The memo was sent out. But since your watch was round, the text must have been cut off and you didn't receive the full message.
Last edited:
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.
Samsung Announces Round 'Gear S2' Smart Watch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The memo was sent out. But since your watch was round, the text must have been cut off and you didn't receive the full message.
Apple was being sneaky by only telling a truth, but not the whole truth (something Jobs did a lot). They said their metal CASE was only that thick.
They left out both the crystal and case back, something no other watchmaker on the planet does in measurements.
Using Apple's magic measurement method, that means they could get rid of the metal case altogether, and their watches would be zero mm thick
This. Plus the crystal on top.
All these Apple fans are bashing the watch. If the Apple Watch was round, it would be the best, if the Samsung watch was square, they would call it copying. I get your a hardcore fan and all, but respect another companies product. You be this 'loyal' to a company, yet you think they'd be loyal to you.
I am a big fan of Apple (apart from their iPhones), but this product just looks staggering.
I am a big fan of Apple (apart from their iPhones), but this product just looks staggering.
I don't understand this need for multiple day battery life.
Do you sleep with a watch on, or something?
Unless you make the text wrap around the entire bezel, meaning you have to rotate to read, I can't think of any other way to display text other than how current round watches do.
There's no EASY way to make a round UI ingenious. You can do it but so far every possible way is simply trash.
Last edited:
I seriously doubt Apple is ahead of the competition because they made a smaller smartwatch. Some people actually prefer a larger watch than what Apple offers. Their implementation, fit an finish have much more to do with it than anything else IMO.
I'm not sure what's asinine here. Allow me to break this down for you even more simply so you can understand:
I don't disagree with either of you, given the exact same usable space, the rectangular useable area inside a circle is less than that inside a circle. No doubt. To achieve approximately the same volume of a circle as a square, the circle would have to wider than the square. And there are tradeoffs for both approaches.
But then all things are not equal here.
In Apple's case, they have imposed a significant black bordered bezel around the display, making it actually more rectangular than even the shape of the watch.
So the reality is, when comparing the useable area of the rectangular Apple watch to the useable area of the exact same sized round watch, there is clearly more useable area on the round watch, without the watch being any taller than the current Watch, albeit wider.
Apple was being sneaky by only telling a truth, but not the whole truth (something Jobs did a lot). They said their metal CASE was only that thick.
They left out both the crystal and case back, something no other watchmaker on the planet does in measurements.
Using Apple's magic measurement method, that means they could get rid of the metal case altogether, and their watches would be zero mm thick
This. Plus the crystal on top.
No I don't think so. In one of the side profiles of the watch it shows the thickness from the top of the crystal to the bottom of the watch as 10.5mm (for the 42mm), Indicating that the bottom sensor array dome is 1.96mm all by itself and accounts entirely for this discrepancy. What is interesting is that given this, the 38mm Watch is listed as only 12.2mm thick, but the side profile including the crystal is the same, suggesting that the bottom sensor dome is actually .3mm thinner than on the 42mm Watch, and therefore Apple is eliminating the measurement that fluctuates between the models.
Last edited:
Looks like Android is going to flood the market with watches just like they do with phones! YAY! Then we can hear about how Android wear is outselling the competition 135 to 1.
Quality over Quantity. I guess that has been forgotten.
Dont be a
hole. 1.
was LAST to market with a smart watch.2. The
Watch offers some choices in styles but at EXORBINENT prices.3. Because IOS is locked to Apple hardware, of course Android Wear will have more options in the market, and probably more utilization since the watches can work with any Android Devices running recent OS and now even iPhones....
4. The Apple Watch doesn't currently do anything better or different than Android Wear except Mobile payments (for now...) but all the new models will.
There is a difference between flooding a market and the market having more options. Google isn't holding a gun to anyone's head saying "Make watches!"
If anything.... this is a good thing. IOS has only really evolved in feature set because of pressure from Android. Android has always trumped IOS in features and eventually (after years usually) Apple builds those features into IOS in a more Apple like way. Come on. When did Apple last actually truly innovate a new feature vs. take a competing feature and implement it in a more Apple like way? Android wear is far easier to use than the Apple Watch, which is just mind blowing to me because it's usually the opposite with the learning curve. Samsung may rip design cues off Apple, but Apple rips feature sets off of literally everyone. And then people sit there like donkey's clapping like the second coming of Christ just occurred at an Apple event when Apple announces some new IOS feature that everyone else has had for years. Then they do some Apple thing to it.... like micromanaging what developers can do when they finally get extra functionality to the lock screen and only cave when shamed that Google has let developers do this for years and it's a reason behind lost market share.
I say bring on competition. It actually forces Apple to up their game which is great for IOS users. Your phone finally does things it should have done 5 years ago. Competition is only going to help everyone put more and more into their watches and the abilities the watches have. HOW IS THIS BAD????
I don't understand why someone wouldn't want better battery life.
I mean yeah I want better battery life, but I mean even with my Pebble, which I could push 4-5 days without charging, I would still charge every night because I don't sleep with a watch on.
Not to mention the Apple Watch charges so fast that it barely leaves my wrist outside of sleep.
I'm for better battery life but this "my watch lasts longer than your watch" is the lowest priority argument, unless it's either designed to be a sleep tracker OR you just sleep with a watch on, for some reason. (I *did* fall asleep with the Apple watch on once, but I had put it into power reserve mode because I wasn't home and when I took it out it had dropped 2% over that 9 hour rest). Let's improve battery life but there's 100x more important things to work on honestly.
I always sleep with a watch on for no reason other than I've always slept with a watch on.
It feels wrong now if I take it off at night.
It's useful if you sleep somewhere other than your house and do not want to carry around an Apple Watch charger. Having to carry a charger alone would more than counteract the small convenience of having a smart watch. My Casio's battery lasts "forever," and I take it wherever I want without worrying.
Haha, what? That's interesting.I always sleep with a watch on for no reason other than I've always slept with a watch on.
It feels wrong now if I take it off at night.
Yep, I think you're right. Thanks!
I do think it was extra clever of Apple (Newson) to move any lugs to the bands, allowing them to leave out those dimensions as well.
Nice display drawings, btw. I was doing something similar, because people don't realize how much bezel area goes unused on the Apple watch.
Those of us with both round and rectangular and Apple watches know the shape is not important except for styling... and with apps that look good being round, like weather radar and other "what's in a circle around me" displays, compasses, analog watchfaces, circular charts, circular slide rule type tip calculators, etc.
Last edited:
I seriously doubt Apple is ahead of the competition because they made a smaller smartwatch. Some people actually prefer a larger watch than what Apple offers. Their implementation, fit an finish have much more to do with it than anything else IMO.
I don't disagree with either of you, given the exact same usable space, the rectangular useable area inside a circle is less than that inside a circle. No doubt. To achieve approximately the same volume of a circle as a square, the circle would have to wider than the square. And there are tradeoffs for both approaches.
But then all things are not equal here.
In Apple's case, they have imposed a significant black bordered bezel around the display, making it actually more rectangular than even the shape of the watch.
So the reality is, when comparing the useable area of the rectangular Apple watch to the useable area of the exact same sized round watch, there is clearly more useable area on the round watch, without the watch being any taller than the current Watch, albeit wider.
Your definition of "useable area" is quite different than mine. I guess to you, as long as you can put color in it, it's useable area. The rest of us care about actual textual content in that area and for that, circular is crap. BTW- you left off the rotating ring in your pictures. That adds to the size, too. Or eats into your area, depending on how you drew your overlays. And it covers up the bezel on their watch.
And I DON'T want a watch that's any bigger than my 38mm Watch. As it is, it hits my hand when I flex my wrist. Any wider and it would be uncomfortable. A circular watch is for a certain group of people's aesthetics, nothing more. There's zero utility to it. Now you have other watches to choose from if that's your thing. Enjoy all that extra blank space with all the actual content in the middle square. A little extra scrolling won't hurt you.
With the glances on the clock faces, ALL the clock faces are rectangular. With the title of the app and the time always in the upper corners and the pages indicator on the bottom, even the circular-look apps are ALL rectangular. You get the most useful information on a watch face when it is RECTANGULAR.
I even find the circular avatars in this new forum annoying and had to work hard to find the best spot to design and position my graphic so it shows enough. I see a lot of other people having trouble, too.
Last edited:
I always sleep with a watch on for no reason other than I've always slept with a watch on.
It feels wrong now if I take it off at night.
Ever whack someone in bed next to you with it while you are sleeping? Catch their hair in it?
Toward the end of the article it says, "...making it [the Gear S2] incompatible with the Android Wear iOS app..." so perhaps you are thinking Samsung will release a Tizen compatible app similar to Google's Android iOS app? Or did the author of the MR article miss something and the Gear S2 is already compatible with iOS?
Apple was being sneaky by only telling a truth, but not the whole truth (something Jobs did a lot). They said their metal CASE was only that thick.
They left out both the crystal and case back, something no other watchmaker on the planet does in measurements.
Using Apple's magic measurement method, that means they could get rid of the metal case altogether, and their watches would be zero mm thick
This. Plus the crystal on top.
Apple was sneaky. My comment on it being smaller and usable screen is still true though.
Yes Apple is ahead, because no one has offered a smaller watch. Men and women wear watches, not just men.I seriously doubt Apple is ahead of the competition because they made a smaller smartwatch. Some people actually prefer a larger watch than what Apple offers. Their implementation, fit an finish have much more to do with it than anything else IMO.
I don't disagree with either of you, given the exact same usable space, the rectangular useable area inside a circle is less than that inside a circle. No doubt. To achieve approximately the same volume of a circle as a square, the circle would have to wider than the square. And there are tradeoffs for both approaches.
But then all things are not equal here.
In Apple's case, they have imposed a significant black bordered bezel around the display, making it actually more rectangular than even the shape of the watch.
So the reality is, when comparing the useable area of the rectangular Apple watch to the useable area of the exact same sized round watch, there is clearly more useable area on the round watch, without the watch being any taller than the current Watch, albeit wider.
I've been around this merry-go-round before... It starts with "Hey, looks nice! Good features!" passes through "crappy build and poor UX" just to return to "announces nice looking, feature rich"...
The pictures are attractive, the feature set sounds promising, I wish they had GPS rather than 3G, but I won't be able to judge until I hold one.
The pictures are attractive, the feature set sounds promising, I wish they had GPS rather than 3G, but I won't be able to judge until I hold one.
Some do (sleep monitoring apps are kind of a thing now), but for me it's about having one less cable to carry when I travel.
One thing these watched can actually technically due, should their battery last, is be a fantastic tool to track sleep patterns. Obviously not everyone does that, but then. It everyone runs with their watch, tracks their steps with their watch, etc. and all of these things are considered legitimate uses for the watch.
I think, for me, the issue with battery life is that with my phone, I can always add an external battery, be that in s case or a standalone pack, or plug in at my desk. With the watch, you take it off and you charge it. I personally view that as a much larger inconclusive than charging a phone.
I would argue that we don't know exactly why they're ahead, but part of it could be that until yesterday, anything BUT an apple watch was almost useless if you were using it with an iPhone.
Not saying I personally find it useful or have a solution. Just claiming that for a round design, it clearly needs some thinking outside of the box (literally).
I'm pretty convinced that the difference between people liking round versus square form factors is the difference between people wanting a smartwatch and wanting a smartwatch.
Granted I come from the later camp, but I think Apple has done about the best they can in trying to bridge those two groups, and clearly haven't captured much of the smartwatch group-- given that Apple is really trying to make their watch about the style and "jewelry" of it, I think that suggests we'll see a round form factor in the future. Maybe not the next rev, but possibly the one after.
Granted I come from the later camp, but I think Apple has done about the best they can in trying to bridge those two groups, and clearly haven't captured much of the smartwatch group-- given that Apple is really trying to make their watch about the style and "jewelry" of it, I think that suggests we'll see a round form factor in the future. Maybe not the next rev, but possibly the one after.
None of Samsung's Tizen based devices are compatible with Android Wear or iOS.
They only work with Samsung phones running the TouchWiz framework with a proprietary watch app.
And I find it hard to believe that Samsung would release an iOS app when they don't even make one for other Android devices.
I think you mean the opposite of what you said. If Apple only cared about the looks of it, they would have probably made it round because looks is the only reason to have a round smartwatch. That and if you want to make a rotating bezel the scrolling/zooming interface. If Samsung had made their watch rectangular, they would have had to copy Apple's crown method. The WATCH design is clean, classic and perfectly efficient for the optimum utility. Perfectly in line with the design philosophy of every other Apple product. They leave gaudy and overwrought to their competitors.
Last edited: