3 ms·

On the one hand, the analog watch they show to compare with the Apple Watch is an Omega Speedmaster, the first watch on the moon. Shows that you can do great th

On the one hand, the analog watch they show to compare with the Apple Watch is an Omega Speedmaster, the first watch on the moon. Shows that you can do great things with just gears and springs. On the other hand, it does cost $3,000...

Jtsummers 9y ago
On the third hand, it'll still be running after 50 years and fully compatible with all standard issue eyeballs. Amortized cost of $60/year. Will the Apple Watch still be running in 50 years? At around $300/watch right now, each one needs to last at least 5 years to remain price competitive.
- inamberclad 9y ago
  5 years sounds alright, actually. Tech can last that long, despite engineering for obsolescence. But that moonwatch will probably stay in style much longer too.
- kerkeslager 9y ago
  In 50 years, will it still fit my sense of style? Will I manage to avoid misplacing it or getting lost for 50 years? I'm not saying I want a Smart Watch (getting even more distracted? No thanks). What I'm saying is that lasting power in a device isn't just about continuing to function.
  - Jtsummers 9y ago
    Fair, but that particular style has apparently already made it 50 years. It's got lasting power at least with a decent sized (or well funded) segment of the market. It's also an object you can give to children and grandchildren. I have a number of objects like these. I would have zero interest in passing on my 2017 Apple Watch 3 in 20 years. There's something to be said, IMO, for things that will last generations and not just years.
    - icebraining 9y ago
      I got a watch from my grandfather. It was completely wasted on me.
  - icantdrive55 9y ago
    I would bet that Omega Speedmaster, Rolex Bubbleback, an IWC ingenier, or older Rolex submariner will still be in style 50 years from now. My favorite watches are all made before I was born, and I'm getting up there. Certain watches are timeless.
- egwynn 9y ago
  That Speedmaster won't run "service free" for that long, though. If you go by this guy's account, it'll cost you over $100/yr to maintain such a thing: https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-service-industry-taking-an-omega-speedmaster-professional-for-an-omega-authorized-service https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-service-industry-takin.... I think the correct takeaway here is: "don't use famous moon watches as your baseline comparison for 'dumb watch'".
nathan_long 9y ago
Sure, but 2,970 of those dollars are just for fanciness. My $30 digital Timex is fast, can be worn to exercise and then in the shower, doesn't need charging or winding, and is (IMO) easier to read than analog. It just doesn't look fancy.

Jtsummers 9y ago

On the third hand, it'll still be running after 50 years and fully compatible with all standard issue eyeballs. Amortized cost of $60/year. Will the Apple Watch still be running in 50 years? At around $300/watch right now, each one needs to last at least 5 years to remain price competitive.

inamberclad 9y ago
5 years sounds alright, actually. Tech can last that long, despite engineering for obsolescence. But that moonwatch will probably stay in style much longer too.
kerkeslager 9y ago
In 50 years, will it still fit my sense of style? Will I manage to avoid misplacing it or getting lost for 50 years? I'm not saying I want a Smart Watch (getting even more distracted? No thanks). What I'm saying is that lasting power in a device isn't just about continuing to function.
- Jtsummers 9y ago
  Fair, but that particular style has apparently already made it 50 years. It's got lasting power at least with a decent sized (or well funded) segment of the market. It's also an object you can give to children and grandchildren. I have a number of objects like these. I would have zero interest in passing on my 2017 Apple Watch 3 in 20 years. There's something to be said, IMO, for things that will last generations and not just years.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    I got a watch from my grandfather. It was completely wasted on me.
- icantdrive55 9y ago
  I would bet that Omega Speedmaster, Rolex Bubbleback, an IWC ingenier, or older Rolex submariner will still be in style 50 years from now. My favorite watches are all made before I was born, and I'm getting up there. Certain watches are timeless.
egwynn 9y ago
That Speedmaster won't run "service free" for that long, though. If you go by this guy's account, it'll cost you over $100/yr to maintain such a thing: https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-service-industry-taking-an-omega-speedmaster-professional-for-an-omega-authorized-service https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/the-service-industry-takin.... I think the correct takeaway here is: "don't use famous moon watches as your baseline comparison for 'dumb watch'".

nathan_long 9y ago

Sure, but 2,970 of those dollars are just for fanciness. My $30 digital Timex is fast, can be worn to exercise and then in the shower, doesn't need charging or winding, and is (IMO) easier to read than analog. It just doesn't look fancy.