Of course people will buy a $1,000 Apple Watch Pro
The word “Pro” gets thrown around a lot in tech, and one company has been chucking it about with great enthusiasm:
That “Pro” word doesn’t just add a greater level of prestige to the device in question, but it also allows Apple to add dollars to the price tag.
Sure, the buyer also gets more — for example, the “Pro” iPhones have better cameras, longer battery life, advanced features such as ProMotion, and a design that uses different materials — but let’s not lose sight of the fact that the main reason for adding a “Pro” version of a device is to allow Apple a new product with some serious marketing artillery behind it.
I mean, aren’t we all “Pros”? Or at the very least, don’t we all aspire to be “Pros,” whatever that means?
Says me, surrounded by my MacBook Pro, AirPods Pro, iPad Pro, and iPhone Pro Max.
The only exception to all this Apple Pro goodness is my Apple Watch.
Well, according to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, the Apple Watch is going to get the “Pro” treatment. This, according to Gurman, will bring a “larger and more shatter-resistant display, enhanced hiking and swim tracking, longer battery life and a heftier and rugged case made from a premium, non-aluminum metal material.”
I like the idea of a tougher display, longer battery life, and generally more rugged case, but I’m not sure that I was a larger, heftier Apple Watch. Compared to a lot of the other smart sports watches out there, the Apple Watch is quite petite.
Hardware differences are to be expected, but something that I don’t want to see is too much deviation in base functionality. Chatting with my ZDNet colleague David Gewirtz, he expressed concern not only about the larger, heftier design (since he, like me, wears his pretty much 24/7) but also that Apple could start to limit what health features were available in the non-Pro versions.
“Health features are too important and should be available to any purchaser,” Gewirtz says, and I wholeheartedly agree.
But the main reason that Apple wants a “Pro” Apple Watch is so it can command a “Pro” price tag. And, if Gurman is right, this could be “closer to $900 to $999.”
$1,000 for a smartwatch?
Sounds crazy, doesn’t it.
But I remember the same debate about a $1,000 iPhone, and it seems people are buying those.
But what about the lifespan of an Apple Watch? Don’t they die in a few years?
Yup. But I don’t think it matters.
I doubt the average $1,000+ iPhone buyer is holding onto their iPhone for more than a year or two before selling it or passing it on.
I expect the same will be true for a $1,000 Apple Watch.
And remember, Apple already sells an $849 titanium Apple Watch Edition, and the Hermès versions top out at $1759.
Apple already knows there’s a market for a $1,000 Apple Watch.
The word “Pro” gets thrown around a lot in tech, and one company has been chucking it about with great enthusiasm:
That “Pro” word doesn’t just add a greater level of prestige to the device in question, but it also allows Apple to add dollars to the price tag.
Sure, the buyer also gets more — for example, the “Pro” iPhones have better cameras, longer battery life, advanced features such as ProMotion, and a design that uses different materials — but let’s not lose sight of the fact that the main reason for adding a “Pro” version of a device is to allow Apple a new product with some serious marketing artillery behind it.
I mean, aren’t we all “Pros”? Or at the very least, don’t we all aspire to be “Pros,” whatever that means?
Says me, surrounded by my MacBook Pro, AirPods Pro, iPad Pro, and iPhone Pro Max.
The only exception to all this Apple Pro goodness is my Apple Watch.
Well, according to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, the Apple Watch is going to get the “Pro” treatment. This, according to Gurman, will bring a “larger and more shatter-resistant display, enhanced hiking and swim tracking, longer battery life and a heftier and rugged case made from a premium, non-aluminum metal material.”
I like the idea of a tougher display, longer battery life, and generally more rugged case, but I’m not sure that I was a larger, heftier Apple Watch. Compared to a lot of the other smart sports watches out there, the Apple Watch is quite petite.
Hardware differences are to be expected, but something that I don’t want to see is too much deviation in base functionality. Chatting with my ZDNet colleague David Gewirtz, he expressed concern not only about the larger, heftier design (since he, like me, wears his pretty much 24/7) but also that Apple could start to limit what health features were available in the non-Pro versions.
“Health features are too important and should be available to any purchaser,” Gewirtz says, and I wholeheartedly agree.
But the main reason that Apple wants a “Pro” Apple Watch is so it can command a “Pro” price tag. And, if Gurman is right, this could be “closer to $900 to $999.”
$1,000 for a smartwatch?
Sounds crazy, doesn’t it.
But I remember the same debate about a $1,000 iPhone, and it seems people are buying those.
But what about the lifespan of an Apple Watch? Don’t they die in a few years?
Yup. But I don’t think it matters.
I doubt the average $1,000+ iPhone buyer is holding onto their iPhone for more than a year or two before selling it or passing it on.
I expect the same will be true for a $1,000 Apple Watch.
And remember, Apple already sells an $849 titanium Apple Watch Edition, and the Hermès versions top out at $1759.
Apple already knows there’s a market for a $1,000 Apple Watch.
Denial of responsibility! Techno Blender is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – [email protected]. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.