Just take a look at their pages for it: http://www.apple.com/watch/apple-watch/ tons of focus on the physical design details, with the actual interface and such taking the back seat.
And with prices ranging from $349 to $17K, it's pretty easy to see it's more fashion than practical.
The fact is, there is a market of people who want this & who bought this, and that's what matters. Yes, it's role as a gadget is questionable, and you certainly do not need it for anything; but people like it anyway.
I don't know that it will flop, in the end. Battery life and features will improve, and new versions will come out that people will buy. Eventually it'll do phone calls and probably have a camera, which will have a whole Dick Tracy appeal to it.
It would flop as a gadget. I don't think it has strong enough legs there; at least not this version. but as fashion it has potential. People did not need the watch like they could have needed the iphone or the ipad. This was purely accessory, something they had to be sold on in ways besides practicality; versus something like the iphone which is phone/gps/flashlight/camera/internet/whatever.
My point? The original author I believe didn't make so much of a mistake because he took well into account what the watch thing represents but still that it failed its target market.
Or, in other words, no one is going to wear a really good looking, really expensive mechanical watch that doesn't run.
That's all subjective though, we're going to have to wait for the numbers. http://vr-zone.com/articles/apple-watch-sales-projections-lo... - but as with any, take them with a pinch (bucket?) full of salt.
