You Pick: 60 Burritos Or One $349 Apple iWatch?

Our ever growing obsession with putting the letter "i" in front of everyday objects may be reaching its zenith with the highly anticipated arrival of the Apple iWatch, which costs $349. In keeping with the trend of wearable tech, Apple is finally joining the game, somewhat behind competitors like Samsung, LG, and even Nike, who released their FuelBand SE a few months ago.

But Apple's $349 price point is significantly higher than many of those already on the market. Samsung and LG both charge $200 for their devices, and even that was considered a bit expensive. The $200 was especially hard to swallow considering what Business Insider calls a "dorky" design, and slow operations. Apple, of course, the poster child for sleek and sexy design, will likely suffer none of these problems.

But even with Apple's reputation of great aesthetics and excellent usability, their iWatch might not be met with a warm reception, or more importantly, with open checkbooks. Mark Sue of RBC Capital Markets pointed out to MarketWatch that "consumers may be unwilling to pay a premium as these devices often duplicate what smartphones already do." After all, the point of the iWatch is essentially to eliminate the arduous necessity of pulling your phone out of your pocket to check the time or your texts.

While it may make things a bit easier and more streamlined, it certainly doesn't seem like a revolutionary breakthrough. Sue noted that an RBC survey indicated that 67 percent of consumers said they wouldn't pay more than $200 for a smartwatch, mostly because they have the exact same thing, in phone form, already. Then again, many people said the same thing about the iPhone when it first came out — after all, it practically served all the same purposes as existing cell phones. But it was just so much cooler.

But cool or not, pricing remains a big issue for consumers, as the RBC survey also revealed that 60 percent of respondents said they wouldn't buy a smartwatch until prices went down. If the existing $200 watches are already proving too expensive, it seems unlikely that Apple's plan of doubling the price will go over well.

In fact, historically speaking, it hasn't. Seven years ago, when Apple first unveiled the iPhone, they charged a whopping $599 for the device, nearly unheard of for contemporary cell phones. After consumers made numerous complaints about the nearly inaccessible price point, Apple decided to reduce the price by $200, and gave the unlucky few who bought the phone at the original price a $100 Apple gift card.

So while you may soon be tempted to spend $349 on an iWatch in the next few months, keep in mind that there are other things you could also spend your hard earned cash on, including (but not limited to) the following items.

An actual watch

I'll be honest — most of the time, I pull out my phone to check the time. I used to wear a watch but then the watch broke and for some reason, I just decided that it was better to check my back pocket than my wrist for the time. But if the iWatch really wants to market itself first and foremost as a watch, then why not spend $349 on a company that, you know, actually specializes in making watches?

Michael Kors has quite a few watches that'll set you back less than $349, and even Gucci and Movado both make watches that are cheaper. Sure, Gucci and Michael Kors don't specialize in watches either, but if you're going to wear a watch, don't you want it to just be, like, a watch? It is frightening to imagine a world where everyone talks into or types on their wrist.

A Persian Cat

America's favorite cat breed can be found at the same price (or even less) than an iWatch. Sure, the iWatch can tell you the time and maybe monitor your health, but can it cuddle you at night and bring you insurmountable amounts of joy? I didn't think so.

A lot of tacos and burritos

I know you think that wearable tech is important, but is it as important as satisfying that insatiable desire you have for Chipotle, Freebirds, or whatever other burrito maker you've picked as your poison? Just think about it — one iWatch, or around 60 burritos? I think I've made my point.

Lots of warm, fuzzy feelings

Instead of buying a $349 iWatch, you could donate $349 to the ALS Foundation, saving yourself from a bucket of ice cold water. You could also donate to any number of the water organizations and charities currently horrified by the amount of water being wasted as an excuse for not giving money to scientific research. The choice is yours — iWatch or fleeting feelings of moral superiority?

Images: Getty Images (6); mobi4all_en/Twitter