Poor glass on Nike Apple Watch

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by markfc, Nov 22, 2016.

  1. markfc macrumors 6502a

    markfc

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    Location:
    Prestatyn, Wales, UK
    #1
    So, I've only had the watch two weeks and the screen has picked up 5 scratches already, despite being really careful. (I look after my Apple stuff)

    Pretty poor quality for a sports watch.

    Anybody else had the issue?
     
  2. Julien, Nov 22, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2016

    Julien macrumors G4

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #2
    All aluminum :apple:Watch's use (basically) the same glass as used on the iPhone and iPad.
     
  3. Closingracer macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #3

    Which is why i decided to return my Rose gold Series 2 watch for the SS with the White sports band :(. I love the light weight of the Aluminum and the color but I am afraid of spending $500 for a watch and having it scratch so easily. I am not fond of the weight and have until January to make a final decision but I will see if I can get used to the weight of the SS one.*



    * I have never owned a watch other than those $10-$30 dollar ones you can find at Kohls.
     
  4. Relentless Power macrumors Penryn

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #4
    So you changed your mind I see. You might be spending more, but the Saphirre display is worth it. Apple got it right using this for the stainless model. As mentioned earlier, I previously owned the Sport Watch and the display scratched easier than expected. I have no scratches with the Saphirre screen. And you will adjust to the weight of the stainless with no problem, it just takes a day or two.
     
  5. Closingracer macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #5
    Yup I did lol. Figured I already spent $500 so $200 I can live with and just eat out less lol. I really did prefer the weight and color options but the glass trumped that. Honestly I don't care about the scratches and dents on the casing so aluminum vs SS isn't a factor but the glass is what factored in. Honestly I would love Apple to put a Sapphire glass on the sports model.



    I don't think price of Sapphire is the reason why they don't use it on the sports model like a lot of people want to suggest but the fact the glass which is similar to gorilla glass is more shatter resistant than Sapphire so it's safer to use in a more active lifestyle.
     
  6. Relentless Power macrumors Penryn

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #6
    Good luck with your purchase. I'm sure you will like it.
     
  7. twinlight macrumors 6502a

    twinlight

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    #7
    And here I am with a old Sport that has been banged against metal bars, sand at the beach and all kind of torture and it only has a light silver streak 2 mm long because I managed to scrape the watch against the inside of a pizza oven. Aluminum vs plastic glass did not go to well.

    Om the other hand I have several flakes of space grey color fall of on the underside of the watch..

    The stainless steel and sapphire would be nice but to expensive for me.
     
  8. Closingracer macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #8

    I thought of that as well But for $200 more and the fact I am in no way upgrading in 2-3 years this watch unless unforeseen issues like breaking it 3 times ( I did buy Apple Care ) or whatever I decided it's worth the investment to get the sapphire glass IMHO.
     
  9. Newtons Apple Suspended

    Newtons Apple

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Florida
    #9
    Hope you enjoy!
     
  10. Closingracer macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #10

    Already hate myself for buying it lol ( joking)! I just bought a classic loop in sea blue for $100 after gift cards ($75), bestbuy certificates ( $5) and one day Shipping for $20. Also have a red sports band which I like but probably will return because I probably will stick with the blue classic band and the white sports band that came with it
     
  11. ifarlow macrumors regular

    ifarlow

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Location:
    Georgia
    #11
    I'm thinking that five scratches on the screen betrays your belief that you were really careful. My Apple Watch Series 2 (aluminum, same hardware as yours) has no scratches on the screen. It also has no scratches on the case, for that matter.
     
  12. TxWatch macrumors 6502

    TxWatch

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2015
    Location:
    Texas
    #12
    +1

    My Watch Sport S0 is one year old and no matter what angle I hold it up to the light, it has zero scratches on the face. I wear mine every day and I seldom wear long sleeve shirts to cover it up. I have bumped it several times hard enough for me to check the face, but nothing has ever shown up on it.

    I am happy with the glass on mine.
     
  13. Tzuten macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2011
    #13
    Mine is scratched to hell.. Only a year of use. It's mostly fine scratches on the rounded edges. And I haven't been hard on mine, and don't recall banging it enough times to create them all. Next Watch will definitely be a SS.
     
  14. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #14
    If scratches on the glass bother you, why not get a screen protector?
     
  15. Relentless Power macrumors Penryn

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #15
    And this is why the Saphirre display has paid for itself for me. Granted, the stainless model is not for everyone. But it really is worth the price tag.
     
  16. Night Spring, Nov 23, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2016

    Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #16
    Screen protectors cost about $10.

    SS models are what, $100 more than the aluminum ones?

    I know there are other reasons to get the SS model, but if preventing screen scratches is the only issue, I don't think it "pays for itself."
     
  17. Relentless Power macrumors Penryn

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #17

    Incorrect. The stainless Models are $200.00 more than the Sport model. The Sapphire is a real advantage over everyday use with the Watch and the 316 L Stainless has the ability to buff light scratches out, where the aluminum is permanently damaged with scratches. Sure, screen protectors can be used if you so wish. But they look chintzy and it cheapens the look of the Watch. Buts that MY opinion.

    I understand it's a cheaper method with screen protectors . I was just stating the obvious with the Saphirre. But it serves its purpose really well.
     
  18. Closingracer macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2010
    #18
    And for me thise screen protectors Suck IMHO
     
  19. Relentless Power macrumors Penryn

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #19
    Especially if they are not applied correctly or poorly manufactured. It ruins the look of the screen.
     
  20. Night Spring macrumors G5

    Night Spring

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2008
    #20
    $200! So the screen protector is even more cost effective than I thought.

    Yes, the SS casing can be buffed is it gets scratched. But to me, the watch is a gadget that will get replaced every few years, so not worth the $200 premium. And screen protectors are almost invisible if put on correctly.

    To each their own, of course.
     
  21. Relentless Power macrumors Penryn

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #21
    Yes, it's costly. But then again, As stated previously, the Saphirre display is worth it and most who own the stainless model, will contest to its durability over a cheap plastic screen protector. Which I think degrades the overall look in my opinion.

    And the stainless Model, if taken care of, has a much higher resale value over the Sport Watch.

    $200.00 might be a steep increase for some, but if one can appreciate the weight, it's much more appealing and has a premium aesthetic appeal.

    I understand everyone views things differently. I predict the Apple Watch could easily last four years, assuming the OS updates are supported.
     
  22. honglong1976 macrumors 65816

    honglong1976

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #22
    Same here. I wear mine every day. No scratches. I just try to avoid bumping it. If I know there is a chance I will scratch it. I just take it off then put it on afterwards.

    It's amazing how many people are incredibly careful and suddenly scratches appeared. The watch made it all the way from China to your country and managed to stay scratch free. The moment you put it on! scratches start to appear! (obviously it got bumped!).

    Reminds me of a laptop repair I did before. The screen was scratched and cracked. I got a note saying the screen had been really well looked after and watching YouTube it started to crack! (hmmmm!). It got send back with no repair!

    I refuse to buy the SS one. I got an Orient watch made from stainless steel (case and band) and sapphire crystal. It cost me £60 brand new from Kyoto, Japan. The profit margin for Apple must be humongous! they have enough money but still want to make even more money. Nothing more than greed!

    How can Apple charge £449 for a stainless watch band? It's nuts!
     
  23. ifarlow macrumors regular

    ifarlow

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Location:
    Georgia
    #23
    The same reason they can charge $70 for a back-only silicone and plastic case for the iPad Pro: it's what the market will bear.
     
  24. honglong1976 macrumors 65816

    honglong1976

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2008
    Location:
    UK
    #24
    I think Apple marketed all their watches and bands like they were Rolex. They aren't and should reduce the prices.

    I got a stainless steel band for my Fitbit Blaze for £25 from CEX. I only use this because there is no sleep tracking. As soon as that's added, it will be buy buy Fitbit.

    Your right. As a business, while people are buying a $10 steel band for £449, Apple will keep selling them!
     
  25. abdulkar.im macrumors 68000

    abdulkar.im

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2014
    Location:
    London
    #25
    Have you actually seen the engineering in the link bracelet? It is definitely not a $10 steel band... £449 is too high granted, maybe more £200, but calling it a $10 band is a little over the top.
     

Share This Page