zlacker

>>ortusd+(OP)
The purpose of these watches has long been served. They introduced Apple Watch as a premium digital watch to the masses, getting free media attention.

Celebrity owners would have got a brief sparkle from it. Perhaps also some of Apple's marketing budget too. And they continue to own a legacy item which will have notoriety beyond mere function.

Collectors of rare historical firearms presumably don't actually fire them.

>>loveme+e8
I'd add one more purpose these watches served: Jony Ive really wanted to make something out of gold. He also really wanted to make a gear linkage and that's why the monitor stands were as complicated as they were. So they served the purpose of keeping him happy I guess.

>>1-more+3f
From what I've read, Ive was the one that wanted to push the watch as a super luxury item. Designers like to cater to that segment of the market but it's not as profitable as the mass market. At least when referring to Apple products. Ive left Apple so there's no one to push to service the upper segment. I suspect they sold very few $17000 watches so it makes sense to just give it up and deal with the few people that will make a fuss. Even if they have to refund a few sales, it will be way cheaper than maintaining a group of techs and SWEs to deal with those watches.

I also suspect that given enough time those are the watches that will become collectors' items and will sell for multiple times their original cost so it's not a total loss for the buyers.

>>Wheels+Xn
> Designers like to cater to that segment of the market but it's not as profitable as the mass market.

Yeah, like with high fashion, Chanel's runway show is there to make sure people come to buy the perfume, the only high margin thing they sell. It never made a ton of sense with Apple because they're like Warhol's thing about Coke: there is no luxury Coca-Cola; everyone gets the same product because it's the best. Similarly, there's no better phone or smartwatch than the highest end made by the mass market companies.