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

On the Pricing of Apple Watch

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 80 posts

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#31

Post by Steko »

Shivetya wrote: post #22
jljljl wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is speculation in some circles that Apple will offer a servicing program, in which the S1 could be removed and replaced with the next generation SoC for the Apple watches. Also just me speculating here: For the high end watches, it might be reasonable for Apple to include some number of SoC upgrades as part of their package.

which would be highly unlikely because when has Apple ever done that for its current consumer items? The iPod, iPad, and iPhone, have all been user pays the cost to replace when a new model drops. I think some people are just trying to justify an expensive purchase they have already decided to buy. If it was a wholly stand alone device I might under stand its pricing but as it stands now I do not. If the article pric…

And none of those things comes in $10K+ enclosures. Things are different. People aren't going to throw away big chunks of gold... either Apple is going to do it or someone else is. Upthread idea that people will just be out $20K after 2-5 years is what's ridiculous here.

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#32

Post by Zikes »

jmsdnns wrote: post #25
nicpottier wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, exactly, this seems so obvious that I don't understand why Gruber is ignoring it. The iWatch will be obsolete in 24 months at most (less if you are the type who values status and want a "$20,000" watch as the next model will probably come out 12-18 months later) Maybe there are enough uber-rich people that are ok buying $20,000 watches every year, but that seems like a really, really small market. Then again, ma…

Phones were once something you bought once and rarely bought again, but that changed and now we all buy new phones once every 2'ish years.

That's mostly because people now lease them on multi-year contracts from their service providers.

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#33

Post by [deleted] »

radley wrote: post #28
eof wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

basically everything in traditional business atire is just demonstration of wealth if you really dig into it. what about the other ten thousand solid/plated gold watches? rolex watches containing gold are probably all over wrists of people you would be happy to do business with. don't get me wrong.. 5k for an iwatch is ridiculous

I have no problem with expensive goods, even gold watches. It's the part of "slap some gold on my Apple device" that is counter-intuitive. There's no way Steve Jobs thought "what we're really missing is a gold version". It's not zen. It's gaudy. The few extremely-successful people I've met that have impressed me have been very low key. Can you imagine PG wearing a gold iWatch???

[deleted]

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#34

Post by quotha »

jmsdnns wrote: post #25
nicpottier wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, exactly, this seems so obvious that I don't understand why Gruber is ignoring it. The iWatch will be obsolete in 24 months at most (less if you are the type who values status and want a "$20,000" watch as the next model will probably come out 12-18 months later) Maybe there are enough uber-rich people that are ok buying $20,000 watches every year, but that seems like a really, really small market. Then again, ma…

Phones were once something you bought once and rarely bought again, but that changed and now we all buy new phones once every 2'ish years.

I recently switched back & bought an early 80's model western electric telephone. Hopefully it will last another 30 years!

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#35

Post by [deleted] »

puranjay wrote: post #26
CJefferson wrote: post #5

There is one massive different with usual watches. Expensive watches are often sold under the idea you will never have to buy another watch, and neither will your children, or your children's children. I will reasonably surprised if any new Apple Watch hasn't been made forcibly obsolete by Apple within 5 years or so, and shocked if it is still functional in 10. Furthermore (and more worrying perhaps for people paying…

I'm absolutely amazed that Gruber and the smart folks who read him have missed this. My dad has a Rolex. It belonged to his dad. My eldest brother will likely inherit it one day. That Rolex is a family heirloom. It's style is timeless (sorry) and it isn't going to run out of RAM or processing power anytime soon.

[deleted]

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#36

Post by MrPepperman »

radley wrote: post #20
solutionyogi wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting that you never do business with people who wear Rolex? I don't know how that makes sense. I would never pay 5k for a watch but I do wear shoes which costs 1300$. That doesn't make me a bad person, just that I like to spend money on shoes. I can completely understand that someone may want to spend 5k on Apple Watch.

Would you pay $5k-20k for a gold-plated version of those shoes? Regarding Rolex (which I also feel are also overpriced antiques) they at least have a lasting value. They're often heirlooms passed down to children, partners, etc. A 100 year old watch is awesome. A 200 year old Rolex will be amazing, but possible. But I just can't imagine Apple supporting a first-gen iWatch 50-200 years after release.

Just a small correction: It will be solid gold, not plated. Your point still remains in tact.

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#37

Post by hbosch »

ssharp wrote: post #29
CJefferson wrote: post #5

There is one massive different with usual watches. Expensive watches are often sold under the idea you will never have to buy another watch, and neither will your children, or your children's children. I will reasonably surprised if any new Apple Watch hasn't been made forcibly obsolete by Apple within 5 years or so, and shocked if it is still functional in 10. Furthermore (and more worrying perhaps for people paying…

I was thinking about how long an Apple Watch could take to become obsolete, given how quickly electronics, and particularly mobile electronics, become obsolete. I kept coming back to the idea that these things could last quite some time, possibly a very long time. The watch shouldn't need to do substantial processing, only has a limited number of pixels to push and shouldn't rely on substantial processing like graphi…

Sure, you may theoretically be able to keep an Apple Watch for 2 years, 5 years, or longer potentially... but Apple will be releasing a new one every year, too. And even though your watch is serviceable for 5 years, you'll be having FOMO after 1 or 2.

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#38

Post by tessierashpool »

when Jobs returned to Apple, he gave a big speech about how market share never mattered to BMW, and that Apple should become the BMW of personal computers.

it did, and it went on to become much, much more. but its huge fame today is pushing the Mac away from being BMWs.

all of which makes me desperately wish there was a Lamborghini or Ferarri of personal computers. most people might only need a computer to look at Facebook, but if you're doing animation, making electronic music, and building web applications - all of which I am personally doing, often - then you absolutely need a great GUI and a Unix-like foundation.

if you're reading HN because you want to do a startup, please, give us the Lamborghini of personal computing. we will buy. Apple knows it, but they don't have time to care, because they're going to make so much more money selling digital watches to the people who drive actual Lamborghinis.

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#39

Post by soylentcola »

jmsdnns wrote: post #25
nicpottier wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, exactly, this seems so obvious that I don't understand why Gruber is ignoring it. The iWatch will be obsolete in 24 months at most (less if you are the type who values status and want a "$20,000" watch as the next model will probably come out 12-18 months later) Maybe there are enough uber-rich people that are ok buying $20,000 watches every year, but that seems like a really, really small market. Then again, ma…

Phones were once something you bought once and rarely bought again, but that changed and now we all buy new phones once every 2'ish years.

Sure, but I pay ~$400 every couple of years for a phone. I also bought a Moto 360 for $175 (normal non-sale price $250). I may replace that in a year or two when the tech has improved enough to justify the update.

Either way, these are still mostly luxuries (I could get a passable smart phone for under $100 and any old watch for $30-50 or just not wear one) but it wouldn't be the first time a company put out a range of products so people of different budgets can become customers while still offering some high-end model for status seekers to shell out for and mortals to drool over.

I'm not interested in the Apple watches at the moment but it makes sense for them to sell a "mere mortal" version for $300-500 as they typically charge a bit more than competitors for their name and reputation for polish. If they sell a Rolex-grade version for rock stars and wealthy heirs then I guess it just adds to the status of the brand as a whole even if nobody normal would ever buy one.

Re: On the Pricing of Apple Watch

#40

Post by smackfu »

CJefferson wrote: post #5

There is one massive different with usual watches. Expensive watches are often sold under the idea you will never have to buy another watch, and neither will your children, or your children's children. I will reasonably surprised if any new Apple Watch hasn't been made forcibly obsolete by Apple within 5 years or so, and shocked if it is still functional in 10. Furthermore (and more worrying perhaps for people paying…

I feel like the general response is that, "this is aimed at rich people, they are not sensitive to price, so it doesn't matter."
Post reply on HN