back to article Oi. APPLE fanboi! You with the $10k and pocket on fire! Fancy a WATCH?

High-end models of Apple's Watch, which apparently has its official release tomorrow, could carry a price tag of at least $10,000. But the 18-carat gold wristputer won't have additional fancy features, according to the Financial Times. Instead, it will apparently come loaded with the same functionality as Cupertino's Apple …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    ...i'll stick with me Casio.

    1. chivo243 Silver badge

      Re: Hmm...$10,000...

      Me too, I'll stick to the casino. $10,000.00 wasted at either place is still lost. With the casino, you could get lucky...

      Oh, wait he said casio, he'll probably come out the winner.

      1. Peter2 Silver badge

        Re: Hmm...$10,000...

        I've been wearing a Casio watch since before the newest entrants to the workplace were born, and I am just idly wondering which Casio watch other people are wearing? (daily, as a working timepiece and not as a fashion statement)

        W-93H for me.

        1. Frank Bough

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          MRG 100T

        2. Richard Wharram

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          W 59

          My old F91-W is still going strong after 15 years without a battery change but the strap broke a couple of years ago :)

          The 59 is similar but I can take the kids swimming with it.

          1. VinceH

            Re: Hmm...$10,000...

            PRG 80L

        3. Not Terry Wogan

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          My 20-year-old Casio DBC-62 is already a smartwatch!

          I can even put my name and phone number in, in case I get so drunk I don't know who I am any more.

          1. DrXym

            Re: Hmm...$10,000...

            I had an awesome Casio watch at school - clock, date / time, alarm clock, stop watch, timer AND calculator. And a battery which lasted years. This was over 3 decades ago.

            Anyway, Casio have a G-shock watch which probably qualifies as the only smart watch to be worth a damn at this time. It has low power bluetooth and an app for phones that can make it vibrate and display a text message and other than that it's just a fancy LCD watch. So the battery lasts ages.

        4. Haku

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          For the longest time (nearly a decade) a TS-150 thermometer watch

          Then I got a TSR-100 infra-red thermo-scanner watch

          After that a CMD-40-1ZT infra-red remote control watch

          Now I got a smartphone for my time telling needs... but I still have those watches (and many more with built-in games)

        5. Gray

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          GW-500A ... the "Atomic" solar-powered recharging watch. Better than a chronometer; resets every night from WWV. Nice present from my son. Casio rules. I did celestial sun shots with this one; time is good to the second. Too bad my eyes aren't!

        6. Spiracle

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...


          It's still an experiment in progress but F-91Ws seem to be costing me approximately £11 per decade to run. Being the Bic Cristal/Honda Super Cub of watches I'd imagine that they'll still be rolling off productions lines 20 or 30 years hence in very similar form.

        7. Humpty McNumpty

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          GW3500B, aesthetics did play at least some part in the choice however. I do also have an F1 TAG but resent the absolute fortune required to change the battery and still have a waterproof watch at the end of it (£60) so it is flat.

        8. goldfish

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          I've got my trusty Casio F-91W, which is waterproof to 10 metres, so I'll drown before it will

        9. Neal Stephenson

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          ACL 200

          Seen me through shed loads of races, ahead of its time with, among numerous other things an asymmetric countdown timer for 50 pairs of independently adjustable laps, plus a backlight that comes on if you turn your wrist upwards.

        10. Glen 1

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...


          Wanted a watch with a stopwatch for my running.

          The next model down had one, but didnt have a backlight.

        11. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...


      2. bpfh

        Re: Hmm...$10,000...

        DW-5600, replacing a classic 30 year old gshock with the big screw-down back.

    2. werdsmith Silver badge

      Re: Hmm...$10,000...

      Do we need watches to tell the time? If I look around my desk, the time is on my monitor screen, my mobile phone and my desk phone. The office wall clock is superfluous. If I go out into my car there is a clock that is kept accurate by RDS signals over the air. In town there are enough time telling devices to cover the time where there isn't one in sight (a few minutes max). I'm generally aware of the approximate time anyway without seeing a clock. At home, the time is on my TV, kitchen cooker, hifi, DAB radio, alarm clocks.

      Why do I need a watch?

      Back in the old days, the only sources of time out of the home were the position of the celestial bodies (not reliable in UK because they often hide) or a clock on a church tower. People carried a small pocket watch on a chain in a pocket. Looking at the time required them to pull the watch out (using the handy chain) open the front casing, observe the time, close the case, replace it in pocket. Then, in the 20th Century, advances brought us the little clock that could be strapped on your wrist and observed by just turning a wrist towards the face. Even with busy hands - brilliant!

      The other step forward was the quartz watch with the eternal battery life -eliminating daily winding.

      Then, in the 21st Century **** me, people regressed back to using the old retrieve from pocket, open case, observe time etc etc, but this time without the handy chain to help them! And all this in a world where the correct time is everywhere and we don't need to look at the time! And daily winding (charging) is back too!

      So what are watches useful for? Well, these mobile phones can give us personalised information, that isn't a common and the same for all of us and ubiquitous. Our feed of information and communication that arrives through our phone. The smartwatch is the step forward from the pocket watch on a chain to a quickly observed wrist twitch that happened with the introduction of the wrist watch.

      But it isn't. Because most of them are impractical devices using inappropriate tech, that need a button press with the other hand. Only Pebble have got it anywhere near right so far.

      1. jai

        Re: Hmm...$10,000...

        <TL:DR>that need a button press with the other hand

        rumours are that the AppleWatch won't need a button press to view the time or latest alerts, you just need to move your arm so you can see the watch face

        1. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          "rumours are that the AppleWatch won't need a button press to view the time or latest alerts, you just need to move your arm so you can see the watch face"

          Excellent. Keep still, save battery.

          It'll be perfect for when I'm asleep.

        2. elDog

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          I see that you said "so you can see the watch face."

          Hang on a sec, there we go: "so the watch can see your face."

        3. DiViDeD

          Re: Hmm...$10,000...

          Wow! Just turn your wrist to see the time. What WILL they think of next?

          Incidentally, rumour has it the Gear already does that. In binary time display if you so wish. As an aside, since I installed the binary face I've had to extend the display timeout to give myself enough time to work out the errrm time.

      2. VinceH

        Re: Hmm...$10,000...

        "Do we need watches to tell the time?"

        Some of us do, yes. Sometimes none of those convenient ways to tell the time are available - it depends on the person, what they do, and where they go.

      3. Gray

        Re: Hmm...$10,000...

        No ... you don't really need a watch any longer ... unless you find yourself needing to use a sextant and almanac to find your position several hundred miles from land. That's where my Casio GW-500A proves its worth. Resets itself every day, and bang-on accurate to the second.

        Or you could dispense with the timepiece and try it with your sundial ... !

  2. Anonymous Coward

    5-hour Energy

    More than enough time to parade it before your friend's (hopefully) envious eyes.

    1. Ole Juul

      Re: 5-hour Energy

      I'd love to stay, but I have to go home and charge my watch.

    2. big_D Silver badge

      Re: 5-hour Energy

      10 year battery - more than enough time for it to be practical. I'll stick with my Casio.

      1. bpfh

        Re: 5-hour Energy

        Just before Christmas, I brought a health/sleep tracker. Battery lasts ~5 days. Cumbersome, not very ergonomic, kept running low when I did not have a charge cable. It's been sitting at the bottom of my sports bag for the last 2 months... I predict somthing very similar happening to the iwatch...

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Resale Value - not a lot

    Men wear watches for 2 reasons.

    1 : To tell the time ( This is the obvious one)..

    2 : Because it is the only piece if jewellery a man can wear whilst retaining some dignity.

    That piece of jewelery can climb to a very tidy sum of money. It can be kept in good condition and where necassary sold for quite a large part of it's initial value. We're talking Philip Patek, Vacheron Constantin etc not Casio here. ( Nothing wrong with Casio, I have one, it's just that Casio usually belongs in the option 1 group )

    Apples iWatch thing will initially cost a lot and then when the "usual Apple hype" wears of, it will be worth next to nothing. Kind of akin to pying for a solid golf neklace, only to learn that it is just shiny silver plated necklace from the pawn shop owner who just keeps laughing when you ask for anything above scrap value.

    Like most things Apple, there is no intrinsic value, just some hype and then all you are left with is a half eaten piece of fruit.... Before the Appletards get all butthurt, it's Ok not to love Apple, they are just another commercial entity that are very successfull at shafting their customers... Steve jobs didn't design good prducts, he designed good marketing...

    1. elDog

      Re: Resale Value - not a lot

      Pretty obvious that you didn't keep your original Apple-II for its resale value nowadays.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Resale Value - not a lot

        elDog, a fool and his money are easily parted.

      2. John Bailey

        Re: Resale Value - not a lot

        "Pretty obvious that you didn't keep your original Apple-II for its resale value nowadays."

        Pretty obvious you don't understand the difference between price and value.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Resale Value - not a lot

      And real men don't need jewellery.

      1. Richard Taylor 2

        Re: Resale Value - not a lot

        Or quiche

        1. Frank Bough

          Re: Resale Value - not a lot

          Give quiche a chance.

          1. Khaptain Silver badge

            Re: Resale Value - not a lot

            "Give quiche a chance."

            Was it John Lemon or Yolk Ohno that said that ?

            1. Sarah Balfour

              Re: Resale Value - not a lot

              Neither. Quiche Richards.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Resale Value - not a lot

                If they really sell this for $10K, you don't think people are going to buy it and be left to twist in the wind, do you? Seems pretty much dead certain anyone who buys one of those will get some sort of specialized service with it that will either trade it in or replace the insides for x number of years with every Watch upgrade. The guts will cost Apple less than $100, pretty simple to do.

                The only risk with buying the initial model is, what if the Watch flops and there are no future versions? Then you have to hope that someday the handful of gold Watches sold become a collector's item for the same sort of people who collect Edsels or Tuckers.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Resale Value - not a lot

      "Kind of akin to pying for a solid golf neklace, only to learn that it is just shiny silver plated necklace from the pawn shop owner who just keeps laughing when you ask for anything above scrap value."

      Your solid golf necklace will be worth more than scrap value, so long as it has an MOT.

    4. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Resale Value - not a lot

      So the only logical solution is to buy a fake Rolex/Omega from a market stall in China.

      You get the accuracy of any other quartz watch and not only do you get the same respect from anybody stupid enough to care about how much your watch costs, but you get to laugh at them behind their back.

      And if you get mugged for it - you have the last laugh.

    5. PNGuinn

      Solid golf neklace

      Whole in one?

      El Reg - I want a Pedantic Spelling Nazi Icon.

      1. frank ly

        @PNGuinn Re: Solid golf neklace


        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: @PNGuinn Solid golf neklace

          I've heard of a pearl necklace. Assuming it's a typo, dare I ask what a solid gold necklace involves?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            pearl necklace

            Ah yes, the "pearl necklace" the ex wife's favorite piece of jewelery. Took ages before she caught on ZZ Top weren't talking about evening wear.

            (It really don't cost that much)

      2. Anonymous IV

        Re: Solid golf neklace

        > El Reg - I want a Pedantic Spelling Nazi Icon.

        Surely you mean Linguistic Purist icon?

      3. Rob Gr

        Re: Solid golf neklace

        Punctilious Spelling Nazi, shurely!

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Resale Value - not a lot

      I wear mine because the crown can be pulled out, revealing several feet of diamond-encrusted piano wire which I can then use to garrotte my adversaries when the government send me into dangerous countries. Normally we send James.


      1. Rob Gr

        Re: Resale Value - not a lot


        When did HMSS start using binary?

    7. Bronek Kozicki

      Re: Resale Value - not a lot

      @ElReg, please nominate this "Men wear watches for 2 reasons ...." to comments of the week. Or failing that, give us the right to double upvote :)

  4. Naughtyhorse

    So at least that answers the question..

    What the well dressed uber-knob will be wearing this year

    1. Paul Shirley

      Re: So at least that answers the question..

      I think you're on to something, the iWatch, a codpiece that tells time!

      Fully consistent with rumours apple are entering the other penis extension market with cars ;)

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So at least that answers the question..

      "What the well dressed uber-knob will be wearing this year"


  5. DrXym

    Whatever the price it'll be too much

    It's shiny. It says Apple. It's a prestige object. I'm sure the general public will weigh up the practical benefits of owning such a smart watch (few) and the disadvantages (many) and buy it anyway.

    1. jai

      Re: Whatever the price it'll be too much has guesses at the prices. Apparently these are purely guesses, Gruber hasn't been given the wink from anyone at Apple or anything. But if he's right, then yes, all but the low-end model are soul-crushingly expensive. And who wants to pay $350 for a watch with a rubber strap?

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    First, I understand the traditional high end watch market - I sport a solid gold Omega chronometer. But there's a difference between my excess and that of those who buy an Apple watch. In a few years, my battery won't have died because my watch is self-winding. In a few years, my watch's functions will all work because there are no chips, operating systems, or radios. In a few years, I will be able to replace my leather strap because it's been a standard design for decades. OTOH, in a few years, gold Apple watches will be melted down for the gold content and non-gold models will only be useful as paperweights.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Really?

      @HildyJ - may I congratulate you on your taste. I'm not being sarcastic, I truly believe that a decent person should wear a decent watch. Casios are fine for teenagers, but adults should wear an adult watch and an Omega is a fine choice. An Apple watch, less so, and a Pebble is simply a wrist advertisement for living with your mum.

      1. King Jack

        Re: Really?

        You guys are aware the the top end Casios are labelled Edifice and are expensive as other premium brands. If you are into tech you can get an atomic radio controlled solar powered one which will keep it's value and still work when you give it to your grand kids after you have expired.

        1. Dave 126

          Re: Really?

          I once read somewhere that many CEOs of Fortune 500 companies wore Timex watches, the implication being that they were there to make money, not spend it. They were not pretending that they are Edmund Hilary (Rolex), Steve McQueen (Heuer) or James Bond (Omega, usually).

          I've also read that many members of the Russian government have watch collections worth many times more than their annual salary...

          There is an appeal to a reliable, accurate and inexpensive watch... it is no more or less than it needs to be. It shows that you know what you need and how to get it without being ripped off. Really, EMP blasts aside, there is little downside to a Quartz watch over a mechanical movement - the mechanical watch will require servicing every few years just, as many quartz models will require battery changes.

          There is also an appeal to more specialist watches. And mechanical watches have a fascination to me, the same part of my brain that loves LEGO Technic and taking things apart.

          1. Hairless Biker

            Re: Really?

            @Dave 126

            You are Sylar, and I'm running away REALLY fast!

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Really?

        I truly believe that a decent person should wear a decent watch. Casios are fine for teenagers, but adults should wear an adult watch

        Why? My current watch isn't even a's a £5 Casio-a-like from eBay. Are you contending that I am somehow less decent than someone sporting an expensive watch? How does that work then?

        1. Peter2 Silver badge

          Re: Really?

          It was aced by an Anon commenter above in a truly excellent post.

          Summarising what he said there are two reasons for wearing a watch. As a timepeice (for which a Casio is perfectly adequate, I wear once myself) or as the only socially acceptable piece of jewellery a man can show off as a status symbol without looking like a total knob.

          So he's saying that we should give up our perfectly adequate Casio combination timepiece/stopwatch/alarm clock/etc for a single purpose timepiece which has the virtue of being an expensive status symbol you can flash at people to impress them.

        2. This post has been deleted by its author

        3. Rob Gr

          Re: Really?

          Don't fret, it's one of those people who feel you can measure someone's decency by the size of their disposable income.

          In England we have a word for it. Fuckwit.

    2. Richard Taylor 2

      Re: Really?

      I also. But I also have to pay an extortionate amount (well not really they are craftsmen/women) to service my rolex

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Really?

      And your watch was how much? And how much do you spend every 2-3 years on a service (£300ish) and oh it tells the time and date. For the record I also had an Omega Chronometer - certainly a decent enough watch but I wanted more than something that just tells me the time so I stopped wearing it. But now the Apple Watch will probably convince me to wear a watch again.

    4. Frank Bough

      Re: Really?

      A Casio is more accurate.

      People who walk around with thousands of pounds worth of jewellery on are desperately trying to prove something.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Really?

          I've had expensive watches. Enough to tell me that what I really want out of a watch is it to tell me what time it is. SImple as that.

          I don't need to make a statement;, attract a mate; or impress someone with how much money I may or may not actually have.

        2. Paul Shirley

          Re: Really?

          @ac if you're smart enough you don't have to grow up... something Steve Jobs came close to demonstrating.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Really?

      The difference is the Apple Watch is likely to be around $349 and yes it may only last 4-5 years before you decide to replace it but your Omega / Rolex probably costs you at least that per year by the time you factor in depreciation, loss of interest on the money, insurance and servicing.

      As a simple example - my wife has an Omega - the insurance is about £100 a year and it costs about £200 every 2 years for a service / battery replacement. So at least £200 per year excluding depreciation which is probably at least that again (certainly in the first few years) - actually makes the Apple Watch look relatively inexpensive.

      1. Roger Anderson

        Re: Really?

        £100/year for insurance? Think you need to shop around more.

        £200 for servicing/battery changes every 2 years is only spent by tossers who like to say their watch is serviced by "craftsmen" meanwhile letting the watch company cash in on your stupidity.

        A decent independent local jeweller can replace a battery for a few quid and a watch shouldn't need serviced for years and years. Especially if it's Quartz.

        I agree that a watch is there to tell me the time rather than act as a fashion statement but I still much prefer wearing my Tag than wearing my Casio (which I wear at work).

        1. PNGuinn

          Re: Really?

          Colour me cynical if you like, but does this uberwatch have some special type of battery for it to cost so much for a service?

          Or will a cell off a card from the local pound shop do equally well?

          Shock - horror - Crapple not the first with overpriced bling for the gullible.

          Disclaimer. I'm a pocket watch man myself. Clock, timer, stopwatch, alarm, calculator etc. Also makes phone calls and sends texts. Battery life only a couple of weeks though.

        2. the spectacularly refined chap

          Re: Really?

          £100/year for insurance? Think you need to shop around more.

          You don't even need to do that most of the time: watches are generally included under the personal possessions cover of your home insurance even out of the house. You may need to check the level of cover for a particularly fancy watch but my £800 O+W is covered without me even needing to declare it.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Really?

          @Roger Anderson

          "A decent independent local jeweller can replace a battery for a few quid and a watch shouldn't need serviced for years and years. Especially if it's Quartz."

          You have to be careful there, especially when the watch is waterproof. Many types of watch use pressure in the case to keep water out, so any operation involving opening the case (like changing batteries) has to be done in a little chamber pressurised to 3/5/whatever atmospheres.

          Few local jewellers have one of these chambers, yet most will happily take your money, and skip the part where they tell you that your watch is no longer waterproof.

      2. Alan Denman

        Re: Really?

        Do you sell timeshare by any chance?

  7. rvt

    As always, we need to see how well, or not so wel it will work. I like apple products, but i am not the type that really needs a watch and a mobile i just use once a day. So i have a android phone, and no watch, as i don't require ( and want to stay up to date every minute of my life). May be it's great, may be it's. Ot...we know in a couple of months..l

  8. dorsetknob

    Wristing Wear

    Ha I Got and wear a Calvin klein watch

    Still waiting for that Super Model to turn up and ask me to (F)wrist her

    1. Cliff

      Re: Wristing Wear

      I instantly thought of a Calvin and Hobbes watch, probably about as much model appeal ;-)

  9. Stuart Dole

    Charge it daily?

    My original Omega needed to be wound every day - it worked better if you did it at the same time every day. And you needed to clean and lube it every year - remember that? Eventually, after several bands wore out, I had the jeweler cut the band lugs off and solder on a little ring, and used it as a pocket watch for many years.

    And our original iPhone is still working beautifully as an iPod - remember the nice stand they came with? And it still retains a fair resale value, should we ever decide we don't need a music player...

    I'm not anxious to buy an Apple Watch for myself, but I'm really curious to see where the technology goes.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Where is any detail on battery tests? $10,000 (rumoured) for a GOLD version?

    You really undermine your journalistic credibility with these articles. They give an excuse for the usual old anti-Apple brigade to come out and make comments.

    1. Dave 126

      I'm no blind fan of Apple, but I too would prefer sensible discussions about certain topics (especially product design and user experience) without the tribal name-calling.

      Apple have their business model, which enables them to do some very interesting things (and frustratingly limit their products' functions on occasion). It is inevitable therefore that they will be cited in conversations across a range of topics.

    2. MrDamage Silver badge


      It's the iTards who are basically responsible for creating the anti-apple brigade.

      When logical thinkers actually look past the marketing hype (magical?), and then look into the patents (rounded corners, swipe to unlock), and comment on how Apple are as innovative as they claim to be, the iTards come out in force to attack the commentor and try to shout them down for not mindlessly worshipping at the sphincter of Jobs.

      So the more you attacked us for daring to think for ourselves, the more we fought back, until it got to the point where we thought "bugger always defending, lets mock and ridicule each new product from the outset". This of course started to hurt your precious iFeelings because you were now being treated with the same level of respect as you showed towards others.

      You reap what you iSow. iNow iSod iOff iAnd iStop iWhinging.

      1. Handy Plough

        Re: Unfortunately


      2. jai

        Re: Unfortunately

        "comment on how Apple are as innovative as they claim to be"

        Then why the arguments, if we both agree the same??

        1. MrDamage Silver badge

          Re: Unfortunately

          I made a typo, and didn't catch it until you mentioned it.

          It should be "aren't".

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Unfortunately

            A typo? Or your subsconcious mind rebelling against you?

            This could be a sign that, deep down, whether you know it or not, you really want an Apple Watch yourself.

            Don't fight it, just give in to your inner desires.

            [...join us.....join us......join us.....]

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    TIMEX!.....Just thought i'd give a shout out to the poor bastards at TIMEX!!......oh, and Sekonda. James Bond had a Sekonda didn't he....had a laser in it....will the snapple watch have a laser?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: TIMEX!, TIMEX!, TIMEX!

      It won't need a laser because it's "magic"....

  12. Swiss Anton

    I still think its a pretty neat idea.

    1. TheProf


      Have an up-vote you hoopy frood.

  13. dan1980

    I see no problem here, whatsoever. A $20 Casio digital watch will do the same things (usually more) as a $20,000 Chopard and a $100 Pulsar will do the same as a platinum-cased, diamond-marked $100,000 Patek Philippe. Let's not even get into those amazing but ultimate useless $400,000 Hublot monstrosities.

    If you want seriously tough watch, you don't have to part with more than $1000 - even if you're diving. (Unless you're doing military/technical diving.)

    But that's function and the difference is everywhere. A $10 t-shirt will hide your nakedness just as well as a $200, designer shirt. (Sometimes better, what with rips bing 'in' again.)

  14. Tromos

    If the 10k price tag is right, it sounds like they put the same percentage mark-up on the gold case as they do on iPhone RAM.

  15. VinceH
  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Love my TISSOT T-Touch







    Touch screen


    And 5 year battery life

    What else does one need?

  17. Mark 85


    I wonder how much people would pay if Apple came out with a wrist sundial?

    1. VinceH

      Re: Sundial?

      Well if they did, at least there wouldn't be questions over battery life.

  18. Tim99 Silver badge

    Function and cost

    My Longines watch was bought by my father in 1942 for £5 - Or a nearly 2 weeks wages for a working man. It is now worth about £1,000 or nearly 2 weeks wages.

    It has been cleaned/serviced 5 times in its lifetime. The last one was 2 years ago and was £150. The total cost of ownership, so far, in real money is about £0.20 a week. I think that I can afford that for something that tells the time, looks good, and of course has a certain reverse-snobbery chic.

  19. ThatGuy

    Why is iWatch battery so bad?

    My top of the line Android phone has a full HD screen and I have bluetooth and WiFi enabled all day, every day. The battery rarely lasts less than a day and half, and more often than not, about 2 days. So why does the iWatch, with smaller screen, more efficient OS(allegedly) and less features, last less than a day on 1 charge? I have my own theory (the iWatch is shit), but a more technical answer would be appreciated...

    1. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Re: Why is iWatch battery so bad?

      Remember that this is V1 of the product.

      The first leccy cars were also shite. (G-Whizz....)

      Now that the battery tech has improved then the cars are getting better. I went for a test drive in a PHEV on Saturday. You hardly knew when the petrol engine cut in to charge the battery. In a traffic jam on the M3 it was on leccy. No pollution perfect. When we got going again, the petrol engine started up to charge the battery.

      The first jet engines were horribly polluting and innefficient. Now?....

      I forsee that in 5 years these devices will last for around a week between charges as battery tech improves.

      There is nothing like a behmoth (As Apple is) entering the market to stimulate the boffins to improve its obvious weak points. That generally benefits all the other players in the market.

      Will I buy one? No chance. I hate anything on my wrist. If someone were to come out with a pocket watch then I might consider it.

      So all you fanbois, hipsters and medallion men please go out and but these things. Then the rest of us can benefit from the advances in this sort fo tech in years to come.

      1. ThatGuy

        Re: Why is iWatch battery so bad?

        I understand what you are saying, but there is 1 major problem: nothing on the iWatch is V1. Its all mature technology, its just a different package.

        1. Anonymous IV

          Re: Why is iWatch battery so bad?

          > I understand what you are saying, but there is 1 major problem: nothing on the iWatch is V1. Its all mature technology, its just a different package.

          So the comment I heard on t' radio, that "the iWatch is the first piece of new technology that Apple has produced since the iPad" is untrue?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why is iWatch battery so bad?

      The battery is a fraction of the size.

      Performance of the device and power usage will have been scaled back accordingly. But if it's too simple and weak then it won't be successful.

      Samsung's own watched don't last long either.

  20. Joe 48

    Who cares

    Some like watch A, some like watch B. Doesn't matter if its, expensive, cheap, functional or beautiful! What matters is if it does what you need! If it doesn't then don't buy it. Jeez, wish these things would talk about the tech.

    1. elDog

      Re: Who cares

      @Joe 48 - Agreeing with you.

      Slow day on the 'nets. There may be some type of CES or other show going on, but let's all talk about a non-functional piece of wearable tech.

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The worst thing is the cost will be high and the lifespan low.

    It's using a battery with a realistic lifespan of 2 years.

  22. sleepy

    $10000 is unlikely

    Nevertheless, a high price serves a purpose. A gold designer watch declares "if you mate with me, there will be money for some fun, and for the child". Any other functionality is incidental.

    The latest news is that Apple's 18 carat gold is not an alloy with other metals, but a composite with lightweight ceramic material. Still 18/24ths gold by weight, but only about 7/24ths by volume. See how Apple gives you less, but still gives you what you want?

    The main purpose of the watch is to handle 95% of interactions without taking the iPhone out of your pocket/bag, and to register notifications instantly instead of next time you happen to look at your phone. It's the iPhone giving us back our lives at last.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: $10000 is unlikely

      Going by a school friend of mine who grew up to be one of the flash watch wearing dudes, more likely "if you mate with me I'll spend our income on junk until the flat get repossessed".

      1. sleepy

        Re: $10000 is unlikely

        ... but he apparently fooled the girl, which is what the watch was for.

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Servicing and changing the battery?!?

    This is an Apple product we are talking about here. It will be virtually impossible to open by design and the battery will be glued into place so it can't be changed.

  24. jai

    What, no Douglas Adams quote?

    “Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the western spiral arm of the Galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun. Orbiting this at a distance of roughly ninety-two million miles is an utterly insignificant little blue green planet whose ape-descended life forms are so amazingly primitive that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea.”

    ― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

    1. Dave 126

      Re: What, no Douglas Adams quote?

      'I have a well-deserved reputation for being something of a gadget freak, and am rarely happier than when spending an entire day programming my computer to perform automatically a task that it would otherwise take me a good 10 seconds to do by hand.

      'Ten seconds, I tell myself, is 10 seconds. Time is valuable and 10 seconds' worth of it is well worth the investment of a day's happy activity working out a way of saving it.'

      Douglas Adams, Last Chance to See, published 1990,

  25. Rosco


    I assume that the snickering Casio-wearers on here wear only hessian sacks? After all, the only function of clothes is to keep you warm. Spending money on anything beyond that function is just throwing money away, right?

    1. Glen 1

      Re: Sackcloth

      Close - Primark

  26. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    I have a Swatch - tells the time great - I do have other watches though but the cost to repair crystal glass fronts or change battery/waterproof too expensive.

    I don't see that much of a market - I am already carrying 2 phones (one of those an iPhone 5S) and a tablet. For Telehealth - there are already good (sub £100) devices to take blood readings/heart rate/weight/oximeters)

    If the Apple (or any other smartphone manufacturer) watch could connect to Bluetooth headsets/take calls/calendar/have Spotify app then I'd be all for it - and leave the phone at home...

    1. Dave 126

      Re: Devices....

      There are watches that have 2G/3G/4G radios, but really the radios only consume yet more power. They tend to be bulky, compromised products.

      Quite a few smart watches have local storage and Bluetooth, so can be used to play music.

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Price estimates keep going up!

    At first it was $5K, then it was $10K and now they say "at least $10K". Is everyone competing to estimate the highest price? Regardless, if they sell something like this I imagine it'll include free or very cheap upgrades/swaps to the latest model. That's comparatively cheap and will get a lot more takers for it than it would otherwise (though there is still a market for stuff like that with no upgrade path, or all those gold plated gem encrusted aftermarket phones from companies like Vertu wouldn't sell)

  28. mcreedy


    I can't wait to go to swimming with this on. And when the battery dies - more landfill! Joy...

  29. Conundrum1885

    Re. Disposable?

    There probably is a way to change it.

    Also the battery on the Watch is a variation on LiNiMn used in power tools so stable, very long lived and good for >1500+ charge cycles.

    Wonder how Apple get around the "No Li-Ion sent by post" issue?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like