Tag Heuer unveils smartwatch venture with Intel, Google | Hacker News Reader

Tag Heuer unveils smartwatch venture with Intel, Google

yahoo.com

37 pointsnoso46 comments

Hodinkee has quite a bit more information on this: http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/Jean-Claude-Biver-Talks-About-S...

Most importantly, the Hodinkee piece mentions pricing - somewhere in the region of $1000, i.e. more expensive than the typical wearable but more affordable than a regular Tag Heuer.

This post is rather pointless "declined to give any details about pricing, functionality or design".

I can help with one: it's going to be expensive ;-)

I suppose it is a natural extension that technology eventually becomes a fashion statement but for some reason the whole idea of they 4 and 5 figure sums for a 'designer' widget really rubs me the wrong way. What's next the $7,500 Ives St Laurent calculator?

It's very easy to criticize other people for having a different priority, such as aesthetics over price/value, from yourself. After all, particular interests often sound ridiculous if you don't share them. This is in everything from having a favorite precious metal to a favorite web development framework.

However, if you're set on making such a criticism here, the least you can do is spell Yves Saint Laurent's name correctly.

Fair enough.

I suppose it does seem rather easy to criticize people who make that priority unnecessarily expensive watches, though. I can appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into them and will agree it makes for a better watch, but nonetheless one far past the cut-off for diminishing returns.

Honestly, I feel like much of the attention paid to premium smartwatches is rooted in insecurity. Many a blog post about one is a fashion item as much as the watch is; it's meant to communicate that the author can appreciate fine things and is definitely not one of those pragmatic-boring "well actually" types that might write something like the first paragraph. Food for thought, if you found yourself thinking as much while reading it.

It's just Saint Laurent as the name changed a while ago. And they do sell $1300 iPad Cases.

But yes "fashion" means you are paying the 99.999% premium over the raw materials.

Apple is going to have a blast playing around in this market.

"Tag Heuer Chief Executive Jean-Claude Biver declined to give any details about pricing, functionality or design."

"unveils"

To the title's credit, it does say that the venture was unveiled, not the watch itself.

It feels like there's an impending crunch in the luxury dumb watch industry. When there is productivity to be had by buying a smart watch, how can expensive dumb watches compete?

Expensive watches are not about productivity or any technical functionality. They are a signal of wealth to others. A $30 Casio keeps better time than a handmade mechanical watch at 1,000 times the price.

They're no different than earrings or bracelets for women (generally).

I keep time accurately with my GPS time synchronized cell phone. The watch is for show, literally. Some of them are amazing.

Because some people buy the luxury dumb watches because they're amazing mechanical engineering. I don't WANT a 'smart watch' at all, but I love my TAG that has no battery or other electrical components as a piece of engineering jewelry.

Out of curiosity (not hostility or snark, I swear) what is it about mechanical engineering of watches that draws such admiration? Is it because the components are large enough to see but small enough to look complicated? Is it a symbol of an idealized past?

It seems quite difficult to make the case that the mechanical watch is superior in terms of human ingenuity, manufacturing / supply chain sophistication, or sheer number of "clever tricks," but I'm not entirely comfortable with the explanation that it's just a status symbol that gains its value from exclusivity or brand.

Have you ever seen a naked mechanical watch? It's wonderful to watch it work, with continuously moving/oscillating pieces driving discrete mechanics, all of it tightly packed, all of it delicate, with some pieces apparently the width of a hair, flexing this way and that. Watching a nice mechanical watch is like watching a tiny ballet of parts.

Your microprocessor is obviously much more complex, but there's no observable operation to marvel at. There's no visceral awe component.

You might like http://techno-logic-art.com/tower.htm .

That's pretty amazing looking :-) I wish he had a video of it in motion, though!

I always saw mechanical watch collecting more like art collecting.

I too am a watch enthusiast and thought I'd give my take in case count doesn't respond with his. There are a few reasons for me.

First, check out this video. Personally I think the watch is ugly as hell, but if anything shows you some of the craftsmanship that goes into a watch, this would be it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIXPplShtg0

Another reason is that I'm a programmer and clockwork is a form of programming. I don't know much about watchmaking (I'm hoping to eventually go to watchmaking school - not for many years though I imagine) but I read quite a bit about it and it fascinates me. It's similar to how the idea of programming on an incredibly old computer with practically no resources fascinates me. Complaining about only having 2K of memory? At least you've got electricity!

There's a hell of a lot of invention and, well, hacking that goes into watchmaking too. Take the perpetual calendar, for example - a type of watch that only needs to be adjusted once every 100 years because it tracks leap years. Moon phases that are accurate for 5400 years[1]. Planetariums on your wrist, all powered by clockwork[2]. Dials that take a century to complete a rotation.

I also love the human aspect of watchmaking. The level of craftsmanship in a high end watch, such as the Patek Philippe you saw in the video, is incredible. I love the attention to detail and the care that goes into every single component: even components that are buried deep inside the watch are still polished and decorated by hand. Pointless? Yes! But I can't help but love it.

You mention supply chain sophistication and you might be right - but don't think that the supply chains for watches aren't sophisticated. If you're interested, Hodinkee.com recently published an article about their tour around the Rolex manufacture. You might be interested in the level of complexity: http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/inside-rolex It's a long article but if you search for "Parachrom Hairspring", that section will give you a bit of insight into the kind of invention that goes into modern watchmaking.

However, after all of that justification, I'll fully admit that it's pointless. A $100 quartz watch is typically more accurate than a $10,000 mechanical. It's pretty much all about emotion, similar to how some people can become attached to paintings where all others see is paint on canvas.

[1] http://monochrome-watches.com/a-worlds-first-christiaan-van-...

[2] http://www.vancleefarpels.com/us/en/article/10935/midnight-p...

(Hm, I wrote quite a bit more than I intended to and must have given you at least an hours worth of reading/watching material! Perhaps I should write this up as a blog post sometime.)

https://vimeo.com/66671255 - The Road To Basel Episode 2: Inside The Atelier With The Legendary Philippe Dufour

I would never use Tag as the benchmark of mechanical watches--in terms of aesthetics, nor machining(they use ETA movements).

That said, after getting into repairing watches, a well made mechanical watch is something to admire. Plus, it's the ultimate recyclable. It is something you can pass down to your kid. A rose gold Rolex bubbleback from the 50's looks and feels great on the wrist--even if bought second hand off ebay. My only concern when wearing a nice watch is theft these days. I guess it's like driving a Olds 442 convertable vs. a Tesla? I can't compare the two. (I have never driven a Tesla though, but I have been in expensive cars)

That said I don't see much difference between the quality of older watch movements. I can honestly state that I can't see any difference on quality of a Rolex vs. Benrus from the 40-70's.(comparing just movements, not the case or straps)

Battery life. Aesthetics. Heirloom status vs planned obsolescence.

That's three right off the bat, and I haven't worn a watch for 20 years. I am sure an actual watch owner will have more.

To paraphrase Darth Vader: Do not be too proud of this battery powered wonder you have rented. The ability to diagnose medical conditions is insignificant next to the dark side of a month-long international trip.

There is no crunch. People who buy watches buy them for their own aesthetic appeal, fashion, and analog engineering. They are also pieces of jewelry that can be passed from generation to generation.

Are luxury watches about productivity? Are expensive restaurants about nutrition?

They are not, but technology gadgets are driven to improvement with speeds and design, a luxury smartwatch will be just as prone to being out of date a year later as an entry level smartwatch

Expensive watches are indicators of wealth. As are boats/jets/sports cars/etc. Tech might be a bit of an outlier, but non tech entrepreneurs/executives/businessmen often wear good watches. They're like hidden handshakes, in a way. They close deals (or at least get the conversation started).

I doubt existing "dumb" watch buyers will switch over to a smart watch. All smart watches I've seen so far look horrible (incl. the Apple one), in comparison to properly constructed mechanical watches. They also don't act as a status indicator.

(Not that I care much about watches. I do however appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into building a proper mechanical watch.)

They're an indicator of wealth, yes. That is not (always) why people buy them. Some (like you, and I) like the craftsmanship, and the quality that comes from it. Nobody sees my hand-woven Egyptian cotton sheets, but I have them. The watch, because of how it was made, and because I like to look at it. The bed linen because of how it feels. I drive a 1972 BMW 3.0CSL because (no particular order) of how it looks, how it drives, because it doesn't have a single chip in it, and because of how it sounds. Not because it turns heads (which it certainly does).

All of this leads to expensive smart watches - I have a Microsoft Band for the SDK (I want to try multi-factor authN with it, based on this - https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=69e92695-f6eb-42e...). Beyond that, nothing. The (few) nice things I have are because they please me - not for their ability to impress others. But then, I'm not wealthy. Maybe when you get there, the outlook changes.

Everyone is worried that this will be the next iPhone, and do not want to be left behind this time. So they are exploring projects at this stage. Not a bad thing.

The same thing happened with the plethora of tablets a few years ago.

With the productivity / efficiency to be had by buying a quartz watch, how can mechanical watches compete?

This question was answered in the 1970s "Quartz Crisis" : watches aren't about functionality.

Here's an interesting article discussing the high-end watch market: http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/9/8176049/apple-watch-edition...

The point is nobody buys a $176,000 watch for "productivity" reasons.

High end watches are about either status, or bought because they're mechanical art.

That's why some cost more than your house or car... Its not about 'function'.

A Picasso doesn't compete with your TV, nor does Viannay Halter or Felix Baumgartner compete with Apple.

This article didn't give much. I'll pass this along. I bought my first nice watch from a overpriced jewelry store in San Francisco. It was a glowing dial Tag F1. I didn't realize at the time, but it was considered a unisex size. I didn't care, I had small wrists. I bought it for $139.00. Jump ahead years later, and the company realized they could add $1000-2000 to that price and still sell watches? Yes, the watches are bigger with a bit more bling, but they still use ETA quartz movements. ETA movements are great, but not worth what Tag is selling them for; I guess you could say that for most luxury watch brands.

That said, all I want on my wrist is something that can tell me the time(analog) time, and maybe the date. I am already a nervous wreck--I couldn't imagine anything yelling/blinking on my wrist. If anyone get's into horology, you might see the value of a mechanical watch? A watch that will last a lifetime. Some of you will even be able to service the watch yourself.(A basic watch--nothing chronograph--books(DeCarle/Fried), tools, a lot of study through Internet videos, practice on cheap watches, etc.). If you do buy a mechanical watch, I can pass this along. You don't need to service it yearly. Service it when the time is off, or it stops. Change the gaskets every two years(if you go in the water). I guarantee most of you can change the back gasket and crown gasket without much study.

(Tag does use some ETA 2824-2 movements. I thought they were all quartz.)

I just have one question to the entire smartwatch industry: why in holy hell do none of you make an IPX8 rated watch?

All I want is a watch that can survive on my wrist >48 hours without recharging (even if that means an e-ink color screen), various sensors for heart rate and such, and can survive people's daily lives.

Hell, even if it was a damned Pebble that pulled it off, I'd buy one.

Apple Watch is at least rated to IPX7.

Will be interesting to see if Microsoft or Blackberry set up their own partnerships with Swiss watchmakers. Arguably their target audiences are far more interesting to the higher end watchmakers than Android or even Apple.

Smart move by Tag Heuer to get in first and position themselves as as the only serious Apple Watch equivalent on the Android side.

Not sure if I agree with that on MSFT or BB. The target audience overlap might be high, but 100% of zero is still zero.

How can it be called "serious" when there's nothing to look at?

We'll bring you more information about this TAG Heuer, Google, Intel collaboration in October, when the triumvirate releases more details about the product.

Yawn. A lot can happen in 6 months. Get back to us then. All you're telling us at this point is that nobody has even put a pencil to paper yet.

I'm not trying to fanboi this thread but this is the kind of bullshit Microsoft used to pull off when they sensed a threat to any of their markets.

There is nothing serious now, so what's a few months ?

Nobody is going to buy a $1000 watch from LG, Samsung, ASUS, Google etc given that the brands are associated with either being: cheap or geeky (and not in a good way). Tag Heuer is a highly respected, fashionable brand that people aren't going to be embarrassed about wearing on their wrist. A lot can happen in 6 months sure but if it's an exclusive relationship then it's the only product that is likely to matter.

I am talking specifically about the middle price point which is the most important to everyone.

I'd be interested to see how many buy 2nd generation TAG smart watches vs mechanical watches. I'm sure the 1st generation will fly off the shelves as "the first TAG of their kind" but once the novelty value dies down I wonder about the longevity of a $5k smart watch vs a $5k mechanical. In 10 years time "where's that computer to plug it into?" "oh right.... "

There is nothing serious now, so what's a few months ?

I wonder if this is what the conversations were like at TAG Heuer back in September after the Apple announcement.

So, the question is: what changed in the last 6 months that TAG Heuer felt compelled to announce a competing product? It's an innocent question.

Because coming out and saying "yeah, we're starting to work on, um, something" seems really unlike something a highly respected fashionable European brand would normally do. Unless I'm wrong about TAG Heuer.

And you have to announce an alliance with Google/Intel? What message does that convey? Hey, we're great at making awesome highly respected fashionable watches but we don't know fuckall about computer hardware and software?

Actually it's quite smart. Look at their price point: $1000 (much cheaper than their other models). Which means this product is a "gateway drug" for young Android guys to get a taste of what a Tag Heuer looks and feels like on their wrist. Once they learn more about what they are wearing the theory is they will be sucked into the watch community and buy a more expensive model.

This watch is Tag Heuer's Mac Mini.

$1,000 is too expensive for someone who wants to pretend to be rich (Burberry scarf) and too cheap for someone who would wear conspicuous consumption watch

If Fitbit would make a 22mm band to fit my existing Maratac dive watch, I'd give them another $249 tomorrow.

I love the functionality of the Surge. I don't need a screen - the connectivity to my phone is enough. I don't need text alerts. Give me the data in a "retro" form factor and I'd be squared away.

Arnie sells watches, Apple sells watches, now Tag Heuer.. EVERYONE IS SELLING watches!!! Jeez talk about a bunch of sheeple! Maybe I should start selling watches.

Now movie The Internship is starting to make more sense. I was always wondering why would Google accept watch salesmen as interns.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com