Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by r0k, Jul 27, 2015.
I enjoy my Apple watch but could never give up mechanicals.
Very nice indeed!
--- Post Merged, May 5, 2017 ---
For my fitness I prefer this
--- Post Merged, May 5, 2017 ---
Always thought most traditional watches, including Rolex and most others shown here, are pretty tacky. The more complicated the watch face, the more gaudy it becomes. Same with the bands, the more intricate, the worse it looks, in my opinion. The Apple Watch's simple design and its option for streamlined watch faces are what makes it most appealing to me.
Sometimes these complications with mechanical Watches are unuseful to me and I agree they add more clutter than what I actually use. I do think some of the mechanical Watch complications adds a more sophisticated appeal, but I prefer a much cleaner watch face.
I'm the same way. I can appreciate why people enjoy them, but they just aren't for me. It's probably sad that I would rather have that Fenix pictured above than the Rolex, but it's true
You don't buy mechanical watches for its accuracy (Quartz and Apple Watch are much more accurate) nor do you buy it for its low maintenance cost (servicing every 5 years can be as much as $800+) nor for its shock resistance (avoid golfing and gun-range!).
As a former (and still a bit mechanical lover), the idea behind having a unique mechanical movement on the wrist is that you have a mechanical "beating heart" on your wrist. It ticks all day long and is made of over 200-300 tiny little steel and exotic metallic parts (depending on complication) put together using just the right amount of finesse and precision. The ticking sound is very soothing to me.
But as many above have found, i find the Apple Watch to be an excellent daily companion and has relegated my Swiss to the closet collecting dust. I love the fitness aspect of the Watch, whether it be reminding me to stand or pushing me everyday to close those damn circles! I love how i can control my Airpods with it. I love that i can find my iPhone with it...and as i get older, this is a MUST have!
--- Post Merged, May 7, 2017 ---
To be honest, i would bet that an AW is more durable in a work environment than any Rolex. Mechanicals are NOT durable in a rough environment, esp one involving fast wrist movement or vibration. They were "tools" when there was no Quartz. Mechanicals are far from being tools these days.
Oil, acids? Depending which AW models you have, but stainless steel AW have sapphire (same as Rolex) and 316L SS. The 316L SS is half-a-grade below your Rolex 904L SS, but that is mainly from a luster point of view. 904L in terms of durability is not all that superior to 316L under 99.99% of circumstances. (The luster quality of 904L does make it worth it though! )
Scratching is the same as Rolex if you have a SS AW. One can argue that it is CHEAPER to polish an AW than it is a Rolex to remove those scratches on the body.
And with Rolex and other mechanicals, your accuracy is at best -4 / +6 seconds per day. (Newer Rolex and Omega movements are more accurate though.). I have to re-adjust my Rolex every month because it gets pretty off. And this accuracy gets worst as the watch ages until you send it into for service.
And of course, if you break something on either watch, it is FAR cheaper to repair/replace AW than it is a Rolex.
While AW does need charging, remember that you can POWER RESERVE option can extend your battery life by several days. And a Rolex needs to be worn every 40-48 hours (unless you have the newer ones with the new movement) for it to be remain ticking...and sometimes sedentary lifestyle is not enough to keep it ticking.
--- Post Merged, May 7, 2017 ---
While I appreciate your anecdotal experience backing up your perception of the AW success, I work in a company of over 5,000 people, and my perception is very different. Of all the wrist worn devices, maybe the AW makes up 2-3% -- certainly not 15%. And we're talking a business defined by its communications, and affluent atmosphere of early adopters. I also see as many Android-based watches as I do AW, still a small share, and some of them are much nicer looking then the AW. In fact the AW by virtue of it expanding its customer base is starting to have the effect I first observed when it first came out -- a generic sameness that cheapens its look. Apple offered their employees a discount when the watch fist came out and at one of my Apple stores, the employees all took advantage of it -- walking in there was a kind of eerie generic quality as everywhere I looked there was an identical featureless AW on a wrist (most opted for the cheapest model with the black or white rubber band). There's something dull about that blank square face, combined with the almost comic bulbous, rounded shape. There's no mistaking an AW, despite the band, and the more I see, the more I dislike it. It really is time for a cosmetic change.
Everyone has to make their own choices. There is no right or wrong when it comes to preference. It is the choice of the watch owner.
What one prefers should not upset the other.
Yep, I have one too....solid and reliable. Good choice! I'd rather see someone get an entry level automatic in the Seiko 5 line than a cheep Chinese knock off or an Invicta bling watch.
--- Post Merged, May 12, 2017 ---
The bottomline here....I'm actually just VERY HAPPY TO SEE PEOPLE WEARING WATCHES....any watches. This is a good thing! Rolex, Timex, Apple Watch, Android, cheep Chinese knock off of something worse wearing, etc. The fact that the ARE wearing a watch is good.
Why? Apple Watch may help those who have never worn a watch discover them and maybe they'll add others to their wear rotation. For some, it will stop at AW and that's fine too. For others, a Timex or Invicta can serve the same purpose. Get's a watch on the wrist at a reasonable cost...then they can move to something nicer down the or an AW too. No matter how I look at it, I'm just happy not to see bare wrists anymore.
--- Post Merged, May 12, 2017 ---
I'm inclined to agree with you hear. Part of it is the general appearance of the AW. No doubt, it it THE BEST smartwatch our there. The shape just doesn't do it for me at all. ALL of my other watches are round, I've always avoided any other shape, they just bother me. I made an exception for my AW and it was okay. No matter if it is black, stainless, ceramic, etc., the majority of the watch is dead black space when on the wrist if not in use. For me, it drives me nuts. I know it's to save the battery and it NEEDS to be that way, I get it.
I think it is time for Apple to expand the design options a bit. Maybe keep version 3 the same with all of the new upgrades coming, that makes sense. It's popular, don't change it too much. I'd like to see them add a second design, round, a bit thinner, with a combination of both brushed and polished stainless on the same case.
The other part of the AW I struggle with is the value proposition. Yes, it's a computer on your wrist. But I have one in my pocket and a MBP too. A nice stainless version which I'd like (round) would probably start around $600-700 and go up from there. Let's call this theoretical watch $750. It's going to last me about 2-3 years of good use before it is outdated, slow and needs to be replaced. If I were to have, for example, two AW's on 5 years, that's about $1500 and at the end of year 5 or maybe 6-7.....I need to replace it again.
Here is where I struggle with it. I keep a MBP for about 4-5 years....a phone for about 3....now I have to do the same with my watch? As I said in my first post on this thread, my favorite automatic mechanical watch is now about 14+ years old and it will run another 50+ years easily with some cleaning and oil when it shows signs of needing it. For this one, it's about every 7 years. I could take that $1500 spent on 2 AW's that last me maybe 5-7 years and get a new mid-level Swiss/German (ex. Sinn, Oris, Doxa, Hamilton or stretch just a tiny bit more for a Tudor) or Japanese (think mid to higher end Seiko) and get a lifetime out of it and pass it on when I'm gone.
The guy that posted his Seiko 5 SNZG15. It's an entry level Seiko that runs between $110-150. It's a robust movement, built tough and will last probably at least 50 years (likely a lot more) with a clean/lube about once every 10-15 years....maybe less frequently. I guess I'm still looking at the value proposition for the AW. I can make money with my MBP and do. My iPhone is a necessity and it helps me make money. An iPad can help me make money. An AW, it doesn't. It's ancillary right now and is a outgoing expense.
--- Post Merged, May 12, 2017 ---
So, ever 5-7 years when you service your automatic, how much is it at an official/reputable/OEM repair shop? Many Swiss official repair shop charges $300-800+. Is that not the price of an average Apple Watch? So, every 5 years you get a brand new Apple Watch. Your Swiss needs the same amount to get "restored". Rolex charges at least $800 per service. Omega is around $600 i think...i may be outdated.
Although Swiss has the heritage and resale value, but look at what the Apple Watch can do to ENHANCE your DAILY life...all at pretty much the same "maintenance" costs as a Swiss.
Interesting aspect that leaves out the fact that the value of AW after 5-7 years is zero, whilst Rolex and Omega will represent a considerable monetary worth as well as prestige even after decades.
Fair enough. How much did Rolex cost when you first buy it? Omega?
I have no doubt that your grand kids will appreciate a Rolex that is 30 years old! Or will they? Look at the current generation of kids and how they do NOT like to wear watches! But in that 30 years to keep your Rolex running like a gem, how much investment did you put into it? Is it worth it?
So, lets say a Rolex costs $8000 to buy. 30 years. Service every 5 years. Cost of each service $800 or more...the latter services costs over $1000 due to replacement of vital components! After 30 years, your Rolex at a MINIMUM has cost you: $8000 + $4800 = $12,800 (or more).
Apple Watch average price...lets say $500. 30 years. Replace it every 5 years. Total cost = $3000.
If you're lucky, then your Rolex has gone up in value in those 30 years...but it has to be a special limited production Rolex (like Daytona)...most Rolex does in fact LOSE VALUE with time!
You have a point. The current generation treats classical watches differently.
You have forgotten about the aspect of "prestige" that these type of watches represent.
A vintage Rolex or Omega has a high value especially for collectors who don't seem to disappear with time from the surface of earth.
Despite the above mentioned I do beleive that the future is about smartwatches, but certainly not those that have to be charged on daily basis.
I agree about prestige...but that is up to the individual. I have Rolex Turn-o-graph that has been discontinued...will it go up in value 30 yrs from now? I would not hold my breath! My wife has Rolex Yachtmaster with Platinum...will that be a collectible? Not sure, but i did try the resale market once and the offer was way less than its purchase cost!
Both of those Rolex(es) are sitting in closet safe collecting dust. Prestige is apparently not high up on my priority list (nor my wife)! We bought our Rolex some 3-8 yrs ago. I am not sure if my kids will even care for them when they are old enough...or will they just pawn it for the latest video game?!!! LOL
LMAO. Sure they will.
I am a classical watch collector, so I have a clue about the prices of prestigious vintage watches.
Just an example. I bought a TAG HEUER Pilot Specialist black dial (and it is not a Rolex by far) in 1994 for 1299 CHF. Now, it is considered to be rare and it keeps its original price.
Let's see what will be the price of your Rolexes 20-25 years from now, if not traded for the latest videogame.
The fact of the matter is that you can make money out of your Rolexes even decades from now, whilst AW will end its short career in a trash.
I just had it serviced for $175, most of mine are all standard (or slightly modified) ETA 2824-2 or 2804-2 (manual wind). Personally, I don't see the "value" in a Rolex level or higher either, personally. I like the mid-level sweet spot where a good watchmaker can work on and repair as needed. They are solid, reliable, work horse movements, etc. Would I keep a Rolex given as a gift? Yes LOL. Will I buy one anytime in the foreseeable future? Nope.
I tend to like the mid-level in pretty much anything, the "sweet spot". I like my MacBook Pro 13", a 2-3 year old iPhone, still have my old 2012 Mac mini i7 running, I drive a mid-level (non-luxury) Japanese car with leather and the options, I do own some Japanese mid-level Seiko's too, we own a home above the median for the community but it's no where near what people would think we should live in given income (it's more modest). The point? I'm not about the "show", but about the function, what it brings to me, how I feel using/driving/living/wearing it, etc.
Don't get me wrong, I wore the AW pretty much daily for 18+ months and still have and like it...it's just a rare use case now as I can't see getting a new one anytime soon given the value it brings to ME.
I would say a Rolex needs servicing every 10 to 15 years unless you are diving with it. The mineral oil doesn't dry up too quickly. Manufacturers always encourage a service more often than needed and there really is no comparison to the AW.
Isn't this whole discussion, comparing a $600 smart watch to a $15,000 or more Rolex, in terms of future value, a bit like comparing a BMW 1-Series M Coupe to a Chevy Volt and criticizing the Volt for not having any future value. Of course it doesn't. The later was never that expensive to begin with and certainly won't be an investment purchase.
This topic just strikes me as a really odd comparison
You like the old thick workhorse movement...2824 is a fine movement. For me, i prefer the in-house movements because it is unique to that brand and not shared throughout the industry. In addition, i like things that are unique...i was one of the first in USA to own an Omega 2500B movement (Deville Coaxial)...that ran into some issues. I wanted the Rolex because i have never owned the Rolex 3135 before and that movement is legendary. I had bad luck with Omega 8500 movement in the HourVision...Omega has not been kind to me.
Not sure about others, but BOTH of my Rolex movements (3131 and 2235) develop issues around 4 years...and these is a legendary movement!
Rolex now recommends a 10 year service interval.
Those are the sort of Rolex watches that can fetch a lot of money in years to come because they originally didn't sell that well. The Daytona wasn't very popular to start with and early models could be picked up for less than a grand 30 years ago. Today these same watches go for well over £100K.
I sure wish that my Rolexes would last 10 yrs b/w services...that's a lot of money saved! But knowing that Rolex 3135 movement have inherent weaknesses, i think that this probably only applies to the newer designed movements with the stronger post with wheel bearing and silicone components to avoid magnetism.
Rolex 3135 review: http://www.chronometrie.com/rolex3135/rolex3135.html
Read the last paragraph and you will see why the older Rolex movements, including the venerable 3135, will have a problem with 10 yrs servicing.
My wife's Rolex YM "Platy" has THE most consistently accurate movement, Rolex 2235...and that one lasted about 4 yrs i think before needing servicing...it ran faster and faster and then date wheel broke.
I sure hope that you're right with my TOG gaining value in future....
I know many that go 20 years or more without service. The most important thing is to at least have the seals checked if you use it wound water at all. If it starts gaining or loosing time then id also get it checked out. The Apple watch is a disposable watch and really cant be compared to a high end Swiss.
I think that's fairly obvious, but the reasons are also of that to be considered:
Technology is disposable related and will be dated like anything with computers, iPhones, wireless earbuds, etc. The reason technology is disposable and dated because the tech device is either not supported through repair or software any further from the manufacturer, batteries which have only an expectancy of three/four years, and most notably, technology is on an annual replacement basis with the newest iteration to debut to conform to the latest tech available.
Swiss made or high end mechanical Watches are not nearly Updated as much, don't require software updates or Charging and usually are well-crafted time pieces that will last for generations or heirlooms to be passed down.
It depends on your tolerance for what it should do. My father had an Omega Deville from 1960's. Running? Yes. Does he have to wind everyday? Yes, because of worn out barrel and lack of oil. Did it keep time? Depending on whether if it is accurate within several MINUTES a day is OK or not. My father had a job that was not particularly strict on being punctual...so for him it was OK to wind it everyday and adjust the minute hand daily.
My Rolex YM Platy i noted above was still running at time of service (4 yrs after purchase)...but it was like 20+ seconds FAST every 24 hours...no matter which sides it was placed on at night. The date mechanism was sticky. Was it still working? Sure. But for me, it was not working as advertised.
On a high end watch, you want to get it serviced by time, even if it is keeping time. The reason is, you want to service it BEFORE there is damage. The more damage, the harder/longer it is to repair.