“Apple chief Tim Cook sees the upcoming Apple Watch in a similar vein as the iPod’s debut more than a decade ago,” Dan Gallagher reports for The Wall Street Journal.
“That may be a helpful model for Apple’s investors to keep in mind,” Gallagher reports. “The iconic digital music player took time to build up… Only 381,000 units sold the first year.”
“Unit sales more than doubled the second year. After five years, the iPod was selling nearly 40 million units annually, and accounted for about 40% of Apple’s annual revenue,” Gallagher reports. “Many analysts expect the watch to sell that many units in its first year.”
Read more in the full article here.
Related article:
Apple Watch, the world’s first real smartwatch, will be a massive hit – September 9, 2014
The AppleWatch is going to sell more than the iPad business. There are so many people that are not using wrist watches but now Apple is giving us a lot of reasons to use them . And many of those that use wrist watches regularly will have also reasons to own the AppleWatch.
Don’t kid yourself. A lot of people who don’t wear watches will not suddenly jump on the bandwagon, some will, but most won’t.
Let’s take a poll. Anyone here who is NOT going to get one?
I believe this is a very easy choice to make, as you don’t have to replace anything you would already be using, (except for that non functional wrist watch you may be wearing right now). For Vacheron Constantin and rolex owners, this would be a must for their accessories arsenal.
I’m not going to be getting one.
I’ve got a multi hundred dollar watch for fancy occasions (could never understand the allure of multi thousand dollar watches), but my day-to-day is my 30+ year old $35 Casio.
When the Apple Watch gets to the point where it can run 84+ hours (a 3 day weekend plus some) with typical use (not just as a dumb watch) I’ll consider one. Not until then. [And, no, I don’t charge my phone every single day — sometimes not even every other day.]
I’m all over this.
I do have a multi-thousand dollar watch, and I suspect it’s going to spend a lot of time in the winder once the Apple Watch hits my wrist.
Wife will be getting one as well…
It’s not so much about Apple as it is the category. Yes there are health applications, but what else really? Glancing at your wrist to get sports scores as Tim Cook mentioned? Pay systems? It’s also not just watches. I have serious doubts about the whole “wearables” category that the pundits and analysts are so bullish on. The most interesting wearable is a watch type device and yet they don’t seem to excite people very much at all.
The 4 categories of Watch users, imho:
1. news and twitter junkies
2. facebook junkies (some overlap with twitter types)
3. health (patients)
4. professionals (doctors, lawyers, military, finance professions)
I’m 3 of the 4.
I hate Facebook.
Nope.
I’ll not be getting one… waiting for that killer app.
Well, I don’t have an iPhone 6 (just 5s) so, for me, the killer app is Apple Pay…. So, yes, I’ll be getting a watch
I was getting one until I got the iPhone 6. I’m not sure I’ll be buying one now. I do love Apple Pay.
I’m not getting one. It’s awesome, but $300 is a lot for something I don’t need.
Mind you, I said that about the iPad too, before breaking down and buying one in 2013. So who knows, three years from now I may decide I do need one.
——RM
Eventually I will get an Apple Watch. But I have to get an iPhone, first. Three of my kids have an iPhone, but not me (yet!).
I just hope that after the Watch is out, there are still suckers out there who will buy a 10-year-old Rolex Submariner.
They will. Some of us do actually use our dive watches for their intended purpose. No matter how cool the Apple Watch will be I’ll still always want a real dive watch like this:
http://www.utswatches.com/4000m-dive-watch
I’m more of an Omega guy. I can’t afford the watches I’d love to have. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r71t-FSoFAI
Liquidmetal – nice!
Blue water sailor here. My 15 year-old Rolex Sub is one tough chunk of steel that’s been through numerous tropical storms, nor’easters and a hurricane. I’ve never had to wind it, it’s never missed a beat. I had it serviced five years ago because I was supposed to. It just works.
I like the idea of the Apple Watch but not as a replacement for my Sub. Maybe down the road Apple will come out with a clip-on version much like the iPod mini. That would work for me.
If it were waterproof to even just 5 meters it would be a total no-brainer. Maybe 2nd gen?
With the new glucose sensor coming at the same time, many diabetics and pre-diabetics like me will be lining up to get one. We are legion!
You do realize that it’s a continuous glucose monitor, not a “glucose sensor”, right? As you you have to replace the subcutaneous sensor every week or two and you still have to prick yourself every day to calibrate the sensor.
It’s for people with some really serious diabetes problems; it’s not intended for casual use by people who don’t want to prick themselves once a day.
Still cool that it connects to the Apple Watch; but it’s not a convenient replacement for small glucose monitors.
The subcutaneous sensor, is every three days. But that’s a different brand. It would be nice if it was permanent. Rase your hand, if you hate poking yourself.
The articles I read, said the continuous monitor could help prevent someone from developing a need for insulin shots, by allowing realtime feedback of what and when you eat. If you are borderline you could use this tool to maintain your BG within a safe level.
It sounds like it can help everyone, no matter what type you are. We plainly eat too much sugar in our daily diet.
My lovely wife has adult onset type 1. We no idea how it happened, something in the environment, plus genetics. We are deeply interested in what we can do with the Apple Watch. Someday there will be a cure.
Blood Glucose monitoring is huge.. Plus other medical benefits. This is not a time piece, its a life watch.
“Many analysts expect the watch to sell that many units in its first year.”
Honestly, though. The user base for potential buyers is much much larger for the Apple Watch. I believe when the iPod was released it was Mac only and the user base was a mere 25 million. Compatible iPhone users are fast approaching half billion. Furthermore, the iPod was $399 in 2001 dollars.
I question comments like this.
The “potential user base” is NOT bigger for the Apple Watch. It’s basically people who have an iPhone (or are getting one), and want to have a watch/fitness wearable.
The “potential user base” for iPods was anyone with ears. I suppose it could be narrowed a bit to people with ears who listen to music.
I suspect there are a lot more people with ears who want to listen to music than people with an iPhone who want a wearable.
Ah!
Read fail! I missed the fact that the iPod was Mac only.
I’ll slink back into the shadows now.
iTunes for windows meant that the iPod was/is not just Mac only.
True, but it started out as Mac only if I remember correctly.
The Apple Watch could cause a substantial bump in iPhone 6/6s in Apple’s 3rd and 4th quarters.