Scott Dolan Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 IIRC, I paid something like $45 for my old watch. It was actually a really nice looking watch, most people thought it was more expensive than it was. If I ever buy another one, I may be willing to spend a little more than that. But it certainly won't be anywhere near $350! I realize there are people out there who spend $XX,XXX on watches, but not this boy. Quote
John L Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 I'll buy the iWatch when they make one that holds at least 500 gigs of music. Quote
A Lark Ascending Posted June 14, 2015 Author Report Posted June 14, 2015 I'll buy the iWatch when they make one that holds at least 500 gigs of music. I'm intrigued by the practicality of having your earphones connected to your wrist. A bugger when gardening or scrambling around coastal footpaths (not to mention International House Cleaning Day). Quote
David Ayers Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 It would be great to have a thread for folks to list all the new or recent technology with which they have no familiarity and do not intend to purchase. Quote
Scott Dolan Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) Only problem being that the Apple Watch isn't "new" technology. That tech has been around since at least the Palm Pilot. And unless one doesn't own a smart phone, they are perfectly familiar with it. They just shrunk it even further so that you can wear it on your wrist. Edited June 14, 2015 by Scott Dolan Quote
Scott Dolan Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 I just don't wear a watch, period. As I said before, neither do I. But that's not the point, IMO. The point is that the overwhelming majority of people who do aren't going to spend that kind of money on one. And since most are already tied into phone contracts, and want bigger screens to surf the web...well... Quote
JSngry Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 Point or not, I don't wear a watch, period. I ain't no Dick Tracy, although, hall of fame style points for the hat/jaw combo. Quote
Scott Dolan Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 Point or not, I don't wear a watch, period. I ain't no Dick Tracy, although, hall of fame style points for the hat/jaw combo. Meaning you're not a part of their target audience. I'm talking about those who are. Quote
JSngry Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 Right - Targets! Made by Marx, of course, enslavement through the illusion of freedom, just like Apple, damnation through the illusion of fruit. Quote
Scott Dolan Posted June 14, 2015 Report Posted June 14, 2015 And it's always an apple, isn't it? Adam & Eve Newton The Beatles Apple Honest Abe was just sticking a karmic finger in the eye of human history. Good for him, I suppose. Quote
Dave Garrett Posted June 15, 2015 Report Posted June 15, 2015 Apple could be grooming the Apple Watch as a kind of replacement for the iPod I do not wear a watch, have not worn a watch since 1974, don't even own one now, and can still find a way to know what time it is when it matters. And if I ever do buy a watch, it's not gonna be from Apple You know what else goes on your wrists? Handcuffs. Speaking of which, I don't wear a wedding ring either, and have remained faithful for every day - and night - of my marriage. So when Apple comes out with their iCockring, I'll not be getting that either. Gotta admit to being mightily amused at the thought of Tim Cook or Craig Federighi onstage at a future WWDC exhorting the Apple faithful to "Imagine a Fitbit, but for your dick." On second thought (and after a quick trip to Google), I might have guessed that someone not only already had the same idea, but actually developed it: http://wgrd.com/oh-good-theres-now-a-fitbit-for-your-dick/ Quote
Scott Dolan Posted June 15, 2015 Report Posted June 15, 2015 Folks may not like the out cum of that product. Quote
mjzee Posted July 15, 2015 Report Posted July 15, 2015 Apple just announced updates to their iPod line, and they're intriguing: faster processor, faster graphics, faster wi-fi.  It's basically now an iPhone without the cellular capability.  Also, the line now includes a 128 gb model for $399.  So now you basically have a classic iPod with solid-state storage (less prone to breakage than a mechanical hard drive) plus upgraded multimedia capabilities.  Not a bad deal.  I'm sure what's driving this is they want people to adopt their new streaming service.  Whatever; it seems a good deal for us music people, esp. if you want to replace your aging iPod. Quote
jcam_44 Posted July 15, 2015 Report Posted July 15, 2015 oooooooo I'm intrigued. My classic died. Picked up an old 32gb touch on craigslist for $40 to hold me over. Quote
xybert Posted July 15, 2015 Report Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) Sounds like an updated/improved version of the iPod Touch, which was already basically just an iPhone minus cellular capability. I'm stoked, because i love my Touch and like having a separate device (to my phone) for music and i will need to replace it at some point. Edited July 15, 2015 by xybert Quote
A Lark Ascending Posted July 16, 2015 Author Report Posted July 16, 2015 Seems to be almost twice the price of the Classic but good to know I can replace a damaged iPod and manage music on the move the way that works for me. Quote
Scott Dolan Posted July 16, 2015 Report Posted July 16, 2015 Sounds like an updated/improved version of the iPod Touch, which was already basically just an iPhone minus cellular capability. I'm stoked, because i love my Touch and like having a separate device (to my phone) for music and i will need to replace it at some point.It's funny how different people can be sometimes. I actually love the fact that I DO have everything all in one device. Less clutter in my pockets. If I had to carry around a phone and an iPod Touch, I'd be annoyed as hell... Quote
mjzee Posted July 16, 2015 Report Posted July 16, 2015 Seems to be almost twice the price of the Classic but good to know I can replace a damaged iPod and manage music on the move the way that works for me.IIRC, the price of the 160 gb Classic was $399. Quote
JSngry Posted July 16, 2015 Report Posted July 16, 2015 That's about what I remember paying for my 120 GB (which is still walking unassisted, but not completely upright). I'm thinking $349.00, maybe? but close enough for time travel. Quote
mjzee Posted July 16, 2015 Report Posted July 16, 2015 That's about what I remember paying for my 120 GB (which is still walking unassisted, but not completely upright). I'm thinking $349.00, maybe? but close enough for time travel. Yes, i love my 120 GB Classic.  However, its infirmities are showing (especially in battery life), so it's not allowed to leave the house. Quote
A Lark Ascending Posted July 16, 2015 Author Report Posted July 16, 2015 My last 160 cost me £179.The iPod Touch 128 is priced at £329 on the Apple site. Of course, in time prices may drop. Quote
mjzee Posted July 16, 2015 Report Posted July 16, 2015 My last 160 cost me £179.The iPod Touch 128 is priced at £329 on the Apple site. Of course, in time prices may drop. Sounds like you blimeys are getting a raw deal.  £329 = $513.49 as of today. Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.