- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: First day of Apple Watch preorders: 957,000
Posted on 4/15/15 at 9:20 am to Korkstand
Posted on 4/15/15 at 9:20 am to Korkstand
quote:
Korkstand
quote:
What do you expect when A MILLION PEOPLE IN ONE DAY preorder a somewhat pricey (yet non-upgradeable and disposable) product without ever having seen or touched one and who aren't sure what they'll use it for, simply because it has an apple on it?
Can you name me one lux timepiece brand (Tag, Rolex, Cartier, Omega) that can be cracked open and upgraded without having to file a warranty claim? Can you point out what those upgrades are or would be?
Now, can you honestly tell me that many, many people with the ability to afford them don't buy Omegas, Tags, Rolexes, etc sight unseen after simply seeing one in magazines and then traveling to the store to pick it up? Or that there are MASSIVE amounts of used/pre-owned sales using watch websites, E-Bay, and the like for watches that folks have never seen or touched the watch they're buying before?
Your takedown makes no sense because it isn't rooted in any sort've logic.
3
Posted on 4/15/15 at 9:36 am to GFunk
All of this back-and-forth revolves around Marketing. The funny thing is that Google aficionados consider Apple to be all Marketing versus Android which is just "better" because of being customizable. Endlessly so.
The irony is that this ability to customize was a decision from a marketing standpoint just as much as anything Apple's done. It's just that the segment of consumers who Google's targeting (another marketing decision) are fervent believers in the ability to customize.
The three ways you can market a product are by (in no order):
1.) Operational Excellence
2.) Customer Intimacy
3.) Product Leadership
Apple has used its Operational Excellence and a long-ago established fervent level of Customer Intimacy to make products that it could eventually market to a deep and wide market segment or demographic.
Tim Cook and Apple have leveraged their ability to source materials and produce well manufactured pieces of hardware married to software designed to run in a closed ecosystem especially for that hardware. This ability to focus on both the product and a wide userbase is very uncommon in marketing.
Google takes a different approach. They appeal on cost and on product differentiation in a unique way. You can essentially BYOD on Android, which creates competitive (read: lower) cost for consumers and more customization.
Both approaches have proven fantastic successes. But at the end of the day, Google fans who harp on Apple success as a product of Marketing are ignoring the distinct, specific choices Google has made-simply using other aspects of marketing philosophy-to fuel their decision-making in terms of their products direction.
They're both extremely successful marketers.
The irony is that this ability to customize was a decision from a marketing standpoint just as much as anything Apple's done. It's just that the segment of consumers who Google's targeting (another marketing decision) are fervent believers in the ability to customize.
The three ways you can market a product are by (in no order):
1.) Operational Excellence
2.) Customer Intimacy
3.) Product Leadership
Apple has used its Operational Excellence and a long-ago established fervent level of Customer Intimacy to make products that it could eventually market to a deep and wide market segment or demographic.
Tim Cook and Apple have leveraged their ability to source materials and produce well manufactured pieces of hardware married to software designed to run in a closed ecosystem especially for that hardware. This ability to focus on both the product and a wide userbase is very uncommon in marketing.
Google takes a different approach. They appeal on cost and on product differentiation in a unique way. You can essentially BYOD on Android, which creates competitive (read: lower) cost for consumers and more customization.
Both approaches have proven fantastic successes. But at the end of the day, Google fans who harp on Apple success as a product of Marketing are ignoring the distinct, specific choices Google has made-simply using other aspects of marketing philosophy-to fuel their decision-making in terms of their products direction.
They're both extremely successful marketers.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 10:02 am to GFunk
quote:
Can you name me one lux timepiece brand (Tag, Rolex, Cartier, Omega) that can be cracked open and upgraded without having to file a warranty claim? Can you point out what those upgrades are or would be?
Now, can you honestly tell me that many, many people with the ability to afford them don't buy Omegas, Tags, Rolexes, etc sight unseen after simply seeing one in magazines and then traveling to the store to pick it up? Or that there are MASSIVE amounts of used/pre-owned sales using watch websites, E-Bay, and the like for watches that folks have never seen or touched the watch they're buying before?
Your takedown makes no sense because it isn't rooted in any sort've logic.
So you're comparing the apple watch to Omegas, Tags, Rolexes, etc...
quote:
makes no sense because it isn't rooted in any sort've logic.
eta
This post was edited on 4/15/15 at 10:04 am
Posted on 4/15/15 at 10:10 am to hawgfaninc
quote:
hawgfaninc
quote:
So you're comparing the apple watch to Omegas, Tags, Rolexes, etc...
He said that the watch could not be upgraded. I was asking him if other watches could be? If it's a black mark against the Apple Watch I'd like to compare to other watches. It's a smart watch but its a timepiece as well.
But let's go one step further and go away from the lux brand segments I mentioned so that you won't snicker as much. Were any other smartphones built for expandability or upgrading? I'm genuinely curious.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 10:18 am to GFunk
quote:I'm glad you asked this question. Luxury timepieces are timeless. They last for generations, and do not require upgrades. Any smartwatch will be outdated in a couple years. This is why I was certain Apple's watch would be upgradeable (just swap out the SoC module) since the "luxury" cases are so expensive. This doesn't appear to be the case, though.
Can you name me one lux timepiece brand (Tag, Rolex, Cartier, Omega) that can be cracked open and upgraded without having to file a warranty claim? Can you point out what those upgrades are or would be?
quote:Those are traditional watches.. they tell you what time it is, maybe the date and a few other things. The decision to buy these watches is done with the knowledge that you are buying a fashion accessory that will last a lifetime. It will do what it was designed to do until the day you die. Apple's watch will only do what it was designed to do until it stops being supported by some future version of the phone it must be paired with, or until its limited functionality is well surpassed by future versions that make it obsolete. Have you ever seen an obsolete Rolex?
Now, can you honestly tell me that many, many people with the ability to afford them don't buy Omegas, Tags, Rolexes, etc sight unseen after simply seeing one in magazines and then traveling to the store to pick it up?
quote:It is rooted in the solid logic that a smartwatch cannot be compared to traditional luxury timepieces as Apple has convinced you that they can. This comes back to the "sheep" stuff.
Your takedown makes no sense because it isn't rooted in any sort've logic.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 10:26 am to GFunk
quote:
But let's go one step further and go away from the lux brand segments I mentioned so that you won't snicker as much.
why did you use those luxury watch brands in the first place?
quote:
I was asking him if other watches could be? If it's a black mark against the Apple Watch I'd like to compare to other watches. It's a smart watch but its a timepiece as well.
If the apple watch was upgradable, the price apple is asking would be more understandable. as it stands it's an overpriced and nonupgradable piece of tech that will be outdated soon. meanwhile the other nonupgradable smartwatches are cheaper and can do the same thing as the apple watch.
quote:
Were any other smartphones built for expandability or upgrading?
LINK
Posted on 4/15/15 at 10:32 am to GFunk
quote:Excluding Project Ara, no, because in most cases this is pointless. There are lots of reasons why it's better to replace the entire device, and I'm sure you can deduce many of them if you think about it. The bottom line is the cost/benefit just doesn't make any sense. Now, it would make sense if the device costs 5 figures, but all sources indicate Apple didn't go this route. A $17k Apple Watch is just as disposable as the $350 version, and in a few years it will only be worth its weight in gold (hint: it's nowhere near $17k). A true luxury watch may even increase in value, because it will never be obsolete.
Were any other smartphones built for expandability or upgrading? I'm genuinely curious.
quote:Repeating this over and over won't make it true.
It's a smart watch but its a timepiece as well.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 10:43 am to TigerGman
quote:Doing the same as everyone else is not what makes someone a "sheep". Most people use Windows simply because most people use Windows. It makes the world go 'round. It's how things get done cost-efficiently. It gets the job done. It's not the size of the herd that defines a sheep, it's the sheep.
No. The confusion is yours. The irony is probably 95% of the "Apple fans are Sheep" crowd are Windows users. They accuse fanbois of being sheep when they're part of the biggest heard of sheep in the world and too myopic to even realize it.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 10:46 am to Korkstand
quote:
Any smartwatch will be outdated in a couple years. This is why I was certain Apple's watch would be upgradeable (just swap out the SoC module) since the "luxury" cases are so expensive. This doesn't appear to be the case, though.
exactly.
i would go so far as to say the v1 apple watch SoC module will be outdated in 6-8 months. do you really want to buy a v1 watch where most of the money you spent is in the 'fine jewelry' component..arguably the part that should last for 10+ years?
this is the stupidest thing apple has ever done if they dont divorce the 'luxury gold bands' from the computer because they know any tech released today is going to be obsolete in short order..particularly a new form factor like a watch.
eta but i'm the guy who paid $70 for an LG and regret NOTHING.
if i want i can swap out the band using ANY COMMON BAND MANUFACTURER for $30 or less.
nothing proprietary about it.
This post was edited on 4/15/15 at 10:48 am
Posted on 4/15/15 at 1:05 pm to CAD703X
I think the interesting thought is that a lot of Apple detractors in this thread have ignored how long Apple went between updating Apple TV. The current rumor is that they'll update it in June.
But outside of the version that made 1080p standard in 2012, they haven't updated the styling or exterior since 2010, which is 5 years. An astoundingly long time to only update Software.
Yet even now it's a significant if not dominant player in set-top streaming devices. With zero hardware upgrades outside of the one 1080p upgrade in 2012.
So 5 years without a cosmetic upgrade and 5 years with nothing but one interior update from Apple. I think while the SoC argument may be valid, it appears there's precedent for Apple in creating a product-even a "hobby" like Apple TV-and being content to innovate through software updates and as a CDN.
But outside of the version that made 1080p standard in 2012, they haven't updated the styling or exterior since 2010, which is 5 years. An astoundingly long time to only update Software.
Yet even now it's a significant if not dominant player in set-top streaming devices. With zero hardware upgrades outside of the one 1080p upgrade in 2012.
So 5 years without a cosmetic upgrade and 5 years with nothing but one interior update from Apple. I think while the SoC argument may be valid, it appears there's precedent for Apple in creating a product-even a "hobby" like Apple TV-and being content to innovate through software updates and as a CDN.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 2:22 pm to GFunk
There was actually a CPU die shrink update in 2013 I believe.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 2:32 pm to colorchangintiger
I saw there were some internals in 2013. You're correct. But the external shell hasn't changed in 5 years. The point being driven at here is its not without precedent for Apple to not create subsequent form factor iterations.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 2:34 pm to GFunk
Apple TV isn't about selling hardware. It's a content delivery pitch for the Apple ecosystem. The only reason it hasn't received yearly iterative hardware updates is because the hardware itself does not make them money. It's the lowest margin item Apple sells.
EDIT: My point being, the Apple watch is sold at even higher margins that smartphones. The hardware is already pushing the limits of the form factor, and its capabilities are pushing the limits of the hardware. The watch does not have the same business model as Apple TV. I would expect to see Apple Watch generations released at a frequency somewhere between the iPhone/iPad and some of their Macs.
EDIT: My point being, the Apple watch is sold at even higher margins that smartphones. The hardware is already pushing the limits of the form factor, and its capabilities are pushing the limits of the hardware. The watch does not have the same business model as Apple TV. I would expect to see Apple Watch generations released at a frequency somewhere between the iPhone/iPad and some of their Macs.
This post was edited on 4/15/15 at 2:42 pm
Posted on 4/15/15 at 3:41 pm to ILikeLSUToo
Korkstand and ILikeLSUToo make good rebuttals to my points. We'll have to see what the market will bear.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 5:19 pm to GFunk
quote:
Yet even now it's a significant if not dominant player in set-top streaming devices.
They were never dominant and last year they were pushed to 3rd. They are trending the wrong direction.
I guess I'm a detractor because I don't make up shite.
ETA:
Apple TV will most likely move down to 4th now that Amazon is balls deep.
This post was edited on 4/15/15 at 5:22 pm
Posted on 4/15/15 at 5:47 pm to Jim Rockford
Gentlemen, I didn't want to start a thread about this, but I'm looking for a little help..
I have an iphone5s with a life proof case but my case is on my last nerve.. I have major problems hearing people and being heard while making phone calls..
Are there any cases comparable to the lifeproof as far as protection but with better call quality?
I have an iphone5s with a life proof case but my case is on my last nerve.. I have major problems hearing people and being heard while making phone calls..
Are there any cases comparable to the lifeproof as far as protection but with better call quality?
Posted on 4/15/15 at 5:50 pm to Negative Nomad
I'm one of those people that can go an entire day off without looking at my phone, so getting text alerts would be nice, but with the battery life, it would end up dying and I'd never remember to recharge it to keep it useful.
So, till the battery life improves dramatically, I'll be smart-watch free.
So, till the battery life improves dramatically, I'll be smart-watch free.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 7:02 pm to BuckeyeFan87
quote:
So, till the battery life improves dramatically, I'll be smart-watch free
Lookup pebble smartwatches - 6 to 10 day battery life depending on what version you go with.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 9:24 pm to junkfunky
Amazon started the Fire Stick but they are fourth. Google did overtake Apple for 2nd, but something tells me Apple has something compelling for June planned that will regain some foothold in terms of market share, and have folks scrambling to supplement content, specs or otherwise.
As far as being dominant, Roku has more offerings but Apple TV has a very healthy share that will more than likely trend back up after refreshing it's specs and product line for the first time in six years outside of incremental internal improvements.
We shall see.
As far as being dominant, Roku has more offerings but Apple TV has a very healthy share that will more than likely trend back up after refreshing it's specs and product line for the first time in six years outside of incremental internal improvements.
We shall see.
Posted on 4/15/15 at 9:45 pm to GFunk
It will be interesting to see if Apple does anything with PrimeSense's tech. It was PrimeSense that powered the original Microsoft Kinect, and Apple bought the company a couple of years ago.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News