As to release cycles: If people won't pay another $300 in 2 years for a watch, no matter how much the internals change, that certainly does put a cap on the consumer enthusiasm for said watch, doesn't it?
Yeah, like it puts at cap at around 2 years for a phone, of around 5 years for a laptop, etc. Reality tends to put caps on things.
You expected people buying new watches every year? Or do you think Apple expected that?
You don't have your lifecycle set to the generation length -- phones, as you note, are around 2-3 years, but they have a lifecycle of one year. The fact that the watch has a much worse lifecycle than the phone -- despite being half the cost -- gives valuable insight into Apple's beliefs about how compelling it is.
If the Apple Watch were amazing, and a new generation could be more amazing yet, why wouldn't a substantial number of the owners upgrade in a year?
Comments
Yeah, like it puts at cap at around 2 years for a phone, of around 5 years for a laptop, etc. Reality tends to put caps on things.
You expected people buying new watches every year? Or do you think Apple expected that?
You don't have your lifecycle set to the generation length -- phones, as you note, are around 2-3 years, but they have a lifecycle of one year. The fact that the watch has a much worse lifecycle than the phone -- despite being half the cost -- gives valuable insight into Apple's beliefs about how compelling it is.
If the Apple Watch were amazing, and a new generation could be more amazing yet, why wouldn't a substantial number of the owners upgrade in a year?