And I don't mean this in a bad way. I just think the media is going overboard on the whole Watch re-think narrative. Listening to John Gruber's interview with Federighi and Schiller it's clear the #1 priority with the Watch was battery life. Obviously Apple has now realized there is battery life to spare so they changed app behavior which will now allow apps to launch much faster. I highly doubt when they were first designing the software they thought apps taking forever to load was a good thing. The honeycomb "home" screen still exists; the Digital Crown is still being used (and developers now have more hooks into it). Even though other options are available to switch watch faces and end workouts, force touch still exists and I believe you can still use it as you did before. So basically that leaves us with re-purposing the side button. Once they decided to convert that to an app-switcher it only made sense to combine glances with it (which then freed up that space for the Watch version of control center). To me while all these changes are good and welcomed I don't see re-purposing the side button as a major re-think of the watch. I think the media has had a narrative for some time now that the Watch UX was ill-conceived so any change is going to be branded as a re-think so they can claim they were right all along. But honestly I think the narrative would have been a lot different had there been no latency issues from day 1. The fact that apps took forever to load (and sometimes didn't load at all) soured a lot of people on the device, probably more so than what the side button was being used for. But maybe I'm just being biased because I've never thought the Watch was confusing or difficult to use.