I think this is a product that exemplifies what makes Apple unique in the market - an amazing integration of hardware, software, and user experience. Is the hardware bigger and less radically amazing that we dreamed about in our PhotoShop-augmented-reality dreams? Absolutely. Problem is this little thing called physics and material science and state of the art in component and manufacturing technology. Just like the original iPad1 (which I still have a use on occasion) the then state of the art in technology that could be built affordable at huge scale placed hard limits of what Apple could do to deliver at a hardware level. The original iPad was kind of thick and heavy by todays standards, but by the standards of the day in tablets (like the Windows Tablet Edition monstrosities) the iPad1 was amazing at all levels. Additionally the amazing integration of HW+SW+UX in the iPad1 defined a product category that has withstood the test of time, exactly as the iPhone had done years earlier. The things that will establish the Apple Watch as the next category defining product will depend heavily on the SW+UX that Apple is able to deliver in an unique way on a HW platform they have optimized for their product and its users.
You could argue that this is an apologist's perspective - and to the degree that walking on water and perpetual motion machines are benchmarks you'd be correct. But as a Version 1.0 product that must demonstrate huge and attainable potential for growth the current Apple Watch is the best we've seen so far because of the things Apple does very well. The utility is obvious, so the next challenge is to deliver battery life that will attract mainstream Apple customers.
So nothing has really changed between what Apple is able to accomplish over its competitors. Competitors who don't have total control over the essential building blocks for envisioning, creating, and manufacturing high precision, world class, non-commodity products that are surrounded by a vast ecosystem of life enriching media and services will continue to struggle against Apple.
The Apple Watch is all about creating another value delivery mechanism for the ever growing Apple media and services ecosystem.
Finally a calm and considered write-up of the watch part of the event.
Several points of Apple-ish elegance and inventiveness reveal how hard they thought about and worked out the concept of "computer watch" or whatever you want to call this new category.
1. The UI as a freeform galaxy of apps, with time in the center, grouped by "neighborhoods" of apps.
2. The precise breakdown of input into crown wheel scrolling, selection by pushing on two different switches as well as by touch and tapping, zooming by crown wheel.
3. The "disappearing thickness" when it's worn on the wrist. I take it that the sensor/charging disc is burying itself into the hollow upper part of the wrist.
4. The slick way the watch bands slide and lock into mounting grooves in the watch body. Don't know if that's unique to Apple, but it's a Ive-like solution that makes a huge difference in desirability and wearability.
5. The watchbands themselves, with the different magnetic closing methods. These seem also very Ive-ish in his jewelry-making mode. Apple has been developing magnetic link and closures for a few years now, and here we see them doing more embedding in new ways.
6. The bonding of the display directly on the sapphire (and the glass?). Screen bonding has been a particular design effort of Apple's for a few years now. I think they may be the innovators in this area, basically getting the image closer to the eyes for aesthetic reasons and to save on thickness.
There are probably more breakthroughs like these that make the watch by Apple stand apart from the others, but this is already an impressive list. Payments and Siri will turn out to be the main drivers of "need" for the watch. They would say the fitness angle, but I'm not one to speculate on that.
I agree and a good summary yourself. I can just imagine the magnificent displays in Apple Stores they will make and also imagine them 'flying off the shelves' when they go on sale. In a couple of years I suspect AAPL will comprise 30% ?Watch revenues as it approaches $200.
I think this is a product that exemplifies what makes Apple unique in the market - an amazing integration of hardware, software, and user experience. Is the hardware bigger and less radically amazing that we dreamed about in our PhotoShop-augmented-reality dreams? Absolutely. Problem is this little thing called physics and material science and state of the art in component and manufacturing technology. Just like the original iPad1 (which I still have a use on occasion) the then state of the art in technology that could be built affordable at huge scale placed hard limits of what Apple could do to deliver at a hardware level. The original iPad was kind of thick and heavy by todays standards, but by the standards of the day in tablets (like the Windows Tablet Edition monstrosities) the iPad1 was amazing at all levels. Additionally the amazing integration of HW+SW+UX in the iPad1 defined a product category that has withstood the test of time, exactly as the iPhone had done years earlier. The things that will establish the Apple Watch as the next category defining product will depend heavily on the SW+UX that Apple is able to deliver in an unique way on a HW platform they have optimized for their product and its users.
You could argue that this is an apologist's perspective - and to the degree that walking on water and perpetual motion machines are benchmarks you'd be correct. But as a Version 1.0 product that must demonstrate huge and attainable potential for growth the current Apple Watch is the best we've seen so far because of the things Apple does very well. The utility is obvious, so the next challenge is to deliver battery life that will attract mainstream Apple customers.
So nothing has really changed between what Apple is able to accomplish over its competitors. Competitors who don't have total control over the essential building blocks for envisioning, creating, and manufacturing high precision, world class, non-commodity products that are surrounded by a vast ecosystem of life enriching media and services will continue to struggle against Apple.
The Apple Watch is all about creating another value delivery mechanism for the ever growing Apple media and services ecosystem.
Well said and let us not forget we just witnessed the birth of a new OS from Apple. It is iOS nor OS X this is WatchOS (my word) and with the new Watch SDK a whole new eco system, App Store and world of connectables are born.
I had no idea what to expect before the event, and I'm pleased to see that for a change, pictures of the ?Watch weren't leaked out by any criminal Chinese workers. It's a good thing that it's not in mass production yet!
I hadn't really thought much about it before, but it makes perfect sense to use the square shape. We are talking about a display that is going to display all sorts of information after all, and not just tell the time. In that regard, watches like the Moto 360 are a total failure, because their function is flawed, not to mention the terrible battery life that has been reported.
Would you buy a round tv for your livingroom? That makes about as much sense as having a round smart watch on your wrists. It doesn't matter how it looks. It's a dumb idea, and it's a flawed concept. Only a few mentally deficient Fandroids would ever want one of those.
I wasn't sure what to think about the ?Watch design when I first saw it, but after seeing many of the gazillion different wristband options for it, and the three different models, I do like how some of the combinations look. This product is extremely customizable, and it's smart of Apple to offer it in two different sizes!
The other smartwatches by Samsung and others don't offer different sizes. I saw this one Samsung watch that is not even made for a human wrist, as the shape doesn't fit good around a wrist. But what else do you expect from a company that is used to copying other people's ideas?
Also that scroll wheel or the digital crown on the ?Watch or whatever it's called seems to be a smart solution.
And it's funny how a few people are complaining about the thickness. These are probably the same people who complain that Apple needs to stop making their phones thinner. Get your stories straight, you hypocrites!
I quite like the way that the iWatch looks. It looks to be extremely well made, like a premium item and not cheap junk like other smart watches.
I think that it has a sort of retro, but classic look to it. I also like how ? offers a more upscale model that's in gold! That model will no doubt be a bit more costly, and that's great! I wrote many months ago that I hoped that ? would offer more expensive models of the ?Watch.
I think that the ?Watch will do decent. I fully expect Fandroids and others who can't afford one to whine about it. The ?Watch is not for everybody, but it's quite a bit ahead of any other so called smartwatch that has been released.
The crown is the worse thing about this high tech device.- like a click wheel on the original iPad. Or a manual volume wheel. Stupid.
I confess that I suspect in version two or three of ?Watch this will be replaced with simply rubbing your finger around the outer edge to accomplish the same results. It is however an attractive looking button that ties us subconsciously back to analog watches.
I would love to see a 100% waterproof version able to take a reasonable scuba depth. It seems the internals lend themselves to being made so, easily enough. Then I am back to worrying about the crown, is this the weak link for such a version I wonder.
Also, hilarious how tech blogs such as engadget are in full troll-mode, with classless, click-bait, hit-whoring headlines. Reminds me of the iPad reveal, when Steve Jobs went to bed depressed that night after non-stop mockery and derision after the unveiling. Some things never change. So sad that these "tech enthusiasts" have so little imagination, wonder, appreciation, or even the ability to wait and see the potential of a product that is genuinely new in so many ways. Such a limited, superficial analysis of a product that is going to become a whole new platform for the company, just as iOS did. You'd think that just MAYBE, by this point people might give Apple the benefit of the doubt in terms of the design and engineering decisions they made, considering they probably tried every single combination of every permutation during the long development phase, led by some of the smartest and most talented people in the world. But nope- absolutely no benefit of the doubt, as usual. Every shitty little troll on the internet with zero accomplishments to speak of apparently believe they can design a better product.
Left handed design: I can't imagine that there were no left handed people anywhere in the design team for this, and that they were ignored when they said "Hey, this thing is kinda awkward for me." Even if Apple had uncharacteristically completely forgotten about or ignored left handed people, it's just software, they can change it.
Likewise the counter-clockwise hand movement, metric clock, and every other alternative form of display. It's software. Want it? Write it.
Also, hilarious how tech blogs such as engadget are in full troll-mode, with classless, click-bait, hit-whoring headlines. Reminds me of the iPad reveal, when Steve Jobs went to bed depressed that night after non-stop mockery and derision after the unveiling. Some things never change. So sad that these "tech enthusiasts" have so little imagination, wonder, appreciation, or even the ability to wait and see the potential of a product that is genuinely new in so many ways. Such a limited, superficial analysis of a product that is going to become a whole new platform for the company, just as iOS did. You'd think that just MAYBE, by this point people might give Apple the benefit of the doubt in terms of the design and engineering decisions they made, considering they probably tried every single combination of every permutation during the long development phase, led by some of the smartest and most talented people in the world. But nope- absolutely no benefit of the doubt, as usual. Every shitty little troll on the internet with zero accomplishments to speak of apparently believe they can design a better product.
I couldnt agree more.
Engadget says : "To date, there's nothing any of these thinly veiled, proof-of-concept, wrist-worn devices can do that the smartphone already in your hand can't." I cant belive that the reviewer didnt even mention the great deal of technology and precision involved in the making of the watch, let alone the years of research and development by people that have PROVEN themself to be the best in their fields. You have to be absolutley cluless or completly reatrded not to see the potential in the technology decision made by Apple for their watch. Sometimes it can be rly painful to read the internet.
One criticism I find highly amusing is that the watch does too much.
I can see there might be some rationale for such reasoning. Bear in mind, I'm not saying there is such a rationale in the articles to which you allude, only that there might be in some hypothetical discussion.
For me, it's not so much a criticism as a regret, as in "Darn, it does more than I need, so it's going to be more expensive than I want to pay for the things I do want." I can see why Apple goes whole hog on these things, I just don't need the whole hog. I just want the bacon.
I was waiting to see what, if anything, Apple was going to offer in this space before deciding what to do about upgrading my existing chest strap heart monitor. While I will be upgrading my iPhone 4 to the new 6, for now, I will also just get a new BLE chest strap to go along with it, since that's the only thing I really need at the moment.
That gives me a few months to come up with excus...er, reasons to buy a Watch when it comes out.
I know there were physical metric clocks built after the French Revolution, but to buy an original would likely require parting with a couple of organs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui
You french already had a crack at decimal time immediately following the revolution. Doesn't seem like a bad idea at all.
But it never really rooted. I’m sure it was never implemented beyond experimental devices such as those ‘Tallest Skil’ mentions. However, the ten day week (or ‘decade’, which, by the way and for once, has kept its original meaning in French since Latin deca diem means 'ten days' – English ‘decade’ is translated by ‘décennie’, English 'decennium') was implemented but ditched together with the French revolution's calendar. The metric system was driven by the urgent need to harmonize the various units that were in usage everywhere in France, sometimes bearing the same name but having different values. By the by, Condorcet suggested to bring about something consistent, and not based on fancy multiples. However, time was practically the only quantity that was measured consistently across the whole world, and so the proposal to decimalize it encountered a strong resistance and was, at the end, chucked. But it would make sense, yes. The same would be true for the angles, where the 360 division is also based on the fact that 360 can be exactly divided in a variety of ways (360 = 2^3 * 3^3 * 5, so can be sliced in 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, etc.)
PS : The 'decade' system was not abandoned because it was deemed unpractical, but because it went against the Scriptures.
To see how far we ran; how fast we ran; how many calories we burned; how many more miles to reach our goal. To see our heart rate. To see our favourite stock results. To see who is trying to reach us. To see what weather lies ahead. To give us directions. But at a glance: without having to take our iPhones out of our pocket. But if we need to, we can then do so, in private, without intruding on those beside us.
And that is not all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Well said and let us not forget we just witnessed the birth of a new OS from Apple. It is iOS nor OS X this is WatchOS (my word) and with the new Watch SDK a whole new eco system, App Store and world of connectables are born.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Indeed, the possibilities are endless.
Agreed. By the time the ? Watch is launched there will be hundreds if not thousands of third party new/modified iPhone apps for ? Watch.
I can see there might be some rationale for such reasoning. Bear in mind, I'm not saying there is such a rationale in the articles to which you allude, only that there might be in some hypothetical discussion.
For me, it's not so much a criticism as a regret, as in "Darn, it does more than I need, so it's going to be more expensive than I want to pay for the things I do want." I can see why Apple goes whole hog on these things, I just don't need the whole hog. I just want the bacon.
I was waiting to see what, if anything, Apple was going to offer in this space before deciding what to do about upgrading my existing chest strap heart monitor. While I will be upgrading my iPhone 4 to the new 6, for now, I will also just get a new BLE chest strap to go along with it, since that's the only thing I really need at the moment.
That gives me a few months to come up with excus...er, reasons to buy a Watch when it comes out.
I find the knee jerk reactions ridiculous. At the end of the day it's all about user experience. At this point it's impossible to say as no one has been able to test the UI and most likely Apple is still making tweaks to it.
We absolutely should go back to 13 months. The Babylonian twelve months is a crime against nature for which we're still paying, actually more with each passing "moonth" that we ignore the harmony of the solar system that we are immersed in. The proverbial "year and a day" is 13 X 28 days = 364 days, plus one day off to get over the New Year's hangover.
Wasn't that the Egyptian system? You'd need one extra day every four year, too. What name would you suggest for the 13th month? Jobember?
Comments
I think this is a product that exemplifies what makes Apple unique in the market - an amazing integration of hardware, software, and user experience. Is the hardware bigger and less radically amazing that we dreamed about in our PhotoShop-augmented-reality dreams? Absolutely. Problem is this little thing called physics and material science and state of the art in component and manufacturing technology. Just like the original iPad1 (which I still have a use on occasion) the then state of the art in technology that could be built affordable at huge scale placed hard limits of what Apple could do to deliver at a hardware level. The original iPad was kind of thick and heavy by todays standards, but by the standards of the day in tablets (like the Windows Tablet Edition monstrosities) the iPad1 was amazing at all levels. Additionally the amazing integration of HW+SW+UX in the iPad1 defined a product category that has withstood the test of time, exactly as the iPhone had done years earlier. The things that will establish the Apple Watch as the next category defining product will depend heavily on the SW+UX that Apple is able to deliver in an unique way on a HW platform they have optimized for their product and its users.
You could argue that this is an apologist's perspective - and to the degree that walking on water and perpetual motion machines are benchmarks you'd be correct. But as a Version 1.0 product that must demonstrate huge and attainable potential for growth the current Apple Watch is the best we've seen so far because of the things Apple does very well. The utility is obvious, so the next challenge is to deliver battery life that will attract mainstream Apple customers.
So nothing has really changed between what Apple is able to accomplish over its competitors. Competitors who don't have total control over the essential building blocks for envisioning, creating, and manufacturing high precision, world class, non-commodity products that are surrounded by a vast ecosystem of life enriching media and services will continue to struggle against Apple.
The Apple Watch is all about creating another value delivery mechanism for the ever growing Apple media and services ecosystem.
I agree and a good summary yourself. I can just imagine the magnificent displays in Apple Stores they will make and also imagine them 'flying off the shelves' when they go on sale. In a couple of years I suspect AAPL will comprise 30% ?Watch revenues as it approaches $200.
He's just being thick, as usual.
I think it already is, but I'm sure evolution will make it thinner. Not too thin, otherwise it will become difficult to rotate the crown.
The crown is the worse thing about this high tech device.- like a click wheel on the original iPad. Or a manual volume wheel. Stupid.
Well said and let us not forget we just witnessed the birth of a new OS from Apple. It is iOS nor OS X this is WatchOS (my word) and with the new Watch SDK a whole new eco system, App Store and world of connectables are born.
I had no idea what to expect before the event, and I'm pleased to see that for a change, pictures of the ?Watch weren't leaked out by any criminal Chinese workers. It's a good thing that it's not in mass production yet!
I hadn't really thought much about it before, but it makes perfect sense to use the square shape. We are talking about a display that is going to display all sorts of information after all, and not just tell the time. In that regard, watches like the Moto 360 are a total failure, because their function is flawed, not to mention the terrible battery life that has been reported.
Would you buy a round tv for your livingroom? That makes about as much sense as having a round smart watch on your wrists. It doesn't matter how it looks. It's a dumb idea, and it's a flawed concept. Only a few mentally deficient Fandroids would ever want one of those.
I wasn't sure what to think about the ?Watch design when I first saw it, but after seeing many of the gazillion different wristband options for it, and the three different models, I do like how some of the combinations look. This product is extremely customizable, and it's smart of Apple to offer it in two different sizes!
The other smartwatches by Samsung and others don't offer different sizes. I saw this one Samsung watch that is not even made for a human wrist, as the shape doesn't fit good around a wrist. But what else do you expect from a company that is used to copying other people's ideas?
Also that scroll wheel or the digital crown on the ?Watch or whatever it's called seems to be a smart solution.
And it's funny how a few people are complaining about the thickness. These are probably the same people who complain that Apple needs to stop making their phones thinner. Get your stories straight, you hypocrites!
I quite like the way that the iWatch looks. It looks to be extremely well made, like a premium item and not cheap junk like other smart watches.
I think that it has a sort of retro, but classic look to it. I also like how ? offers a more upscale model that's in gold! That model will no doubt be a bit more costly, and that's great! I wrote many months ago that I hoped that ? would offer more expensive models of the ?Watch.
I think that the ?Watch will do decent. I fully expect Fandroids and others who can't afford one to whine about it. The ?Watch is not for everybody, but it's quite a bit ahead of any other so called smartwatch that has been released.
Will you buy one?
I confess that I suspect in version two or three of ?Watch this will be replaced with simply rubbing your finger around the outer edge to accomplish the same results. It is however an attractive looking button that ties us subconsciously back to analog watches.
I would love to see a 100% waterproof version able to take a reasonable scuba depth. It seems the internals lend themselves to being made so, easily enough. Then I am back to worrying about the crown, is this the weak link for such a version I wonder.
I know I'll but one of each size ... which models though .... ?
Fantastic Analysis.
Also, hilarious how tech blogs such as engadget are in full troll-mode, with classless, click-bait, hit-whoring headlines. Reminds me of the iPad reveal, when Steve Jobs went to bed depressed that night after non-stop mockery and derision after the unveiling. Some things never change. So sad that these "tech enthusiasts" have so little imagination, wonder, appreciation, or even the ability to wait and see the potential of a product that is genuinely new in so many ways. Such a limited, superficial analysis of a product that is going to become a whole new platform for the company, just as iOS did. You'd think that just MAYBE, by this point people might give Apple the benefit of the doubt in terms of the design and engineering decisions they made, considering they probably tried every single combination of every permutation during the long development phase, led by some of the smartest and most talented people in the world. But nope- absolutely no benefit of the doubt, as usual. Every shitty little troll on the internet with zero accomplishments to speak of apparently believe they can design a better product.
Is there a version with a metric clock?
Left handed design: I can't imagine that there were no left handed people anywhere in the design team for this, and that they were ignored when they said "Hey, this thing is kinda awkward for me." Even if Apple had uncharacteristically completely forgotten about or ignored left handed people, it's just software, they can change it.
Likewise the counter-clockwise hand movement, metric clock, and every other alternative form of display. It's software. Want it? Write it.
Fantastic Analysis.
Also, hilarious how tech blogs such as engadget are in full troll-mode, with classless, click-bait, hit-whoring headlines. Reminds me of the iPad reveal, when Steve Jobs went to bed depressed that night after non-stop mockery and derision after the unveiling. Some things never change. So sad that these "tech enthusiasts" have so little imagination, wonder, appreciation, or even the ability to wait and see the potential of a product that is genuinely new in so many ways. Such a limited, superficial analysis of a product that is going to become a whole new platform for the company, just as iOS did. You'd think that just MAYBE, by this point people might give Apple the benefit of the doubt in terms of the design and engineering decisions they made, considering they probably tried every single combination of every permutation during the long development phase, led by some of the smartest and most talented people in the world. But nope- absolutely no benefit of the doubt, as usual. Every shitty little troll on the internet with zero accomplishments to speak of apparently believe they can design a better product.
I couldnt agree more.
Engadget says : "To date, there's nothing any of these thinly veiled, proof-of-concept, wrist-worn devices can do that the smartphone already in your hand can't." I cant belive that the reviewer didnt even mention the great deal of technology and precision involved in the making of the watch, let alone the years of research and development by people that have PROVEN themself to be the best in their fields. You have to be absolutley cluless or completly reatrded not to see the potential in the technology decision made by Apple for their watch. Sometimes it can be rly painful to read the internet.
Indeed, the possibilities are endless.
One criticism I find highly amusing is that the watch does too much.
I can see there might be some rationale for such reasoning. Bear in mind, I'm not saying there is such a rationale in the articles to which you allude, only that there might be in some hypothetical discussion.
For me, it's not so much a criticism as a regret, as in "Darn, it does more than I need, so it's going to be more expensive than I want to pay for the things I do want." I can see why Apple goes whole hog on these things, I just don't need the whole hog. I just want the bacon.
I was waiting to see what, if anything, Apple was going to offer in this space before deciding what to do about upgrading my existing chest strap heart monitor. While I will be upgrading my iPhone 4 to the new 6, for now, I will also just get a new BLE chest strap to go along with it, since that's the only thing I really need at the moment.
That gives me a few months to come up with excus...er, reasons to buy a Watch when it comes out.
I know there were physical metric clocks built after the French Revolution, but to buy an original would likely require parting with a couple of organs.
You french already had a crack at decimal time immediately following the revolution. Doesn't seem like a bad idea at all.
But it never really rooted. I’m sure it was never implemented beyond experimental devices such as those ‘Tallest Skil’ mentions. However, the ten day week (or ‘decade’, which, by the way and for once, has kept its original meaning in French since Latin deca diem means 'ten days' – English ‘decade’ is translated by ‘décennie’, English 'decennium') was implemented but ditched together with the French revolution's calendar. The metric system was driven by the urgent need to harmonize the various units that were in usage everywhere in France, sometimes bearing the same name but having different values. By the by, Condorcet suggested to bring about something consistent, and not based on fancy multiples. However, time was practically the only quantity that was measured consistently across the whole world, and so the proposal to decimalize it encountered a strong resistance and was, at the end, chucked. But it would make sense, yes. The same would be true for the angles, where the 360 division is also based on the fact that 360 can be exactly divided in a variety of ways (360 = 2^3 * 3^3 * 5, so can be sliced in 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, etc.)
PS : The 'decade' system was not abandoned because it was deemed unpractical, but because it went against the Scriptures.
What do we primarily do with any watch? We glance at it.
And as Apple describes it, Glances. Just the right amount of information, right where you want it
To see how far we ran; how fast we ran; how many calories we burned; how many more miles to reach our goal. To see our heart rate. To see our favourite stock results. To see who is trying to reach us. To see what weather lies ahead. To give us directions. But at a glance: without having to take our iPhones out of our pocket. But if we need to, we can then do so, in private, without intruding on those beside us.
And that is not all.
Well said and let us not forget we just witnessed the birth of a new OS from Apple. It is iOS nor OS X this is WatchOS (my word) and with the new Watch SDK a whole new eco system, App Store and world of connectables are born.
Indeed, the possibilities are endless.
Agreed. By the time the ? Watch is launched there will be hundreds if not thousands of third party new/modified iPhone apps for ? Watch.
Key ? Watch Moments: Ives @ 64 min; Lynch @ 76 min; Health & Fitness @ 92 min; So much more @ 98 min
PS : The 'decade' system was not abandoned because it was deemed unpractical, but because it went against the Scriptures.
Ah, really? I’d always heard that the thought of one resting day per 10 (rather than 7) was its downfall, but this makes even more sense.
Lol. The photos that supposedly come 'straight from the iPhone6' on that page come from Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh).
We absolutely should go back to 13 months. The Babylonian twelve months is a crime against nature for which we're still paying, actually more with each passing "moonth" that we ignore the harmony of the solar system that we are immersed in. The proverbial "year and a day" is 13 X 28 days = 364 days, plus one day off to get over the New Year's hangover.
Wasn't that the Egyptian system? You'd need one extra day every four year, too. What name would you suggest for the 13th month? Jobember?
Ah, really? I’d always heard that the thought of one resting day per 10 (rather than 7) was its downfall, but this makes even more sense.
That might have been another factor, but I suspect at that time the major trade unions were still in limbo