Do you think the next gen. will feature a redesign?

[MrGimper]

Personally, I don't want a watch that's a girlie bangle, so those pics do nothing for me.

I'm actually happy with the current design. If there was to be a change I would personally move the Crown to the middle of the side, and have a button above and below the crown. That way it looks the same on both the left and right wrist.

The information presented on the AW is best viewed on a rectangular device. Perhaps it's just my perception.... I view the AW as a wrist-worn computer that happens to tell the time, as opposed to a watch that happens to do other things too.

 

[44267547]

There's no functional need for the AW's design to radically change. The strap connection is the best in the business, the case size is neither too big nor too small, and the display shape works properly with smartwatch content. It would need to become demonstrably better if it changes -- not simply different for the sake of vanity.

As long as Ive is lead designer for the Apple Watch, I don't foresee a round variant. That's not to say I don't believe there shouldn't be a round variant, but based on Apple's design history and of course, many of us are not engineers, (We) don't fully understand everything that entails what it takes to make a round Watch, considering the band port, display of data, etc. I fully understand the request for the Watch to be round, but it doesn't make it practical according to Apple's history and Ive's quote.

I do, however, believe if a round variant should suffice, diversity is good and provides options. Apple remains the idea of being different, and they hold true to their beliefs, which having a round version is certainly a possibility, but doesn't mean Apple will allow that possibility to be a reality.

And most, if not all, really appreciate how simplistic the band switching is. I have mentioned many times on the amount of bands I own and can switch them in a seconds. Apple not only executed that perfectly with how secure they are, but opened up a huge door with plenty of OEM and third party bands to completely customize the experience. I see this design being around for quite some time.

 

[BarracksSi]

I'm actually happy with the current design. If there was to be a change I would personally move the Crown to the middle of the side, and have a button above and below the crown. That way it looks the same on both the left and right wrist.

The information presented on the AW is best viewed on a rectangular device. Perhaps it's just my perception.... I view the AW as a wrist-worn computer that happens to tell the time, as opposed to a watch that happens to do other things too.

In the same article, Jony Ive briefly described why he made the crown offset instead of centered:

One afternoon in the studio, Ive sketched the Apple Watch as seen from the side, with the crown asymmetrical on two axes: nearer the top of the watch than the bottom, and nearer the face than the back. (There is also a more flush secondary button.) As an afterthought, he quickly drew the front of an iPod: a rectangle within a rectangle, and a circle within a circle. He pointed at the watch drawing. “It’s not for us to say if things are iconic,” he said, and then described it as a “very, very iconic view.” Ive explained that, had he centered the Digital Crown, the watch would be a quite different product. “It’s just literal. And you could say, ‘Why is that an issue?’ Well, if it’s literally referencing what’s happened in the past, the information about what it does is then wrong.” The crown rotates, which is reassuring, but it doesn’t wind the watch or adjust hands. The goal, Ive said, was to create “the strangely familiar.”

"Referencing what's happened in the past" is what a centered crown would do, I think. One a regular watch, you see the crown (even if it's offset to 4:00 or on the opposite side) and know that it'll turn and adjust the time. Centered on the AW, it would be a little more familiar -- but also wouldn't really declare itself to be capable of other functions, either. It would not be a smartwatch crown, if you catch my meaning.

But, instead, it's in a new place. It's round with a knurled edge, so it's obviously meant to be turned -- but because of where it is, it makes a new user think, Hmm, can this knob do more than just change the time?

I'm not sure if I'm making much sense, and I feel like I'm "mansplaining" a bit, too. But I think it's how they made it, uh.... "subtly obvious" that the AW straddles the line between wristwatches and computers.

(and two side buttons versus the one we have now -- I think I prefer the simplicity of the single button, but this tangent can get into the same old discussion as one-button versus multi-button mice)

 

[LoveToMacRumors]

No because they are focused for Iphone 8. Highly unlikely at 99% that they will release 2 major redesign at the same time. I believe the major redesign for AW will be in Fall 2018

 

[1050792]

I'm sure they will make it thinner (no joke).

 

[44267547]

No because they are focused for Iphone 8. Highly unlikely at 99% that they will release 2 major redesign at the same time. I believe the major redesign for AW will be in Fall 2018

The iPhone 8 focus has nothing to do with the redesign of an Apple Watch. Apple can release multiple products that have been redesigned and introduced during a Keynote. If another iteration of the Apple Watch is released in September 2017, it will likely be minor enhancements in Software/hardware.

Otherwise, if we don't see another Apple Watch in September 2017, and If the 18 month cycle is consistent and accurate, March 2018 would be the next time line release for a major overhaul.

 

[LoveToMacRumors]

The iPhone 8 focus has nothing to do with the redesign of an Apple Watch. Apple can release multiple products that have been redesigned and introduced during a Keynote. If another iteration of the Apple Watch is released in September 2017, it will likely be minor enhancements in Software/hardware.

Otherwise, if we don't see another Apple Watch in September 2017, and If the 18 month cycle is consistent and accurate, March 2018 would be the next time line release for a major overhaul.

If you want to maximize profit, you wouldn't release 2 very popular at the same time.

 

[BarracksSi]

Thinking about having two side buttons --

Since they'll likely be unlabeled (unlike the buttons on a Casio G-Shock, for example), how would the user know what their functions are?

When I tried out another smartwatch with two side buttons flanking a crown, I expected one button to be "up" and the other to be "down", whatever that could mean. I didn't expect them to be like a traditional chronograph with "start/stop" on the top and "reset" on the bottom, though. But when I actually used them, it wasn't clear what was happening onscreen. I'm not sure if one was "enter" and the other was "back", or if they changed depending on the app, or what.

I should go back to the store and try it again. I might have a chance later today, too.

But I don't like it when the function of a hardware button changes. I'll acknowledge that the AW's side button has three main operations, but a single click always produces the same result (same with double-click and long-press). The same physical action should produce the same functional result because the physical action can't change.

Adding a second side button to the AW, IMO, suddenly increases the conceptual complexity of its interface. What does the first one do, what does the second one do, and are they always going to be the same? If they're going to change, shouldn't we see a label onscreen for each button? But, onscreen labels would just add clutter and take away space for content on the size-restricted screen (which won't get appreciably bigger because our wrists aren't getting any bigger either).

"No sir, I don't like it." - Mr. Horse

 

[Newtons Apple]

I can not see Apple changing the design big time. Maybe small change but overall it will be the same as far as looks.

 

[the future]

I'm sure they will make it thinner (no joke).

Exactly. There will be many, many iterations/refinements of this current design until it contains all the tech it is meant to contain (LTE, more sensors etc.) and is thin enough to be as elegant as it can be. Before this ideal version of the current design is reached, there certainly won't be a fundamental re-design.

 

[44267547]

If you want to maximize profit, you wouldn't release 2 very popular at the same time.

That's actually not accurate at all. Let me explain why.

Maximizing profits and releasing a new product have no direct correlation with each other. Maximizing profits has everything to do with profit margins where the product is priced at. For example, an OEM Apple Watch Sport Band is priced at $50.00 charged to the consumer, where it costs Apple approximately XYZ to make and ship the band, thus leaving a net profit of XYZ. It's important to remember that Profit margins are long term, where products releases don't determine net value until quarterly reports.

When Apple announces products to the consumer during Keynotes, it's quite often where the iPhone launches with the iPad or iPhone with Apple Watch. The point is Apple launches products based on a 12-18 month cycle, refreshing the product line. What you don't want is consumer exhaustion where the same product launches with in a short time of each other being how expensive Apple products are.