“The first-ever ‘Piper Jaffray Watch & Wearables survey'” polled nearly 100 individuals with an average age of 32 years old and household income of $130,000,” Neil Hughes reports for AppleInsider. “The survey skewed mostly female, at 61 percent, while almost all respondents were from North America.”
“The poll found that 14 percent of consumers would buy an ‘iWatch’ priced at $350,” Hughes reports. “Among the 86 percent who said they wouldn’t buy, Piper Jaffray polled them on pricing, and found that users would be far more interested at a price below $200. However, 41 percent of respondents said they would not be interested in an ‘iWatch’ regardless of the price.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Such a survey would presumably have more utility after Apple unveils the device(s) in question and explains its features. For now, at least, it does measure the percentage of rabid early adopters with an average age of 32 years old and household income of $130,000 who live in North America. It also tells us that 41% have the rather terrifying ability to set their minds in stone based on little or no information whatsoever. Pray for the human race.
A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them. – Steven P. Jobs, May 12, 1998
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Dan K.” for the heads up.]
I don’t know if I can ever jump on the Smart Watch bandwagon. The concept seems cool, but I still love my Sonic the Hedgehog analog watch I got for my birthday back in the 5th Grade. It reminds me of the fun times I had back in grade school. I know we are pretty much in the future, but I hope that analog watches with the arms will still have a place in this modern world.
A 32 year-old woman with an annual salary of $130,000 is typical? This is why those overpaid analysts are so out of touch with reality!
Given a choice between having a hypothetical product of unknown specification priced at $350, and that same hypothetical product with the same unknown specification at less than $200 I think I’d rather spend under $200. Of course, if the difference in price was the differentiator between a good and bad product then I would pay the higher price. Similarly, if both were unsuitable I wouldn’t be interested in either. Where am I on the survey?
“polled nearly 100 individuals with an average age of 32 years old and household income of $130,000,”
This says a lot.
““The poll found that 14 percent of consumers would buy an ‘iWatch’ priced at $350,” Hughes reports. “Among the 86 percent who said they wouldn’t buy,”
This says more.
Why would a young person up to 35 years old need a device whose main function is to check their vitals all day. What exactly will they do with such info? The other function will be a scaled down device of their $650 iPhone in their pocket.
I think iWatch is a simpler device than many expect. It will feel like NOT wearing a watch at all, yet do useful things that a “real” watch (or smartphone) cannot do. But it will NOT do many things that a smartphone CAN do (so you’ll still need an iPhone). So, don’t expect to be able to shoot photos and video (or even watch videos) from it, or talk into it to make calls.
And since the new iPhone is expected to be larger, and therefore less convenient to pull out of wherever you are carrying it (that is less likely to be your pocket), iWatch (with help from Siri and iPhone headset) serves as an optimized interface for common interactions.
I don’t think it will cost $350. This is another case, like with iPad, where Apple needs to bring it in below a certain key price point, and I think that amount is $200.
As always, MDN puts the positive spin on a negative although, common sense, report of how the whole world is not at the edge of their seat waiting on Apple’s latest gadget. The iWatch will certainly be better, have more features, and initially claim how it will magically change the world. Then, after some early adopters strap it on, we’ll see.
MDN’s “positive spin” is pretty much that this is meaningless until/if such a device is unveiled.
Your spin is pretty much that this is meaningless until/if such a device is unveiled.
You troll too much!
14% of Lucky Charms eaters believe in leprechauns.