5 Reasons Why the iPad will be a disaster for Apple.
5 Reasons Why the iPhone will be a disaster for Apple.
5 Reasons Why the iPod Mini will be a disaster for Apple.
5 Reasons Why the MacBook Air will be a disaster for Apple.
5 Reasons Why the Intel migration will be a disaster for Apple.
...
...
Watches have gone through some changes since they were invented, and though for a while they were purely utilitarian (Casio), they are now almost exclusively a fashion domain. Apple has demonstrated that they are quite good at promoting technology to fashion, but they've failed at going in the opposite direction (capturing fashion).
Point #1 is irrelevant. Steve also didn't wear shirts with color. That doesn't mean they were obsolete.
Point #2 is valid. The utilitarian purpose of the watch is adequately fulfilled by your phone, which you must have. Also, everybody has a phone, and there are clocks everywhere. It's very unlikely that you need a watch for utilitarian purposes.
Point #3 is weak.
Point #4 is practically an argument for Apple. They have never originated a market. Instead, they enter a market with horrifyingly bad user experience and fix it. They almost never try to create a market when they could instead capture a young, but rapidly growing market. If this were a rapidly growing market, I would say this is a point for the opposition. However, I don't think it is a growing market, certainly not growing at the rate that would interest Apple in it, Pebble be damned.
If people suddenly decided they absolutely had to have a watch, I could see Apple trying to enter the market, but I doubt they would succeed simply because they tend to fail at fashion for its own sake.
Point #5 is the best one. Apple tends to be both aspirational and democratic. You may balk at spending $600 on a tablet, but it's unlikely that this price point is truly out of reach for the average Westerner. You're only balking at it because you know you can get a Nexus for $400 or whatever. But for the wealthy, who are basically the market for good watches, they are a status symbol, which means you either want something unique (the $5M watch) or you want something instantly recognizable as expensive (the $5K+ Rolex). Apple fails in both these markets.
...but that said, these are (mostly) good criticisms. I am not sure about the last one; wealthy people do often wear expensive watches, but I've also seen a lot of whimsy and individuality in watch choices. I've known millionaires that wear Swatches, their Dad's old Timex, etc.
3 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 35.1 ms ] thread5 Reasons Why the iPad will be a disaster for Apple. 5 Reasons Why the iPhone will be a disaster for Apple. 5 Reasons Why the iPod Mini will be a disaster for Apple. 5 Reasons Why the MacBook Air will be a disaster for Apple. 5 Reasons Why the Intel migration will be a disaster for Apple. ... ...
Point #1 is irrelevant. Steve also didn't wear shirts with color. That doesn't mean they were obsolete.
Point #2 is valid. The utilitarian purpose of the watch is adequately fulfilled by your phone, which you must have. Also, everybody has a phone, and there are clocks everywhere. It's very unlikely that you need a watch for utilitarian purposes.
Point #3 is weak.
Point #4 is practically an argument for Apple. They have never originated a market. Instead, they enter a market with horrifyingly bad user experience and fix it. They almost never try to create a market when they could instead capture a young, but rapidly growing market. If this were a rapidly growing market, I would say this is a point for the opposition. However, I don't think it is a growing market, certainly not growing at the rate that would interest Apple in it, Pebble be damned.
If people suddenly decided they absolutely had to have a watch, I could see Apple trying to enter the market, but I doubt they would succeed simply because they tend to fail at fashion for its own sake.
Point #5 is the best one. Apple tends to be both aspirational and democratic. You may balk at spending $600 on a tablet, but it's unlikely that this price point is truly out of reach for the average Westerner. You're only balking at it because you know you can get a Nexus for $400 or whatever. But for the wealthy, who are basically the market for good watches, they are a status symbol, which means you either want something unique (the $5M watch) or you want something instantly recognizable as expensive (the $5K+ Rolex). Apple fails in both these markets.
I'd be shocked if Apple actually tried.
...but that said, these are (mostly) good criticisms. I am not sure about the last one; wealthy people do often wear expensive watches, but I've also seen a lot of whimsy and individuality in watch choices. I've known millionaires that wear Swatches, their Dad's old Timex, etc.