Knock-Off Apple Watches Hit the Chinese Market Less Than 24 Hours After Launch

schwit1 writes Fake versions of the Apple Watch can be bought for as little as £25 — despite the fact the real thing will set you back more than 10 times that. The flagship new product was only launched in San Francisco yesterday but knock-offs are already available in China. According to CNN Money, they can be found at Huaqiangbei electronics market in the southern city of Shenzhen, and others are being sold nationwide via popular e-commerce websites. Right down to the digital crown, the fakes mimic the design and style of Apple's new offering.

Comments

iSpy watch

[ITRambo]

I can't wait to get one of these newfangled Crapple iSpy watches. I wonder if they even connect to smartphones.

Re:iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course they do. How else will the Chinese government hack into your phone?

Re:iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

The funny thing is that the knock-off watches are better than the actual Apple watch. They run Android so they are more open, have a bigger and better library of software and can be used with any phone. Also, they only cost $40.

Re:iSpy watch

[Noah Haders]

Why do you think it's ispy? No camera, health data is stored locally, many privacy pledges by apple which is more than google does.

Re:iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

So a gold-plated iphone 6 isn't required just to check the time?! I love the new direction of this company!

Re:iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

Right, because running android is the sole differentiator in being "better". Hint - the fact that these guys can claim 180 hours of battery, and no one making a serious smart watch can even achieve 3 days indicates that these things do 2/3 of fuck all. It's highly likely that the only functionality on these knock offs is telling the time, and even that likely not very well.

Re: iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

They tell the time? That's probably more than what the genuine Apple watch will do.

Re: iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

Err... iDiot much?

Re: iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

The Apple watch actually has some pretty strong guarantees about its time keeping accuracy, so... no, I'm better the AppleWatch has the knockoffs beat even here.

Re:iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL Privacy pledges. Sure, keep dreaming.

Both companies will take your privacy and are happy to sell you advertisements. You can say "With google, you are the product" as much as you want, but APL does the same thing.

They just don't tell you. (there's a reason why they are the only ones that can sell ads on the i platform)

Re:iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

Angry Apple fanboi is angry.

Re:iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

Hint - the fact that these guys can claim 180 hours of battery

Where do they claim that? All I see is a battery capacity of 350 mAh, which is perfectly believable.

no one making a serious smart watch can even achieve 3 days

Pebble can get 5 to 7 days.

Basically, you're full of shit and don't have a clue.

Re: iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

But only for 18 hours, then the battery is dead.

Re:iSpy watch

[carbonates]

Apparently you clicked past the 65 page disclosure for iTunes that Apple uses to pretty much allow them to do almost anything they want with anything they find on your device.

Re:iSpy watch

[idontgno]

I've had good luck pairing my Magnetbox Bluetoof speakers to my Sandsung Galaxian phone. I think this will be just fine.

Re:iSpy watch

[Noah Haders]

citation to an article that discusses specifically about how apple violates privacy? or does it not exist?

Re:iSpy watch

[Noah Haders]

I have never seen an iAd. The only reason it exists is so apple can set a precedent for banner ads that protect privacy. they probably lose money on the initiative.

Re:iSpy watch

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.apple.com/privacy/privacy-policy/

Yeah, sure, but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Will they blend?

mapple watch

[Anonymous Coward]

All hail the mighty Mapple.

Why is this a surprise?

[rudy_wayne]

Do you really think that the 'fake' watches don't come from the same Chinese factory as the 'real' ones?

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, since the design of the fakes doesn't match that of the real ones. They are just close copies.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Lunix Nutcase]

In this case, yes. These fakes don't have the same components or run the same software as the real ones. They merely aped the design of the enclosure.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[PolygamousRanchKid]

The joke is, most folks who are willing to spend $10,000 for watch won't be able to tell the fake ones from the real ones.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

The real joke is if the "fakes" were made from the same official apple factory 3rd shift.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[MightyYar]

They definitely do not. Apple is a huge customer. Just, startlingly huge. I once spoke to an Apple guy at a trade show. He wanted to know if our company could produce enough machines to assemble a part that they were musing about. We are the largest manufacturer in the world of the equipment that we make - something like 70% market share. I kind of laughed at first, since I figured there was no way they would tax our capacity. Then we started talking numbers, and it quickly became clear that we would have to resort to extraordinary measures to have any chance at meeting their demand. They are a massive operation, and if you are a vendor of theirs you don't need to share factory floor space with other customers - and certainly not knock offs of their products.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[supernova87a]

This is why I have a hard time buying luxury goods where the brand is more important than some tangible functionality.

If I cannot tell the difference between a $100 watch and a $10,000 watch by its accuracy or functionality, I open myself up to being deceived by people who exploit that people cannot tell the difference.

I don't need to be told a luxury story about how a watch is an expression of my adventurousness or legacy, to part me with $10,000 more than the next equally functional good is worth.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can always tell the difference, but it takes time to detect lead poisoning and sneaky malware.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[hey!]

In this case almost certainly not. This is not some guy in his spare bedroom emailing specs to a Chinese supplier. This is a *big* client with the resources to keep tabs on its supplier launching a high profile product that hopefully will sell bucket loads of units. You'd have to be a moron to mess with them.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[aaaaaaargh!]

Possibly, but for 25£ they are too expensive anyway.

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. I can't tell the difference between a bar of gold, and a bar of gold hollowed out and filled with lead*.

*These fakes exist too (with valid serial numbers from real gold bar manufactures)

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Threni]

Very few things are "worth" what they cost. I mean, sure, on one level things are worth exactly what they cost. But on another level there's the cost of the raw materials and the labour required to assemble them, and the factory and its running costs etc. Do you include marketing? Shipping? R&D which is required up front but not to manufacture. A $600 smartphone costs $100 or so to build, and less after a while. What's it worth - $100 or $600? Is it "better" than a $100 smartphone? A smartwatch can keep time more accurately than a more expensive watch by simply correcting for any mistakes once a day. But when people spend any more than $100 on a watch it's not because they're after the accuracy.A lot of rather sad people are going to buy the Apple watch because they think they're in with a chance to be as cool as they think the people who got the first iPhones were. And the sort of people who spend $100,000 on a watch certainly aren't going to get one; not even the tasteless gold one (although i'm sure it'll go down a storm in the middle east and asia).

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you suggesting that genuine Apple products are not as susceptible to malware?

Wow that's naive.

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[ArcadeMan]

Gold-pressed lead... that's from the Bizarro Star Trek Universe, right?

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

They are a massive operation, and if you are a vendor of theirs you don't need to share factory floor space with other customers - and certainly not knock offs of their products.

The problem is that you knock a lot of other customers out of the way to take care of Apple, and they become your only huge customer. Then they pull the rug out from you and your left with no customers.

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[nukenerd]

I can't tell the difference between a bar of gold, and a bar of gold hollowed out and filled with lead*.

Archimedes sorted that problem years ago.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[freeze128]

I wonder if a jeweler will be able to tell the difference.

Ordinary watches have been the domain of jewelers for centuries. Now, they will need to start learning about digital technology.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[youngone]

I wear a Citizen Quartz watch which cost me about $NZ100 in about 2006. It is a nice watch, it keeps pretty accurate time and shows the day and date. When I bought it there were lots of other watches for sale. I could have spend $20 or $8,000, but around $100 seemed the appropriate price based on my income and the quality on offer. When the time comes for me to replace my watch, I will need to consider whether a connection to my smartphone is something I need, so I will consider whatever smartwatches are available when that time comes. However $100 or so is really the most I would be prepared to spend, so the various Samsung watches I see around ($300 - $400) and now this Apple watch ($350 US which will wind up being NZ$800 or so) are just too expensive. I suspect I am reasonably typical among the watch wearing public too, based on how few of these items seem to sell.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Jumunquo]

Chinese manufacturing is also unimaginably huge. Foxconn manufactures Apple's iPhones and iPads, but they also manufacture Kindles, PS4s, XB1s, and Wii Us. If you think about the capacity they must need to meet peak demand for new iPhone models, they most certainly share factory floor space during off-peak seasons. Many companies have been ruined by overramping their capacity and workforce to meet peak demand and then facing the music when the expected orders don't continue to roll in. Smart companies don't put all their eggs in one basket.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

That may be true but I can 100% guarantee the real designs were stolen and then manufactured by someone else. Happens to everything over there.

But don't go thinking that just because it's based on the real design that it's going to be anything equivalent. They will use low-end failure-prone parts and build them in a contaminated environment by an unskilled workforce. That's how they get the low price.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Musc]

You need to study some basic economic concepts.

The WORTH of something is (correctly and with good reason) completely decoupled from the amount of money it COSTS to make.
The worth of something is how much the consumer is defined as the maximum he/she is willing to pay, according to the benefits he/she subjectively feels he/she the purchase would yield

Those subjective benefits can be in regards to the technical merits, the the aesthetic appeal, an irrational emotional response, or anything else. The PRICE is determined by government regulations interacting with market forces like competition, marketing. At the end of the day, the correct price is the one that makes the seller the most money. Competition would hopefully reduce this to something fair to the consumer.

The only time production cost becomes relevant is if the revenue doesn't lead to enough profits, because the market won't bear high enough prices.
At this point the company stops making the product.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Jumunquo]

They'll throw in a free Rolex if you ask...

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[penguinoid]

I can't tell the difference between a bar of gold, and a bar of gold hollowed out and filled with lead*.

Archimedes sorted that problem years ago.

Then how about a bar of tungsten with a little lead to lower it's density to that of gold, then coated with gold?

In case you missed it, the parent's point was that sometimes people buy things because other people value or are expected to value them, of which any form of money including gold bars are a perfect example.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Consider the difference between manufacture and assembly.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[AaronW]

I know someone who has bought a number of "Rolex" and other expensive watches in China. These aren't the really cheap knock-offs and they're actually of decent quality and keep excellent time. One of my cousins has a real Rolex watch. We put them side by side and it was impossible to tell them apart, right down to the hologram on the back. Of course they were different when you opened them up, but the works in these fake watches were often made in Switzerland or Germany just like the real watches. The writing on the inside of the back of the case also made it obvious that these were fake and this appears to be intentional. From the outside, however, everything seems to be the same, even the smooth movement of the second hand.

Now with the iWatch it should be fairly obvious since they run different operating systems, though I suppose it's possible for a cloned watch to also be able to run iOS just like the real one.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[thegarbz]

Oh you assume they share the factory floor? No that's not how fake products work.

Fake products are often no different to real ones. Sometimes it's the result of a production run at a time where there's no supposed to be one, working a shift that isn't supposed to exist without oversight or QC, and sometimes it is purely people stealing products and having them hit the grey market to make a little more money on the side.

This would all be a great disaster if management found out, if it weren't for high levels of corruption in these types of companies. You are completely underestimating the level of ingenuity of the Chinese clone / fake / grey market.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[rmdingler]

Very few things are "worth" what they cost. I mean, sure, on one level things are worth exactly what they cost. But on another level there's the cost of the raw materials and the labour required to assemble them, and the factory and its running costs etc. Do you include marketing? Shipping? R&D which is required up front but not to manufacture. A $600 smartphone costs $100 or so to build, and less after a while. What's it worth - $100 or $600?

Very few things are worth what they cost...aside from the value-added things you mention, profit enters the mix as a reasonable consideration a company must account for if remaining in business is part of the mission statement.

Apple's products are Veblen goods of the most coveted sort: profitable and popular.

Things are always and only worth what you can get for them.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

The joke is, most folks who are willing to spend $10,000 for watch won't be able to tell the fake ones from the real ones.

But the engineers whose research and development salaries that are suppose to be paid off by the $10k watch will know. The cheap Chinese freeloaders who copied their work will know.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

The joke is, most folks who are willing to spend $10,000 for watch won't be able to tell the fake ones from the real ones.

until the fake one catches fire and burns your hand off. is there a notification for "YOUR HAND IS ON FIRE"?

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing about a Rolex is it (supposedly) loses less value if you resell it, because many people would be willing to get an old one at a discount. This also holds true for a few other brands, but not many. The Apple thing looks like will be useless in two years given their track record with ither products.

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that what Fort Knox is full of now?

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

At some point, being too dependant on one huge customer is only barely different from being owned by the customer. The difference being is that the customer takes none of the risk, but gets all the benefits. The customer can even leverage their position of power over the company to renegotiate deals, dictate terms, meddle with the internal affairs of the company, and other such abuses. And as the article shows, some huge customers do not give a damn about what will happen when (not if) they eventually dump a company.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[drinkypoo]

Fake products are often no different to real ones.

Well, not really.

sometimes it is purely people stealing products and having them hit the grey market to make a little more money on the side

But that's not a fake product, that's just stolen and potentially unserialized product. Most fake products differ from the official products at least in quality of components. Switches, caps, anything that can get cheaper does get cheaper. Odds are most of that stuff is built the same way, on the same production lines but during off hours and using inferior materials.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[MightyYar]

That may be true but I can 100% guarantee the real designs were stolen and then manufactured by someone else. Happens to everything over there.

That is absolutely true. I know our designs go to our competitors and vice versa. That said, it would be extremely hard to produce some of the things Apple does - if you could even source the parts - while significantly undercutting their price. They really do push the envelope on miniaturization of the form factor. I suppose you could cheat if you used a bulkier layout and sacrificed battery size or something... but that is diverging from the design. The knock-off maker is going to want to avoid as much R&D as possible :)

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[MightyYar]

Yes, but inventory is going to be pretty tightly controlled by Apple. Foxconn couldn't just set up a little side business pumping out a few extras here and there without Apple noticing the missing parts.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Bing Tsher E]

The place I work is one of General Motor's bitches. We supply them and haven't been able to sell to other customers (our sales team claims. I think they just like being GM bitches.)

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[MightyYar]

That is a danger, but I think we would approach it as a one-off. We make capital equipment and so are used to ramping up and down. It's all fantasy-land anyway, since nothing ever came of it - I was just struck by the scale they operate at.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[CaptainDork]

If I pay $10,000 dollars for a watch, it better damn well cause me to have an orgasm every four hours (accurate to a billionth of a second per 40 thousand years).

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know, use acoustic or electrical or some other properties? Or just drill it?

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[thegarbz]

It is within the standard definition of fake. The product does not show up on formal documentation, will lack or have incorrect serial numbers and generally lack any form of quality control shipping everything out without oversight.

There are a big range of what is considered a "fake". It could be a piece of shit with "Appel" written on it (likely) but you can't discount the fact that it could be the exact same device made from the exact same factory. The Chinese are well known for this practice.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realise despite how startlingly huge you think Apple are, everything is relative. They may seem large to you but their manufacturer is orders of magnitude larger. For fun and games why not look up how many people for instance work at "Foxcon city."

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[pasamio]

Be careful what you wish for:
http://www.stippy.com/japan-wa...

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[pasamio]

Luckily we've at least moved on from DOS:

Hand on fire.
Abort, Retry, Fail?

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oddly enough, in this particular instance your post a germane to the apple watch. The gold they use has been mixed with ceramic particles but behave like metal alloys. These have large volumes but low mass compared to metal alloys. The result is the hardness of the gold went up but the weight of the gold to filler did not change much (it's still 18)

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll be impressed if the fake version contains $9,000 worth of gold.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently, it's "extremely hard" to do something everyone else is already doing... LOL Sure, they throw different software on it but that's about it...

Hell, even the Moto watch is more "unique" with it's circular design instead of a super-small smartphone sans radio.

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't tell the difference between a bar of gold, and a bar of gold hollowed out and filled with lead*.

Archimedes sorted that problem years ago.

No he didn't, he figured out a way to measure the volume of an irregularly shaped object so that its density could be calculated and compared to a known density. Presumably a bar of gold is in a shape that is easy to calculate the volume.

According to wikipedia, density of gold is 19300 kg/m3, lead is 11340 kg/m3, so a bar of gold hollowed out and filled with lead would have to be up to 1.7x the size of a bar of pure gold in order to have the same weight. (Less larger if the amount of lead is small but that isn't the point of the GP.....)

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[Threni]

Need to learn to read,dude. Second sentence.

Re: Why is this a surprise?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, they are tungsten bars, specially made and coated with gold. No lead.

Federal reserve bought hundreds of thousends of tungsten bars during Clinton precidency times. Years ago there was a big "ruckus" between China and US, becouce chinese were not trusting the fort knox chipment og gold bars and tested all the bars. They all were fake bars, no gold only gold coated tungsten.

In October 2009, China reportedly received a large shipment of gold, containing some 6,000 bars, weighing 400 ounces each. When it was received, the Chinese government asked that tests be performed to guarantee the purity and weight of the gold bars. In this test, four small holes were drilled into the bars, and the metal was analyzed. Officials were shocked to find the bars were bogus. They contained cores of tungsten, with only an outer coating of real gold. What’s more, these gold bars, containing serial numbers for tracking, originated in the United States and had reportedly been stored in Fort Knox for years.

Tungsten is vastly cheaper than gold—maybe $30 dollars a pound, compared to $1,200 an ounce for gold right now. It has exactly the same density as gold, to three decimal places. Therefore, it has to be drilled to detect the fraud. The only differences are that it’s the wrong color, and that it’s much harder than gold. Pure gold is soft and can be dented with a fingernail.

At first, many gold experts speculated that the fake gold must have originated in China, which is considered the world’s best knock-off producers. However, the Chinese government investigated and issued a statement pointing a finger squarely at the United States.

The Chinese claim that in 1995—during the Clinton administration (Robert Rubin, Alan Greenspan and Lawrence Summers)—between 1.3 million and 1.5 million 400-ounce tungsten blanks were manufactured by a sophisticated refiner in the United States, amounting to more than 16,000 metric tons. Some 640,000 of these tungsten blanks were then gold plated and shipped to Fort Knox, according to the Chinese, where they are said to remain to this day. The Chinese contend that the remaining collection of these 400-ounce fakes was eventually gold-plated and then “sold” into international markets.

The global market is literally “stuffed full of 400 ounce salted bars,” said one unnamed expert. “It’s enough to destroy the world markets.”

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[MightyYar]

I might suggest that manufacturing is harder than you seem to think it is. Months can be spent fine-tuning a single part in a complex product. That part might not even be available to other manufacturers. Process can be a very difficult part of manufacturing - simply getting the drawings is insufficient (though quite helpful).

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[MightyYar]

Still, they aren't just a drop in the bucket - they are more like a liter in the bucket... that was my surprise.

Re:Why is this a surprise?

[AmiMoJo]

What you call economic concepts are really more extreme capitalist concepts. Let's try again:

The WORTH of something is (correctly and with good reason) completely decoupled from the amount of money it COSTS to make.
The worth of something is how much the consumer is defined either subjectively by the consumer or by society's mandated access to it (e.g. air, water).

Those subjective benefits can be in regards to the technical merits, the the aesthetic appeal, an irrational emotional response, or anything else. Society can decide that individuals have the right to certain things, either for free or at a regulated price. The PRICE is determined by government regulations interacting with market forces like competition, marketing. At the end of the day, the correct price is the one that society deems is fair. Purely optional items like jewelery have no upper limit, essential medicines might be capped, necessities might be provided for free as a condition of access to other markets.

The only time production cost becomes relevant is if the revenue doesn't lead to enough profits, because the market won't bear high enough prices, or because society will not tolerate high enough prices. In such causes the company may either stop making the profit or seek an alternative arrangement with society to keep producing it in exchange for some other benefit.

Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[pla]

But the important question - Do they work?

...Because a sub-$100 knock-off counts as the only way I'll ever try one.

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[John Bokma]

Good for you! *clap clap*. If you want to try a real one you have to buy a real one. Buying a fake one is like sitting in a bathtub claiming you're on the beach.

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe: It wouldn't be surprising if they were from the "3rd shift" from the "official" apple factory.

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[xaxa]

But the important question - Do they work?

Probably, but probably not especially well. Spend a bit more for the Chinese watch that isn't trying to be Apple, where the effort has gone into features, not imitation.

My flatmate bought an "iPhone 6" in Albania for about £40. He was convinced it was real, to the point that he's contacted Apple UK support because it wouldn't charge properly.

I haven't handled an iPhone 6, but I thought the buttons seemed a bit wobbly, although the rest of the case was convincing. The graphics were spot on, and smooth enough that I wasn't certain it was fake (I thought it could be stolen). What gave it away was pressing "iTunes Apps" opened the Android "Manage Applications" screen. There were a few other apps, settings etc that opened Android things but had Apple labels.

It could have been OK, a cheap phone with an Apple-like interface. Except the touchscreen was so shoddy it was impossible to dial "#" (I wanted "#*#*INFO*#*#"), and it won't recognise the SIM.

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[AmiMoJo]

There are some pretty insane smart watches on eBay and AliExpress. They aren't just auxiliary displays for smart phones, they have their own SIM sockets and run a full Android OS. Battery life claims to be a day but that's about as credible as the Apple Watch's 18 hours...

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

If I wanted to try one, I'd go to one of the Apple stores. Costs a lot less than $100, and I know it'll actually work.

Dropping a benjamin on a random knock-off seems kind of silly.

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[SumDog]

This is such a shit article. They're not knock-off eyeWatches. They run some crappy OS or some modified Android. It's like those shit game systems that have like 10 old Atari games in an emulator.

I'd be more impressed if they got a hold of the firmware and made actual, working Apple watch knock-offs at a fraction of the price. That would actually be impressive and pretty awesome (fuck their overpriced watch. Get a pebble. You don't have to charge it every fucking day).

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[tlambert]

Maybe: It wouldn't be surprising if they were from the "3rd shift" from the "official" apple factory.

They're not. Apple products don't get "third shifted", because Apple controls the supply chain for at least 8 components of each of their products. You could get a display that looked similar, but it wouldn't have the same pixel density horizontally and vertically. Or you could get an integrated SIP/SOC, but it wouldn't be an S1. And it's apparently at *least* a 32 bit ARM system, since it's running a ported version of iOS.

One thing Tim Cook has *always* been good at is locking up the product parts suppliers, specifically to avoid "third shift" tactics. That's not to say that there isn't "lossage" or "misidentification of good parts as "faulty & destroyed", but that's all locked up pretty tightly.

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[Bing Tsher E]

What gave it away was pressing "iTunes Apps" opened the Android "Manage Applications" screen. There were a few other apps, settings etc that opened Android things but had Apple labels.

That sounds like an upgrade, not a knockoff. An Apple phone that ran Android would be an improvement. Better yet even if it was easy to install an open android like cyanogenmod on it.

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're so right.

You could find a better pixel density... why would anyone want to downgrade?

With an ARM processor anyone can license... Big deal it doesn't come from one particular company -- hundred of others have no problems...

Also, 8 components? Like what? The CPU is about the only thing they design. Camera? That's Sony. Display? Samsung. CPU? Probably Samsung again (yes, they may design it, but they don't have a fab).

There's almost nothing unique about the watch in terms of hardware...

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[tlambert]

You're so right.

You could find a better pixel density... why would anyone want to downgrade?

So the Apple software doesn't look like crap when you run it on your pseudo-Apple Watch.

With an ARM processor anyone can license... Big deal it doesn't come from one particular company -- hundred of others have no problems...

Apple has the best memory bandwidth of any ARM processor, period. Samsung is trying to catch up, but they are far from achieving it, and at nowhere near the power and thermal profile Apple has. Apple place their parts based on thermal budget, not based on shortest wire route. And they are number one at doing power management.

Also, 8 components? Like what? The CPU is about the only thing they design. Camera? That's Sony. Display? Samsung. CPU? Probably Samsung again (yes, they may design it, but they don't have a fab).

There's almost nothing unique about the watch in terms of hardware...

You're dead wrong. I don't think you are understanding "lock up the supply chain", so I will explain.

(1) They do not buy all the parts they need for a production run. They buy *ALL* the parts, and *ALL* the future production for those parts. This is why there is so much SPAM from dickheads wanting to first-party source iPhone displays: Because they *simply can't do it, period*.

(2) The parts include the CPU, the flash parts, the display, the *machines capable of being used to make the display bezel at all*, the microswitches for the buttons, etc..

(3) When Apple went to laser cut their LED pinholes that they use to show the LED through the aluminum bod of some of their devices, *they bought *ALL* the lasers. Not just *SOME* of them. *ALL* of them, and the production for the remainder of the year.

(4) Do you want to build a power supply for charging the thing? Sorry, you can't *GET* the connector.

(5) Do you want to build something that can *USE* one of Apple's power supplies? Again, sorry, yuou can't *GET* the other connector, either.

(6) Do you want to buy the Broadcom chip they use in their touch interfaces on the bezels and their trackpad on their laptops? Sorry *BROADCOM* on't sell you the chips.

Do you get it now?

It's the same thing IBM under Lou Gerstner used to do with the ThinkPads, before they sold that division off to Lenovo.

Apple has a monopoly on building hardware that will work with their software. Nothing you can do about it.

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, Appple's suppliers won't sell parts to anyone but apple - they don't want to jeopardize their golden deal with Apple. But often enough, they all have their stuff made in China/Korea/Taiwan because that is cheaper. So to make a fake iSomething, you can't third-shift at the iSomething factory. But you can third-shift at various other suppliers. So you get the fancy connectors.

And for some items,you don't need exactly the same. Broadcom is not the only one with touchscreens. Lasers is not the only way to make holes, so you use a different technique. And if you're going to run android on the clone product - surely you dont need the same processor as Apple!

Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet?

[tlambert]

And for some items,you don't need exactly the same. Broadcom is not the only one with touchscreens.

No. But they're the on;ly one that's capable of running the touchscreen firmware blob your pirated version of iOS is going to shove down to the chip every time the thing boots.

Well... are we surprised?

[Dutch Gun]

This is one of the "hidden" costs of doing business in China. You can pretty much count on the theft and exploitation of your designs. How dare they exploit us back!

However, given the fact that this is a luxury good and status symbol, I don't think Apple is too worried about this, except if consumers are fooled into buying one. No one wants to show off a knock-off status symbol. It defeats the entire purpose.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[Anonymous Coward]

No it doesnt.
  The point of a status symbol is to show off in front of friends/women.
If It's a good fake, then the same result is acheived.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[tehlinux]

>The point of a status symbol is to show off in front of friends/women.

And if they want to see/play with it, just tell them the battery is too low. Who isn't going to believe that?!

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[kamapuaa]

If this had been made in Brazil, Chinese companies would still have copied the basic design. You can also get fake rolexes in China, and those are made in Switzerland (according to 3 seconds of Googling).

They didn't use the same factory, so the country of the original is a basically irrelevant point.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[nukenerd]

I don't think Apple is too worried about this, except if consumers are fooled into buying one. No one wants to show off a knock-off status symbol. It defeats the entire purpose.

But someone who buys a knock-off is not generally going to announce to people that it is a knock-off. So, if it looks the part, the knock-off is going to be just as effective as a staus symbol as the real thing.

Or just as ineffective. The very existence of the knock-offs defeats the status symbol, because even if you buy that $10,000 one, people are just going to assume that it is a knock-off.

I knew a woman who owned a really large diamond, worn in a necklace. When people saw it they would ask if it was real, and she would say "Of course not!". But it was real. Either she did not want to look super-vain, or did not want to risk it being stolen. I suppose she had it for self-gratification or as an investement, but as a status symbol it was pointless.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[gnasher719]

Or just as ineffective. The very existence of the knock-offs defeats the status symbol, because even if you buy that $10,000 one, people are just going to assume that it is a knock-off.

There are plenty of Rollex watches and Rolodex watches around. And you'd have to be blind to not see the difference.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[Mr. Freeman]

Yep. Many companies have gone bankrupt because some new executive decides to outsource production to China. The new executive is naive enough to believe that a Chinese company will honor the non-disclosure agreement and won't sell critical trade secrets to everyone else. Manufacturing is moved overseas, stateside employees are laid off, the business suffers initial losses because the Chinese company hasn't figured out how to actually perform the process correctly yet, and then a few months later the company goes entirely bankrupt because their trade secrets are now suddenly common knowledge in the entire industry.

The executive then gets another bright idea: they'll sue the Chinese company to recover damages! If the Chinese company still exists by this point (unlikely), they'll win in court because, to no one's surprise, the Chinese government doesn't give a fuck about protecting American IP rights. Much money is burned, legal fees are collected, the executive staff gets a golden parachute, and all the hard working American employees are shit out of luck and scrambling to find jobs at another American company that will make the same fucking mistakes as their previous employer.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[AaronW]

I know someone with a fake Chinese "Rolex" watch and it's a damned good copy. My cousin has a real one. Side by side it was virtually impossible to tell them apart. The fake one even had the same hologram on the back and the movements looked the same. The fake one keeps excellent time as well and the workmanship is top notch. Opening them up one can tell the difference. The wording on the inside of the back looks like they intentionally made it different. The works were made in Switzerland though. This wasn't a cheap fake Rolex, I think he paid under $200 though. He's picked up a number of other "expensive" watches over there as well. The place that sells them keeps their hidden inventory in the ceiling with someone up there who passes down the merchandise when the inspectors aren't around. All the vendors keep a close eye on them and quietly hide stuff when they come around looking for counterfeit goods.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[AaronW]

Some of the knock-offs are actually quite good and very difficult to spot the differences. They're not the $40 ones though. As I have said in other posts, I know someone with some of these fake watches and holding them side by side with the real thing it's impossible to spot the difference. The movement is the same, the same workmanship, everything. Only opening them up can you spot the difference, though the works in the fake "Rolex" were made in Switzerland.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[Anonymous Coward]

Was it a synthetic diamond and was there a murder involved?

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[DNS-and-BIND]

Did this actually happen or did you just make it all up? Citation, please. Foreign companies and sue and win in Chinese courts and do so all the time. Sounds like your ideas are stuck in a decade ago, but honestly it wasn't like that even then.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[gtall]

Ever look at the trade surplus China has with the U.S? Your flip comment of "How dare they exploit us back!" has no relevance.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[AmiMoJo]

No need to sell trade secrets or break the NDA. Most of the clones just reverse engineer the original the old fashioned way. Fake iPhones run Android with a very good iOS skin, for example. There would be little point copying the iPhone hardware any more than superficially if you wanted to run Android anyway.

Re:Well... are we surprised?

[Anonymous Coward]

How the fuck we are exploiting China?

Where can I buy one?

[Anonymous Coward]

Link?

Re:Where can I buy one?

[ArcadeMan]

Here you go.

24 hours, eh?

[ArcadeMan]

Took them long enough!

Re:24 hours, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

They were ready ahead of time -- someone sent them detailed plans months ago -- they just decided not to release until afterwards to keep their spy safe. They want CAD models, not cell-phone pics of prototypes, and they don't want to burn their expensive spy just to get a few hours drop on possible competitors (if any even exist).

Re:24 hours, eh?

[supernova87a]

Well, they did have to stop and charge the Apple Watch a few times to get it to work for more than 24 hours.

Re:24 hours, eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps NASA should order a couple of nuclear powered Mars vehicles from the Chinese contractors right now. Delivery to spec in 24 hours, tenth of a price.

Well, technically

[Anonymous Coward]

The real thing would be between 10 and 400 more expensive..

Design patents?

[Wootery]

Will they be legal for sale in the USA, or will design patents prevent that?

Re:Design patents?

[alvinrod]

Presumably it will be illegal, just as many other knockoffs are illegal. It's also very likely that many of them violate Apple's trademark as well so even without design patents these would still run afoul of the law.

Re:Design patents?

[gnasher719]

Will they be legal for sale in the USA, or will design patents prevent that?

Design patents would be relevant if someone tried to sell these watches under their own name. That's unlikely to happen. They will be sold as "Apple Watches". What makes this illegal is that it is fraud, and that it is infringing on a trademark.

Interestingly, if someone sells a cheap watch that looks like an Apple Watch and you think it is so cheap because it is stolen, and buy it, you are in the USA legally guilty of an attempt to buy stolen goods (it would obviously be hard to prove that you believed it was stolen).

Re:Design patents?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironic that you have to leave the USA to enjoy the benfits of a "free market".

Re:Design patents?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironic that the US would have laws that help the people who live in the US make money, rather than laws that help Chinese con men make money?

Re:Design patents?

[Wootery]

It seems better to view it as a good example of why totally unregulated markets aren't a good thing.

Is it a free market of intellectual property if a country has no copyright laws?

One BEEEELION Dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

http://memegenerator.net/instance/60133689

weeks ago

[YesIAmAScript]

They were available weeks ago actually. Didn't slashdot already host a link to a review of one even?

What will they think of next?

[Moridineas]

What will they think of next--fake Rolex watches? Fake Oakley sunglasses? I'm shocked--SHOCKED--by this most recent development.

Re:What will they think of next?

[Anonymous Coward]

I got your Rolodex watches right here. Uggkley sunglasses come free with purchase.

Re:What will they think of next?

[Tablizer]

I once saw a "Relox" watch. I didn't catch the letter difference at first. I was temped to buy one, at least as a semi gag piece.

What happens if your company name is very similar to another that makes the same category of products?

I'm thinking of setting up Aple.com, Slushdot.com, Googel.com, Yooha.com, Micrasoft.com, Diice.com, Yuotube.com, Amozon.com, facebok.com, fakebook.com, eBuy.com, and Pinterist.com.

(Uh, don't try any of those, some go to "shady" places. Dadgummit, they beat me to it.)

Re:What will they think of next?

[Anonymous Coward]

What happens if your company name is very similar to another that makes the same category of products?

You get sued. Good luck with that.

Re:What will they think of next?

[drinkypoo]

Uggkley sunglasses come free with purchase.

Foakleys look exactly like Oakleys, right down to the packaging in many cases, and even an O-logo embroidered cleaning cloth. And then you wear them like five times and they break.

Re:What will they think of next?

[Tablizer]

Perhaps in the US, but what about in other countries?

Re:What will they think of next?

[Anonymous Coward]

slushdot.com = Slashdot beta

Re:What will they think of next?

[Tablizer]

No, that's Slashdud

lame story is lame

[sootman]

Wow, 24 hours after launch? That's AMAZING! That is, if you ignore the fact that precise measurements and high-res images of the real thing have been online for months at apple.com... but other than that, yeah, quite a feat.

Re:lame story is lame

[DigiShaman]

If the Chinese can copy and produce a fake Apple Watch in 24 hours after launch, imagine what their combined will could archive at cleaning up their pollution.

Re:lame story is lame

[ArcadeMan]

They need another country to do it first so they can copy it.

Re:lame story is lame

[Anonymous Coward]

Watches can be made blindly ... so we are assured, but no ... in fact you cannot get rid of pollution. Whenever bitch Gaia scratches her fav itch, Yellowstione blows up. EOF.

Re:lame story is lame

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, that's what happened. Even though Apple showed the watch back in September, the knock-off guys were just sitting around until last Monday. Then they said "finally, we can get started on this. You've got 24 hours. Go."

Re:lame story is lame

[Anonymous Coward]

They would have to Outsource manufacturing, the same way your country cleaned up its pollution.

Re:lame story is lame

[DigiShaman]

Oh, we cleaned up our pollution alright. In fact, it was so expensive that it was cheaper to manufacture in China. Perhaps you have a point. Guess the baton of progress finally gets handed off from China to Africa next. It's like enduring pollution is a rite of passage or something, right?

This time it is Apple who are the copy-cats

[Anonymous Coward]

Smart (in fact smarter) watches have been around for several years, mostly Linux/android based. It is about time Apple got shown up for being the fraudulent hype masters that they are. Even the look of the first iPhones was based on the concept work of other people produced back in the early 90's.

Woah, chinese people live in the future!?!

[Anonymous Coward]

1.) It hasn't launched yet.
2.) Pictures have been available online since WWDC.
3.) I hate dice.

On a positive note...

[seedybd]

You can guarantee the battery life will be better.

Not really a knock off...

[NoKaOi]

More like a look-alike. I'm not trying to play semantics here, but the term knock-off implies that either it's pretending to be the same thing. These watches are made to look like the Apple watch (whose pics have been available for a long time) but they don't carry the same name (Ai-watch, D-watch) and there is no indication at all about functionality. It's like the difference between a knock-off Rolex that actually says Rolex on it and a cheap watch from Wal-Mart that is made to look like a Rolex.

Bought for show?

[myid]

The article says, "Yet it is unlikely that buyers will mistake the clones for the real thing. The price tag alone is a dead giveaway -- the Apple Watch costs from $349 in the U.S." So I'm guessing they're buying the fake watches to show their friends: "Look - I have an Apple Watch!"

So let me understand this...

[roc97007]

So, bear with me here. The Apple watch is manufactured and assembled in China, except for the solid gold ones, which (I've read, but it hasn't been substantiated) have guts made in China but the final assembly is in the US to avoid shipping gold to China to be made into watch cases. Or something like that.

So, let's assume for the moment that (at least) all the consumer grade Apple watches and all the guts are made in China. We also know that China companies in general have ... different ... ideas about intellectual property.

...and we know that the Apple Watch is the must-have trinket of this century. Well, 2015. Well, March of 2015. Well, the second week of March, 2015.

And so, anyone who is surprised that "knock-offs" start appearing nearly simultaneously with launch, should be beaten with a switch and made to sit in the corner. Hell, the "knock-offs" could have been made at the same factory.

Funny story -- I'm a photographer, and the brand I use (which will remain nameless) demands premium prices for official accessories, which are often just pieces of plastic with a certain shape and a few basic electronics. Almost immediately after a new product is introduced, a shower of "knock-off" accessories appear, which are often indistinguishable from the official parts. The story is, they're identical because they're a covert run from the same factory, merely with different branding and perhaps not as fastidious quality control. (Or, at least, that last part is what the vendor wants you to believe.) And so an official battery grip may list for $300, street cost $255, and the knock-offs are not more than $50, look and behave identically, and appear to last as long even under rough use. (And you don't mind being rough with them because if they break, you can get another for $50.) However, there will always be (brand name) affectionados who will sneer at your $50 part with "you get what you pay for", even in the face of contradictory evidence.

And of course, as no true Apple enthusiast at least in this country would dream of wearing a knock-off, even were it electrically and visually identical, Apple will still make a bazillion dollars off the product.

Re:So let me understand this...

[WeeBit]

"We also know that China companies in general have ... different ... ideas about intellectual property."

Yes everyone knows this, and companies in America still keep China in business. If you visit China or YT you can find many videos on YT showing counterfeit shops, and goods. /ahem They even have a Hilton! This guy on YT said it's much better to visit these shops in person.

                              "And so, anyone who is surprised that "knock-offs" start appearing nearly simultaneously with launch, should be beaten with a switch and made to sit
                                in the corner. Hell, the "knock-offs" could have been made at the same factory."

Good chance it probably was the same factory. The ones that can reverse engineer and do it cheaply are the very companies that America runs too.

  When you tell America that China are the guilty ones for taking American jobs...well it's taken longer than we thought for America to realize that China is stealing from them. So how long do you think it will take for America to realize that China stole our jobs?

Re:So let me understand this...

[myid]

And of course, as no true Apple enthusiast at least in this country would dream of wearing a knock-off, even were it electrically and visually identical, Apple will still make a bazillion dollars off the product.

Well, I guess you could call me an "Apple enthusiast", in the sense that I prefer to use a Mac. But I don't plan to get even the cheapest Apple Watch, let alone an expensive one.

Re:So let me understand this...

[Anonymous Coward]

So how long do you think it will take for America to realize that China stole our jobs?

China didn't steal your jobs. Your leadership gave your jobs away to someone who would do it for less, that way they could boost that quarter's numbers and their bonus.

Re:So let me understand this...

[roc97007]

And of course, as no true Apple enthusiast at least in this country would dream of wearing a knock-off, even were it electrically and visually identical, Apple will still make a bazillion dollars off the product.

Well, I guess you could call me an "Apple enthusiast", in the sense that I prefer to use a Mac. But I don't plan to get even the cheapest Apple Watch, let alone an expensive one.

I wouldn't call you an apple enthusiast. I have used the products -- I retired a G4 not too long ago, and I still have an old ipod connected to the stereo in my truck. Daughter was a big fan of the ipod touch, 'till she slowly realized that her Android phone does all of that and more. My understanding is that her touch remains in its docking station in the bathroom now, so she can play music while showering. Wife owns a nano. We use Apple products (not a lot, but some) and I will admit to a large amount of animosity towards Microsoft for their business models and recent design choices. Yet I would not call us Apple enthusiasts.

To me, an Apple enthusiast is someone who will camp in front of the store in the rain the night before to be the first to trade their iphone in for a newly released, virtually identical iphone.

I happen to know someone who is currently between jobs, but it's not lost on him that the Apple Watch is just slightly more than a single unemployment check. Yeah, that's an Apple enthusiast.

Re:So let me understand this...

[roc97007]

So how long do you think it will take for America to realize that China stole our jobs?

China didn't steal your jobs. Your leadership gave your jobs away to someone who would do it for less, that way they could boost that quarter's numbers and their bonus.

...while somehow not realizing that they're trying to sell their products to the same people they're screwing by sending jobs overseas.

Re:So let me understand this...

[msobkow]

What makes you think the CEOs, boards, and investors ever gave a shit about your jobs, peon?

Re:So let me understand this...

[thegarbz]

And so, anyone who is surprised that "knock-offs" start appearing nearly simultaneously with launch, should be beaten with a switch and made to sit in the corner. Hell, the "knock-offs" could have been made at the same factory.

This. And people seem to forget that fake iPhone 4 were available several weeks before the official launch.

Re:So let me understand this...

[roc97007]

That's a point. But this means it hasn't yet occurred to them that we need money to buy the crap they make.

Suspicious

[Tablizer]

They must be fake, iMaps works right.

Re:Suspicious

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, this is one place where Apple is ahead of the crowd. The AppleWatch is the only smart watch I'm aware of that actually has a Maps app. No one else has managed to get it to work.

spam trap

[burne]

'All about the new Apple watch in 0:90'

What? 1:30 of advertising? command-W and FO.

Re:24 hours, eh? [Took them long enough!]

[Tablizer]

because the Chinese had to outsource it to Vietnam to get profitable labor rates

Like a Boss....

[ruir]

The local Apple representative here has been selling the "iWatchz" for months now...€100. I should complain to Apple, actually.

Yeah, but titanium is another matter.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

I can't tell the difference between a bar of gold, and a bar of gold hollowed out and filled with lead*.

Archimedes sorted that problem years ago.

Yes, but his method won't work if you make an undersized ingot of titanium and cast a little gold around it. Same specific gravity, to within the resolution of even some extremely accurate measurement tools.

yes, I do.

[YesIAmAScript]

I'm not quite sure how some people delude themselves as much as you do.

The maker of this watch has too much to lose by making fakes in their factories. They would be killing the golden goose.

I'm sure there are some counterfeits which are really just "night production". But to assume this is the case in all cases and here is a failure to really put much thought into it.

Have you read the reviews of the fakes?

http://mashable.com/2015/01/08...

It's clear they don't have the same parts. It doesn't even have the same screen or knob. One of the knockoffs doesn't even have a touchscreen!

Semantics-wise, you're off base here

[YesIAmAScript]

The Chinese government officially recognizes both knock-offs and counterfeits. Counterfeits are illegal. Knock-offs, which merely look at lot like the other item but do not try to pretend to be it, are legal.

These are knock-offs and are legal. The fake Rolexes you speak of are counterfeits and are illegal even in China. Of course, the law is unevenly enforced there.

It's different

[Anonymous Coward]

You can insert a SIM card into this Chinese Ai watch. It should have been available before Apple officially launch it, not after.

i would like to see that fake copy product

[Anonymous Coward]

i have gotten as a present two items from China quite a long time ago - a 2gb usb stick and fake ipod

as a computer enthusiasist i had a lot of fun with them - the usb stick had just 512mb of real memory in it, and the rest was faked by overwriting the capacity information. the ipod has lasted for like two days, and had an incredibly shitty screen and horrible feedback, absolutely incomparable to ipod's of the current generation. i think it was able to play mp3s though.

You see this watch? You see this watch?

[Anonymous Coward]

. . .this watch costs more than your car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kZg_ALxEz0

How's the battery life?

[ilsaloving]

If the knock offs have better battery than the original, I'll take the knock offs any day.