Slashdot Mirror
Swatch Co-Inventor Predicts Apple Will Bring an 'Ice Age' To Swiss Watch Market
MojoKid writes It seems that these days everything Apple touches turns to gold, hence why the company was able to post an $18 billion profit for its fiscal first quarter of 2015. Be that as it may, can Apple popularize the smartwatch market as others have been unable to do so far? Not only is that the expectation, but according to Swatch watch co-inventor Elmar Mock, Apple is going to bring about an "Ice Age" to the Swiss watch market. Elmar noted that he expects the Apple Watch to quickly reach sales of 20 million to 30 million units per year. For the sake of comparison, Switzerland exported 28.6 million watches in 2014, none of them with smart capabilities. "Apple will succeed quickly. It will put a lot of pressure on the traditional watch industry and jobs in Switzerland...I do expect an Ice Age coming toward us," Elmar said. Analysts for Barclays noted to investors that the Apple Watch launch could result in a 6 percent annual decline in Swatch Group AG's revenue. To keep up with the times and fend off Apple, there are at least three Swiss watch companies planning to make smartwatches, including Swatch Group, which will unveil a smart model sometime this year.
My $30 Timex tells me the time just fine.
While the idea of a "wrist communicator" sounds almost as cool as a Star Trek chest badge, I just can't see spending hundreds of dollars on such a thing when I don't even own a "smart phone" because I rarely leave the house. Quite frankly, I don't see the point of devices that have to be tethered to a smart phone, because that means you still have a pocket full of phone to bend or break.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
That's okay, traditional watch makers can just switch to making mechanical smart-phones, a wide open niche.
Table-ized A.I.
First of all, it needs an iPhone. Don't have one, don't want one. Although I use a MacBook pro for my daily hardware needs, I abhor the Apple ecosystem. Don't use any of the iCloud stuff. Don't like it, don't want it. I predict it will be a flop. The minions may snap em' up at first, but it will fade quickly. Then again, I said the same thing about the iPod. I was like, "Yea, it's just another mp3 player, big deal." That was until I got one as a gift. It was absolutely brilliant, light years beyond anything else. So I was wrong there, might be again. But I think it's going to be a flop in the longrun. Maybe if it had all the function of an iPhone, but it doesn't. I just don't see the longterm space for the watch, yet.
Watches such as the Swiss make are luxury items and are the one item of "jewelry"
a man can wear without controversy in any social circles. Also, a high-end Swiss
watch is a means of identifying yourself in a particular group, for example a Breitling
Navitimer probably means you are a professional pilot or at least you want people
to think you are. An Apple watch will never ever replace a Breitling in this market.
The Apple watch presents no threat to such Swiss watches, any more than a Tesla
car presents a threat to Porsche.
Me, I think the Apple watch is interesting but it is ten times more expensive than it should be
and is not waterproof, and these two facts mean I will never ever own one.
I want an Apple Watch, and will likely purchase one. However, looking down at my decade old Omega, the thing I like most about it is that I can enjoy it now, and be confident it will last many more decades providing the date and time, and looking great. The idea of having such an expensive piece of electronics that's also jewelry is a strange idea. From what I have read, Apple can replace the battery, and I am sure that there will be 3rd party batteries as some juncture as well. However, what happens if the battery corrodes, or the electronics are otherwise damaged? The watch is just a bracelet at that point.
Instead of doing the part of the baby-crying lobby to get government compensations, to actually launch smartwatches to compete with Samsung and Apple? What? But I guess it is easier to ask for "compensations" than doing actual work.
I can't imagine the differences in any Swatch watches from the past 15 years is anything but external. I imagine they're mostly a watch face theme company, if not, then engineering was failing. But, external design isn't going to go completely away, unless they make ugly rectangles with ugly bands like all of the current smart watches (besides the Motorola 360). These first gen smart watches *can't* be as good as it gets. Put micro batteries in the bands and blow everyone away in terms of thickness. Add functionality to the bands (would love control on the band (swipe or whatever) in addition screen since my finger isn't transparent). I'd prefer a much smaller screen than what's available.
Swiss movement was old technology which should have died out a long time ago. Quartz was superior in every way.
The real problem I see with all watches (including Apple's watches) is that they're still way too bulky. It's hard to find a mass-produced watch less than 5mm thick.
Swatch Group Stock.
Shit on the wrist is set to comeback just as well.
This guy is thinking Apple can't miss - but they often have in their history. My guess is that this will be an AppleTV moment, somewhat successful, but nothing like their other products.
These poor guys in Switzerland all worried their industry is going to go under need to take a deep breath - these are smartwatches that will become obsolete in a few years...Apple will sell some of these, but until they can replace the phone itself (that time will come) the compelling justification for them (expensive short lifed smartwatches) just isn't there., IMHO...saying that as someone who likes Apples products.
They have to keep up with the time, else they are doomed.
If that were true, Timex would have destroyed the Swiss watch industry. Yet Patek, AP et al are doing fine. That market isn't about telling time but making a statement. A Patek says I appreciate a finely crafted timeless design and don't need to blast "look at me" by wearing a Rolex. It's not copied by every mass market brand yet those who appreciate a fine watch knows what it is; and is a watch that you will pass down from generation to generation. In addition, people who buy numerous watches will continue to do so because they like the design and want to have a choice of waht they want in their wrist. Formal dinner? Time for the gold Cellini. Day a the beach? Seamaster. Building a fence or stone wall? The Timex that will survive the scrapes and doesn't cost $500 to replace a crystal. Apple will do fine but so will the Swiss. An Apple watch will simply be one more to add to the collection Now, if I was Motorola or Samsung? Yea, I'd be worried.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
If small phones didn't sell, why would putting one on your wrist be so much better?
Face it, the tradeoffs are not good, they don't even show the time unless you press a button and they're almost unusable for anything else. The swiss watch market is mostly bling, but the bling on a iWatch is only visible when you turn on the screen, otherwise its just a dull square with a black screen.
So even as bling its not good.
I don't expect Smartwatches to suddenly succeed just because Apple makes one.
Anybody who has the money to buy a "smart" watch, also has the money to buy a dumb ol' regular watch, and probably owns more than one watch. 30 million smart watches bought don't equal negative 30 million dumb watches bought.
Smart watches are expensive. They are luxury items. They are not a replacement for the average man's watch.
For info I am interested i watches, with a little collection including several vintages. Nothing truly expensive, most even cheap, I do simply like the mechanical engineering.
This being said, the Swiss watch industry has been carefully marketing its expensive mechanical watches, creating that impression of refined heirloom engineering and jewelry, while by and large you pay simply for marketing and big profits. Very little real innovation happens in the world of mechanical watches. There is the coaxial escapement from Daniels, but what else was recently introduced? The price of luxury watches goes mainly to profit, marketing (posters with Daniel Craig everywhere), boutique costs. In a way you don't get more real engineering quality in many swiss watches than in a gold apple watch.
Then comes Apple. As a watch enthusiast, while I am not yet conviced about the current utility of a smartwatch, I was immediately impressed by the attention to materials and the straps & bracelets. Barely any innovation happened in that respect in the traditional watches. Look how the lugs are easily exchanged and are ideally adapted to each strap. There is the refined bracelet that you can resize without tools. The magnetically closing milano mesh (admittedly this would not work with a mechanical watch), the way the sports band folds under (this was first done by designer Newsom in his rare Ikepod watches, no coincidence that he is on the Apple design team now). I like how Apple did not simply add a strap to a watch but truly thought it over from scratch.
Then there is the marketing, where health will become even more a cornerstone in future iterations, since they have hired people specialised in medial sensors. Everyone wants to be healthy, I think this will be the "killer app" going forward. And even in v1, there are several millions of happy iphone users who will be curious to try it, I think that it is indeed not a stretch to imagine it selling a few million pieces by EOY, with real ramp up coming from v2 onwards.
I think that the apple watch and the more refined android smartwaches will start to bring havoc to the sub $1000 segment of traditional watches from this year onwards. Luxury mechanicals will still sell, but the perception of the public about their worth may well change, I am not sure that the traditional Swiss marketing "you're looking after it until you pass it on" will have staying power.
If Apple replaces the battery, is it not possible for them to harvest information that the watch has retained without the user knowing about it?
I come here for the love
If that were true, Timex would have destroyed the Swiss watch industry.
The reason why the Apple Watch is different though, is that not only do they offer a high end model, but that the functionality of a smart watch greatly exceeds a normal watch, making it much harder to go without. A Timex did a few things more than normal watches, but basically it did the same thing.
The Apple Watch also kind of doubles as a battery extension for your phone; the more you review alerts and other things on the watch, the less phone battery you are consuming to power the larger screen.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
At current date and time, Apple Watch Ver. 1 is DEAD.
1) More expensive than Lisa
2) Less functional than Newton.
For Apple, i.e. Cook and Ivy to make this "Thingy" go, they need to embrace Gay Pron.
Apple Watch Ver. 2, with ultrasonic vibrator !
The greatest Female and Male masturbator EVER.
And by-the-second readout and GPS to control your "BITCH".
Apple is Cum'n !
Ha ha
He's right. Smartwatches are going to hit the luxury watch market hard over the long term.
I was a fan of good (but affordable, like Orient) automatic watches always kept my eyes open for deals on interesting ones. At least, until I received an LG G watch (Android smartwatch).
It unlocks my phone just by being near.. Tells me who is calling. Let's me reply quickly to text messages and emails. Accepts voice commands like "Set a reminder for 7 pm to take out the trash" or "How many people live in London". Allows me to change watch faces depending on the situation (e.g. something classier for date night). My default watch face shows me the weather radar, hourly temperature and hourly rain forecast throughout the day. Tracks my activity. And I think it looks decent enough too.
I keep noticing deals on new watches, but they hold no interest. Why spend money on a watch that doesn't do what I'm now used to?
Eventually, luxury watches will be a sign of shallowness and stupidity. Let's say you meet three folks at a conference. One pulls out their iPhone 6, one pulls out their Nexus 6, and one pulls out their Vertu. Who are you going to take seriously? The two folks who have a fashionable and practical phone? Or the idiot who spent $20,000 on a barely functional behind-the-time tool instead of a modern functional one just because it was covered in diamonds.
It may take a decade or two, but eventually a luxury watch will get the same reaction. Maybe not from every last person, but from enough to impact sales.
I think it will struggle for sales since it needs to be accompanied by an iPhone to be useful.
It reminds me of those 'mini credit cards' that were introduced a while back that seem to have faded away.
The reasoning was that they would be more convenient to carry as they are smaller
However they don't work in all machines
So they also come with a full size card for use in such cases
Which means now you have to carry 'two' cards
So why not just carry the large one?
If I only had a device that tells time, tracks steps. collects information, checks pulse, supports bidirectional communication in text, Email, video and voice formats, has a fat battery ( and requisite chargers with unique connections - Gah! ), does GPS, Traffic, predicts weather, has a huge developer base and global acceptance. Wait, I do.... Cell phone... many of you have them now. Will the FanBoy effect be enough to make 20,000,000 sales? The only different thing (it seems) is a continual proximity to the skin (might be niche?) for blood chemistry monitoring (There I said it.. prior art, though it seems obvious to me). I have a cell phone, and can get another in a variety of sizes...I am past the watch phase. Think most of us are, unless it does something that much better.. Do i want High def on a 1"x5/8" screen? Nope. Will wait till I get home for my garden variety 52" TV. It is interesting how MP3 Tech was scooped up and make into a proprietary format, but am skeptical that the same will happen for a format most of us keep in the drawer these days. Maybe medical monitoring will be the niche?
Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
I'm not sure I agree with the dire predictions of a Swiss watch "Ice Age" on this one. Traditional high end Swiss watches are primarily jewelry and, in certain cases, status symbols. Yes, it's jewelry with a function, but you can get that function dirt cheap and not pay $8000 dollars for that Rolex Submariner. The Apple watch is primarily a function play that has some design elements to keep it from looking loathsome like what you would have likely gotten out of someone other than Apple. It just doesn't strike me as something that is primarily a jewelry item.
I think you have different market segmentation here where you will likely have Apple watch appealing to people who don't even normally see the need for a watch. Some market segments (younger people, for example) seem less prone to wear watches especially since smart phones are ubiquitous and tell time just fine. Those people probably weren't going to be prone to spending thousands of dollars on something that essentially is jewelry. I'm sure you have some market segmentation overlap, but I think the bigger threat to the Swiss watch market remains the strong Swiss currency compared to the dollar and the euro.
Anyone who is remotely smart will avoid the first gen of apple watch...
Horrible battery life and ridiculous price for what it is.
Sure it will sell to all the apple fanboys out there, but certainly won't sell 20 million in a year.
He works for the major watch makers, and did not disclose this until bloggers started writing about it.
Add functionality to the bands (would love control on the band (swipe or whatever) in addition screen since my finger isn't transparent).
Pebble are already working on this with their "smartbands" which act as quick-swap accessories for their new Time, though whether it'll catch on is another matter.
I have a smart phone but an automatic (automatically winding, mechanical) watch. I have zero interest in replacing my watch with a digital "smart" watch. I don't expect there are many others that do, either. The market may gradually be eroding on its own - in no small part due to the flood of cheap Chinese-made mechanical watches that are closing in on 99% as accurate as the Swiss and Japanese models - but the smart watches aren't much of a factor in that happening.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Oh yes! A fool and his money are soon parted. The guy may not even be wrong, but quite frankly if Apple sells so many watches each year all it tells me is that there's an awful lot of suckers on the watch market. Still, I don't think Apple has the same prestige as Swiss watch brands, and perhaps far more importantly your Swiss watch won't become outdated within a year, with all support for it probably ceasing within five at most.
the guy buying a watch for $25 will not buy a $300 watch
the guy buying a $10,000 watch will not buy a $300 watch
wait...
http://www.engadget.com/2015/0...
ok, yeah, they're fucked
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The recent strength of the Swiss Franc isn't helping Swiss watchmakers export more of their products. Granted, currency isn't helping Apple either, but Apple has tremendously more pricing flexibility than the entire Swiss watch industry.
If Apple watch was released before Pebble, it would rule the market. But this time there is ample competition from Pebble, Android Wear and Tizen, with many watches competitive in style for under $1K models and superior in features. You have choices that range from weeklong battery life to independent phone service. Apple has undeniable marketing muscle but, without groundbreaking unique features, people who get interested in smartwatches will also check out other offerings. Swiss watchmakers will massively benefit if they license one of open technologies and provide continuity of style.
I don't see them selling 3MM watches per year. That's probably why they did the stupid expensive versions, to recover the research and development costs via insane markup on very limited sales volume rather than the usual merely ridiculous Apple-expected markup on large sales volume.
Plus, the Swiss watch industry caters to an established, conservative market which doesn't have anywhere near complete overlap with whoever Apple expects to sell watches to. The Swiss guys will be just fine.
Of those 28.6 million watches without "smart" capabilities, exactly zero of them had a battery life of 18 hours or less.
Love sees no species.
Hipsters will keep you afloat, NO NEED TO WORRY!
`Bring on the ice age! Lets stop global warming! Oh wait global warming is fictitious..
Remember that Apple got sued by a Swiss Rail company because of the similarity to the classically swiss clock.
This is just Apple being punitive against the Swiss in general...
'We will crush them..'
Watch lasts 4 years before you have to change the battery. 18 hours will be a burden to folks soon enough. Still, as many stories have already touted, who wears a watch anymore? I do, but I'm an old fart. :)
I have a couple of analog watches that are ~25 years old. My dad has an Omega that is over 60 years old.
Part of the attraction of a fine mechanical watch is its heirloom value. It will still be a fine watch when you hand it down to your kid. Apple watches won't outlast their 'end of support' dates. That's going to limit how much people are willing to pay for them.
Have gnu, will travel.
Watches such as the Swiss make are luxury items and are the one item of "jewelry" a man can wear without controversy in any social circles.
iPhones are already considered fashion accessories and status symbols by some. So having an Apple watch go down the luxury path you mentioned to some degree seems entirely plausible. Now consider all the experienced luxury branding and marketing people Apple brought on board in the last couple of years.
Also, a high-end Swiss watch is a means of identifying yourself in a particular group, for example a Breitling Navitimer probably means you are a professional pilot or at least you want people to think you are. An Apple watch will never ever replace a Breitling in this market.
Note iPads jave replaced paper charts and manuals in some professional cockpits. An Apple Watch could also have special aviation centric functionality via the tethered iPad. The Breitling Navitimer's future may be more fashion accessory and less practical tool.
The Apple watch presents no threat to such Swiss watches, any more than a Tesla car presents a threat to Porsche.
Well the Porsche station wagons are safe perhaps. :-)
It's seriously not waterproof? So if it rains you have to take it off and put it in your pocket?
I believe it has some international rating that equates to 3 feet for 30 minutes. Not 100% sure though.
The point of wearable computing, IMO, is to be something that you can completely forget about... technology that invisibly blends into your existing lifestyle, assisting you when you call upon it, but if you have to take it off and charge it every single night, then that means you have to think about it every day too... which kind of defeats the point.
I would usually wear my watch in bed... and sometimes even wear it in the shower if I haven't remembered to take it off before. Water resistant to some ridiculous depth that would probably only be a concern of mine if I were into scuba diving, I can even go swimming with it on, and it will not be harmed in any way.
The tech just has too far to go, too many hurdles to overcome, for me to even be mildly interested.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
For some reason, when men buy fancy Swiss watches these days, they buy these fat monstrosities that don't play well with the shirt cuff. The Apple watch is fat, but not fatter than many of the dumb watches from Switzerland. There are also some wonderful thin Swiss mechanical watches, but they aren't in fashion right now. If the Swiss push a new generation of sturdy but slim, elegant mechanical watches, I think they will be able to convince many men that they are better off choosing a wristwatch over some gaudy thing that duplicates the functions of their phone.
Swatch now owns many Swiss watch manufacturers. The whole premise behind the original Swatch was to make cheap "second-watches" for people to wear and destroy without affecting their nicer ones. In many regards the brand of swatch was nothing more than colourful face-plates, but Swatch the company makes all sorts of watches with different mechanical designs and complications like tourbillions, self winding mechanisms, calendars, chronographs, etc.
Apple's tacky watch will never replace swiss-made watches.
I love the idea of a dumb-ish watch or a brilliant watch; But not something in the middle. I have looked at the Apple watch talk and it seems that you will still need your phone yet you will have not a whole lot of battery life.
Right now I want a watch that basically gives me minor tips as to what is going on with my phone. Texts, the time, the date, appointment reminders, and maybe directions from a running GPS route(all coming from my phone). That is about it. I don't need a map, I don't need to schedule appointments, I don't need health crap, I don't need to send texts, I don't need video, I don't need to take pictures, and just about anything else. For those features I have a phone that is really good.
This way my watch can be thin, simple, and have a great battery life.
Eventually (when the tech is ready)I want my watch to be my phone so that in theory I can wear it alone and be able to do a scaled down version of most of what I do on my phone now. Then I want to carry a screen thing that talks to my watch to access its features. But I only want this when the battery life is at least as good as my phone is now.
So if the Swiss are smart they will go for simplicity and elegance as a substitute for the gold plated pickup truck that apple plans on selling.
That said, Apple is going to sell a bazillion of these things and make piles of money; which is a good thing for a company. I just hope that they eventually go for simplicity or that someone else does; which will be a good thing for me; and maybe the Swiss.
"do expect an Ice Age coming toward us,""
Really, I see it as more of a hiccup in some gov't services, since the majority of Swiss GDP is bank fees on off shore accounts.
I doubt the swiss will be hurting from Apple... Yes Apple will hit the existing watch market hard.
Those gimmicky points seem gimmicky to me also (although I'd love to be able to get a group of heartbeats, then you could pretend to be monitoring a group of colonial marines). You never know, perhaps the social features will catch on...
In any case there is real value to not taking your phone out of your pocket. That really does save on battery life, and on time... don't forget that for a lot of women, getting a phone out involves some digging in a purse, it's not quite as simple as just pulling a phone out of a pocket - and since you don't have to pull a phone out of a purse as often, it makes the larger phone more practical to own.
In my case, I'm especially looking forward to using it while hiking, as I usually have the phone tucked away in a somewhat protected place rather than in a pocket where it could fall out or get damaged if I'm going over boulders.
But apart from all that, the real reason to expect the watch will be outstanding is because of the HUGE developer interest in it. The iPad was a relatively unknown quantity before release, with a lot of people questioning success, and there were around 3000 unique titles for it at launch. I expect there will be quite a lot more developer support this time around as the possibility of success is more evident.
I absolutely do not think it will disrupt much, except perhaps other smart watches - but then there's not a lot to disrupt there. But I do think that may people will find it a useful extension of a phone, and that it will be pretty successful.
I myself plan to get a Pebble Time also (already bought into the Kickstarter) - that too has pretty good app support, and of course better battery life. I'm looking forward to see how the two different approaches work out in practice.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I don't see the Apple watch as being much of a threat. A good Swiss watch will work just as well five years later as it did new. It won't go obsolete and it won't need charging after five hours of use.
Within three years the iWatch will probably need a new battery, which probably will not be easily replacable. It will quickly grow obsolete as watches with better battery life and better features come out.
And we all know that you never buy an Apple 1.0 product.
Besides, people would look silly if they treated their watches like a Dick Tracy watch or had to hold their wrist up to their ear to hear Siri.
I wear a watch that is a far better watch than the iWatch. I never have to charge it (solar) and the only time I need to set it is to change the time zone or daylight savings since it sets itself. If it breaks or I lose it I'm not out several hundred dollars and it will last me years. I tend to be hard on watches too. It does a supurb job telling me the time and date. It's water proof and I never have to take it off. I also don't get distracted by it. It doesn't beep or flash messages at me, talk to me or anything else. I don't have to update the firmware or worry about security issues. If I want to pay by phone it takes me 2 seconds to remove my phone from my belt pouch to pay for something. I don't have to turn my wrist into contortions for NFC or for something to read the screen.
Years ago I used to have watches that had features like a calculator or that could store a phone book and other stuff. With a phone I no longer need these features which were awkward to use at best due to the small size of the watch.
If I'm going to make a phone call I'll hold my phone. It will be a lot easier to hear and will be clearer for the person at the other end. If I'm on the phone a lot I'll get a bluetooth headset.
There are a lot of smart watches out there and none of them seem to be taking the world by storm. The iWatch is not all that different than many of the other watches out there other than the fact that it's more expensive and made by Apple. In some cases it's obsurdly expensive. $10,000 for a gold iWatch with well under $1000 worth of gold? It's just asking to be stolen like somebody wearing a Rolex. Unlike a Rolex, though, in 5 years time it will be worth far less. It's not something you'll be able to hand down to your children and grandchildren. It won't last 20+ years like a good watch will.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Writing as a Swiss, in my view there are two parts to the Swiss watch market. Apple doesn't threaten either one of them.
First, we have the market where Swatch succeeded: the inexpensive fashion accessory. $30 bucks and you had something cool to wear. Apple's products are a hell of a lot more expensive, so they aren't addressing this market.
Second, we have the really expensive Swiss watches. They are also fashion accessories, but they are almost exclusively mechanical watches. I don't see a digital watch gaining any traction among people who spend thousands and sometimes millions for what is essentially mechanical artwork.
Where Apply may succeed is among young professionals: people far enough along to have some disposable income - past the Swatch age - but not in the market to spend crazy amounts of money for a status symbol. The thing is: people in this market have already stopped wearing watches, because their smart phones show the time. Maybe Apple will get them to wear a fancy bracelet again - and maybe not. Either way, it's pretty irrelevant to the watch manufacturers.
Of course, I never have understood the Apple Koolaid. Slick marketing gets people to buy overpriced products that don't work any better than those of the competition. Why?
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
the majority of Swiss GDP is bank fees on off shore accounts
Nice stereotype you have there, but it doesn't have a lot to do with reality.
The Swiss financial sector in total is around 11% of our GDP; of that, banks are a bit more than half. Take out domestic banking services, and offshore banking is well under 5% of our GDP. Pharmaceuticals, biotechnology and medical devices are far more important, as are other industry sectors.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
It's not realistic to keep it going for a year. But if it automatically charged any time you were near the charger, then it wouldn't be arduous to have to charge it every day.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
although traditional watches may take a hit over the coming years, digital watches caused a stir, but analog mechanical watches still survive. The Swiss can't hold onto the market forever, and I think they lost it years ago. As for the Apple watch, daily recharge? cmon people, you can do better.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
I wouldn't spend a fortune on a watch, but if I did I wouldn't spend it on one that will be obsolete in 5 years. A good quality Swiss watch will retain much of its value.
I don't see the Swiss watch buying crowd overlapping the iFan crowd really at all here, for rather simple reasons.
First off, those who spend the extra money on a Swiss-made timepiece are not the kind of people who are looking to throw that timepiece in the garbage in 3 years because it is essentially obsolete. At least with a simple well-made timepiece, we can count on it to do the one thing it does rather well through generations.
iFans will replace their watches when the next wave of colors is released in time for Christmas. Or when the next model of the $300 "accessory" you need to run your watch comes out.
It was also stated that less than 30 million Swiss-made timepieces were exported last year. There's a reason that number is not 30 billion. The market is still rather select on those who will spend the extra money on a Swiss-made timepiece. Yes, we all know what they are famous for, and it's not because they come equipped with GPS and solar power as other watches now do.
The death of expensive designer watches is nowhere near imminent. Apple will reach it's usual target market of shallow, social-climbing neo-yuppies, but the truly wealthy and stylish will always go for ostentation and style over flavor-of-the-month gadgetry. Two different market demos entirely.
Do you really think Lamborghini fears Google smart cars? Is Lugano worried about Google Glass?
I think not.
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
I don't wear a watch. Last watch I bought was at least 15 years ago and it lasted 2 days. I'm hard on watches. They get bashed into things routinely. I'll buy a smartwatch as soon as someone posts a youtube video subjecting one to a point-blank diacharge of a 44 magnum at it, and it survives.
Taking literally the biblical texts is nowadays no longer compatible with the aim of staying intellectually honest. Tons of scientifically based evidences conflict with your unjustified claims (biblical texts are not science based).
Remind some scientifically based evidences:
1) The sky show us plenty of evolving objects at distances that light needs thousands to billions of years to reach us.
2) Any serious geologist observing km thick layers and layers of rocks arrive to the conclusion that most of the stones and fossils must be millions to billions years old and made by processes like sedimentation or volcanic eruptions.
3) Archeologists can date the spread of human ancestors over the Earth back to millions of years.
4) Historians can document the emergence of civilizations from the Neolithic period well before any epochs you mention, such as 8'000-10'000 BCE in Egypt and Mesopotamia.
5) There is no geological evidence for a world wide flooding as described in the Bible. The required amount of water is just not available on Earth.
Believing in biblical chronologies together with not ignoring scientific evidences must lead to the conclusion that the universe was created by a god devious enough to introduce at the same time uncountable false evidences (like all the photons coming from deep space) for the existence of a consistent but fake universe, millions of times older than the biblical one. .
Another clickbait link to shithardware.com. Don't feed the spammers.
My prediction is this will be the next iPad insomuch as it's a device that doesn't actually solve an identified need, but people will buy it in droves as a status symbol regardless.
"I tell you, we are here on Earth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you different." ~ Kurt Vonnegut Jnr.
The last thing they should try is get into a fight on Apples on turf. I'd focus on what they're good at: Building traditional mechanical watches within the bizaro price-range.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
I don't understand why people buy Apple products, no matter if they are good or not I would not go near a company that avoid all standards that exist and do everything to lock in users, sure the others do that also but Apple take it to the extreme, they do not support USB, they don't support MP3 and no video formats beside quicktime, ok, they do support HTML5 but only because they don't have any other choice, but that is pretty much it.
The apple watch is a toy for geeks and arm candy for insecure rich extroverts.
How practical is a watch that needs to visit the (highly proprietary) charger after no more than 18 hours of "typical" use? If you are traveling and you forget the charge cable your watch turns into an expensive but useless bracelet. Your Swatch, Timex, Casio, Rolex, Patak, Seiko, etc. will still tell time.
Utterly ridiculous.
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
How does this guy expect them to sell 20-30million a year of these things? I guess he's taking into account the yearly updates when apple would like it very much if you ditched your overpriced gimmick device on your wrist and bought their slightly newer and marginally different but still vastly overpriced piece of crap to replace it. Don't work though, they'll still find room for the logo somewhere, people HAVE to know you're in the cult too.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
You picked 15 years deliberately, didn't you? Because the co-axial escapement was first introduced in Omega (part of Swatch group) watches 16 years ago.
Which is why the comments from this particular individual on the Apple Watch may not be the most accurate. He was a cofounder of a company that made cheap timekeeping pieces for the masses. The product that the company he helped found has been under assault from smartphones and cellphones for years so yes the Apple Watch is a threat because it targets the group of customs that want a watch so they don't have to constantly take out their phone. His comments seem out of place regarding watches as jewelry.
"Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
Chocolate! Thank you for chocolate, and the watches.
Hmm. http://choconet1.com/chocolate...
Until there's an iKnife, at least the Swiss have another export to fall back on.
"can Apple popularize the smartwatch market as others have been unable to do so far?"
Perhaps the author hasn't heard of Garmin which already had loads of awesome smartwatch offerings, or Pebble which pretty much started the recent smartwatch craze.
Yes because when people buy a watch they do it so they can charge it every day just to tell time.
Good one.
An ice-age, eh? To me it sounds like hyped-up FUD; there's a certain comic value in the observation that someone called Elmar emits FUD, I think.
I can't see why watchmakers should tremble any more than they already do. People haven't bought watches to cover their need for knowing the time for a long time - they are simply fashion accessories, jewellery that men can use without feeling effeminate. There is a certain something about having a fully mechanical watch, that I think most engineers will appreciate; a machanical clock is at the same time both such a simple device and an amazing piece of engineering and craftsmanship. I still find it fascinating to watch the way it works - bloody clever, if you want my opinion; it's a bit like those carved balls of marble, with a small ball inside a larger one inside a larger one. A smart watch just doesn't have it, even if it comes with 16 core CPU, holographic projectors and surround sound.
The co-inventor of the Swatch, the biggest piece of crap in horology in the last 300 years, had better keep his money and a low profile.
Explain how any of that contradicts a simple genealogical record from relatively recent history.
1) Which has nothing to do with anything in the Bible. Or are you confusing "what the Bible says" with "what young-earth creationists say"? My guess is the latter. I'd also guess that you haven't bothered to even read the Bible, much less study it so as to understand it.
2) Or were disturbed by a massive geological upheaval, which is exactly what a global flood would be.
3) Based on what? Guesses, speculation, and wild butt-pull numbers? Or do they have some real, concrete numbers taken from verifiable tests?
4) Based on what? Carbon-14 and it's 5730-year half-life? Try again. Even 6000 years ago is too long ago for radio-carbon dating to be a reliable test.
5) Meanwhile, everyone panics about global warming, climate change, and sea levels that will soon rise due to that. You can either admit there's enough water on the earth to do what is described in the flood account, or you can blatantly deny that the sea levels are going to rise as a result of global warming. And you're probably blissfully unaware of the consequences of a flood like that, which would cause massive geological shifts, both topographically and tectonically. Pre-flood, it's very likely that continents were in different positions and mountains were smaller, making the volume of water to "cover the mountains" much less than it would be now. And the climate shifts would be enormous, too. Which is why we have hard evidence of a flash-freeze in Siberia. That used to be much warmer, and then suddenly everything froze. And it froze fast enough to leave undigested food in the stomachs of mammoths.
The Bible isn't a science book. But what it says is not scientifically inaccurate.
Apple watch technology has been around for years, if not decades.
http://communities-dominate.blogs.com/brands/2015/03/the-irevolution-that-wasnt-why-apple-watch-will-be-rare-iflop-more-like-newton-and-lisa-than-iphone-.html
It's a niche market, I highly doubt they'll reach the other i device levels of success with these(iPad Mini doesn't count).
There is one thing missing in this thread. The Swiss Watch industry's main purchasers are men. Men buy the expensive high end, and mostly the mid range as well. Women do not tend to buy expensive watches; they spend on other jewelry instead.
The Apple Watch will be mostly purchased by women and not men. Apple knows this. Look at the modeling of the watch on their site and its almost all women wearing it. They had a women on stage during the announce of it. If its sucessful it will be a female market.
Women shoppers follow fashion and have no problem spending large amounts of money on an expensive status symbol that falls out of style rather rapidly and loses all its value and is replaced. Think expensive purses and shoes here. They do this to display status to each other. This is where apple will sell the watch, if it sells. But it won't hurt the Swiss makers much, if at all. They're really trying to open a new market here, but fashion is fickle, and it may boom for a year or three and then die rapidly, or not take off at all.
While reading this post I wondered what features I'd want in a watch that would convince me to actually wear one..
Here's the only thing I can think of:
http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/ML-600-Antistatic-wrist-strap-Esd_60119127934.html
A watch that doubles as an ESD strap.
Thinkgeek, are you listening?
I have to assume that yesterday's XKCD was aimed squarely at the iWatch.
Don't answer this idiot. It only encourages them.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Will an Apple Watch slide in your asshole as smoothly as an iPhone does? That's what most Macfags are interested in.
No, for that, you'll want the Mac Pro.
When you see "Swiss Made" at the 6 o'clock position on a watch it can mean several things. The lower end "Swiss" watches, like Swatch, are actually built largely in China. They are allowed to call it Swiss Made because the watch movement was designed in Switzerland. The higher end Swiss watches like Rolex are designed and built entirely in Switzerland. That makes them more expensive to build and, arguably, of higher quality.
You can bet that Rolex is not happy that cheaper watches are allowed to claim they are Swiss Made when they are really not made there at all. It's kind of like when the orange juice carton says "100% Juice" when it is really only about 10% juice from oranges and 90% other stuff.
Some of the sort of mid level Swiss watches, Tissot for example, are what I would call high quality Chinese built Swiss watches. It doesn't have the cachet of a "pure" Swiss watch but you can get one for well under $1,000. I have a Tissot 1851 in my collection which is a quartz (battery) movement. It is well built, looks good and keeps good time. I think I paid around $200 for it.
If you want a high end Swiss watch most people immediately think of Rolex. It's a very good watch and will probably last you a lifetime. But you can pick up an Omega for about half the price. I have an Omega Seamaster with the GMT complication (allows you to set a secondary time zone). It has a beautifully built automatic movement, it's very rugged, and it's a true "dive watch".
By the way, if you are scuba diving you definitely want a watch with an automatic movement rather than a battery. Why? The battery can die at any time whereas the automatic movement will generally run for about 24 hours (or more) once it is wound. Trust me - you don't want a dead watch when you are 50 meters below the surface and trying to time your assent :-)
Maybe the prices will dip, and I'll FINALLY be able to afford my Omega Speedmaster 3570.50.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Watches are a tool of the oppressor.
Do you see dolphins wearing digital watches? NO. Because the concept of Time is unnatural.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
It took 2 (or more) people to "invent" the idea of selling cheap watches?
Well that was kind of my point. When he quoted figures for the industry he wasn't quoting jewelry. A large portion of those 30million Swiss watches will be people who wanted a timepiece and there's concern that this will be offset by people who will buy a timepiece with built in computer.
presents no threat to Porsche. Absolutely insane.
People said at the time that Apple would never sell 1M iPods, or iPhones, or iPads. They've sold hundreds of millions of these things. In each of these categories they sold more than 1000x more than what all previous manufacturers in those categories had every sold...combined.
No guarantee they'll do the same here--but everyone who has bet against them before has been catastrophically wrong.
Which one of the guys did Jeremy Clarkson punch?
It contradicts it because you're arguing from an unstable platform. You are assuming that the bible is a genealogical record and it is actually accurate. Scientific evidence shows that it cannot be correct. It just can't.
The future is NOW and it is less than fifty bucks!
It is your personal opinion that, you, have no use for a smartwatch.
There are several non-Suiss wrist watches on the market that today will be around
I wear a Seiko. It is less thick then the thickness of two American Quarter coins. The battery lasts seven years, and the precision is better than one second per month.
For month that have fewer than 31days, I have to manually change the day number.
If I wanted a watch that is "perpetual", (has a built-in photocell and produces enough power to recharge battery and this watch can keep going for weeks, if left in a drawer, that watch will be 1/3rd thicker than mine. And I can go swimming with my watch.
What will the band of the Apple contain? Will contain batteries to allow the watch to run 18 hours?
Enough said!
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
...that has to be recharged every day (or couple of days; I have actually no clue about how long the battery will last but for sure no longer that 3-4 days)?
I feel like this single detail is already a giant step backwards. It's already quite a big bother to have to recharge the battery of my smartphone every day, I don't need this additional inconvenience. And all for what? For having a watch that can do a fraction of the things my smartphone can do but with a smaller screen and a higher price?
And of course, a high-end watch like a Rolex is for a lifetime and when your children inherit it it will still have a high value if it was well maintained. The iWatch will be just as obsolete as the first iPod is today and have practically no value.
Honestly, I don't see this a big threat for the Swiss watch industry. Just like they survived after Casio started mass-producing digital watches, this will be no more than a niche for Apple-fanboys.
Does this I mean I should sell my Movado Museum on E-bay while I can get something for it ? The battery in it only lasts 10 years. I have to send it back to Movado to have it cleaned & serviced anyway. At least it won't need a software upgrade. It is 20 years old maybe I should a new daily driver.
The swiss watch industry sold ~30 million watches - to people who want to buy swiss watches.
People who just want accurate timepieces buy casio or timex or whatever (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...)
Swiss watches are fancy jewellery, marketed by a national body building an image in the same way that de Beers crafted the diamond market.
Apple watches are a different kind of jewellery.
For most people the USP of anything they put on their wrist is the jewellery factor. People who can afford a $24,000 apple watch don't have just one watch and those who buy the base model would probably never even think of paying $350 for a Tissot 1853 PR100 Titanium.
IMHO the market for both barely overlaps. I could be wrong, but I don't believe that Apple selling 30 million watches a year will impact on swiss sales by even 1-2%.
The real danger to watch sales in all areas has been mobile phone sales.Even the dumbest phone has an accurate clock onboard. In the 1980s, just about every adult in western countries wore a watch. Take a look around today and see how many you see. The market to sell a new piece of wrist adornment is huge, if people can be persuaded to wear them.