Timeless!? The only reason watches became round is because hour, minute, and second hands were moving in a circle, and made it look more aesthetic given that constraint.
Sundials (the time keeping devices that preceded watches) were not circular by any means.
Some day you'll figure it out.
Even though they did not need to be (since the shadow sweeps a more-or-less elliptical path, rather than circular) most sundials were round. Here is an ancient one that simply had a hole for a bolt to be placed in (and cast a shadow) and a semi-circle divided into 12 equal segments...
There are thousands of more images of circular sundials.
Regardless, it's my observation that whether a watch needs to be circular to tell time or not (they don't) the majority of people prefer the circular shape if they are going to wear anything on their wrist. So it will make a difference in the marketing efforts of the ? Watch. It blows my mind that people are denying this. I understand and acknowledge the one side (that rectangular is superior for the computing aspects of this) but many others here won't acknowledge the importance of aesthetics in wearables.
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.
Have you used the Apple Watch, or are you just imagining what it would be like?
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.
I agree. The Apple Watch is very practical, it is my everyday workhorse watch.
But it is not good looking by any stretch of the imagination. It is inoffensive, and that is good enough for every day wear. But on many occasions, I still out on the Jaeger or the Panerai. Women carry Birkin bags, men wear mechanical watches. The Apple Watch is a minivan (with lots of cup holders), but you also need a proper car.
The kind you could do yourself, or had to get done at a store (or with some fancy watch tools)?
Which major watchmaker? Please provide a link. Or move along. Enough trolling.
Fancy tools? A number of other watches just used a standard pin based band, you shouldn't have to go to a store or use any fancy tools to remove those.
The ASUS ZenWatch had a simple quick release for the pins on their straps. These required no tools at all:
The kind you could do yourself, or had to get done at a store (or with some fancy watch tools)?
Which major watchmaker? Please provide a link. Or move along. Enough trolling.
I often say to people that one of the most innovative things about the Apple Watch is the mechanism they came up with to change bands. It's hands down one of the best I have seen on a watch.
Geiger comes to mind of a pretty slick interchangeable band mechanism that requires no tools.
That being said, changing bands on something like a Swatch requires little more than about 2 minutes with a paper clip.
I've tried on the Moto 360 and it did look comically huge on my wrist. I guess hence why they have a smaller size now.
Then again, Apple and most of its fans - me included - thought that those Samsung phablets were comically huge. Look how that turned out. I guess that's why Apple makes larger sizes now. Apple doesn't always get its initial trade offs right.
Ha, touche, but I spoke too much and diluted my own point, which was:
(1) many people care more about aesthetics when they have to wear the object, and
(2) round things are in general more aesthetically pleasing than straight things
Yes, fashion will certainly evolve, and advancements in tech can force that issue. Who knows whether rectangles can make a comeback as most favored of watch shapes? Could be.
But in answer I assert that at this point in time it would be foolish for Apple to completely dismiss the lure of the round smartwatch. With regard to form following function, I believe that rectangular is currently better for the task, but I do believe that there will be a way to answer both in either rectangular or round formats. It will just take some study to get it right. (I bet you Apple is studying that right now in top secret labs.)
Apple temporarily missed out on the larger phone sizes by being pigheaded about the trade-off between one-handed use versus screen size, and I think they may lose out on a large number of watch sales if they get pigheaded about the trade-off between watch size/shape versus area that can be used specifically for lists. I believe there is a way to make elegant round smartwatches that also perform all functions well. I'm certain of it. If not Apple, then somebody else will do it, and they will be the temporary king like Samsung was with its big screen phones, until Apple comes in and does it even better.
I did get your point, just I felt a bit like teasing
I think that the overall shape will also be determined by how much the current tech can shrink. If the watch is thinner, maybe some functions transferred to the bands, then the trade off between round and larger shape might work. Honestly, I'm already amazed what they can put into the small housing and seeing that battery tech is currently not about to make a step change, and future models of the watch will rather contain more features than less I don't really believe in substantial reduction of volume over the next generations. Unfortunately, I have to add.
Regarding your comparison to the iPhone I'm still in between. Whenever I pickup my old 5s I'm happy how easily it fits in my hands and how well it is suited for one hand use. And that's really convenient. When I switch back to the 6 I'm always happy about the screen estate. Funny thing is, before the 6 I never missed that, and I have my iPad mini around for reading.
On the aesthetics side until now I never felt the apple watch unpleasant or less beautiful to look at from an overall design perspective. Of course I adore my mechanical watches and the craftsmanship is as amazing to me as in case of the Apple watch. The only thing I feel really pity about is that the Apple watch is designed as a consumer produxt with very short lifecycle when compared to the mechanical ones. Maybe it's just a question of getting used to, but the idea of replacing the watch every other year makes me feel slightly uneasy, while I never had such a feeling related to the phone.
Then again, Apple and most of its fans - me included - thought that those Samsung phablets were comically huge. Look how that turned out. I guess that's why Apple makes larger sizes now. Apple doesn't always get its initial trade offs right.
Again, with the 5s I never felt there was a trade off. neither did I have this feeling with any model before the 5s at the time I bought and used them and before the next model came out. The 6 is the first model where from the start I felt "ah. Screen size vs one handed usability - that's a trade off".
I will laugh my ass off if all these other companies start making rectangular wrist worn computers ( or as most call them, watches) like Apple, and siriously, people need to get over the danm old mechanical watches, that era is dying. Watches are no longer watches. Let it go.
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.
So why is Apple courting the elite of the fashion world? Why is Apple actively courting the world's most exclusive boutiques, why is the ?Watch being sold along side Rolexes at New York's high end London Jewelers? Or The Hour Glass in Malaysia?
You keep making this assertion that Huwei and others are trying to fool somebody. Do you think Fossil makes and sells this watch to people who think it looks as good as the real thing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan
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.
Once again your lack of imagination is not proof that it can't be done effectively.
As far as your tired argument goes, since the watch is square to maximize the ability to read text, why on Earth are you even using an analogue watch face at all? It just takes up unnecessary room for all those complications. There's only one appropriate watch face for your rectangle and that's this one:
Maestro, the difference is that you don't wear your phone. Or your iPad. Or your TV. Or your computer. Or anything else that people here are using to poo-poo the notion that people want round watches. The fact that you wear it makes a difference to a hell of a lot of people. The fact that people here don't understand that only proves that we are not vain about what we wear. Some of us are too geeky to care, while others are just too practical to care. But I am certain that there is a large set of people who do not wear watches at all today but would gladly wear an ? Watch for all of the utility it brings, provided it looked more elegant. Jony has done a fantastic job, no doubt, but it needs more refinement and more shape options. Round >> rectangle from an elegance perspective. The evidence is all around you in the world.
By the way, I went through much the same process as you just described, and I love my ? Watch. But I do wish that there were a larger round option that circumscribed my current rectangular screen. If the bezel is lost, the result would be slightly taller and maybe 25% wider. (I'm going to model it out on paper and see someday.)
Style is bias; bias changes. Apple has designed its watch for function as well as elegance and style. The market will decide over time which form factor is in vogue, and which is out. It might be the case the round is the old, and rectangular is the new.
All of them had interchangable bands. Funny how when Apple goes to 2 screen sizes on the iPhone it's not copying but if someone does something Apple does it's copying. That's called hypocrisy, and I don't need to be an apologist of anyone to see it.
Agree! Is more like an adaptation to the current market. If you don't adapt you don't sell. Fortunately all these companies have the pressure to compete and come up with new things or re-invent things, thus making our gadget better and our life more lazy. And I hope more companies keep putting pressure on Apple so they can keep on innovating, and not stay stagnant. :smokey:
Comments
Timeless!?
Sundials (the time keeping devices that preceded watches) were not circular by any means.
Some day you'll figure it out.
Even though they did not need to be (since the shadow sweeps a more-or-less elliptical path, rather than circular) most sundials were round. Here is an ancient one that simply had a hole for a bolt to be placed in (and cast a shadow) and a semi-circle divided into 12 equal segments...
There are thousands of more images of circular sundials.
Regardless, it's my observation that whether a watch needs to be circular to tell time or not (they don't) the majority of people prefer the circular shape if they are going to wear anything on their wrist. So it will make a difference in the marketing efforts of the ? Watch. It blows my mind that people are denying this. I understand and acknowledge the one side (that rectangular is superior for the computing aspects of this) but many others here won't acknowledge the importance of aesthetics in wearables.
Yep, and the sales figures for the Watch compared to android wearables would suggest that there are a lot of beholders.
That's only because Apple's rectangular watches are nicer than those goof-ball's round ones. But a round Apple watch... ooh I would salivate!
Have you used the Apple Watch, or are you just imagining what it would be like?
I agree. The Apple Watch is very practical, it is my everyday workhorse watch.
But it is not good looking by any stretch of the imagination. It is inoffensive, and that is good enough for every day wear. But on many occasions, I still out on the Jaeger or the Panerai. Women carry Birkin bags, men wear mechanical watches. The Apple Watch is a minivan (with lots of cup holders), but you also need a proper car.
The kind you could do yourself, or had to get done at a store (or with some fancy watch tools)?
Which major watchmaker? Please provide a link. Or move along. Enough trolling.
Fancy tools? A number of other watches just used a standard pin based band, you shouldn't have to go to a store or use any fancy tools to remove those.
The ASUS ZenWatch had a simple quick release for the pins on their straps. These required no tools at all:
All of them had interchangable bands.
The kind you could do yourself, or had to get done at a store (or with some fancy watch tools)?
Which major watchmaker? Please provide a link. Or move along. Enough trolling.
I often say to people that one of the most innovative things about the Apple Watch is the mechanism they came up with to change bands. It's hands down one of the best I have seen on a watch.
Geiger comes to mind of a pretty slick interchangeable band mechanism that requires no tools.
That being said, changing bands on something like a Swatch requires little more than about 2 minutes with a paper clip.
Then again, Apple and most of its fans - me included - thought that those Samsung phablets were comically huge. Look how that turned out. I guess that's why Apple makes larger sizes now. Apple doesn't always get its initial trade offs right.
There's a 46mm for larger wrists.
Two 42mm, one for women and one for men. Loses a little battery life but gains in screen res.
Plus a Sport Edition.
For what its worth I have been waiting for a company to come out with a round phone that doubles as a pocket watch.
I think the steampunk/hipster crowd would love something like that.
I did get your point, just I felt a bit like teasing
I think that the overall shape will also be determined by how much the current tech can shrink. If the watch is thinner, maybe some functions transferred to the bands, then the trade off between round and larger shape might work. Honestly, I'm already amazed what they can put into the small housing and seeing that battery tech is currently not about to make a step change, and future models of the watch will rather contain more features than less I don't really believe in substantial reduction of volume over the next generations. Unfortunately, I have to add.
Regarding your comparison to the iPhone I'm still in between. Whenever I pickup my old 5s I'm happy how easily it fits in my hands and how well it is suited for one hand use. And that's really convenient. When I switch back to the 6 I'm always happy about the screen estate. Funny thing is, before the 6 I never missed that, and I have my iPad mini around for reading.
On the aesthetics side until now I never felt the apple watch unpleasant or less beautiful to look at from an overall design perspective. Of course I adore my mechanical watches and the craftsmanship is as amazing to me as in case of the Apple watch. The only thing I feel really pity about is that the Apple watch is designed as a consumer produxt with very short lifecycle when compared to the mechanical ones. Maybe it's just a question of getting used to, but the idea of replacing the watch every other year makes me feel slightly uneasy, while I never had such a feeling related to the phone.
Have you used the Apple Watch, or are you just imagining what it would be like?
Again, with the 5s I never felt there was a trade off. neither did I have this feeling with any model before the 5s at the time I bought and used them and before the next model came out. The 6 is the first model where from the start I felt "ah. Screen size vs one handed usability - that's a trade off".
Maybe taking a big, gold android phablet put on a heavy gold chain and hanging from your neck will already do the job nicely
I like that combination. I wonder how white would look on black? Did you pick Noah up?
So why is Apple courting the elite of the fashion world? Why is Apple actively courting the world's most exclusive boutiques, why is the ?Watch being sold along side Rolexes at New York's high end London Jewelers? Or The Hour Glass in Malaysia?
You keep making this assertion that Huwei and others are trying to fool somebody. Do you think Fossil makes and sells this watch to people who think it looks as good as the real thing?
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.
Once again your lack of imagination is not proof that it can't be done effectively.
As far as your tired argument goes, since the watch is square to maximize the ability to read text, why on Earth are you even using an analogue watch face at all? It just takes up unnecessary room for all those complications. There's only one appropriate watch face for your rectangle and that's this one:
Anything less and you're just being hypocritical.
Maestro, the difference is that you don't wear your phone. Or your iPad. Or your TV. Or your computer. Or anything else that people here are using to poo-poo the notion that people want round watches. The fact that you wear it makes a difference to a hell of a lot of people. The fact that people here don't understand that only proves that we are not vain about what we wear. Some of us are too geeky to care, while others are just too practical to care. But I am certain that there is a large set of people who do not wear watches at all today but would gladly wear an ? Watch for all of the utility it brings, provided it looked more elegant. Jony has done a fantastic job, no doubt, but it needs more refinement and more shape options. Round >> rectangle from an elegance perspective. The evidence is all around you in the world.
By the way, I went through much the same process as you just described, and I love my ? Watch. But I do wish that there were a larger round option that circumscribed my current rectangular screen. If the bezel is lost, the result would be slightly taller and maybe 25% wider. (I'm going to model it out on paper and see someday.)
Style is bias; bias changes. Apple has designed its watch for function as well as elegance and style. The market will decide over time which form factor is in vogue, and which is out. It might be the case the round is the old, and rectangular is the new.
It's a calendar alert for tomorrow, but yeah I'll get to him on time
Agree! Is more like an adaptation to the current market. If you don't adapt you don't sell. Fortunately all these companies have the pressure to compete and come up with new things or re-invent things, thus making our gadget better and our life more lazy. And I hope more companies keep putting pressure on Apple so they can keep on innovating, and not stay stagnant. :smokey: