03-28-2015, 08:21 PM
deckeda wrote:
Apple's putting modern materials and manufacturing into a luxury watch run by a computer. I don't see that as much different today, especially at the $350 starting point. The much greater expense of the "top" model is different in that you're buying materials, not performance advantages, but that's the luxury aspect that was always the goal.
Have you used a lot of smart watches to compare it to the theoretical advantages of the Apple watch? Even the base model is more expensive than most other devices in its class. And I like the though that luxury is the goal, but that's still somehow similar to the original Apple computers. That's so opposite of the original Apple devices it's actually comical reading the comparison. Apple is never going to be the cheapest device in any given market, but stupidly expensive for little advantage was supposed to be FUD, not a positive company talking point.
Another thought, the Apple 1 and 2 were pretty early in on the whole PC market, Apple's smart watch is at least a decade late. Apple is swooping in with a luxury product that seems to largely compete on strength of logo. I'll pass, but reserve the right to change my tune once the device that everyone keeps talking about actually freaking ships. Two announcements in six months and still not shipping? Yeah, that isn't a cynical attempt to keep the product not actually shipping in the news.
I don't get it. How can Woz be wrong here?