In the beginning, smartphones were big because they had to be. Then they got really small, probably so that they could fit in men’s pockets (side note: women’s clothing needs more pockets!). Now, with the iPhone 6 Plus and the Samsung Galaxy series, smartphones are getting big again. To top it all off, Apple just announced they’ll be releasing their new, super tiny 38 millimeter Apple Watch in April. Make up your minds, tech companies! Do you want us to have big devices or little ones? We can’t handle this push and pull anymore!
In all seriousness, the Apple Watch seems pretty cool as a device. You can send and receive text messages from your wrist, take a quick phone call, play music, check the weather, get directions — basically all of the things you do most frequently on an iPhone except on a much smaller screen. There are even some cool new functions like being able to remotely tap someone on the wrist to let them know you’re thinking about them . . . which I’m sure will always be used for good and never to annoy your friend when she’s out on a date.
Whether the Apple Watch is worth $349 or more is another question that everyone will have to answer for themselves. There’s even speculation that the high-end Apple Watches — which come in 18-karat gold cases — might cost thousands of dollars. At that rate, I’d personally be expecting a super elegant watch with crystals and diamonds, and not a glorified beeper for my wrist. If Apple wants to price their watches as though they’re the height of fashion, they definitely need to step up their style game — based on the models they have been showing off at least.
Tech companies have been struggling to make wearable tech that women would actually want to wear and, so far, Apple seems to also be riding that same struggle train. The first potential problem with the new Apple Watch is that it’s square with slightly rounded corners. At first glance, it looks like the hi-tech version of one of those ugly calculator watches that people wore in the ’90s. Maybe square watches can make a comeback but, right now, I wouldn’t bet $350 on it. Watches need to be a lot more stylish for people to want to wear them all day with every outfit in their wardrobe. But then again, maybe we’re just adjusting to this whole new modern vibe.
The second BIG problem with the new Apple Watch designs is that they are, well, kinda dull. The entry-level collection is all neutral colors with one token soft pink strap — because pink is the only color women like, amirite ladies? The sport collection, at least, has straps in some bright neon shades which works for taking a run but you’d definitely have to take it off everywhere else (except for maybe an ’80s costume party). And the luxury watches — you know, the ones that might cost a thousand dollars are more — are also disappointing. The rose gold case on one is a classy touch but the straps and buckles look far too utilitarian to act as a fashion statement.
There’s no shame, of course, if you do want to wear an Apple Watch or even if you like the neutral boxy design! But for now it looks like Apple Watches might appeal to a larger fraction of men than women — and like maybe they’re a bit too Jetsons when we really want them to be more Jupiter Ascending. What do you think? Would you buy the Apple Watch? Let us know!