There are several reasons why Apple users are tempted to part with their US$10,000 to get their hands on an Apple Watch. The Cupertino company will definitely encourage the consumers without presenting why they should not because it is a pretty interesting piece of technology.
However, all logic points to the argument that avid Apple followers should spend only hundreds, not thousands, on an Apple Watch.
There are three arguments that advocate for sound financial decisions when it comes to buy the fancier Apple Watches or not.
There is a sizable mismatch between cost and value.
Depending on the user's budget, they could argue than any of the watches in the Apple Watch lineup are expensive. But that goes double for the top-of-the-line models, where they are paying a lot of money for a watch without that many features. It’s easy to argue that the Apple Watch will just become more useful as developers build more apps for it.
But even Apple isn’t sure yet what the smartwatch’s “killer app” will be, and the first generation of the Apple Watch will likely prove to be very underpowered for the great apps that will eventually emerge, a generation or two into the Apple Watch product lineup.
That problem doesn’t make it a flawed gadget, just a first-generation one, and almost everyone pretty much never recommend buying the pricey, gold-plated first generation of anything. The real issue with the cost/value proposition of the high-end Apple Watch models is that consumers are paying a lot of money for a gadget that isn’t any better in terms of functionality than the affordable versions.
It’s subject to planned obsolescence.
Inextricably tied to the mismatch between the Apple Watch’s cost and value is the fact that the smartwatch is going to depreciate in value and functionality very quickly. Like any Apple product, users will likely be able to get years of use out of the Apple Watch if they don’t mind passing up on upgrades.
But just as the iPhone’s hardware better and adds new features each year, expect new generations of Apple Watches to steadily outpace the one you made a huge investment to purchase. Eventually, the first-generation Apple Watches likely won’t be compatible with the newest software, and after that, Apple will likely quietly remove them from its website as generations of new watches take their place.
Think of the problem this way: today, eight years after the original iPhone was introduced, it would be practically unusable when one take into account the demands of modern apps and connectivity. The Apple Watch will likely be the same eight or ten years from now — regardless of whether consumers paid US$ 350 or US$ 10,000 for it.
This isn’t a new problem, or one that’s unique to the Apple Watch, but it’s a problem everyone should consider if they are thinking of spending a large amount of money on a product that may not last as long as they imagine it will.
The Apple Watch is not built to be an heirloom piece.
Some may argue that it’s unfair to compare the Apple Watch to a traditional timepiece, but since no one is likely to wear both a luxury watch and the Apple Watch, at least at the same time, it’s a comparison that bears making. The Apple Watch is constructed as a piece of technology, not as a beautiful accessory meant to be worn for a lifetime and passed on to your son. Even if the technology wouldn’t become quickly outdated, the Apple Watch won’t have the staying power of a classic wristwatch.
For that reason, the only viable thing to do is to buy a real watch. It may not enable users to track their workouts, call their mom, or share their heartbeat with their girlfriends, but a classic watch that’s built to last will not only work today, but will be just as good decades from the day they bought it. It’s not just about the money — they can find well-made timepieces at prices both above and below what Apple’s asking for its high-end Apple Watches — but about the fact that a luxury watch should continue to feel like a luxury watch, not an outdated piece of tech, years after the initial investment.
However, all logic points to the argument that avid Apple followers should spend only hundreds, not thousands, on an Apple Watch.
There are three arguments that advocate for sound financial decisions when it comes to buy the fancier Apple Watches or not.
There is a sizable mismatch between cost and value.
Depending on the user's budget, they could argue than any of the watches in the Apple Watch lineup are expensive. But that goes double for the top-of-the-line models, where they are paying a lot of money for a watch without that many features. It’s easy to argue that the Apple Watch will just become more useful as developers build more apps for it.
But even Apple isn’t sure yet what the smartwatch’s “killer app” will be, and the first generation of the Apple Watch will likely prove to be very underpowered for the great apps that will eventually emerge, a generation or two into the Apple Watch product lineup.
That problem doesn’t make it a flawed gadget, just a first-generation one, and almost everyone pretty much never recommend buying the pricey, gold-plated first generation of anything. The real issue with the cost/value proposition of the high-end Apple Watch models is that consumers are paying a lot of money for a gadget that isn’t any better in terms of functionality than the affordable versions.
It’s subject to planned obsolescence.
Inextricably tied to the mismatch between the Apple Watch’s cost and value is the fact that the smartwatch is going to depreciate in value and functionality very quickly. Like any Apple product, users will likely be able to get years of use out of the Apple Watch if they don’t mind passing up on upgrades.
But just as the iPhone’s hardware better and adds new features each year, expect new generations of Apple Watches to steadily outpace the one you made a huge investment to purchase. Eventually, the first-generation Apple Watches likely won’t be compatible with the newest software, and after that, Apple will likely quietly remove them from its website as generations of new watches take their place.
Think of the problem this way: today, eight years after the original iPhone was introduced, it would be practically unusable when one take into account the demands of modern apps and connectivity. The Apple Watch will likely be the same eight or ten years from now — regardless of whether consumers paid US$ 350 or US$ 10,000 for it.
This isn’t a new problem, or one that’s unique to the Apple Watch, but it’s a problem everyone should consider if they are thinking of spending a large amount of money on a product that may not last as long as they imagine it will.
The Apple Watch is not built to be an heirloom piece.
Some may argue that it’s unfair to compare the Apple Watch to a traditional timepiece, but since no one is likely to wear both a luxury watch and the Apple Watch, at least at the same time, it’s a comparison that bears making. The Apple Watch is constructed as a piece of technology, not as a beautiful accessory meant to be worn for a lifetime and passed on to your son. Even if the technology wouldn’t become quickly outdated, the Apple Watch won’t have the staying power of a classic wristwatch.
For that reason, the only viable thing to do is to buy a real watch. It may not enable users to track their workouts, call their mom, or share their heartbeat with their girlfriends, but a classic watch that’s built to last will not only work today, but will be just as good decades from the day they bought it. It’s not just about the money — they can find well-made timepieces at prices both above and below what Apple’s asking for its high-end Apple Watches — but about the fact that a luxury watch should continue to feel like a luxury watch, not an outdated piece of tech, years after the initial investment.
Posts
0 comments
Post a Comment