Re:Has Technology Killed the Jewelry Industry?
by TeMPOraL on Monday January 26, 2015 @02:49AM
(#8945939)
> Where's the value?
Lasts a lifetime. Which means it:
- acquires sentimental value; it can be passed on to children, and then to grandchildren
- doesn't tie you to the economic system that much - you bought it, you have it, you don't need to go and buy a new one every year
- doesn't generate so much waste; lets you refuse participating in the waste-generation system
- still a much better value store than diamonds
Re:Has Technology Killed the Jewelry Industry?
by thaumasiotes on Friday January 30, 2015 @09:36AM
(#8972164)
All of that, including "a better value store than diamonds", is true of a cinder block. But you don't see people congratulating themselves on how they savvily bought one of those.
Re:Has Technology Killed the Jewelry Industry?
by gaius on Tuesday January 27, 2015 @08:39AM
(#8952913)
It will cost you significantly more than a lifetime supply
People who believe that, are going to spend an awful lot more on smart watches, than a Rolex costs, in the next 10 years.
Re:Has Technology Killed the Jewelry Industry?
by thaumasiotes on Thursday January 29, 2015 @04:14AM
(#8965094)
You don't see any problems at all with taking my sentence, "It will cost you significantly more than a lifetime supply of quartz watches", truncating off "of quartz watches", and responding as if I had said "of smartwatches"?
A quartz watch will do everything a Rolex will do, and more, while keeping more accurate time. A smartwatch will do significantly more than a quartz watch will.
It will cost you significantly more than a lifetime supply of quartz watches.
It will require more maintenance than a quartz watch.
And it will keep less accurate time."
Where's the value?