That's a fine strategy followed by many companies. It's not usually Apple's strategy though. They pride themselves on being a huge company with a very limited product range. Even in the product ranges they do have they're not usually the first one out with new products. iPod/iPhone/iPad were all very polished products launched into markets that already had quite a few products but still took over. They have a few niche products but the watch seemed to be another of those big bets which is why people are looking at it attentively.

The problem with the absolute numbers is that wearables as a whole is a new market (in the Lean Startup) sense. You can't rush adoption in a new market: no matter how much advertising you throw at it, it still takes time for people to assimilate what the product category can do, to identify why they'd want one, and to make the purchasing decision. The best you can do is to establish a dominant position within the market so that as it grows, you grow along with it.

I thought maps/navigation were the killer app for smartphones - for many other things you could use a laptop instead, but being able to use your phone to navigate was just so damn useful that you'd be a fool not to buy one if you could afford it. Neither Google Glass nor the Apple Watch seem to have hit on a magic thing that they do so much better than a phone, so far.

The DeLorean Effect.

that's what the top commenter fail to realize. nobody needs expensive watches, but the communicate that you have disposable income and maybe good taste. an apple watch communicates you're a nerd. which may be quaint in some parts of San Francisco.

I respectfully disagree.

Like all objects, watches hold different meanings to different people. For you, it sounds like they are a social signalling mechanism - but not for everyone. For example, if you collect watches you'll appreciate many aspects of these wonderful objects. Take the Omega Speedmaster 105.003 - it's vintage, it's probably expensive, and it looks like your grandfathers watch. I could care less what it signals to others, for me - it's the watch NASA sent to the moon. It's mechanical. It's an object that I love! I wear it because it pleases me to look at it.

However, having said that - I now wear an Apple watch for a completely different reason - it's functional. It's more useful than the Omega.

Wearing a watch is not about social signalling for everyone. Some people just like watches :-)

An interesting example. If they had been assembled under license by a little-known NASA contracted-company in Illinois, would you still be as keen on it?

Until 1979 Soviet cosmonauts used their standard pilot-issue Strela watch, including on EVAs. In the West it was branded and sold as Sekonda[0]. Without the cachet of a luxury brand and extensive marketing it is almost unknown despite being just as functional as the Speedmaster.

http://www.netgrafik.ch/russian_space_watches.htm

[0] The Sekonda trademark was later sold and today has no connection with the original watch

Yes, the brand doesn't hold a lot of meaning for me - in any case (no pun intended) it's not just Omega. Arguably one of the most important parts - he movement itself, wasn't actually designed by Omega. It's a Lemania Calibre 1873 (Omega branded this as Calibre 861).

Extreme temperatures, vibration, pressure, acceleration, shock and so on; the 1873 enclosed within an Omega case survived all of this with +- 5 seconds per day accuracy. Moreover, it outperformed the qualification conditions against other well-funded, experienced watch makers. For me, this is impressive.

If the same watch was built by a little-known company out of Illinois, I'd be even more impressed!

P.S. Thanks very much for the information on Soviet watches, I'm really interested to learn more about these models. Thanks again!

https://omegaforums.net/attachments/img_0405-jpg.125750/

If Apple can displace the swiss watch I used to wear from my wrist, they're moving in the right direction in my opinion.

The question is - does anyone really need a watch when they have a phone in their pocket? No.

However, do I feel properly dressed if I go out without a watch? No.

A good mechanical watch lasts you for life. The life of an iPhone is 3 years. Who really needs more items going obsolete every 3 years?

There are lots of reports of people swimming with their Apple watches. I shower with mine on all the time. But Apple is simply not quite ready to guarantee that you can swim with your watch.

You'd figure it would have some level of waterproofing, as any sport device is expected to handle a lot of sweaty athletes.

I was considering writing my own app for laps, and I do believe there was a story shortly after the watch came out where someone else worked on an app like that, but obviously it would not be allowed on the store. :(

But Apple doesn't promise it and it would void your warranty. It's a question of if you're willing to risk $400+ on people's anecdotes or not.

And that is the difference between Apple-with-Jobs and Apple-without-Jobs. Apple with Jobs didn't worry about "if smart watches disrupt..."; Apple with Jobs built products that DID disrupt.

Anyway, disruption doesn't happen in a year with the first version of a product in a brand-new market category. But when watches do become capable enough to disrupt phones, Apple is well-positioned to ride that wave.