There's NO proof Apple is working a car as you well know. Rumors and conjecture don't equate to proof (as I believe you've opined about other companies or their products on occasion. Remember vaporware?) All you or anyone else outside of Apple's circle knows is they're doing something in the automotive field.
I like this Pizza, except it a little poison.
I like this home, except some times the roof caves in.
I like this beach, except the water is polluted.
I like this watch, except its too big. THATS THE ENTIRE REASON WHY APPLE CHOOSE THE RECTANGLAR DESIGN!!! To make it as small as possible without compromising usability. A round screen throws all of that out of the window.
There's room to make the case smaller isn't there, or the display larger? That's a fairly large case relative to the screen.
That's like saying my Car is really nice except the engine sometimes does not work.
The watch being too LARGE is the whole point why round watches don't work.
You either have to compromise with a small usable screen area or make the Watch much bigger than the rectanglar conterpart.
I am not saying that watch has to be round. I am just saying that the watch doe snot look too bad. It will get smaller in a year or two. Even the Apple Watch screen size is too small to be usable, so may as well.
And there you have it. That's exactly the point. All this talk in absolutes is pretty silly when much of what you claim is based on personal taste coupled with some guessing about Apple's thought process.
but there is a ton of smoking guns that Apple is working on a car.
Meet with Tesla.
Meet with BMW.
Hired a dozen auto executives.
Moved 100+ employees to project Titan.
asked about renting a test track.
hired a bunch of car battery experts.
I have yet to see a single piece of data that shows Apple is going to release a round watch.
You think you'd be privy to it? You didn't know they were releasing a phablet either until just a few short months before it hit the market either did you? The iPhone itself was a closely guarded secret too.
There's room to make the case smaller isn't there, or the display larger? That's a fairly large case relative to the screen.
Of course there is. Here's the Huawei 42mm watch overlaid exactly on the Apple 42mm watch. With some slight clipping on the corners of the ?Watch display, it fits almost perfectly inside the Huawei's bezel (are there even any apps that utilize those corners?). The 38mm ?Watch display fits easily into the same circle allowing them to reduce the circumference of the watch as well. And given the circle has greater display area than Apple's rectangular displays, there's no reason they could not go even smaller than Apple's 38mm display with a custom round-UI to make it just as legible.
Show me a good looking and nice User Interface round watch. It does not exist. Because either you have to compromise with a tiny usable screen or have a HUGE screen that is usable. I don't understand why thats so hard for you to understand. There is a very good reason why all computers, laptops, tablets, and smartphones have rectangle screens.
The current ? Watch is a rectangle that is 42 mm high by 36 mm wide, including the bezels. It's diagonal, including the bezels, is 52 mm. (I just measured mine, going from far edge to far edge on the casing in all dimensions.) If Apple could design a round watch that is 42 mm in diameter with screen edge-to-edge (no bezels) then it would only take up a little more space (6 mm or 17%) in the horizontal direction. Further, we can inscribe a rectangular area that would be a "list containing field", and this would be 42 mm on the diagonal, same as the useable screen on today's ? Watch. I think it would work just fine for viewing emails, texts, etc, which wrap, and other visual items that you might want to scroll your way through. Now, since the background in all of those apps is currently black (screen off) I don't think it would be bothersome that the parts around the "list containing field" were also black when viewing such apps. Meanwhile, other apps which aren't so rigidly constrained (i.e. neither needing to display long strings or lists of text nor scroll through their views) could make use of the extra space. Where this is concerned, circles are the most efficient shape for maximizing surface area relative to perimeter & material. Through Xcode, Apple could provide easy means of utilizing the rectangular field specifically or the entire screen as desired. They could make it slick and backwards compatible with older apps until such time as developers wanted to release a version for Watch 2.0. (Same has happened for increasing sized iPhones in the past, where legacy apps were letterboxes because they couldn't be scaled into a different aspect ratio.)
Now, perhaps its unreasonable to expect an edge-to-edge screen. But Apple could probably design something with an exceedingly small bezel. And I have no doubt that they could properly manage the rect/round issue via tools in Xcode.
Rather than dismiss this out of hand, why don't you think about it as a possibility and then see where you can improve upon it rather than automatically debunking it?
Look how massive that Watch looks. And how small the text is in the 2nd and 3rd line.
On my screen the watch looks absolutely MASSIVE and yet I still can't even read the 2nd and 3rd line without plastering my face on the screen.
Again mostly a matter of personal taste. Fortunately for Apple they can probably decide for themselves if a round version makes market sense to them. If they do they'll let you know about it in their own good time and probably even give you rational reasons for it.
But if Apple has zero bezel technology than the current rectangle AppleWatch would be even smaller.
Its simple geometry. You can't get around it. The round watch will always be worse for showing text at any given footprint.
I think I have shown that under the right conditions (i.e. zero bezel) that a round watch would have virtually the same footprint as the current ? Watch, enjoy the same sized text field, and possibly answer the mail of variety in form factor. Plus, the watch faces would be stunning, using the complete circle. (I want the spaceship campus on mine!)
So your curt dismissal of my idea is now reduced to the fact that Apple either currently doesn't have "zero bezel tech" or hasn't used it yet, for whatever reason. Obviously, you conclude that they couldn't produce it if they wanted to, either. That's not forward thinking. I knew you couldn't break out of pig-headed mode long enough to entertain the possibilities.
Anybody who says that is a bit slow in the head; no can accuse Apple of being lazy...... on the other hand, I found that intelligence and judgement are two different things. Intelligence is rational and analytical. Judgement, unfortunately, is emotional (that's why you have some intelligent people making apparently bad judgement like being anti-immigration, pro-gun, pro capital punishment, racist, holocaust deniers, climate change deniers, etc, all of which are purely analytically to be the "wrong" judgments). Jobs had no emotion, so his judgement was not clouded. I am not so sure about everyone else, so I expect Apple to make bad judgements (or avoiding judgement as can be glimpsed from their new approach to throwing everything they can think of into a new launch (e.g., Playlists, Connect, Radio, streaming, off-line, Match, Cloud, etc).
I don't think the square form factor is wrong judgement.... And I am refraining on judging anything else, I am neither intelligent nor without emotion,, I just provide my views and my emotions on this forum.
When thinking about any issue, you must first take into account the perspective of a person before you can suggest that his/her judgement is not aligned with an intelligent analysis. Here's a wild example for you. Let's say you have a person who feels that humans are out of balance with a sustainable natural ecosystem that supports not only the whims of the human species but also the largest array of other species currently inhabiting the planet. Such a person might have a very different view of guns and the death penalty versus you; it's just that they might have assigned a different value to a pound of human biomass than you have. Such a person might calculate our value in aggregate, as a species, against all other biomass on the planet, and arrive at a much lower estimate of value of a human life than another person who is more indoctrinated in the human-centric view of the world. I would submit that such a person sees things more objectively, and thus more clearly, and so the notion of more humans carrying guns, which might play its own role in reducing human population, might be perfectly logical to such a person. Same with serving the death penalty versus imprisoning and feeding a dead ender. If you aren't making a positive difference toward a sustainable ecosystem, in such a person's view, then you are only taking up space and consuming resources. See how perspective changes the whole equation?
So why doesn't Apple make a round iPhone? Don't sell them short.
just because they CAN does not mean they WILL.
And explain to me how a round smart watch solves your 'problem' about having a unique watch? Apple would sell TENS of MILLIONS of round and rectangle watches. So you STILL have your so called 'problem' of having the same Watch as someone else at a party.
That's like saying its a problem to wear diamond stud ear rings since someone else might have them also. LOL. No. People buy Ferrari's and have no problem when someone else drives a Ferrari. Hell Ferrari owners regularly MEET UP on purpose to see other Ferrari owners! A dress is different since there are literally a MILLION different dresses. So the chance of wearing the same dress as someone else is a rare event. Not with watches. Many people own classic Rolex's and have ZERO problem with someone wearing a similiar model. In fact I often see people comment and give high fives when they see a fellow Rolex owner.
There was a series of children's shows produced by Dan Schneider on Nickelodeon that had a running gag of all the mobile electronics like phones and pads being "PearPhones" and "PearPads" and they were shaped like pears. The postproduction had the screen display looking not half bad.
So when do you think the round iPhone is coming out?
When do you think the Apple car is coming out. I' don't have any idea whether Apple is doing a round watch or not. You're the one seemingly so certain of everything.
But look at real work pictures of the watch vs the Apple watch
Look how damn massive that round watch looks!
Zero bezel tech would have made it much more tolerable, and I think I've already shown that if you had that you could achieve the same amount of usable area on an edge-to-edge ? Watch for anything with rectangular constraints and more area for other content.
The Apple Watch looks so much smaller even though they both have the same amount of usable space.
But the problem is if you make the round watch any smaller you won't be able to read the text.
No idea where that picture comes from, and it looks to me like it's had a little 'shop work done on it. Dunno, but here's the Huawei watch from a hands-on article.
The current ? Watch is a rectangle that is 42 mm high by 36 mm wide, including the bezels. It's diagonal, including the bezels, is 52 mm. (I just measured mine, going from far edge to far edge on the casing in all dimensions.)
Let's use Apple's official measurements, shall we?
42.5mm high, 36.44mm wide (not including the digital crown +1.59), 12.46mm thick.
38.56mm high, 33.27mm wide (not including the digital crown +1.62), 12.2mm thick.
As far as this idea that a smaller than 42mm round watch would be unreadable, here's what Apple is already doing between the 42mm & 38mm versions:
And here's the mockup of the 38mm watch display circumscribed within a 38mm round watch case:
Since nobody is complaining about the 38mm watch display being too small, I suspect they could go even smaller, and with a different layout given the additional display area a circle affords, everything on the display could remain about the same size while the circumference shrinks around it.
This is a non-issue, technical limitations aside. Apple's 38mm watch already compromises battery life to get it down that small.
But you are comparing a current tech Apple Watch to a future tech round Apple Watch.
Do you not see how that is not a fair comparison?
You need to compare a rectanglar Apple Watch without a bezel to a round watch without a bezel.
You are moving the goal posts.
I'm not trying to prove that a future round ? Watch would be "better" in all ways than the largest possible future rectangular ? Watch (both with zero bezels). That is your soapbox, your agenda. I'm only trying to prove that a future round ? Watch (with zero bezels) could work as a viable design that people might select. Assuming you believe that the current 42 mm ? Watch works just fine (and clearly it does, since there is even a smaller version in use right now) I think we have just concluded that there is a chance a future round ? Watch could work. Thank you for your help, even though you attempted all of these: (1) straw-man arguments, (2) dismissive behavior (of zero bezel tech), and (3) moving the goal posts.
Comments
That's like saying my Car is really nice except the engine sometimes does not work.
The watch being too LARGE is the whole point why round watches don't work.
You either have to compromise with a small usable screen area or make the Watch much bigger than the rectanglar conterpart.
I am not saying that watch has to be round. I am just saying that the watch doe snot look too bad. It will get smaller in a year or two. Even the Apple Watch screen size is too small to be usable, so may as well.
No doubt (in my meaningless little mind), the future.
There's room to make the case smaller isn't there, or the display larger? That's a fairly large case relative to the screen.
Of course there is. Here's the Huawei 42mm watch overlaid exactly on the Apple 42mm watch. With some slight clipping on the corners of the ?Watch display, it fits almost perfectly inside the Huawei's bezel (are there even any apps that utilize those corners?). The 38mm ?Watch display fits easily into the same circle allowing them to reduce the circumference of the watch as well. And given the circle has greater display area than Apple's rectangular displays, there's no reason they could not go even smaller than Apple's 38mm display with a custom round-UI to make it just as legible.
Show me a good looking and nice User Interface round watch. It does not exist. Because either you have to compromise with a tiny usable screen or have a HUGE screen that is usable. I don't understand why thats so hard for you to understand. There is a very good reason why all computers, laptops, tablets, and smartphones have rectangle screens.
The current ? Watch is a rectangle that is 42 mm high by 36 mm wide, including the bezels. It's diagonal, including the bezels, is 52 mm. (I just measured mine, going from far edge to far edge on the casing in all dimensions.) If Apple could design a round watch that is 42 mm in diameter with screen edge-to-edge (no bezels) then it would only take up a little more space (6 mm or 17%) in the horizontal direction. Further, we can inscribe a rectangular area that would be a "list containing field", and this would be 42 mm on the diagonal, same as the useable screen on today's ? Watch. I think it would work just fine for viewing emails, texts, etc, which wrap, and other visual items that you might want to scroll your way through. Now, since the background in all of those apps is currently black (screen off) I don't think it would be bothersome that the parts around the "list containing field" were also black when viewing such apps. Meanwhile, other apps which aren't so rigidly constrained (i.e. neither needing to display long strings or lists of text nor scroll through their views) could make use of the extra space. Where this is concerned, circles are the most efficient shape for maximizing surface area relative to perimeter & material. Through Xcode, Apple could provide easy means of utilizing the rectangular field specifically or the entire screen as desired. They could make it slick and backwards compatible with older apps until such time as developers wanted to release a version for Watch 2.0. (Same has happened for increasing sized iPhones in the past, where legacy apps were letterboxes because they couldn't be scaled into a different aspect ratio.)
Now, perhaps its unreasonable to expect an edge-to-edge screen. But Apple could probably design something with an exceedingly small bezel. And I have no doubt that they could properly manage the rect/round issue via tools in Xcode.
Rather than dismiss this out of hand, why don't you think about it as a possibility and then see where you can improve upon it rather than automatically debunking it?
But if Apple has zero bezel technology than the current rectangle AppleWatch would be even smaller.
Its simple geometry. You can't get around it. The round watch will always be worse for showing text at any given footprint.
I think I have shown that under the right conditions (i.e. zero bezel) that a round watch would have virtually the same footprint as the current ? Watch, enjoy the same sized text field, and possibly answer the mail of variety in form factor. Plus, the watch faces would be stunning, using the complete circle. (I want the spaceship campus on mine!)
So your curt dismissal of my idea is now reduced to the fact that Apple either currently doesn't have "zero bezel tech" or hasn't used it yet, for whatever reason. Obviously, you conclude that they couldn't produce it if they wanted to, either. That's not forward thinking. I knew you couldn't break out of pig-headed mode long enough to entertain the possibilities.
When thinking about any issue, you must first take into account the perspective of a person before you can suggest that his/her judgement is not aligned with an intelligent analysis. Here's a wild example for you. Let's say you have a person who feels that humans are out of balance with a sustainable natural ecosystem that supports not only the whims of the human species but also the largest array of other species currently inhabiting the planet. Such a person might have a very different view of guns and the death penalty versus you; it's just that they might have assigned a different value to a pound of human biomass than you have. Such a person might calculate our value in aggregate, as a species, against all other biomass on the planet, and arrive at a much lower estimate of value of a human life than another person who is more indoctrinated in the human-centric view of the world. I would submit that such a person sees things more objectively, and thus more clearly, and so the notion of more humans carrying guns, which might play its own role in reducing human population, might be perfectly logical to such a person. Same with serving the death penalty versus imprisoning and feeding a dead ender. If you aren't making a positive difference toward a sustainable ecosystem, in such a person's view, then you are only taking up space and consuming resources. See how perspective changes the whole equation?
So why doesn't Apple make a round iPhone? Don't sell them short.
just because they CAN does not mean they WILL.
And explain to me how a round smart watch solves your 'problem' about having a unique watch? Apple would sell TENS of MILLIONS of round and rectangle watches. So you STILL have your so called 'problem' of having the same Watch as someone else at a party.
That's like saying its a problem to wear diamond stud ear rings since someone else might have them also. LOL. No. People buy Ferrari's and have no problem when someone else drives a Ferrari. Hell Ferrari owners regularly MEET UP on purpose to see other Ferrari owners! A dress is different since there are literally a MILLION different dresses. So the chance of wearing the same dress as someone else is a rare event. Not with watches. Many people own classic Rolex's and have ZERO problem with someone wearing a similiar model. In fact I often see people comment and give high fives when they see a fellow Rolex owner.
There was a series of children's shows produced by Dan Schneider on Nickelodeon that had a running gag of all the mobile electronics like phones and pads being "PearPhones" and "PearPads" and they were shaped like pears. The postproduction had the screen display looking not half bad.
ETA: http://icarly.wikia.com/wiki/Pear_Company
Looks nice in that fake computer graphic.
But look at real work pictures of the watch vs the Apple watch
Look how damn massive that round watch looks!
Zero bezel tech would have made it much more tolerable, and I think I've already shown that if you had that you could achieve the same amount of usable area on an edge-to-edge ? Watch for anything with rectangular constraints and more area for other content.
So when do you think the round iPhone is coming out?
I think they'd stay with the fruit theme and buy the PearPhone concept off the guy who produced Carly.
Pear shaped will be the new rectangle!
Plus all those countless headline writers who have specialized in making fruit metaphors for the tech and stock of Apple can keep working.. win-win.
http://icarly.wikia.com/wiki/Pear_Company
The current ? Watch is a rectangle that is 42 mm high by 36 mm wide, including the bezels. It's diagonal, including the bezels, is 52 mm. (I just measured mine, going from far edge to far edge on the casing in all dimensions.)
Let's use Apple's official measurements, shall we?
42.5mm high, 36.44mm wide (not including the digital crown +1.59), 12.46mm thick.
38.56mm high, 33.27mm wide (not including the digital crown +1.62), 12.2mm thick.
As far as this idea that a smaller than 42mm round watch would be unreadable, here's what Apple is already doing between the 42mm & 38mm versions:
And here's the mockup of the 38mm watch display circumscribed within a 38mm round watch case:
Since nobody is complaining about the 38mm watch display being too small, I suspect they could go even smaller, and with a different layout given the additional display area a circle affords, everything on the display could remain about the same size while the circumference shrinks around it.
This is a non-issue, technical limitations aside. Apple's 38mm watch already compromises battery life to get it down that small.
But you are comparing a current tech Apple Watch to a future tech round Apple Watch.
Do you not see how that is not a fair comparison?
You need to compare a rectanglar Apple Watch without a bezel to a round watch without a bezel.
You are moving the goal posts.
I'm not trying to prove that a future round ? Watch would be "better" in all ways than the largest possible future rectangular ? Watch (both with zero bezels). That is your soapbox, your agenda. I'm only trying to prove that a future round ? Watch (with zero bezels) could work as a viable design that people might select. Assuming you believe that the current 42 mm ? Watch works just fine (and clearly it does, since there is even a smaller version in use right now) I think we have just concluded that there is a chance a future round ? Watch could work. Thank you for your help, even though you attempted all of these: (1) straw-man arguments, (2) dismissive behavior (of zero bezel tech), and (3) moving the goal posts.
Q.E.D.