

I don't know that the phone shops will be selling it, but I can imagine somewhere like Brown Thomas might. I'm not entirely sold on the idea yet so I'll be wanting to go into Apple in Belfast and try it on.

shanec1928

If the talks of the February release date in America are true I'll more than likely pick one up when I'm over at the end of February.

Doodah7

I never buy the first iteration of an Apple product. Yes the first one is usually ground-breaking and momentous but is usually underpowered/underspecced. it is only with later releases and further refinements that are the brilliant Apple products. So clear examples would be the original iPad vs iPad 2, the original iPhone vs everything that came after it and even the original Apple TV against its successors.

I think I'll wait this one out...

murpho999

Don't get why people would say they will get one in the States or Belfast when none of us know how good the actual product is and it hasn't been reviewed properly.

Creamy Goodness

murpho999 wrote: »

Don't get why people would say they will get one in the States or Belfast when none of us know how good the actual product is and it hasn't been reviewed properly.

going on 's track record, this device will be a hit, yup the gen one will have some issues but so does all tech. A guy in my office has had nearly every Android wear watch since they've released (how old are they less than 12 months), the gear live -> corroded contacts due to sweat, LG G Watch -> strap broke, Moto 270 -> casing cracked due to pressure from a metal wrist band.

With , the quality will be there from day one for me, that's enough of an incentive to buy for me, sod anyone else

murpho999

Creamy Goodness wrote: »

going on 's track record, this device will be a hit, yup the gen one will have some issues but so does all tech. A guy in my office has had nearly every Android wear watch since they've released (how old are they less than 12 months), the gear live -> corroded contacts due to sweat, LG G Watch -> strap broke, Moto 270 -> casing cracked due to pressure from a metal wrist band.

With , the quality will be there from day one for me, that's enough of an incentive to buy for me, sod anyone else

Yes, so assuming that Apple Watches won't physically break, apart from that people don't know how the actual watch will work and integrate with phone etc.
I don't think I would buy it without knowing what uses it has.
Having to charge it everyday is a big negative for me as well.

patmac

I wonder what kind of money they will be?

shanec1928

patmac wrote: »

I wonder what kind of money they will be?

$349 i think i seen mentioned before.

bop1977

$500 dollars was the price I heard last night on Bloomberg TV.

patmac

bop1977 wrote: »

$500 dollars was the price I heard last night on Bloomberg TV.

:eek:
Might chance the Pebble instead.

Creamy Goodness

that's for the Watch standard edition, the sport edition will be $349 and even at that it's a complete estimate made up by Bloomberg of all sources :pac:

as a pebble steel owner, I like what pebble are doing, but if I don't want a notification on my wrist I have to disable push notifications for that app. With the Watch I assume I can say what and what doesn't go to my wrist without having to completely nuke notifications for said app.

Sam Mac

You can pretty much guarantee they will be 299+ for the 'standard edition', typical Apple pricing really.

Bootros Bootros

The high level ones will cost $5k and up.

Creamy Goodness

Sam Mac wrote: »

You can pretty much guarantee they will be 299+ for the 'standard edition', typical Apple pricing really.

They've already announced the price, and it's been mentioned a couple of times in the thread. $349+. In  terms that's €329 minimum (more likely €349).

That's for the sport edition which is using cheaper components than the watch. Can see the watch edition being any cheaper than the cheaper sport edition.

AndyBoBandy

I like my Apple kit, all the way back to my first iPod in 2004, 4 iPhones, iPad, and numerous iMac's/MacBooks.

I think I'll be passing on the watch though.

I don't think they chose to go into the watch market, rather they were forced to as everyone else was doing it.

macpac26

Personally I dont want to do anything on a watch other than view the time. I dont want to stare at a watch as much as I do a phone. Its a much tougher sell than an iPad/iPhone for Apple. Those products are very much short term purchases for most Apple customers but watches traditionally are much more long term.

I have a Seiko watch given to be by my GF (now wife) 8 years ago and its sentimental value is priceless to me. You cant say the same about a phone or an iPad. Will customers adopt similar purchasing behaviour with the watch to the iPad/iPhone with annual or two year upgrades?

Im open to trying one out in store but I cant see myself ever buying one.

challengemaster

Looks like the apple event on the 9th will be an apple watch release.... pre-orders for this have popped up



Anyone have a spare $75k? :eek:

Creamy Goodness

Some people have zero taste :P. I'd rather wear a moto 270 than that hideous thing.

AndyBoBandy

yeah, I'll stick to my Tag

Inquitus

Had to go to page 2 of this forum to find this thread, anecdotally that would suggest the product is unlikely to make a splash. Personally I don't see the value proposition in Smart Watches based on current battery technology, and Apple's offering is going to be alot pricier than other android and pebble products without appearing to offer anything much more.

I fail to see how there will be a high end market for these watches and with people touting 2k to 10k for the Gold Watch edition its in direct competition with true Heirloom timepieces like rolex, tag's etc only unlike them it will be obsolete in no time.

Be interesting to see how they pitch it tomorrow.

Dudda

Is there another Apple Watch thread or how is the 'buzz' about it so dead in the Apple Forum? There was a huge Tim Cook presentation yesterday on it.

Zcott

It's in here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057388012&page=9

the_monkey

Bootros Bootros wrote: »

The high level ones will cost $5k and up.

This is what I don't get, whoever spends $5k+ on a watch is going to go for a classic watch that shows quality and craftmanship like Patek Philippe or Rolex.

I get the Apple popularity, but this is a market it's never going to fill (high end watches)

AndyBoBandy

the_monkey wrote: »

This is what I don't get, whoever spends $5k+ on a watch is going to go for a classic watch that shows quality and craftmanship like Patek Philippe or Rolex.

I get the Apple popularity, but this is a market it's never going to fill (high end watches)

Aye, €10,000 and there'll be a newer version of it released in 12/18 months!

spockety

the_monkey wrote: »

This is what I don't get, whoever spends $5k+ on a watch is going to go for a classic watch that shows quality and craftmanship like Patek Philippe or Rolex.

I get the Apple popularity, but this is a market it's never going to fill (high end watches)

I think you might be wrong. There is a large cohort of people who have lots of money but would never consider wearing a watch at all, never mind a Rolex or a Patek. The Apple watch will be the equivalent status symbol for their generation. They won't care if it doesn't work in 10 years. They will not be choosing between a Rolex and an Apple, they will just be choosing to buy a high end Apple watch.

I'm not sure it will go well for them, but for different reasons. However, most of the people poking holes in it by comparing it to Rolex or Patek are barking up the wrong tree.

the_monkey

spockety wrote: »

I think you might be wrong. There is a large cohort of people who have lots of money but would never consider wearing a watch at all, never mind a Rolex or a Patek. The Apple watch will be the equivalent status symbol for their generation. They won't care if it doesn't work in 10 years. They will not be choosing between a Rolex and an Apple, they will just be choosing to buy a high end Apple watch.

I'm not sure it will go well for them, but for different reasons. However, most of the people poking holes in it by comparing it to Rolex or Patek are barking up the wrong tree.

Sure but it'll for people with more money then sense (plenty of those around) it will be worth f*ck all in 15 years time, where as a Patek or Rolex will be worth the same or more.

Investment v Throwing money on a fad.

So yeah, it's a bad comparison to compare Apple with Rolex/Patek - but they are the ones who want to enter the luxury watch market.

wrt40

Have you got the time? No sorry my battery is dead. The whole smart watch concept is an utter failure. A €400 device that saves you from taking your phone out of your pocket and is pretty bad as a time keeping device unless you carry around a couple of spare battery chargers. People will buy them, no doubt about it. And they'll quickly get sick of having to charge them throughout the day and forgetting to charge them at night. I can honestly see people wearing these as jewellery without ever bothering to use them.

c_man

macpac26 wrote: »

Personally I dont want to do anything on a watch other than view the time.

I like the having the date as well

Sticklers for me straight off the bat are battery time and the cost. But it'll be interesting to see how this evolves (or not!)

murpho999

wrt40 wrote: »

Have you got the time? No sorry my battery is dead. The whole smart watch concept is an utter failure. A €400 device that saves you from taking your phone out of your pocket and is pretty bad as a time keeping device unless you carry around a couple of spare battery chargers. People will buy them, no doubt about it. And they'll quickly get sick of having to charge them throughout the day and forgetting to charge them at night. I can honestly see people wearing these as jewellery without ever bothering to use them.

I read there is a reserve battery that wlll allow you to see the time for 72 hours.

baby and crumble

wrt40 wrote: »

Have you got the time? No sorry my battery is dead. The whole smart watch concept is an utter failure. A €400 device that saves you from taking your phone out of your pocket and is pretty bad as a time keeping device unless you carry around a couple of spare battery chargers. People will buy them, no doubt about it. And they'll quickly get sick of having to charge them throughout the day and forgetting to charge them at night. I can honestly see people wearing these as jewellery without ever bothering to use them.

My gf has a smart watch for the last year or so and she loves it. It's ugly as sin but it's a cool piece of kit. It's not just a watch, it's handy for controlling your music, making calls etc without taking your phone out. From a security point of view that's pretty great.

People who compare it to a watch of equivalent value are not really comparing like with like.

As for the charging thing, she gets 2 days out if hers and I never sleep with my watch in anyway- so if I need to charge it overnight it's no skin off my nose.

kjl

murpho999 wrote: »

I read there is a reserve battery that wlll allow you to see the time for 72 hours.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/09/apple-watchs-battery-life-could-be-its-achilles-heel/

3 hours?? My Galaxy gear gen 1 lasted 3 days.

murpho999

kjl wrote: »

http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/09/apple-watchs-battery-life-could-be-its-achilles-heel/

3 hours?? My Galaxy gear gen 1 lasted 3 days.

No 72 hours, and that's 3 days.

guil

kjl wrote: »

http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/09/apple-watchs-battery-life-could-be-its-achilles-heel/

3 hours?? My Galaxy gear gen 1 lasted 3 days.

Is there something wrong with your eyesight? It specifically says there about the 72 hour reserve.

wampyrus77

steve jobs cant invent a watch that dosntt need iphone to work from

whiterebel

wampyrus77 wrote: »

steve jobs cant invent a watch that dosntt need iphone to work from

You do know Steve Jobs is dead, don't you?

MaceFace

wrt40 wrote: »

Have you got the time? No sorry my battery is dead. The whole smart watch concept is an utter failure. A €400 device that saves you from taking your phone out of your pocket and is pretty bad as a time keeping device unless you carry around a couple of spare battery chargers. People will buy them, no doubt about it. And they'll quickly get sick of having to charge them throughout the day and forgetting to charge them at night. I can honestly see people wearing these as jewellery without ever bothering to use them.

I am using a moto360 for the last 4 months and never had an issue with battery. Had it on ambient since 4am and it is currently 54%. That's after 16 hours.

wampyrus77

whiterebel wrote: »

You do know Steve Jobs is dead, don't you?

what ever apple cant invent watch that doesnt require smartphone to operate it

7upfree

wampyrus77 wrote: »

what ever apple cant invent watch that doesnt require smartphone to operate it

whiterebel

wampyrus77 wrote: »

what ever apple cant invent watch that doesnt require smartphone to operate it

Thanks for clearing that up. Makes as much sense as your previous post.

Mourinho

Won't be bothering with this. Can't see the draw tbh that's goes for all smart watches. I thought it would be great for the fitness types but no GPS is a real shocker I must say.

wampyrus77

the standard iphone has gps

naasrd

Cost is the big prohibitor for me. Would have bought one just for the sake of it if it were around the 180-220 mark. But fur the price it is and all it can do I'll happlily go without.

Tom Dunne

naasrd wrote: »

Cost is the big prohibitor for me. Would have bought one just for the sake of it if it were around the 180-220 mark. But fur the price it is and all it can do I'll happlily go without.

Yeah, that's exactly my thinking.

I do spend money on gadgets (and am quite fortunate that I am in a position to do so), but I'm really having trouble justifying the guts of a thousand Euro on a watch.

AndyBoBandy

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Yeah, that's exactly my thinking.

I do spend money on gadgets (and am quite fortunate that I am in a position to do so), but I'm really having trouble justifying the guts of a thousand Euro on a watch.

Exactly, especially when that €1,000 can buy you a watch that will still be as good as the day you bought it 20 years from now!

I buy a watch, it is for a lifetime (my Tag)
I buy a phone every 2 years from Apple (4,5,6)
an Apple watch that will need replacing every 2-3 years! no thanks.

even if you want to keep it for 10+ years, within 3-4 years (1,000+ charge cycles) it will still need it's battery replaced, and guess who has the privilege of doing that for a small fortune?

Oafley Jones

Andybobandy wrote: »

Exactly, especially when that €1,000 can buy you a watch that will still be as good as the day you bought it 20 years from now!

I buy a watch, it is for a lifetime (my Tag)
I buy a phone every 2 years from Apple (4,5,6)
an Apple watch that will need replacing every 2-3 years! no thanks.

even if you want to keep it for 10+ years, within 3-4 years (1,000+ charge cycles) it will still need it's battery replaced, and guess who has the privilege of doing that for a small fortune?

Hadn't been thinking about this, but I'm curious as to what Apple envision the upgrade cycle being on this. It's common knowledge that they're disappointed with the iPad cycle and I have to imagine there's a stronger case there for people to upgrade more often. What can they add to watch each year to make it a compelling purchase. GPS? Can't see that moving much, besides battery life I'm kinda stumped.

The original goal for this device was that would look after your health. That it would constantly monitor you and give you a heads up if needed. It'd be a compelling product, with a strong narrative and not the half baked device that was unveiled. Thing is, I can't see them reaching that potential for five to ten years and I wonder will it just fall into the background in the mean time.

patmac

I have a Pebble (€129 delivered) for about a month now and I am very pleased with it, handy for the following:
Tells the time with many different watch faces I like the one that buzzes you every hour during work reminding me to stretch and take a break from the desk.
The charge lasts one week and only takes 10 minutes to recharge.
When the phone is on silent it notifies you when a call and text happens, also if you are in a pub you can see who's calling etc.
Great for counting steps etc.
You can control your music handy for when your walking, running or cycling. There is probably loads more things that can be done and I'm sure the Iwatch does the same but at €271 more and with shorter re-charge times I wont be upgrading.

AndyBoBandy

Oafley Jones wrote: »

It's common knowledge that they're disappointed with the iPad cycle and I have to imagine there's a stronger case there for people to upgrade more often.

I still use my iPad 2 (2011) and wouldn't dream of upgrading it, for what I use it for, theres just no need for an expensive upgrade, it still does everything I want/need of it.

Oafley Jones wrote: »

not the half baked device that was unveiled.

I'm still of the opinion that they were forced into doing it as it's what all the other tech companies were doing (had done) and if they didn't jump on board, they'd be left playing catch up. Similar to how everyone else played second fiddle to Apple for years after the release of iPhone/iPad. Apple were probably worried the same would happen them!

TinCool

I haven't been keeping up with the iWatch as I have a perfectly good Seiko that I've had for over 15 years, doesn't need a battery as it's self winding and have no interest in replacing it. I wouldn't have any inclination of getting a smart watch and if the price tag is that much you can forget it.

I've recently gotten back on board with Apple having got an iPad Air 2 - absolutely fantastic device and have recently purchased an iPhone 6, after 4 years with Samsung Galaxy's. But iWatch, absolutely no interest. I doubt it's going to do all that well and for the reasons that have already mentioned, battery life, hideous price tag and having to replace it after a few years.

Oafley Jones

Andybobandy wrote: »

I still use my iPad 2 (2011) and wouldn't dream of upgrading it, for what I use it for, theres just no need for an expensive upgrade, it still does everything I want/need of it.



I'm still of the opinion that they were forced into doing it as it's what all the other tech companies were doing (had done) and if they didn't jump on board, they'd be left playing catch up. Similar to how everyone else played second fiddle to Apple for years after the release of iPhone/iPad. Apple were probably worried the same would happen them!

I'm the same with my iPad 2. "We made them too well" is something I've heard more than once. They released it because Tim Cook needs it for his own legacy and of course to have more product lines to fuel growth, not because of what someone else is doing. I firmly believe that this product, as it is, would not have been released under Jobs. The multiple interface paradigms are just confused and a sure sign of a horse drawn by committee. I'd guess that they're worried about this actually being a hit. Hence the rumours on the apple car that started emerging.