The People vs. Apple Watch

Is the Apple Watch of any Value? A Preview.

Case # 00001: The People vs. the Apple Watch

This may not be the Supreme Court, heck it may not even be the people’s court. It’s not even night court (although our hallways are also littered with wise-cracking prostitutes and slimy lawyers) but we dispense justice and in the end that is all that matters!

We have abducted a product or service on the market and are now bringing them to our extremely unofficial and unprofessional court for judgement. We have provided them with the best legal representation that minimum wage can buy and are prosecuting them with our crack team of inhuman vultures who feel no sympathy or pain. To bring some ethical balance into our courtroom we have filtered the jury down to 12 peers that represent the every-man. Of course, be it that we are in an illegal underground ‘fight club-esque’ courtroom, our jury selection is not necessarily from the cream of the crop, but the homeless and danger junkies that accepted the job are honour bound to listen to all the evidence before judgement. Ultimately however the verdict is up to you. The prosecution and defense provides their arguments, and you determine if the defendant is guilty or innocent. It’s like a pick your own adventure book, except riddled with foul language and no educational value what so ever.

Opening Arguments

---

Prosecution:

“Ladies, Gentlemen and Wookies of the jury, we will prove to you all today beyond any doubt, that the Apple Watch is guilty of the following crimes: Attempted robbery and grand larceny, intellectual property theft, and overall uselessness. Apple wants to take your money and offer you nothing in return. They confuse the issue and breed nothing but techno lust and greed. This madness has peaked with the Apple watch and must be stopped.”

Defense:

“We are here today, because the prosecution wants to attack a product that they have never used, in fact it is a product that has not yet been released. How can it be guilty of any crime if it has never seen the light of day? What we have here is a prosecution who does not understand the product nor how pricing works and is now shaking their fist at a cloud like a senile old man. Ladies and Gentlemen…”

Angry voice from the Jury:

“Grrrwaaaaaarggggh!”

Defense:

“… and Wookies… The Apple Watch is innocent and no amount of propaganda will change that fact.”

Prosecution:

“We submit to you exhibit ‘A’, the Apple Watch pricing. Apple is no stranger to price gouging and the Apple Watch is the most blatant example of this. We have an entry level version of the watch that nobody will want being sold for $350 American dollars, a steel version that is expected to be the standard model, being sold for close to $600 and an exaggerated gold version for $10,000. All of these prices get higher as we add custom bands to it. The people find that these prices are not based in reality and are clearly an attempt to separate fools from their money. Let’s look at the Apple Watch ’Edition’ – there is rumoured to be approximately $2,000 worth of gold in the Apple Watch ‘Edition’. Furthermore, there are no additional features in the gold edition that the Sport version doesn’t have. We can therefore only account for a $2,350 price tag. Even if we add $1,000 for additional unabashed profit we are nowhere close to $10,000. The greed of this price tag is unmatched and additionally used as a distraction – Let’s go back to the Sport model; $350 is much more expensive than any other smart watch on the market and with nothing new to offer. We knew this price tag for quite some time, as Apple revealed this last year. Upon release of this pricing, it created tremendous backlash. However with new knowledge of the $10,000 ‘Edition’ price tag, we are confused into believing that the Sport and Steel versions, which we initially thought were too expensive are now an appropriate price.”

Defense:

“What I am hearing from the prosecution is nothing but crying about the price of a product. Nobody is making anyone buy this device. If you want it, save your money for it like an adult, if you don’t want it or cannot afford it, then do not buy it. This is why I drive a Pinto and not a fancy car like a Taurus. The prosecution seems offended by an expensive price tag on a non-essential device. This is not a staple, life-essential good like water, food or heroin. Apple is offering a product and has the right to charge whatever they want for it. As for alleged Apple price gouging – Apple charges for components, design and build quality as well as a mark-up for profit, as any successful business should. In particular, if we look at the price of Apple computers, the PC competition has lowered the bar and standards of laptops to the point where people believe $300 is a reasonable price for a machine. Of course companies like Lenovo will fill it with cheap plastic parts, substandard build quality, slap it in a hideously designed case and of course load it up with crapware and super-fish malware. You get what you pay for and Apple is the best example of a company that refuses to ‘race to the bottom’ and instead preserves their brand name by building quality at a quality price. With the Apple watch, this is again an example where the competition has inferior build design and a price tag that is blindly interested in capturing market share with no respect to quality or the intelligence of their customers. Apple is not guilty of anything other than being a luxury product with a luxury price tag. Apple and the market will decide what the appropriate price is – not this courtroom. The Gold Edition is a luxury product which is designed for a luxury market. Those that know the value in having such an enviable device, the honour and prestige it brings, will see the value beyond the mere raw materials. The price must reflect the luxury, it is part of it. It is an intangible quality that cannot be broken down into quantifiable components, it is a status symbol and is not designed for everyone. It was designed for a specific market. Discussion of the Sport and ‘Edition’ models of the Apple watch should be separate, as they do not belong to the same group of customers. Using the luxury price of $10,000 to attack the sport model is a false comparison. Do you really think that the crowd that wants the Mickey Mouse watch face and the crowd that wants a power-play status symbol are the same?”

Prosecution:

“If the Gold watch is a luxury product then perhaps they shouldn’t have announced it at the same time and place as the Sport and Steel versions. I’m not buying it. Apple knows full well what they are doing, and this is a shameless attempt to manipulate us into accepting an unreasonable price.”

Defense:

“And this is a crime? How? This is business. Tim Cook may have some passion products that he and Apple feel really do make the world a better place, but at the end of the day – they are a business. I see no evidence that they are attempting to confuse or manipulate the audience with pricing but there is no crime here even if they were doing this. Apple is not your friend, it is a business.”

Prosecution:

“We would now like to submit to the court, exhibit ‘B’ – A website which shows Samsung and Motorola watches being sold prior to the Apple watch. We the people also find Apple is guilty or creating an unoriginal rip-off of a Samsung device!”

Jury:

*Gasp!*

Prosecution:

“This intellectual theft is rampant in the tech industry and Apple is clearly guilty this time of being the culprit. As much as Apple plays victim in these situations, it is Apple that stole the watch idea from Samsung and Motorola. Android Wear was created, released and had follow-up versions long before Apple’s event. Apple, who we will remind you had a conniption fit about Samsung allegedly stealing their intellectual properly concerning their phones, has blatantly stolen this idea. How can anyone say otherwise? Samsung was first with a squared watch that sends notifications, tracks fitness and offers communication with other watches and phones. This is the definition of a smart watch and Apple has clearly lost all innovation and has given us instead a knock-off product at an inflated price. The only person who would want to buy this would be that famous reviewer ‘The Knock-Off Nerd’. But even he, as brilliant and handsome as he is, would find this product offensive. This, our honoured members of the Jury is theft, plain and simple.”

Defense:

“Who the fuck is the Knock-Off Nerd?”

Defense:

This is a complaint that many of those that wish to attack Apple, and have no foundation to do so, love to use. It is easy, sounds like its true and gets the Apple fans all riled up, but let’s look at the recent history of Apple product releases – The iPod, iPhone, iPad and Apple TV. None of these devices were the first of their kind, yet they were all so innovative, original and perfect that they changed the landscape forever. We cannot blindly assume the Apple watch will do the same, but Samsung and Motorola must think the Apple Watch will since they started investing development time and raced to release a product based solely on the rumour that Apple was thinking of making one. While Apple may not have invented the platform, it was obvious that the competition wanted to get ahead of Apple based on their past experience playing catch up. There is no evidence that Apple has ripped off Samsung any more than Starbucks ripped off Tim Hortons – They both sell coffee. And in this case, Samsung, Motorola and Apple all sell watches that are distinct enough from each other that nobody can claim one is theft of the other. Apple never claimed to invent the watch category, the media and the public that have never heard of Samsung’s version may think Apple invented it, but that is not Apple claiming anything. Clearly they are innocent of all these trumped up charges”

Prosecution:

“It only works for iPhone. What kind of racket are they running?”

Defense:

“The same one as Samsung and Motorola, which work only on Android.”

Prosecution:

“You need your iPhone present to use it, what’s the point?”

Defense:

“It is a second screen for your iPhone. That is true of the entire smart watch category. Furthermore the Apple watch will also rely on Wi-Fi connectivity so your phone can be in another room and the watch will still work just fine.”

Prosecution:

“That’s a pretty expensive ‘sidekick’ screen… How much Apple Kool-Aid did you drink anyway?”

Defense:

“I was thirsty…”

Prosecution:

“The Defense is attempting to confuse the issue – Regardless of what the Apple spin is on this device, who would pay $350 for a mere watch? We will not take anything away from the successes of Apple’s past – the iPhone and iPad changed the landscape indeed. I will even concede that early on, many reviewers lambasted the iPhone and iPad, before understanding what advantages these devices brought to their lives, but that was a different time. Apple has now failed on a grand scale to tell the story of the Apple Watch. There have been no value propositions, no grand problems of the world that this device pretends to resolve. There is no need that this product fills what-so-ever. The device i s nothing more than an extension of the device you already have. What is the point? We can see the value of a touch screen, portable, internet connected computer in our pocket. However there is absolutely no reason or value to replicating some of these features on a small screen for your wrist. It brings nothing on its own. Is Apple really trying to resolve the ‘problem’ of having to pick up a phone or pull it out of a pocket? This is beyond first-world problems, this is nothing but rampant greed and consumerism with a pathetic need to fill any spiritual hole with a toy … an expensive one at that. Does anyone need a miniature version of an iPhone with less than 1/100th of the features? Apple is manufacturing a product solely because they want to sell it and keep you in an endless cycle of upgrade hell. This is the best watch Apple will invent – until next year, when your old watch, which you still may have not finished paying for, will be obsolete. Apple has not presented us with the point of this product, simply because there is NO point. This device is useless and made only to tie users into a contract-like cycle of payment.”

Defense:

“The honourable prosecution has referred to this device as merely a watch, and as a side-kick with no new abilities. He has referred to the Apple Watch as useless on its own and with no value. He even went so far as to say that it is leading the world to blind consumerism and trapping us in an upgrade cycle from which there is no escape. Luckily the prosecution stopped short of blaming the Apple watch for causing cancer. I will address all of these by discussing the features and value in the Apple watch shortly, but first – let me remind you that the Apple Watch is nothing more than a product on the shelf. You do not have to buy it any more than you have to buy anything else on the store shelves. If you cannot say no, then you need to look inward, rather than blaming Apple. Nobody is forcing you to buy anything. Apple also makes 3 versions of the MacBook; the MacBook, MacBook Air and MacBook Pro. Nobody is expecting you to buy all three of these. If you want the watch then buy it, but nobody is forcing you to do so. So what value does the Apple Watch bring? I thought it was clear:

• The notifications clearly illustrate their value the second you are in a situation where your hands are full and you feel your phone buzzing with a text. Rather than dropping whatever you are holding, and fighting for your phone, you can glance at your wrist and even respond to it if it is important with its built in Siri integration.

• If you are relying on the maps function of your phone to get where you want to go, you know that you will look at it often to ensure you are going the right way. Imagine the watch providing this information for you quickly and with vibrating feedback, indicating that you need to turn either left or right. This is much more convenient and can even be safer to use, as it reduces distractions and is more subtle to glace at if you are in a bad part of town.

• The introduction of Research Kit, turns the watch into a health device that not only gives you and your doctor much needed diagnostic information before it is too late, but Apple themselves do not harvest the data and so your privacy is protected.

• Finally, it is beautiful and fun. Watches are jewellery as much as functional timepieces. And what is wrong with fun?

These are just a few of the Apple Watch specific features. You can refer to Apple’s website to see more. You just need to listen and put away your biases”

Prosecution:

“Sounds no different than the competition to me.”

Defense:

“We both know that the app developers will change that and that the Apple Watch ecosystem will get the best apps for years.”

Prosecution:

“But I have to charge it every night? This is stupid, my old watch lasts for years without a battery change. Why should I accept this? Because Apple said so?”

Defense:

“Your old watch doesn’t do anything other than tell time. The Apple watch is not just a watch, it is a wearable computer and health monitor. You need to charge your laptop and iPhone. Why is this device so much more offensive to have to charge?”

Prosecution:

“You claim it is not just a watch. Why is it called the Apple watch then?”

Closing arguments

---

Prosecution:

“We have clearly shown that Apple has created a knock-off device that is overpriced and creates nothing but lust in order to waste your money while offering no real value. You have an iPhone that you have to upgrade every year, do you really need to do the same thing with a watch? Use your iPhone that you loved so much 2 weeks ago instead. Anyone who buys this thing is a dick.”

Defence:

“Apple has created a beautiful device that provides clear value, even if it is a non-essential device. What you do with your money is your own business, Apple is not guilty of anything other than trying to offer you a product. The critics just don’t get it… ‘cause they are dicks.”