Really? Honestly, I feel sorry for Google in a way. Apple was fashionably late to market, as they often are, and yet the mainstream press continues to ignore Google Wear and treat Apple Watch as if it came first. I'm sure they're paying for a lot of this but Apple Watch is the first smart watch I've seen on the covers of fashion magazines, in articles on watch blogs and on the wrists of celebrities.

That said, I can't say I blame them. The Apple Watch got so much stuff right and was so fantastically well designed (not just in terms of aesthetics but in terms of how it works). It isn't just better than other watches in its price range, the build quality matches Swiss watches in the sub-$3000 range. The link bracelet, for example, is considerably better than some extremely high end watches.

I listened recently to a watch podcast where Ariel Adams of aBlogToWatch - a very popular watch enthusiast website - spoke about how he has trouble taking his Apple Watch off and that his traditional mechanical watch doesn't have quite the same feel now. If Apple is convincing watch enthusiasts to wear it, they're doing well. He also compared it to a Ressence watch (~$15,000) and said that, whilst the Ressence is different in many ways, the build quality and smoothness of the case was very close. This is significant and the Swiss low-end should definitely be worried. Version 1 of a product and they're doing better than many traditional brands.

One of the reasons I feel that Apple Watch has been embraced by watch enthusiasts (although many still dislike it, it has been a much warmer greeting than I would have assumed) is that the Watch is so clearly horologically influenced, with things like calling the widgets on the dial "complications", or the way the back of the watch has information about its materials and manufacture ("316L Stainless Steel - Sapphire Crystal - 38mm case", etc - you wouldn't see that on an iPhone). Apple clearly understands watches, and so they should: the team behind the watch are prolific collectors. Ive has worked with Jaeger LeCoultre, Phil Schiller is often seen wearing a Patek Philippe Nautilus (which, coincidentally, seems to have influenced the hands of the watch faces). Marc Newson co-founded Ikepod, a high end Swiss watch company, and the influences from Ikepod are clear. Bob Mansfield is known for his love of watches too, although I'm not sure what his preference is. This watch was made for regular people, of course, but it will also be worn by Apple execs. And they clearly made something that they knew could replace their Pateks.

Finally, you mention app support - all indications seem to show that Apple Watch is seeing more attention from major/important app developers. Luckily, now that the smart watch category has been validated, Android Wear should pick up too.

Let me also address your final points regarding specs of phones. Comparing the iPhone based on specs is missing the forest for the trees. The specs of an iPhone don't matter, this isn't a PC. What matters is how well it runs, how smooth scrolling is, whether there is lag, how good the camera is in low light, etc. There will always be Android phones with better specs in particular areas, but the iPhone is an overall great phone and that's all that matters. Even if the iPhone had triple the specs of the best Android phone, would you get it? You don't need to worry about specs and stats. (Also, your point about OS upgrades is flat out wrong - Android is well known to stop updating sooner).

Please don't claim that down votes are due to "fanboyism". It's insulting. Whilst I disagree with some of your points, I'm not going to imply you're basically a mad fan: I assume you have reasoning behind your thoughts, even if I don't agree with it.

If you haven't read the Hodinkee Apple Watch review, I recommend it: http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-review