3 ms·

I was thinking about how long an Apple Watch could take to become obsolete, given how quickly electronics, and particularly mobile electronics, become obsolete.

by ssharp 12y ago

I was thinking about how long an Apple Watch could take to become obsolete, given how quickly electronics, and particularly mobile electronics, become obsolete. I kept coming back to the idea that these things could last quite some time, possibly a very long time. The watch shouldn't need to do substantial processing, only has a limited number of pixels to push and shouldn't rely on substantial processing like graphics, crunching data, decoding a/v, and other things we push our smartphones to do. It seems like if Apple launches with good enough hardware, that software updates can keep the watch hardware relevant for many times longer than software updates can keep phones relevant.

hbosch 12y ago
Sure, you may theoretically be able to keep an Apple Watch for 2 years, 5 years, or longer potentially... but Apple will be releasing a new one every year, too. And even though your watch is serviceable for 5 years, you'll be having FOMO after 1 or 2.
jannotti 12y ago
That all sounds reasonable. But I have to believe it's completely wrong. Because it's the same sort of "reasonable" that says every level of technology is pretty much all you need. That is finally (decades later) pretty much true of desktop computers (but not displays). And it's getting there for laptops (excepting their displays and batteries). It's still years away for phones. And to think that the very first generation of of Apple watch is somehow going to get everything right to last for even one decade? I think that's preposterous. The only way I can see them getting around this is by saying that for, say $500, we'll be able to take your watch in and swap out its guts entirely. It feels like that has to be true. (Yet, it also seems "chincy" to talk about popping things in and out. I guess we'll see.)
- ssharp 12y ago
  I could just be completely off their target markets, but I just can't fathom why someone would spend $1,000 on a watch every two years. With phones, the case for upgrading every two or three years can be reasonably built. How much tech are they really going to add to a tag-along device that will require more hardware? If the technology is going to change that quickly, I think those speculating of some sort of update process have to be correct.
nnain 12y ago
> if Apple launches with good enough hardware, that software updates can keep the watch hardware relevant The first release of the Watch is completely dependent on the iPhone, and that's mostly due to hardware limitations. It's wrong to believe that hardware won't see an update -- the battery life would soon start to seem very dated, new less power consuming processors would arrive and better communication chipsets would help reduce the dependence on iPhone. So a hardware update is imminent.

by ssharp 12y ago

hbosch 12y ago

Sure, you may theoretically be able to keep an Apple Watch for 2 years, 5 years, or longer potentially... but Apple will be releasing a new one every year, too. And even though your watch is serviceable for 5 years, you'll be having FOMO after 1 or 2.

jannotti 12y ago

That all sounds reasonable. But I have to believe it's completely wrong. Because it's the same sort of "reasonable" that says every level of technology is pretty much all you need. That is finally (decades later) pretty much true of desktop computers (but not displays). And it's getting there for laptops (excepting their displays and batteries). It's still years away for phones. And to think that the very first generation of of Apple watch is somehow going to get everything right to last for even one decade? I think that's preposterous. The only way I can see them getting around this is by saying that for, say $500, we'll be able to take your watch in and swap out its guts entirely. It feels like that has to be true. (Yet, it also seems "chincy" to talk about popping things in and out. I guess we'll see.)

ssharp 12y ago
I could just be completely off their target markets, but I just can't fathom why someone would spend $1,000 on a watch every two years. With phones, the case for upgrading every two or three years can be reasonably built. How much tech are they really going to add to a tag-along device that will require more hardware? If the technology is going to change that quickly, I think those speculating of some sort of update process have to be correct.

nnain 12y ago

> if Apple launches with good enough hardware, that software updates can keep the watch hardware relevant The first release of the Watch is completely dependent on the iPhone, and that's mostly due to hardware limitations. It's wrong to believe that hardware won't see an update -- the battery life would soon start to seem very dated, new less power consuming processors would arrive and better communication chipsets would help reduce the dependence on iPhone. So a hardware update is imminent.