POST A COMMENT

35 Comments

Back to Article

  • yeeeeman - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    Hmm, if you have money falling off your pocket you can choose this watch. But maybe there is a better way to get this kind of watch, I mean, really the exact same capabilities with less money? Here you go http://www.gearbest.com/smart-watch-phone/pp_57617... . Same display (AMOLED, 1.39 inch 400x400), bigger battery (450mAh), metal case (you don't really need titanium, you will die before this watch is destroyed), full android experience - you can install everything you like, quad core CPU (compared to two Intel Silvermont), 1GB of RAM compared to 512, 8GB of storage compared to 4GB, SIM support compared to...nothing. Shall I continue? The only thing missing on the Finow X5 plus compared to this watch is the missing Tag Heuer badge which....can be engraved easily. Reply
  • mjeffer - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    This is aimed at people who buy luxury watches and they would have zero interest in buying that one you linked. This is for a niche market and for that market this price is right in line. Reply
  • shabby - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    There's nothing luxurious about this watch, its a regular smartwatch with a "high end" brand stamped on it, it will drop in value as soon as you put it on your wrist... meaning its not a luxury watch at all. Reply
  • eddman - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    "smartwatch with a "high end" brand stamped on it"

    ...which is the whole point. Rich people buy brands. That's the most important thing to them. Specs might be important to some extent but are secondary for them.
    Reply
  • geekman1024 - Sunday, March 19, 2017 - link

    well, this watch and that one which yeeeeman linked, might be manufactured by the same Chinese factory....if that's the case, that will be a rather sad and funny ironic. Reply
  • BrokenCrayons - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    It's stereotypical to say wealthy people care about branding. I'd argue to the contrary. People who have wealth are more effective money managers that understand the value of things and take into account product specifications, value for the cost, brand prestige, AND (something you forgot which is most important) the usefulness of a particular purchase. These trinkets are more for the upper middle class sorts that are trying to demonstrate wealth, but are actually not exactly above the masses of working class they're trying to escape. Reply
  • fanofanand - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    I have to disagree with this. There are some wealthy people who are concerned with specifications and performance, but "most" wealthy people cannot be bothered to research items they are purchasing. Half the time they have an assistant who will be doing the purchasing for them, and the other half just buys whatever their friends have or whatever is most expensive. Truly wealthy people don't have time to sit down for a couple hours researching each purpose. They just tell their assistant "I need a new watch, get me a new Rolex and make it a good one" or something to that effect. We all probably have our own unique experiences with the wealthy that might guide our understanding, but my personal example would be my uncle in-law. The man is worth a few hundred million dollars, and all he cares about is prestige and appearance. He only buys/drives Mercedes "because it's a Mercedes", his watch is a Rolex, the list goes on and on. He doesn't know the first thing about tech, but he knows that "Apple is the best" so whatever is Apple, he buys. That doesn't make him dumb, the man is a brain surgeon and a lung surgeon, he is a brilliant man. He just doesn't have time to research "toys" which is what stuff like this is to the wealthy. It's one more watch to add to their collection. Nothing more. Reply
  • boozed - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    That is how luxury brands like Tag Heuer operate. In the case of its mechanical watches, they're generally lightly modified off-the-shelf movements (e.g. ETA, Sellita) surrounded by a bunch of marketing. It's not so much about the value proposition. Reply
  • yeeeeman - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    I fully agree with what you said, just wanted to show how outrageous this offer is. Reply
  • Murloc - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    titanium is about weight not durability. Reply
  • frodesky - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    That watch runs Android (without Google Play), not Android Wear. In other words, it'll probably run out of battery before half the day is gone, and it has NO apps aside from ones by the maker that are customized for a watch experience. It's basically dead in the water from day one, and you might as well get an activity tracker watch instead. Reply
  • Notmyusualid - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    @ frodesky

    So you own one then? Nice review pal.

    Not.
    Reply
  • frodesky - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    Of course I don't own one - I'm not stupid enough to buy one when I wanted an industry supported OS, like Android Wear ;). There's reviews of it out there that echo my sentiments if you bother to Google. Reply
  • Mathieu Bourgie - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    $1650 for a watch that can only keep time for 25 hours before needing to be charged, during which I can't put the watch on my wrist to do its primary function? That's way too inconvenient. Reply
  • Shadow7037932 - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    Are you staying awake 25 hours? Reply
  • beginner99 - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    Up to 25 hrs...So if you use it probably around 12h. Reply
  • Mathieu Bourgie - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    Of course not, but it's going to be unable to tell me the time the next morning if I don't charge it, say if I'm staying somewhere else overnight, travelling overnight, etc. What if I just don't want to think about it every single night, because I'd much rather think about something else and not live in constant worry about having to charge my watch. Besides, it's just annoying to have to think about charging it every single night, otherwise I'm stuck without a watch the next day. Makes me feel like I'm working for the watch and not the other way around around. Reply
  • fanofanand - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    I would suggest that you are not in the market for a "smart watch" based on what you wrote. You would be better off using your phone to tell time like 99.999999999999999999% of the world. This is a product searching for a market. All smart watches are. Reply
  • LordOfTheBoired - Tuesday, March 21, 2017 - link

    I have continued to wear a watch, smart or not, on my wrist because wristwatches are just so much more convenient than anything in my pocket.

    And really, that is the amazing thing about the current world to me: We had the time at a glance and could talk to anyone in the world at any time, and now the "right" way to do things is fishing out pocket watches and sending telegrams. Throw in some robot horses and laser-sixguns and I'll be living in a retro-future western.
    Reply
  • boozed - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    Other than the price, you've just described almost all "smartwatches"... Reply
  • RaistlinZ - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    A fool and his money... Reply
  • Ro_Ja - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    Well you have no control of which things should people buy so that's invalid. Reply
  • fanofanand - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    Your response to his post is invalid. His post is actually quite valid, he is suggesting that only a fool would purchase a product that is in a fledgling market and has not demonstrated any real world advantage for anything to anyone. There are a handful of corner cases where a few people might benefit from certain functions, but typically those same functions can be completed with a Fitbit for under $100. His post suggests that only a fool would pay $1500 for a smart watch that needs to be charged every night, and he's absolutely right. Unless you are an early adopted and absolutely understand the shortfalls of this product, and are ok with it, then only a fool would purchase it. Stating that only a fool would drop $1500 on a beta product has nothing to do with trying to control what others purchase. Reply
  • Peskarik - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    25 hours....who buys this crap?! Reply
  • serendip - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    I miss Pebble. Seriously, no other smartwatch out there has multi-day battery life, a good developer environment and tough design. The world doesn't need crazy expensive smart Tags that barely last a day. Reply
  • plewis00 - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    Garmin Fenix 3 and similar. Expect 3-4 weeks battery and most of the decent smart features you'll want to use. Has literally barely come off my wrist in over a year and been through some brutal events. Reply
  • YoloPascual - Saturday, March 18, 2017 - link

    Nope Reply
  • kreacher - Sunday, March 19, 2017 - link

    Isn't Merrifield a couple of years old just like the technology in Snapdragon 2100.
    First the SoC and smartwatch manufacturers use ancient technology for smart watches (while focusing on smart phones) and then they complain about wearables market not growing.
    Samsung Gear S3 has decent hardware but unfortunately they won't use Android Wear.
    Reply
  • Gadgety - Sunday, March 19, 2017 - link

    I'm glad that Android Wear attracts some upmarket brands. That said, I'd like to see the electronics being upgradeable with future electronics. That would make it far more attractive. Reply
  • Notmyusualid - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    I was drugged & robbed of my gold Tag watch in Central America. Fortunately it wasn't a bath of ice that I awoke in...

    When I got home to normal-land, I sold every piece of gold jewellery I owned. Treated myself to a Subaru STi with the money.

    And so, regrettably, I do not wear expensive watches anymore. I have a Gear S, and my wealthy client who wears Patak Philippe laughes openly at it over dinner, pointing out how they are at the opposite ends of the specrtum, and I don't mind one bit, for I know that all the high-end watch companies will (need?) to follow Tag's example here, just to stay afloat. And well, he disagreed.

    I do miss the watch though...
    Reply
  • lana - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    Amazing offer on this luxurious watch. Thanks for providing the info.Delta emulator application is exceptionally prominent to play a wide range of games on your ios device without jailbreaking. Delta emulator is the right place play Nintendo games on iPhone/iPod touch. http://deltaemulator4ios.com/ Reply
  • fanofanand - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    Ryan please delete the spam Reply
  • nitram_tpr - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    A very expensive watch and no doubt it will be very popular. There are some rich people in this world that love nothing more than to spend their money on things that most of us think an obscene waste of money, let em. I have a really nice Casio that has a solar panel, I've had it 6 years it keeps perfect time, never runs out and is everything I could ever want from a watch. Reply
  • boozed - Monday, March 20, 2017 - link

    "Furthermore, the watchmaker says that the Connected Modular 45 design could easily fit a mechanical module and be converted into a regular timepiece."

    So a bit like the Fortis Flipper from 1975?
    Reply
  • twtech - Wednesday, March 22, 2017 - link

    The price is one thing, but the battery life is the Achilles heel. I could see a professional who wanted a high-end smartwatch that wouldn't look out of place when visiting clients being willing to spend this kind of money. The Garmin activity watches are approaching half this price now, for that matter.

    But that battery life is abysmal. A watch that in real-world usage likely won't last even a single day is all but worthless.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now