Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

techspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 75 posts

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#41

Post by hutzlibu »

aziaziazi wrote: post #34
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not the outrage the object is obsolete. It’s the outrage it’s obsolete while making marketing material like the ‘Mother Earth’ movie. There’s a huge disconnect with what’s being said and the day to day actions. Bringing disposable objects like this and AirPods into the world is environmentally abhorrent. Which you know I’m actually fine with for the trade off but just don’t lecture me about how much you care whe…

Many commercials works by saying stuff far from the reality. Can’t help thinking of those gigantic EV advertised everyday and everywhere as climate saving wands. « Change the world, by X or Y » (no pun intended).

So why isn't this considered and treated as fraud?

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#42

Post by clnq »

tyingq wrote: post #2

Feels like artificial outrage to me. I'm not convinced the people who can afford a $10k-17k smart watch and bought it in 2015 are surprised it's now going to be unsupported. It probably also still has some collector type value, and at least $2-3k of gold scrap value.

There are different customer expectations in the luxury watch market and tech market. Apple didn't respect those expectations.

A luxury watch, certainly above the $15k range, is expected to receive lifetime servicing. It is a very clear principle that practically all luxury watchmakers respect.

It's not so much something to outrage about, as it is Apple harming themselves in this market a lot.

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#43

Post by yccs27 »

throwaway10965 wrote: post #31
whywhywhywhy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not the outrage the object is obsolete. It’s the outrage it’s obsolete while making marketing material like the ‘Mother Earth’ movie. There’s a huge disconnect with what’s being said and the day to day actions. Bringing disposable objects like this and AirPods into the world is environmentally abhorrent. Which you know I’m actually fine with for the trade off but just don’t lecture me about how much you care whe…

So how should a company that makes tech that people want while being as environmentally friendly as possible present itself? What other company is more environmentally conservative while making the tech that people want (for example Xiaomi, Huawei, etc) than Apple? "Don't make it" is not a good answer. People buy it, so someone will make it. And I'm happy that Apple educates their customers about the environmental im…

"People buy it, so someone will make it" doesn't apply when they're at the size of Apple. They absolutely make things that no one else could make if they didn't.

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#45

Post by [deleted] »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #10
tyingq wrote: post #2

Feels like artificial outrage to me. I'm not convinced the people who can afford a $10k-17k smart watch and bought it in 2015 are surprised it's now going to be unsupported. It probably also still has some collector type value, and at least $2-3k of gold scrap value.

It’s not the outrage the object is obsolete. It’s the outrage it’s obsolete while making marketing material like the ‘Mother Earth’ movie. There’s a huge disconnect with what’s being said and the day to day actions. Bringing disposable objects like this and AirPods into the world is environmentally abhorrent. Which you know I’m actually fine with for the trade off but just don’t lecture me about how much you care whe…

[deleted]

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#46

Post by SilverBirch »

This is like writing an article about Rolex producing watches with terrible accuracy - just completely missing the point. If people are genuinely upset that their first generation solid gold iWatch is obselete then... sell it, it's probably worth more now than it was when released. It is (and was always) a collectors item.

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#47

Post by O_nlogn »

g232089 wrote: post #40
piokoch wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, next to pushing people to buy new iPhone every two years.

How do they do that?

In the UK at least Apple has a subscription-based iPhone upgrade program [1] to get a new iPhone every year. Makes sense as they want recurring revenue, but it does seem wasteful to promote that type of consumer behavior.

[1] https://www.apple.com/uk/shop/iphone/iphone-upgrade-program

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#48

Post by camillomiller »

mcv wrote: post #38
Jorge1o1 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you bought a $17k Rolex Submariner back in 2015, and they told you it could no longer be serviced, I think many people would be outraged. Rolex's own recommended service timeline is every 10 years, so you would actually be told it's obsolete before the first recommended service.

Yes, but that's Rolex. Apple doesn't have that level of trust or reliability. It is ridiculous of course that these overpriced toys have such a limited lifespan, but that's a problem with every gadget these days. Stuff used to be good for decades, sometimes even centuries. All our modern high tech is only good for years. If that. Our economy is all about disposable luxuries. Even so, if I was Apple, I'd probably stil…

Yes, and this is why the Apple Watch in gold was a branding mistake. That’s when Jony Ive started losing it, confusing elitism with high design. He wanted to turn an Apple product in a piece of timeless design for the enlightened few and by doing that he absolutely lost track of what Apple is about. That is what he needed to do and in fact he’s better off creating bizantine logos for King Charles rather than the next environmentally friendly Apple device.

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#49

Post by hutzlibu »

jraph wrote: post #3
tyingq wrote: post #2

Feels like artificial outrage to me. I'm not convinced the people who can afford a $10k-17k smart watch and bought it in 2015 are surprised it's now going to be unsupported. It probably also still has some collector type value, and at least $2-3k of gold scrap value.

Yes. I think we should be revolted to see hardware released in 2015 being out of support for environmental reasons, but I can't feel sad for people needing this amount of status. They should be fine.

But maybe it makes more sense to have those rich people on your side, when it is for the common cause, instead of mocking them.

Re: Apple declares its $17,000 solid-gold watch officially obsolete

#50

Post by sebastianconcpt »

jraph wrote: post #30
nickpeterson wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, gold, silver, and bronze sponsorships.

Well played xD I'll refrain from qualifying your comment, chains of bad puns are not very highly regarded here.

Upvoted out of rebelliousness.
Post reply on HN