Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

It's the crown that's won it for apple

S

shenfrey

macrumors 68030
Original poster
May 23, 2010
2,541
803
Yeah the tach looks sick, the software is great and the functionality is terrific. But it's the fact that the crown makes it look and feel like a real watch, it's game over for the competition because you just know Apple is patenting the hell outta it.

You can bet that 99% of smart watch manufactures are kicking themselves right now.
 
I played with a watch in a store.

I actually felt like the crown was a retrograde step from the direct touch UIs we're all used to now. Like using a scroll-wheel mouse to drive an iPad screen: Instead of directly manipulating screen objects, you have to do it by remote control. Not as satisfying, IMHO.

I get the point about trying to avoid fingers obscuring the screen, but maybe they shouldn't putting so much info on the screen in the first place?

Also, why isn't it knurled or fluted? I know they did a token bit of machining (slots) on the very edge of the crown, but considering that you're supposed to slide your finger up and down over the crown (as opposed to twist it) a "stickier" surface would make sense.
 
Last edited:
It's amazing how much sense it makes, yet surprising that nobody else thought of it. But then again, the incredible attention to details is part of what makes Apple who they are
 
Using a crown is only possible because the Watch is as thick as a brick, allowing the crown to stand a few millimetres off the wrist.

What will replace the crown if/when battery tech facilitates a significantly slimmer Watch?
 
I admit at first I thought it was really gimmicky, and didn't need it at all. Even when I played with the Watch in the store, it felt... foreign. But, just after about 10-15 minutes of playing with the crown, I started getting the hang of it and was making much more sense. I can't say for sure, but I think after we get through the learning curve it will be like second nature.

If this matters, I brought my girl friend to the Apple Store with me, and she doesn't use a single Apple product and is not tech savvy at all. When we went over to the watches, the thing she was most excited about was the crown. She just thought it was "cool". I think she had a bit too much customizing the watch faces using the crown.

Although that's just an isolated case, perhaps the crown is also targeted at drawing in the less tech-savvy? Would be interesting to hear how other non-Apple-geeks reacted to using the Watch.
 
I agree the crown is the score over other manufacturers, however I disagree that a physical button/scrollwheel is the best solution.

How long the crown will function correctly is yet to be seen, and it feels just a little to fiddly to me at the moment.
 
mojolicious said:
Using a crown is only possible because the Watch is as thick as a brick, allowing the crown to stand a few millimetres off the wrist.

What will replace the crown if/when battery tech facilitates a significantly slimmer Watch?
Click to expand...

How about sliding your finger along the side of the case to achieve the same result?
 
It's the crown that's won it for apple

scwinsett said:
My Point Exactly. "99%" doesnt make any sense when referring to 5 or so competitors. just being nitpicky
:eek:
Click to expand...


You don't think there's more in the making by other companies now that apple is creating a market? I think "99%" makes perfect sense and your just acting, like you said, nitpicky.
 
I would have preferred the crown to be centred on the side of the case.

For some reason Apple saw an urgent need for another button, I hope their reason is good enough. It could be that they believe accessing the people view is super important and needs its own hardware control, or it could be that two physical buttons are required for some things (screenshots?).
 
dotnet said:
I would have preferred the crown to be centred on the side of the case.



For some reason Apple saw urgent need for another button, I hope their reason is good enough. It could be that they believe accessing the people view is super important an needs its own hardware control, or it could be that two physical buttons are required some some things (screenshots?).
Click to expand...


The only reason is for their communication features.
 
edlex said:
How about sliding your finger along the side of the case to achieve the same result?
Click to expand...
I guess that could be made to work, although it sounds more expensive and more 'damageable' than the crown solution, particularly if it incorporates the crown's push/click function.
 
mojolicious said:
Using a crown is only possible because the Watch is as thick as a brick, allowing the crown to stand a few millimetres off the wrist.

What will replace the crown if/when battery tech facilitates a significantly slimmer Watch?
Click to expand...

There will most likely be touch sensitivity along the casing in a future model.
It can even incorporate Force Touch technology like the new Macbook.
Definitely not "damageable"...
 
mojolicious said:
Using a crown is only possible because the Watch is as thick as a brick, allowing the crown to stand a few millimetres off the wrist.

What will replace the crown if/when battery tech facilitates a significantly slimmer Watch?
Click to expand...

A slimmer crown? :eek:
 
I wonder because adding buttons is so un-Apple like. If anything they try to avoid more buttons, so having the crown and the side button surprises me. I don't think a crown was really necessary for navigation. It does make sense that it gives it more of a traditional watch design so maybe it was done to cater to watch collectors rather than make it feel like a gadget. I can't judge until I use it. I have my try on appointment today to get a sense of it.
 
edlex said:
How about sliding your finger along the side of the case to achieve the same result?
Click to expand...

I think that's where watch V2 might be headed.

The original iPod had a mechanical scroll wheel. It gave a lovely smooth feeling until it got gummed up with grit and dust. That's probably why Apple swapped to a touch "wheel" later. Nothing mechanical to break.
 
Arran said:
I played with a watch in a store.

I actually felt like the crown was a retrograde step from the direct touch UIs we're all used to now. Like using a scroll-wheel mouse to drive an iPad screen: Instead of directly manipulating screen objects, you have to do it by remote control. Not as satisfying, IMHO.
Click to expand...
No, you don't have to do it by remote control, you can still swipe the actual screen to scroll if you desire. The crown is designed to be an optional scrolling method for people who don't want to have to keep swipe-swipe-swiping on such a tiny little screen area.

shenfrey said:
The only reason is for their communication features.
Click to expand...
The side button is also used for Apple Pay, to take screenshots (I think that's how you do it, press both side button and crown at the same time), and a couple other uses (like reset the watch). Having two physical buttons is definitely very useful.
 
n10797 said:
A slimmer crown? :eek:
Click to expand...

What he is saying is that most crowns are not easy to turn while wearing, at least not easy enough to use all the time. By placing the crown higher off the wrist, the crown is easier to turn. If you lose that space, or make the crown much smaller, it becomes harder to turn. That's fine if it is to change the time or date on a mechanical watch. It's a nonstarter if it is meant to be used all of the time as a UI element.
 
DreamPod said:
No, you don't have to do it by remote control, you can still swipe the actual screen to scroll if you desire. The crown is designed to be an optional scrolling method for people who don't want to have to keep swipe-swipe-swiping on such a tiny little screen area.
Click to expand...

Understood. But iPhone/Pad has trained us all to directly manipulate on-screen objects. Heck, there's even times I'll try to pinch-zoom a paper magazine. :)

So, IMHO, the crown seems redundant if it simply lets you achieve the same end-result should you chose not to use the gestures you already know well. Why would anyone do that?

Granted, it's a nice decoration, and a comforting reference to old-fashioned watches - but isn't Apple trying to re-define what "watch" means? Historically they've always embraced the future - even it it means going out on a limb and being shockingly different. But the goal of the outward design of the watch seems to be more in line with appeasing the populace by giving them something familiar.

Sure there's cool technology packed into an unbelievably small space, but there's nothing jaw-droppingly incredible about the experience.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back