The marriage of fashion accessories and technology hasn’t always been a successful long-term business strategy. Smart glasses, like those made by Google, have already been burned by a consumer market that isn’t interested in compromise from either end, looking for products to be both functionally and aesthetically pleasing. That’s a pretty difficult bill to pay no matter the technological innovation being discussed.
If a product is going to thrive in this niche industry, it must be affordable, fashionable and productively convenient towards peoples’ lives. If it isn’t, two of the three categories must be exceptional enough to overshadow it’s short coming in the third.
The latter example is fitting for companies like Apple and Samsung. There are many competing names in the market, though the two technology brands have secured themselves at the top.
The older model Apple Watches retail for $269, serving as the lowest price across multiple options that peak at $1,299. Samsung’s Gear 2 starts at only $50 less and extends to $349 for their newest version of the device.
Opinions are bound to vary among consumers, but buying a traditional watch will undeniably cost you less while holding a classic look. Apple and Samsung have both taken steps to accent their products with different straps and faces to help not only give the products a unique viewpoint, but also one that is customizable towards each consumer. That’s a massively useful design aspect from a fashion standpoint. It eases the burden of commitment towards buying a smartwatch by knowing that there are dozens, if not hundreds, of looks to wear and match with different wardrobes.
Determining if either brand’s offerings are affordable is less complicated though, leads to looking at their functional benefits.
Let’s ignore the obvious of checking the time, which many millennials defer towards checking their phones for, and look at it’s most intricate uses. Primarily, smartwatches offer the common uses of a phone, checking calls, sending texts, etc., on your wrist compared to taking your phone out of your pocket. Again, how convenient using it for such actually is becomes dependent on the individual using it.
Many consumers buy either product for exercise and fitness purposes additionally. They’re capable of tracking heart-rate, time, distance for runners and many other features. Athletes would all have a universal use for a smartwatch in relation, except there are competitors who focus directly on functions like this.
Fitbit has models of their smart fitness bands that exist solely for these exact purposes. Their caveats extend to other uses, but any interested athlete probably isn’t buying it to check their email from their wrist either. Plus, their starting price is $79.
The decision to buy a smartwatch certainly doesn’t seem like a concrete yes or no. It’s accompanied by choosing which brand, model, features and style you really want. The biggest aspect to keep in mind when doing so is that regardless of which direction you choose to go from each perspective, smartwatches aren’t truly necessary.
Other than how much you’ll pay, there isn’t any separation between normal watches and their smarter counterparts in terms of fashion. Being able to take calls, email and text messages doesn’t require a smartwatch. Athletic uses don’t require the $100+ pricetag that comes with mainstream smartwatches.
If you’re someone who wants these specific conveniences or, better yet, wants to say they’re part of one the newest trends, smartwatches might be for you. For the average person, it’s more of an unnecessary luxury.