I enjoyed (and agreed) with Gruber’s piece on the Apple Watch. Two (related) points in particular stood out to me.

1 - The Price

“The most fun I’ve had over the past week is speculating with friends about how much the different tiers of Apple Watch are going to cost. One thing that is absolutely clear, to me at least: when Tim Cook said the starting price is $349, that’s for the aluminum and glass Sport edition. My guesses for starting prices:

Apple Watch Sport (aluminum/glass): $349 (not a guess)
Apple Watch (stainless steel/sapphire): $999
Apple Watch Edition (18-karat gold/sapphire): $4999

Most people think I’m joking when I say the gold ones are going to start at $5,000. I couldn’t be more serious. I made a friendly bet last week with friends on the starting price for the Edition models, and I bet on $9,999.”

I agree. They are (at least with the - strangely named - Edition version) not trying to make a smart watch - they are making a piece of functional jewelry. It will be priced in the thousands, and everyone is going to be appalled.

2 - Obsolescence

“But Apple Watch is not just a piece of jewelry, and it’s not a mechanical device. It’s a computer. And all computers have lifespans measured in just a handful of years before obsolescence.”

This is what I keep coming back to. A high-end watch like a Rolex is a once-in-a-lifetime purchase for all but the super-wealthy. It is a family heirloom, something that you can expect to last for generations all the while working as well as the day you bought it.

Tech products on the other hand improve markedly, year over year. Everyone knows Moore’s law. There is no doubt that the 2016 Apple Watch will be better than the 2015 version (in fact I’d expect the 2015 version, like all 1st generation products, to be pretty crappy…). The traditional 3-5 yeah tech upgrade cycle, let alone the 1-2 year phone upgrade cycle, simply does not fit with what might be a $10,000 product.

I assume Apple must have a plan for this, but I have no idea what it is.