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.
I thought this was supposed to be a WATCH?!
- Thread starter mavis
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, that's weird. How are you supposed to test this if you can only see the time to the nearest minute?
I fail to see what all the fuss is about.
Every 1980's 5 bucks digital watch had seconds on the display and maybe even a calculator below.
If people want to have the addition of seconds on their digital watch face on the Apple Watch then so be it.
EDIT: And people asking others what they need seconds in the digital watch face for: really, you just asked this? If they want it they just can have it, it's not friggin' rocket physics.
Every 1980's 5 bucks digital watch had seconds on the display and maybe even a calculator below.
If people want to have the addition of seconds on their digital watch face on the Apple Watch then so be it.
EDIT: And people asking others what they need seconds in the digital watch face for: really, you just asked this? If they want it they just can have it, it's not friggin' rocket physics.
I'm glad I'm not the only person who wants/needs seconds to be displayed on the digital faces. Looking at some of these replies, you'd think I was!
I prefer the analog faces and a sweeping second hand provides comforting feedback that time is indeed in motion. Digital watch faces also have their place and I would like to see the seconds there as well. In fact, I'd like to see hundredths of a second — I just like seeing the numbers flip by.
I wouldn't go as far as to say it's not a watch if can't display digital seconds. However, it mystifies me that it isn't an option.
Apple must have reasons for leaving seconds off. I get the feeling they just thought it looked less cluttered with just hours and minutes — it wouldn't do to have the flashing seconds count drawing attention away from the beautiful jellyfish. But it seems like it would be a perfect option for the modular face.
Exactly. I think that we should have the option to make current time the center module - shouldn't that typically be the largest, easiest-to-read item on a digital watch face?
Why didn't Apple allow 3rd party watch faces from the start. Changing the watch is one of the best features of a smart watch. Even just including a personal photo to be the background would be nice.
I love the people bending over backwards to explain why we don't need to see seconds on the watch. But somehow it's vital to have the phases of the moon always available as a complication?
I'm willing to accept that this is just version 1.0 and that it will evolve. It's just baffling that they didn't think it was necessary to include on any of the faces.
I'm willing to accept that this is just version 1.0 and that it will evolve. It's just baffling that they didn't think it was necessary to include on any of the faces.
You mean on the modular face? It is the largest and easiest-to-read item.
And no, the most important item should not be in the dead centre of the frame, any photographer or graphic designer can tell you that.
Jeebus, you're really clutching at straws now, aren't you? The centre module has the largest green box around it but it is a collection of smaller elements, using smaller text and/or a dimmed appearance. The digital clock display is by far the most prominent feature on the face.
Awesome. It would be cool if we had the option of making the center module display the time, including seconds.
I guess every watch I've owned for the last 25 years were not watches. Who knew? Apparently it's not a watch without displaying seconds!
This is certainly a shocking development.
This is certainly a shocking development.
Yeah, you're right. Why on earth should the most advanced watch in the history of the world, with the capacity to display "millions" of different watch faces, need to display the seconds!
Yeah, you're right. Why on earth should the most advanced watch in the history of the world, with the capacity to display "millions" of different watch faces, need to display the seconds!
Well, don't forget that Apple makes no mistakes and everything they do is perfect!
Seriously though, I can't wait to see the new faces they come up with! Hopefully they'll address this problem soon.
Say that to the giant glowing apple logo on the back of my macbook air and my macbook pro
All of these deficiencies will be addressed in time. I remember how many complaints there were when the early iPhones lacked MMS or cut and paste. We're just experiencing early-adopter pain.
Actually, I think you've hit the nail on the head, by bringing up MMS:
In any major project, a lot of influence comes from the top. For final decisions on functionality and design, the age of the bosses in charge is a big factor.
Steve Jobs was of an age where statistically speaking, men rarely used MMS back then. I think that's why MMS was not high on his priority list for the original iPhone. I think it would've been, if a younger person had final say.
Likewise, Cook and Ive are old enough to be used to analog watches, and thus those faces would get a little more attention from them. Again, a younger person might easily have gone the other way. For instance, I've found that many younger people (as below 30) cannot read analog faces at all. Only digital.
That's my theory, anyway, from long experience.
I wish there were, maybe, fish or something like stars twinkling in from of a nebula (like an OS X,iOS desktop default) offered as an alternative on the Motion clock face. Butterflies and flowers are sort of feminine (not afraid of my feminine side but...damn I don't want a flower or butterfly on my wrist you'd find in a crystal shop), and jellyfish just kind of creep me out.
And, yeah, the complication rules are sort of arbitrary.
I agree. I'm in the younger age range and it takes me a second to tell the time on a two-handed clock. I mean, I can tell time, but it's not instantly recognizable to me, and without the numbers it takes me forever.
I can read, write, and speak three languages, and I can read music and play the violin, so I'm not worried about my time-telling ability.
I'm not *that* young, but I prefer clock faces to have numbers. I often have trouble telling if the hand is pointing to 1 or 2, 4 or 5, 7 or 8, or 10 or 11. Having the numbers on the clock helps me differentiate these in-between positions.
It's apparently no longer a stigma to not be able to read an analog clock.
It's far more common than you'd think.
I also think it's why a lot of people are okay with the rectangular shape of the Apple Watch, because they're only going to use a digital face anyway.
Just got my watch today and disappointed to find no option for digital seconds display. As a health care professional I use the seconds frequently at work. I know I can use the second hand on a clock face but I much prefer a digital face. I think this is a huge oversight and hope they add the option in the near future.
I can certainly read an analog clock face, but it does take a second for it to register in some cases (depending on where the hands are). Digital faces are more glanceable for me. But I've been experimenting with using an analog face to see if I can get better at using it, and I've also experimented using the 24-hour time setting for the digital faces, since many of my Japanese clients use that.