In a sense the debate really boils down to whether the principal purpose of Apple Watch is to display data or analog time. If it's data, then rectangular follows as the more logical shape.
Yet they chose to use round icons. IMHO it looks a little out-of-place on a rectangular display and not it's most appealing screen.
Yet they chose to use round icons. IMHO it looks a little out-of-place on a rectangular display and not it's most appealing screen.
I'm confident that Apple will eventually make a round watch to address customers fashion tastes, just like gold iPhones/iPads/MacBooks, iPad minis, and iPhablets, mostly products Apple said they weren't interested in making, nor were they optimal for use with the technology. In the end Apple caters to the market, and if the market demands round smart watches, they will not want to lose out on those customers. And of course Apple will do it far better than the competition, just like they did with the iPhone 6 Plus.
These arbitrary arguments that a smart watch can only square are ridiculous (especially when comparing it to Android offerings). It all boils down to taste. I would never carry a gold iPhone, but I hear its one of the most popular colors. It's clear the software can work just as well on a round face as a square (if not better in some instances). So if a customer prefers round, or maybe wants a round and square ?Watch to mix it up, then I have faith based on Apple's previous track record that they will offer a round watch, while doing it better than anything previously seen on the market.
Surely you are joking about the "if" of Swiss and Japanese watchmakers getting into the business. With Apple out front with its smartwatch, they have no choice but to compete and attempt to meet Apple's high standards. Apple dominates mobile UI, and leads in consumer electronics; hardly a fair fight against mechanical watch builders, who will likely have to settle on second tier Android Wear.
I'm going to laugh my ass off at all you Apple Watch doubters when the watchmakers fail miserably in smartwatches.
I never doubted the ?Watch. That's your inference. I think it will do quite well. In fact I think it will do so well that eventually Apple will offer a round watch to attract customers that may not be interested in wearing a square watch, and they will do it better than anything previously seen, as usual -- just like they did with the 5.5" iPhablet, and 7" iPad mini.
As for the watchmakers, yes, they may chose not to get into the smart watch business -- as has been pointed out to me on numerous occasions, the ?Watch is NOT a watch -- it's computer worn on your wrist. Traditional watches will always be there, if only for a fashion statement. Personally I wouldn't underestimate the watchmakers. Apple was once not the dominate consumer electronics maker, Sony was, for instance. The watchmakers have a high bar to reach for should they go up against Apple, but they also have a quality and build ethic that rivals Apple's own. And Android may be the only immediate option for these watchmakers, but they can hire their own top software developers, just as Apple hired top fashion people, and come up with something as good or better.
I'm confident that Apple will eventually make a round watch to address customers fashion tastes, just like gold iPhones/iPads/MacBooks, iPad minis, and iPhablets, mostly products Apple said they weren't interested in making, nor were they optimal for use with the technology. In the end Apple caters to the market, and if the market demands round smart watches, they will not want to lose out on those customers. And of course Apple will do it far better than the competition, just like they did with the iPhone 6 Plus.
These arbitrary arguments that a smart watch can only square are ridiculous (especially when comparing it to Android offerings). It all boils down to taste. I would never carry a gold iPhone, but I hear its one of the most popular colors. It's clear the software can work just as well on a round face as a square (if not better in some instances). So if a customer prefers round, or maybe wants a round and square ?Watch to mix it up, then I have faith based on Apple's previous track record that they will offer a round watch, while doing it better than anything previously seen on the market.
The "round is like gold" argument makes no sense to me. One thing for sure, if anything is circular, it is this debate.
As has been said, square beats round for pure functionality. But the Apple Watch is unlike any other Apple product before it in that the form is of equal importance to the function,* not merely a byproduct of efficient/minimalist design. Thus, there is no singular 'best' form for the watch to take. I think it makes perfect sense for Apple to come out with a square version first, since it's the smartwatch's purest form, and easier from a technological perspective. But, I think Apple will also make a round version in the not too distant future, not because they are 'catering to the public', which is not Apple's MO, but because it makes sense given it's purpose. As Marvin pointed out, there are a lot of ways, aesthetically, where round has an advantage, particularly given certain design decisions Apple has already implemented, like the home screen icon layout, the change from list to rotary dial for contacts, and the round sensor facing the skin. Just because all the round watches to date seem to be complete sh*t, doesn't mean Apple can't do it right, as usual. It just depends on the user, and whether their personal preference is functionality (square), or aesthetics (round).
*Subjective opinion of the wearer/society is a key aspect of the watch since it NEEDS to look good to be worn.
Its bigger because the round face makes that NECESSARY.
Again look at the picture. If they made the Moto any smaller the readable area would be microscopic. And that's my point. With a round face you will always be losing efficentcy of space.
Sure, if you define the readable area to be rectangular, which there is no obvious justification for. If you're making a round watch, you design your software to it, you don't design for a rectangular watch. There are lots of things you can do with the space outside of your crudely drawn border.
And Android may be the only immediate option for these watchmakers, but they can hire their own top software developers, just as Apple hired top fashion people, and come up with something as good or better.
Really?
Apple hired top fashion people for marketing, not for design of apps, UI, or SOC's, all skills sets that watchmakers will have to master to be "as good or better". Sure, it's possible, given enough time and money, but not likely, and Apple will own the smartwatch market by then.
A round face will ALWAYS be bigger to display the same information as a rectangle face. So unless super huge watches are the future than we wont see a round Apple watch for a very long time.
You're welcome.
But I think you missed my point. I think aesthetic improvement (even if subjective) can, for some, outweigh the relatively minor compromise in functionality. I'm a sucker for aesthetics, so I'd be very tempted to see an Apple version of a round watch. For me, just playing around with the icons on the home screen would make a round Apple watch worth it. For now though, I'm incredibly excited about the Apple Watch, and I'll definitely be up at midnight on April 10.
These watches are going to keep shutting off like you see in the Moto maps video here:
The speaker in the video contradicts himself at one point he is saying , its taking a while to come up on the screen then at end of clip he says its pretty quick.
I would imagine the Apple watch will be a lot faster and a better experience that that
But I think you missed my point. I think aesthetic improvement (even if subjective) can, for some, outweigh the relatively minor compromise in functionality. I'm a sucker for aesthetics, so I'd be very tempted to see an Apple version of a round watch. For me, just playing around with the icons on the home screen would make a round Apple watch worth it. For now though, I'm incredibly excited about the Apple Watch, and I'll definitely be up at midnight on April 10.
I would never say never, especially where Apple is concerned, but to me it's clear that Apple intends to create their own aesthetic statement with this product, just as they have with every other before it. None of Apple's previous product designs were driven purely by aesthetics. These objects are meant to be used, not hung on the wall. If anyone finds them to be beautiful it will be as expressions of function defining form. An object that feels and works right when you hold it in your hand (or strap it to your wrist) will be aesthetically successful. The job of the industrial designer is to create a pleasurable user experience, not to start with a shape and make it work somehow.
Shame that they spent so many years on a project that will probably not be a major long term success. It won't sell big at the beginning, and no one is going to upgrade this thing.
I recently took up employment at a National Park and an Apple engineer from the Apple Watch team came into the store. Wearing one no less. No doubt he was doing some stress testing on the device. Based on his impressions 'in the wild', I have no doubt this thing will sell like hot cakes.
I recently took up employment at a National Park and an Apple engineer from the Apple Watch team came into the store. Wearing one no less. No doubt he was doing some stress testing on the device. Based on his impressions 'in the wild', I have no doubt this thing will sell like hot cakes.
I don't know how well hotcakes sell these days, but out of curiosity, what did this Apple engineer say that gave you that idea?
Not very useful since that's only the VERY CENTER of the watch. When you scroll up or down it will be cutoff. irritating.
Please stop with the ALL CAPS. They're irritating, and aren't helping with your point. As I said, they make you come across like an enraged psychopath.
Anyway, you presume scrolling. I anticipate doing minimal scrolling with a smartwatch. Single screen, no scrolling notifications can make use of that space with properly formatted text.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
Why would you need those buttons? That's what the digital crown is for.
The digital crown isn't the only way of interaction with the device, you touch, tap, and you swipe to reach different screens. Hot sectors for other features could be another part of the UI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
What camera takes pictures in round format?
The one that you use for your contacts in iOS? Don't ask stupid questions please, the camera doesn't need to take round pictures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
No scroll wheel needed. Thats what the digital crown is for.
Frankly, I'd prefer the scroll wheel. Digital crown looks like a weak point of the device to me.
Aside from that, scroll wheel could still be useful, and you asked me for things that it could do, not to fully consider every aspect of the Apple-designed UI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
I agree. But thats it.
I think you underestimate this bit. The device is called a watch. The watch is going to be a substantial part of it's function. Therefore being an attractive watch is an important feature. And the other things I mentioned would be nice too.
But it isn't a minor compromise in functionality. It is major. You will be losing 30-40% of useable screen because of a round face. That will either make the watch incrediblily massive (like the Moto360) or incredibliy small usable area.
again compare the picture. Look how much BIGGER a round face would need to be to show the same data. IN a vacum you may like the round shape but it will come with a MUCH BIGGER sized watch.
Looking at the round watches made to date, you're 100% right. But I think there's potential for Apple to make a round watch where the pro's outweigh the cons for a significant fraction of consumers. Don't know for sure though until Apple makes one, if they make one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss
I would never say never, especially where Apple is concerned, but to me it's clear that Apple intends to create their own aesthetic statement with this product, just as they have with every other before it. None of Apple's previous product designs were driven purely by aesthetics. These objects are meant to be used, not hung on the wall. If anyone finds them to be beautiful it will be as expressions of function defining form. An object that feels and works right when you hold it in your hand (or strap it to your wrist) will be aesthetically successful. The job of the industrial designer is to create a pleasurable user experience, not to start with a shape and make it work somehow.
Agreed. But my point is that aesthetics is an integral part of the user experience, and thus a round watch could be justified, particularly given the need for personalization, so long as there is not a significant compromise in functionality.
Agreed. But my point is that aesthetics is an integral part of the user experience, and thus a round watch could be justified, particularly given the need for personalization, so long as there is not a significant compromise in functionality.
It could only be justified by those who believe that if it's worn on the wrist that it should be round. This pretty much arbitrary distinction only serves to point out how little people stop to consider the sources of their aesthetic preferences.
It could only be justified by those who believe that if it's worn on the wrist that it should be round. This pretty much arbitrary distinction only serves to point out how little people stop to consider the sources of their aesthetic preferences.
I think the Apple Watch needs to be considered as a fashion object. With fashion, peoples' priorities are different, hence the existence of square mechanical watches, despite the functional irrelevance of the squared off corners. So, while a round watch would be less practical from a purely utilitarian standpoint, it may be more practical for some people depending on their priorities (e.g. fits into their sense of style, sense of aesthetics, etc.).
Comments
Yet they chose to use round icons. IMHO it looks a little out-of-place on a rectangular display and not it's most appealing screen.
I don't make the connection, sorry.
Yet they chose to use round icons. IMHO it looks a little out-of-place on a rectangular display and not it's most appealing screen.
I'm confident that Apple will eventually make a round watch to address customers fashion tastes, just like gold iPhones/iPads/MacBooks, iPad minis, and iPhablets, mostly products Apple said they weren't interested in making, nor were they optimal for use with the technology. In the end Apple caters to the market, and if the market demands round smart watches, they will not want to lose out on those customers. And of course Apple will do it far better than the competition, just like they did with the iPhone 6 Plus.
These arbitrary arguments that a smart watch can only square are ridiculous (especially when comparing it to Android offerings). It all boils down to taste. I would never carry a gold iPhone, but I hear its one of the most popular colors. It's clear the software can work just as well on a round face as a square (if not better in some instances). So if a customer prefers round, or maybe wants a round and square ?Watch to mix it up, then I have faith based on Apple's previous track record that they will offer a round watch, while doing it better than anything previously seen on the market.
Surely you are joking about the "if" of Swiss and Japanese watchmakers getting into the business. With Apple out front with its smartwatch, they have no choice but to compete and attempt to meet Apple's high standards. Apple dominates mobile UI, and leads in consumer electronics; hardly a fair fight against mechanical watch builders, who will likely have to settle on second tier Android Wear.
I'm going to laugh my ass off at all you Apple Watch doubters when the watchmakers fail miserably in smartwatches.
I never doubted the ?Watch. That's your inference. I think it will do quite well. In fact I think it will do so well that eventually Apple will offer a round watch to attract customers that may not be interested in wearing a square watch, and they will do it better than anything previously seen, as usual -- just like they did with the 5.5" iPhablet, and 7" iPad mini.
As for the watchmakers, yes, they may chose not to get into the smart watch business -- as has been pointed out to me on numerous occasions, the ?Watch is NOT a watch -- it's computer worn on your wrist. Traditional watches will always be there, if only for a fashion statement. Personally I wouldn't underestimate the watchmakers. Apple was once not the dominate consumer electronics maker, Sony was, for instance. The watchmakers have a high bar to reach for should they go up against Apple, but they also have a quality and build ethic that rivals Apple's own. And Android may be the only immediate option for these watchmakers, but they can hire their own top software developers, just as Apple hired top fashion people, and come up with something as good or better.
I'm confident that Apple will eventually make a round watch to address customers fashion tastes, just like gold iPhones/iPads/MacBooks, iPad minis, and iPhablets, mostly products Apple said they weren't interested in making, nor were they optimal for use with the technology. In the end Apple caters to the market, and if the market demands round smart watches, they will not want to lose out on those customers. And of course Apple will do it far better than the competition, just like they did with the iPhone 6 Plus.
These arbitrary arguments that a smart watch can only square are ridiculous (especially when comparing it to Android offerings). It all boils down to taste. I would never carry a gold iPhone, but I hear its one of the most popular colors. It's clear the software can work just as well on a round face as a square (if not better in some instances). So if a customer prefers round, or maybe wants a round and square ?Watch to mix it up, then I have faith based on Apple's previous track record that they will offer a round watch, while doing it better than anything previously seen on the market.
The "round is like gold" argument makes no sense to me. One thing for sure, if anything is circular, it is this debate.
As has been said, square beats round for pure functionality. But the Apple Watch is unlike any other Apple product before it in that the form is of equal importance to the function,* not merely a byproduct of efficient/minimalist design. Thus, there is no singular 'best' form for the watch to take. I think it makes perfect sense for Apple to come out with a square version first, since it's the smartwatch's purest form, and easier from a technological perspective. But, I think Apple will also make a round version in the not too distant future, not because they are 'catering to the public', which is not Apple's MO, but because it makes sense given it's purpose. As Marvin pointed out, there are a lot of ways, aesthetically, where round has an advantage, particularly given certain design decisions Apple has already implemented, like the home screen icon layout, the change from list to rotary dial for contacts, and the round sensor facing the skin. Just because all the round watches to date seem to be complete sh*t, doesn't mean Apple can't do it right, as usual. It just depends on the user, and whether their personal preference is functionality (square), or aesthetics (round).
*Subjective opinion of the wearer/society is a key aspect of the watch since it NEEDS to look good to be worn.
Its bigger because the round face makes that NECESSARY.
Again look at the picture. If they made the Moto any smaller the readable area would be microscopic. And that's my point. With a round face you will always be losing efficentcy of space.
Sure, if you define the readable area to be rectangular, which there is no obvious justification for. If you're making a round watch, you design your software to it, you don't design for a rectangular watch. There are lots of things you can do with the space outside of your crudely drawn border.
Also...
"MONSTEROUSLY"
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Holy hyperbole Batman, someone needs to calm down. ALL CAPS really make you read like a psychopath.
Really?
Apple hired top fashion people for marketing, not for design of apps, UI, or SOC's, all skills sets that watchmakers will have to master to be "as good or better". Sure, it's possible, given enough time and money, but not likely, and Apple will own the smartwatch market by then.
You might want to rethink your position.
Thanks for making my point for me.
A round face will ALWAYS be bigger to display the same information as a rectangle face. So unless super huge watches are the future than we wont see a round Apple watch for a very long time.
You're welcome.
But I think you missed my point. I think aesthetic improvement (even if subjective) can, for some, outweigh the relatively minor compromise in functionality. I'm a sucker for aesthetics, so I'd be very tempted to see an Apple version of a round watch. For me, just playing around with the icons on the home screen would make a round Apple watch worth it. For now though, I'm incredibly excited about the Apple Watch, and I'll definitely be up at midnight on April 10.
These watches are going to keep shutting off like you see in the Moto maps video here:
The speaker in the video contradicts himself at one point he is saying , its taking a while to come up on the screen then at end of clip he says its pretty quick.
You're welcome.
But I think you missed my point. I think aesthetic improvement (even if subjective) can, for some, outweigh the relatively minor compromise in functionality. I'm a sucker for aesthetics, so I'd be very tempted to see an Apple version of a round watch. For me, just playing around with the icons on the home screen would make a round Apple watch worth it. For now though, I'm incredibly excited about the Apple Watch, and I'll definitely be up at midnight on April 10.
I would never say never, especially where Apple is concerned, but to me it's clear that Apple intends to create their own aesthetic statement with this product, just as they have with every other before it. None of Apple's previous product designs were driven purely by aesthetics. These objects are meant to be used, not hung on the wall. If anyone finds them to be beautiful it will be as expressions of function defining form. An object that feels and works right when you hold it in your hand (or strap it to your wrist) will be aesthetically successful. The job of the industrial designer is to create a pleasurable user experience, not to start with a shape and make it work somehow.
I recently took up employment at a National Park and an Apple engineer from the Apple Watch team came into the store. Wearing one no less. No doubt he was doing some stress testing on the device. Based on his impressions 'in the wild', I have no doubt this thing will sell like hot cakes.
Tell me what useful things can you do with the non-rectangular parts of a round watch face?
The "non-rectangular parts of a round watch face"?
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Ok, I know what you mean, but are you kidding me? You can't think of any?
Well for a start, you can fit more text in the horizontal strip along the centre, a few fair more characters.
You can have left/right and up/down buttons that sacrifice comparatively little of the screen face (compared to a rectangular face)
You can show more of the horizontal and vertical parts of an image, particularly useful for faces for contacts, which tend not be rectangular.
You could implement an iPod-esque scroll wheel in software, for navigating lists, or whatever.
You can show clearer and more familiar faces for watches, compasses, measurement dials, anything circular.
And loads more I'm sure, I'm not every developer.
I recently took up employment at a National Park and an Apple engineer from the Apple Watch team came into the store. Wearing one no less. No doubt he was doing some stress testing on the device. Based on his impressions 'in the wild', I have no doubt this thing will sell like hot cakes.
I don't know how well hotcakes sell these days, but out of curiosity, what did this Apple engineer say that gave you that idea?
^ Apple engineers speaking highly of Apple products is hardly a shocker.
^ Apple engineers speaking highly of Apple products is hardly a shocker.
Not trying to be a smartass about it, but I did not ask you.
Not very useful since that's only the VERY CENTER of the watch. When you scroll up or down it will be cutoff. irritating.
Please stop with the ALL CAPS. They're irritating, and aren't helping with your point. As I said, they make you come across like an enraged psychopath.
Anyway, you presume scrolling. I anticipate doing minimal scrolling with a smartwatch. Single screen, no scrolling notifications can make use of that space with properly formatted text.
Why would you need those buttons? That's what the digital crown is for.
The digital crown isn't the only way of interaction with the device, you touch, tap, and you swipe to reach different screens. Hot sectors for other features could be another part of the UI.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sog35
What camera takes pictures in round format?
The one that you use for your contacts in iOS? Don't ask stupid questions please, the camera doesn't need to take round pictures.
Quote:
No scroll wheel needed. Thats what the digital crown is for.
Frankly, I'd prefer the scroll wheel. Digital crown looks like a weak point of the device to me.
Aside from that, scroll wheel could still be useful, and you asked me for things that it could do, not to fully consider every aspect of the Apple-designed UI.
Quote:
I agree. But thats it.
I think you underestimate this bit. The device is called a watch. The watch is going to be a substantial part of it's function. Therefore being an attractive watch is an important feature. And the other things I mentioned would be nice too.
But it isn't a minor compromise in functionality. It is major. You will be losing 30-40% of useable screen because of a round face. That will either make the watch incrediblily massive (like the Moto360) or incredibliy small usable area.
again compare the picture. Look how much BIGGER a round face would need to be to show the same data. IN a vacum you may like the round shape but it will come with a MUCH BIGGER sized watch.
Looking at the round watches made to date, you're 100% right. But I think there's potential for Apple to make a round watch where the pro's outweigh the cons for a significant fraction of consumers. Don't know for sure though until Apple makes one, if they make one.
I would never say never, especially where Apple is concerned, but to me it's clear that Apple intends to create their own aesthetic statement with this product, just as they have with every other before it. None of Apple's previous product designs were driven purely by aesthetics. These objects are meant to be used, not hung on the wall. If anyone finds them to be beautiful it will be as expressions of function defining form. An object that feels and works right when you hold it in your hand (or strap it to your wrist) will be aesthetically successful. The job of the industrial designer is to create a pleasurable user experience, not to start with a shape and make it work somehow.
Agreed. But my point is that aesthetics is an integral part of the user experience, and thus a round watch could be justified, particularly given the need for personalization, so long as there is not a significant compromise in functionality.
Agreed. But my point is that aesthetics is an integral part of the user experience, and thus a round watch could be justified, particularly given the need for personalization, so long as there is not a significant compromise in functionality.
It could only be justified by those who believe that if it's worn on the wrist that it should be round. This pretty much arbitrary distinction only serves to point out how little people stop to consider the sources of their aesthetic preferences.
It could only be justified by those who believe that if it's worn on the wrist that it should be round. This pretty much arbitrary distinction only serves to point out how little people stop to consider the sources of their aesthetic preferences.
I think the Apple Watch needs to be considered as a fashion object. With fashion, peoples' priorities are different, hence the existence of square mechanical watches, despite the functional irrelevance of the squared off corners. So, while a round watch would be less practical from a purely utilitarian standpoint, it may be more practical for some people depending on their priorities (e.g. fits into their sense of style, sense of aesthetics, etc.).