The rumors were true: Apple's top tier smartwatch, the Edition, will sell for $10,000, a jaw dropping price for most, but a relatively reasonable price for those accustomed to paying for similarly pricey luxury goods.
But as discussions about who exactly will actually pony up the cash to buy the expensive smartwatch take place, another thread has gained traction: the device's viability, or perhaps lack thereof, as an heirloom piece.
[seealso slug="apple-watch-real-hands-on"]
Historically, when a person spends thousands of dollars for a piece of jewelry -- and let's be honest, as tech-powered as it is, the gold Apple Watch Edition counts as jewelry -- they also expect to be able to hand that item down to a family member in the future.
However, in the case of the Apple Watch, even with such a high price tag, the basic value of the device, in terms of technological functions, will plummet in just a couple of years. Sure, you could hand down a $10,000 gold Apple Watch to your kids in 10 to 15 years, but by then will we even still be looking at flat screens on our wrists, much less using the same kind of software architecture that powers the Apple Watch?
To be fair, Apple has never been in the business of selling heirlooms, it sells computing devices. Well designed, and now wearable computing devices, but still, computing devices. Some diehard Apple fans still have their all-in-one classic Macintosh with the black and white screen, but at this point the computer is only good for sitting on your shelf and bolstering your geek cred. In the current computing landscape, it's not a useful device.
The same fate is likely to befall the Apple Watch, a fact many on social media are already discussing openly.
I can *almost* understand paying $10K for a future family heirloom. But Apple Watch is tech. It couldn't be less timeless.— Curtis Gasser (@curtisgasser) March 9, 2015
I don’t have any strong feelings against a $10K Apple watch other than that it’s an heirloom price for a disposable tech product.— Tobias Dodgen (@TobyDodgen) March 9, 2015
A 10k Rolex, etc, can be handed down as a family heirloom and still function. A 10k Apple Watch will be outdated in a year or two.— Wade Fulp (@WadeFulp) March 9, 2015
If I had $1,000 to spend on a watch, I'd buy an heirloom watch to give to my son one day, not an Apple watch that will soon be obsolete.— Matt Tolander (@matttolander) March 9, 2015
The Apple Watch is not an heirloom object like traditional watches. It’ll be obsolete (and unusable) in a few years.— Cody Peterson ✋ (@codypeterson) March 9, 2015
Such a weird combination of tech toy and pricey heirloom. Here, son. Your grandfather's Apple watch. No, it won't sync with your iPhone 28.— Amandeep Jutla (@AmandeepJutla) March 9, 2015
Apple, If you want to charge for a watch like its jewelry then build it to last. That watch's battery isn't going let it be a heirloom.— Jobiwan Kenobi (@j0biwan) March 9, 2015
Those sentiments are all quite reasonable given the device's dependence on batteries (which are sure to change in the next five to 10 years) and state of the art technology (also subject to change in just a few years). And while it won't say it, Apple is likely just fine with that dynamic. Product turnover is its bread and butter, not one-time sales, even if the price point crosses over into mortgage down-payment territory.
So next month, when it's time to offer your credit card up for Apple's wearable, it might be a good idea to remember that the price you're paying doesn't necessarily include buying a historical artifact that will accrue value, like traditional, high-priced watches.
The Apple Watch is designed to be enjoyed for just a brief moment in time. Then you'll just have to move on to the next one.
BONUS: Apple Watch Hands-On
[brightcove video=4101682591001]