Just got back from trying it... the problem with the 42 is NOT that it is "big"

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by NOLF1, Apr 10, 2015.

  1. NOLF1 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    #1
    I just got back from seeing the 42mm. I can confirm what most are saying - the pictures do make it look like it is too "big" for the wrist. It really isn't.

    The problem is that it is too THICK. Almost to the point of being comical. It almost felt like I strapping a block of metal to my wrist. This is why I think it looks so ridiculously massive in some of the pictures.... it's an optical illusion due to the thickness. This same thickness and appearance is present on the 38mm and neither is going to get rid of it.

    To put this in perspective, the iPhone 6 6.9mm thick, the iPhone 5 is 7.6mm thick, the iPhone 4 is 9.3mm thick. This watch is over 10mm thick. This thing is thicker than an iPhone 4. Pretend you strapped an iPhone 4 to your wrist. Let that sink in for a moment.

    Obviously, the thickness was to house a large enough battery to get the usage time they needed.

    Now that I have tried it on, I think the *biggest* flaw was not using a curved LCD display. (Think the Samsung Gear S with the curved LCD display tech) This would have done a lot, IMO, to eliminate the "I've got a block of metal strapped to my wrist" feel since the watch would curve around the wrist.

    If your wrist is too small, you WILL have a thick block of metal jutting off your wrist, and, because of the thickness, it will look ridiculous because of the optical illusion this thickness creates. But, is the screen it's self too "big" in so far as screen dimensions for most peoples wrists? No.

    Now, is this a deal breaker? No. Is it something you will probably get used to feeling pretty fast? Yes. Was the watch overall good with TONS of potential and probably lots coming in future generations? Yes. Make no mistake, however, this literally *feels* like a first gen product. My first comparison in my mind actually was "brick" first generation cell phones.

    Still, no regrets on the pre-order.
     
  2. dBeats macrumors 6502a

    dBeats

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    #2
    As I look down at my Breitling Super Avenger on my wrist and notice that I would measure the thickness of this behemoth in inches, not mm's.... 3/4 of an inch to be specific....My Apple Watch will feel tiny and svelte in comparison.
     
  3. NOLF1 thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    #3
    The fact that you have to compare it to something absolutely massive in thickness to make it feel "tiny", pretty much underscores my point.

    My 20b cat looks absolutely tiny when I compare him to an elephant, too.
     
  4. Crosspjc macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2015
    #4
    My current watch is 10mm think and it's not considered large. I've got a try on tomorrow but expecting it to be fine.
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Newtons Apple macrumors P6

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #5
    It is all what you are used to. Some people are used to large and thick watches. If you got small wrists a larger watch can take some getting used too.
     
  6. bnorthro macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2010
    #6
    And we measure the weight in lbs, ha. My Avenger Seawolf weighs 1/2 lb and is 18mm thick, the Apple Watch is not a big or heavy watch.
     
  7. crispApple, Apr 10, 2015
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2015

    crispApple macrumors regular

    crispApple

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2015
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #7
    At first I seen the 38mm it looked very small. But after trying it on i felt more comfortable on my wrist versus the 42mm

    Edit** this is the 38mm :)
    [​IMG]
     
  8. SarZ macrumors regular

    SarZ

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #8
    A Breitling Super Avenger is an absolutely amazing watch
    The apple watch is a thick piece of metal slab on your wrist
     
  9. caligurl macrumors 68030

    caligurl

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    socal
    #9
    apple watch is thinner than my current watch.....
     
  10. dBeats macrumors 6502a

    dBeats

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    #10
    Well, most mechanical self winders are pretty thick, and considering horological enthusiasts might have one of those, I think it's apropos to bring the point up. YMMV.
     
  11. iamasmith macrumors regular

    iamasmith

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2015
    Location:
    Cheshire, UK
    #11
    A lot of watches, including the Apple watch look a lot thinner than they are when they are on because often the back is considerably raised.

    A GMT-II at a glance looks like it might be about 6mm thick but it's in fact about 11mm and the illusion is created by a raised back which doesn't extend across the full size of the watch. It also helps to make the watch less of a burden when you flex your wrist upwards if it is a largish face.

    It is something you get used to very quickly.
     
  12. GrumpyMom macrumors 603

    GrumpyMom

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2014
    #12
    Yep, just as I thought, chubby metal chiclet. It's going to look absurd on my narrow wrist. But by sheer force of my charm and charisma I'll rock that look, dammit! :cool:
     
  13. technosix macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2015
    Location:
    West Coast USA
    #13
    I'm calling mine my Apple Cartoon Watch :eek:

    All along I've tried to tell the devotees that because of the bulging rounded sides it's fat and funny looking.

    For me it really doesn't matter, I have no desire to "show-off" any of my watches. I bought Apple Watch simply to play with. It's the only true way for me to be able to comment on what it's really like.

    With all the new Apple gear I've bought over the last eighteen months I'm fully prepared for a host of problems. Yet being a non-essential item, since I have a watch collection, I won't mind if Apple's watch becomes unreliable.
     
  14. abluehaze macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    #14
    Which size is that in the picture? It looks great and that's the one you should be getting.

    Do you know your wrist size? I'm about a 158mm and am torn between the 38 and 42.
     
  15. earthdog macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2014
    #15
    I too was surprised its MUCH smaller than I thought.
     
  16. edlex macrumors 68000

    edlex

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Location:
    Miami
    #16
    My Tag Heuer Professional is just over 13mm thick so I'm looking forward to the 42mm SS:D
     
  17. crispApple macrumors regular

    crispApple

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2015
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #17
    Yes thank you I definitely agree. That is the 38mm. I'm sorry I don't know my wrist size. I'm a smaller guy. About 5'5 average.
     
  18. puckhead193 macrumors G3

    puckhead193

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Location:
    NY
    #18
    thick? It's about the same size as most modern watches. :confused:
     
  19. MrLoL macrumors 6502

    MrLoL

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2014
    #19
    Original Pebble is 10,2 mm thick, and it's looking just fine imo.

    So I'm not too much worried about this
     
  20. FrankySavvy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2010
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    #20
    My current watch is over 10mm thick so to be honest I'm used to wearing that thickness on my wrist. The cool thing is the apple watch can do so much more.

    I think for most people who were a watch it won't feel that thick. For someone who does't wear anything on their wrist, thats a different story.
     
  21. dBeats macrumors 6502a

    dBeats

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    #21
    Only problem is the black and blue marks on my wrist if I try to run or do sports with it on. :cool: Hence getting an Apple Sport Watch for everyday duties...Thanks for the compliment, I love the watch too, just seems more like a dress watch after 4 years of wearing it almost everyday, the weight and size start to get to you....
     
  22. DJTJ macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    #22
    I have a tag heuer 6000, i think that watch is THIN, and I just googled it - its 42 mm and 11 mm thick! So Apple Watch is actually thinner! This just keeps getting better for me!
     
  23. chibamac macrumors 6502

    chibamac

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    #23
    You are awesome!

    That's all I gotta say.

    Chiba
     
  24. cmichaelb macrumors 68020

    cmichaelb

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Location:
    Kansas
    #24
    My 16 year old stainless steel Fossil dress watch is smaller than the huge watches they sell today, and it's not much thinner than an watch and has a slightly smaller footprint.

    I don't think it will be that much of an issue.

    I have an aluminum Lunatik band for my iPod nano 6th gen and it's about watch size. It's not a big issue.
     
  25. Steve686 macrumors 68030

    Steve686

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2007
    Location:
    US>FL>Miami/Dade>Sunny Isles Beach>Condo
    #25
    Being very thick doesn't make it big?

    Are you actually referring to the "diagonal width" of the watch when you talk about "big"?
     

Share This Page