I'd be disappointed if they made Apple Watch slimmer

[ipaine]

Honestly, having worn this beauty (Stainless Steel) since launch, it really does not need to slim down. I love the weight and think it already is slim enough.

What do the rest of you think? I agree with phones, tablets, laptops etc getting slimmer. Can we honestly say the same philosophy should apply to watches, too? I'd rather wear a more substantial watch than something dainty and quaint.

 

[AR15MBP]

Honestly, having worn this beauty (Stainless Steel) since launch, it really does not need to slim down. I love the weight and think it already is slim enough.

What do the rest of you think? I agree with phones, tablets, laptops etc getting slimmer. Can we honestly say the same philosophy should apply to watches, too? I'd rather wear a more substantial watch than something dainty and quaint.

I would agree with everything you've said. Thinner = better doesn't apply to watches, and as this is a "fashion gadget" I would think that would be taken into account. Also, with limited battery space I doubt they would want to reduce any more power capacity.

 

[BeyondtheTech]

I'd be shocked if the next iPhone is going to be any slimmer than the current models. They already know we need battery power the hungrier and busier the processors continue to be (health and monitoring, more notifications, plus now constantly communicating with the WATCH), and of course we know this generation of iPhone is thin enough to be able to bend.

As for the 18-hour battery life, it's decent for a first-gen product, but the more it becomes mainstream and more useful, the more battery power or better power management we'll need, so we definitely don't need a slimmer watch that sacrifices the already tiny battery capacity the current WATCH has.

 

[hlfway2anywhere]

Honestly, having worn this beauty (Stainless Steel) since launch, it really does not need to slim down. I love the weight and think it already is slim enough.

What do the rest of you think? I agree with phones, tablets, laptops etc getting slimmer. Can we honestly say the same philosophy should apply to watches, too? I'd rather wear a more substantial watch than something dainty and quaint.

I think the apple watch would look really awkward if they made it much slimmer. i didn't feel that way until i owned it.

 

[michael1019]

well, this is a watch.

In the watch world there are many kinds of watches for many different settings, personalities, and purposes, not to mention the wearers personal sense of style. Some may enjoy thick, purposeful tool watches like certain Panerai, or dive watches from Omega, or a Rolex Submariner. Those watches tend to be thick and chunky, but certainly beautiful in a sort of rugged way. In short, they are watches that intend to be worn AND used. Remember, James Bond wears a Rolex Submariner in the books and now a beautiful Omega Seamaster in the movies. You can dress it down and hit the beach or dress it up and look dashing in a tux.

Then there are other sorts of watches, and some are exceedingly thin. There is a certain panache and elegance inherent in a very, very thin mechanical watch. Its certainly no different than the iPhone in that both require impressive engineering to deliver something that works, and works reliably, in a case that's as small as physically possible.

Having said all that, I see room for variations in the apple watch lineup, exactly as many watchmakers approach their business. Why have just one model? I see Apple producing a couple variations at least. Perhaps an exceedingly thin sort of 'formal' watch - that would be VERY Apple.

----------

then again, you're most likely not a watch person.

I think the apple watch would look really awkward if they made it much slimmer. i didn't feel that way until i owned it.

 

[michael1019]

Piaget is famed for making EXCEPTIONALLY thin mechanical watches. In some cases this is quite an achievement. And most certainly not 'awkward', but elegant.

 

[ipaine]

well, this is a watch.

In the watch world there are many kinds of watches for many different settings, personalities, and purposes, not to mention the wearers personal sense of style. Some may enjoy thick, purposeful tool watches like certain Panerai, or dive watches from Omega, or a Rolex Submariner. Those watches tend to be thick and chunky, but certainly beautiful in a sort of rugged way. In short, they are watches that intend to be worn AND used. Remember, James Bond wears a Rolex Submariner in the books and now a beautiful Omega Seamaster in the movies. You can dress it down and hit the beach or dress it up and look dashing in a tux.

Then there are other sorts of watches, and some are exceedingly thin. There is a certain panache and elegance inherent in a very, very thin mechanical watch. Its certainly no different than the iPhone in that both require impressive engineering to deliver something that works, and works reliably, in a case that's as small as physically possible.

Having said all that, I see room for variations in the apple watch lineup, exactly as many watchmakers approach their business. Why have just one model? I see Apple producing a couple variations at least. Perhaps an exceedingly thin sort of 'formal' watch - that would be VERY Apple.

----------

then again, you're most likely not a watch person.

Your last line... I have a 70-year-old Omega Seamaster and would certainly consider myself a watch person. But I think I can distill your post into a simple conclusion: it's all about personal taste.

 

[michael1019]

You're right - it is about personal style. Definitely.

But - there's also a lot of room for different case designs and thicknesses. Dive watches don't necessarily have to be 18mm thick. Some do, some don't - depends on the depth rating and all of that. But it is much more about style than it is about engineering. How many actually dive deeper than 30m? Very few. Its just like a 200mph car. Just because YOU won't be driving that fast doesn't mean it isn't cool (or exclusive, or empowering, or whatever) to know that you own something CAPABLE of that - even if you aren't. Again, this is about personal philosophy or style or whatever you want to call it.

I think there's room for a thicker, perhaps more active, fitness related case AND a more formal, business-ey, elegant thin case design.

Your last line... I have a 70-year-old Omega Seamaster and would certainly consider myself a watch person. But I think I can distill your post into a simple conclusion: it's all about personal taste.

 

[slicecom]

You're crazy. One of my favourite watches are the extremely thin Movado watches.

I'm not a fan of making phones so thin that it hurts battery life, but for watches, I'll be happy when Apple starts slimming it down.

 

[Mac 128]

I would agree with everything you've said. Thinner = better doesn't apply to watches, and as this is a "fashion gadget" I would think that would be taken into account. Also, with limited battery space I doubt they would want to reduce any more power capacity.

Well count me in the category that thinks Apple sees this primarily as a "fashion gadget". Still too early to tell, but based on their pandering to the fashion illuminati, I have to think they will still care how the fashion world perceives their entry into it a year from now.

That means to me, that they will be something like the Movado of watches -- an original iconic design that put them on the map and perseveres year after year, but also expanding their design pallet to include a number of different styles addressing various aspects of the fashion watch business, and that includes round watches, large chunky watches, thin elegant watches, et al.

Nobody likes to show up to a party wearing the exact same thing as someone else. Offering a variety of bands will only go so far. Once Apple reaches a certain percentage of iPhone users, the desire to wear something other than the same black square as everybody else is going to push people to look at other alternatives. And this will probably happen a lot sooner because of the fashion industries constant quest for change. I've been looking at pictures of the Watch since last September, and it's already starting to look old. It's still the best designed and best looking smart watch out there, but that may not be enough to protect it from fickle fashion trends, or critical style reviews, to say nothing of the other smart watch makers and entry by the Swiss watchmakers who will all step up their game for the next release.

 

[hlfway2anywhere]

Piaget is famed for making EXCEPTIONALLY thin mechanical watches. In some cases this is quite an achievement. And most certainly not 'awkward', but elegant.

yeah i'm not all about that 'wafer on my wrist' look. definitely a matter of preference.

 

[michael1019]

Neither am I - I prefer thick dive watches. But who cares? That's just my individual preference. Many others prefer delicate watches. That's the way it goes.

I don't think we're going to see some evolution of one particular watch model just get slimmer and slimmer and slimmer. I think its far more likely that we'll have a few different case designs.

Just like other watchmakers.

yeah i'm not all about that 'wafer on my wrist' look. definitely a matter of preference.

 

[kmj2318]

I agree. If it was much thinner I don't think I'd like it as much, I'm not a fan of thin watches. I think this is a positive for the watch long term. There's less need to keep reducing the thickness and weight because any reductions are negligible as it is strapped to you.

There's a lot of people who say 'keep it the same thickness and have better battery' regarding the iPhone. I think that could actually happen for the watch.

If I had to guess, I think Apple will hold the battery life where it is (I think people are comfortable charging once a day), and focus all the improvements in GPU intensive tasks such as GPS and an always-on display.

 

[Mac 128]

You're right - it is about personal style. Definitely.

Finally a thread with people who seem to get where Apple is taking this.

Jony Ive said once a person wears a product they have the expectation of choice. One watch design, in a couple of different sizes and colors, with a few different watch band selections is not going to cut it. Watch companies introduce dozens of newly designed models every year, along with their tried and true staples. No matter how great the technology, Apple surely knows they are competing in a much more personalized product space than they ever have before, and to compete, they will have to cater to as many different tastes and styles as possible.

 

[AbsoluteMustard]

Thin watches look terrible on men IMO. That may cause some people here to call my masculinity comfort into question, but men look better in larger thicker watches. None of my mechanical watches are thinner than 13mm, due to the movement being so thick. Thin mechanical watches are cool in that they can engineer them to work, but they don't look great fashion wise.

A Smart car is an achievement in size, but I would never drive one.

Also Movado should not be used as a benchmark in the watch industry. They are an overpriced department store fashion brand. They appeal to people who know nothing about watches.

 

[michael1019]

Thin watches look terrible on men IMO. That may cause some people here to call my masculinity comfort into question, but men look better in larger thicker watches. None of my mechanical watches are thinner than 13mm, due to the movement being so thick. Thin mechanical watches are cool in that they can engineer them to work, but they don't look great fashion wise.

A Smart car is an achievement in size, but I would never drive one.

Obviously this is your opinion and many, many people don't share it. Your sense of style is highly individual.

----------

Also Movado should not be used as a benchmark in the watch industry. They are an overpriced department store fashion brand. They appeal to people who know nothing about watches.

You're right about Movado, for the most part. I can't agree that watch people would shun any particular brand because of its 'status' or whatever. I prefer people that think. I prefer people who cultivate their OWN sense of style instead of just aping the crowd.

I'd like to see a slim apple watch for one reason: choice. I'd like to see a few different case designs.

 

[AlliFlowers]

I wouldn't mind if it were a hair thinner. But I'm perfectly happy as it is now.

As mentioned before...strictly a matter of taste.

 

[Mackinjosh]

I think in it's current form it's ugly and stupidly fat. Until it's much thinner, this monstrosity isn't even an option.

 

[slicecom]

I think in it's current form it's ugly and stupidly fat. Until it's much thinner, this monstrosity isn't even an option.

I thought the same until I tried it on. While I disagree with many who say they look smaller in person than in pictures, I'd certainly say they look thinner on your wrist than they do in the promo shots. That said, I'd still like to see it much thinner in future versions.

 

[5105973]

I'm fine with the way my 38 mm looks. It's not the chubby steel Chiclet I thought it would be. It looks pretty smart.

But it's a bit heavy on my wrist. Don't tell me I should have gotten the Sport--I am happy with my SS. I just am saying I wouldn't mind if they shaved off a tiny bit of thickness and weight from it for the next generation, especially with the sensor dome adding some unseen thickness and weight and pressure. But I would not want to lose so much thickness that they'd need to redesign the bands and lugs. And I would not want to lose any battery capacity over it. If they can't make it slightly thinner without sacrificing battery and features, then no, I don't want it slimmed down.

 

[AbsoluteMustard]

Obviously this is your opinion and many, many people don't share it. Your sense of style is highly individual.

----------



You're right about Movado, for the most part. I can't agree that watch people would shun any particular brand because of its 'status' or whatever. I prefer people that think. I prefer people who cultivate their OWN sense of style instead of just aping the crowd.

I'd like to see a slim apple watch for one reason: choice. I'd like to see a few different case designs.

Having an opinion is better than not having an opinion, or worse just stating that everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

The first is boring, and the latter is obvious.

 

[Foggydog]

I think in it's current form it's ugly and stupidly fat. Until it's much thinner, this monstrosity isn't even an option.

Although I haven't actually worn one yet, just from the looks I agree. I'm kinda thinking if they can slim down the chips inside, make a slightly thicker battery, then make the sensors on the bottom flush, that would be a good upgrade.
But, until I actually try one one........

 

[spiderman0616]

I would like to see it thinner, but I don't mind how it looks now. It's only slightly thicker than my old watch, and most people don't even notice I'm wearing it.

But yes, I would love if they could make it a little slimmer but keep the same battery life, if not improve the battery life. And I guarantee next year's model will be slimmer.

 

[MasterRyu2011]

Nothing is beneath Jony "Miniaturization" Ive.

Guaranteed, Apple Watch 2 will be lighter and slimmer.

"For the Apple Watch 2 Edition, we've managed to reduce the weight of gold so that it is now lighter...oh wait"

 

[AtheistP3ace]

I kind of agree. I could go a little slimmer but not much more.