4 ms·

It is quite interesting how when someone does the job to create something, someone, that probably has not created anything meaningful in their live,because if t

It is quite interesting how when someone does the job to create something, someone, that probably has not created anything meaningful in their live,because if they had they will at least respect those that try, has to say it is not going to work. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IvnptQJ__U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IvnptQJ__U I believe that Apple has probably better information that you have. The world is tremendously big. I have been with Chinese oligarchs with several hundreds of millions of dollars of wealth, the puppet oligarchs in Ukraine and Saudi Arabia supported by the US or Russia,Africa leaders,Brazil wealthy, the owners of fortune 500 companies. These people could spend 10.000 dollars with the blink of an eye. In day to day decisions they risk millions. I don't like this, but not liking it does not make part of the reality banish.

blub 12y ago
He said watch enthusiasts, not rich people. By definition these people shouldn't be impressed by something coming with a 1 year warranty (extendable to two years). They are also interested in the mechanical wizardry happening on the inside, not just in how it looks. Apple watch is pretty much a computer, even if a pretty nifty one by our standards.
- itchyouch 12y ago
  It's amazing how irreverent we can be towards just "computers" due to their apparent ubiquity and widespread availability, yet not appreciate that a single fabrication of a silicon wafer is far more complex than the couple hundred components that are put together in a watch. We can fathom the difficulty, craftsmanship and effort that goes into combining several hundred components together in a watch, yet scoff at hundreds of millions of transistors that are just as artfully designed and brought together to bring to the masses leverage to human ability that was unfathomable just a century ago. Sure, a silicon wafer is built by machines, and does not have the "hand craftsmanship" of say a watch, yet, I would argue that far more collective effort went into designing circuits than did into designing the gear combinations that went into building a watch. When it comes to buying high-end, high-end has been about exclusivity, multiplied by the effort put into building such a product. However, when one considers the effort necessary to complete a given task, exclusive or not, being impressive can be quantified by the effort placed. Thus we are sometimes impressed when someone does something through the hard route, when an obviously easier route existed, (a la, "I'm not even mad, that's amazing"). The wealthy (and the commonors as well) like to purchase the exclusivity of effort (custom) within the bounds of their understanding as it either stirs their innate appreciations or scratches their ego. Either way, people can only appreciate the efforts of what they understand, while the efforts of what is not understood gets belittled. And the caliber of complexity occasionally peeks it heads out amongst the ultra-rich. The ultra-rich who appreciate watches and boats, versus the ultra-rich who appreciate rockets and education. As children are easily impressed at young ages and become less so as they age, our ability to be impressed should grow with our growth. IMO, If the pinnacle of "craftsmanship" is in very small turning gears, it's a shame, because there is so much more beyond that barrier.

blub 12y ago

He said watch enthusiasts, not rich people. By definition these people shouldn't be impressed by something coming with a 1 year warranty (extendable to two years). They are also interested in the mechanical wizardry happening on the inside, not just in how it looks. Apple watch is pretty much a computer, even if a pretty nifty one by our standards.

itchyouch 12y ago
It's amazing how irreverent we can be towards just "computers" due to their apparent ubiquity and widespread availability, yet not appreciate that a single fabrication of a silicon wafer is far more complex than the couple hundred components that are put together in a watch. We can fathom the difficulty, craftsmanship and effort that goes into combining several hundred components together in a watch, yet scoff at hundreds of millions of transistors that are just as artfully designed and brought together to bring to the masses leverage to human ability that was unfathomable just a century ago. Sure, a silicon wafer is built by machines, and does not have the "hand craftsmanship" of say a watch, yet, I would argue that far more collective effort went into designing circuits than did into designing the gear combinations that went into building a watch. When it comes to buying high-end, high-end has been about exclusivity, multiplied by the effort put into building such a product. However, when one considers the effort necessary to complete a given task, exclusive or not, being impressive can be quantified by the effort placed. Thus we are sometimes impressed when someone does something through the hard route, when an obviously easier route existed, (a la, "I'm not even mad, that's amazing"). The wealthy (and the commonors as well) like to purchase the exclusivity of effort (custom) within the bounds of their understanding as it either stirs their innate appreciations or scratches their ego. Either way, people can only appreciate the efforts of what they understand, while the efforts of what is not understood gets belittled. And the caliber of complexity occasionally peeks it heads out amongst the ultra-rich. The ultra-rich who appreciate watches and boats, versus the ultra-rich who appreciate rockets and education. As children are easily impressed at young ages and become less so as they age, our ability to be impressed should grow with our growth. IMO, If the pinnacle of "craftsmanship" is in very small turning gears, it's a shame, because there is so much more beyond that barrier.