Apple watch hands on review by Ariel Adams

[Piggie]

Here is a site that does a plausible job of calculating the depth at 12.3mm (38mm) and 12.46 (42mm) based on the known length. Keep in mind this is maximum depth and at the highest point of the sensor. Most watches have a flat back, so the 'on wrist' perceived thickness will likely be considerably less since the 'point' of the sensor will rest between the ulna and the radius (natural divot). The watch body (sans sensor) of the 42mm is 10.6mm deep which will probably be closer to what wearing it will be like.

Also this is the same or less than my Garmin 620 at 12.5mm. The Moto 360 is about 11%/12.4% thinner at 11mm and no HR sensor.

Is 12.3mm/12.46mm thin? No
Is it as thin as Apple would like? Probably not
Is it as thin as Jony Ive & Marc Newson would like: No
Is it as thin as the 2ed Gen? Probably not
Is it as thin as I would like? No

Despite all of the above the aWatch will fall in the mid thickness range and is NOT a thick or bulky watch.

Thank you for this sensible post.
I agree totally with all your 'Is it as thin' points, and I'm confident the future will prove you right.
This is a mirror image of screaming how the iPhone1 or iPad1 was the perfect thickness, and now people year later and laughing at how thick they were back then.
It's as if people think Apple would not of loved to have stunned the world by bringing out exactly what they have done, but it was only 5mm thick.
People would be raving about how did they do it, and amazed such a feat were possible.
Boasting of how amazing Apple was, and that no other maker could do it, and how fat and stupid all the other brands of smart watches look now in comparison.
Of course we all know THAT would then be the products major point, and Apple would be showing the watch of sideways on all the time as opposed to front on, and angled just right to hide the thickness most of the time.

We just have to live with what they have made for a v1.00 and accept that they best compromise they've come up with for now.
I just find it funny how people will proclaim it's perfect, when we know dam well, if if was thinner, then THAT would be proclaimed perfect.

 

[Tanegashima]

I think apple watch thickness is just right, and I don't want a slimmer watch that will have to have a smaller battery and fell insubstantial in the wrist (for the ss models)

 

[Piggie]

I think apple watch thickness is just right, and I don't want a slimmer watch that will have to have a smaller battery and fell insubstantial in the wrist (for the ss models)

Do you feel the rest of Apple's range of products are too thin?

What may I ask will do you, if Apple makes future models of a watch thinner?
Will you select another brand that is thicker as you like them to be, or simply not buy one?

 

[SHNXX]

Do you feel the rest of Apple's range of products are too thin?

What may I ask will do you, if Apple makes future models of a watch thinner?
Will you select another brand that is thicker as you like them to be, or simply not buy one?

Let it go man

 

[matrix07]

Do you feel the rest of Apple's range of products are too thin?

What may I ask will do you, if Apple makes future models of a watch thinner?
Will you select another brand that is thicker as you like them to be, or simply not buy one?

I think he's talking about current technology. The more proper question is does he want longer battery life on a lot thicker one?

 

[Supermallet]

Thank you for this sensible post.
I agree totally with all your 'Is it as thin' points, and I'm confident the future will prove you right.
This is a mirror image of screaming how the iPhone1 or iPad1 was the perfect thickness, and now people year later and laughing at how thick they were back then.
It's as if people think Apple would not of loved to have stunned the world by bringing out exactly what they have done, but it was only 5mm thick.
People would be raving about how did they do it, and amazed such a feat were possible.
Boasting of how amazing Apple was, and that no other maker could do it, and how fat and stupid all the other brands of smart watches look now in comparison.
Of course we all know THAT would then be the products major point, and Apple would be showing the watch of sideways on all the time as opposed to front on, and angled just right to hide the thickness most of the time.

We just have to live with what they have made for a v1.00 and accept that they best compromise they've come up with for now.
I just find it funny how people will proclaim it's perfect, when we know dam well, if if was thinner, then THAT would be proclaimed perfect.

So what's your beef then? Is it that you think the watch is too thick and therefore shouldn't be purchased by anyone, or is it that people will choose to defend a thick watch?

There's more going on to the aesthetics and total experience of the watch than the thickness of it. I think the Apple Watch looks a damn sight better than any Android Wear device released so far, and thickness is one factor of many that made me come to that decision.

Also, it seems you've decided that any watch thicker than some measurement that you've predetermined to be the best thickness is just ugly and used for macho posturing. That's a silly stance to take. Different watches have different designs and look good on different types of wrists. Slender watches on big wrists don't look very good, and giant watches on tiny wrists also don't look very good.

Is your complaint that you think the Apple Watch is too thick for your wrists in particular and you would buy one if it were thinner? Okay, fair enough. But realize that not everyone values thickness or thinness the same way that you do.

And yes, this is a first gen watch. It won't be as refined as later iterations in some respects. However, that doesn't make it a bad or undesirable product. Heck, aside from the 3G radios, I think the iPhone 2G was a nicer overall device than the 3G/3GS. Aside from the screen, I think the iPhone 2G was a nicer overall device than the iPhone 4/4S. I like the look of the Apple Watch. I want an Apple Watch, even knowing its full thickness. And it has nothing to do with macho posturing. I just like the watch based on what I've seen of it so far.

Do you feel the rest of Apple's range of products are too thin?

What may I ask will do you, if Apple makes future models of a watch thinner?
Will you select another brand that is thicker as you like them to be, or simply not buy one?

I think the 6/6 Plus phones are too slim. They should have been bigger to avoid both the protruding camera and to increase battery life. Right now those phones are so thin that I find it slightly annoying to pick my 6 Plus up from a flat surface. This is one of the reasons I have a case on it, to add a little thickness to it.

Here's my question: If Apple makes future watches thinner, will you buy one or will you find something else to fixate on and post about here?

 

[diamond.g]

Here is a site that does a plausible job of calculating the depth at 12.3mm (38mm) and 12.46 (42mm) based on the known length. Keep in mind this is maximum depth and at the highest point of the sensor. Most watches have a flat back, so the 'on wrist' perceived thickness will likely be considerably less since the 'point' of the sensor will rest between the ulna and the radius (natural divot). The watch body (sans sensor) of the 42mm is 10.6mm deep which will probably be closer to what wearing it will be like.

Also this is the same or less than my Garmin 620 at 12.5mm. The Moto 360 is about 11%/12.4% thinner at 11mm and no HR sensor.

Is 12.3mm/12.46mm thin? No
Is it as thin as Apple would like? Probably not
Is it as thin as Jony Ive & Marc Newson would like: No
Is it as thin as the 2ed Gen? Probably not
Is it as thin as I would like? No

Despite all of the above the aWatch will fall in the mid thickness range and is NOT a thick or bulky watch.

What do you mean no HR sensor on the 360?

 

[Julien]

What do you mean no HR sensor on the 360?

I was mistaken.

 

[diamond.g]

I was mistaken.

No worries. To be honest no one has done side by side comparisons of the Apple Watch and it competitors (for size comparisons). The photos of the 360 that I posted do reinforce that it is a big watch, so maybe the Apple Watch will appear to be tiny, but then again if it is so small why would you want to do more than look at notifications on it.

 

[cleirac]

I don't think average watches are thinner.

If we are talking popular mechanical watches (by sales), these brands should cover more than 90% of total sales in watches:

Rolex
Omega
Tag Heuer
Longines
Swatch
Tissot
Panerai
IWC
Cartier
Hublot
Breitling
Audemars Piguet
Patek Philippe
Vacheron Constantin
Breguet
Chopard
A. Lange & Sohne
Casio
Seiko

Which among these sells many watch models that are significantly thinner than the Apple Watch?

Rolex - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch
Omega - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch
Swatch - probably most of their models are thinner than the Apple Watch
Tissot - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch
Cartier - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch
Hublot - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch
Breitling - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch
Audemars Piguet - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch (all Royal oak offshores)
Patek Philippe - almost all watches thinner than the Apple Watch
Vacheron Constantin - almost all watches thinner than the Apple Watch
Breguet - almost all watches thinner than the Apple Watch
Chopard - not sure
A. Lange & Sohne - almost all watches thinner than the Apple Watch
Casio - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch
Seiko - most watches are similar or thicker than Apple Watch

So as you can see, except for Swatch's plastic watches and some haute horlogerie brands like PP, VC, ALS, Apple watch is comparable.

Those who think Watch is thick / too thick, **** already.

 

[Piggie]

I don't understand the logic here.

If people here were in charge of Apple there would be no iMac, no iPad etc.

They would all be saying:

"What do you mean the Apple desktop computer is big, Look at the PC, Look at all PC's, Look how thick they are and people are buying them in their millions, they are THE most popular computer. Don't be stupid, Thin computers would be stupid, Apple does not been to make their computers any thinner, that's dumb"

And yet look where we are now

I love the junk logic people here use.

You just know in say 10 of 20 years time, IF we had thin smart watches, the same people would be saying, OMG remember how amazingly thick those really old early watches were. God, can you imagine anyone today wanting such a thing.

 

[AX338]

Not sure about this watch.

 

[Supermallet]

I don't understand the logic here.



If people here were in charge of Apple there would be no iMac, no iPad etc.



They would all be saying:



"What do you mean the Apple desktop computer is big, Look at the PC, Look at all PC's, Look how thick they are and people are buying them in their millions, they are THE most popular computer. Don't be stupid, Thin computers would be stupid, Apple does not been to make their computers any thinner, that's dumb"



And yet look where we are now



I love the junk logic people here use.



You just know in say 10 of 20 years time, IF we had thin smart watches, the same people would be saying, OMG remember how amazingly thick those really old early watches were. God, can you imagine anyone today wanting such a thing.

And if you were running Apple, the company would have gone bankrupt because you'd wait so long to release any products until they can meet your standards of thinness that you'd run out of money.

 

[Piggie]

And if you were running Apple, the company would have gone bankrupt because you'd wait so long to release any products until they can meet your standards of thinness that you'd run out of money.

No, not at all.

I would do similar to Apple, as I have said, their approach is quite logical.

I just don't like all the bull and carefully scripted junk they spew out when grinning to camera as if they know what's right for the world.

It's a safe non offensive shape, of a size that's a compromise between size and function. I don't like the Paris fashion junk, but I appreciate they have no idea and are just throwing stuff at the fan, and hoping behind doors, the watch sticks somewhere.

It could be fashion, it could be sport, it could just be the geeks.

We'll all know in a few years, but at the moment they are just spreading their wings in all directions and hoping it's real popular function becomes apparent in time.

This is probably the trickiest item.

We all wanted a small device to listen to music, people have wanted that for hundreds if not thousands of years.

We all wanted a way to communicate with each other over long distances for hundreds if not thousands of years.

Computers that could be carried like a book have been the WANT of people since the early SciFi films, and in StarTrek.

These have all been things that have been wanted before being made.

The Watch is going to be tricky as we already have them.
We have watches for fashion and time. And we are already carrying they devices to do our tasks with, the phones.

Is there a WANT for a smart watch, well, a dumb watch really as it needs the phone to work.

Give it a few years and we'll know

 

[SHNXX]

With laptops, tablets and phones, thin seems to be a good thing.
All things being equal, thin is desirable for those types of devices.


With watches, it's not clear that thinner is better unless the form factor changes (to a wristband for example).

We already know from non smart watch market that people do not prefer 5mm over 12mm, since most popular watches are around 10-15.

 

[Tanegashima]

Do you feel the rest of Apple's range of products are too thin?

No, only the iPhone 6/6+, because of the camera, but most people don't have a problem with that.

What may I ask will do you, if Apple makes future models of a watch thinner?
Will you select another brand that is thicker as you like them to be, or simply not buy one?

I don+t recall saying I sold my soul to Apple.

----------

With watches, it's not clear that thinner is better unless the form factor changes (to a wristband for example).

In fact, most "normal", quartz watches people buy, are artificially thicker.

People prefer a more substantial feeling watch, and not a featherweight.