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.
New Video Shows Thinner Display and Larger Battery for Apple Watch 2
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It's amazing how much money Corning put into flexible printed circuit boards to make that watch a reality.No, but this is a sleek, sexy rectangular watch. Maybe the Watch that Apple should have designed.
Wait, it's just a cheap concept that everyone is saying looks great but haven't considered the actual practicality of manufacturing (with today's technology)? Shame.
Seriously, Apple's "wristband" variant of the watch is going to be spectacular in 3-5 years time, but the technology required simply isn't manufacturable yet.
Just curious, as these kinds of things are entirely in the eye of the beholder, but what kind of watch (doesn't need to be a smart watch) is "sleek" or "sexy" to you?
Personally I love the minimalistic design of my apple watch, but I find most actual watches to be way too busy for me to look at. Now this is probably because I can't stand patterns or stripes in most things (All my clothes are flat colors, any and all t shirts are without graphics).
I was wondering if you could just provide an example of a watch that is sleek or sexy to your eyes?
Thanks
Men's -- the simpler Pateks and Omegas, the Classima and Clifton line of Baume-Mercier are good baselines for me.
[doublepost=1472756694][/doublepost]
The 4 when the 4S, 5S when the 5 came out, the 6, when the 6S came out, etc. The 5C was a model unto itself at the bottom of the rung, not the mid model.
How did they modify them other than lowering the storage capacity (or eliminating the highest storage capacity)? I wouldn't call dropping certain colors "modifying" but rather simply discontinuation.
Sounds like they've been working from my list:
1. Make it thinner
2. Always on display
3. Battery should last a week
My grandad had a digital watch in the 70s which required the display to be off for the majority of the time. At least it had decent battery life. That puts the design flaws of the first revision of this device in context.
1. Make it thinner
2. Always on display
3. Battery should last a week
My grandad had a digital watch in the 70s which required the display to be off for the majority of the time. At least it had decent battery life. That puts the design flaws of the first revision of this device in context.
Ha! Funny you should bring up Aspect Ratios. Netflix has introduced a bunch of new series that shoot in Univisium 18:9. The net effect is that it creates a thin horizontal line at the top and bottom of the screen. I mostly don't see it, but every so often it stands out and it makes me nuts! Oh well.
Another reason for round watches is the aesthetic on the arm. I like to see some of my arm framing the watch. The rectangular format looks more like a cuff, so it's very bulky looking, and doesn't really blend as well for my taste, at least the larger format rectangular watches which take up the entire wrist.
Meh, another incremental comment from a commenter that is incrementally becoming mediocre.
[doublepost=1472757849][/doublepost]
Light is even better for a phone. When is the last time a playing card or credit card went flying out of your hands accidentally?
[doublepost=1472757929][/doublepost]
There's a reason that "watch" isn't on a wrist.No, but this is a sleek, sexy rectangular watch. Maybe the Watch that Apple should have designed.
[doublepost=1472758331][/doublepost]
Except now you have an aesthetic problem. The text on the round watch looks asymmetrical and ugly. The negative space on the sides and the cropped top doesn't conform well with any text. What's the point of more screen real estate if it's not used and looks bad? Of course that's a subjective observation but why try to conform to old, round standards when designing a smart watch? Smart watch makers get to reinvent the wheel and most of them just give us the same old wheel. At least Apple's looks like it's from a future with design standards and functionality without conflict.While what you suggest is true in general, all things being equal, Apple is currently behind in having the advantage. A 42mm round watch like the Huawei displays more information than the Watch. And similar round watches will have this advantage until Apple changes their display, which they have 100% compromised for aesthetics. The 38mm is even worse.
Here's a 1:1 comparison to the Huawei 42mm.
And here's the comparison with the display optimized for the round display.
There's no question even with a text display that there's far more screen real estate for developers to work with.
Now, if Apple ever expands their display edge to edge then it's a different ballgame. But for now, and for at least the next year it appears, round watch displays will have a clear advantage over the Watch.
Last edited:
Ok, I didn't make myself clear I guess. I was pointing more to the smartphones being slimmer. I know many people here argue that better battery life and bit thicker, while you get others saying bit thinner smart watch and never mind battery life. I would like iPhone to be even thinner. That thing goes on my pocket when I am not using it. And I don't wear skinny pants but you can easily tell the shape of the phone in there. Battery life have not been an issue for me. I agree that Apple watch is not the best looking one by design and it looks a bit thick for something you wear on the wrist. But for me not to the point to anoy me or anything.
The current trend where wearing big ass watches are in style disputes that. The 42mm AW is actually smaller than my previous mechanical watch.
I doubt that. Did the jump from the 1560 mAh battery in the 5s to the 1810 mAh in the iPhone 6 result in a decrease in battery life? Nope. The 6 had better battery life in every metric when compared to the 5s. Don't hate just to hate.
I understand the curiosity but I do not understand the necessity for a circular display. What am I missing?
If anything, it seems less practical for smart watch functions. There is a reason phones and computers and TVs and books are not round.
Watches were only ever round by necessity due to analog functionality.
I hope it's waterproof and there is a swimming track app. This is water is holding me back.
Also, I am taking a hard look at the Fitbit flex 2. Looks good and I can still use my Omega Seamaster daily.
Also, I am taking a hard look at the Fitbit flex 2. Looks good and I can still use my Omega Seamaster daily.
Well, for one, changing the storage capacity is a modification. If memory serves me, the "new" version of the old iPhone models were also tweaked.
Ulimately, I don't see your point. Apple didn't take the "top level" iPhone x and just lop off the price when the iPhone z was released and call it a day. It was still the iPhone x but not entirely so. All I am suggesting is that the fact Apple has allegedly changed a few parts on AW doesn't mean it's AW2. It could very well be AW 1, ver 2 and released aside AW2, but at a lower price point, maybe only as the Sport model.
[doublepost=1472769301][/doublepost]
Actually the oversized trend is winding down, to turn a pun. It's been doing so for a couple of years, at least in better watches. The trend now is proportional, so big wrist, big watch, small wrist, small watch.
Here is an older NYT article on the subject.
Other than adding 8GB and discontinuing 16 and 32GB for some last gen models, how were they "tweaked?"
You think that would look sleek on somebody's wrist?!? Seriously ?!?No, but this is a sleek, sexy rectangular watch. Maybe the Watch that Apple should have designed.
Does it matter? They were tweaked at least with different RAM and then demoted from top to mid-tier. That was my point. End.
So other than storage capacity, they weren't actually "tweaked" material-wise.
Apple watch is probably the worst product Apple ever made,if not the worst,definitely up there amng the worst 3.
and the design is THE worst looking Apple device,no doubt.
and the design is THE worst looking Apple device,no doubt.
Is it purely design preference or were you conditioned to like round watchfaces because you were surrounded by them all your life? If you mostly saw rectangular watchfaces all your life, do you still think you'd prefer a round watchface? Also, if it was purely a design preference wouldn't that same preference also apply to computer monitors and smartphones? Because that's what a smartwatch is... Just shrunken down to fit your wrist.
I ask those questions because having worn the Apple Watch for over a year now, I actually find round watchfaces a bit odd now, even though I've worn them most of my life. Also, every time I see a round smartwatch display data, whether it be text or image, it reminds me of just how impractical it is... It's literally like looking at a round smartphone, just smaller.
Does it really? Did that watch from the 70s have an OLED screen, WiFi, Bluetooth, Heart rate monitor?
They most likely won't introduce a new style until Version 3, at least in terms of a round Watch. If anything, we may see additional casing options aside from aluminum and stainless steel.
[doublepost=1472788238][/doublepost]
What, no Swiss Watch? I have three to Sport any day and time of the week for that matter. Or my Panerai Luminor Marina 1950 or Panerai Radiomir.
Apple Watch 42 MM stainless for play.
Last edited: