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.

275 of 389 comments (clear)

  1. $30 Timex by msobkow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:$30 Timex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      because I rarely leave the house

      Yea I don't think you're the norm, or even remotely relevant. Most people aren't shut-ins.

    2. Re:$30 Timex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have a $30 MetroPCS flip phone.... Mostly because I hate the large bulky touch screen phones that always call the cops from the lock screens that have passwords. The other lock screens that hide the 911 call don't have passwords so basically I'm stuck with either securing my phone or finding that my phone is on the phone with a 911 operator when I pick it up, and she's been listening to my conversation with my friend for the past 2 minutes. Happened a lot.

      Plus I vastly disagree with the NSA spying apparatus and refuse to carry what amounts to a bug in my eyes.

      I highly doubt I'm also not the norm. Other people have brains I'd like to think....

    3. Re:$30 Timex by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yet but do you see that despite your lack of need for a smart phone there has been billions sold?

      Strange that.

    4. Re:$30 Timex by aralin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How is your comment relevant to any discussion about Apple Watch? Let me paraphrase what you've said: "I'm unique in this very special way and in my particular case, the product would not make sense. So why would anyone buy it?"

      This seems to be a meme on Slashdot. Markets are not about the exception cases, the long tail is what handles exceptions. Market is often about the most common case. If you were a target audience for the watch and it would not work for you for some legitimate reason, that would be newsworthy to hear about. But what you said is irrelevant to most of us who are not exceptional in your own special way.

      I have not worn watch in 30 years and I will buy this one. Not because I need to know time, I don't. Not even because I need a status symbol. I don't. Simply because there are so few fun toys to play with lately. You know, gadgets... for geeks. And like most geeks, I've got more money than I could spend with nothing worthwhile to spend it on. So why not? Plus maybe it will be cool, maybe it will improve my life in some way, it is worth the money to try. But yeah, the last thing I need it is to tell time. Seriously, I am well aware of the time without a watch and at times I forget and need to be made aware of the time, my phone reminds me.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    5. Re:$30 Timex by hey! · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm actually something of a watch nut; but collecting expensive watches is ... expensive. I collect *cheap* watches, which is in its way just as interesting. There's still that interplay between expense, features and design, but the constraining factor is low cost.

      I actually think that in terms of pragmatic qualities, watches become worse as the price climbs from $30 to $100. Why? Because watches accrete features that undermine their ergonomics or have little practical value. Take water resistance. What you want in a cheap watch is 50m or 100m, which are adequate for any practical purpose. Above that you're paying for fantasy value. Watches rated at 200m and above might as well claim a gazillion meters; you'll never be the wiser.

      Also as price rises, dials become more cluttered with features and design elements that actually make them harder to read. Nobody needs a second redundant hour subdial, it's only there to look expensive. And then you go from cheap and every accurate to expensive and quite a bit less accurate mechanical movements. It's a bit like paying to watch a circus act where dogs walk on their hind legs; the whole point of the act is that it's ridiculously hard.

      My favorite watch is a $16 quartz analog day/date Casio "dive" style watch with a rotating bezel and day date at 3:00. The watch face is based on Rolex's classic submariner watch, which costs $10,000 and keeps worse time. Of course the submariner is a much more elegant watch, but it is in no sense any more practical. My next favorite watch is another Casio, the digital F-91W ($9), which happens to be Al Qaeda's standard issue training camp watch. They also use it for bomb detonators. It's cheap, accurate and simple and has a elegantly straightforward design -- something you get only on very cheap or very expensive watches.

      I also own a Pebble, which is in my view ugly as sin and quickly developed a screen tearing problem. But in terms of combining timekeeping and notifications it'd be hard to improve upon functionally. As for the phone in my pocket I'd be less worried about it than my leg in a mishap that might break it.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    6. Re:$30 Timex by rogoshen1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      or maybe the dude just realizes that the signal to noise ratio in your 'always connected 24/7' world leans heavily in the direction of pointless trivia.. and has more interesting things to be concerned with?

    7. Re:$30 Timex by Tourney3p0 · · Score: 1

      The guy pretty clearly listed two distinct reasons for not having one, and neither of those were what you suggested.

    8. Re:$30 Timex by aralin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I would want to fly, but I will settle for a fast car, especially if all I got right now is an old beat up car. So if I do have to carry a phone anyway right now, not having to take it out of the bag every time, seems quite preferable. If most of the interfacing with my phone can be done through smaller display conveniently located on my wrist, it would seem like an improvement over my current situation. My phone can then stay in my laptop bag, working as a modem and occasionally come out for some of the richer apps.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    9. Re:$30 Timex by msobkow · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh, like "wow, man."

      He dug up my public Facebook pic.

      Scary shit, eh? Next thing you know he'll look up my Linked In profile and tell you where I worked... :P :P :P

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    10. Re:$30 Timex by msobkow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or maybe Mr. CowHARD will actually read my Crackbook profile and let the cat out of the bag that I'm a medical cannabis user, as if that's supposed to embarass me any more than a photo I made public does.

      LOL. Kids these days.

      They have no idea what freedom there comes from "getting old." 99.99% of people my age and older look like they've been run over by a truck. It's called "age".

      Not to worry, though. Mr. CowHARD will learn what it is to be "old" soon enough. :D

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    11. Re:$30 Timex by hankwang · · Score: 1

      "50m or 100m, which are adequate for any practical purpose. Above that you're paying for fantasy value. Watches rated at 200m and above might as well claim a gazillion meters; you'll never be the wiser."

      I thought that these ratings have more to do with the reliability/longevity. At least, I've owned two 300 euro "100m" Seiko watches that lost their water-tightness over the course of a few years, because the seals of the crown degraded from exposure to sweat, soap, and the occasional sea water. Repairs were quoted as 150 euros, so I didn't bother.

      Now I have a a Pebble.

    12. Re:$30 Timex by AvitarX · · Score: 2

      Thank you for that wonderful post.

      Sadly true.

      But it is so nice not giving a fuck. I carry a purse, and nobody gives me shit about it, because old, and I'm not really even that old at all. I really like that part of life, we're all the cool kids now, we can all do us and nobody really cares.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    13. Re:$30 Timex by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      My $30 Timex tells me the time just fine.

      The time?

      My eyes pass over a display with "the time" every few minutes. How bad a memory do you have to have to need to be reminded of the time more often than that?

      Maybe you're speaking of survival situations in the middle of nowhere?

    14. Re:$30 Timex by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Apparently you're never had to wait for a bus or been sitting under the clock at the doctor's office while waiting for an appointment... :)

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    15. Re:$30 Timex by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      What the fuck is this? Is it 1998 again?

      You say that because using those marks is out of fashion, and so anyone using them looks out of date and out of touch.

      *Everyone* is subject to fashion, even Slashdotters who live in the basement. It might be a different subset of fashion, but deep down it's the same thing.

    16. Re:$30 Timex by Cederic · · Score: 1

      No, it's basically down to how you can safely use the watch before the seals go.

      Basically you need different ratings as you escalate from walking in the rain, doing the washing up, swimming, snorkelling, scuba diving and "proper" diving. You also need to take into account peak water pressures; the rating is measured as a static object in water, doing something like diving into a swimming pool subjects the watch to significantly more water pressure during that impact than the subsequent floating on the surface.

      Losing water sealing over a few years doesn't sound too unreasonable. For a 300 euro watch repair is expensive, for a 10,000 euro watch it's a cost of ownership that people should budget for.

    17. Re: $30 Timex by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      My phone has a battery that runs out in a day (or three, if I'm very careful not to use it).

      My watch battery has been going strong for over four years. Last week I thought it had expired ; it had just popped out of the contacts. Still going strong.

      Given the enormous number of times I remove my phone from my pocket just to look at the time, lock it, and return it, having the watch for days when I'm travelling on a schedule makes the money I spent on it worth it. I don't have any overhead charging it, syncing it, etc, and it's just there, on my wrist, telling the time.

      I don't wear it the rest of the time, because the strap catches on the edge of things while I'm typing.

    18. Re:$30 Timex by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Asking if its 199x is so 2000 and late.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    19. Re:$30 Timex by stealth_finger · · Score: 2

      The other lock screens that hide the 911 call don't have passwords so basically I'm stuck with either securing my phone or finding that my phone is on the phone with a 911 operator when I pick it up, and she's been listening to my conversation with my friend for the past 2 minutes. Happened a lot.

      You could, you know, buy a cheap screen cover. Or find out how every other fucker manages to have a phone in their pocket without dialling the emergency services.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    20. Re:$30 Timex by houghi · · Score: 1

      I do not use a watch anymore since I have a phone that tells me the time. In the past my search was always to find a watch that told me the day of the week and it should be thin,

      To me the iPhone watch is not about time as that is already available on the iPhone. It is just a second screen like many have a second screen for their portable.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    21. Re:$30 Timex by FearTheDonut · · Score: 1

      Wish I had mod points.. An appropriate retort.

    22. Re:$30 Timex by Insightfill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I do not use a watch anymore since I have a phone that tells me the time.

      I eventually got a regular watch when I realized that every time I reached to my phone in my pocket to check the time was one more time I'd probably drop the phone. The watch SAVES me money over time. Also: visibly checking your phone when you're with someone usually tells them you're bored, while a quick glance at a watch isn't as bad. Finally: when you check a watch, you're done right away, while checking your phone for the time can often lead to an endless cycle of checking email, text messages, Facebook, whatever; you can lose a lot of time that way.

      I was debating getting the F-91W, just for the nostalgia of it (and the Amazon reviews are pretty funny), but ended up finding the MQ-24-1(Black) and MQ24-1E instead. They look decent as well, and take a beating.

    23. Re:$30 Timex by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 3, Informative

      Also, as a diver I have a dedicated dive computer. (A Shearwater Petrel) My daily-wear watch is a Movado. I happen to like the minimalist look and the thin profile.

      I haven't seen a diver using a "dive watch" in ... ever. My backup timepiece is a Timex Ironman my dad got me when I was a teenager.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    24. Re:$30 Timex by ezdiy · · Score: 1

      Now now careful here with basement dwelling remarks, judging from the butthurt replies you've struck a sensitive chord here.

      Currently, smart watch makers are desperately trying to do ton of stuff, and suck at most of it (yes, including showing time). These things can't be more than dumb screen terminal for the time being, yet most vendors are afraid to market it as such. You might be interested in pebble watch, actually a fun piece of programmable hardware on your wrists, compared to lobotomised, underpowered android devices, or outright obscure+irrelevant+proprietary systems.

    25. Re:$30 Timex by Whorhay · · Score: 1

      Modded Troll, oh the rage of gadgets geeks.

      I have a more expensive watch that I really like but I have much the same opinion. I also don't own or want a cell or smart phone because I spend 95% of my waking time with ready access to a far more capable computer and landlines. I'm a parent with a job, I'm either at home or at the office most of the time. There are very small fractions of the day where I travel to or from work, and every few weeks I might go run some errands. In any case, paying exorbitant amounts of money for cellular phone service isn't worth it, for me.

      Even if I did have a smart phone I'm still not sure where the use case for a smart watch is. It's one more fragile device to manage and charge every day. If people thought they had to go to great lengths to protect their phones just imagine how many of these things are going to end up in land fills with cracked screens and such. I could see possibly using one if it was actually a replacement for the smart phone, but so long as it's just an accessory to it I don't see the point.

    26. Re:$30 Timex by deadweight · · Score: 1

      You are not quite right on the depth rating. Granted I have never taken a watch below about 60 meters, but that rating is for static conditons, i.e. still water and not touching any controls. Being in rough water, surf, banging the watch around, etc. can all flood a watch well above the rated depth. 200 or 300 meter ratings have a real advantage when diving or surfing. That said, I tend to stick to the $30-$60 Casios and get my money's worth out of them.

    27. Re:$30 Timex by houghi · · Score: 1

      It might depend on the person you are, but I have never dropped my phone. I also seldom check my phone for the time when I am with someone (or in the past my watch) unless I need to be somewhere, which will be told to the person I am with.

      So when I look, the other person or persons know why I am looking and even will help me to leave in time, in case I forget to look.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    28. Re:$30 Timex by random+coward · · Score: 1

      I suggest you take a look at some of the Russian Vostok watches, especially the Amphibia, to add to your collection. You can get a quality sapphire jewel automatic mechanical movement, water resistant, even to 200m for well under $100. These are also very easy to maintain. For your $30 you can get a Comanderski manual wind, also a sapphire jewel movement, but not automatic.

    29. Re:$30 Timex by hey! · · Score: 1

      I once had a $100 (nominallly $300) "dive" watch that was rated for 200m fog up after I wore it swimming laps. It was only two years old. I'm reasonably certain that the problem was that they skipped greasing the seals at the factory.

      Restoring a "dive" watch's waterproofing isn't hard, and you don't need any expensive special tools aside from a case opener. What's hard is testing the waterproofing after. It's just about the simplest watch repair you can do, but the reason repair shops charge so much is that they're going to have to buy you a new watch if the seal fails.

      So this is a pretty good DIY repair if you're into that sort of thing. You can find the instructions on the Internet. Testing your work involves assembling the movement without the works and putting it in a pressure chamber, which you won't have, so you'll have to wear it and hope for the best. You could I suppose find a deep enough body of water and lower the case down on some fishing line.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    30. Re:$30 Timex by hey! · · Score: 1

      Why would you debate over getting a $10 watch? Nice choices, by the way. You obvious get what I'm talking about with the cheap aesthetic. To get a "good" watch that elegant you might end up sending over $100.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    31. Re:$30 Timex by macs4all · · Score: 1

      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.

      Other than the fact that you like to read your own words, what in the hell are you even engaging in this conversation? You are so NOT the target audience for this product that I would be hard-pressed to find a more useless opinion on the matter.

      This is like someone in the tropics complaining about a new furnace being introduced, because they "rarely need heat."

    32. Re:$30 Timex by hey! · · Score: 1

      I would be shocked if you were under 50 and you'd ever seen anyone diving with a "dive" watch. They were standard equipment in the 50's through 70's and were popularized by the James Bond movies, which probably sold more Rolex Submariners than there divers in the world.

      To this day most sub $30 "dive" watches have unidirectional crowns, even though nobody in his right mind would trust his life to one. One of the things I like about the Casio MRW200H-7EV is that it has a smooth bi-directional friction mechanism rather than a cheap ratchet. I find the bezel quite handy.

      Nice choice on the Movado. They make the kind of watches I'd wear if I were into $300+ watches rather than $30-.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    33. Re:$30 Timex by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Before you go to the doctors office call and ask how far behind they are running and when you should show up for your appointment.

      If they lie to you. Fire the doctor and walk out, tell the receptionist why. There are many more doctors and you are their customer. Don't take any shit form anybody.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    34. Re:$30 Timex by hey! · · Score: 1

      Well, I can certainly see surfing, although you do have to factor in that you're probably not going to lose much sleep over a $15 watch. There are 200m rated watches for under $30, but I'm not a big fan of the G shock look. But for someone who liked the big plastic aesthetic it'd be a good choice.

      I also believe water resistance ratings of mid-range sport watches are exaggerated. I got into cheap watches after I had a $100 "dive" watch fog up on me after swimming laps. Now I swim with $15 watch rated to 50m that has never given me any problem, but if it did I'd chuck it out satisfied with the service it's already given me.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    35. Re: $30 Timex by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      ...except it's expensive to travel with. If I go outside the country, the phone pretty much turns into an Archos. It's not terribly useful anymore. Certainly not as useful as it could be.

      Any time that my phone becomes a paperweight due to poor network access or highway robbery network prices, the watch comes out of hiding.

      I have an expensive watch because it's a match for the wife's. Beyond that, I would never pay a lot of money for any sort of watch.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    36. Re:$30 Timex by hey! · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the tip. I've seen Soviet era Vostoks on ebay and have definitely been tempted. I have to be discreet though because my wife already thinks I'm crazy.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    37. Re:$30 Timex by macs4all · · Score: 2

      I would want to fly, but I will settle for a fast car, especially if all I got right now is an old beat up car. So if I do have to carry a phone anyway right now, not having to take it out of the bag every time, seems quite preferable. If most of the interfacing with my phone can be done through smaller display conveniently located on my wrist, it would seem like an improvement over my current situation. My phone can then stay in my laptop bag, working as a modem and occasionally come out for some of the richer apps.

      Mod Parent up to Infinity (and beyond!).

      This is EXACTLY the typical use-case for a "tethered" SmartWatch (and quite frankly, a SmartWatch like the Apple Watch, is perfectly positioned when it IS used in conjunction with a Smartphone).

      We are probably a decade away from this product evolving to the point where the "peripheral" becomes the "system". And quite frankly, it may not happen even that soon. But in the meantime, although it SOUNDS terribly effete to whine about having to reach into your pocket to retrieve your phone do most of the things you can do with the Apple Watch, I can tell you that, if you had one on your wrist for a few days (assuming you also had an iPhone), that you would soon wonder why you have put up with doing some stuff on your phone. Remember, your phone doesn't have to be in your pocket. It can be safely tucked away inside your book bag, laptop case, whatever. I don't know about you; but I wear a fair amount of clothes (like T-shirts without pockets) that make it kind of a pain to get to my phone, especially while driving. Being able to tap my wrist to answer a call (or, I assume using Siri, PLACE a call or answer a Text), covers about 80% of what I use my phone for while on-the-go.

      It's not that it's THAT onerous to dig around in my pants-pocket to retrieve my phone; but it's damned annoying to do while driving.

      The Apple Watch neatly makes that ALL go away.

      I will admit that when I first saw the demo of the Apple Watch a few months ago, I was in the "not for me" camp (and I AM a huge Apple fan); but after seeing the Keynote Demo the other day, the use-cases (at least for me) are beginning to accumulate fairly rapidly.

    38. Re:$30 Timex by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      I drop my phone on occasion, because I'm clumsy. I haven't damaged one by doing so.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    39. Re:$30 Timex by Ravaldy · · Score: 2

      GJ on that response. The idiot didn't have an argument so he attacked you personally. What a hero! I'd love to smack him in the back of the head since obviously his parents didn't do it enough.

    40. Re:$30 Timex by farble1670 · · Score: 1, Funny

      My $30 Timex tells me the time just fine.

      you're sooooo interesting! tell us more about your thoughts, concerns, and so on.

    41. Re:$30 Timex by bungo · · Score: 1

      I have a dive watch, and I dive with it every week. My dive instructors also wear dive watches.... ... of course, this is in a swimming pool, where we need to time things when training for our certifications (i.e. 50 seconds under water without air).

      When we go open water diving, it's always with a computer, although the chief dive instructor always has a watch for a backup.

      --
      "The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
    42. Re:$30 Timex by hankwang · · Score: 1

      You also need to take into account peak water pressures; the rating is measured as a static object in water, doing something like diving into a swimming pool subjects the watch to significantly more water pressure

      That's a common misconception. The dynamic pressure is additive (not multiplicative) and amounts to about 0.5 rho v^2, where rho=1000 kg/m3 is the densitiy and v the velocity. For example, at v = 10 m/s, the added dynamic pressure is 50 kPa, equivalent to only 5 m extra depth under water.

    43. Re:$30 Timex by Cederic · · Score: 1

      That's a common misconception.

      Sorry, what is? Nothing you posted contradicted anything I posted.

    44. Re:$30 Timex by hankwang · · Score: 1

      If a watch is watertight for 50 m static water pressure, then it is also watertight for 45 m static water pressure in combination with an enormous amount of dynamic pressure. So that cannot be the reason why usually the depth ratings are translated as "splash proof" (30 m), "you can swim" (50 m), and "you can dive to the bottom of the swimming pool" (100 m).

  2. Steampunked by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's okay, traditional watch makers can just switch to making mechanical smart-phones, a wide open niche.

    1. Re:Steampunked by iluvcapra · · Score: 2
      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    2. Re:Steampunked by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Damn, everything's on the Interwebs. Should've known: in the late 90's I once googled (Lycosed?) "Lego porn" as a joke (honestly), and was surprised to find it existed.

      Nuther mPhone:

      http://www.imore.com/sites/imo...

    3. Re:Steampunked by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      The mind boggles....

      Corded Wifi!
      App Cartridges!
      Or, for the ultimate in convenience -- Dial-an-App! Just dial "C","r","a","z","y"," ","B","i","r","d","s" using the convenient 26-character dial to enjoy the latest in fist-pumping, arcade-style gameplay in the expansive 2x60 character display

    4. Re:Steampunked by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      The maker of SWATCH of all things is not a terribly good source here. He's just another loser. I don't see the Swiss watch crowd being too impressed by the Apple product. Apple might get some sales but it will likely be just people who are already part of the iCult. I don't see them causing a mass exodus from the Swiss brands.

      It's much like trying to declare the demise of the PC. Those people know what they want and it's not the new shiny shiny.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:Steampunked by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      Damn, everything's on the Interwebs. Should've known: in the late 90's I once googled (Lycosed?) "Lego porn" as a joke (honestly), and was surprised to find it existed.

      Nuther mPhone:

      http://www.imore.com/sites/imo...

      You can say google, they were a search provider in the late 90s

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
  3. Well, I wouldn't buy one by spoot · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    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.

    1. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by nomel · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing it's more about the concept of a smart watch than a specific brand of smart watch.

    2. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by SecurityGuy · · Score: 1

      Really? It needs an iPhone?! That's comical. I don't want an iWatch (or whatever they call it) because I already have an iPhone and it's in my hands often enough that I don't need to strap a small one around my wrist. I don't even like the iPhone much anymore. It was outstanding when it was the new kid on the block, but now there are others just like it (and in some ways better) and iPhones have developed their own stupid, annoying problems, just like every other piece of technology.

      I'm expecting a flop, too. Don't need, don't want, won't buy.

    3. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      How can you tell someone owns a Mac?

      Oh, don't worry. They'll tell *you*.

    4. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by countach · · Score: 1

      I don't think we should be taking advice about the potential success of the apple watch from someone who abhors iPhones.

    5. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Oh, it's ok. Just realise that such comments made on Slashdot are simply a contra-indicator. That is, it's quite likely the watch will be a huge success, and you can tell because elitists on Slashdot are panning it.

    6. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Your comment made me chuckle, because clearly you bought a mechanical watch over a quartz watch for some unspecified aesthetic reason.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    7. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Funny

      I have a Mac.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    8. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Better invest your entire net worth in Apple stock. Hurry!

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    9. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      I have a Big Mac.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    10. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      First of all, it needs an iPhone. Don't have one, don't want one.

      So you don't have what it requires so you don't want one. Thanks for that. Guess you don't want a furnace because you live in Hawaii so therefore no one else on earth needs a furnace. Apple has sold over 700 million iPhones as of March 2015, even if only 5% buy an Apple Watch it will be a huge success.

      Everyone cried that the iPad was ridiculous, it was just a large iPod Touch that cost triple the price. It sold like crazy. The Apple Watch will sell like hotcakes. Apple Watch will sell more in 1 day than all the Android Watches ever sold. Then Samsung will make an exact copy of the Apple Watch, add a SD card and removable battery, and the samsung fanbois will make fun of Apple for not having a micro SD card slot and a removable battery.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    11. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      I predict a lot of people will buy the 1.0 product and it will become obsolete quicker than you can say "apple stock". The 2.0 product might be more interesting. Can't believe they are charging 10k for the "higher end" watch. Bragging rights for rich folks, but rings pretty hollow considering what you get.

      Apple Watch will probably go obsolete as quick as any iOS product, which takes a few years before they stop supporting it. The latest iOS 8 still supports the 2011 iPhone 4s. That's much better than Android, I don't think there are any 2011 Android devices that support Android 5.0 without rooting them.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    12. Re:Well, I wouldn't buy one by Lord+Flipper · · Score: 1

      Oh, don't worry. They'll tell *you*.

      I have a MacBook Pro.

      Oh... that runs OS 10.10.3, Ubuntu 14.10, FreeBSD 10.1, and Win 7 Ult. But, honestly? Rarely more than three of those simultaneously.

      Three OS's ought to be enough for anyone, though, right?

  4. This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Apple watch presents no threat to such Swiss watches, any more than a Tesla car presents a threat to Porsche.

      And back in 2007 you'd be telling us the iPhone would present no threat to BlackBerry. And before that you'd have told us that the iPod would pose no threat to other mp3 players. The sheer amount of fault predictions that Slashdot nerds have made about Apple are hilarious.

    2. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Apple watch presents no threat to such Swiss watches, any more than a Tesla car presents a threat to Porsche.

      And back in 2007 you'd be telling us the iPhone would present no threat to BlackBerry. And before that you'd have told us that the iPod would pose no threat to other mp3 players. The sheer amount of fault predictions that Slashdot nerds have made about Apple are hilarious.

      But different reasons. Those high end watches are jewelry that happens to be a watch. Their expense is their allure, and wearing an expensive watch is astatus symbol.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      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.

      An Apple watch is really a bargain next to most Rolexes, and it does so much more than them. Hopefully, it will have a better anti-theft capability than a Rolex. Rolexes are nice, but sometimes thieves will chainsaw your arm right off in order to get the Rolex intact.

    4. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by nomel · · Score: 2

      Uhh, Tesla *is* hurting Porsche sales.

      You think people buy Porsches for the 0-60 or handling!? Maybe 1 in 20 (at least, that's the number of Porsches I've seen not putting along at 5mph under the speed limit, riding the brakes around every corner, and nearly all were old 90's Porsches).

    5. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by nomel · · Score: 1

      oops

      > and nearly all that *weren't* were old 90's Porsches

    6. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Hence why Apple is also selling $10k, $15k and $17k 18k gold watches. iFags have lots of money to waste on Apple products.

      Maybe that soohuld be telling you something.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    7. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      It's seriously not waterproof? So if it rains you have to take it off and put it in your pocket?
      I thought the pathetic 18 hour battery life was the major killer.

    8. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't understand the fuss, since the iWatch and a Swiss watch are two different markets. It's equivalent to saying the new Nikes will kill Louboutin's couture high heel market because sneakers are lighter and more practical. Or TV dinners will destroy the three hat restaurant scene because food is now easier and more convenient I know a few people with expensive watches ($10k+) These people are not interested in flavour of the day gadgets, they prefer hand made shirts, and shoes, and fine dining, and associate with brands that are conservative, exclusive and stand the test of time. None which Apple qualify for.

    9. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Additionally, a Breitling Emergency has a longer battery life than an iWatch while transmitting an emergency signal to space

    10. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Except no one will buy that watch. Why would you buy a disposable 18k gold watch?

      If you buy an expensive watch you're buying the skill and craftsmanship of the watchmaker. You're buying something that will stand the test of time and pass down to generations. While i'm not a huge watch guy I have a very nice watch that was my great-grandfather's and has been passed down for several generations and it still works well.

      Who's going to buy a $10,000 18k gold Apple Watch that will be obsolete in 6 months? There are no nice pieces, no craftsmanship; you're paying $10,000 for a disposable gold watch made by Chinese peons instead of a quality timepiece made by a master craftsman. There's a huge difference.

    11. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah and back in 1991 you were probably telling us Apple could never fail at anything ever. Keep riding the hype wave, everyone knows they always last forever...

    12. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by SpzToid · · Score: 4, Informative

      Excellent point. I had never heard of such a watch or technology before, and searched for it. Here's a link: http://www.breitling.com/en/em...

      --
      You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
    13. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by unimacs · · Score: 1

      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.

      The "cheap" Apple Watch is $350. You really think it's only worth $35? You're right though, they aren't waterproof but they are water resistant enough that they can be submerged in 3 ft of water for 30 minutes without suffering damage. That means you can safely wash dishes with it on or even take a shower. Swimming would be something I would avoid.

      An Apple Watch that's suitable for more dressy occasions is going to cost close to $600 but hopefully 3rd parties will sell some nicer bands that will be compatible with the aluminum version.

    14. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Camembert · · Score: 3, Insightful

      fyi the Swatch group has many luxury brands like Omega, Breguet, Rado, etc.
      I'd expect him to have more of a clue than most of the posters on /.

    15. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by ZipK · · Score: 1

      While i'm not a huge watch guy I have a very nice watch that was my great-grandfather's and has been passed down for several generations and it still works well.

      "Works well" as long as you're willing to live on an unsupported, back-level version of time.

    16. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by exomondo · · Score: 1

      There are no nice pieces, no craftsmanship; you're paying $10,000 for a disposable gold watch made by Chinese peons instead of a quality timepiece made by a master craftsman. There's a huge difference.

      You're right, if you're wearing an expensive watch it's generally hand-crafted and not mass-produced like these are. Most people in that market would prefer to spend that on something more bespoke, perhaps one with a platinum case with inset diamond made by a jeweller, which wouldn't be hard given that the internals of the $10,000 one are no different to the $349 one.

    17. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your fatal assumption is assuming the word "Swiss" or the company name "Swatch" means that it is high-end. I guarantee you that the Swiss do not sell 30million Rolex equivalent watches every year.

      The reality is Swiss watches encompass a wide range of companies with a wide range range of styles and price ranges. My girlfriend has a "Swiss" watch. It cost $130. Made in Switzerland. The Swatch group's own main brand "Swatch" is also a very low-end company making watches that range from kids toys (I had a $60 swatch when I was younger). I mean even the company name "Swatch" came from the idea of owning a "second-watch" that was cheap and fun and you could bash it around and wear it while doing the gardening etc, and they are not the only cheap watch manufacturer in Switzerland.

      Swatch nowadays is a group that owns about 15 brands which sell watches for well under $1000. They do also own really high-end brands like Omega.

    18. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by exomondo · · Score: 2

      I think the concern is around the potential benefits of the Apple Watch outweighing its own failures and the advantages of traditional timepieces. But i think the overlap market would be pretty small, this is still only practically applicable to iPhone users, it can't even get a full days' charge out of the battery and it's not exactly "exclusive" or a brand with much cachet.

      I have an iPhone for its utilitarian purpose, if I wanted to feel special in my choice of smartphone I wouldn't have chosen the most common and best-selling one - "Hey, check out my Ford F150!" - it's likely the Apple Watch will be much the same. Personally I don't see the usefulness of it (yet), though of course that may change over time, and they certainly have strayed from the genuine benefits to marketing silly gimmicks like sharing your heartbeat.

    19. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Greyfox · · Score: 2
      Ahem

      Watches! Because wearing a bracelet would be a little bit gay!

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    20. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you say that now, but you just wait until you start moving at relativistic speeds.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    21. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Powercntrl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      And back in 2007 you'd be telling us the iPhone would present no threat to BlackBerry. And before that you'd have told us that the iPod would pose no threat to other mp3 players. The sheer amount of fault predictions that Slashdot nerds have made about Apple are hilarious.

      You're revising history as much as Apple revises their products. A $599 phone (with no subsidy discount), locked to one carrier, that can't run 3rd party applications, doesn't support MMS, has poor call quality and no 3G support was no threat to Blackberry. A $399, Mac-only, MP3 player that lacks USB was no threat to other MP3 players.

      The iPod didn't become a genuine threat to competitors (and a runaway success) until hell froze over and Windows support was added. The iPhone didn't become a threat to competitors until Apple allowed AT&T to subsidize it. By the time the products had overcome their respective major roadblocks to widespread adoption, the current versions resembled their initial predecessors in name and physical appearance, but most of the missing capabilities the nerd peanut gallery derided them for, had been addressed.

      If anything, this is a cautionary tale that while the Apple Watch may eventually be yet another blazing success story for Apple, the model that goes on sale on April 24th will be nothing like the updated version that catapults it to mainstream popularity. Of course, it could also flop. As they said on Mythbusters, "failure is always an option." Either way, it will be an amusing show, and I'm sure plenty of people will have their own revisionist history to write when it succeeds or fails.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    22. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Dorianny · · Score: 1

      Tablets has been approved for use in cockpit during all phases of Flight. Many small plane pilots have switched to tablets for flight planning and real time navigation. As tablets become more widely used in every aspect of the flight, app makers will surely find some clever uses for smart-watches and perhaps in time a Breitling Navitimer will become something that identifies the old-timers.

    23. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by BitZtream · · Score: 1, Informative

      The Apple watch presents no threat to such Swiss watches, any more than a Tesla
      car presents a threat to Porsche.

      Heh, so you don't understand at all how much of a threat Tesla can be to Porsche then, eh? The roadster has some serious clout. Performance wise, ignoring battery life, its a serious contender worthy of debating. Luxury feel? It beats Porsche.

      I say this as a Porsche fan who isn't particularly a fan of electric cars. If they get batteries down to 5 minute charge cycles so I can charge in roughly the same time as a fill up, Tesla will probably sell me my next car.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    24. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by mehtars · · Score: 2

      See this is where I disagree. Men only have two hands, and can only wear one watch. I can tell you that even the richest of people use an Iphone (or android) since there is no other equivalent cell phone of greater technical capability.

      If the apple watch promises to give back time to the wearer through its ease of use, and subsequently becomes a replacement for the daily watch, this will infact very well cause huge pressures on the swiss watch industry.

    25. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by rogoshen1 · · Score: 2

      the really interesting thing about predictions involving gadgets is that no one really seems to come out and just say it... that expensive gadget you're buying today will be a Chinese knockoff at 3x the capability in 5 years, and 1/10th the price. Meanwhile neither iteration will do anything even remotely concrete to improve your life.

      there is absolutely nothing compelling about any gadget since the cell phone with texting capabilities that even comes close to warranting the attention the 'slashdot nerds' pay.

      checking your email on the go? it's a curse.
      social media? even more of a curse. more like a plague. kill it with fire.
      navigation? mehh, maybe. But still serves to alienate people from their environment, why learn your surroundings if google maps can just turn by turn your ass there? Also sometimes exploring can be an exhilarating experience in and of itself.

    26. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by kuzb · · Score: 1

      Yep. Watches are for snobs.

      Oh, and people who want to know what time it is.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    27. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by kuzb · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not just that, but half the components aren't made in switzerland, or by "master watchmakers". All you have to do in order to maintain the "swiss" title is make sure that 50% of the components that make up the watch are made in switzerland. What this generally means is that half of your swiss watch (usually the more expensive/important half) is made of chinesium.

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
    28. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by lindseyp · · Score: 1

      >The Apple watch presents no threat to such Swiss watches, any more than a Tesla
      >car presents a threat to Porsche.

      The fact that the Tesla Model S 85D is about the same price, but is actually quicker than a porsche, tells me Tesla is capable of being a real threat to Porsche, in some model categories now, and potentially all model categories in the near future.

      >Me, I think the Apple watch is interesting but it is ten times more expensive than it should be

      So are swiss 'luxury' watches. The people who plonk down $5k on a mechanical watch over a quartz aren't going to blink at $349 for a status symbol that's also very useful. Let alone those walking round with $30k timepieces.

      >and is not waterproof, and these two facts mean I will never ever own one.

      That is a big issue for me, as is the 18h battery life. What good is having your payment system and your hotel key built into the watch if the watch is dead by the time you pay your bill for dinner or return to the hotel at night?

      The other issue is planned obsolescence. I can't imagine the level of douchebaggery required to plonk down $10k on a piece of tech that will be obsolete in a year's time. Apple has to at least maintain the form factor and offer upgrades down the line, which so far they haven't stated will be possible.

      --
      j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
    29. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by lindseyp · · Score: 2

      On second thoughts, I *can* imagine that level of douchebaggery, it's called Vertu.

      --
      j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
    30. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by lindseyp · · Score: 1

      I'll admit I'm something of a watch 'enthusiast'. Now, there are a couple of reasons I probably won't buy the iWatch right away, but I'd consider it down the line, especially as more apps get made. It looks quite useful. Now if I find my self wearing the iWatch all the time I'm less likely to want to plunk down for another mechanical piece.

      --
      j'ai découvert une démonstration vraiment admirable (de ce théorème général) que cette si
    31. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

      Thieves don't need to bother with a chainsaw, I'll give them the watch. My life is worth much much more than any possession I own.

    32. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by unimacs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In 2007 there was a 4Gig iPhone that was $499. The $599 model was 8 Gig.

      6.1 million original iPhones were sold in spite of the shortcomings you mentioned.

      iPhone sales surpassed blackberry sales for the first time in the 4th quarter of 2008, - less than a year and 1/2 after it had been introduced. Overtaking a market leader within 18 months is pretty remarkable, especially considering Apple had never sold a phone before.

      Bill Gates recognized the threat right away. RIM didn't and has never recovered.

      I'm not sure the Apple Watch is going to have the same level of success. The smart phone solved a real problem by combining a cellphone with a PDA, and an MP3 player, - two or three devices that many people were carrying. The iPhone was a better implementation of the smart phone than what had existed at the time.

      The Smart Watch doesn't solve those kinds of problems except for perhaps people who carry fitness gadgets with them.

    33. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The Swatch group's own main brand "Swatch" is also a very low-end company making watches that range from kids toys (I had a $60 swatch when I was younger).

      $60 is only a valid price for a children's toy watch if you are rich. Hell, I had a swatch as a kid which was worth $30, but I got it for $15 IIRC... But I went through a shitload of watches as a kid, because they would get smashed on things.

      Sadly, the swatch-brand cheap watches were shit back then. A timex or a cheap casio digital would have been better. The cheap swatch couldn't actually take any abuse.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    34. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      The prices for the Apple watch are in line with what I'd expect (and am prepared) to pay for a decent looking watch (not the straps though, the pricing of those is what I'd expect of Apple, and nowhere near reasonable). The design of the watch isn't to my liking, but even if it were more like say the Moto 360, what I have big problems with is paying 4 figures for a watch that will likely be obsolete in a few years. Forget about that dumb modular cell phone idea, what we need is a good looking, well designed smart watch that allows us to swap out the guts every few years for a couple hundred. Even if we have to go to an Apple store to have it done.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    35. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by execthis · · Score: 1

      Great comment. Only correction I would suggest is that it only takes maybe a year or two at most for the better Chinese models to hit the market.

      I seriously can't understand what appeal the tiny interface of a watch would have for any type of application a person might have/want/need beyond telling time.

      For example, regarding the medical diagnostic applications, if I were going to acquire a device that had such a capability, why on Earth would I want it in a form factor with such a ridiculously small and limited interface?

      One thing about small gadgets - the smaller they are, that means even a small increase in the interface size is dramatically significant. For example, if you have a 5" display and go to a 6", it will be a nice increase, but not overly significant.

      Now if you have a 1" display and suddenly go to 2", that is a vast increase. Suddenly all these new capabilities open up with such a dramatic change.

      So what is the appeal of going really tiny, especially for something like a medical monitoring application that you are going to want to have a decent device to provide the function, when having something even a little larger - like the size of a credit card even - is so much better/convenient/useful?

    36. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      An Apple watch is really a bargain next to most Rolexes, and it does so much more than them.

      I'm not commenting on the likely success of the iWatch here, but I don't think people buy Rolexes because of the features. Also, I think the "bargain" thing is misplaced: people buy expensive Rolexes to show they have an expensive Rolex. Being cheap would kind of defeat the purpose.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    37. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      You hit the nail on the head. There are already plenty of really good smart watches on the market that cost a fraction of what the Apple Watch does and have better battery life. From what Apple have shown it doesn't seem like they have been able to really add anything other than bling. The others have apps, health monitoring etc. The market will be commoditized in short order which is why Apple is hoping they can create some jewellery and use the Reality Distortion Field to keep their prices high, but it's a stretch.

      People who want a smart watch have better, cheaper options. People who want a watch will buy one that doesn't need charging every day or more.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    38. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by countach · · Score: 1

      I don't think their expense is their allure. Watch people often like watches in all price ranges.

    39. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by countach · · Score: 1

      LOL, true, but that watch is a heavy lump.

    40. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Qbertino · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right, the Swatch guy (!!) doesn't have a clue about the watch market, or, in particular, the swiss watch market.

      Dude, seriously.

      --
      We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    41. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by tburkhol · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the swatch-brand cheap watches were shit back then. A timex or a cheap casio digital would have been better. The cheap swatch couldn't actually take any abuse.

      But a basic black, $10 timex was boring. Swatch made cheap ($20), crap watches that came in different colors. With 'funky' designs. People paid for swatches twice what they were worth because they had an off-center stripe on the face. And then someone realized that you could wear two, three, or even four swatches on one arm!

      When the swatch guy gets up and tells you that iWatch has the potential to crush swiss watchmaking, he's talking about fashion, not function.

    42. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by houghi · · Score: 1

      Nobody seems to get it. Not the watchmakers. Not the people looking at tech.

      The 10.000 dollar watch is irrelevant. That is NOT what they are interested in selling. What they are interested in are two things.
      1) The buzz this creates, Everybody is talking about it. Talk about great marketing
      2) Selling the cheaper watches. In Retaurants and bars it is very common to have one extremely expensive item. e.g. a very expensive wine or wiskey. This is not to sell the expensive iten, this is to make OTHER amounts SEEM less expensive.

      Three watches, three prices. The middle one now suddenly looks 'cheap' and thus will sell better.

      This is marketing 101. So even if NOBODY buys the 10.000 dollar watch and thet have to trow all of the production into the sea, the increase in sales to the more expensive ones. If X% buys a more expensive one, they are making money.

      They must be high-fiving all the way to the bank about all the fuzz it created.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    43. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'd agree with that.

      My favourite watches are often fucking expensive, but that's because they're bloody difficult to design, to build and to invent the necessary alloys for, and so the price includes all the R&D, the rarity/cost of the raw materials and the time of the master craftsmen needed to put it all together.

      I love the engineering; make it available for £20 and I'll buy a dozen different variants then buy more for friends.
       

    44. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I want the mechanical watch with the smart screen overlay.

      Kairos are already taking pre-orders, using third party "swiss made" movements, although I'm not enamoured with their initial range.

      Hyetis promised a watch in December 2013 and it still hasn't been delivered. They're now promising a second model before they even deliver the first, but my confidence isn't high.

      I can't see it being too long before Breitling get in on the act with a quartz offering, and it's almost inevitable the Swiss watch industry will start to offer hybrid smart mechanical watches over the next few years, and I'll definitely look out for one.

      Surely an automatic winder can be used as a battery charger ?!

    45. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      The Iphone did not present a threat to Blackberry. What killed Blackberry was bad management. They abandoned their market to pursue the market opened by the Iphone. When Blackberry made this decision their sales were still growing but they were losing market share in the "smart phone" segment. What they failed to realize was that they were not in the "smart phone" business. They were in the "secure business phone" segment (secure may not quite be the right term, but it is probably how they should have viewed their market and represents the types of innovation they should have pursued).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    46. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by excelsior_gr · · Score: 1

      And what brand of (smart)phone do they carry?

    47. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by gnupun · · Score: 1

      Or rich people who can afford the luxury and enjoy a comfortable, quiet and extremely fast car? Unless they plan to sell their sports car every three years, the cost is only 5 or 7 times the cost of a cheap compact... so not very expensive to them.

      Swiss watches are luxury items and there is so much variety. How exactly is the iWatch going to replace all the wonderful watch designs with their plain rounded-corner rectangle design? The Swatch guy is full of it.

    48. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by coofercat · · Score: 1

      Which one is going to get a girl to say "ooh, nice watch!" though? That's what'll matter to Apple.

    49. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by coofercat · · Score: 1

      I'll bet most of them have an iphone though (instead of an Android of any variety).

    50. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Jahta · · Score: 1

      The Apple watch presents no threat to such Swiss watches, any more than a Tesla car presents a threat to Porsche.

      And back in 2007 you'd be telling us the iPhone would present no threat to BlackBerry. And before that you'd have told us that the iPod would pose no threat to other mp3 players. The sheer amount of fault predictions that Slashdot nerds have made about Apple are hilarious.

      And back in 2007 few people had even heard of Android phones, which now outsell iPhones 5-to-1 worldwide. Who knew?

    51. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by c · · Score: 1

      I can't understand the fuss, since the iWatch and a Swiss watch are two different markets.

      Mostly. However, there's going to be a large intersection in the people who buy a $device in that price range mostly to show off how much money they have, and the iWatch is probably going to own that market.

      People who care about Swiss watches aren't going to buy an iWatch. People who care about the functionality of an iWatch probably aren't going to buy an iWatch. But people who want an excuse to flash an expensive piece of wristwear are going to buy a gold iWatch and set their phone to send a notification to the watch every few minutes so everyone can see them checking their wrist.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    52. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      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.

      Yeah, until..... someone creates the Breitling Navitimer app for the Apple watch!

      Hell, I can be among 5 different "in crowds" now. I'll get a Rolex app for it, too!

    53. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 1

      Except no one will buy that watch. Why would you buy a disposable 18k gold watch?

      If you buy an expensive watch you're buying the skill and craftsmanship of the watchmaker. You're buying something that will stand the test of time and pass down to generations. While i'm not a huge watch guy I have a very nice watch that was my great-grandfather's and has been passed down for several generations and it still works well.

      Who's going to buy a $10,000 18k gold Apple Watch that will be obsolete in 6 months? There are no nice pieces, no craftsmanship; you're paying $10,000 for a disposable gold watch made by Chinese peons instead of a quality timepiece made by a master craftsman. There's a huge difference.

      I've thought the same thing (many times) but I wonder if it'll be possible - if not easy - to simply change out the "guts" of it every couple of years when a new model comes out. I mean, the actual watch is worth a few hundred bucks, right? So if I dropped $10K for one upgrading it two years from now for $300 is a bargain. It should be possible to remove the old watch from the case and drop a new one in as long as Apple doesn't change the form factor. And my guess is that there's less desire to change the form factor given that this is a piece that goes on someone's wrist and it's already about as big as a watch should be.

    54. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 2

      Yeah and back in 1991 you were probably telling us Apple could never fail at anything ever. Keep riding the hype wave, everyone knows they always last forever...

      I agree with that, but keep in mind that Apple has a couple hundred billion dollars in the bank right now. They have more money than the federal government and they don't even have the machines to print it. Think about that.

      That's not saying there can never be a decline - even Rome fell. But Apple nearly died in the 1990s and ran out of cash. At this point they could quit selling products and they'd still have enough cash to coast along for decades (the cash is invested). It's a whole nother ball game.

      Microsoft is essentially in the same boat, by the way.

    55. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      The other fatal assumption is that Apple is going to sell 20M watches.

      Android and Pebble combined barely tilt at 1M (Samsung's latest generation offerings, barely sold 300K combined).

      So now Apple is going to sell not just as many Apple Watches as smartwatches combined, but 20 times as much? Granted, interest is high, and even a product like the iPad was mocked as being something completely without reason but still.

    56. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      And back in 2007 you'd be telling us the iPhone would present no threat to BlackBerry.

      No, personally I always thought that the BlackBerry sucked so much that any alternative at all that would let people have mobile e-mail would instantly replace it, no matter how much it sucked. BlackBerry was the phone you went, "goddamnit, I need to replace my nokia or motoralla with this shit, because of my need to send and receive e-mail anywhere!"

      And before that you'd have told us that the iPod would pose no threat to other mp3 players.

      That one I'll cop to. In fact, I still don't understand it. The ipod is the worst music player I've ever seen. Back when it came out, I had a Windows PDA, and I thought that worked better.

    57. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      If you buy an expensive watch you're buying the skill and craftsmanship of the watchmaker.

      Except that modern manufacturing process can beat a skilled craftman any day. People buy expensive watches because they're expensive. It's a status symbol. They have something that other people can't afford.

      For that reason, the $10k edition of the apple watch will sell plenty. Like the old "I Am Rich" app

    58. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      Considering Tesla actually is marketed more as a high end car than some save the whales green peace car I don't agree with your analogy. Tesla either is, or is in a great position to quickly become a direct competitor to those all levels of rich "car" guy cars. Yes they cannot win over the retro-revamed 1964 chevy muscle car guys, but the guy the goes out to buy a NEW Porsche is looking at Teslas. Apple is not and never could become a direct competitor to either those $30 cheap give give me the correct time watches, or those 1-2 hundred cheap look at this gold thing strapped to my wrist watches, or those multiple thousand dollar mechanical pieces of art.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    59. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      OK, but most expensiveness watches are not bought by watch guys, just rich guys who want something pretty on their wrists and the more expensive the better.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    60. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by macs4all · · Score: 1

      But different reasons. Those high end watches are jewelry that happens to be a watch. Their expense is their allure, and wearing an expensive watch is astatus symbol.

      So, the $10k version of the Apple Watch is not "expensive" enough to be a status symbol?

      That's funny: The Breitling Navitimer is only about $5k on the street. Took about .5 secs of Googling to determine that fact.

      Next meme?

    61. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Swatch is not a 'normal' Swiss watch company. They sell disposable junk to hipsters.

      Swatch should be a lot more worried the Rolex.

      Is Swatch still in business? I thought they were 20 years gone.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    62. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      A good quality fake Rolex does that just fine. Buy the $200 fake Rolex, not the $40 one, gold diggers know about the sweep second hand.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    63. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by stealth_finger · · Score: 2

      Who's going to buy a $10,000 18k gold Apple Watch that will be obsolete in 6 months?

      Who's going to buy a $150K car that is going to lose half its value in three years?

      The same people.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    64. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? A Porsche SUV? Those are proof you failed the Porsche IQ test.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    65. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      They won't get the 'car' guys. At least not until they get the pigs weight down. Teslas lose to all other sports cars in the first corner.

      They already have the 'pretentious conspicuous consumption ' guys.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    66. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      > And back in 2007 you'd be telling us the iPhone would present no threat to BlackBerry.

      Except an iPhone is much more like a Blackberry than any Apple product is similar to a Swiss watch.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    67. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by avandesande · · Score: 1

      A lot of wealthy people don't even carry a phone

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    68. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I hate to get into the "I don't want one, so it'll flop" business, but who's going to buy a mechanical watch with a smart overlay? Electronics are so much better than mechanics in keeping time, and a watch with a smart screen isn't going to look like one of those wonders of mechanism.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    69. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      People who care about the iWatch functionality will buy iWatches, but they aren't going to spend $10K on one. The non-gold ones are in the price range I'd consider for an electronic device I really liked (I've paid more for lots of things), although nothing about these is currently tempting me, but the gold is just for show.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    70. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Cederic · · Score: 1

      A lot of mechanical watches look like a lot of quartz watches - leather bracelet, sapphire glass, coloured face, solid metal back. Projecting electronic content onto the glass above the face doesn't stop it being the same mechanical watch with the same look and feel it had before you made it 'smart'.

      Or go for the sapphire glass back to show off the mechanical movement. Or have a combi watch, with mechanical time on one side and smart screen on the other. Or build the smart capabilities into the bracelet (Breitling have bracelet embedded functions on one of their quartz watches).

      High precision mechanical watches can't match an atomic clock radio time signal updated quartz watch for accuracy, but they have their own beauty and attraction. Why lose that just to add 'smart' features?

    71. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by jasenj1 · · Score: 1

      I think the Apple watch is interesting but it is ten times more expensive than it should be

      You think the Apple watch should cost $34.95? Or do you mean the limited Edition $10,000+ one? The high end one is irrelevant when discussing pricing. It is purely a fantasy model for the 0.1% to buy. Like race cars by BMW or couture by fashion brands.

    72. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Excellent point

      If you think putting a MBA next to an 8 pound plastic Inspiron is a great comparison, because the Dell has comparable disk space and processor speed, sure.

    73. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      That's funny: The Breitling Navitimer is only about $5k on the street. Took about .5 secs of Googling to determine that fact. Next meme?

      Keep up with the conversation, The expensive Apple watch is also a status symbol. If you care to re-read through th comments, I was responding to a poster's remark about what people have said about Apple products. This is a differnt matter, these expensive apple watches, yet unless a person is living on a knife edge budget, the other apple devices are in the same order of magnitude as what the poster was talking about.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    74. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by RandomAdam · · Score: 1

      Agree; I have a pebble (original kickstarter edition) coming up on three years, still has 7 - 8 days battery life.

      I have kickstarted the pebble time. With the smart band options that will likely be developed I see me getting an even longer life (battery and total lifetime) out of my new watch. Looking forward to receiving my new watch soonish.

      I don't really see having such a small touch screen as an advantage.

      --
      @Random_Adam

      Sometimes a sig doesn't have to be funny!!
    75. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by c · · Score: 1

      People who care about the iWatch functionality will buy iWatches

      Well, shit. That's what I wrote in my head. So much for proofreading.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    76. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Until they look at the balance sheet next year and realise what Samsung et all already know. Smart watches (along with those stupid fitness bands) are a gimmick. I'm sure they'll make some cash short term, but I really can't see this being a thing in 10 years time.

    77. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      I'll admit a lot of them have iPhones. But that's because they need a phone, and Apple has the shiniest models for non-techies. But no-one needs a smart watch, in fact they don't even need the watches or yachts or super cars they already have either. They own these things to tell the world they have made it, and a consumer toy made in China doesn't really have that same appeal. When you're steering your 60ft classic 1960's racing yacht around the heads with your hand made cashmere sweater draped across your shoulders, you're not going to spoil that image with anything that uses electricity.

    78. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      True. Because everyone needs a mobile phone, and Apple make the shiniest versions of those. No-one needs a smart-watch (just ask Samsung), so the market is completely different.

    79. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      These types of people will get laughed at if they are in the company of other rich people who own $20k Swiss watches. If you've ever been on a yacht you'll understand how this crowd works.

    80. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      The Fed Govt threw a Trillion dollars away in a pointless war and didn't even blink. I'm not sure what universe you live in that you think Apple has that sort of spending power.

    81. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by catmistake · · Score: 1

      the model that goes on sale on April 24th will be nothing like the updated version that catapults it to mainstream popularity.

      This.

      Apple competitors have had an actual watch that is a phone, no tethering to any other device necessary, on the market already for a year or two, at least. Apple is obviously going that direction, but can't quite get it to be the size they want yet... so they left the obvious killer function out for now, and are misdirecting the expected criticism of the absence of this function with all this haptic feedback stuff, a flashy interface and oooo checks my pulse wow. When Apple finally does release an actual watch phone, everyone will act like Apple invented it or at least perfected it... five years after you could have had that function (but not slick Apple design) from another tech company.

      IMO, the entire idea is flawed if Apple expects it to carry the company's success through another decade. Apple is a hardware company, not a jewelry company. Apple is completely ignoring its actual customers (education and home computing markets) to go after the high hanging fruit. I think Apple needs a product to compete here, but I don't think they should expect great things at the expense of their bread and butter products. Those that buy expensive watches know a thing or two that Apple apparently does not: a good watch is a good investment. There are no good digital watches that appreciate. They're not going to get the high hanging fruit, i.e. new customers that were former Breitling customers. They're going to get the same customers they've always had, their loyal customers Apple keeps ignoring. I know this because I have been a loyal Apple customer for more than 20 years, and I have salivated over each new product... brainwashed maybe... but this... idk what this thing is... I am so stunned by it, it has deprogrammed me. Its having the same effect on me as if Apple was releasing a rectal thermometer as their new flagship product, a beautifully designed thermometer that doesn't yet give you a temperature and only works in conjuction with your iPhone.

    82. Re:This ex-Swatch guy doesn't have a clue by kuzb · · Score: 1

      I was not the first to use it (see: http://www.urbandictionary.com... ), nor will I be the last. Enjoy!

      --
      BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  5. Non-removable battery - Jewelry? by siemmer · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Non-removable battery - Jewelry? by siemmer · · Score: 1

      My mistake on the title! I meant to say "Removable battery - Jewelry?" but got distracted.

    2. Re:Non-removable battery - Jewelry? by jordanjay29 · · Score: 1

      You'll soon come to love sleeping with your hand shackled to the Apple Watch charger.

    3. Re:Non-removable battery - Jewelry? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Hopefully battery technology can improve, but the tethering is not a technical choice it's a policy choice designed to lock you inside the Apple system.

      Oh, come off it!

      Do you REALLY think that Apple (or anybody?) could place a CELLULAR ANTENNA (let alone the hardware to drive it) inside that package? Not to mention the battery it would take to maintain communication with the cellular network. You think the battery life is short NOW?...

      Not to mention that, to be autonomous from a cellphone (and still have even a large fraction of the features) you would have to figure out how to shoehorn all (or nearly all) of the hardware seen in steps 15 through 17 of this iPhone 6 Teardown. Again, I ask you: Where does that hardware go? What does it use for a battery?

      Think before you bleat out such idiocy, fucktard.

    4. Re:Non-removable battery - Jewelry? by macs4all · · Score: 1

      steps 15 through 17...

      Correction: I meant steps 15 through 18

      Even worse!

  6. What prevents them by ruir · · Score: 1

    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.

  7. Is there really that much involved besides looks? by nomel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  8. Swiss garbage by snsh · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Swiss garbage by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      It's hard to find a mass-produced watch less than 5mm thick.

      Go to eBay and pick a NOS Casio from the 90's. The oversized trend hadn't taken hold at that time.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    2. Re:Swiss garbage by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      If you knew anything about fashion, then it has nothing to do with practicality. Jewellery is pure form over function, otherwise why else would high heels exist?

    3. Re:Swiss garbage by Cederic · · Score: 2

      Hmm. That's not why I wear them.

      It's nice being taller and they make your legs look great. Although both of those increase your chances of a romantic encounter all of my partners have been rather shorter than me, so really she needs to be in the heels not me.

    4. Re:Swiss garbage by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      You joke, but they make Women's back arch. Which is 'fuck me' body language.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  9. And that's my cue to buy by itomato · · Score: 1

    Swatch Group Stock.

    Shit on the wrist is set to comeback just as well.

  10. Everyone is thinking Apple can't miss by sasparillascott · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  11. Not sure I agree by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.
    1. Re:Not sure I agree by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

      Now, if I was Motorola or Samsung? Yea, I'd be worried.

      Yeah, because the Samsung smartwatch has literally rocked the world. Seems to have dropped off the radar after it's initial hype, which was mainly about how they beat Apple to the punch. Now days, no one gives a shit about the samsung smart watch. And Motorola? They don't even matter anymore. And speaking of Timex. Compared side by side, that Samsung looks more like the cheap ass Timex as far as "smart watches" go. http://www.amazon.com/gp/produ... http://cdn.macrumors.com/artic...

    2. Re:Not sure I agree by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's arguable the iWatch will boost demand for Swiss watches, as it makes wrist-wear fashionable again.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Not sure I agree by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      And a year from now, nobody will care about the Apple watch. It's a company chasing after the notion that they can on a whim create a whole new product category, in a niche that doesn't even exist.

      Steve would have killed it very early on. It's a shark jump product.

    4. Re:Not sure I agree by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Wearing a watch has always been fashionable. I used to work for a fashion retailer and watches were our most reliable profit centre. Sure it fell off the scene for everyday types once the mobile phone market took off, but then these people probably aren't interested in a smart watch. For people interested in fashion and accessories, the watch was always a must have. And it's not like this is a new thing, Other manufacturers have smart watches already yet the concept hasn't exactly taken the world by storm.

    5. Re:Not sure I agree by recharged95 · · Score: 1

      "That market isn't about telling time but making a statement."

      Sound like Apple products, with the exception that some Apple products also increase productivity. Hence Apple will impact the market, but with the GDP of the Swiss, their services and banks--I doubt it will make an impact.

    6. Re:Not sure I agree by macs4all · · Score: 1

      And a year from now, nobody will care about the Apple watch. It's a company chasing after the notion that they can on a whim create a whole new product category, in a niche that doesn't even exist.

      Steve would have killed it very early on. It's a shark jump product.

      Don't kid yourself; St. Jobs probably initially approved the project. Seriously, how long do you think the development cycle is like for a product like this? Jobs had only been dead 3 years by the time Tim Cook was wearing one last Fall. I would be very surprised if there weren't at least some preliminary prototypes floating around Apple before Steve went to his Reward.

  12. Swiss vs Apple marketing by Camembert · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Swiss vs Apple marketing by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      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.

      The big difference is hardware vs software. Most people prefer things that are tangible, and physical things have historically proven to last a lot longer than virtual things (See the Pyramids for example) . People don't buy Swiss for the technology, it is all about the conservative, long lasting, refined image you think you are buying into. I can't see a technology company ever cracking into that space. The two are mutually exclusive. If anything the popularity of old fashioned-ness has been brought about as a foil to the increasingly technological world.

    2. Re:Swiss vs Apple marketing by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      physical things have historically proven to last a lot longer than virtual things (See the Pyramids for example)

      I'm not so sure. The very oldest things we have are physical, but we have numerous virtual things. For instance, the story of Noah's Ark is over 2000 years old, and possibly almost as old as the pyramids themselves. A lot of the bible is from that time. Of course, the actual books of the bible are themselves physical, but the stories predate the bible. Other mythic stories have lasted longer than the new testament, and some longer than the old testament. It is, of course, difficult to ascribe exact timelines to when these ideas started.

      Yes, some stories have been twisted and altered. At the same time, the Pyramids don't look today like they did at the time of their building. Same basic shape, but smooth, shiny, and white.

      Then there's language. Language is a virtual thing that mutates fairly rapidly on the scale of history, but eg. Proto-Indo-European has been somewhat reconstructed and is thought to be almost 6000 years old or more.

    3. Re:Swiss vs Apple marketing by Dorianny · · Score: 1

      A 10G Apple watch to monitor hear rate in spin class will soon be a must-have accessory among those that can afford it.

    4. Re:Swiss vs Apple marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      For instance, the story of Noah's Ark is over 2000 years old, and possibly almost as old as the pyramids themselves. A lot of the bible is from that time. Of course, the actual books of the bible are themselves physical, but the stories predate the bible. Other mythic stories have lasted longer than the new testament, and some longer than the old testament. It is, of course, difficult to ascribe exact timelines to when these ideas started.

      Tracing back through lifespans and the age of parents as their children were born (as recorded in the Bible), the biblical deluge can be calculated to have occurred in 2370 B.C.E. Noah began construction on the ark 60 years prior to that, in 2430 B.C.E. The pyramids likely were not from before the flood, since they show no signs of water damage. (OTOH, the Sphinx does, and likely predates the flood.)

      The events of the flood were recorded in what we now know as the Book of Genesis sometime around 1513 B.C.E. by the hand of Moses as the Israelites left Egypt. (Moses completed writing Genesis in 1513 B.C.E. Obviously, he had to start somewhere, so some parts of it were recorded earlier than others.)

      So the story of Noah's Ark is well over 4000 years old (nearly 4500), and was recorded over 3500 years ago. Using the technique of following genealogies and pivotal dates, it's not difficult to ascribe exact timelines to when many events recorded in the Bible occurred. It even provides, quite plainly, the month and day (the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, roughly corresponding to the end of October or the first part of November).

    5. Re:Swiss vs Apple marketing by countach · · Score: 1

      Most swiss watches I dare say, are not of the super expensive kind. What innovation do you want from a mechanical watch? It tells the time, that's it. When I buy a new watch (and I have many), I could care less about innovation.

    6. Re:Swiss vs Apple marketing by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 1

      Not the same, since these are analog copies, not the same instance, nor are any of them likely to accurately resemble the original thing. The pyramids, are the actual pyramids that were built 4500 years ago.

  13. If Apple replaces the battery by justthinkit · · Score: 1

    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
    1. Re:If Apple replaces the battery by nomel · · Score: 2

      You can only assume that each watch gets plugged into an NSA data transfer/backdoor update terminal each service. Although, it's silly to think that they need physical access if they want your data. :P

    2. Re:If Apple replaces the battery by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Well, the point about physical access is that it ensures that no one can hack the interface *without* having to force open the phone first.

      --
      I come here for the love
    3. Re:If Apple replaces the battery by macs4all · · Score: 1

      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?

      Paranoid much?

      Just how much "information" do you think that a watch can store and still have room for an OS and Apps?

    4. Re:If Apple replaces the battery by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Yes, I am unapologetically paranoid.

      As to your point, have a look at the ratio of data to programs on your hard drive. Not counting audio/video, data size is microscopic compared to program size.

      The amount of data the *could* be collected is related to the features on the iWatch, both today's and any future version. Thin edge of the wedge and all that.

      --
      I come here for the love
    5. Re:If Apple replaces the battery by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Just noticed that Wired published this story today: Big Data: One Thing to Think About When Buying Your Apple Watch.

      So I guess Wired is paranoid as well.

      --
      I come here for the love
  14. Why Timex is a different case by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    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
    1. Re:Why Timex is a different case by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      You're working hard to spin up motivation to care about this thing. It shows. And when even one of the premiere Apple shills on slashdot has to struggle hard to justify an Apple product, it shows what a turkey the product is.

      Yeah, right. Putting the same 'will be just as obsolete' module into a gold case makes it a luxury item.

      Good grief. So sad to see so many fawning over these 21st century tulip bulbs.

    2. Re:Why Timex is a different case by exomondo · · Score: 1

      I still can't see what all the fuss is about from a practical usage point of view.

      There's the gimmicky:

      • Send a heartbeat
      • Send a sketch
      • Send a vibration

      And there's the contrived examples around particular scenarios where "Hey this is so awesome because I can do it without going to the painstaking process of taking my phone out of my pocket".

      There's just nothing outstanding about it, maybe that will change in future. But with the original iPhone the advantages were obvious in changing the way things worked and disrupting an existing industry, with this, not so much.

    3. Re:Why Timex is a different case by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      I used to wear a Casio with built-in calculator. Not only useful, but a personal fashion statement.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  15. He's right by blagder · · Score: 2

    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.

    1. Re:He's right by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      The Vertu doesn't look behind the times to me. It has everything I was looking for in a phone and looks great.

      Still, not spending 12k on it, and the concierge benefits say a lot about who the target market is (those that don't know how to type on an internet connected device).

      I'll get the leather on my Moto X for a 20th the price...

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:He's right by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      It unlocks my phone just by being near.

      The cops like this feature even more than you do.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:He's right by countach · · Score: 1

      I disagree. The people who thought watches were primarily for telling the time gave up (in large part) on wearing them long ago, in favour of their smartphone. Those people never wanted something wrapped around their wrist to tell the time when their phone was good enough, and this won't win them back. The people who still wear watches just like watches, and those folks will think this Apple watch is crass. Why do I need to talk into my wrist for a reminder when I can just as well do it with my phone (which I have to be carrying anyway).

      I wear a watch because I like it. I could care less if it has a date window, stopwatch, day, calendar, or whatever. I wear it because I like it, all those things are just gimmicks.

    4. Re:He's right by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Eventually, luxury watches will be a sign of shallowness and stupidity.

      Just like diamond engagement rings. Shallow and stupid and those and those are really dropping off in popularity.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    5. Re:He's right by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      Oooooohhh note to self: develop "CODE RED" (or blue) watch app. When the cops are walking towards you you don't have time to go fumbling for your phone, and they're going to know what's up anyway. You do a sequence of taps on your watch and say a pass phrase and it locks down all of your shit. (or perhaps, just listens for the phrase "What seems to be the problem, officer?") Encrypts some files, shreds others, sends texts and emails to family/friends/lawyer/God, turns on secret audio and video recording on your phone that auto-uploads to a server or service of your choosing.

      That actually sounds like a really fun project. I think I'll buy an android watch just to make that. Not that I have frequent run-ins with the police, but it would be fun to act like a secret agent.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  16. Duplicated technology by kevingolding2001 · · Score: 1

    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?

  17. I wish I had a device that... by See+Attached · · Score: 1

    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.
    1. Re:I wish I had a device that... by unimacs · · Score: 1

      I have a cell phone and a watch. It's a nice diver's watch with a mechanical rotating ring that functions as a timer. It cost be about $250 if I remember right. The watch is almost always with me. The phone is not. I don't want to fish a phone out of my pocket or retrieve it from wherever I happened to leave it just to check the time. If a watch can quickly and easily provide me with more information, - all the better.

      To me the biggest problem with the Apple Watch is the short battery life. It may not be Apple's smart watch that ends up being the big success but when smart watches can function independently from phones, the battery life improves, and the cost comes down, they will be extremely popular.

      Think about Smart Home products a little bit. There's way too much reliance on phone apps for them to be very convenient, - but if you could control things in your house via a watch?, - that's a big improvement.

    2. Re:I wish I had a device that... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Possibly the medical applications will justify these things. Maybe biometric authentication use?

      I could see a future of smartwatches monitoring their wearer for medical and authentication purposes. Of course also being unremovable.

    3. Re:I wish I had a device that... by See+Attached · · Score: 2

      That intimate connection to the skin could be an inductive pick up point for blood monitoring . Watching for spikes in blood chemistry would be great for monitoring cancer remission (calcium levels etc), blood sugar, (insert new IOT thing here). The ANT+ interface spec http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... could hook to a Phone in a flash though. Medical records? Pill handling?

      --
      Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
    4. Re:I wish I had a device that... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      There's some utility in not having to take your phone out of your pocket (or, worse, purse), to do some of that stuff. Since Apple likes ease of use, the watch hooked to the phone is a logical extension.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  18. Market Segmentation by Limekiller42 · · Score: 1

    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.

  19. Re:Is there really that much involved besides look by Nemyst · · Score: 1

    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.

  20. Where's the market overlap? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    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.
    1. Re:Where's the market overlap? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      I wear a watch not as nice as yours, but it was cheap and gets compliments (just a random square guess watch with a simple silver face and date, 24 hr, and day of week wheels).

      I definitely plan on buying a smart watch though, probably next generation (I want that lifespan, with the face on), or maybe a pebble steel if the color one brings the price down on the old ones.

      If I can get a Zenwatch or a Moto 360 for $250, just a little smaller, and a little more life, I will.

      I went without a watch for a while, thinking phone is watch, but since I started wearing one again, I miss it when I forget it.

      For me the killer feature though is the customizable face, I want a Qlocktwo, for a fraction of the price. I am obsessed with time in words for some reason, I'm told it's crazy.

      There's no market overlap for me I suppose, because I was a long way off from spending much on a watch, but I can see myself getting value from a couple notifications, and a watch face I like. I think they (smart watches in general, not the Apple ones, they have the battery I would need, but $350 is too much, and that's the frumpy one) will destroy the $150-$500 watch market. I'd be very worried if I were Fossil, or some other company in that range.

      I think there's a decent chance they'll make watches over-all more appealing though, in which case the Swiss could win in the end.

      I guess the real question though is about the batteries, if they are not replaceable, and only good for a year or two of charging, that's a real problem. I assume the CPU won't ever need to do much more with most of the processing coming from the phone, and the screens are already there from what I can tell.

      yammer yammer, I'm tired.

      Summary, I think the $100-$500 watch market will be destroyed, as people who want a watch choose those that can do a little extra. A smart watch with a good screen will be a logical choice for many people.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  21. What's the saying again? by Nemyst · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.

    1. Re:What's the saying again? by msobkow · · Score: 1

      Well, the gold one will still be shiny, even if it stopped booting three years ago... :P

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    2. Re:What's the saying again? by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      As with all (Cr)apple products...vastly overpriced, cheaply made crap that only iDiots will buy!

      Cheap? Crap? No. Apple is one of the rare companies to still care about innovation, design and durability. The Macbook I bought 4 years ago is still kicking well and doesn't show battery problems. As for overpriced, design innovation and durability all have a price. People who care about these criteria pay the price. People like you buying the cheapest available contribute to lower the quality bar ; basically you tell companies "make crap, as long as it's cheap I'll buy it".

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    3. Re:What's the saying again? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      he is quite wrong.

      the people don't buy the expensive watches because they lose value to nothing in 5 years. quite the opposite.

      the same folks who buy them might keep buying a new apple watch every 2 years. yeah, maybe, MAYBE some dolt thinks that the 10k first run apple watches have some value as collector items later on, but really it's rather unlikely to keep the value due to large product runs and the product being a paper weight 5 years from now. at least an old rolex is a) collectible and b) still works.

      the real threat might be that plenty of folks don't give a shit about buying a swiss watch when they're used to looking up the time from a mobile phone anyways, and thus don't see the point in collectible luxury watches. the chinese market should take care of that for a while though - or rather asian market in general. they think of shit like that as investments and for some reason they think that they will do better in life if they can pose with expensive items. I kid you not, the suckers have clubs for buying expensive shit and then everyone gets a rotated week to wear the expensive watch so they can act like a big shot. it's like timeshare luxury items.

      or a swatch. shows the time anyways.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  22. not at apple's prices by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    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
  23. And the Swiss Franc by BBCWatcher · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  24. This time things are different by iamacat · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:This time things are different by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Except that you don't know that it doesn't have groundbreaking unique features *in* *practice*. One of the really neat things about the original iPhone was the web browser. Other phones had had web browsers for some time, but the Apple one was a whole lot easier to use. If the Apple watch does enough useful things sufficiently easier than other watches, that may work as groundbreaking unique features.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  25. Apple should be so lucky by Dracos · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Apple should be so lucky by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      This is about putting out FUD so the sharks who have set up short positions on Swiss watch companies can rake in some dough.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  26. And yet... by KermodeBear · · Score: 1

    Switzerland exported 28.6 million watches in 2014, none of them with smart capabilities.

    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.
  27. It's Apple getting revenge... by mtippett · · Score: 1

    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..'

    1. Re:It's Apple getting revenge... by countach · · Score: 1

      LOL. More likely they said "Hey we paid all this money to Mondaine for the swiss rail clock rights, let's make more use of it".

  28. How long .... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... will an iWatch last? I don't mean physically break down. I mean become functionally obsolete. How often will one have to 'trade up' to get the latest features or even compatibility with current apps?

    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.
    1. Re:How long .... by countach · · Score: 1

      Like the iPhone, every 2-3 years probably. More often if you want to be bleeding edge.

  29. Porsche station wagons not threatened by perpenso · · Score: 1

    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. :-)

    1. Re:Porsche station wagons not threatened by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The Porsche SUV is the only one threatened.

      Because it was the one being bought by pretentious idiots who can't drive. Same as Teslas.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Porsche station wagons not threatened by avandesande · · Score: 1

      I think the battery life is a deal breaker. Suppose you fall asleep with the watch on and forget to recharge it- you get on the subway the next morning and notice it is dead. Now what? It's kind of embarrassing to be walking around with a dead watch so you take it off and put it in your pocket and it falls out or you forget where it is or you sit on it and its bands are mashed up. After this happens a few times the watch will be sitting in your desk drawer.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
  30. Water: 3 feet for 30 minutes ? by perpenso · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Water: 3 feet for 30 minutes ? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      So basically, safe in the rain, don't wear it in the bath.

      Not too unreasonable, although it doesn't compare well to jewellery watches (e.g. my solar powered watch is rated to 200m, my mechanical to 100m).

    2. Re:Water: 3 feet for 30 minutes ? by RandomAdam · · Score: 1

      Yes it did achieve the rating but apple does not "encourage" users to test this....I guess it would be fine in the shower but not the bath or swimming pool.

      --
      @Random_Adam

      Sometimes a sig doesn't have to be funny!!
  31. Needs a battery life of at least a year... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... before I will ever even consider one.

    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.

    1. Re:Needs a battery life of at least a year... by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I don't wear my watch when I'm sat down, let alone overnight. So a wirelessly charged watch could be charged every time I go to bed without any additional hassle for me.

      That's still a lot longer than 18 hours though, and I'd probably stick with one of my other watches when away for the weekend.

  32. Swiss watches need to get thinner by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

    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.

    1. Re:Swiss watches need to get thinner by geekmux · · Score: 1

      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.

      I know what you mean with this FAT watch fashion, but I really didn't think it had eclipsed entire catalogs.

      I guess I should have gotten a clue when I walked through the Invicta store. They've always had some crazy lines, but there wasn't a damn model in there that didn't look deep-sea diver capable. Ridiculous.

      And honestly, the future is bleak for simple timepieces. It will likely be inevitable that your smartphone will completely live on your wrist in the future. This will drive future generations back to wearing something on their wrists, but it probably won't be a simple well-made timepiece. It will be something you rent every two years. Sad, I know.

  33. Re:Is there really that much involved besides look by thegarbz · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  34. Opportunity for a cleaner watch by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 2

    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.

  35. It's all about variety of Apps. by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    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
  36. Not much of a threat by AaronW · · Score: 2

    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.
  37. Re:Seriously doubt it. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    I didn't wear one from about '08-'12, I got a new one then, and I miss it when I forget to put it on.

    It's nice to check the time on the wrist.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  38. He's an idiot... by bradley13 · · Score: 2

    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.
    1. Re:He's an idiot... by sudon't · · Score: 1

      I think you're spot-on about the watch market.
      As for not understanding the Apple Kool Aid, their products do work better. I mean, you've used Windows, right? But what Apple does best is, to be well ahead of everyone else. Most of the "other products" are direct copes of Apple products. When the first Mac came out, everyone else, the few using computers, were still typing commands. Windows was a direct rip-off of Mac OS. Same with Android. It looks quite a bit like iOS. Apple "invented" the smart phone, then the imitators came. Much of what everyone takes for granted these days (in computing) was brought to us by Apple.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    2. Re:He's an idiot... by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You're holding "don't work any better" wrong.

      In any product that has features, the good questions to ask are what the features are and how easy are they to use. If the average purchaser finds it too onerous to use a feature, it might as well not be there. The original iPhone didn't do anything that other smartphones didn't already, but its features were more usable, and for practical purposes for many people it did have features nothing else did. I can program very comfortably with separate windows with vim, g++, gdb, etc. on my screen, and I can do pretty much what Visual Studio can do (with better standards support), so would you say that Visual Studio didn't work any better than my collection of xterms?

      "Marketing" is the geek version of "the god of the gaps". If something sells better than a typical geek expects, he tends to blame marketing or stupid purchasers rather than wondering why the thing might be better than the competition.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  39. Re:Swiss bank accounts - huh? by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.
  40. No, it needs long-range wireless charging by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    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.'"
    1. Re:No, it needs long-range wireless charging by mark-t · · Score: 1

      It's not realistic to keep it going for a year

      As the battery in my current watch, which does everything I really need a watch to do and several things that I don't, but are nice to have, lasts about 5 years, I don't think asking for one full year is out of line. Either battery tech needs to improve, or they need to improve the technology's power consumption.

  41. Re:Seriously doubt it. by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

    It's nice to check the time on the wrist.

    What's even nicer is not structuring your life such that you need to care what time it is all the time. I don't know about yours, but my phone will give me reminders to let me know what time it is, so that I don't have to keep checking it to see if it's time to do something yet.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  42. Re:Seriously doubt it. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    That's actually not a terrible point, but would be even better handled with a smartwatch I'd think.

    Also, some of us like to know how much longer we'll be waiting, or at work, or etc. While truly not needing to worry about time would be excellent, if I'm just chilling at home, and am meeting someone at 8, I may want to know if I have time to vacuum before I start getting ready or not, I don't see how notifications could tell me that.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  43. been said before by pbjones · · Score: 1

    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.
  44. I wouldn't spend a fortune on a watch, but by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    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.

  45. I call bullshit by geekmux · · Score: 2

    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.

    1. Re:I call bullshit by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      You will notice that Apple has shown a great deal of ability in selling things people who aren't iFans want. iFans had nothing to do with the iPod success, since there were so few people who bought Apple stuff compared to the number who bought iPods. It's continued with the iPhone and iPad, things that sell well to people who don't use Macs.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    2. Re:I call bullshit by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      You will notice that Apple has shown a great deal of ability in selling things people who aren't iFans want. iFans had nothing to do with the iPod success, since there were so few people who bought Apple stuff compared to the number who bought iPods.

      Ssh! You'll harsh their buzz, man, and Hatorade isn't free.

      You also have to wonder, if all that separates mediocre product offerings from billions in quarterly profits is marketing....why hasn't anyone else done it? It's not like Apple has snipers stationed along Madison Avenue, thus keeping HP from sharking up the markets for mp3 players, phones, and now watches.

    3. Re:I call bullshit by geekmux · · Score: 1

      You will notice that Apple has shown a great deal of ability in selling things people who aren't iFans want. iFans had nothing to do with the iPod success, since there were so few people who bought Apple stuff compared to the number who bought iPods. It's continued with the iPhone and iPad, things that sell well to people who don't use Macs.

      It think it's a bit early to be calling the smart watch a success from any vendor. Apple might appear flawless in their marketing execution, but that hardly means every product is a home run.

      The iPod was successful because of a $49 starting price point for a device that was an accessory to another device (generic computer) that 99% of consumers owned already.

      The iWatch is a $500 accessory that only works very well with an $500 iPhone.

      Because of that considerable difference, let's just see how the market takes off with $500 watches. Or not.

  46. Apples and Oranges by some+old+guy · · Score: 1

    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.
  47. Only if it's bulletproof. LITERALLY bulletproof. by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 1

    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.

  48. Re:Old things by Framboise · · Score: 1

    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. .

  49. The new iPad by MeesterCat · · Score: 1

    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.
  50. Could be the wrong move. by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    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
  51. 18 hours? Really? by lophophore · · Score: 1

    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
  52. Who to by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    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
  53. Re:Why do people by Apple products ? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

    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.

    It's remarkably simple really, the devices are pretty and they sell them to idiots.

    --
    Wanna buy a shirt?
    https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  54. Re:Is there really that much involved besides look by Talderas · · Score: 1

    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
  55. Re:Swiss bank accounts - huh? by Cederic · · Score: 1

    Chocolate! Thank you for chocolate, and the watches.

    Hmm. http://choconet1.com/chocolate...

  56. The other Swiss export by Anarchitektur · · Score: 1

    Until there's an iKnife, at least the Swiss have another export to fall back on.

  57. The end is nigh! by jandersen · · Score: 1

    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.

  58. Apple watch offers nothing new by walterbyrd · · Score: 2

    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

    1. Re:Apple watch offers nothing new by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Irony: poo pooing Apple for being a derivative latecomer while using a page about the Newton to do so.

  59. Me thinks by ttyX · · Score: 1

    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).

  60. The Apple Watch is not aimed at men. by random+coward · · Score: 2

    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.

  61. Re:The Swatch? by random+coward · · Score: 1

    The Swatch did save the Swiss watch industry though.

  62. the only watch I'd have a use for .... by nblender · · Score: 1

    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?

  63. Oblig XKCD by irrational_design · · Score: 2

    I have to assume that yesterday's XKCD was aimed squarely at the iWatch.

  64. Re:Old things by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    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'
  65. Re:LOL! by macs4all · · Score: 1

    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.

  66. A little background on Swiss watches... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    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 :-)

  67. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  68. "Repent, Harlequin!" Said the Ticktockman by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    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

  69. Re:Is there really that much involved besides look by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    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.

  70. You are insane if you think Tesla by Brannon · · Score: 1

    presents no threat to Porsche. Absolutely insane.

  71. iPod, iPhone, iPad. by Brannon · · Score: 1

    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.

  72. Swatch may disappear, but not real wristwatches. by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

    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
  73. Why would anyone buy a watch... by andyteleco · · Score: 1

    ...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.

  74. Fears are overstated. by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

    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.