Unless it adds either beauty or functionality, why pay for it? For me, that's the killer for the stainless steel version: I can't tell it from the aluminum version and, since the aluminum version stays scratch free, it doesn't offer any real benefit (or is the crystal still saphire? -- that would be a benefit).
So, I figure that, at best titanium may provide a lighter watch --- which is nice but not a big deal. But, a ceramic watch could offer color variations not possible otherwise and provide beauty and distinction.
The stainless has a sapphire display. My series 3 has seen some serious physical action that has bashed as scraped the display against many hard objects - the display still looks as perfect as when it was unboxed. The stainless ages beautifully because the cold forged material is very hard and scratches are not deep. It gradually loses its highly polished surface but the surface stays smooth and shiny and is much less textured than what your see on a gold wedding ring. In my opinion the stainless looks even better over time.
Titanium will be an interesting option. Much less dense than steel but still two and a half times more dense than aluminum. It could be as light as the aluminum if they make the titanium case really thin.
Titanium will not have the clean silver color of stainless. Natural titanium will look a little darker and have a tan or brown hue. Titanium also has a softer surface than stainless and will pick up deeper scratches.
Rather than replacing stainless, I expect titanium to show up as an “Edition” model and that Apple will use a diamond-like coating to improve the look and scratch resistance. It will probably have a very dark color.
I'm still waiting for Apple to do something with liquid metal and it seems that the Watch would be an interesting use. IIRC, LM was supposed to be easy to fabricate so it would seem that the important factors would be cost and durability. This assumes that Apple has not given up on Liquid Metal.
Are the screenshots verified? Find it strange the text around the outside is in Helvetica rather than San Francisco.
San Francisco is not Apple’s “official” font, it is a user interface font. Its licence doesn’t permit uses other than the user interface. The text on the ceramic Series 2 back looks like San Francisco, however.
Paying extra for these watches with better materials is a really poor investment.
tbh I can’t tell the difference between them, and no one cares either. You want a quality watch get a patek philippe.
i’ve said It over and over, they need to make the watch thinner. Most comments I get when I wear mine is that it looks chunky.
Who says it’s an investment? It’s part tool, part jewelry. To me aluminum looks junky compared to steel.
Can’t imagine being told it’s chunky, as it’s thinner than the popular men’s watch fashion of having fat watches.
Yeah people often comment how bulky it looks compared to how phones seem to be getting slimmer and slimmer. That’s I guess what they compare it too. Phones are obviously a similar thickness, but not worn on your wrist, so different level of expectation there..
to put it simply. Any premium material should be offering more than a cosmetic/robustness benefit
Huh? Not following you there....what should the material do in addition to a robustness or cosmetic benefit, of which the non-Sport models indeed do? Steel, ceramic, and titanium all wear better than aluminum (and the ceramic and titanium better than steel), and also have cosmetic value.
Ok, so a premium material should allow a more premium design; with some sort of functional and tangible benefit.
For example:
I own a Aluminium Watch 4. The steel version is identical. Both are 10.7mm thick; its bulky and ugly. It’s the Achilles heel of the Apple Watch design.
If Apple are proposing a titanium or ceramic version at a premium price point I would expect that it’s main design flaw would be improved. To my eye, a 7mm watch would deserve a premium price point.
You’ve done a great job listing your opinions as fact. Alas, they are not.
Well I agree with the other poster... Apple Watches are bulky and ugly.
A titanium version should allow for a more streamlined watch.
I do agree with you though that aluminum vs steel are very different in appearance...
I did a bit of research on ceramics and determined that there is enormous variation... conductive/non-conductive. It all depends on what it’s made of. But, it’s pretty much universal ceramics are hard but brittle. Making a ceramic watch is a lot more challenging and probably not worth it... which is probably why Apple stopped.
Ceramics for a better wireless signal looks real (vs metals) but not as good as glass or plastics.
If you did that bit of research you already know that this is not toilet bowl ceramic, this ls zirconium oxide, a.k.a zirconia. Zirconia is as resistant as steel, this is why it is also used in ceramic knives. You cannot produce a knife with a brittle material. If you know how to break it all materials are brittle.
When AW first came out, those Edition models got a lot of attention. The pre-release speculation was that these would cost "thousands" and people rolled their eyes. then they were revealed at $10k and $14k and there was an audible gasp. Watches in the 5 digit price range are certainly nothing new, but electronics are known to be dated items...they don't endure for decades. I wondered if Apple would offer some sort of upgrade program, and that never occurred. Apple sold some of these editions and made good money off of doing so. I still wonder if some sort of program like the annual iPhone program could make such editions sell in greater numbers. But then, if you're buying a $14k watch, I guess you don't care how long before it needs an update.
My AW4 is a huge upgrade to the original AW0. Much as these new ones look, sound cool, I can't justify the upgrade. YMMV. I'm expecting at least 5 years on AW4. I got 4 out of AW0, and that was a bit of a stretch.
My ceramic watch is going on three years now, and despite its abuse shows no scratches on the body or screen. My original stainless watch was scratched badly in months by comparison. The ceramic watches also seem to have a better build quality, without the screen popping issues some stainless watches had.
I would not go back to stainless personally, although I would love to get another year out of my current watch.
I'm still waiting for Apple to do something with liquid metal and it seems that the Watch would be an interesting use. IIRC, LM was supposed to be easy to fabricate so it would seem that the important factors would be cost and durability. This assumes that Apple has not given up on Liquid Metal.
I think the big selling point of Liquid Metal was that it was effectively an injection moldable metal. The problem they had with it was related to being able to make large enough products. I believe what was happening with anything bigger than a sim ejector tool, was that the metal was cooling too quickly within the die or even the injector, meaning you couldn’t fully form pieces without some crazy heat management process and ultra expensive dies. I could be wrong, as it’s been years since I read about the tech, but I do have a bunch of injection molding experience, but the differences between metal and plastic make it understandable why we haven’t seen any LM products on the market.
Paying extra for these watches with better materials is a really poor investment.
tbh I can’t tell the difference between them, and no one cares either. You want a quality watch get a patek philippe.
i’ve said It over and over, they need to make the watch thinner. Most comments I get when I wear mine is that it looks chunky.
Thanks for the insight man, pretty sure nobody can tell ANY difference between the different cases and it's not like the SS cases offers a more durable watch or anything. Also, I can picture Tim seeing the watches prototypes and saying "too thin, make it chunkier!".
Paying extra for these watches with better materials is a really poor investment.
tbh I can’t tell the difference between them, and no one cares either. You want a quality watch get a patek philippe.
i’ve said It over and over, they need to make the watch thinner. Most comments I get when I wear mine is that it looks chunky.
Who says it’s an investment? It’s part tool, part jewelry. To me aluminum looks junky compared to steel.
Can’t imagine being told it’s chunky, as it’s thinner than the popular men’s watch fashion of having fat watches.
Yeah people often comment how bulky it looks compared to how phones seem to be getting slimmer and slimmer. That’s I guess what they compare it too. Phones are obviously a similar thickness, but not worn on your wrist, so different level of expectation there..
to put it simply. Any premium material should be offering more than a cosmetic/robustness benefit
What does that even mean? It’s as though you used cosmetic/robustness to cover any practical use, and then question whether it’s enough. The entire purpose of ANY case, on ANY product is for cosmetics and robustness. You really need to explain that statement so that it has some meaning.
Paying extra for these watches with better materials is a really poor investment.
tbh I can’t tell the difference between them, and no one cares either. You want a quality watch get a patek philippe.
i’ve said It over and over, they need to make the watch thinner. Most comments I get when I wear mine is that it looks chunky.
Who says it’s an investment? It’s part tool, part jewelry. To me aluminum looks junky compared to steel.
Can’t imagine being told it’s chunky, as it’s thinner than the popular men’s watch fashion of having fat watches.
Yeah people often comment how bulky it looks compared to how phones seem to be getting slimmer and slimmer. That’s I guess what they compare it too. Phones are obviously a similar thickness, but not worn on your wrist, so different level of expectation there..
to put it simply. Any premium material should be offering more than a cosmetic/robustness benefit
Huh? Not following you there....what should the material do in addition to a robustness or cosmetic benefit, of which the non-Sport models indeed do? Steel, ceramic, and titanium all wear better than aluminum (and the ceramic and titanium better than steel), and also have cosmetic value.
Ok, so a premium material should allow a more premium design; with some sort of functional and tangible benefit.
For example:
I own a Aluminium Watch 4. The steel version is identical. Both are 10.7mm thick; its bulky and ugly. It’s the Achilles heel of the Apple Watch design.
If Apple are proposing a titanium or ceramic version at a premium price point I would expect that it’s main design flaw would be improved. To my eye, a 7mm watch would deserve a premium price point.
It’s neither bulky or ugly. In fact a-plies watches have won numerous design awards over the years. Perhaps it’s your problem with design that’s the problem.
on addition, I’ve owned a number of “beautiful” high end watches over the years. Most of them have been heavier and bulkier than my black SS Watch. And vastly more expensive either. I’ve had a number of people tell me that the 44mm watch is too small. Weight is often something people want in a watch.
so your statements are really parochial, and just reflect your values. If you want a lightweight model, just get the aluminum model. The ceramic also weighs slightly less than the SS model. If titanium comes out, it will be lighter than the SS model, but slightly heavier than the aluminum model.
i think we can be assured that the cases Apple designed are as small as possible considering what goes inside. If that isn’t understood, then nothing is being understood.
I’m wondering when titanium dropped from being a strategy metal, mined mostly in Russia. When I was in the Air Force in the early 80s ami got hold of a small thin piece, about the length but half the height of a credit card. And very thin. Nothing I or my friends could do to it would bend it. Very tuff stuff.
Some of the tanks of my Kodachrome processor were pure titanium. It was the bleach tanks, which used potassium ferricyanide. That would dissolve 316 SS tanks into a nice Prussian Blue dye. These tanks were about 5.5 feet high, 18 inches wide, and 3 feet across. Lots of money folks. One 10/32 1/2” screw cost several dollars.
but while strong, titanium isn’t very hard. It will scratch, even alloyed titanium.
Never got a scratch on any of my awatches with the SS case and black diamond coating. Or the bracelet.
I agree, I purchased my S3 Stainless Steel Space Gray when it became available from Apple. I wear it every day and do not coddle it whatsoever. I'm retired so the Watch does not exist in a vacuum or protected environment. It is exposed to all sorts of activities. There is no apparent wear and tear or scratches. I purchase things for me that provide me with value and purpose, I really don't give a flip about trying to impress anyone with a damn watch.
I have shops. I weld, grind, woodwork, plastics, glass, etc. I’ve not scratched my bracelet yet. I bought it with the series 2 watch, and put it on white new o e I buy every year. I think that’s amazing. I had a ceramic watch and bracelet years ago, and that did get fine scratches over time.
I was going to post on that too, and I suppose I am. It’s been a very long time since Apple first became involved with Liquidmetal. I remember getting involved in several arguments with people here, in several separate threads about when it would be used, and for what. Even when the inventor, in an interview, said that it would be years before becoming practical for these types of products, some people said he didn’t know what he was talking about (as though they did).
a watch, as I’ve said before, is the perfect product for this. It’s small and uses little material, and can be expensive enough to make it worthwhile. Frankly, at this time, I’m surprised that we’re not seeing something from Apple, other than the tiny sim rejection tool made out of it that Apple sent with the phones what now seems to be ages ago. I still have mine.
maybe they’ve abandoned it. I hope not. I still would buy the watch in a liquidmetal case, and bracelet.
What about glasses frames made with Liquidmetal? Might be a good material for their (possible) AR glasses product.
It could be. But I’ve had glasses made with memory wire. They are almost impossible to damage. I’ve got various gauges of memory wire that I experiment with or use for some special projects. Pretty amazing sruff. Also expensive.
I'm still waiting for Apple to do something with liquid metal and it seems that the Watch would be an interesting use. IIRC, LM was supposed to be easy to fabricate so it would seem that the important factors would be cost and durability. This assumes that Apple has not given up on Liquid Metal.
I think the big selling point of Liquid Metal was that it was effectively an injection moldable metal. The problem they had with it was related to being able to make large enough products. I believe what was happening with anything bigger than a sim ejector tool, was that the metal was cooling too quickly within the die or even the injector, meaning you couldn’t fully form pieces without some crazy heat management process and ultra expensive dies. I could be wrong, as it’s been years since I read about the tech, but I do have a bunch of injection molding experience, but the differences between metal and plastic make it understandable why we haven’t seen any LM products on the market.
They were making golf club heads out of it, as well as other fair sized parts. It’s hard to know what the problems are, but some things can be guessed.
for one, Apple’s cases are forged and machined. Liquidmetal will be very hard to forge. Does it need to be? I don’t know. It will be hard to machine. Does it need to be? Yes, unless Apple and the company can come up with some method that would eliminate that need. But I don’t know how. The contracts Apple had with the company aren’t perpetual. I haven’t seen anything about it in years.
Comments
Titanium will be an interesting option. Much less dense than steel but still two and a half times more dense than aluminum. It could be as light as the aluminum if they make the titanium case really thin.
Titanium will not have the clean silver color of stainless. Natural titanium will look a little darker and have a tan or brown hue. Titanium also has a softer surface than stainless and will pick up deeper scratches.
Rather than replacing stainless, I expect titanium to show up as an “Edition” model and that Apple will use a diamond-like coating to improve the look and scratch resistance. It will probably have a very dark color.
My AW4 is a huge upgrade to the original AW0. Much as these new ones look, sound cool, I can't justify the upgrade. YMMV. I'm expecting at least 5 years on AW4. I got 4 out of AW0, and that was a bit of a stretch.
I would not go back to stainless personally, although I would love to get another year out of my current watch.
It’s neither bulky or ugly. In fact a-plies watches have won numerous design awards over the years. Perhaps it’s your problem with design that’s the problem.
on addition, I’ve owned a number of “beautiful” high end watches over the years. Most of them have been heavier and bulkier than my black SS Watch. And vastly more expensive either. I’ve had a number of people tell me that the 44mm watch is too small. Weight is often something people want in a watch.
so your statements are really parochial, and just reflect your values. If you want a lightweight model, just get the aluminum model. The ceramic also weighs slightly less than the SS model. If titanium comes out, it will be lighter than the SS model, but slightly heavier than the aluminum model.
i think we can be assured that the cases Apple designed are as small as possible considering what goes inside. If that isn’t understood, then nothing is being understood.
Some of the tanks of my Kodachrome processor were pure titanium. It was the bleach tanks, which used potassium ferricyanide. That would dissolve 316 SS tanks into a nice Prussian Blue dye. These tanks were about 5.5 feet high, 18 inches wide, and 3 feet across. Lots of money folks. One 10/32 1/2” screw cost several dollars.
but while strong, titanium isn’t very hard. It will scratch, even alloyed titanium.
I have shops. I weld, grind, woodwork, plastics, glass, etc. I’ve not scratched my bracelet yet. I bought it with the series 2 watch, and put it on white new o e I buy every year. I think that’s amazing. I had a ceramic watch and bracelet years ago, and that did get fine scratches over time.
It could be. But I’ve had glasses made with memory wire. They are almost impossible to damage. I’ve got various gauges of memory wire that I experiment with or use for some special projects. Pretty amazing sruff. Also expensive.
for one, Apple’s cases are forged and machined. Liquidmetal will be very hard to forge. Does it need to be? I don’t know. It will be hard to machine. Does it need to be? Yes, unless Apple and the company can come up with some method that would eliminate that need. But I don’t know how. The contracts Apple had with the company aren’t perpetual. I haven’t seen anything about it in years.