Compare the Series 4 Apple Watch 40mm and 44mm sizes to older models with this printable g...

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 56
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,174member
    paxman said:
    dm3 said:
    They're too big. Why does Apple suddenly have a fixation with size.
    If they would have kept the same 38mm size, I'd be in line for a gen4. But I don't want a bigger watch. 

    Pretty soon we'll have iPhone sized watches and iPad sized phones, and they'll make a iPad the size of a laptop.... oh wait.
    The perception and acceptance of the 'perfect size' is a moving target. When the first iPhone came out there were many comments about it being ridiculously big for a phone. When the large Androids came out they just looked silly but now nobody bats and eye when you hold an 6" device to your ear. As Watches and tAndroid equvelants prove themselves to be ever more useful I am sure they will continue to grow. I am not sure Apple has a fixation with size (maybe it is you?), they are just moving with the times. Design is not and never has been a 'fixed thing'. Not to evolve and develop = moving backwards. T'was always thus.
    Speaking of size, this is the first time they made it thinner and specifically stated that it has less internal volume. The real benefit is a 32–35% larger display, which is needed since it's not a traditional watch that only need to glance it.
    randominternetpersonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 56
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,137member
    AF_Hitt said:

    mac_128 said:
    sw5959 said:
    dm3 said:
    They're too big. Why does Apple suddenly have a fixation with size.
    If they would have kept the same 38mm size, I'd be in line for a gen4. But I don't want a bigger watch. 

    Pretty soon we'll have iPhone sized watches and iPad sized phones, and they'll make a iPad the size of a laptop.... oh wait.
    Seriously? A 2mm difference is too big? 1/16 of an inch? 

    What won't people complain about when it comes to Apple?
    Now compare it to the 42mm Huawei watch ... it's now larger than the watches many were saying were too big when the Apple Watch first came out, and the Huawei still has more display area, and no bezels.


    I question how useful the extra display area in a round display is. I'd argue it's less useful, and that that's the obvious reason why we don't have, you know, round monitors. 
    Yes, but what about a pyramid?

    I love the false equivalency argument, that somehow a wristwatch, long a fashion and jewelry item worn on the body, is somehow equal to a TV, or desktop video display for watching video, viewing photos and handling spreadsheets and documents. There have been triangular shaped watches as well, though not particularly popular or in widespread use, but an excellent example of how people who wear things on their body desire a choice of style, regardless of the functionality of the device itself. However, I would never expect to see a triangular phone, tablet, laptop, desk display or TV, either.

    That said, let me say that a round monitor would neatly solve the recent problem that's arising out of portrait video being shot on smartphones. The aspect ratio could quickly change from horizontal to vertical, maintaining full resolution, without resorting to shrinking the image down dramatically within extremely wide pillar bars. And it has the potential to handle different aspect ratios, like IMAX and 16:9 without changing the size as well. Desk monitors could swivel, but a round wall mounted TV wouldn't be unreasonable, and just like the much smaller wristwatch, also serves a fashion and decorative function as well.
    edited September 13
  • Reply 23 of 56
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,137member
    How can i post a picture here?
    Click the black document icon in the text editing window header.
  • Reply 24 of 56
    mac_128 said:
    How can i post a picture here?
    Click the black document icon in the text editing window header.
    Thank you so much..
    interesting the header is hidden on the first page at the bottom where " post comment window is "
    but when i click on more comments.. on the 2nd page " post comments’ window shows the editing tools ..... 🤔🤔
  • Reply 25 of 56
    Kind of rough.. but showes relative  size 
    dark is series 3
    light is series 4 


  • Reply 26 of 56
    When I click the link - "This document has been removed from Scribd."

  • Reply 27 of 56
    Just draw two squares one with 20mm sides and the other with 22mm sides on a piece of paper. Cut them out and presto! Decide.
  • Reply 28 of 56
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,137member
    dws-2 said:
    mac_128 said:
    sw5959 said:
    dm3 said:
    They're too big. Why does Apple suddenly have a fixation with size.
    If they would have kept the same 38mm size, I'd be in line for a gen4. But I don't want a bigger watch. 

    Pretty soon we'll have iPhone sized watches and iPad sized phones, and they'll make a iPad the size of a laptop.... oh wait.
    Seriously? A 2mm difference is too big? 1/16 of an inch? 

    What won't people complain about when it comes to Apple?
    This is how it stacks up, the red areas are how much larger the 44mm is compared to the 42 ... it definitely makes the watch look larger.



    Now compare it to the 42mm Huawei watch ... it's now larger than the watches many were saying were too big when the Apple Watch first came out, and the Huawei still has more display area, and no bezels.


    I think you could have argued the same point before this new watch, given that the size change isn't really much in the picture you used.

    It's also worth noting that with the Apple, you're including the whole thing, minus the strap. With the Huawei, you aren't including the additional top and bottom metal that's on the actual watch before the strap starts, and that looks to be substantial. Also, there are bezels, but they are covered with the steel ring. You may think that's a more attractive way to hide the bezel (and I think you'd get a lot of agreement on that), but the fact remains that the bezel is there (although it is probably somewhat smaller).

    Oh, I'm not discounting the band attachment points at all. And I'm not discounting the steel ring. In fact, that's my point, in my overlay, the steel ring is clearly smaller than the metal case edge of the AW surrounding the crystal, and the bezel itself. Yet the display goes right up to the steel case, whereas it does not on the AW. I'm showing you a precise scaled overhead view of the Huawei watch intact, though I have removed the band attachment wings for illustrative purposes. It's the display area I'm highlighting here, NOT the construction of the watch. Also note, the Huawei is 2mm smaller than the AW, so that further minimizes the band attachment points, which are situated at the bottom of the case so they drop immediately down, whereas the Apple bands are attached in the middle, and flare out a bit more before they drop down essentially making up for the band attachment wings on the Huawei.

    Again, display area and bezels are NOT the only consideration. I have no idea how the internal space of the Huawei is organized for how vital that space in the band attachment points. By the way, I did not include the bands in the AW example, as the case goes all the way to the edge. Here's a revised graphic eliminating the bands below. But again, the AW does things the Huawei doesn't. Nevertheless, the point being that Apple is growing larger into the Huawei territory, without the same display area. I don't care for the AW bezels and would rather see them extend to the metal case as with the Huawei, but YMMV. 

    And yes, I did make this argument for the Series 0-3 AW, which was even more effective, given the huge bezels on the original. I'd say the new watch more or less equalizes the usable area base on the corners which are clipped by the case bezel. However, the new 40mm active display area fits just fine in the round 42mm case, giving considerably more room. Yes it's not as large a display, but it is exactly the same content as the 44mm display, just slightly smaller -- which as far as I know has never been a concern of anyone who bought the 38mm AW (or now 40mm AW) for that matter. In fact, the new rounded displays fit perfectly inside a round case, suggesting a very easy transition for older Apps going to a possible round AW in the future, gaining a lot more useable space as well -- even if the size is slightly smaller than the rectangular model of the same size. 




    edited September 13
  • Reply 29 of 56
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 30,862member
    gutengel said:
    This is such a huge difference on the body and screen. When you compare the new AW the old one, it looks like a cheap Chinese knock off. Can't wait to get mine!
    The body isn’t that much bigger. The screens are though. The new 40mm has a screen that looks bigger than my 42mm model. The 44 is huge!. I’ve got my Apple Store app all set up, just waiting for 12:01 to hit the continue button to get to buy it.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 56
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,174member
    mac_128 said:
    In fact, that's my point, in my overlay, the steel ring is clearly smaller than the metal case edge of the AW surrounding the crystal, and the bezel itself.
    WTF?! With a lie that blatant you should consider running for POTUS in two years.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 56
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 30,862member

    mac_128 said:
    sw5959 said:
    dm3 said:
    They're too big. Why does Apple suddenly have a fixation with size.
    If they would have kept the same 38mm size, I'd be in line for a gen4. But I don't want a bigger watch. 

    Pretty soon we'll have iPhone sized watches and iPad sized phones, and they'll make a iPad the size of a laptop.... oh wait.
    Seriously? A 2mm difference is too big? 1/16 of an inch? 

    What won't people complain about when it comes to Apple?
    This is how it stacks up, the red areas are how much larger the 44mm is compared to the 42 ... it definitely makes the watch look larger.



    Now compare it to the 42mm Huawei watch ... it's now larger than the watches many were saying were too big when the Apple Watch first came out, and the Huawei still has more display area, and no bezels.


    For text the Watch is still better. These round watches have a lot of problems at the top and bottom of the displays where a lot of text gets cut off.
    bb-15StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 56
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 30,862member

    Just like the iPhone doc:

    Notice

    This document has been removed from Scribd.

    It is also possible that this is regional, or linked to adblocker settings. The document is getting read.
    I really don’t want to join Scribe to download a pdf. Yes, it’s free for a while, but it’s a pain. Why couldn’t you put the pdf in the article, directly?
    StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 56
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,174member
    melgross said:
    Just like the iPhone doc:

    Notice

    This document has been removed from Scribd.

    It is also possible that this is regional, or linked to adblocker settings. The document is getting read.
    I really don’t want to join Scribe to download a pdf. Yes, it’s free for a while, but it’s a pain. Why couldn’t you put the pdf in the article, directly?
    You aren't able to see the document in the main article? A PDF would be nicer, but I've personally never had an issue with Scribd on Safari for Mac.
  • Reply 34 of 56
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 30,862member

    larrya said:

    mac_128 said:
    sw5959 said:
    dm3 said:
    They're too big. Why does Apple suddenly have a fixation with size.
    If they would have kept the same 38mm size, I'd be in line for a gen4. But I don't want a bigger watch. 

    Pretty soon we'll have iPhone sized watches and iPad sized phones, and they'll make a iPad the size of a laptop.... oh wait.
    Seriously? A 2mm difference is too big? 1/16 of an inch? 

    What won't people complain about when it comes to Apple?
    Now compare it to the 42mm Huawei watch ... it's now larger than the watches many were saying were too big when the Apple Watch first came out, and the Huawei still has more display area, and no bezels.


    I question how useful the extra display area in a round display is. I'd argue it's less useful, and that that's the obvious reason why we don't have, you know, round monitors. 
    What are you talking about?!?  In this example, the round 42mm watch displays everything that the rectangular 44mm square displays, PLUS it has the areas outside that rectangle. You just can’t imagine putting anything there, like, say, a complication or any number of Apple apps that use a round metaphor, like activity rings, volume, or progress toward running goal?  Is the round monitor meme really so important to you that you willfully ignore all the extra real estate?
    No, it doesn’t. A lot of the corners are cut off. It’s the same problem I see in every article about these watches. One word in the middle at the top and bottom. Three words next, etc, until the space used is taken up as the line forms. But the text lines still don’t fill the entire width in the middle height of the screen, so it’s still wasted.

    no matter what, round screens are a terrible choice for anything like this, and there’s no sensible argument that it is, other than Apple isn’t producing round watches as Google and their OEMs are.

    we saw the same argument against the crown, until Google realized it’s the best way to handle scrolling and other functions, and added it to the second version. Then most all of the negative commenting on a crown disappeared. Amazing!
    bb-15StrangeDayswatto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 56
    melgross said:

    Just like the iPhone doc:

    Notice

    This document has been removed from Scribd.

    It is also possible that this is regional, or linked to adblocker settings. The document is getting read.
    I really don’t want to join Scribe to download a pdf. Yes, it’s free for a while, but it’s a pain. Why couldn’t you put the pdf in the article, directly?
    Wouldn't (potentially) millions of downloads cost these guys in terms of bandwidth with their host/service provider?
  • Reply 36 of 56
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 30,862member
    mac_128 said:
    AF_Hitt said:

    mac_128 said:
    sw5959 said:
    dm3 said:
    They're too big. Why does Apple suddenly have a fixation with size.
    If they would have kept the same 38mm size, I'd be in line for a gen4. But I don't want a bigger watch. 

    Pretty soon we'll have iPhone sized watches and iPad sized phones, and they'll make a iPad the size of a laptop.... oh wait.
    Seriously? A 2mm difference is too big? 1/16 of an inch? 

    What won't people complain about when it comes to Apple?
    Now compare it to the 42mm Huawei watch ... it's now larger than the watches many were saying were too big when the Apple Watch first came out, and the Huawei still has more display area, and no bezels.


    I question how useful the extra display area in a round display is. I'd argue it's less useful, and that that's the obvious reason why we don't have, you know, round monitors. 
    Yes, but what about a pyramid?

    I love the false equivalency argument, that somehow a wristwatch, long a fashion and jewelry item worn on the body, is somehow equal to a TV, or desktop video display for watching video, viewing photos and handling spreadsheets and documents. There have been triangular shaped watches as well, though not particularly popular or in widespread use, but an excellent example of how people who wear things on their body desire a choice of style, regardless of the functionality of the device itself. However, I would never expect to see a triangular phone, tablet, laptop, desk display or TV, either.

    That said, let me say that a round monitor would neatly solve the recent problem that's arising out of portrait video being shot on smartphones. The aspect ratio could quickly change from horizontal to vertical, maintaining full resolution, without resorting to shrinking the image down dramatically within extremely wide pillar bars. And it has the potential to handle different aspect ratios, like IMAX and 16:9 without changing the size as well. Desk monitors could swivel, but a round wall mounted TV wouldn't be unreasonable, and just like the much smaller wristwatch, also serves a fashion and decorative function as well.
    That’s kind of absurd. A round monitor solves nothing. We saw round monitors in early science fiction films that have looked stupid for decades. They were round, because tubes were round, and they couldn’t think of anything else, and it looked so far out from what people expected.

    but even very old TVs had the top and bottom blanked out, along with a bit of the sides to more emulate the old motion picture format. If round was so great, we would have seen round movies, photos and Tv shows.

    ‘The smaller the display, the more important is is to be rectangular. I’m sorry they rounded the corners off so much.
    its just a really terrible idea. Think of how large these things would be. How big would the 27” iMac have to be to encompass this idea? How much more would it, or any display cost? It could easily be triple. There would be so much waste to the substrate that would be thrown away. Plus the extra size to get the same size image. Feh!
    edited September 13 bb-15StrangeDaysrandominternetpersonrossb2watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 56
    claire1claire1 Posts: 350unconfirmed, member
    This is an absolute beauty and seems like it can be the design for years to come.

    I can only see a few improvements possible at this point:

    Remove the Digital Crown

    Flatten the sensors completely

    Here's a cool flat Apple Watch concept:






    mac_128watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 56
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 30,862member
    Soli said:
    melgross said:
    Just like the iPhone doc:

    Notice

    This document has been removed from Scribd.

    It is also possible that this is regional, or linked to adblocker settings. The document is getting read.
    I really don’t want to join Scribe to download a pdf. Yes, it’s free for a while, but it’s a pain. Why couldn’t you put the pdf in the article, directly?
    You aren't able to see the document in the main article? A PDF would be nicer, but I've personally never had an issue with Scribd on Safari for Mac.
    No.
  • Reply 39 of 56
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,174member
    melgross said:
    Soli said:
    melgross said:
    Just like the iPhone doc:

    Notice

    This document has been removed from Scribd.

    It is also possible that this is regional, or linked to adblocker settings. The document is getting read.
    I really don’t want to join Scribe to download a pdf. Yes, it’s free for a while, but it’s a pain. Why couldn’t you put the pdf in the article, directly?
    You aren't able to see the document in the main article? A PDF would be nicer, but I've personally never had an issue with Scribd on Safari for Mac.
    No.
    How about this?

    edited September 13
  • Reply 40 of 56
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,137member
    Just draw two squares one with 20mm sides and the other with 22mm sides on a piece of paper. Cut them out and presto! Decide.
    Here's the 44/42 and 40/38 comparison. Just cut the red off to get the Series 3 sizes. 


    bb-15
Sign In or Register to comment.