Which is probably why we haven't seen watch faces yet. I've seen some of the watch faces available for Android Wear and they're not good. I will be very interested to see what Apple does here.
I would disagree with this, now that we know that custom watch faces are coming with Watch OS 2.0. People are going to have all manner of hideous watch faces as soon as that comes out. It's far worse than allowing carefully currated third party watch faces through the watch App Store.
Apple announced three custom watch faces back in Septemebr, which did not materialize when the watch shipped. And now we know know some of them are coming back. This is not exclusively about style control, regardless of your personal opinion of what you may have seen on some Android Wear watches.
Which is probably why we haven't seen watch faces yet. I've seen some of the watch faces available for Android Wear and they're not good. I will be very interested to see what Apple does here.
I would prefer that Apple Watch do things that analog mechanical watches cannot. For example, for the licensed Mickey Mouse watch, Mickey is animated and taps his foot once per second while slightly bouncing his own body. A mechanical Mickey watch of course cannot do that. Simple mimicry of luxury analog faces would be boring, even if done well and tastefully. And only serves to compare the Apple Watch against their mechanical counterparts on their terms, rather than the Apple Watch's terms.
I was foolish enough to pay actual money for the iVAPO - I wanted a cheap and/or disposable bracelet that I could use to swap out my legit stainless link band for golfing and/or any other time I might have sweaty wrists. Sadly the bracelet feels like a $3.99 discount store item, not a $39.99 one. Poor machine quality, low tolerances, kludgy feel. The way it moves and clasps makes it seem more like coated plastic than metal (but it IS indeed metal, otherwise it wouldn't have scored the inside of my connecting grooves when I tried to slide it in).
Also, the closure is prone to sudden openings.
However, the poor quality of the bracelet is secondary to the poor quality of the customer experience in trying to return it for a refund. Whatever frustrations you have from the poor workmanship and usability of the bracelet, multiply by those when trying to send it back.
If you don't mind the closure popping open and the scratches in your connection slots, this is an okay buy for 10 dollars or so. Too bad it's four times that.
I would disagree with this, now that we know that custom watch faces are coming with Watch OS 2.0. People are going to have all manner of hideous watch faces as soon as that comes out. It's far worse than allowing carefully currated third party watch faces through the watch App Store.
"Custom watch faces" meaning a standard digital clock face that you can add a photograph to as a backdrop.
Because that's all that Apple is allowing, AFAIK.
"Allowing carefully curated third-party watch faces" is a trip through a minefield. Since tastes differ, the only logical consequence of that is the watch-face equivalent of four thousand fart apps.
I agree. A person who only sees the watch as a "computer" would do this. Watches have traditionally been seen as jewelry, for men in particular since they wear very little else, and a statement of wealth and power. Putting a cheap band on a nice watch almost always blatantly makes the statement that the wearer is cheap, or tasteless. Apple has made it quite clear that the ?Watch is a fashion statement as well, and the wide variety of quality well designed bands demonstrate that. Putting a cheap band on it does a disservice to Apple's design and intent with this product, as well as others impressions of the watch. What happens when someone sees the ?Watch for the first time on your wrist, and they think your poor decision to pair it with a cheap third party band, is what Apple sold you with it?
I would disagree with this, now that we know that custom watch faces are coming with Watch OS 2.0. People are going to have all manner of hideous watch faces as soon as that comes out. It's far worse than allowing carefully currated third party watch faces through the watch App Store.
Apple announced three custom watch faces back in Septemebr, which did not materialize when the watch shipped. And now we know know some of them are coming back. This is not exclusively about style control, regardless of your personal opinion of what you may have seen on some Android Wear watches.
Apple hasn't announced custom watch faces in 2.0. you're likely referring to the apple watch face that allows a background image of your choosing.
Comments
Apple announced three custom watch faces back in Septemebr, which did not materialize when the watch shipped. And now we know know some of them are coming back. This is not exclusively about style control, regardless of your personal opinion of what you may have seen on some Android Wear watches.
I would prefer that Apple Watch do things that analog mechanical watches cannot. For example, for the licensed Mickey Mouse watch, Mickey is animated and taps his foot once per second while slightly bouncing his own body. A mechanical Mickey watch of course cannot do that. Simple mimicry of luxury analog faces would be boring, even if done well and tastefully. And only serves to compare the Apple Watch against their mechanical counterparts on their terms, rather than the Apple Watch's terms.
Also, the closure is prone to sudden openings.
However, the poor quality of the bracelet is secondary to the poor quality of the customer experience in trying to return it for a refund. Whatever frustrations you have from the poor workmanship and usability of the bracelet, multiply by those when trying to send it back.
If you don't mind the closure popping open and the scratches in your connection slots, this is an okay buy for 10 dollars or so. Too bad it's four times that.
"Custom watch faces" meaning a standard digital clock face that you can add a photograph to as a backdrop.
Because that's all that Apple is allowing, AFAIK.
"Allowing carefully curated third-party watch faces" is a trip through a minefield. Since tastes differ, the only logical consequence of that is the watch-face equivalent of four thousand fart apps.
And I agree with you.
Apple hasn't announced custom watch faces in 2.0. you're likely referring to the apple watch face that allows a background image of your choosing.