44mm size needed

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Serban, Apr 5, 2015.

  1. Serban Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #1
    I think additionaly to the 38 and 42 Apple need to make in the future a 44 mm size for those with big wrists
     
  2. ninethirty macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #2
    I tried on a 45mm watch the other day thinking it wouldn't be so bad and it looked absolutely ridiculous. The "big watch" trend is one that needs to die.

     
  3. Vundu macrumors 65816

    Vundu

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #3
    Ridiculous on you maybe. No reason they can't be available for others.
     
  4. ninethirty macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #4
    No, they're ridiculous on everyone. And plenty of reasons they can't.

     
  5. Dwalls90 macrumors 601

    Dwalls90

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    #5
    They're saving bigger watches for the Apple Watch 5.
     
  6. KPOM macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #6
    If anything, I think Apple would try to make a smaller watch (maybe 34 or 36mm) if future LCD technology allows a smaller bezel within the thickness of the current design. 38mm is actually a traditional men's watch size, though it is positioned as the more likely size for women.
     
  7. AleXXXa, Apr 5, 2015
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2015

    AleXXXa macrumors 6502

    AleXXXa

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2015
    #7
    +1.
    It's kinda already dead here in Europe! Of course, from time to time you see a chav wearing a big 44mm+ fashion watch like a diesel or whatever, but it's getting rare these days. Thank god!
    Big watches look tasteless even if you're pretty big (see Stallone and his huge Panerais).
     
  8. ninethirty macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #8
    Yeah, the watch I tried on the other day was a Panerai (PAM572). Couldn't stand the look of it so I went with the PAM512 (42mm). Much nicer size. Other Panerai, which can get as large as 47mm are ridiculous looking if you ask me!

     
  9. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #9
    Persons like lets say someone we all know..Vin Diesel or Dwayne Johnson wrist size, the 42mm is too small..that is what i meant.
    Get real we need a 44mm size or something bigger than the 42mm
     
  10. chrise2 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2012
    #10
    Or at least larger bands. I think the biggest is 210mm or something like that, which isn't very big.
     
  11. ninethirty macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #11
    It's nuts that you were able to figure out this huge mistake Apple made, and it probably never even occurred to them!

     
  12. mattopotamus macrumors G4

    mattopotamus

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    #12
    I feel like apple nailed it with the sizes. They could have just offered one, but instead made two sizes. Most people will be able to make one or the other size work.
     
  13. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #13
    Unfortunately we can't make any bet. I am sure Apple will make in the future a bigger one than the 42mm
     
  14. Vundu macrumors 65816

    Vundu

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #14
    Not everyone has skinny arms. Normal sized watches look ridiculously small on me.

    [​IMG]
     
  15. virginblue4 macrumors 68000

    virginblue4

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #15

    LOL. Trying to work out if you're being sarcastic?

    Good job you wear your watch on your wrist and not towards the top of your arm....
     
  16. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #16
  17. virginblue4 macrumors 68000

    virginblue4

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #17
    That's a monstrosity!
     
  18. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
  19. Multiverse223 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2015
    #19
    Yeah you're supposed to wear your watch on your wrist, not your forearm. I need a 15" watch for my chest.

    P.S. In the picture your wrists look below average male, and they look skinny.

    ----------

    'We also made a 44mm for the morbidly obese, with matching ginormous straps' read that in Ive's voice. The funny thing is that the 42mm is really the one that encompasses the fat wrists so 44mm is just not necessary...unless you're shaq
     
  20. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #20
    It's because of the photo
    The wrist is big enough for a 42mm watch trust me

    ----------

    Baby, you tried apple watch on the event? i guess not based on your last statement
    Trust me 42mm is for a normal man wrist. For americans fat ones is just too small
    Apple did a small 38mm watch in height for small wrist (apple statement) so they need for large wrist too, the opposite way
     
  21. TallManNY macrumors 68040

    TallManNY

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #21
    Agree that super big watches are a bit silly. But Stallone is a bad example because he is about 5' 8" and while very built is also probably thinner than you realize.
     
  22. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #22
    44mm is not super big...or you are a small human if for you 44mm is SUPER BIG
    The big watches are from 46.5mm to 48mm
     
  23. Glideslope Suspended

    Glideslope

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2007
    Location:
    NY
    #23
    No, the "Apple Watch Pocket." :apple:
     
  24. ninethirty macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #24
    Actually, anything over 40mm is generally considered "bigger" when it comes to watches. I'm wearing a 42mm now and it's literally the size of my wrist.

     
  25. Serban thread starter Suspended

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2013
    #25
    sorry but almost all the men' Rolex has 42mm
    so you have a normal wrist if 42mm is literally the size of your wrist
    but there are fat man or man with bone structures bigger
     

Share This Page