4 ms·

I'm really torn on these smart watches. I really don't see the utility benefit vs. the tradeoff of a another gadget to care for. They seem more fragile than a

by brk 12y ago

I'm really torn on these smart watches. I really don't see the utility benefit vs. the tradeoff of a another gadget to care for. They seem more fragile than a traditional watch, and also quite fugly. I think watches have become a bit of fashion accessory or other outward statement over the last several decades. Seeing things converge on 2 or 3 dominant watch faces and some minor variations among bands just seems ...bad... to me. Like a tiny piece of individually has to be traded in for technological advancement. My current watch collection is almost all items that have emotional ties to people, life events, etc. Maybe I'm very much in the minority, but I don't think so, not to the extent required to truly make a "market" for smart watches.

deelowe 12y ago
I'm in the same boat. I received a smart watch as a gift and never use it. Pulling out my phone simply isn't enough of a hassle to warrant using the watch and the watch alone doesn't bring any new features to the table. My watch is a piece of jewelry for me and as a piece of jewelry, smart watches just aren't the same. I believe we are seeing the tipping point of technology as fashion. Others have predicted a resurgence of non-digital goods. Perhaps watches and glasses will be the first examples where tech fails hard?
- brk 12y ago
  Yes, it's difficult to invest heavily in a tech fashion accessory that you know is going to be regarded as one step short of useless in a few years. All of my watches are either made of precious metals, or have diamonds (or both) (yes, in that regard I may skew more towards the non-geek spectrum). But in buying each of them I had little concern for them suddenly being eclipsed by an updated version in the near future. In fact, you can own a decent Rolex for almost $0. There is a big hit on resale value from initial purchase, much like the "driving a car off the lot decreases the value by 10%" thing. But I could sell the Rolex I'm currently wearing that I bought used for about what I paid for it. However if I buy a smart watch, I'll be lucky to get 10% of the cost of it back 5 years later.

by brk 12y ago

deelowe 12y ago

I'm in the same boat. I received a smart watch as a gift and never use it. Pulling out my phone simply isn't enough of a hassle to warrant using the watch and the watch alone doesn't bring any new features to the table. My watch is a piece of jewelry for me and as a piece of jewelry, smart watches just aren't the same. I believe we are seeing the tipping point of technology as fashion. Others have predicted a resurgence of non-digital goods. Perhaps watches and glasses will be the first examples where tech fails hard?

brk 12y ago
Yes, it's difficult to invest heavily in a tech fashion accessory that you know is going to be regarded as one step short of useless in a few years. All of my watches are either made of precious metals, or have diamonds (or both) (yes, in that regard I may skew more towards the non-geek spectrum). But in buying each of them I had little concern for them suddenly being eclipsed by an updated version in the near future. In fact, you can own a decent Rolex for almost $0. There is a big hit on resale value from initial purchase, much like the "driving a car off the lot decreases the value by 10%" thing. But I could sell the Rolex I'm currently wearing that I bought used for about what I paid for it. However if I buy a smart watch, I'll be lucky to get 10% of the cost of it back 5 years later.