Yeah, I didn't even mention the insane markup on the bands. What's sad, too, is that while there is no shortage of aftermarket affordable bands, many (most?) of them seem to have miscellaneous quality control issues. It seems like there would be a great opportunity for multiple 3rd parties to make some good money making good-quality, affordable, band options. This shouldn't be rocket science.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Aluminium silver version looks like a cheap toy?
- Thread starter TJ82
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I’m the opposite haha. The only reason I can justify it is because it a great gym and running companion. A thousand times better now with lte. If it didn’t do well in those areas I’d never wear it. Notifications on my wrist are great, but I don’t need them. Sometimes they’re actually annoying. I don’t care about immediately learning of half the emails I receive lol.
I’m sure we will reach a point where these things last more than a year or two before being bogged down. They’re in their infancy; I remember going from an iPhone 3g to a 3GS and being blown away by the difference. I was only a student then so I can’t say my productivity improved, but if I used the thing for work I’m sure it would’ve been a night and day difference. The s3 bs s0 feels like that sort of leap. Meanwhile I’m still on a 6s plus, wife is on an 8, and the day to day loading and productivity are identical.
When AW teaches the point that productivity doesn’t improve by leaps and bounds every year I’ll probably spend the money for a stainless model, or maybe even something nicer than that. At this point the hardest depreciation is in the stainless (haven’t looked at ceramic but I’d guess that’s up there too), as I’m sure you know since you buy them second hand! I sold my s2 a few weeks before the announcement for $320, so I upgraded for $110 out of pocket. At some point, like my 6s plus, it will be worth just keeping the watch for 2-3 (more?) years. Hopefully...
[doublepost=1507489998][/doublepost]
I’ve had a knockoff Nike band (that glows! That was an odd surprise) for about a year. Seems to be holding up. My wife has had a leather one for around that time and likes it. I also have a Milanese link that I spent around $15 on. I don’t use it daily but I’ve had it for around 6 months with zero issues.
For the prices though I’m fine even if they fall apart in a year lol. You can get half a dozen sport straps for half the price of *one* at Apple. At those numbers you could afford to throw one away monthly and still be ahead after a year is up. Not to mention the potential of a design refresh potentially making all of our straps obsolete. Until Apple announces they’re committed
To the strap design I’m certainly not spending any “real” money on straps.
The price of the Apple bands are a joke. If third party bands/straps weren’t a thing I wouldn’t have even entertained the idea of getting an AW. My leather straps from amazon cost 10% of the price of the official ones and look just as nice.
Having had a silver aluminium watch the first time round, I’ve gone for stainless steel this time and am really pleased with it. I expect to keep it at least a couple of years and will wear it every day so spending a bit more to have a different finish seemed reasonable. I really dislike the space grey and space black variants (and the ceramic ones) so my options for making a change were limited!
I’d like one of the new sport loop straps but not sure I want one enough to spend fifty quid!
I’d like one of the new sport loop straps but not sure I want one enough to spend fifty quid!
I supported the black stainless today with the brown Cocoa sport band, and it looked awesome.
You can wear a bulky Seamaster with rubber band in a dinner suit and look classy, but if you haven't got it, you'd still look like trash even if you had a $35k Patek Phillippe or Chopard Happy Diamonds.
Since when does shiny make a watch more "professional" where matte doesn't? Not all gold watches are shiny gold - in fact some of the shinier ones just look more "try hard" and cheap!
Since when does shiny make a watch more "professional" where matte doesn't? Not all gold watches are shiny gold - in fact some of the shinier ones just look more "try hard" and cheap!
Exactly. One comment not directed to ANYONE in this thread or your choice of watches and clothes. A lot of the bling brand names are what I call the poor person's imagination of being rich. A certain penthouse on 5th Avenue comes to mind. True style and class is way understated. You can even make a statement by wearing a casio to work. Look at Bill Gates, Steve or Warren Buffett. Tommy Hilfigger, Armani, Versace etc plaster their names all over their clothes. For the outside! Real high quality clothing (and watches to a certain extent) HIDE how expensive they are. YOU know and that's all that should matter. Check out Brioni or a bespoke tailored Saville Row suit. You can spend 15000 USD but no one else will know.
The older I get I see that people who aspire toward wealth or status buy things that they may not be able to afford to show it off. People who already have it may still buy expensive things (but rarely stamped with a brand) or are simply content with wearing off the rack Walmart and sporting an aluminum Apple Watch with a matte finish.
Nothing WRONG with wanting and owning expensive things. I like cars personally. But you should define the car not the other way around. Buy a Jag because you appreciate the design, heritage and handling. If you're buying it so others think you're cool or rich .. wrong reason.
My .02. Buy and wear whatever the heck you want. Let no one else define you.
Some of you guys have taken the original post personally.
This is not about class war, or displays of wealth. It's about design and certain materials looking inexpensive.
The nuance here is not to do with status or wealth as I've said, the nuance, if you had to get into it, would be concerned with pairing certain colours to certain materials which enhance or tone down particularly notable characteristics.
The problem today is that people are so sensitive that they'll take a simple observation about common aluminium personally and go on wild rants about Versace.
Ironically, and this is in direct reference to the post above, eVolcre clearly has little clue about Brioni or bespoke Saville Row suits, as those clothes are very obvious status symbols, and people do instantly know you're wearing expensive clothes. There is nothing hidden about them. You would stick out like a sore thumb in a £2000 tailored tweed suit and £1000 unbranded leather satchel sitting on public transport.
The reason being is that the materials and cuts look expensive. In the same way which the aluminium that Apple used in the sport watch look inexpensive.
Carry on ranting, this thread has taken a turn for the silly.
This is not about class war, or displays of wealth. It's about design and certain materials looking inexpensive.
The nuance here is not to do with status or wealth as I've said, the nuance, if you had to get into it, would be concerned with pairing certain colours to certain materials which enhance or tone down particularly notable characteristics.
The problem today is that people are so sensitive that they'll take a simple observation about common aluminium personally and go on wild rants about Versace.
Ironically, and this is in direct reference to the post above, eVolcre clearly has little clue about Brioni or bespoke Saville Row suits, as those clothes are very obvious status symbols, and people do instantly know you're wearing expensive clothes. There is nothing hidden about them. You would stick out like a sore thumb in a £2000 tailored tweed suit and £1000 unbranded leather satchel sitting on public transport.
The reason being is that the materials and cuts look expensive. In the same way which the aluminium that Apple used in the sport watch look inexpensive.
Carry on ranting, this thread has taken a turn for the silly.
It's funny you're picturing this over your MacBook. Because I also had qualms about the silver aluminium looking cheap when I saw it in a video about a leather band I was interested in (shortly before I bought my first AW) and then I realised that the very expensive (at launch anyway) iPhone 6 plus I was holding at the time has the exact same finish. And so does that expensive MacBook pro in your picture. So what makes the watch with that same finish look cheap? My guess it has something to do with the thickness. It makes the aluminium finish more "in your face".
In my country there's no LTE versions (yet) so I only had the option of the aluminium colours and I was convinced I would get the space grey instead. But in the end I went for the silver after all because I'd like to play with more bands and I felt the silver was a better option for that.
About the fog band it came with, at first I dismissed this one as well as not a very nice option, but the woven nylon band I bought was kind of uncomfortable at first (I hadn't worn any watch for a few months because my battery died, and that watch was quite lightweight) so I switched back to the fog band and it started to look quite classy to me after a bit.
I'm not a high end aesthetics kind of person but I am keen on color (combinations) and if it doesn't look right to me it irks me. A lot. But I am now quite happy with my silver alu AW.
See #8080 and #10 for some pics of mine with different bands.
Yes, it's nuanced, but asking whether or not something looks expensive or like a 'cheap toy', you are ultimately talking about status. Characteristics, materials and design are employed to create a perception. One of elevated or lower 'class'.
But it's important to remember, looks and brand names aren't everything. In the end, people should care less what others think (of course it's easier said than done. We're social beings after all)
But it's trying to find your personal style and owning it.
Last edited:
I changed my GPS Series 3 for the LTE version today, purely for the ceramic back.
I considered the SS black, but it looked too shiny for my taste. Money wasn't a deciding factor; genuinely like the less heavy and matt finish of the aluminium.
I don't believe that anyone should by an AW (or any product) to show their wealth/status.
I considered the SS black, but it looked too shiny for my taste. Money wasn't a deciding factor; genuinely like the less heavy and matt finish of the aluminium.
I don't believe that anyone should by an AW (or any product) to show their wealth/status.
Surely if you chose the aluminium watch, it has a composite back? Worrying about the back baffles me though; no one sees it!
On edit: having checked, I realise it does indeed have the ceramic back. I’m still a bit baffled about why it matters though! My 2.5 year old aluminium watch still tracks heart rate accurately as far as I can tell so the scratches seem to be purely cosmetic.
Last edited:
Hey it’s lighter and if it looks like a toy it won’t get stolen. Two wins in my book.