This is a very interesting thread with some fascinating comments.
I've been a watch collector for many years, mainly with automatic, self-winding mechanical movements, plus the
wonderful Eco-Drive movements and those with incredibly cheap but marvellous little movements as indicated by the Casio F-91W (shown in post #78). And the even better, indeed exceptional (and still inexpensive) Casio GW-M5610.
I totally get it that many are attracted to Apple watches (AW) for the features; fitness trackers, health companions, contactless payments etc, and that's fine. I'll stop short at saying all are 'disposable', but I find it strange that some pay 500$ and often far more for a device that has a finite life. Arguably a $1k AW in 10years time will have little or no commercial value, whereby a traditional watch of that value
'if chosen with care' over 10years or more will generally retain it's initial value, and in many cases exceed it!
If it's an Eco Drive model one can very easily change the battery for approx $25 after a good number of years, and on other models, rechargeable/secondary batteries will last up to 40 years with manufacturers claiming that it's highly unusual for these batteries to fail.
I followed the AW hype and general info long before it was launched, and admit to being extremely excited and was convinced I would purchase one. Then came the 2015 launch and I read not one but several of the official reviews. I was gutted by what I read. I'd expected it to be a wear-and-forget-for-years device in battery terms. As a watch enthousiast having to re-charge even a smart-watch battery every 24 hrs or so I thought was a cruel joke. And that's one of the reasons I still don't own one.
With advanced technology since 2015, I'm surprised that most 2023 AW models are rated 'good' for around 25-30 hours, and require several recharges to last even a week.
Lastly a word about the all-important water-proofing. I believe I read that the series 8 and Ultra AW (relatively expensive at $500 upwards) and also some Garmin and Huawei models are proofed to 10bar which is the recommendation for swimming and snorkeling but not for surface diving or other active water sports.
Whereby I have a number of less expensive diver's watches at double the proof rating (20bar) suitable for whatever water sport one wishes to practice without any fear of water ingress; one of which I purchased new last year for a mere $50 which (unlike many G-Shocks) is not only an impressive and attractive watch for everyday use, but is rapidly becoming an icon amongst collectors. Which begs the question, why cannot Apple produce a smart watch with a similar 20bar rating across all their models and suitable for all sports, if Casio and some others easily achieve this with clever sealing arrangement without the need for super-strong adhesives? As for the Hermes collection, I'll say no more...... except, in preference there is one Seiko model which is a little cheaper and I would purchase in a heartbeat if I could find one.
The Apple watch has been an undeniable success, selling more watches in 2020 than the entire Swiss watch industry which includes Swatch, Tag Heuer and others. But even as a long-term fan and collector of Apple products as well as watches, the AW, although a fascinating device, still has no place reserved in my collection.
For those AW wearers who may eventually also be interested in a very good, inexpensive traditional watch, why not look in on the
Picture Gallery/Whos Got A Nice Watch forum.
