Knock-Off Apple Watches Hit the Chinese Market Less Than 24 Hours After Launch 156
schwit1 writes Fake versions of the Apple Watch can be bought for as little as £25 — despite the fact the real thing will set you back more than 10 times that. The flagship new product was only launched in San Francisco yesterday but knock-offs are already available in China. According to CNN Money, they can be found at Huaqiangbei electronics market in the southern city of Shenzhen, and others are being sold nationwide via popular e-commerce websites. Right down to the digital crown, the fakes mimic the design and style of Apple's new offering.
iSpy watch (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Of course they do. How else will the Chinese government hack into your phone?
Re: (Score:1)
The funny thing is that the knock-off watches are better than the actual Apple watch. They run Android so they are more open, have a bigger and better library of software and can be used with any phone. Also, they only cost $40.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Hint - the fact that these guys can claim 180 hours of battery
Where do they claim that? [aiwatch.hk] All I see is a battery capacity of 350 mAh, which is perfectly believable.
no one making a serious smart watch can even achieve 3 days
Pebble can get 5 to 7 days.
Basically, you're full of shit and don't have a clue.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you think it's ispy? No camera, health data is stored locally, many privacy pledges by apple which is more than google does.
Re: (Score:2)
citation to an article that discusses specifically about how apple violates privacy? or does it not exist?
Re: (Score:2)
I have never seen an iAd. The only reason it exists is so apple can set a precedent for banner ads that protect privacy. they probably lose money on the initiative.
Re: (Score:3)
I've had good luck pairing my Magnetbox Bluetoof speakers to my Sandsung Galaxian phone. I think this will be just fine.
Yeah, sure, but... (Score:1)
Will they blend?
mapple watch (Score:1)
All hail the mighty Mapple.
Why is this a surprise? (Score:1)
Do you really think that the 'fake' watches don't come from the same Chinese factory as the 'real' ones?
Re:Why is this a surprise? (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, since the design of the fakes doesn't match that of the real ones. They are just close copies.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In this case, yes. These fakes don't have the same components or run the same software as the real ones. They merely aped the design of the enclosure.
Re:Why is this a surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)
The joke is, most folks who are willing to spend $10,000 for watch won't be able to tell the fake ones from the real ones.
Re: (Score:2)
If I cannot tell the difference between a $100 watch and a $10,000 watch by its accuracy or functionality, I open myself up to being deceived by people who exploit that people cannot tell the difference.
I don't need to be told a luxury story about how a watch is an expression of my adventurousness or legacy, to part me with $10,000 more than the next equally functional good is worth.
Re: (Score:1)
Very few things are "worth" what they cost. I mean, sure, on one level things are worth exactly what they cost. But on another level there's the cost of the raw materials and the labour required to assemble them, and the factory and its running costs etc. Do you include marketing? Shipping? R&D which is required up front but not to manufacture. A $600 smartphone costs $100 or so to build, and less after a while. What's it worth - $100 or $600? Is it "better" than a $100 smartphone? A smartwatch
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You need to study some basic economic concepts.
The WORTH of something is (correctly and with good reason) completely decoupled from the amount of money it COSTS to make.
The worth of something is how much the consumer is defined as the maximum he/she is willing to pay, according to the benefits he/she subjectively feels he/she the purchase would yield
Those subjective benefits can be in regards to the technical merits, the the aesthetic appeal, an irrational emotional response, or anything else. The PRICE is
Re: (Score:2)
What you call economic concepts are really more extreme capitalist concepts. Let's try again:
The WORTH of something is (correctly and with good reason) completely decoupled from the amount of money it COSTS to make.
The worth of something is how much the consumer is defined either subjectively by the consumer or by society's mandated access to it (e.g. air, water).
Those subjective benefits can be in regards to the technical merits, the the aesthetic appeal, an irrational emotional response, or anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
Very few things are "worth" what they cost. I mean, sure, on one level things are worth exactly what they cost. But on another level there's the cost of the raw materials and the labour required to assemble them, and the factory and its running costs etc. Do you include marketing? Shipping? R&D which is required up front but not to manufacture. A $600 smartphone costs $100 or so to build, and less after a while. What's it worth - $100 or $600?
Very few things are worth what they cost...aside from the value-added things you mention, profit enters the mix as a reasonable consideration a company must account for if remaining in business is part of the mission statement.
Apple's products are Veblen goods of the most coveted sort: profitable and popular.
Things are always and only worth what you can get for them.
Re: (Score:2)
If I pay $10,000 dollars for a watch, it better damn well cause me to have an orgasm every four hours (accurate to a billionth of a second per 40 thousand years).
Re: (Score:2)
Be careful what you wish for:
http://www.stippy.com/japan-wa... [stippy.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Gold-pressed lead... that's from the Bizarro Star Trek Universe, right?
Re: Why is this a surprise? (Score:5, Informative)
I can't tell the difference between a bar of gold, and a bar of gold hollowed out and filled with lead*.
Archimedes sorted that problem years ago.
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
I can't tell the difference between a bar of gold, and a bar of gold hollowed out and filled with lead*.
Archimedes sorted that problem years ago.
Then how about a bar of tungsten with a little lead to lower it's density to that of gold, then coated with gold?
In case you missed it, the parent's point was that sometimes people buy things because other people value or are expected to value them, of which any form of money including gold bars are a perfect example.
Yeah, but titanium is another matter. (Score:2)
Yes, but his method won't work if you make an undersized ingot of titanium and cast a little gold around it. Same specific gravity, to within the resolution of even some extremely accurate measurement tools.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually, they are tungsten bars, specially made and coated with gold. No lead.
Federal reserve bought hundreds of thousends of tungsten bars during Clinton precidency times. Years ago there was a big "ruckus" between China and US, becouce chinese were not trusting the fort knox chipment og gold bars and tested all the bars. They all were fake bars, no gold only gold coated tungsten.
In October 2009, China reportedly received a large shipment of gold, containing some 6,000 bars, weighing 400 ounces each. When
Re:Why is this a surprise? (Score:5, Informative)
I know someone who has bought a number of "Rolex" and other expensive watches in China. These aren't the really cheap knock-offs and they're actually of decent quality and keep excellent time. One of my cousins has a real Rolex watch. We put them side by side and it was impossible to tell them apart, right down to the hologram on the back. Of course they were different when you opened them up, but the works in these fake watches were often made in Switzerland or Germany just like the real watches. The writing on the inside of the back of the case also made it obvious that these were fake and this appears to be intentional. From the outside, however, everything seems to be the same, even the smooth movement of the second hand.
Now with the iWatch it should be fairly obvious since they run different operating systems, though I suppose it's possible for a cloned watch to also be able to run iOS just like the real one.
Re: (Score:2)
Ordinary watches have been the domain of jewelers for centuries. Now, they will need to start learning about digital technology.
Re: (Score:2)
Luckily we've at least moved on from DOS:
Hand on fire.
Abort, Retry, Fail?
Re:Why is this a surprise? (Score:5, Informative)
They definitely do not. Apple is a huge customer. Just, startlingly huge. I once spoke to an Apple guy at a trade show. He wanted to know if our company could produce enough machines to assemble a part that they were musing about. We are the largest manufacturer in the world of the equipment that we make - something like 70% market share. I kind of laughed at first, since I figured there was no way they would tax our capacity. Then we started talking numbers, and it quickly became clear that we would have to resort to extraordinary measures to have any chance at meeting their demand. They are a massive operation, and if you are a vendor of theirs you don't need to share factory floor space with other customers - and certainly not knock offs of their products.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They are a massive operation, and if you are a vendor of theirs you don't need to share factory floor space with other customers - and certainly not knock offs of their products.
The problem is that you knock a lot of other customers out of the way to take care of Apple, and they become your only huge customer. Then they pull the rug out from you and your left with no customers. [extremetech.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
At some point, being too dependant on one huge customer is only barely different from being owned by the customer. The difference being is that the customer takes none of the risk, but gets all the benefits. The customer can even leverage their position of power over the company to renegotiate deals, dictate terms, meddle with the internal affairs of the company, and other such abuses. And as the article shows, some huge customers do not give a damn about what will happen when (not if) they eventually dump
Re: (Score:1)
The place I work is one of General Motor's bitches. We supply them and haven't been able to sell to other customers (our sales team claims. I think they just like being GM bitches.)
Re: (Score:2)
That is a danger, but I think we would approach it as a one-off. We make capital equipment and so are used to ramping up and down. It's all fantasy-land anyway, since nothing ever came of it - I was just struck by the scale they operate at.
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese manufacturing is also unimaginably huge. Foxconn manufactures Apple's iPhones and iPads, but they also manufacture Kindles, PS4s, XB1s, and Wii Us. If you think about the capacity they must need to meet peak demand for new iPhone models, they most certainly share factory floor space during off-peak seasons. Many companies have been ruined by overramping their capacity and workforce to meet peak demand and then facing the music when the expected orders don't continue to roll in. Smart companies
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but inventory is going to be pretty tightly controlled by Apple. Foxconn couldn't just set up a little side business pumping out a few extras here and there without Apple noticing the missing parts.
Re: (Score:1)
That may be true but I can 100% guarantee the real designs were stolen and then manufactured by someone else. Happens to everything over there.
But don't go thinking that just because it's based on the real design that it's going to be anything equivalent. They will use low-end failure-prone parts and build them in a contaminated environment by an unskilled workforce. That's how they get the low price.
Re: (Score:2)
That may be true but I can 100% guarantee the real designs were stolen and then manufactured by someone else. Happens to everything over there.
That is absolutely true. I know our designs go to our competitors and vice versa. That said, it would be extremely hard to produce some of the things Apple does - if you could even source the parts - while significantly undercutting their price. They really do push the envelope on miniaturization of the form factor. I suppose you could cheat if you used a bulkier layout and sacrificed battery size or something... but that is diverging from the design. The knock-off maker is going to want to avoid as much R
Re: (Score:2)
I might suggest that manufacturing is harder than you seem to think it is. Months can be spent fine-tuning a single part in a complex product. That part might not even be available to other manufacturers. Process can be a very difficult part of manufacturing - simply getting the drawings is insufficient (though quite helpful).
Re: (Score:2)
Oh you assume they share the factory floor? No that's not how fake products work.
Fake products are often no different to real ones. Sometimes it's the result of a production run at a time where there's no supposed to be one, working a shift that isn't supposed to exist without oversight or QC, and sometimes it is purely people stealing products and having them hit the grey market to make a little more money on the side.
This would all be a great disaster if management found out, if it weren't for high levels
Re: (Score:2)
Fake products are often no different to real ones.
Well, not really.
sometimes it is purely people stealing products and having them hit the grey market to make a little more money on the side
But that's not a fake product, that's just stolen and potentially unserialized product. Most fake products differ from the official products at least in quality of components. Switches, caps, anything that can get cheaper does get cheaper. Odds are most of that stuff is built the same way, on the same production lines but during off hours and using inferior materials.
Re: (Score:2)
It is within the standard definition of fake. The product does not show up on formal documentation, will lack or have incorrect serial numbers and generally lack any form of quality control shipping everything out without oversight.
There are a big range of what is considered a "fake". It could be a piece of shit with "Appel" written on it (likely) but you can't discount the fact that it could be the exact same device made from the exact same factory. The Chinese are well known for this practice.
Re: (Score:2)
Still, they aren't just a drop in the bucket - they are more like a liter in the bucket... that was my surprise.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case almost certainly not. This is not some guy in his spare bedroom emailing specs to a Chinese supplier. This is a *big* client with the resources to keep tabs on its supplier launching a high profile product that hopefully will sell bucket loads of units. You'd have to be a moron to mess with them.
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly, but for 25£ they are too expensive anyway.
Re: (Score:1)
They'll throw in a free Rolex if you ask...
yes, I do. (Score:2)
I'm not quite sure how some people delude themselves as much as you do.
The maker of this watch has too much to lose by making fakes in their factories. They would be killing the golden goose.
I'm sure there are some counterfeits which are really just "night production". But to assume this is the case in all cases and here is a failure to really put much thought into it.
Have you read the reviews of the fakes?
http://mashable.com/2015/01/08... [mashable.com]
It's clear they don't have the same parts. It doesn't even have the s
Does AliBaba have them listed yet? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
But the important question - Do they work?
Probably, but probably not especially well. Spend a bit more for the Chinese watch that isn't trying to be Apple, where the effort has gone into features, not imitation.
My flatmate bought an "iPhone 6" in Albania for about £40. He was convinced it was real, to the point that he's contacted Apple UK support because it wouldn't charge properly.
I haven't handled an iPhone 6, but I thought the buttons seemed a bit wobbly, although the rest of the case was convincing. The graphics were spot on, and smoo
Re: (Score:3)
There are some pretty insane smart watches on eBay and AliExpress. They aren't just auxiliary displays for smart phones, they have their own SIM sockets and run a full Android OS. Battery life claims to be a day but that's about as credible as the Apple Watch's 18 hours...
Re: (Score:2)
This is such a shit article. They're not knock-off eyeWatches. They run some crappy OS or some modified Android. It's like those shit game systems that have like 10 old Atari games in an emulator.
I'd be more impressed if they got a hold of the firmware and made actual, working Apple watch knock-offs at a fraction of the price. That would actually be impressive and pretty awesome (fuck their overpriced watch. Get a pebble. You don't have to charge it every fucking day).
Re:Does AliBaba have them listed yet? (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe: It wouldn't be surprising if they were from the "3rd shift" from the "official" apple factory.
They're not. Apple products don't get "third shifted", because Apple controls the supply chain for at least 8 components of each of their products. You could get a display that looked similar, but it wouldn't have the same pixel density horizontally and vertically. Or you could get an integrated SIP/SOC, but it wouldn't be an S1. And it's apparently at *least* a 32 bit ARM system, since it's running a ported version of iOS.
One thing Tim Cook has *always* been good at is locking up the product parts suppliers, specifically to avoid "third shift" tactics. That's not to say that there isn't "lossage" or "misidentification of good parts as "faulty & destroyed", but that's all locked up pretty tightly.
Re: (Score:2)
You're so right.
You could find a better pixel density... why would anyone want to downgrade?
So the Apple software doesn't look like crap when you run it on your pseudo-Apple Watch.
With an ARM processor anyone can license... Big deal it doesn't come from one particular company -- hundred of others have no problems...
Apple has the best memory bandwidth of any ARM processor, period. Samsung is trying to catch up, but they are far from achieving it, and at nowhere near the power and thermal profile Apple has. Apple place their parts based on thermal budget, not based on shortest wire route. And they are number one at doing power management.
Also, 8 components? Like what? The CPU is about the only thing they design. Camera? That's Sony. Display? Samsung. CPU? Probably Samsung again (yes, they may design it, but they don't have a fab).
There's almost nothing unique about the watch in terms of hardware...
You're dead wrong. I don't think you are understanding "lock up the supply chain", so I will
Re: (Score:2)
And for some items,you don't need exactly the same. Broadcom is not the only one with touchscreens.
No. But they're the on;ly one that's capable of running the touchscreen firmware blob your pirated version of iOS is going to shove down to the chip every time the thing boots.
Well... are we surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is one of the "hidden" [brown.edu] costs of doing business in China. You can pretty much count on the theft and exploitation of your designs. How dare they exploit us back!
However, given the fact that this is a luxury good and status symbol, I don't think Apple is too worried about this, except if consumers are fooled into buying one. No one wants to show off a knock-off status symbol. It defeats the entire purpose.
Re: (Score:3)
If this had been made in Brazil, Chinese companies would still have copied the basic design. You can also get fake rolexes in China, and those are made in Switzerland (according to 3 seconds of Googling).
They didn't use the same factory, so the country of the original is a basically irrelevant point.
Re: (Score:2)
I know someone with a fake Chinese "Rolex" watch and it's a damned good copy. My cousin has a real one. Side by side it was virtually impossible to tell them apart. The fake one even had the same hologram on the back and the movements looked the same. The fake one keeps excellent time as well and the workmanship is top notch. Opening them up one can tell the difference. The wording on the inside of the back looks like they intentionally made it different. The works were made in Switzerland though. This wasn
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think Apple is too worried about this, except if consumers are fooled into buying one. No one wants to show off a knock-off status symbol. It defeats the entire purpose.
But someone who buys a knock-off is not generally going to announce to people that it is a knock-off. So, if it looks the part, the knock-off is going to be just as effective as a staus symbol as the real thing.
Or just as ineffective. The very existence of the knock-offs defeats the status symbol, because even if you buy that $10,000 one, people are just going to assume that it is a knock-off.
I knew a woman who owned a really large diamond, worn in a necklace. When people saw it they would ask if
Re: (Score:2)
Or just as ineffective. The very existence of the knock-offs defeats the status symbol, because even if you buy that $10,000 one, people are just going to assume that it is a knock-off.
There are plenty of Rollex watches and Rolodex watches around. And you'd have to be blind to not see the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Some of the knock-offs are actually quite good and very difficult to spot the differences. They're not the $40 ones though. As I have said in other posts, I know someone with some of these fake watches and holding them side by side with the real thing it's impossible to spot the difference. The movement is the same, the same workmanship, everything. Only opening them up can you spot the difference, though the works in the fake "Rolex" were made in Switzerland.
Re:Well... are we surprised? (Score:5, Informative)
The executive then gets another bright idea: they'll sue the Chinese company to recover damages! If the Chinese company still exists by this point (unlikely), they'll win in court because, to no one's surprise, the Chinese government doesn't give a fuck about protecting American IP rights. Much money is burned, legal fees are collected, the executive staff gets a golden parachute, and all the hard working American employees are shit out of luck and scrambling to find jobs at another American company that will make the same fucking mistakes as their previous employer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No need to sell trade secrets or break the NDA. Most of the clones just reverse engineer the original the old fashioned way. Fake iPhones run Android with a very good iOS skin, for example. There would be little point copying the iPhone hardware any more than superficially if you wanted to run Android anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Ever look at the trade surplus China has with the U.S? Your flip comment of "How dare they exploit us back!" has no relevance.
Re: (Score:1)
>The point of a status symbol is to show off in front of friends/women.
And if they want to see/play with it, just tell them the battery is too low. Who isn't going to believe that?!
24 hours, eh? (Score:4, Funny)
Took them long enough!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:24 hours, eh? [Took them long enough!] (Score:1)
because the Chinese had to outsource it to Vietnam to get profitable labor rates
Design patents? (Score:2)
Will they be legal for sale in the USA, or will design patents prevent that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Will they be legal for sale in the USA, or will design patents prevent that?
Design patents would be relevant if someone tried to sell these watches under their own name. That's unlikely to happen. They will be sold as "Apple Watches". What makes this illegal is that it is fraud, and that it is infringing on a trademark.
Interestingly, if someone sells a cheap watch that looks like an Apple Watch and you think it is so cheap because it is stolen, and buy it, you are in the USA legally guilty of an attempt to buy stolen goods (it would obviously be hard to prove that you believed i
Re: (Score:2)
It seems better to view it as a good example of why totally unregulated markets aren't a good thing.
Is it a free market of intellectual property if a country has no copyright laws?
weeks ago (Score:2)
They were available weeks ago actually. Didn't slashdot already host a link to a review of one even?
What will they think of next? (Score:5, Funny)
What will they think of next--fake Rolex watches? Fake Oakley sunglasses? I'm shocked--SHOCKED--by this most recent development.
Re: (Score:1)
I once saw a "Relox" watch. I didn't catch the letter difference at first. I was temped to buy one, at least as a semi gag piece.
What happens if your company name is very similar to another that makes the same category of products?
I'm thinking of setting up Aple.com, Slushdot.com, Googel.com, Yooha.com, Micrasoft.com, Diice.com, Yuotube.com, Amozon.com, facebok.com, fakebook.com, eBuy.com, and Pinterist.com.
(Uh, don't try any of those, some go to "shady" places. Dadgummit, they beat me to it.)
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps in the US, but what about in other countries?
Re: (Score:2)
Uggkley sunglasses come free with purchase.
Foakleys look exactly like Oakleys, right down to the packaging in many cases, and even an O-logo embroidered cleaning cloth. And then you wear them like five times and they break.
lame story is lame (Score:4)
Wow, 24 hours after launch? That's AMAZING! That is, if you ignore the fact that precise measurements and high-res images of the real thing have been online for months at apple.com... but other than that, yeah, quite a feat.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They need another country to do it first so they can copy it.
Re: (Score:2)
On a positive note... (Score:1)
Not really a knock off... (Score:2)
More like a look-alike. I'm not trying to play semantics here, but the term knock-off implies that either it's pretending to be the same thing. These watches are made to look like the Apple watch (whose pics have been available for a long time) but they don't carry the same name (Ai-watch, D-watch) and there is no indication at all about functionality. It's like the difference between a knock-off Rolex that actually says Rolex on it and a cheap watch from Wal-Mart that is made to look like a Rolex.
Semantics-wise, you're off base here (Score:2)
The Chinese government officially recognizes both knock-offs and counterfeits. Counterfeits are illegal. Knock-offs, which merely look at lot like the other item but do not try to pretend to be it, are legal.
These are knock-offs and are legal. The fake Rolexes you speak of are counterfeits and are illegal even in China. Of course, the law is unevenly enforced there.
Bought for show? (Score:2)
The article says, "Yet it is unlikely that buyers will mistake the clones for the real thing. The price tag alone is a dead giveaway -- the Apple Watch costs from $349 in the U.S." So I'm guessing they're buying the fake watches to show their friends: "Look - I have an Apple Watch!"
So let me understand this... (Score:3)
So, bear with me here. The Apple watch is manufactured and assembled in China, except for the solid gold ones, which (I've read, but it hasn't been substantiated) have guts made in China but the final assembly is in the US to avoid shipping gold to China to be made into watch cases. Or something like that.
So, let's assume for the moment that (at least) all the consumer grade Apple watches and all the guts are made in China. We also know that China companies in general have ... different ... ideas about intellectual property.
And so, anyone who is surprised that "knock-offs" start appearing nearly simultaneously with launch, should be beaten with a switch and made to sit in the corner. Hell, the "knock-offs" could have been made at the same factory.
Funny story -- I'm a photographer, and the brand I use (which will remain nameless) demands premium prices for official accessories, which are often just pieces of plastic with a certain shape and a few basic electronics. Almost immediately after a new product is introduced, a shower of "knock-off" accessories appear, which are often indistinguishable from the official parts. The story is, they're identical because they're a covert run from the same factory, merely with different branding and perhaps not as fastidious quality control. (Or, at least, that last part is what the vendor wants you to believe.) And so an official battery grip may list for $300, street cost $255, and the knock-offs are not more than $50, look and behave identically, and appear to last as long even under rough use. (And you don't mind being rough with them because if they break, you can get another for $50.) However, there will always be (brand name) affectionados who will sneer at your $50 part with "you get what you pay for", even in the face of contradictory evidence.
And of course, as no true Apple enthusiast at least in this country would dream of wearing a knock-off, even were it electrically and visually identical, Apple will still make a bazillion dollars off the product.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes everyone knows this, and companies in America still keep China in business. If you visit China or YT you can find many videos on YT showing counterfeit shops, and goods.
"And so, any
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think the CEOs, boards, and investors ever gave a shit about your jobs, peon?
Re: (Score:2)
That's a point. But this means it hasn't yet occurred to them that we need money to buy the crap they make.
Re: (Score:2)
So how long do you think it will take for America to realize that China stole our jobs?
China didn't steal your jobs. Your leadership gave your jobs away to someone who would do it for less, that way they could boost that quarter's numbers and their bonus.
Re: (Score:2)
And of course, as no true Apple enthusiast at least in this country would dream of wearing a knock-off, even were it electrically and visually identical, Apple will still make a bazillion dollars off the product.
Well, I guess you could call me an "Apple enthusiast", in the sense that I prefer to use a Mac. But I don't plan to get even the cheapest Apple Watch, let alone an expensive one.
Re: (Score:2)
And of course, as no true Apple enthusiast at least in this country would dream of wearing a knock-off, even were it electrically and visually identical, Apple will still make a bazillion dollars off the product.
Well, I guess you could call me an "Apple enthusiast", in the sense that I prefer to use a Mac. But I don't plan to get even the cheapest Apple Watch, let alone an expensive one.
I wouldn't call you an apple enthusiast. I have used the products -- I retired a G4 not too long ago, and I still have an old ipod connected to the stereo in my truck. Daughter was a big fan of the ipod touch, 'till she slowly realized that her Android phone does all of that and more. My understanding is that her touch remains in its docking station in the bathroom now, so she can play music while showering. Wife owns a nano. We use Apple products (not a lot, but some) and I will admit to a large amoun
Re: (Score:2)
And so, anyone who is surprised that "knock-offs" start appearing nearly simultaneously with launch, should be beaten with a switch and made to sit in the corner. Hell, the "knock-offs" could have been made at the same factory.
This. And people seem to forget that fake iPhone 4 were available several weeks before the official launch.
Suspicious (Score:1)
They must be fake, iMaps works right.
spam trap (Score:2)
'All about the new Apple watch in 0:90'
What? 1:30 of advertising? command-W and FO.
Like a Boss.... (Score:2)
How's the battery life? (Score:2)
If the knock offs have better battery than the original, I'll take the knock offs any day.
Re: (Score:2)
Here you go [jbox.com].