I love this bit from the narrative: "there were hot new startups in the digital watch field, and it was around this era where tech companies were literally jumping over themselves to get into digital watches".
History repeating itself?
That watch is exactly the same design concept as the ?Watch, right down to placement of the "digital crown".
Is there really a smart watch market to dominate? Has anyone ever seen anybody wear a smart watch that is currently on the market? I see a very small number of fit bits, but no watches. Millions of smart phone owners, but none of them wear a smart watch. If there was a market, you would see people wearing them now, from the vendors that sell them.
"The first-generation Apple Watch relies on iPhone for features like GPS navigation and cellular data transmission"....and everything else to function. It is a $349 brick without the iPhone. I don't know why people would want a smart watch, from any vendor.
get educated -- you're flat out wrong, or trolling. it's a wireless iPod and fitness tracker and payment device even without an iPhone. which is what I want it for.
I agree that for text, a rectangle is better than a circle. However, I don't think there is such a thing as an optimal smartwatch shape, because smartwatches are big compromises in the first place. Do I want to read this email on my watch? No, I’ll take out my iPhone or iPad.
who is suggesting you read emails on an apple watch?
There's no GPS in the Apple Watch; that's one of its principal failings, many though there are of them.
nope. not a failing at all. I doubt you'd ever even considered GPS in a fitness tracker until you heard Apple watch doesn't have it. I'd put money on it, except I know i wouldn't believe you anyway.
I know where i run. I'm not a professional athlete. this, GPS doesn't add much value to fitness stats...certainly not enough value to offset the opportunity cost. durr
I agree that for text, a rectangle is better than a circle. However, I don't think there is such a thing as an optimal smartwatch shape, because smartwatches are big compromises in the first place. Do I want to read this email on my watch? No, I’ll take out my iPhone or iPad.
n
nope. not a failing at all. I doubt you'd ever even considered GPS in a fitness tracker until you heard Apple watch doesn't have it. I'd put money on it, except I know i wouldn't believe you anyway.
I know where i run. I'm not a professional athlete. this, GPS doesn't add much value to fitness stats...certainly not enough value to offset the opportunity cost. durr
I'm not all that surprised there's no GPS. If I'm running then I need to know distance, time and average speed. I don't need to know where my house is because, rightly or wrongly, I tend to assume it'll be roughly where I left it.
Still, it would be great if you could swim with it.
30 seconds of google magic... stupidity disproved.. I rest my case.
I like that 1919 watch, very pretty
Many wrist watch were basically derived from the pocket watch design, that's why many were round (lazyness and familiarity).
But, rectangle design emerged from very reputed watchmakers too.
---
This is info about this watch
----
The vintage Girard-Perregaux is particularly interesting, as one hardly ever encounters pieces from this era that depart from the pocket watch derived circular form. The first era of the wristwatch, from a practical point of view usually taken as being from 1914 to 1920, was concerned with the adaptation of the pocket watch in order that it could be worn on the wrist, this usually being achieved by adding wire lugs to what was in spirit still a miniaturised pocket watch. This item is clearly a wristwatch in its own right, with a very large ( the watch has a length of 41mm and a width of 28mm) rectangular case that would never have been used on a timepiece that was not intended to be fixed to a strap.
----
The size of this watch is between 42mm and 38mm Apple Watch model... 95 years later :-).
The Art Deco Era had loads of square watches into the mid 1930s.
Watches are round because of the ticking hand. Even then there are beautiful somewhat rectangular watches like franck muller. I'm glad apple didn't design a round watch just because tradition dictates. Form should follow function and in a digital watch a rectangular shape makes so much more sense.
The round faces of Android smart-watches will stigmatize Androidwear for quite a while. They look like ridiculous Kmart Dad Watches. A look that could only appeal to geekiest of geeks. Why anybody would think round was the way to go, I will never know. But I do know that they will be heavily discounted for the holiday season to try and get rid of them.
Form follows function. That's the number one rule of design. Not make it look like something it's not because we think so poorly of the intelligence of our consumer.
There's very little difference between the two shapes in terms of being able to fit content in, you just lay it out differently, the following is a size of round display that would be a little smaller than the Apple Watch, probably not far off the Huawei watch at 42mm:
The round one offers more padding at the edges for text. On the square one, the text goes right to the edge of the display. With OLED, this display edge might not be visible so that makes the outer bezel become the padding, which isn't quite so bad.
Given that it's not intended to be interacted with much and mostly for display purposes, I personally think a round style is the better route. 80% of traditional watches sold are round:
The round style would be less bulky because there's no corners sticking at the edges of the wrist. You can see how far the corners of similarly sized square watches extend to the edges of the wrist here:
The Moto 360 shown there is far too big though and it's not necessary to be that size. The Huawei one is the same height as the Apple Watch:
If they'd angled the bezel the other way and cleaned up the lugs then it would look even less bulky.
It would also mean the gold model would be cheaper because the sensors would take up more of the base. It could even be half the price being round.
One good thing with the Apple Watch is that changing bands is easy enough to do on a regular basis. Other watches keep using those stupid pins that you have to take out with a screwdriver. That will allow you to get say a stainless steel watch and use a rubber band while running and a chain link or leather one for a formal event and just switch them with a click.
In terms of dominating the smartwatch segment, Apple is appealing to just iPhone users. Android Wear is limited to Android phones and they have a little under double the number of devices out there. Android Wear buyers won't be part of Apple's demographic until they make Android Wear iOS compatible. The Android people won't switch to an Apple Watch, it's mainly Pebble and fitbit buyers. The Android Wear sales were reported to be 720k:
That site lists some higher numbers for Android Wear - Moto 360 at 0.5m, LG G Watch at 0.4m. Still pretty small numbers overall per device.
Apple can easily top all of those numbers but it would have been easier for them if they'd made it round. If they'd made a round one, nobody would be asking for a square one.
There's very little difference between the two shapes in terms of being able to fit content in, you just lay it out differently, the following is a size of round display that would be a little smaller than the Apple Watch, probably not far off the Huawei watch at 42mm:
Notice how round content (obviously) is more appropriate for the round shape and text information for the rectangle.
So traditional analog faces, happy faces, planets, hula hoops etc all look better on a round device.
But round is s a ridiculous shape for a text based information device.
There's very little difference between the two shapes in terms of being able to fit content in, you just lay it out differently, the following is a size of round display that would be a little smaller than the Apple Watch, probably not far off the Huawei watch at 42mm:
Notice how round content (obviously) is more appropriate for the round shape and text information for the rectangle.
So traditional analog faces, happy faces, planets, hula hoops etc all look better on a round device.
But round is s a ridiculous shape for a text based information device.
But that's the whole point; it isn't for reading large amounts of text in the first place. It's for getting snapshots of information, which is why round would have been better. No-one is going to be reading emails on their watch or browsing the internet. Even texts will sometimes be a stretch.
I bet that people who buy this watch will start out by trying to send and receive texts, and will find that, in fact, their iPhone is still quicker and easier, and so they will revert to iPhone.
"Apple Watch too closely resembles a "gadget," and that many people may prefer devices that resemble conventional watches. Products like the Moto 360 and LG Watch Urbane are consciously designed with round faces, among other traditional touches"
And yet the Apple watch will sell in huge quantities while no-one is buying the 'traditional style' smart watches!
Do a google image search for 'contemporary watch' - you'll get a 50/50 split of round and square watches. So I don't think Apple would have felt compelled to make a round watch. I think they stayed true to the design process and designed what was 'right' for a watch with a screen in it.
But that's the whole point; it isn't for reading large amounts of text in the first place. It's for getting snapshots of information, which is why round would have been better. No-one is going to be reading emails on their watch or browsing the internet. Even texts will sometimes be a stretch.
I bet that people who buy this watch will start out by trying to send and receive texts, and will find that, in fact, their iPhone is still quicker and easier, and so they will revert to iPhone.
The whole point is to deliver information in the most concise and readable format within a limited space.
Is there really a smart watch market to dominate? Has anyone ever seen anybody wear a smart watch that is currently on the market? I see a very small number of fit bits, but no watches. Millions of smart phone owners, but none of them wear a smart watch. If there was a market, you would see people wearing them now, from the vendors that sell them.
"The first-generation Apple Watch relies on iPhone for features like GPS navigation and cellular data transmission"....and everything else to function. It is a $349 brick without the iPhone. I don't know why people would want a smart watch, from any vendor.
Yes, and Garmin currently owns it; but I don't expect Garmin to hold that position.
Notice how round content (obviously) is more appropriate for the round shape and text information for the rectangle.
So traditional analog faces, happy faces, planets, hula hoops etc all look better on a round device.
But round is s a ridiculous shape for a text based information device.
The circle has a square area inside it for displaying text blocks. The available space on a similarly sized round watch for the main body text would be about 75% of the square one and the remaining segments would be used for status info to make up the difference:
In some ways, that would be functionally better because it means that while scrolling vertically, your finger wouldn't come close to hitting the back button so you can swipe all the way up the watch face whereas on the square one, you'll probably do lots of very small swipes making sure to avoid going over the top line. It displays pretty much the same information. I'd say the square one looks more cramped too.
By having the body text fit into a center box and fade it out before it hits the edge, you wouldn't experience any cutoff text either if that's preferred. In the following, the Apple Watch will crop off the buttons so you scroll to input the action and possibly hit one of the action buttons by mistake but on the round one you can crop the text inside the notification bubble leaving the actions at the bottom and you also have room for forward and back arrows to move through the messages:
Comments
A round face says sun dial.
That's an interesting link, thanks.
I love this bit from the narrative: "there were hot new startups in the digital watch field, and it was around this era where tech companies were literally jumping over themselves to get into digital watches".
History repeating itself?
That watch is exactly the same design concept as the ?Watch, right down to placement of the "digital crown".
get educated -- you're flat out wrong, or trolling. it's a wireless iPod and fitness tracker and payment device even without an iPhone. which is what I want it for.
who is suggesting you read emails on an apple watch?
nope. not a failing at all. I doubt you'd ever even considered GPS in a fitness tracker until you heard Apple watch doesn't have it. I'd put money on it, except I know i wouldn't believe you anyway.
I know where i run. I'm not a professional athlete. this, GPS doesn't add much value to fitness stats...certainly not enough value to offset the opportunity cost. durr
Wish my keyboard had a backpedal key. ????
And it also doesn't support iTunes Radio in the UK.
What were they thinking?? ????????
I'm not all that surprised there's no GPS. If I'm running then I need to know distance, time and average speed. I don't need to know where my house is because, rightly or wrongly, I tend to assume it'll be roughly where I left it.
Still, it would be great if you could swim with it.
Calculator?
Calculator?
Umm Calculator??
30 seconds of google magic... stupidity disproved.. I rest my case.
I like that 1919 watch, very pretty
Many wrist watch were basically derived from the pocket watch design, that's why many were round (lazyness and familiarity).
But, rectangle design emerged from very reputed watchmakers too.
---
This is info about this watch
----
The vintage Girard-Perregaux is particularly interesting, as one hardly ever encounters pieces from this era that depart from the pocket watch derived circular form. The first era of the wristwatch, from a practical point of view usually taken as being from 1914 to 1920, was concerned with the adaptation of the pocket watch in order that it could be worn on the wrist, this usually being achieved by adding wire lugs to what was in spirit still a miniaturised pocket watch. This item is clearly a wristwatch in its own right, with a very large ( the watch has a length of 41mm and a width of 28mm) rectangular case that would never have been used on a timepiece that was not intended to be fixed to a strap.
----
The size of this watch is between 42mm and 38mm Apple Watch model... 95 years later :-).
The Art Deco Era had loads of square watches into the mid 1930s.
Nice to see a post from AI that has stirred the troll pot:
There's very little difference between the two shapes in terms of being able to fit content in, you just lay it out differently, the following is a size of round display that would be a little smaller than the Apple Watch, probably not far off the Huawei watch at 42mm:
The round one offers more padding at the edges for text. On the square one, the text goes right to the edge of the display. With OLED, this display edge might not be visible so that makes the outer bezel become the padding, which isn't quite so bad.
Given that it's not intended to be interacted with much and mostly for display purposes, I personally think a round style is the better route. 80% of traditional watches sold are round:
http://www.ubergizmo.com/2014/03/motorola-moto-360-smartwatch-jim-wicks/
The round style would be less bulky because there's no corners sticking at the edges of the wrist. You can see how far the corners of similarly sized square watches extend to the edges of the wrist here:
The Moto 360 shown there is far too big though and it's not necessary to be that size. The Huawei one is the same height as the Apple Watch:
If they'd angled the bezel the other way and cleaned up the lugs then it would look even less bulky.
It would also mean the gold model would be cheaper because the sensors would take up more of the base. It could even be half the price being round.
One good thing with the Apple Watch is that changing bands is easy enough to do on a regular basis. Other watches keep using those stupid pins that you have to take out with a screwdriver. That will allow you to get say a stainless steel watch and use a rubber band while running and a chain link or leather one for a formal event and just switch them with a click.
In terms of dominating the smartwatch segment, Apple is appealing to just iPhone users. Android Wear is limited to Android phones and they have a little under double the number of devices out there. Android Wear buyers won't be part of Apple's demographic until they make Android Wear iOS compatible. The Android people won't switch to an Apple Watch, it's mainly Pebble and fitbit buyers. The Android Wear sales were reported to be 720k:
http://www.canalys.com/newsroom/over-720000-android-wear-devices-shipped-2014
but Samsung uses Tizen and they sold 1.2m in 2014:
http://www.androidheadlines.com/2015/02/samsung-still-leads-smartwatch-market-motorolas-moto-360-gaining-ground.html
That site lists some higher numbers for Android Wear - Moto 360 at 0.5m, LG G Watch at 0.4m. Still pretty small numbers overall per device.
Apple can easily top all of those numbers but it would have been easier for them if they'd made it round. If they'd made a round one, nobody would be asking for a square one.
A round face is much friendlier, especially on a wrist.
Notice how round content (obviously) is more appropriate for the round shape and text information for the rectangle.
So traditional analog faces, happy faces, planets, hula hoops etc all look better on a round device.
But round is s a ridiculous shape for a text based information device.
But that's the whole point; it isn't for reading large amounts of text in the first place. It's for getting snapshots of information, which is why round would have been better. No-one is going to be reading emails on their watch or browsing the internet. Even texts will sometimes be a stretch.
I bet that people who buy this watch will start out by trying to send and receive texts, and will find that, in fact, their iPhone is still quicker and easier, and so they will revert to iPhone.
And yet the Apple watch will sell in huge quantities while no-one is buying the 'traditional style' smart watches!
Don't these people get embarrassed?!
Do a google image search for 'contemporary watch' - you'll get a 50/50 split of round and square watches. So I don't think Apple would have felt compelled to make a round watch. I think they stayed true to the design process and designed what was 'right' for a watch with a screen in it.
The whole point is to deliver information in the most concise and readable format within a limited space.
Yes, and Garmin currently owns it; but I don't expect Garmin to hold that position.
The circle has a square area inside it for displaying text blocks. The available space on a similarly sized round watch for the main body text would be about 75% of the square one and the remaining segments would be used for status info to make up the difference:
In some ways, that would be functionally better because it means that while scrolling vertically, your finger wouldn't come close to hitting the back button so you can swipe all the way up the watch face whereas on the square one, you'll probably do lots of very small swipes making sure to avoid going over the top line. It displays pretty much the same information. I'd say the square one looks more cramped too.
By having the body text fit into a center box and fade it out before it hits the edge, you wouldn't experience any cutoff text either if that's preferred. In the following, the Apple Watch will crop off the buttons so you scroll to input the action and possibly hit one of the action buttons by mistake but on the round one you can crop the text inside the notification bubble leaving the actions at the bottom and you also have room for forward and back arrows to move through the messages: