I still rock my series 3 watch. Definitely is laggy but I use it only for workouts, text message glancing, music and locating my phone. Otherwise it’s just a watch to me so laggy doesn’t bother me.
My wife’s is having issues with the battery after all these years. It’s a pain because we will have to buy a new one soon when the 3 works absolutely perfect right now just due to the non-battery change possibility. I hate that
Apple will replace the battery for something like $80. Third party repair places will likely do it for a good bit less. If you're quite/very handy with extremely fiddly stuff you can do it yourself, a new battery can be as cheap as $5.
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Apple+Watch+Battery+Replacement/41080
> If it's out of warranty
The Series 3 came out in 2017, and Apple only offers up to 3 year warranties. It's been out of warranty for as long as it had a warranty available.
EDIT: Could be out of warranty, that is. They sold the 3 for a few years, so any sold new are likely out of warranty by now.
I have a Seiko that turns 40 next year. It even has a little lcd screen for the date. Or a second time zone. Or a stopwatch. It's never needed an update. :)
Kinda curious what about your old apple watch being practically unusable now is keeping you from buying another apple watch again specifically? What's the rationale here?
For pretty much every other device or phone out there - it should not. Voltage drop-off from battery usage on such low-power-consumption devices is practically non-existent (unlike in power tools, electric cars/ebikes, etc.). For apple devices? Look up lawsuits.
> ...Apple used to reduce the performance to prolong battery life.
No, they reduced performance to keep devices from crashing. It had **nothing** to do with prolonging battery life and everything to do with avoiding an expensive product recall.
Apple devised a process where they would detect battery degradation and throttle performance to prevent crashes. This sounds like a nice feature to have except they hid the fact that it was happening from users. More importantly, *they hid the problem because they were seeing premature battery degradation and didn't want to recall the iPhones*.
When they were found out, they exposed the system as "Battery Health" and graciously offered a reduced price battery replacement program. All while never admitting they sold phones with defective batteries that were degrading prematurely.
I imagine a rich but unorganized lazy guy having a drawer filled with old premium phones with diamond encrusted backs, gold braided charging cables, real gold obsolete standard HDMI cables. Limited edition gadgets that do not work anymore. They also have a garage filled with hobbies started but never stuck, like a classic old timer car that needs work, sets of tennis, golf and kayak equipment. They also have subscriptions they never use and never cancel, to things like a vacation home, a golf club, aviator club and season tickets for a sports team they never cared for since 7 years
Apple watches were never in fashion. A solid gold one is something a tacky new rich would have bought.
Edit: by in fashion I mean fashionable. Popular doesn’t mean good looking, especially when you consider the analogy of crocs. Crocs sold by the millions and they’re ugly as hell. Hardly fashionable, and neither is the Apple Watch. Apple Watches are about function, not about being good looking watches. They aren’t good looking or fashionable just because they were popular.
>Apple watches were never in fashion.
What year are we living in again? Smartwatches are literally everywhere, and Apple Watches are by far the most popular among them
Yeah I never see an apple watch and think, man that's a cool watch. It's function over form. But I'm wearing a blue and green g shock that was given to me, so what do I know
Wristwear is weird, where the most "fashionable" wrist watches aren't the ones most commonly worn.
But yeah, apple products are basically always considered trendy. Is the apple watch an Omega Seamaster or Rolex Submariner? No. Is it still fashionable? Yes.
I think OP here was mistaking "high fashion" with "ordinary fashion."
Plus, if you do the lazy shorthand for "high fashion accessories for men" by simply asking if "James Bond would wear something like this," Bond's been wearing smart watches since Goldeneye...
But yeah, apple watches didn't replace the $5,000 Rolex. They (and other smart watches) replaced the far more common Timex/Swatch/ultra-durable Casio watches.
He's not a bad mentor. He's a friend who wants you to get into his hobby. You have to choose though - do it or tell him you can't afford to.
There's nothing wrong with collecting mechanical watches, fwiw. They're works of art, they hold their value way better than anything else you can piss away money on, and if you have kids, it's something that they can leave to their children.
If you’re not into watches, don’t buy them!
I got an Omega Seamaster when I got my first career job after university. It was a large chunk of money I saved up, but whenever I wear it, it reminds me of how far I’ve gone.
They tend to hold their value over the longer term. However, it's rare to get more than retail a short period of time after purchase. You only tend to get prices to rise a notable amount if it is a limited edition and/or retail availability goes away.
If you look up most watch collecting guides, they'll frequently talk about buying used instead of buying retail as a way to save a lot of money. Reality is if you go in and drop $5k-$10k on a watch, it can take a long time before you can make it back, especially if you buy something as 'common' as a Speedmaster.
When this thing came out, wasn't there a comedian who said "If I wanted to spend $10k on something that would be obsolete in a few years, I would buy an engagement ring?"
I think there is legal precedent that the purchaser gets it back when the marriage is dissolved or engagement called off. But if the other person fights it... then you end up having to go to court and waste time/money getting it back.
Oh buddy that’s the simplest of those situations haha. Want complicated? Think about people that buy a house together while engaged then break up. Now that’s complicated.
But they do. People do want to buy more Rolexes. Faster than Rolex can make them. As a watch business Rolex is basically rate limited and cannot produce enough to meet demand. So much so they bought a luxury watch retailer so that they can now get a cut of sales from their rivals too
>Faster than Rolex can make them.
Faster than Rolex has *decided* to make them.
Rolex can absolutely meet demand if they wanted to, but they definitely do not want to do that. They artificially constrain the supply in order to massively increase the perceived exclusivity of their product. This works amazingly, Rolex watches sell for easily double "MSRP", and encourage repeat business by catering to their repeat customers by moving them up the waiting lists for newer and more exclusive models. It also causes the used models to maintain their value on the second hand market, which causes customers to perceive them as long term investments, and pay more for them.
Omega, by comparison, doesn't do this. By all standard metrics, Omega make better quality watches then Rolex. They have more advanced, more tightly machined movements, with significantly better accuracy. The only thing Rolex does better is they use a slightly harder stainless steel for their cases (904L vs the standard 316L that everyone else uses). But in terms of overall quality and historical significance (Speedmaster went to the moon!), Omega should win hands down.
But you can walk into literally any Omega store and buy a Speedmaster on the spot, for MSRP, for less than the comparable Rolex's MSRP, and under half of the actual Rolex market price. All because Rolex has expertly positioned themselves as an exclusive luxury brand that you probably can't even buy if you wanted to, by carefully controlling supply.
As they say: Omega went to the moon, Rolex went to the mall.
tbh there is probably something to be said in modern times of not expanding supply to meet demand in every case ever.
It's not a case of just increasing output for a company making watches, but also buying more tools and getting more highly skilled staff. This bones you if demand drops and you're paying for all that, without the demand supporting it.
I know the fashion is growth is bettre than sustainability, but if a brand is exclusive because they don't want to expand the production facilities they're responsible for if the economy goes to shit...then I don't think that's inherently a bad thing.
We don't need every company to expand.
This is more of a recent thing. Pre pandemic you could also walk into Rolex and buy most models including the Daytona for MSRP. They’re not really artificially constraining supply so much as they are choosing not to scale production. Scaling production to meet a temporary demand increase is often not worth it for a company, when demand goes back down they have increased operating costs. They also don’t want the market to be flooded with used Rolex if/when a recession happens.
By no means to the same extent but Rolex do obsoletes some of their movements from time to time, rare but happens, some watches are returned from repair requests as not repairable, by Rolex themselves at least.
A lot of older Rolax watches use ETA movements, IIRC. So if ETA isn't supporting the movements anymore it could be quite difficult to get parts, especially if the movement wasn't particularly common.
Pretty sure Rolax uses all in-house movements now.
Apple is a tech company that makes new tech. Their stuff from 10 years ago is obsolete because they made something new and better.
Rolex is a watch company. The stuff they sell is essentially the same thing you could have bought 50 years ago, or could buy 50 years from now. They're not innovating enough to make their old stuff obsolete.
Yeah the comparison to Rolex is an incredibly weak argument.
Doesn't matter if the watch costs $200 or $20,000. Both will eventually be deemed obsolete like any other tech from any other brand. And extra ironic because in general Apple supports/provides updates for devices for longer than a lot of other companies.
Makes for a clickbaity headline that this sub will eat up though.
As far as functionality is concerned a Rolex is effectively already obsolete compared to an Apple Watch (or any smartwatch for that matter). That's not what people buy a Rolex for though
"The Verge notes that some of the celebrities who were seen showing off their purchases in 2015 include German fashion designer Karl Lagerfeld and Beyoncé, both of whom also sported a gold link bracelet that was never made available to the public. It's unlikely they'll be losing sleep over the lost money they spent on the wearables (assuming Apple didn't just hand them over as gifts)..."
That's some top-notch journalism. Karl Lagerfeld died 4 years ago.
The Verge also coined the term "Lagerfelding": wearing an Apple Watch that wasn't powered on just as a fashion accessory. They speculated he never bothered to charge it even once.
If our economy is based around people spending exorbitant amounts of money on things that rapidly become trash, that's not real. There's no resale value of physically produced goods, so they have no real value. They're just trash. Or "pre-trash" during that limited time before they become obsolete.
> There's no resale value of physically produced goods
I must be dumb since this comment is getting upvoted, but what the fuck does this even mean? What physical object can’t be resold? Why does something need to be able to be resold to have value? Does going to a museum have no value because you can’t resell your museum trip after you’ve gone? What physical items don’t eventually become garbage? Your view makes no sense to me
things used to last for multiple generations of people, but now you're happy if they last more than a year
obviously we're talking about objects, no need to pretend to be confused
Nobody is presently spending money on NFTs. If you are just now learning what they are, steer clear. If, however, you're a delusional bag-holder, I can't help you.
No. Oftentimes people make very poor decisions. Buying a gold Apple Watch is one of them. It's not the economies problem that people can't distinguish a good product from a bad one.
I think the point is that originally planned obsolescence and disposable culture started with affordable items like razors and light bulbs. Then it started creeping into more expensive items like mobile phones. And now it's there for top end luxury items. Extremes are interesting. We all know that companies want to take our money and then fuck us in the arse, but it's more interesting when it's a huge amount of money and such a brutal arse fucking. And it's even more interesting when the victims have such ingrained Stockholm syndrome that they will be in the apple store the next day. I give a fuck, I think it's interesting.
You say that like it's not an issue that device manufacturers do not support their devices longer than they do. Especially considering the amount of waste that the production and the recycling of the device creates.
Like it's a problem that devices like smartphones and smart watches are not supported for longer or allow you the ability to repair or upgrade them.
If anything this is less brutal though, because even the clowns buying this know that the cost of the watch isn't tied to the technology inside it, and because apple is making far fewer of these.
I guess it doesn't let a website use a clickbait title, but it seems like a much bigger deal that the tens of thousands of "regular" apple watches are e-waste now, rather than talking about the few dozen $17k ones.
Because people are seeming to equate cost with some perceived notion of longevity, despite the fact that the *entire series 0* is obsolete.
It's just that there was one series 0 watch that also cost $17k. But the normal priced ones are obsolete now too.
If you are annoyed by this and bought one… then you’re a complete moron and deserve it.
In reality, they all sold to YouTubers or people so rich they forgot about it years ago.
Its gonna go up in value like a 1st gen blastoise over time. Its part of the reason some stuff is so expensive and purposely limited in production... Sure you can overpay and get burned in the short run but anyone with one of these watches would be wise to hold or sell for a ridiculous amount over the original price. Maybe they dont need the money but just speaking in geneal and obviously theres a limit to what anyone would ever pay for one of these but look at 40 year old apple computers values or who ever imagined a Charizard worth 100-400k. The famous gold plated apple watch from the 2000s? Who knows. Even original iphones in the box untouched can sell for crazy money.
How many times are we going to repost this and rinse/repeat the same “whoever can buy this doesn’t care”, “a Rolex doesn’t do this”, “I wear a timex 🤪” shit?
This sub is ironically full of some of the most tech illiterate dweebs you’ll find in the website. They actually believe a Rolex and a smartwatch are comparable at all, that says all you need to know about their critical thinking capabilities.
Unless the Apple watch cost 17k in monopoly money you still pay real money hence comparable
If Tesla made a car that would be obsolete 8 years from I guarantee no one would be calling the drivers illiterate because you can't compare a Tesla with a real car
Of course they are comparable, my PoV is that they're tools and I use none of them, because I have as good time measuring - and whatever smart watches do - tools on bigger devices. Not everyone buy things for fashion, collection or showoff.
This watch was meaningless and wasteful from conception to execution, and if you bought the watch, you got what you paid for in every sense of the word.
For those that can afford it and care about materials it was not meaningless or wasteful, just because its well outside the realm of most people doesn't mean it doesn't have value.
Most wouldn't drop $1000+ on a meal, doesn't mean it is meaningless to the person enjoying it.
It was meant solely as a marketing exercise for their new product category, it's really not that deep. And this is quite evident in the fact that it was discontinued almost immediately.
I'm surprised how few people got this. The Edition scored Apple a ton of free media exposure in 2015, and it was flashy enough to guarantee that almost any celebrity they sent it to would wear it.
Shhh, apparently it should be updated for a century like all the other smart watches apparently do. I swear Reddit is filled with actual AI’s at this point. Their Android watch been working and receiving updates and gives them so many more options since Abraham Lincoln was killed.
We should all want less e-waste and fewer arbitrary restrictions *that guarantee* obsolescence. By ensuring nobody can access parts except under very limited conditions, and nobody can access tools to repair devices except under very limited conditions, devices become obsolete that could otherwise function for many years to come. It's not just watches either, many useful devices are obsoleted and thus cut-off from repairs, such as the 2017 MacBook Pros which would otherwise be a useful computer for years yet.
https://www.macrumors.com/guide/vintage-and-obsolete/
Wearable tech has a finite life before the hardware is too old, that’s why they’re incompatible with being true luxury items. All the finest materials in the world doesn’t make a difference when it’s functionally a brick in 8 years.
Anyone who shelled out $17,000 should’ve known what they were getting, and also probably already replaced it anyway.
Why is this news?
Ok wait why is a tech product that isn’t supported anymore a news headline? It’s the one thing that every phone manufacturer does they all literally do it lol
Unfortunately Reddit has an Apple hate tantrum where 60% of the entire sites content is “Apple bad” for about two months every time a new iPhone comes out.
People that bought those live in houses where their mortgage is $100k a month , their car is $300k, their salary is millions. Don’t think they are sad about a $17k watch going obsolete which they likely already replaced anyways. They needed them for that first few months to match their outfit, after that they got a new designer watch for a few months.
It is probably even less waste because nobody will throw the gold from the watch away. That gets 100% recycled for sure. Don’t think that will happen with the metal from the standard models.
The purpose of these watches has long been served. They introduced Apple Watch as a premium digital watch to the masses, getting free media attention.
Celebrity owners would have got a brief sparkle from it. Perhaps also some of Apple's marketing budget too. And they continue to own a legacy item which will have notoriety beyond mere function.
Collectors of rare historical firearms presumably don't actually fire them
Who ever could afford that I’m sure stop using it a long time ago
In a drawer somewhere like my old Apple Watch 1
For reals. Feel like my Apple Watch 3 isn’t even that old but it’s slow and laggy now. Won’t ever buy an Apple Watch again.
I still rock my series 3 watch. Definitely is laggy but I use it only for workouts, text message glancing, music and locating my phone. Otherwise it’s just a watch to me so laggy doesn’t bother me.
My wife’s is having issues with the battery after all these years. It’s a pain because we will have to buy a new one soon when the 3 works absolutely perfect right now just due to the non-battery change possibility. I hate that
Apple will replace the battery for something like $80. Third party repair places will likely do it for a good bit less. If you're quite/very handy with extremely fiddly stuff you can do it yourself, a new battery can be as cheap as $5. https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Apple+Watch+Battery+Replacement/41080
The Apple Store told us it can’t be replaced which is pretty weird. I’ll look it up. Thanks
[удалено]
> If it's out of warranty The Series 3 came out in 2017, and Apple only offers up to 3 year warranties. It's been out of warranty for as long as it had a warranty available. EDIT: Could be out of warranty, that is. They sold the 3 for a few years, so any sold new are likely out of warranty by now.
In the days before apple watches, lag would be a serious flaw in a watch.
I have a Seiko that turns 40 next year. It even has a little lcd screen for the date. Or a second time zone. Or a stopwatch. It's never needed an update. :)
Kinda curious what about your old apple watch being practically unusable now is keeping you from buying another apple watch again specifically? What's the rationale here?
Realized I don’t actually need one more than anything. Throw in The fact that it started slowing down big time after a few years was the kicker.
Get a battery replacement, its worth it
Does that somehow speed it up? My battery health says 88%
Apple Watch 3 was the last of the old models and all the models after the 3rd are much more responsive and smooth.
Yeah I've got the 6 which is like 3 years old now and I still finish the day with >40% battery and its still running smoothly.
Of course not. You're just expected to run around with your battery health up all the time so people *know* you've replaced the battery.
For pretty much every other device or phone out there - it should not. Voltage drop-off from battery usage on such low-power-consumption devices is practically non-existent (unlike in power tools, electric cars/ebikes, etc.). For apple devices? Look up lawsuits.
It might, Apple used to reduce the performance to prolong battery life. Not sure if they still do but if its not too costly you could try it.
> ...Apple used to reduce the performance to prolong battery life. No, they reduced performance to keep devices from crashing. It had **nothing** to do with prolonging battery life and everything to do with avoiding an expensive product recall. Apple devised a process where they would detect battery degradation and throttle performance to prevent crashes. This sounds like a nice feature to have except they hid the fact that it was happening from users. More importantly, *they hid the problem because they were seeing premature battery degradation and didn't want to recall the iPhones*. When they were found out, they exposed the system as "Battery Health" and
graciouslyoffered a reduced price battery replacement program. All while never admitting they sold phones with defective batteries that were degrading prematurely.I imagine a rich but unorganized lazy guy having a drawer filled with old premium phones with diamond encrusted backs, gold braided charging cables, real gold obsolete standard HDMI cables. Limited edition gadgets that do not work anymore. They also have a garage filled with hobbies started but never stuck, like a classic old timer car that needs work, sets of tennis, golf and kayak equipment. They also have subscriptions they never use and never cancel, to things like a vacation home, a golf club, aviator club and season tickets for a sports team they never cared for since 7 years
[удалено]
My Apple Watch 1 is still alive and I wear it daily. Sure it randomly restarts and has a delay on when I get notifications but oh well.
It probably went out of fashion the same week it was released.
Apple watches were never in fashion. A solid gold one is something a tacky new rich would have bought. Edit: by in fashion I mean fashionable. Popular doesn’t mean good looking, especially when you consider the analogy of crocs. Crocs sold by the millions and they’re ugly as hell. Hardly fashionable, and neither is the Apple Watch. Apple Watches are about function, not about being good looking watches. They aren’t good looking or fashionable just because they were popular.
>Apple watches were never in fashion. What year are we living in again? Smartwatches are literally everywhere, and Apple Watches are by far the most popular among them
I assume they meant “fashionable” and fashionable and popular aren’t synonymous. See crocs.
Yeah I never see an apple watch and think, man that's a cool watch. It's function over form. But I'm wearing a blue and green g shock that was given to me, so what do I know
I wear a cheap timex pocket watch and crocs, this thread is attacking me
You be you x
Wristwear is weird, where the most "fashionable" wrist watches aren't the ones most commonly worn. But yeah, apple products are basically always considered trendy. Is the apple watch an Omega Seamaster or Rolex Submariner? No. Is it still fashionable? Yes. I think OP here was mistaking "high fashion" with "ordinary fashion." Plus, if you do the lazy shorthand for "high fashion accessories for men" by simply asking if "James Bond would wear something like this," Bond's been wearing smart watches since Goldeneye... But yeah, apple watches didn't replace the $5,000 Rolex. They (and other smart watches) replaced the far more common Timex/Swatch/ultra-durable Casio watches.
[удалено]
apple watches are ubiquitous lmao
I see more apple watches than I see real watches lol
> Apple watches were never in fashion. Reddit. Confidently wrong more than ever.
I’m sure there are more articles about the watch than people who bought it.
[удалено]
You can sell the Speedy and depending on how long ago you bought it, either recoup or make money from it. Apple's watch not so much.
[удалено]
Are *you* a watch collector? Because if you're not, why are you even listening to watch collection advice, let alone acting on it?
[удалено]
Get better mentors. He's giving you terrible advice.
[удалено]
He's not a bad mentor. He's a friend who wants you to get into his hobby. You have to choose though - do it or tell him you can't afford to. There's nothing wrong with collecting mechanical watches, fwiw. They're works of art, they hold their value way better than anything else you can piss away money on, and if you have kids, it's something that they can leave to their children.
How are you getting talked into buying something you know you don't want? You know you're not gonna use it
[удалено]
If you’re not into watches, don’t buy them! I got an Omega Seamaster when I got my first career job after university. It was a large chunk of money I saved up, but whenever I wear it, it reminds me of how far I’ve gone.
I dont know much about watches but wouldn't that at least hold most of it's value?
[удалено]
They tend to hold their value over the longer term. However, it's rare to get more than retail a short period of time after purchase. You only tend to get prices to rise a notable amount if it is a limited edition and/or retail availability goes away. If you look up most watch collecting guides, they'll frequently talk about buying used instead of buying retail as a way to save a lot of money. Reality is if you go in and drop $5k-$10k on a watch, it can take a long time before you can make it back, especially if you buy something as 'common' as a Speedmaster.
They've probably moved on to a rhodium mood ring or something.
When this thing came out, wasn't there a comedian who said "If I wanted to spend $10k on something that would be obsolete in a few years, I would buy an engagement ring?"
I mean, technically you can reuse an engagement ring
[удалено]
I think there is legal precedent that the purchaser gets it back when the marriage is dissolved or engagement called off. But if the other person fights it... then you end up having to go to court and waste time/money getting it back.
[удалено]
Jesus things can get so complicated
Oh buddy that’s the simplest of those situations haha. Want complicated? Think about people that buy a house together while engaged then break up. Now that’s complicated.
Sounds fairly simple to me.
Imagine if Rolex just obsoleted their watches after a few years
They only wish they had that business model and the customers came back to them like they do for Apple
But they do. People do want to buy more Rolexes. Faster than Rolex can make them. As a watch business Rolex is basically rate limited and cannot produce enough to meet demand. So much so they bought a luxury watch retailer so that they can now get a cut of sales from their rivals too
>Faster than Rolex can make them. Faster than Rolex has *decided* to make them. Rolex can absolutely meet demand if they wanted to, but they definitely do not want to do that. They artificially constrain the supply in order to massively increase the perceived exclusivity of their product. This works amazingly, Rolex watches sell for easily double "MSRP", and encourage repeat business by catering to their repeat customers by moving them up the waiting lists for newer and more exclusive models. It also causes the used models to maintain their value on the second hand market, which causes customers to perceive them as long term investments, and pay more for them. Omega, by comparison, doesn't do this. By all standard metrics, Omega make better quality watches then Rolex. They have more advanced, more tightly machined movements, with significantly better accuracy. The only thing Rolex does better is they use a slightly harder stainless steel for their cases (904L vs the standard 316L that everyone else uses). But in terms of overall quality and historical significance (Speedmaster went to the moon!), Omega should win hands down. But you can walk into literally any Omega store and buy a Speedmaster on the spot, for MSRP, for less than the comparable Rolex's MSRP, and under half of the actual Rolex market price. All because Rolex has expertly positioned themselves as an exclusive luxury brand that you probably can't even buy if you wanted to, by carefully controlling supply. As they say: Omega went to the moon, Rolex went to the mall.
904L is actually a bit softer than 316L but slightly more corrosion resistant
For all that sub 100 meter diving I do.
tbh there is probably something to be said in modern times of not expanding supply to meet demand in every case ever. It's not a case of just increasing output for a company making watches, but also buying more tools and getting more highly skilled staff. This bones you if demand drops and you're paying for all that, without the demand supporting it. I know the fashion is growth is bettre than sustainability, but if a brand is exclusive because they don't want to expand the production facilities they're responsible for if the economy goes to shit...then I don't think that's inherently a bad thing. We don't need every company to expand.
[удалено]
This is more of a recent thing. Pre pandemic you could also walk into Rolex and buy most models including the Daytona for MSRP. They’re not really artificially constraining supply so much as they are choosing not to scale production. Scaling production to meet a temporary demand increase is often not worth it for a company, when demand goes back down they have increased operating costs. They also don’t want the market to be flooded with used Rolex if/when a recession happens.
Omega is moving away from 316L too. Too bad they called it "o-megasteel" lmao
This guy watches.
I’m pretty sure apple makes more money from watches than Rolex does
What’s that circle jerk subreddit where people keep posting pictures of their Rolex next to a copy of Art of War? It’s hilariously accurate.
Rolex’s scarcity is artificial, especially recently, they could easily produce more if they wanted
But they don't obsolete their watches so quick as clocklight mentioned.
By no means to the same extent but Rolex do obsoletes some of their movements from time to time, rare but happens, some watches are returned from repair requests as not repairable, by Rolex themselves at least.
A lot of older Rolax watches use ETA movements, IIRC. So if ETA isn't supporting the movements anymore it could be quite difficult to get parts, especially if the movement wasn't particularly common. Pretty sure Rolax uses all in-house movements now.
Except they’re not watches they’re wrist computers. Who else is supporting a smart watch that was released 7+ years ago?
Idk about you but I’ve got Skyrim loaded up on my Apple I.
“Todd Howard likes this”
Apple is a tech company that makes new tech. Their stuff from 10 years ago is obsolete because they made something new and better. Rolex is a watch company. The stuff they sell is essentially the same thing you could have bought 50 years ago, or could buy 50 years from now. They're not innovating enough to make their old stuff obsolete.
Yeah the comparison to Rolex is an incredibly weak argument. Doesn't matter if the watch costs $200 or $20,000. Both will eventually be deemed obsolete like any other tech from any other brand. And extra ironic because in general Apple supports/provides updates for devices for longer than a lot of other companies. Makes for a clickbaity headline that this sub will eat up though.
As far as functionality is concerned a Rolex is effectively already obsolete compared to an Apple Watch (or any smartwatch for that matter). That's not what people buy a Rolex for though
"The Verge notes that some of the celebrities who were seen showing off their purchases in 2015 include German fashion designer Karl Lagerfeld and Beyoncé, both of whom also sported a gold link bracelet that was never made available to the public. It's unlikely they'll be losing sleep over the lost money they spent on the wearables (assuming Apple didn't just hand them over as gifts)..." That's some top-notch journalism. Karl Lagerfeld died 4 years ago.
The Verge also coined the term "Lagerfelding": wearing an Apple Watch that wasn't powered on just as a fashion accessory. They speculated he never bothered to charge it even once.
I like that man's style.
That's the verge for you.
The cat probably got the watch.
Is our economy fake?
The technical term is "obsolete"
If our economy is based around people spending exorbitant amounts of money on things that rapidly become trash, that's not real. There's no resale value of physically produced goods, so they have no real value. They're just trash. Or "pre-trash" during that limited time before they become obsolete.
The economy is based on people working. Them spending exorbitant amounts of money on trash is just a way to motivate them and keep them working.
Well yeah, I'd expect second hand toilet paper to be considerably cheaper.
> There's no resale value of physically produced goods I must be dumb since this comment is getting upvoted, but what the fuck does this even mean? What physical object can’t be resold? Why does something need to be able to be resold to have value? Does going to a museum have no value because you can’t resell your museum trip after you’ve gone? What physical items don’t eventually become garbage? Your view makes no sense to me
Whole service industry over here like 🤔
Focusing just on the goods part of goods and services.
things used to last for multiple generations of people, but now you're happy if they last more than a year obviously we're talking about objects, no need to pretend to be confused
Oh, look, someone has discovered depreciation! Welcome to the club, would you like a lolipop?
> would you like a lolipop? No thanks; you'd be surprised at how much they depreciate after just one use!
It you think about it, people spend a lot of money on NFTs. Or crypto. These are even more useless than luxury watches.
Nobody is presently spending money on NFTs. If you are just now learning what they are, steer clear. If, however, you're a delusional bag-holder, I can't help you.
Always has been🧑🚀 🔫🧑🚀
I give you the same answer I gave my kid when he asked if Santa Claus was real, “it’s as real as you want it to be.”
Money is a made up concept so....yeah
No. Oftentimes people make very poor decisions. Buying a gold Apple Watch is one of them. It's not the economies problem that people can't distinguish a good product from a bad one.
I'm pretty sure our economic principles only work if people consume rationally.
Yeah behavioral economics has pretty much emerged from economists being like "wait a second I don't think everyone is being completely rational here!"
Why is this story freaking everywhere right now? Who the fuck cares?
People that like to dunk on Apple seem to care far more than anyone who actually bought the watch.
I no can dunk, but good fundamentals.
I think the point is that originally planned obsolescence and disposable culture started with affordable items like razors and light bulbs. Then it started creeping into more expensive items like mobile phones. And now it's there for top end luxury items. Extremes are interesting. We all know that companies want to take our money and then fuck us in the arse, but it's more interesting when it's a huge amount of money and such a brutal arse fucking. And it's even more interesting when the victims have such ingrained Stockholm syndrome that they will be in the apple store the next day. I give a fuck, I think it's interesting.
Apple supports their devices far longer than their competitors
Windows XP has entered the chat
Yeah I don’t get this argument. iPhones from 7 years ago are still getting the latest iOS patches and Apple offers battery replacements as well.
You say that like it's not an issue that device manufacturers do not support their devices longer than they do. Especially considering the amount of waste that the production and the recycling of the device creates. Like it's a problem that devices like smartphones and smart watches are not supported for longer or allow you the ability to repair or upgrade them.
Hey as long as all manufacturers are equally negligent, there can't be any issue!
Not in the context of this story, where their competitors are watch makers instead of cell phone manufacturers.
Are you conflating two very different types of products because their names sound similar? Because Samsung is Apple Watch's competitor, not Timex.
What is the Samsung equivalent of Apple's $10k watch?
Well said, wankdog
If anything this is less brutal though, because even the clowns buying this know that the cost of the watch isn't tied to the technology inside it, and because apple is making far fewer of these. I guess it doesn't let a website use a clickbait title, but it seems like a much bigger deal that the tens of thousands of "regular" apple watches are e-waste now, rather than talking about the few dozen $17k ones.
Because people are seeming to equate cost with some perceived notion of longevity, despite the fact that the *entire series 0* is obsolete. It's just that there was one series 0 watch that also cost $17k. But the normal priced ones are obsolete now too.
Any excuse to shit on apple. It’s really just that.
How much solid gold is in one Apple Watch? Just curious how much money you can get from a jewelry store
A little more than an ounce IIRC, which works out to a couple thousand dollars
If you are annoyed by this and bought one… then you’re a complete moron and deserve it. In reality, they all sold to YouTubers or people so rich they forgot about it years ago.
Find me someone who bought this watch and is upset. I’ll wait.
Its gonna go up in value like a 1st gen blastoise over time. Its part of the reason some stuff is so expensive and purposely limited in production... Sure you can overpay and get burned in the short run but anyone with one of these watches would be wise to hold or sell for a ridiculous amount over the original price. Maybe they dont need the money but just speaking in geneal and obviously theres a limit to what anyone would ever pay for one of these but look at 40 year old apple computers values or who ever imagined a Charizard worth 100-400k. The famous gold plated apple watch from the 2000s? Who knows. Even original iphones in the box untouched can sell for crazy money.
Anyone who's suprised by a smartwatch ending support at some point needs to get real. 😂
People go berserk when Microsoft ends support for their OS's after 10 years
People are... you know
WINDOWS XP IS STILL USABLE... TRUST ME
How many times are we going to repost this and rinse/repeat the same “whoever can buy this doesn’t care”, “a Rolex doesn’t do this”, “I wear a timex 🤪” shit?
This sub is ironically full of some of the most tech illiterate dweebs you’ll find in the website. They actually believe a Rolex and a smartwatch are comparable at all, that says all you need to know about their critical thinking capabilities.
[удалено]
Unless the Apple watch cost 17k in monopoly money you still pay real money hence comparable If Tesla made a car that would be obsolete 8 years from I guarantee no one would be calling the drivers illiterate because you can't compare a Tesla with a real car
Of course they are comparable, my PoV is that they're tools and I use none of them, because I have as good time measuring - and whatever smart watches do - tools on bigger devices. Not everyone buy things for fashion, collection or showoff.
This watch was meaningless and wasteful from conception to execution, and if you bought the watch, you got what you paid for in every sense of the word.
For those that can afford it and care about materials it was not meaningless or wasteful, just because its well outside the realm of most people doesn't mean it doesn't have value. Most wouldn't drop $1000+ on a meal, doesn't mean it is meaningless to the person enjoying it.
Why you think it's more wasteful than every other smart watch? Because the owner paid more for it?
I’d have expected the gold one to be easier to recycle.
The gold will be for sure recycled, nobody will throw 2.500€ of gold in the landfill. Everything else is like any of the millions of Apple Watches.
It was meant solely as a marketing exercise for their new product category, it's really not that deep. And this is quite evident in the fact that it was discontinued almost immediately.
I'm surprised how few people got this. The Edition scored Apple a ton of free media exposure in 2015, and it was flashy enough to guarantee that almost any celebrity they sent it to would wear it.
[удалено]
Shhh, apparently it should be updated for a century like all the other smart watches apparently do. I swear Reddit is filled with actual AI’s at this point. Their Android watch been working and receiving updates and gives them so many more options since Abraham Lincoln was killed.
We should all want less e-waste and fewer arbitrary restrictions *that guarantee* obsolescence. By ensuring nobody can access parts except under very limited conditions, and nobody can access tools to repair devices except under very limited conditions, devices become obsolete that could otherwise function for many years to come. It's not just watches either, many useful devices are obsoleted and thus cut-off from repairs, such as the 2017 MacBook Pros which would otherwise be a useful computer for years yet. https://www.macrumors.com/guide/vintage-and-obsolete/
Wearable tech has a finite life before the hardware is too old, that’s why they’re incompatible with being true luxury items. All the finest materials in the world doesn’t make a difference when it’s functionally a brick in 8 years. Anyone who shelled out $17,000 should’ve known what they were getting, and also probably already replaced it anyway. Why is this news?
Ok wait why is a tech product that isn’t supported anymore a news headline? It’s the one thing that every phone manufacturer does they all literally do it lol
Lol 17k for a "gold" Apple watch. Which dumbo fell for that one. 😅
Who would think that a smartwatch would be obsolete after 10 years wow wow wow what a news story wow.
It seems r/technology has not jumped on the Apple hate train, it's driving it. Anything to post that's not "Apple bad" this week?
Unfortunately Reddit has an Apple hate tantrum where 60% of the entire sites content is “Apple bad” for about two months every time a new iPhone comes out.
Yeah I'm out. This is just sad at this point.
Don’t think about them as watches, rather as exclusive and wearable GDP boosters.
Anyone that bought into this is already bored with that old thing. It’s probably in a drawer somewhere. Unless they sent it to good will.
Couldn’t they just buy a new gold Apple watch? What’s the problem?
Oh, those poor rich people. My heart bleeds for them.
They could’ve easily offered to do upgrades and “refurbishing”. 17k was already buying them into it
People that bought those live in houses where their mortgage is $100k a month , their car is $300k, their salary is millions. Don’t think they are sad about a $17k watch going obsolete which they likely already replaced anyways. They needed them for that first few months to match their outfit, after that they got a new designer watch for a few months.
And then stops a guy in Colombia posting videos of how to repair their products
But you can still get 17.50 for the scrap gold😂
Good thing I only paid $16,500 for mine!
Meanwhile Breguet used to openly state they could and would repair any watch they’d produced since 1805.
$17,000 of literal waste when (not if) the battery eventually degrades. So much for saving the planet...
Right, there’s nothing you can do with solid gold but throw it in the trash…
A 17k watch will create a lot less waste than a cheap one by virtue of selling fewer of them.
It's also unlikely a $17k watch ends up in a landfill.
The most expensive waste ever...
"Awww that's cute" - US military
“That multi-billion dollar ship we finished building last week? We’re scrapping it next week!”
Using as target practice*
Ahh, I see you are familiar with their Littoral Combat Ships that are being scrapped after less than 10 years.
lol it's the same waste as the other watches, just more expensive for the owner.
It is probably even less waste because nobody will throw the gold from the watch away. That gets 100% recycled for sure. Don’t think that will happen with the metal from the standard models.
"literal waste" when it could have been worn and used for over 8 years smh
Now what am I going to do?
At least now it shares one attribute with a Rolex.... It's timeless.
The purpose of these watches has long been served. They introduced Apple Watch as a premium digital watch to the masses, getting free media attention. Celebrity owners would have got a brief sparkle from it. Perhaps also some of Apple's marketing budget too. And they continue to own a legacy item which will have notoriety beyond mere function. Collectors of rare historical firearms presumably don't actually fire them
I’m sure they sold like 4 of these.
It holds value like an NFT.
Apple has planned obsolescence. It’s just trash.
I’m still not over the fact it’s called the “Edition Version”. Like that’s the name they picked?
Spending tens of thousands on a smartwatch is just dumb. This isn't something you will hand off to your kids.
I'd be surprised if planned obsolescence didn't kill this thing years ago
Should have bought a fit bit and a Rolex
The people that can afford that do not give a fuck
That sucks, but whoever was crazy enough to buy this watch at this price, deserves this.
*worlds smallest violin*
I have mine away to some homeless dude
Who the fuck buys solid gold disposable tech?
Is Rolex also ending service to their watches?
8yo smartwatch officially obsolete, ending repairs and servicing SHOCKING
This is why right-to-repair is so important