[jevalladares]

With the invention of mobile phones, watches are now considered more like jewelry. Does anybody think smartwatches will be able to change this perception or just a very cool trend that will eventually be a niche?

[Bigeric23]

I believe the Apple Watch will change the way people look at smartwatches. . . . A few years from now, you'll see many more people wearing these devices. However, I'm not sure smartwatches will ever get to the level of smartphones.

[Ledsteplin]

Generally speaking, watches have been considered jewelry since way before the first computer. The Watch has not changed that one way or another. The Watch will increase the number of smartwatch users for sure, but they will still remain a small niche of the population. Regardless of what Apple puts on the Watch, most people will remain uninterested in a smartwatch. You can't tell it from reading the igadget forums, but go out into the general population and see what's going on. The Watch and smartwatches in general are the farthest thing from the minds of most people. But as for the thread title...watches have been a jewelry accessory for years.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

[Ipheuria]

Generally speaking, watches have been considered jewelry since way before the first computer. The Watch has not changed that one way or another. The Watch will increase the number of smartwatch users for sure, but they will still remain a small niche of the population. Regardless of what Apple puts on the Watch, most people will remain uninterested in a smartwatch. You can't tell it from reading the igadget forums, but go out into the general population and see what's going on. The Watch and smartwatches in general are the farthest thing from the minds of most people. But as for the thread title...watches have been a jewelry accessory for years.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

I agree with you on the fact that watches have always been jewelry at least that was my first thought when I saw the thread title. I disagree with you about the smartwatch's possibility of going mainstream. Before the iPhone smartphones were mostly used by business types. The Blackberrys, HP and Palm gadgets. The iPhone came out and was aimed at consumers instead of enterprise. Android followed in it's footsteps and device manufacturers implimented the Android OS. Now look at smartphones today. I think the Watch has the same oppurtunity of doing that same thing for smartwatches. It will become the standard for Android wear competitors because of it's success based on sales. If Apple was going to stop selling it next year then I could agree that it probably wouldn't make a difference. However I don't think there are many who would think that Apple will not be making Watch for the forseeable future. This is a 1.0 product and just like the apps make the iPhone. As apps come out and new features are added and existing features get better things will change rapidly. An Watch that allows people to open car doors instead of using a key fob, open the garage door/front door just by proximity. There is no way that the mainstream will not want that kind of convenience.

[Just_Me_D]

For all of my life, watches have always been considered jewelry. Go to almost any decent retail store and you will find the watches at the jewelry section. The Watch will not have an effect on that perception. I think it is still trying to find an identity, to be honest. I mean, I don't think of the Watch in the same manner as I do my other watches, even though it can also tell the time. I see it more as a mobile alert system for the wrist, if that makes any sense.

[SprSynJn]

Unless Apple put a solar panel on those things, and drop the price by a couple hundred dollars, I ain't biting. I have no problem using my iPhone to do iPhone things.

[ctt1wbw]

I think the 90s generation considers watches to be jewelry, since they grew up with cell phones and haven't ever known anything else. I hear people who consider themselves to "be in the know" about cell phones and stuff and their first device was an iPhone 3G or a Galaxy 3 or something. They don't even know what vinyl refers to. lol

[kch50428]

Watches have had a jewelry aspect to them for my entire life... And I'm a 60s generation....

[Ledsteplin]

I agree with you on the fact that watches have always been jewelry at least that was my first thought when I saw the thread title. I disagree with you about the smartwatch's possibility of going mainstream. Before the iPhone smartphones were mostly used by business types. The Blackberrys, HP and Palm gadgets. The iPhone came out and was aimed at consumers instead of enterprise. Android followed in it's footsteps and device manufacturers implimented the Android OS. Now look at smartphones today. I think the Watch has the same oppurtunity of doing that same thing for smartwatches. It will become the standard for Android wear competitors because of it's success based on sales. If Apple was going to stop selling it next year then I could agree that it probably wouldn't make a difference. However I don't think there are many who would think that Apple will not be making Watch for the forseeable future. This is a 1.0 product and just like the apps make the iPhone. As apps come out and new features are added and existing features get better things will change rapidly. An Watch that allows people to open car doors instead of using a key fob, open the garage door/front door just by proximity. There is no way that the mainstream will not want that kind of convenience.

Your reasons are valid points, but MOST people won't be willing to pay the cost of the Watch for what it does. I know a few who say they would not pay $99. for the Sport model, much less $399. Go out and ask around. Prices would have to come way down for the Watch to go truly mainstream. Most can barely afford their smartphone.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

[SprSynJn]

Smartphones can be also be paid monthly on contracts and subsidized, which the iWatch cannot. That, along with the battery life, are the biggest reasons they won't go mainstream in my opinion. Looking at the iWatch has caused me to search into the Pebble. Because, you know, that's actually affordable.

[eh-up]

Your reasons are valid points, but MOST people won't be willing to pay the cost of the Watch for what it does. I know a few who say they would not pay $99. for the Sport model, much less $399. Go out and ask around. Prices would have to come way down for the Watch to go truly mainstream. Most can barely afford their smartphone.

I don't know. I know plenty of people that have no problem spending these amounts on a watch that does nothing more than tell the time.

[Ledsteplin]

I don't know. I know plenty of people that have no problem spending these amounts on a watch that does nothing more than tell the time.

You must run in a "well to do" circle. And I said "most" people, not all people.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

[anon(4698833)]

Smartphones can be also be paid monthly on contracts and subsidized, which the iWatch cannot. That, along with the battery life, are the biggest reasons they won't go mainstream in my opinion. Looking at the iWatch has caused me to search into the Pebble. Because, you know, that's actually affordable.

The sport model of the Apple watch, in my opinion, is quite affordable...especially considering what it is capable of.

Affordability is all relevant to who you ask.

...and let's face it, the Apple Watch has already clearly gone mainstream.

[pkcable]

Yea, watches have been jewlery for a LONG time! Just look at the price of some high end, Swiss, Japanese and German models, some even make the Apple Watch Edition look cheap.

[Ledsteplin]

Smartphones can be also be paid monthly on contracts and subsidized, which the iWatch cannot. That, along with the battery life, are the biggest reasons they won't go mainstream in my opinion. Looking at the iWatch has caused me to search into the Pebble. Because, you know, that's actually affordable.

There is no iWatch.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

[warcraftWidow]

There is no iWatch.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

True. But people are going to call it the iWatch even though Apple cannot due to trademark issues.

[ctt1wbw]

There is no iWatch.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

There is no iWatch only Zuul.

[Ledsteplin]

True. But people are going to call it the iWatch even though Apple cannot due to trademark issues.

I reckon you're right about that.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

[pkcable]

True. But people are going to call it the iWatch even though Apple cannot due to trademark issues.

Someone ELSE has iWatch trademarked? I can't imagine Apple would not be able to win it back or buy it back if they really wanted. They have established the i in the name with the iPhone, iPod, iPad, iOS etc so it would probably be pretty easy to win the name back in court. And certainly they have the bucks to make a settlement if they wanted.

My guess is that they intentionally didn't want to call it the iWatch. Not that I fully understand why.

[warcraftWidow]

Someone ELSE has iWatch trademarked? I can't imagine Apple would not be able to win it back or buy it back if they really wanted. They have established the i in the name with the iPhone, iPod, iPad, iOS etc so it would probably be pretty easy to win the name back in court. And certainly they have the bucks to make a settlement if they wanted.

My guess is that they intentionally didn't want to call it the iWatch. Not that I fully understand why.

I could be remembering wrong but I thought Swatch had iWatch trademarked.

[Just_Me_D]

I could be remembering wrong but I thought Swatch had iWatch trademarked.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworst...called-iwatch/

[Ledsteplin]

I could be remembering wrong but I thought Swatch had iWatch trademarked.

A report from CNBC said, "In August 2012, Fresno, California-based OMG Electronics applied for the iWatch trademark. Apparently, there was a legitimate interest in doing something with it, as OMG ran a crowdfunding campaign on Indiegogo from September to October of that year.
OMG isn't alone. An entity in New York called M.Z. Berger & Co. applied for a trademark on the iWatch name in June 2007. But Swiss watchmaker Swatch successfully opposed the filing a year later, claiming that it would cause confusion with Swatch's registered names.
And according to a Bloomberg story published in October, a Dublin-based software studio named Probendi has owned the iWatch trademark in the European Union since 2008."
It's no wonder Apple steered away from the name.


Sent from my ancient but trustworthy iPhone 5. ☮

[substring]

With the invention of mobile phones, watches are now considered more like jewelry. Does anybody think smartwatches will be able to change this perception or just a very cool trend that will eventually be a niche?

Watches have always been jewelry/accessories. Otherwise, why do you think people need to put diamond and gold on the watches? And why would you need multiple watches with different styles if it is not jewelry/accessories? Seriously, buying watches is no different from buying handbags. People need more than one with different colors and different styles.

[pkcable]

Son of a gun!

[Speedygi]

I think the real assessment of this is that Apple is trying to take Smartwatches into Luxury Watch territory, albeit heavyhandledly...