# Apple says its 'Apple watch' should last 3 years!!!!!!



## Trickydick (Jun 8, 2014)

I don't own any smart watch myself, but if they are just designed to have such a short life span (as with the mandatory cellphone), I cannot ever see myself investing in any smart watch. Would I buy any watch which had such a short life expectancy? I don't think so. If these smart watches were given away as a freebie when you purchase a new cellphone, then I could see the attraction of owning one. But to pay multiple £££$$$ on top the purchase price for the cellphone, I cannot see the the attraction to fork out again in another three years or so. 
Here is the article 
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/15/apple-iphone-last-three-years-mac-computer-four


----------



## T1meout (Sep 27, 2013)

I don't give a sh1t. Personally I prefer oranges.


----------



## SSTEEL (Mar 3, 2013)

Kind of reminds me of a scam house security company that was taken to court a while back for selling house alarms which had a circuit built in, to disable the alarm after a certain time period shortly after the warranty had run out. They made a fortune so called repairing all these, but the consumer right were onto them.


----------



## MrDagon007 (Sep 24, 2012)

Many keep their macs and idevices longer than that, much linger for macs It is not because the older ones are technically not cutting edge anymore that they have become useless.


----------



## WatchingYou77 (Jan 31, 2016)

MrDagon007 said:


> Many keep their macs and idevices longer than that, much linger for macs It is not because the older ones are technically not cutting edge anymore that they have become useless.


I love apple computers and have been using their laptops for years. I travel quite a bit, and for some reason I have never had a computer last more than about 3 years. Invariably, the hard drive engage mechanism always poops out and apple says it will cost 100000 USD to fix it, at which point I just get a new one.

Annoying, but forced obsolescence keeps the profits flowing. Perhaps I am just hard on my gear.

Until the Apple Watch has a teleportation feature, I will never buy one.


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

Maybe apple don't feel there is enough money in the AW to follow the same release cycle as the iPhone. Maybe they want to invest the R&D money in other products.


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

The key is the vast majority of their target audience won;t keep them that long anyway. While I keep a phone until it dies my wife and most of mine/her friends get a new one as soon as the next generation comes out. I am an AV geek and buy new TVs and projectors long before they die so I understand the concept.


----------



## Watch Fan in Beijing (Jul 15, 2009)

Obviously if it is useful to my daily life (it isn't so far from what I've seen) - I'd pay 300, 400 bucks for a device that only lasts 3 years. That's hardly outrageous. Laptops and cellphones can have around that length of lifespan.


----------



## James_ (Sep 5, 2011)

It's the same with mobile phones. The phone is usually outdated after 3 or 4 years. 

I had a perfectly fine Samsung Galaxy Ace 2. I bought it when it was already about 2 years on the market. I turned off automatic software and app upgrades because I wanted to choose myself. Then it started to go funny, think photobucket compatibility with my browser and every other browser was the first to play up. So then I manually uptated the phone which then made it unusable.


If you think you are gonna have a fully functioning easy to usr modern smartphone or watch forever then you're gonna be disappointed.


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

Sounds the same as with cell phones. "Need" to upgrade every few years to avoid obsolescence.


----------



## BarracksSi (Feb 13, 2013)

I'm still on my iPhone 5S, which is pushing three years old. It runs fine (iOS 9.3.1 is just as quick as the original OS it shipped with), but it needs a fresh battery.

The _obsolescence_ life cycle is much longer for Apple. Seven years, I think, is the point where they stop making replacement parts. Apple had to discontinue the long-running iPod Classic, too, because nobody was making the hard drives anymore.


----------



## scentedlead (May 11, 2015)

Also, people don't upgrade because their products are useless, they upgrade because they want new features. My dad's still using an iPhone 4S-his needs are simple so he's happy with it, and the phone still works.

Upgrading is expensive, but not upgrading means missing out on new features. For most people, around three years is a good compromise. Smartwatches, like other computers, will follow the same pattern. If you don't upgrade your computer, and tablet, and smartphone frequently, then you also prolly won't upgrade your smartwatch too frequently.



Trickydick said:


> I don't own any smart watch myself, but if they are just designed to have such a short life span (as with the mandatory cellphone), I cannot ever see myself investing in any smart watch. Would I buy any watch which had such a short life expectancy? I don't think so. If these smart watches were given away as a freebie when you purchase a new cellphone, then I could see the attraction of owning one. But to pay multiple £££$$$ on top the purchase price for the cellphone, I cannot see the the attraction to fork out again in another three years or so.
> Here is the article
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/15/apple-iphone-last-three-years-mac-computer-four


"Investing"? If you're buying a smartwatch as an "investment," you're barking up the wrong tree. People don't buy electronics for investments, they buy them for convenience and productivity.

My watch does a lot of things. If I keep my watch for 3 years and it costed me $400, that's $2.74 per day. That's cheaper than a coffee at Starbucks-which I use my watch to pay for.

Heck, even for complications alone-day/date; sunrise/sunset; time zones; moon phase; and, to get really fancy, planetarium-even if I buy a new AW Sport every two years for the rest of my life, that'll still cost me less than a mechanical watch with *all* of those complications. Some people want to buy a watch as an investment; some people want to buy a watch they will *use*.


----------



## Ed.YANG (Jun 8, 2011)

My ETA powered SANDOZ had lived with me from the day i bought, till today... 20yrs and still rockin!!!


----------



## MrDagon007 (Sep 24, 2012)

scentedlead said:


> Also, people don't upgrade because their products are useless, they upgrade because they want new features. My dad's still using an iPhone 4S-his needs are simple so he's happy with it, and the phone still works.
> 
> Upgrading is expensive, but not upgrading means missing out on new features. For most people, around three years is a good compromise. Smartwatches, like other computers, will follow the same pattern. If you don't upgrade your computer, and tablet, and smartphone frequently, then you also prolly won't upgrade your smartwatch too frequently.
> 
> ...


A lot of good points but your math is weak


----------



## utzelu (Aug 17, 2015)

We shouldn't confuse the article with believing that the AW has a built in obsolesce of three years. I think the 3 years is more of a business guidance used in their business plan. The product is built to last more than that, and as long as you are OK with the feature limitation over the time, it will probably live more. Changing the battery will be a real issue as most probably Apple won't provide a new one after some time (heck, they don't want to change it on my 4 years old iPad 3).


----------



## MrDagon007 (Sep 24, 2012)

utzelu said:


> We shouldn't confuse the article with believing that the AW has a built in obsolesce of three years. I think the 3 years is more of a business guidance used in their business plan. The product is built to last more than that, and as long as you are OK with the feature limitation over the time, it will probably live more. Changing the battery will be a real issue as most probably Apple won't provide a new one after some time (heck, they don't want to change it on my 4 years old iPad 3).


Exactly. I expect the basic protocols to keep working for several years. The attraction of newer models will be size, new sensors (health will be a killer app for weaeables), a facetime camera etc. But like a new rolex, it doesn t mean thar the previous gen is suddenly useless.
Regarding battery, it can be replaced with a tool and you can bet that vendors will offer the service for several years.


----------



## arrowandboard (Apr 23, 2016)

I feel like it's a love/hate thing for me personally.
My dad has always had awesome mechanical watches that have lasted my entire life, so automatics always have a place in my heart.
But I love all of the extra things my Apple Watch can do, particularly making me more aware of my activity/health - that alone makes the price worth it for me.


----------



## Cobia (Nov 24, 2013)

The type of person who buys that sort of watch will have ditched it by then as they will have a new model to wear then and it will be technically outdated, so it wont be very smart any more either, the reality is that these are throw away disposable items, just like mobile phones.


----------



## wtma (Jul 26, 2014)

Trickydick said:


> I don't own any smart watch myself, but if they are just designed to have such a short life span (as with the mandatory cellphone), I cannot ever see myself investing in any smart watch. Would I buy any watch which had such a short life expectancy? I don't think so. If these smart watches were given away as a freebie when you purchase a new cellphone, then I could see the attraction of owning one. But to pay multiple £££$$$ on top the purchase price for the cellphone, I cannot see the the attraction to fork out again in another three years or so.
> Here is the article
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/15/apple-iphone-last-three-years-mac-computer-four


This is an inherent property of a product that is basically computing device. Silicon-based products such as computer, cell phone, and this smart watch will render itself almost totally useless in less than ~10yrs at most because the technology (both hardware and software) advances in such a high pace as demanded by the modern culture of the society. IMO, a traditional watch and smart watch are two different things altogether (despite the word "watch" is in both names).


----------



## zetaplus93 (Jul 22, 2013)

Calm down people.

If you read Apple's webpage, you'll see that, for the purpose of a product lifecycle assessment, they model customer's expected usage to be about 3 years. This means they expect people to sell the watch, on average, after 3 years. Once sold, someone else wears the watch for some time after that (perhaps after the battery is replaced, and perhaps the case as well), so the total years is longer than 3 years:

http://www.apple.com/environment/answers/

But yes, they don't expect people to wear a smart watch beyond X number of years (I don't expect it to last more than 5-7 years personally). It's not a traditional watch.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## zetaplus93 (Jul 22, 2013)

BarracksSi said:


> I'm still on my iPhone 5S, which is pushing three years old. It runs fine (iOS 9.3.1 is just as quick as the original OS it shipped with), but it needs a fresh battery.


No way, my iPhone 5S was noticeably slower after I got iOS 8.3 (damn Apple Music). So much so that I upgraded to a 6S Plus.

But I suppose it's a matter of usage and expectations. I hate lag anywhere since I use the phone so much.

Likewise, watchOS 2 really slowed down the AW. Feels like I'm using an iPad 2 (no, not iPad Air 2, but the 2nd gen iPad from 2011) with iOS 9. Horribly slow. But I suppose this is the price of going with a first gen product. Oh well.

</end rant>

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## zetaplus93 (Jul 22, 2013)

Ed.YANG said:


> My ETA powered SANDOZ had lived with me from the day i bought, till today... 20yrs and still rockin!!!


I'll bet my Motorola StarTAC from the 90s still works. I'm sure I can charge it up and make calls. Not bad for a 20 year old phone.

Then again, it pales in comparison with my iPhone in terms of what I can do.

Same comparison applies for smart watches and traditional watches.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

This is the same as for cell phones. Until technical progress is much slower than today, you need to upgrade every year or to to get the full functionality of the devices.


----------



## zetaplus93 (Jul 22, 2013)

scentedlead said:


> Also, people don't upgrade because their products are useless, they upgrade because they want new features. My dad's still using an iPhone 4S-his needs are simple so he's happy with it, and the phone still works.
> 
> Upgrading is expensive, but not upgrading means missing out on new features. For most people, around three years is a good compromise. Smartwatches, like other computers, will follow the same pattern. If you don't upgrade your computer, and tablet, and smartphone frequently, then you also prolly won't upgrade your smartwatch too frequently.
> 
> ...


Agreed, though it's actually $0.365 a day ($400 over 3 years). Boosts your argument even further though.

In comparison, my GS cost $2.5k, and assuming 2 services ($500 each time) to get me to 20 years of use (and assuming $500 residual value at the end of 20 years), would work out to be $0.411/day.

Then again, my GS only tells me the time and date. But it does look so much better 

The solution? Wear one on each wrist 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## scentedlead (May 11, 2015)

zetaplus93 said:


> Agreed, though it's actually $0.365 a day ($400 over 3 years). Boosts your argument even further though.


Serves me right for doing math _after_ my shot of whisky night cap.



> In comparison, my GS cost $2.5k, and assuming 2 services ($500 each time) to get me to 20 years of use (and assuming $500 residual value at the end of 20 years), would work out to be $0.411/day.
> 
> Then again, my GS only tells me the time and date. But it does look so much better
> 
> The solution? Wear one on each wrist


I have a Timex Easy Reader (T20041) that I think looks much better than my Apple Watch. It's a bit small at 35mm, but some of the other Easy Readers got a size boost to 38mm and I hope in the next few years, this model too will get that boost. At $30 for a few years, that works out to 3¢/day-vs. the AW's 37¢/day-and if all I needed was a good looking watch and the date and time, then clearly the Timex would be all I need to be content.

But last night, I went out drinking and my breathalyzer has a watch app. Not having to pull out my phone when I'm drunk and surrounded by drunk people? How expensive does a traditional watch have to be before it can do that?

As for wearing one watch on each wrist? Sometimes redundancy is good-multiple copies of data are a lifesaver! Sometimes redundancy is, well, redundant-and I think wearing two watches falls into this category. But, when I know my car will be parked in a garage instead of a lot, I'll keep a spare watch in there, just in case.


----------



## MrDagon007 (Sep 24, 2012)

Meanwhile I love my AW, actually wearing it right now in a business trip - the stainless model on leather looks perfectly acceptable on a suit, whatever WIS think.
The one thing I notice is that I use the standard functionality, but I don't particularly care for the 3rd party apps so far. I hope that the base functionality stays compatible for several years to come.


----------



## lvt (Sep 15, 2009)

I'm typing this post using a 4 yo HTC smartphone. It's on the second battery and still runs strong.

I think if you can replace your AW battery you could easily double its lifespan.

_I'm a professional [desk] diver._


----------



## pr1uk (Sep 25, 2012)

The worst thing about Apple products and i own all of them well except the latest mini wrist phone is the fact that you could never replace the battery giving them a limited life span. Not the best thing for customers but a great thing for Apple sales and as nowadays i tend to either be wearing my Vector or Pebble smart watch i have to have bluetooth turn on 24/7 so an even greater battery drainage. 

Peter


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

pr1uk said:


> The worst thing about Apple products and i own all of them well except the latest mini wrist phone is the fact that you could never replace the battery giving them a limited life span. Not the best thing for customers but a great thing for Apple sales and as nowadays i tend to either be wearing my Vector or Pebble smart watch i have to have bluetooth turn on 24/7 so an even greater battery drainage.
> 
> Peter


Can't Apple replace a dead battery for a fee?


----------



## BarracksSi (Feb 13, 2013)

ronalddheld said:


> Can't Apple replace a dead battery for a fee?


Yup.

And don't mind that guy. He's fulfilling his weekly quota for anti-Apple posts.


----------



## scentedlead (May 11, 2015)

pr1uk said:


> The worst thing about Apple products and i own all of them well except the latest mini wrist phone is the fact that you could never replace the battery giving them a limited life span. Not the best thing for customers but a great thing for Apple sales and as nowadays i tend to either be wearing my Vector or Pebble smart watch i have to have bluetooth turn on 24/7 so an even greater battery drainage.
> 
> Peter





ronalddheld said:


> Can't Apple replace a dead battery for a fee?





BarracksSi said:


> Yup.
> 
> And don't mind that guy. He's fulfilling his weekly quota for anti-Apple posts.


And he has a _very very high_ quota for anti-Apple posts.

(He doesn't seem to understand that being that Seiko user who rants and rants and rants and rants and rants against Rolex-in the Rolex forum-makes him _that guy._ But whatev.)


----------



## BarracksSi (Feb 13, 2013)

scentedlead said:


> And he has a _very very high_ quota for anti-Apple posts.
> 
> (He doesn't seem to understand that being that Seiko user who rants and rants and rants and rants and rants against Rolex-in the Rolex forum-makes him _that guy._ But whatev.)


Makes me wonder if Samsung pays him per post.

(not unheard of, either)


----------



## ronalddheld (May 5, 2005)

Anyone know the cost of an AW battery replacement? More likely than not I would upgrade to a new watch before a battery is fully dead.


----------



## BarracksSi (Feb 13, 2013)

ronalddheld said:


> Anyone know the cost of an AW battery replacement? More likely than not I would upgrade to a new watch before a battery is fully dead.


$79

(it's kinda buried in their site, to be fair)
https://www.apple.com/batteries/service-and-recycling/
https://support.apple.com/kb/index?page=servicefaq&geo=United_States&product=applewatch
https://support.apple.com/kb/index?...States&product=watch&select=WARRANTY__PRICING


----------



## pr1uk (Sep 25, 2012)

scentedlead said:


> And he has a _very very high_ quota for anti-Apple posts.


Anti Apple not me 
I own a Macbook, iPad, iPad mini, Apple TV 2, iPhone 5s and time capsule and hoping that this September when they release the iPhone 7 it will be a better size then the 6 so i can upgrade my phone.

"Makes me wonder if Samsung pays him per post."
Oh and i do not own anything made by Samsung not that they are a bad company just not my choice


----------



## bryan00 (Nov 21, 2015)

Cobia said:


> The type of person who buys that sort of watch will have ditched it by then as they will have a new model to wear then and it will be technically outdated, so it wont be very smart any more either, the reality is that these are throw away disposable items, just like mobile phones.


I agree with you buddy.


----------



## shnjb (May 12, 2009)

No s---. Really?
A mobile computing device running on a small lithium ion battery, like smartphones, will not be useful after three years of daily use?
Really?
Shocking.


----------



## Mr.Argyle (Oct 24, 2014)

that can't be true?!


----------

