But you said this below: Which we already know the first Gen has the serial number attached on the outer portion, its not a Series 1 in the picture, its a _First_ Gen Apple Watch pictured. I think you’re confused slightly.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Has anyone had issues with Apple’s tradein program?
- Thread starter ApplePersonFreak
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But you said this below: Which we already know the first Gen has the serial number attached on the outer portion, its not a Series 1 in the picture, its a _First_ Gen Apple Watch pictured. I think you’re confused slightly.
There is one thing I am confused about, but we won't get into that.
In your original, unedited post (which can be seen quoted here in post #23) you posted an image of the back of an Apple Watch in which you said, "Example of Series 1." I pointed out that the image was in fact a first generation and not a Series 1. You then removed the image and deleted all references to the Series 1 in that post. You later added the image again as a new attachment and now you are trying to pass it off as if I am confused.
False on two accounts. The image was actually never removed, the server would not allow me to process the original photo that I uploaded indicating it was too large as a JPEG (Which is a known effect on Macrumors), therefore I had to crop it in order to post as a thumbnail only. It was _never_ removed at all, if you’re confused/unsure about something, simply just ask versus assume.
(Side Note: The reason I indicated I think you’re slightly confused, is I think we are talking about the same thing, but in two different contexts, but you see it as the Series one misconstrued as the first generation Apple Watch, which I referred to as the “first GEN watch”, therefore you only thought I was referring to the Series one to begin with, when I was not with the Serial number inscribed in two different places for both models.)
Hence:
Last edited:
Let's just agree to disagree on why the image was there, then wasn't, then was again.
The reason I thought you were referring to the Series 1 is because you specifically mentioned the Series 1 twice in a single post, as can be seen in your post that I quoted. The really puzzling part is why you mentioned "the first Gen and Series one have the serial numbers on the back" in the same sentence if you really only meant the first generation. It was after I corrected you in my reply that your post was edited to remove all such instances of a Series 1.
So, rather than assume, I will simply ask: Did you realize you were not initially correct and go back and edit your original response?
{Topic note:I think we’re convoluting this thread enough, so this will be my last response in regard to an exhausted topic that’s been reiterated and discussed ad nauseam in multiple ways, which it all means the exact same thing, it’s just *you’re* choosing to interpret this your own way.}
That said, There is nothing to Disagree on. The image was never deleted. It was always their. If you saw the image originally, then refreshed your browser, then it likely reappeared Being it was to large to support. That’s likely what I’m thinking happened.
Right, but in the same respect, you also were mentioning how the Series one had the serial number inscribed in a totally different place from where I was indicating the first GEN, also known as Series “0” or some construe it as Series one, which the serial number indicated on the back of the Apple First Gen Watch, which Apple changed later in the future when they relocated the serial number two completely different locations in the band port for the future Apple Watch models.
No, you did not.
What you said was:
You indicated Series one multiple times, when I was referring to the first generation Apple Watch, and you inferred that I was referring to the Series 1 model, when it was actually the first GEN model watch. Then I indicated that was not true, because the First generation supports the serial number in a completely different location from the other three models. I’m not saying what you said was entirely inaccurate, what I am saying is that you were talking about something Soley different from my third post, two things that are not mutually exclusive.
I admit my wording was not conveyed appropriately as it should have been, but I think that you realize I meant the same thing as you were indicating, but we are talking about two different watch names, but in the same respect I indicated above with the various titles. As mentioned, you decided to interpret differently for the sake of providing a counter argument why you were right versus who is wrong. Its just circular talk at this point.
Nothing was actually never edited any differently then after you initially responded in the process of when I posted my original post, from the time when you actually went back and reiterated that I deleted my image, which in fact that never happened either. So I think it’s just you trying to create strawman arguments out of nothing, but in a sense were talking about a lot of the same things, but somehow you are processing that we are talking about two different things, when it _is the_ exact_ same_thing.