Seriously, that's your defense? Two objects that came into existence long after round watches? Doesn't that reinforce the timelessness of the round watch face and the utter soullessness of an Apple Watch, which, incidentally matches the shape of the front of a CRT? How modern!
Yeah timeless if all you're showing is a clock, which, prior to smartwatches is what 99% of watches did. If I care about timeless I'll just buy a nice mechanical watch, not one of these traditional watch wannabes.
Were you trying to make a point? If so, try a little harder next time. There's no connection between computer and TV screen shape and watch shape. That's just silly. The vast majority of watches and clocks have been round for...forever. The square shape has been tried many times by many watch makers and while square watches are available on the market, they aren't particularly popular. How often do you see a square watch on someone's wrist? Round is classic and timeless. Apple's Watch design is not. Sorry. Might be a great product, but it looks quite pedestrian compared to a nice high-end round watch face.
I agree with your statement, and it is a little bothersome to have a round clock face on the square display. I would also say they Apple maybe should have not called it a watch since most everyone think of round when you say a watch. Also Clocks and watches have been made in all sort of shapes but they do all come back to round at some point. The issue is the Apple watch is more than a time piece so it sever lots of functions so 90% of what it does make square a better choice.
I will share this, people notice the square shape immediately and know/ask if it is infact the Apple Watch. Apple did something right, they have a design they people know what it is. unlike most other round smart watches, most people will have no clue what you have on your wrist. Remember it is about marketing and brand recognition. It like have a Ferrari which looks like a Chevy why would you pay Ferrari price if no one knows you driving one.
Yeah timeless if all you're showing is a clock, which, prior to smartwatches is what 99% of watches did. If I care about timeless I'll just buy a nice mechanical watch, not one of these traditional watch wannabes.
There's absolutely nothing innovative about the Apple Watch's form factor. Square watches have existed for a very, very long time. I actually think a round face is far more innovative when it comes to a smart watch. A square screen is obvious, and a bit lazy. I don't see how the Apple Watch benefits from a square screen anyway really. The screen is too small for meaningful work and a round watch is likely just as good at displaying notifications, etc. as a square screen.
We have the judge, jury, and executioner when it comes to style right here, folks!!
Your computer and TV are meant for extended viewing of data/images. Traditional wrist watches and smartwatches are meant for quick glances at information. If you're spending more than a 5 or ten seconds interacting with the screen on your Apple Watch at a time, you're doing it wrong.
Horrible form-factor for quickly glancing at the time or a notification or your heart rates, or the progress on your workout? Hardly. When I get a notification on my watch, I lift my wrist, see what it is, then go about my business. If it's something really important that requires my immediate attention, I pull out my iPhone. I personally don't view a smartwatch as something that I spend a long amount of time looking at during the day. Maybe you're different in your usage patterns.
I see the Apple Watch as 60% fashion and 40% useful tool that lets me keep my iPhone in my pocket more. If some people prefer the more rounded look for their primarily fashion-based device, then more power to 'em. But this constant bashing of something for being "different" is really getting old.
at anyone calling round smartwatches different when they're trying so hard to look like traditional watches that existed since forever. Jony Ive says ?Watch is not in competition with luxury watches. LG, Huawei and Moto are trying so hard to look like luxury watches but come off like cheap imitations instead.
I agree with your statement, and it is a little bothersome to have a round clock face on the square display. I would also say they Apple maybe should have not called it a watch since most everyone think of round when you say a watch. Also Clocks and watches have been made in all sort of shapes but they do all come back to round at some point. The issue is the Apple watch is more than a time piece so it sever lots of functions so 90% of what it does make square a better choice.
I will share this, people notice the square shape immediately and know/ask if it is infact the Apple Watch. Apple did something right, they have a design they people know what it is. unlike most other round smart watches, most people will have no clue what you have on your wrist. Remember it is about marketing and brand recognition. It like have a Ferrari which looks like a Chevy why would you pay Ferrari price if no one knows you driving one.
Good point about the shape being immediately recognizable. But does that translate into sales? I'm not sure. Then again, I don't wear a watch and have no interest in them. However, if I did buy one, I would not buy a square watch, smart watch or not. I just don't like the look.
I'm not sure that I agree on the screen shape being more suited, though. I mean, what does the Apple Watch do? It displays bits of data. I don't see how the Apple Watch does a better job of this because the screen is square.
at anyone calling round smartwatches different when they're trying so hard to look like traditional watches that existed since forever. Jony Ive says ?Watch is not in competition with luxury watches. LG, Huawei and Moto are trying so hard to look like luxury watches but come off like cheap imitations instead.
By "different" I meant, "not Apple"
If it doesn't have an Apple logo on it, it's bound to be bashed on this forum
No argument on the benefit of a square/rectangular screen over round in terms of functionality. That said, these ARE watches. You wear them on your wrist. Sure, they can do a lot more, but you're still wearing a watch. Many watch makers offer square watches, but how often do you see someone wearing a square watch? They just don't look as nice. I'm very impressed by the Apple Watch from a tech standpoint, but I think the design is weak. It looks cheap and part of that is the square chicklet gum form factor.
Here is the problem with your statement, it is like art, it is all in the eyes of the individual on what it pleasing to them. I am not a fashion snob I tend to select things base on function over form. However, Apple hit on something and you obviously disagree, but if people are buying that means more than anyone's opinion. I had more people come up to me and ask me about the Apple watch and I am not a person which people will just wall up to and talk too. Most people are extremely interested in the watch and like the design I get far more favorable responses than anything else. I would say the watch functions as intended.
Seriously, that's your defense? Two objects that came into existence long after round watches? Doesn't that reinforce the timelessness of the round watch face and the utter soullessness of an Apple Watch, which, incidentally matches the shape of the front of a CRT? How modern!
You missed the point of the comparison. Soulless or ugly, whatever suits your fancy is a valid criticism of the Apple Watch, but form follows function and Apple Watch is more of a wearable computer and less of a traditional watch. IOW, there's no good reason for the display of a wearable computer to be round, just as there is no good reason for a TV screen to be round.
if you think the 360 looks better than the Watch...damb
I don't, but I think it suggests that Apple could make a round version that looks far nicer than its current rectangular one.
While I understand and agree with your (and everyone else's) points that rectangular is the far superior shape for a computing device, I repeat my observations that:
(1) While many folks will ultimately want to wear a computing device, many of them won't want to wear something that looks like a computing device, like the ? Watch does (although much less so than competitor's offerings of any shape). Geeks like us don't care. Others do.
(2) A certain fraction of society just won't wear anything on their person that they don't think looks nice on them. Carry and use all day long? Yes. Wear? No. I know two females that are avoiding the ? Watch for this reason alone. Vanity? Perhaps. Reality? Yes.
(3) Generally speaking, circles are more elegant than rectangles. That's why the shape of the new Mac Pro kicks so much butt and why the new Apple campus will too. It's also why Apple makes all of their rectangles into rounded rectangles. "Squareness" is just so inelegant, whereas roundness is not. The same holds true for arcs versus straight lines. Sure, you can point out exceptions to this "boring rectangle rule" - on an earlier thread someone pointed to Cartier Tank watches - but round is generally more elegant.
Now... before you go down the list of why round is wrong for computing devices, let me assure you, I've heard you and I agree. But I don't think there can be no compromises. Consider...
I wonder how much larger a round ? Watch would have to be in order to perfectly circumscribe the usable portion of the current ? Watch's rectangular screen? I think that I might get out some scratch paper and a compass, plot it out, cut it out, and set it on my wrist to see. That would allow current apps to run just the same and display information just as nicely, but it would also allow Apple to add new round watch faces with plenty of room for complications, etc. It could also allow developers the opportunity to specifically target round app spaces if they want to utilize the rest of the screen. Of course, you could turn around and point out that a larger rectangle still could be horizontally circumscribed about this new round shape for even more efficient use of the surface area. But the resulting rectangle would probably be way too tall. Who knows where we reach the obnoxious size limit? Maybe when I cut out my hypothetical round watch it will already be there. If not, I'm sold.
I've got to believe that there is some size of round watch that renders a nice usable rectangular area in the center for our current iOS apps but also offers the elegance of being round and an opportunity for some apps to make use of the additional round space. If Apple could find the right balance, I'd buy the round one over the rectangle every time.
You missed the point of the comparison. Soulless or ugly, whatever suits your fancy is a valid criticism of the Apple Watch, but form follows function and Apple Watch is more of a wearable computer and less of a traditional watch. IOW, there's no good reason for the display of a wearable computer to be round, just as there is no good reason for a TV screen to be round.
But you don't USE an Apple Watch like a computer. That's the distinction that I think that many people here lose sight of when they try to claim that the rectangular display is superior to a round display for a smartwatch. The fact that the input methods and usable information that is viewable on the screen is so limited in the first place, it's only good for short bursts of bite-sized information that you either choose or choose not to act upon.
You're not going to be using the screen to type in a URL or compose an email or anything like that, so let's not get ahead of ourselves.
There's absolutely nothing innovative about the Apple Watch's form factor. Square watches have existed for a very, very long time. I actually think a round face is far more innovative when it comes to a smart watch. A square screen is obvious, and a bit lazy. I don't see how the Apple Watch benefits from a square screen anyway really. The screen is too small for meaningful work and a round watch is likely just as good at displaying notifications, etc. as a square screen.
I never said Apple Watch's form factor was innovative. And what's innovative about round? It's obviously not difficult since every Android Wear OEM is doing it now.
I'm just looking at my ?Watch display right now. In order for all of that information to fit in a round display the watch face would need to be much bigger and would look ridiculous on my wrist. Also I wouldn't give up the taptic engine for anything so if Apple had to go square to make that work than square it is. But I'm someone who went 4-5 years without wearing a watch so I'm not partial to a specific style.
Here is the problem with your statement, it is like art, it is all in the eyes of the individual on what it pleasing to them. I am not a fashion snob I tend to select things base on function over form. However, Apple hit on something and you obviously disagree, but if people are buying that means more than anyone's opinion. I had more people come up to me and ask me about the Apple watch and I am not a person which people will just wall up to and talk too. Most people are extremely interested in the watch and like the design I get far more favorable responses than anything else. I would say the watch functions as intended.
Agreed. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That said, considering the vast majority of watches have been round forever, it's highly likely that people favor the look of round to square. After all, square watches have been available forever and most people still choose round.
I don't disagree that Apple hit on something. I think they chose the square factor for two obvious reasons: easier to make the UI work and product differentiation. Assuming the smart watch category continues to grow and more people buy them, I don't see the public suddenly falling in love with square watches just because Apple chose that shape. Of course, all of this is conjecture and it's way too early to know how this will all play out.
I personally doubt it's the design of the Apple Watch that is motivating people to ask about the watch. It's a new product that has been well hyped and I'm sure people are curious, just like they were curious about the first iPhone. They might like the design, but they'd be just as interested if it were round...because it's the Apple Watch.
You missed the point of the comparison. Soulless or ugly, whatever suits your fancy is a valid criticism of the Apple Watch, but form follows function and Apple Watch is more of a wearable computer and less of a traditional watch. IOW, there's no good reason for the display of a wearable computer to be round, just as there is no good reason for a TV screen to be round.
Pardon me Newton, but there is a reason for a watch to be round: elegance and vanity. It may not seem like a good reason to you, but I know two females that won't use a wearable computer if it looks like a wearable computer. Make it more round and elegant, and they're in. (Mind you, these girls don't even wear watches today, but they are interested in the new uses that the ? Watch might bring. Just not enough to go with the computerish look.)
We are geeks, and they are not. Maybe you think that's just vanity and it's just silly. But like it or not, it's a force in our society that Apple will likely have to face one day.
And where do complications go on that display? I currently have 5 on my ?Watch, two in the corners. These watches look great when all they're doing is showing the time via a faux analog display. I won't argue that at all. But is timekeeping really the future of smartwatches? In 2007 Steve Jobs said the killer app on the phone was making calls. How many people today would say the killer app on iPhone is the phone app? I know timekeeping was one of ?Watch's tentpole features too but I see the future being less about telling time and more about other things. If I want a nice looking watch that tells time I'll buy a mechanical watch with the battery that last several years, not something that needs to be charged every couple days.
I'm just looking at my ?Watch display right now. In order for all of that information to fit in a round display the watch face would need to be much bigger and would look ridiculous on my wrist.
How sure are you about that? I think it's a key point, because it it approached the limit of ridiculousness but didn't quite get there, I think that would be perfect!
Good point about the shape being immediately recognizable. But does that translate into sales? I'm not sure. Then again, I don't wear a watch and have no interest in them. However, if I did buy one, I would not buy a square watch, smart watch or not. I just don't like the look.
I'm not sure that I agree on the screen shape being more suited, though. I mean, what does the Apple Watch do? It displays bits of data. I don't see how the Apple Watch does a better job of this because the screen is square.
Here is what it does for me on daily bases, it allows me not to look at my phone all the time especially in meeting with Senior management. I can quickly glance down at it to get updates on things, as well as seeting text and seeing who is calling and decide to answer or not. It taps on my wrist and reminds me a I have meeting I need to be at when I am not infront of my computer.
You probably use your phone for time, do you complain about it being rectangular verse being a round time piece.
I thought long and hard about getting Apple watch since I too did not see value in it beyond it being a watch. But I was in the market for a new everyday watch along with a fitness device, and realize to get both it would cost the same as the Apple watch for the feature I wanted. I got it for a watch and fitness features, but soon found myself using it for lots of things. Just last week I used it for updates on my flights and also for the boarding pass to get through security and onto the plane. I did not have to open my bag to get the tickets out or pull the phone from my pocket, I just walled up and put my watch to the reader and I was done. The same goes for apple pay. Can not tell you how many time I seen people drop their phone as they trying to do mobile payment or boarding passes becuase the juggling bags and trying to do something else. People are noticing how much it makes things easier.
Every time I do this I get lots of looks and people saying did you see what he just did.
The people I hear saying it not worth is it is useless are people who never trying it. I normally am not the first in on technology like this, I give it time and watch and see. This time I took the leap of faith and trusted Apple got it right, and bought in.
Comments
Yeah timeless if all you're showing is a clock, which, prior to smartwatches is what 99% of watches did. If I care about timeless I'll just buy a nice mechanical watch, not one of these traditional watch wannabes.
Were you trying to make a point? If so, try a little harder next time. There's no connection between computer and TV screen shape and watch shape. That's just silly. The vast majority of watches and clocks have been round for...forever. The square shape has been tried many times by many watch makers and while square watches are available on the market, they aren't particularly popular. How often do you see a square watch on someone's wrist? Round is classic and timeless. Apple's Watch design is not. Sorry. Might be a great product, but it looks quite pedestrian compared to a nice high-end round watch face.
I agree with your statement, and it is a little bothersome to have a round clock face on the square display. I would also say they Apple maybe should have not called it a watch since most everyone think of round when you say a watch. Also Clocks and watches have been made in all sort of shapes but they do all come back to round at some point. The issue is the Apple watch is more than a time piece so it sever lots of functions so 90% of what it does make square a better choice.
I will share this, people notice the square shape immediately and know/ask if it is infact the Apple Watch. Apple did something right, they have a design they people know what it is. unlike most other round smart watches, most people will have no clue what you have on your wrist. Remember it is about marketing and brand recognition. It like have a Ferrari which looks like a Chevy why would you pay Ferrari price if no one knows you driving one.
OMG, the flat tire is SOOOO ugly!! It's like a bad car wreck - you just can't take your eyes off it!! OMG!!
Yeah timeless if all you're showing is a clock, which, prior to smartwatches is what 99% of watches did. If I care about timeless I'll just buy a nice mechanical watch, not one of these traditional watch wannabes.
There's absolutely nothing innovative about the Apple Watch's form factor. Square watches have existed for a very, very long time. I actually think a round face is far more innovative when it comes to a smart watch. A square screen is obvious, and a bit lazy. I don't see how the Apple Watch benefits from a square screen anyway really. The screen is too small for meaningful work and a round watch is likely just as good at displaying notifications, etc. as a square screen.
All these Android Wear watches look much better in PR photos than IRL, especially on someone's wrist.
The final version of the Huawei watch looks a lot like their earlier PR photos:
I agree with your statement, and it is a little bothersome to have a round clock face on the square display. I would also say they Apple maybe should have not called it a watch since most everyone think of round when you say a watch. Also Clocks and watches have been made in all sort of shapes but they do all come back to round at some point. The issue is the Apple watch is more than a time piece so it sever lots of functions so 90% of what it does make square a better choice.
I will share this, people notice the square shape immediately and know/ask if it is infact the Apple Watch. Apple did something right, they have a design they people know what it is. unlike most other round smart watches, most people will have no clue what you have on your wrist. Remember it is about marketing and brand recognition. It like have a Ferrari which looks like a Chevy why would you pay Ferrari price if no one knows you driving one.
Good point about the shape being immediately recognizable. But does that translate into sales? I'm not sure. Then again, I don't wear a watch and have no interest in them. However, if I did buy one, I would not buy a square watch, smart watch or not. I just don't like the look.
I'm not sure that I agree on the screen shape being more suited, though. I mean, what does the Apple Watch do? It displays bits of data. I don't see how the Apple Watch does a better job of this because the screen is square.
By "different" I meant, "not Apple"
If it doesn't have an Apple logo on it, it's bound to be bashed on this forum
No argument on the benefit of a square/rectangular screen over round in terms of functionality. That said, these ARE watches. You wear them on your wrist. Sure, they can do a lot more, but you're still wearing a watch. Many watch makers offer square watches, but how often do you see someone wearing a square watch? They just don't look as nice. I'm very impressed by the Apple Watch from a tech standpoint, but I think the design is weak. It looks cheap and part of that is the square chicklet gum form factor.
Here is the problem with your statement, it is like art, it is all in the eyes of the individual on what it pleasing to them. I am not a fashion snob I tend to select things base on function over form. However, Apple hit on something and you obviously disagree, but if people are buying that means more than anyone's opinion. I had more people come up to me and ask me about the Apple watch and I am not a person which people will just wall up to and talk too. Most people are extremely interested in the watch and like the design I get far more favorable responses than anything else. I would say the watch functions as intended.
You missed the point of the comparison. Soulless or ugly, whatever suits your fancy is a valid criticism of the Apple Watch, but form follows function and Apple Watch is more of a wearable computer and less of a traditional watch. IOW, there's no good reason for the display of a wearable computer to be round, just as there is no good reason for a TV screen to be round.
if you think the 360 looks better than the Watch...damb
I don't, but I think it suggests that Apple could make a round version that looks far nicer than its current rectangular one.
While I understand and agree with your (and everyone else's) points that rectangular is the far superior shape for a computing device, I repeat my observations that:
(1) While many folks will ultimately want to wear a computing device, many of them won't want to wear something that looks like a computing device, like the ? Watch does (although much less so than competitor's offerings of any shape). Geeks like us don't care. Others do.
(2) A certain fraction of society just won't wear anything on their person that they don't think looks nice on them. Carry and use all day long? Yes. Wear? No. I know two females that are avoiding the ? Watch for this reason alone. Vanity? Perhaps. Reality? Yes.
(3) Generally speaking, circles are more elegant than rectangles. That's why the shape of the new Mac Pro kicks so much butt and why the new Apple campus will too. It's also why Apple makes all of their rectangles into rounded rectangles. "Squareness" is just so inelegant, whereas roundness is not. The same holds true for arcs versus straight lines. Sure, you can point out exceptions to this "boring rectangle rule" - on an earlier thread someone pointed to Cartier Tank watches - but round is generally more elegant.
Now... before you go down the list of why round is wrong for computing devices, let me assure you, I've heard you and I agree. But I don't think there can be no compromises. Consider...
I wonder how much larger a round ? Watch would have to be in order to perfectly circumscribe the usable portion of the current ? Watch's rectangular screen? I think that I might get out some scratch paper and a compass, plot it out, cut it out, and set it on my wrist to see. That would allow current apps to run just the same and display information just as nicely, but it would also allow Apple to add new round watch faces with plenty of room for complications, etc. It could also allow developers the opportunity to specifically target round app spaces if they want to utilize the rest of the screen. Of course, you could turn around and point out that a larger rectangle still could be horizontally circumscribed about this new round shape for even more efficient use of the surface area. But the resulting rectangle would probably be way too tall. Who knows where we reach the obnoxious size limit? Maybe when I cut out my hypothetical round watch it will already be there. If not, I'm sold.
I've got to believe that there is some size of round watch that renders a nice usable rectangular area in the center for our current iOS apps but also offers the elegance of being round and an opportunity for some apps to make use of the additional round space. If Apple could find the right balance, I'd buy the round one over the rectangle every time.
You missed the point of the comparison. Soulless or ugly, whatever suits your fancy is a valid criticism of the Apple Watch, but form follows function and Apple Watch is more of a wearable computer and less of a traditional watch. IOW, there's no good reason for the display of a wearable computer to be round, just as there is no good reason for a TV screen to be round.
But you don't USE an Apple Watch like a computer. That's the distinction that I think that many people here lose sight of when they try to claim that the rectangular display is superior to a round display for a smartwatch. The fact that the input methods and usable information that is viewable on the screen is so limited in the first place, it's only good for short bursts of bite-sized information that you either choose or choose not to act upon.
You're not going to be using the screen to type in a URL or compose an email or anything like that, so let's not get ahead of ourselves.
I never said Apple Watch's form factor was innovative. And what's innovative about round? It's obviously not difficult since every Android Wear OEM is doing it now.
I'm just looking at my ?Watch display right now. In order for all of that information to fit in a round display the watch face would need to be much bigger and would look ridiculous on my wrist. Also I wouldn't give up the taptic engine for anything so if Apple had to go square to make that work than square it is. But I'm someone who went 4-5 years without wearing a watch so I'm not partial to a specific style.
By some people, yes. I don't consider myself one of them.
Here is the problem with your statement, it is like art, it is all in the eyes of the individual on what it pleasing to them. I am not a fashion snob I tend to select things base on function over form. However, Apple hit on something and you obviously disagree, but if people are buying that means more than anyone's opinion. I had more people come up to me and ask me about the Apple watch and I am not a person which people will just wall up to and talk too. Most people are extremely interested in the watch and like the design I get far more favorable responses than anything else. I would say the watch functions as intended.
Agreed. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That said, considering the vast majority of watches have been round forever, it's highly likely that people favor the look of round to square. After all, square watches have been available forever and most people still choose round.
I don't disagree that Apple hit on something. I think they chose the square factor for two obvious reasons: easier to make the UI work and product differentiation. Assuming the smart watch category continues to grow and more people buy them, I don't see the public suddenly falling in love with square watches just because Apple chose that shape. Of course, all of this is conjecture and it's way too early to know how this will all play out.
I personally doubt it's the design of the Apple Watch that is motivating people to ask about the watch. It's a new product that has been well hyped and I'm sure people are curious, just like they were curious about the first iPhone. They might like the design, but they'd be just as interested if it were round...because it's the Apple Watch.
You missed the point of the comparison. Soulless or ugly, whatever suits your fancy is a valid criticism of the Apple Watch, but form follows function and Apple Watch is more of a wearable computer and less of a traditional watch. IOW, there's no good reason for the display of a wearable computer to be round, just as there is no good reason for a TV screen to be round.
Pardon me Newton, but there is a reason for a watch to be round: elegance and vanity. It may not seem like a good reason to you, but I know two females that won't use a wearable computer if it looks like a wearable computer. Make it more round and elegant, and they're in. (Mind you, these girls don't even wear watches today, but they are interested in the new uses that the ? Watch might bring. Just not enough to go with the computerish look.)
We are geeks, and they are not. Maybe you think that's just vanity and it's just silly. But like it or not, it's a force in our society that Apple will likely have to face one day.
And where do complications go on that display? I currently have 5 on my ?Watch, two in the corners. These watches look great when all they're doing is showing the time via a faux analog display. I won't argue that at all. But is timekeeping really the future of smartwatches? In 2007 Steve Jobs said the killer app on the phone was making calls. How many people today would say the killer app on iPhone is the phone app? I know timekeeping was one of ?Watch's tentpole features too but I see the future being less about telling time and more about other things. If I want a nice looking watch that tells time I'll buy a mechanical watch with the battery that last several years, not something that needs to be charged every couple days.
I'm just looking at my ?Watch display right now. In order for all of that information to fit in a round display the watch face would need to be much bigger and would look ridiculous on my wrist.
How sure are you about that? I think it's a key point, because it it approached the limit of ridiculousness but didn't quite get there, I think that would be perfect!
Good point about the shape being immediately recognizable. But does that translate into sales? I'm not sure. Then again, I don't wear a watch and have no interest in them. However, if I did buy one, I would not buy a square watch, smart watch or not. I just don't like the look.
I'm not sure that I agree on the screen shape being more suited, though. I mean, what does the Apple Watch do? It displays bits of data. I don't see how the Apple Watch does a better job of this because the screen is square.
Here is what it does for me on daily bases, it allows me not to look at my phone all the time especially in meeting with Senior management. I can quickly glance down at it to get updates on things, as well as seeting text and seeing who is calling and decide to answer or not. It taps on my wrist and reminds me a I have meeting I need to be at when I am not infront of my computer.
You probably use your phone for time, do you complain about it being rectangular verse being a round time piece.
I thought long and hard about getting Apple watch since I too did not see value in it beyond it being a watch. But I was in the market for a new everyday watch along with a fitness device, and realize to get both it would cost the same as the Apple watch for the feature I wanted. I got it for a watch and fitness features, but soon found myself using it for lots of things. Just last week I used it for updates on my flights and also for the boarding pass to get through security and onto the plane. I did not have to open my bag to get the tickets out or pull the phone from my pocket, I just walled up and put my watch to the reader and I was done. The same goes for apple pay. Can not tell you how many time I seen people drop their phone as they trying to do mobile payment or boarding passes becuase the juggling bags and trying to do something else. People are noticing how much it makes things easier.
Every time I do this I get lots of looks and people saying did you see what he just did.
The people I hear saying it not worth is it is useless are people who never trying it. I normally am not the first in on technology like this, I give it time and watch and see. This time I took the leap of faith and trusted Apple got it right, and bought in.