Slashdot Mirror


Apple Is Back To Being the World's Top Wearable Maker (techcrunch.com)

Apple is once again the biggest selling producer of wearables after its third-generation Apple Watch, released in September, helped it pip China's Xiaomi to the post. TechCrunch reports: The new device, Apple's first that connects to the internet without being tethered to a smartphone, took the U.S. mobile giant to 3.9 million shipments in the recent Q3 2017, according to new data from Canalys. The firm estimates that the gen-three version accounted for just 800,000 shipments, due to supply issues, which bodes well for Apple coming into the lucrative holiday season. That figure was a big jump on 2.8 million shipments one year previous. It also gave Apple 23 percent of the market, putting it fractionally ahead of the 21 percent for Xiaomi, the Chinese firm that was briefly top of the industry for the first time in the previous quarter. Apple's wearable division has enjoyed something of a renaissance this year, grabbing the top spot in Q1 for overall wearables the first time since Q3 2015. CEO Tim Cook said in Apple's most recent earnings report that Watch sales were up by 50 percent for the third consecutive quarter thanks to a focus on health services. As for the others: Fitbit took third in Q3 2017 for 20 percent, while phone makers Huawei (six percent) and Samsung (five percent) were some way behind in rounding out the top five. In proof of considerable fragmentation within the industry, "other brands" accounted for a dominant 25 percent, according to Canalys' figures.

48 comments

  1. unteathered by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    > The new device, Apple's first that connects to the internet without being tethered to a smartphone [...]

    About damned time. I'm currently wearing a Gear S that's been able to do that since 2014.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    1. Re:unteathered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      An what an unsightly lump that Samsung Gear was. Of course Apple could have done that in the first Apple Watch as well, but they waited until they could fit it in the small and thin apple watch package.

    2. Re:unteathered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet I'd bet that most of us would be happier with a device that doesn't require Internet connectivity to be usable... smart phone or not.

      I can't describe the number of Internet of Trash items that didn't work after a hurricane hit my home this year. I had generator power to run and charge anything in my house after the winds died down.. yet after Irma damage kept me off the grid for a full week because my ISP wasn't reachable and the working cell towers were overloaded.. to the point where I spent hours trying to send texts to family members and loved ones that I was alive and well... only to have at best sporadic results.

      Another sheeple device congratulations to those willing to deal with the long-term limitations of its funcationality. You paid real money for something that can become unusable with a simple removal of connectivity to the mother ship.

      =P

    3. Re:unteathered by kamapuaa · · Score: 1

      Right. Also electrical devices are all garbage, because during a storm the electricity gets knocked out. Plus, why by a house, when a hurricane could blow the roof off? Get with it sheeple! Now I won't buy anything unless it can be powered by hamsters in a wheel or sticking electrodes into a lemon.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    4. Re:unteathered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I recognize this is English, but...

    5. Re: unteathered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because of course people would rather not have it if it doesn't suit their fashion sense. Anyone who likes a car produced today could argue that the car industry should not have produced any cars prior to the first year they think cars looked any good.

    6. Re:unteathered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A less sarcastic way to say it would have been, just because things might not work in an emergency doesn't mean they're valueless. People will buy an Apple watch with the understanding that it won't work with a once-every-30-years type calamity, because it is understood not to be of critical importance. Whereas of course you would want a pacemaker (for example) to be able to work well throughout an emergency.

    7. Re:unteathered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well... it is with wearable as with all other tech...

      until APPLE makes it... it APPARENTLY does not exist. Period.

      therefore Apple has invented everything and using Apple gear is the ONLY way to stay on the cutting edge technologically

      Q.E.D. - your Samsung Gear S does either
      a) not exist OR
      b) it will somehow be made next year, making it a shameless ripoff of Apple's products

      Indeed, the Apple Steve Jobs reality distortion field is still at full strength, despite that Jobs is no longer alive.

    8. Re:unteathered by antdude · · Score: 1

      How are their battery lives though?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    9. Re: unteathered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please, Samsung rushed that thing out the door because the rumors were everywhere that Apple was going to enter that market. They made a piece of crap rather than taking their time. Then, they repeated that piece of crap FIVE times within just a year...and then the Apple Watch came along and made it nothing but a memory.

    10. Re:unteathered by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      How are their battery lives though?

      With everything turned on, I'm getting about two days on a charge. It's a 3 year old battery, though. I'm thinking about changing it out and see if that improves.

      The later versions have front facing cameras (do Dick Tracy - like facetime) wireless charging and look more like a real watch, (which is attractive to me) but I don't have a good enough use case to warrant the cost of trading up, yet. Also, I'm not wedded to Samsung -- am also interested in the Garmin with GPS incorporated into the watch. It'll take more research and a little more cost. I don't buy stuff just to have it; the device has to fill a genuine need. The Apple watch is not a contender, though, for the simple reason that I don't carry an iphone.

      The objective is to not need to carry the smartphone unless I really need something with a larger screen. My use case for the Gear S was that if the phone gets out of bluetooth range, calls to the phone are automatically routed to the Gear over cellular. (And this works really well, in my experience.) So when I leave the phone on the charger (happens 3 or 4 times a month) or at my desk when I'm at lunch, I don't miss calls. And before you ask, devices like watches and tablets with sim cards are priced differently (at least, with T-mobile) than phones. I think I pay $10 a month flat fee for the watch.

      The Apple watch, I believe has been marketed differently -- it was never intended to be a stand-alone device, but only ever as an accessory for the phone, something to make the iphone a more attractive purchase. I can see where Apple would be really reluctant to give it stand-alone capabilities. It doesn't match their marketing paradigm. I think this is the real reason Apple was reluctant to incorporate cellular capability into the watch. Bulk and battery life are marketing fud.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    11. Re:unteathered by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      facetime

      That was my favorite part!

    12. Re:unteathered by TheGrimmReaper · · Score: 1

      so... it only matters who does it first? Well then... about your android phone...

  2. Bullshit by sexconker · · Score: 4, Funny

    The top wearable maker has got to be Durex or Trojan.

    1. Re:Bullshit by sit1963nz · · Score: 1

      Looking at some people, I don't think they were worn enough.

    2. Re: Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They were, uh, holding it wrong.

    3. Re:Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The top wearable maker has got to be Durex or Trojan.

      Sure, but what is the resale value of their products compared to Apple?

  3. cant wait for apple dumbphone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    now im just waiting for apple to make a non-smartphone based on the LTE watch hardware/OS. i wants my dumbphone!

    1. Re:cant wait for apple dumbphone by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      the watch has apps or at least app stubs however you like to call them..

      a "featurephone" ? nah. whats the point. even featurephones have apps though, however you can't multitask on them(according to the 15 year old spec about what is what).

      on a related note, the first iphone didn't fill the requirements for a smartphone in analyst categories prior to iphone. neither did wp7.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  4. Biggest fish in a small pond by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    I own an Apple Watch, but I only know of two other people in my circle who have one - and one of those is my wife.

    I do see them around occasionally - but it's quite obvious it's a niche market. What's anecdotally more notable is that I see significantly fewer fitness trackers than I did a couple years ago. I suspect that a lot of people simply gave up on them; and at least some of the remainder replaced them with a smart watch.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was at a company meeting recently ( not Apple ) of ~12 people (some local, some from the parent office). 5 were wearing Apple watches. Just another anecdote that doesn't mean much - as yours.

    2. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by MouseR · · Score: 1

      Been an Apple developer since 1988. Coded on them since 1982. Stuck with the brand through salt and grime. Now been an iPhone developer for 10 years.

      Know what? Can't be brought to give a hoot about a watch that will die of obsolescence in ~4 years and can't hold a full 24h.

    3. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What you may be neglecting is that what is learned today can be applied in another way tomorrow. Sure it's a watch and may not have mass appeal, but as Apple learns to miniaturize components and apply them in different ways that are not attached to your wrist, there are far more opportunities ahead. I'd call it an investment in research that is also paying for itself.

    4. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by jshackney · · Score: 1

      The benefit of fitness trackers goes to agencies collecting and selling the data. Not to the generator of the data.

    5. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by kamapuaa · · Score: 2

      This is stupid. People can receive measurable health benefits from wearables, while I doubt fitbit is getting rich from that "some guy did 6,800 steps today" money.

      --
      Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
    6. Re: Biggest fish in a small pond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple aren't learning to miniaturise components. They buy everything from their suppliers and do very little actual R&D in house other than UI/UX whatever the fuck that means.

    7. Re: Biggest fish in a small pond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet itâ(TM)s a market pulling in more than the iPod did at peak.

    8. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by maralatho · · Score: 1

      Well, except that his anecdote was probably true.

    9. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by sound+vision · · Score: 0

      But our watch will be beautiful. It will be so big, and so beautiful, the people will have no choice but to buy it. Apple will be the #1 in portables... wearables... cybers... It's the greatest, believe me.

    10. Re: Biggest fish in a small pond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite yet. Probably next year (but getting close). Apple doesnâ(TM)t give details so it has to b guessed. See here for some educated guesswork on when it will probably happen: http://www.asymco.com/2017/11/08/when-watch-surpassed-ipod/

    11. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I like the idea of a smartwatch, but the technology is not there yet. They're at the same stage that the Nokia Communicator was in the smartphone market: they show you that something is possible, but it's not really something you want to carry around. My watch is 5mm thick (close to the upper limit for a thing I can completely forget is on my wrist) and has a battery that lasts 3-5 years. A watch that's more than double that thickness, and doesn't even last a week between charges (sure, I can charge it most nights, but I forget to plug my phone in some days and I'm sure I'd do the same on the watch - I also like my watch working on flights where I'm away from sensible charging facilities for more than 24 hours).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    12. Re:Biggest fish in a small pond by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple likely gets at least $6.7 billion from its wearables sales, most of which are either Airpods or the watch, which seems like a pretty decent size pond.

      What is the size of the Linux support market these days?

  5. Apple saves your life! by labnet · · Score: 1

    Gruen (Australian ABC program that debates how the advertising industry influences you) spent about 5 minutes on the iWatch.
    It said their initial marketing campaign positioning it as a luxury item failed. They couldn't compete with the Rolexes and Breitlings of the world.
    So they have done a major re branding, positioning it as a life saving device.. literally they showed an online ad by apple (only had 1Million views) having real users telling stories about how the watch saved their lives!
    Apparently its working.

    --
    46137
    1. Re: Apple saves your life! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple canâ(TM)t compete with Rolex? Apple passed Rolex in revenue from watches already.

  6. Whores will have their trinkets. by CaffeinatedTech · · Score: 0

    Man I wish Pebble didn't screw up. The market is full of toy smart-watches.

    1. Re:Whores will have their trinkets. by Maavin · · Score: 1

      Amen to that!

      --


      Crivens! I kicked meself in me own heid!
    2. Re:Whores will have their trinkets. by wwphx · · Score: 1

      I'm still wearing mine (Time Steel), and will continue to do so until it dies. I may look to buy another one, but I think I'll wait until this one dies and then reevaluate how support is doing.

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
  7. I wanted the Apple Watch, but noped out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wanted the apple watch, but it's too big and has too little battery life.

    Which is funny because I bought the iPhone and thought it was too big, but I wanted longer battery life as well.

    I actually find that the FitBit has a usable battery life, but even then, I opted for the fitness tracker, not the watch because I didn't like the size of the watch.

    What Apple should do, is find a way to put the battery in the strap.

    1. Re:I wanted the Apple Watch, but noped out by wwphx · · Score: 1

      That's the thing that I don't get: your watch having to live on a charger overnight just doesn't appeal. I can get two weeks out of my Pebble if I turn it off at night. And the cost of the Apple Watch makes me flinch.

      --
      When you sympathize with stupidity, you start thinking like an idiot.
  8. Battery life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All itâ(TM)s features are great and good enough for me but boy the battery life really sucks. They really need to add kinetic charging or whole room charging or fuck-it both. We have the technology.

  9. I have never seen a single person own one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But I'm living in a >1 million people city in Germany, where most people haven't yet gone full retard.
    We're working hard on catching down though.

    But on an even more serious note: Who the hell is /stupid/ enough to boy that crap? That's even below "voter" level stupidity!

  10. An Apple a day... by MerlTurkin · · Score: 0

    Keeps your wallet Emp-Tay.

  11. Getting rich from trackers by DrYak · · Score: 1

    while I doubt fitbit is getting rich from that "some guy did 6,800 steps today" money.

    Remember that a lot of countries still don't have universal true healthcare (unlike a sizeable chunk of Europe, Canada, etc.)
    and that includes the US (and a few other developed countries aren't quite there yet like Switzerland).

    There, healthcare is still managed by for-profit companies.

    Their main concern sadly isn't to spread the cost across an as large population as possible to diminish the financial hit of an individual having an unexpected medical problem (that's the whole purpose of an actual, real insurance),
    their main concern is generating as much profits as possible (like any for-profit company), and dividends for their share-holders (if it's publicly traded).

    They mostly do it by trying to reject as many applicants as possible who have risks of having actual health problem, and trying to attract as many healthy people that will never get sick ever in their entire life.

    The kind of data gathered by sports-tracker can be used to feed whatever complex big-data analysis pipeline they use to help them predict which are the cheapest clients. Meaning that they are ready to pay quite a lot of money to Fitbit, Apple, etc. in exchange of collaborations in data gathering.

    (And give something stupid and shiny, like a 10% of the monthly fee of the health plan, or even a one-time 50% of the smartwatch's price, to persuade the client to sign and accept health data sharing with the health insurance company)

    So yeah, in the end Fitbit *CAN* get rich from that "some guy definitely isn't doing a lot of steps on a regular basis", by reselling it to health insurance companies.

    People can receive measurable health benefits from wearables

    (BTW, how much it benefits health and if it actually measurable isn't clearly proven yet.)

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  12. "Pip" by Verdatum · · Score: 2
    Pip: v. "to beat by a narrow margin" (British)

    I learned something today!