To find out I suggest you wave your ?Watch at a lady and ask her "besides looking shiny, what can your amazing 2 carat diamond do?" Then study her reaction.
*facepalm*
Lol! You are funny. I own a $15000 solid gold watch. Besides telling time it is useless. I haven't use it in a wild. People really need to get their head off their behind and stop comparing smart watches to old fashion watches. Specially when the materials are so different. The ?Watch is not even a watch, is a small computer. Yes Apple has some fault with this issue. You also have to take in consideration that sweat is very toxic and things will have a reaction to it. For some people more than for others.
Love how he compares a printed on for the Sport version to his engraved watch instead of the Watvh or Edition wh in clearly have much nicer engravings, if we really want to talk about quality.
As for, "mine is superior for never needing to be charged argument" he is clearly using some sort of electronic device to troll this forum instead of an Etch-A-Sketch or slmethjg else without power. Perhaps he's be better off just writing his vitriol in sand with a finger so we don't have to read it.
I think you missed the "/s" on those posts. It was sarcasm directed at the people who claim the watch is not selling.
I think you missed the "/s" on those posts. It was sarcasm directed at the people who claim the watch is not selling.
Really? Are we sure it wasn't added after the fact? I always look for it before posting - although at the time I posted, I was operating on no sleep for 48+ hours so it is entirely possible that I did misinterpret the messages . It would make a lot more sense if they were genuinely sarcastic posts...:). Oops!
Love how he compares a printed on for the Sport version to his engraved watch instead of the Watvh or Edition wh in clearly have much nicer engravings, if we really want to talk about quality.
As for, "mine is superior for never needing to be charged argument" he is clearly using some sort of electronic device to troll this forum instead of an Etch-A-Sketch or slmethjg else without power. Perhaps he's be better off just writing his vitriol in sand with a finger so we don't have to read it.
Context can be useful in a discussion. The reason for the photo and the post was the original posters assertion that far more expensive watches than the Sport could be expected to suffer wear and tear in a similarly short space of time. Since the topic is the back of the watch I posted a photo of the back of a watch to show it hadn't suffered the claimed wear and tear after 22 years, let alone the claimed few months. He also made the point that expensive watches require expensive maintenance. I was also addressing that to point out that a much cheaper watch than those cited, one in the same price bracket as the sport, could run for 20+ years without requiring any maintenance or further expenditure. The OP also asserted that the quality of an ?Watch was comparable to watches costing 10 times the amount, a claim that is completely ridiculous. An $18,000 edition, with its 50% ceramic bloated gold, is in no way comparable to watches costing ten times as much. To me, the Sport isn't even comparable in quality to watches in it's own price bracket.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikolay Iliev
You are speeking of spending 3-400$ for a watch like it is a fortune and you should receive something tha should stay intact for decades...
Pathetic indeed. I've yet to see a watch of any price range that looks like new after few month of daily use...Hublot, Patek, Rolex, every single watch would have sings of wear after few month. Even the most expensive watches in the world require service maintances every 10 years or so, including polishing and cleaning of mechanism. Ofc you dont know that because you dont have one. So you are comparing the Apple Watch to some imaginable quality standard thats only in your head. Apple Watch is the best smart watch you can buy with money and the quality is equal to standard watches that cost 10 times more...so shut up and stop trolling.
Apple hasn't declared it to be normal wear and tear yet so it's amazing that so many people on this from know that it's wear and tear. It sounds to me like a manufacturing defect and that Apple intended that it would last longer. If that's true, then I fully expect that Apple will issue replacements to any who experience the problem. If the same issue existed on all of the watch models, I might tend to agree that it is normal wear and tear - but that's not what's being reported. Either way - it's probably not the end of the world or reason for any type of scandal. It does nothing to detract from the operation of the watch or the look and feel of it while it's being worn. It may lower the resale value - but again - I expect that Apple will step up and offer a replacement to anyone that has a watch affected by the problem. Also keep in mind that just because it is ONLY being reported by owners of the Space Grey Sport model - those reports don't mean that ALL of those models suffer from the problem. There could have just been 1 or 2 bad batches. In any case, I'm curious where the person who claims the there were only a few sold got their numbers from. Oh! They just made it up? Thought so. LOL
I used to know a salesman who had such high acid in his body that couldn't wear a metal watch. The watch would become ruined just by normal contact with his skin.
Why not just stamp/emboss the info into the back. None of my watches have printed details and everything is legible up to 25 years later in some cases.
Context can be useful in a discussion. The reason for the photo and the post was the original posters assertion that far more expensive watches than the Sport could be expected to suffer wear and tear in a similarly short space of time. Since the topic is the back of the watch I posted a photo of the back of a watch to show it hadn't suffered the claimed wear and tear after 22 years, let alone the claimed few months. He also made the point that expensive watches require expensive maintenance. I was also addressing that to point out that a much cheaper watch than those cited, one in the same price bracket as the sport, could run for 20+ years without requiring any maintenance or further expenditure. The OP also asserted that the quality of an ?Watch was comparable to watches costing 10 times the amount, a claim that is completely ridiculous. An $18,000 edition, with its 50% ceramic bloated gold, is in no way comparable to watches costing ten times as much. To me, the Sport isn't even comparable in quality to watches in it's own price bracket.
You are so right!
Apple has to charge for a lot more than just the vessel. The sport may seem expensive for a lot of people, but it actually the cheapest of the option. It can not be expected to be so perfect.
Context can be useful in a discussion. The reason for the photo and the post was the original posters assertion that far more expensive watches than the Sport could be expected to suffer wear and tear in a similarly short space of time. Since the topic is the back of the watch I posted a photo of the back of a watch to show it hadn't suffered the claimed wear and tear after 22 years, let alone the claimed few months. He also made the point that expensive watches require expensive maintenance. I was also addressing that to point out that a much cheaper watch than those cited, one in the same price bracket as the sport, could run for 20+ years without requiring any maintenance or further expenditure. The OP also asserted that the quality of an ?Watch was comparable to watches costing 10 times the amount, a claim that is completely ridiculous. An $18,000 edition, with its 50% ceramic bloated gold, is in no way comparable to watches costing ten times as much. To me, the Sport isn't even comparable in quality to watches in it's own price bracket.
While I believe that Apple should fix this problem with the back of the Space Gray Sport watches, the photo of the Citizen watch was not a good comparison.
The Citizen watch back has simple metal engraving. The closest Apple Watch Sport to the Citizen would be the Silver Sport model which is more like plain aluminum. And the Silver Apple Watch Sport does not have a reported issue of color flaking off the back (since it has no color).
To make a valid comparison would require a watch that is colored through a process of anodizing or painting.
Apple has dealt with problems with coloring aluminum before. The white iPhone took years of development. The black iPhone 5 (which I still have) had color that was easily scraped off.
- With the Space Gray Apple Watch Sport there has been an improvement over earlier efforts. But again the flaking of black coloring off the lettering on the back needs to be fixed.
Mine isn't space gray; it's silver. I don't get it wet, except to wipe it off occasionally. Today I noticed the " WATCH" printing is coming off. I've owned it 8 months. So much for happening on only Space Gray.
Some Apple Watch owners are experiencing problems with the Apple logo disappearing off the back of their devices, and/or scratching around the surrounding text, according to complaints posted online.
Via Apple Support Communites user dougie70w
Issues have been ongoing for at least a few months, variousposts on Reddit show. In most examples, only the logo has been affected. A Wednesday post on Apple's support forums, though, suggested similar trouble with the rest of the text as well.
One person who spoke with Apple support, contacted by AppleInsider, said they were given a call back by someone at the company, and promised a free replacement Watch so that engineers could study the problem. The Apple representative asked about local climate, activity levels, and whether the device was immersed in water, but suggested that other people have reported the problem, and only with the space gray Sport.
Many if not all of the damaged units appear to be space gray Sport models, implying that the problem is with the way text is printed on those devices. Stainless steel Watches have their text engraved instead of printed.
Via Reddit user eternitydia
Apple marketing has placed a strong emphasis on the luxury and craftsmanship of the Watch, which has led to more attention to potential defects. The Sport is Apple's cheapest model, but still starts at $349 and uses things like tougher 7000-Series aluminum and reinforced "Ion-X" glass.
My space gray sports watch is worn everyday, I don't go swimming with it but always have it on in the gym and even when doing building/gardening which could scuff/scratch it, it still looks like new. The writing on the back shows no signs of damage or wear. I do keep it clean though (wipe it down every morning). 2 of my friends who have the same watch also have no signs of damage/wear so I wonder if it is related to climate or activity.
Steve Jobs was a big believer in the value of wear-and-tear. When the first aluminum iPod was introduced, he talked about the patina that would form on the device after years of wear. He didn't mind that things would slowly degrade after a while. That was a feature -- not a bug.
Well, you know what that means... Apple is doomed! The text on the Apple watch is coming off! It's stock will plummet into a pile of billowing flames! Die! Die! Die!
I can't see any scratches on my apple watch: BUY and Hold!
Comments
Lol! You are funny. I own a $15000 solid gold watch. Besides telling time it is useless. I haven't use it in a wild. People really need to get their head off their behind and stop comparing smart watches to old fashion watches. Specially when the materials are so different. The ?Watch is not even a watch, is a small computer. Yes Apple has some fault with this issue. You also have to take in consideration that sweat is very toxic and things will have a reaction to it. For some people more than for others.
?Watch
Some people should just let their thoughts go.
Love how he compares a printed on for the Sport version to his engraved watch instead of the Watvh or Edition wh in clearly have much nicer engravings, if we really want to talk about quality.
As for, "mine is superior for never needing to be charged argument" he is clearly using some sort of electronic device to troll this forum instead of an Etch-A-Sketch or slmethjg else without power. Perhaps he's be better off just writing his vitriol in sand with a finger so we don't have to read it.
Context can be useful in a discussion. The reason for the photo and the post was the original posters assertion that far more expensive watches than the Sport could be expected to suffer wear and tear in a similarly short space of time. Since the topic is the back of the watch I posted a photo of the back of a watch to show it hadn't suffered the claimed wear and tear after 22 years, let alone the claimed few months. He also made the point that expensive watches require expensive maintenance. I was also addressing that to point out that a much cheaper watch than those cited, one in the same price bracket as the sport, could run for 20+ years without requiring any maintenance or further expenditure. The OP also asserted that the quality of an ?Watch was comparable to watches costing 10 times the amount, a claim that is completely ridiculous. An $18,000 edition, with its 50% ceramic bloated gold, is in no way comparable to watches costing ten times as much. To me, the Sport isn't even comparable in quality to watches in it's own price bracket.
You are speeking of spending 3-400$ for a watch like it is a fortune and you should receive something tha should stay intact for decades...
Pathetic indeed. I've yet to see a watch of any price range that looks like new after few month of daily use...Hublot, Patek, Rolex, every single watch would have sings of wear after few month. Even the most expensive watches in the world require service maintances every 10 years or so, including polishing and cleaning of mechanism. Ofc you dont know that because you dont have one. So you are comparing the Apple Watch to some imaginable quality standard thats only in your head. Apple Watch is the best smart watch you can buy with money and the quality is equal to standard watches that cost 10 times more...so shut up and stop trolling.
I used to know a salesman who had such high acid in his body that couldn't wear a metal watch. The watch would become ruined just by normal contact with his skin.
You are so right!
Apple has to charge for a lot more than just the vessel. The sport may seem expensive for a lot of people, but it actually the cheapest of the option. It can not be expected to be so perfect.
While I believe that Apple should fix this problem with the back of the Space Gray Sport watches, the photo of the Citizen watch was not a good comparison.
The Citizen watch back has simple metal engraving. The closest Apple Watch Sport to the Citizen would be the Silver Sport model which is more like plain aluminum. And the Silver Apple Watch Sport does not have a reported issue of color flaking off the back (since it has no color).
To make a valid comparison would require a watch that is colored through a process of anodizing or painting.
Apple has dealt with problems with coloring aluminum before. The white iPhone took years of development. The black iPhone 5 (which I still have) had color that was easily scraped off.
- With the Space Gray Apple Watch Sport there has been an improvement over earlier efforts. But again the flaking of black coloring off the lettering on the back needs to be fixed.
2 of my friends who have the same watch also have no signs of damage/wear so I wonder if it is related to climate or activity.