It's starting get boring seeing everyone use the same face type. Apple not allowing 3rd party watch faces with 2.0 really sucks and the new ones they added just aren't practical in the slightest
I think it's because the complications are larger than the other faces and thus easier to read. Plus it has up to 5 of them, more than most.It's starting get boring seeing everyone use the same face type. Apple not allowing 3rd party watch faces with 2.0 really sucks and the new ones they added just aren't practical in the slightest
I think it's because the complications are larger than the other faces and thus easier to read. Plus it has up to 5 of them, more than most.
Or at least the ability to change their colors independently. Being tiny and all the same color as the watch numbers makes hem blend in more. Many of the modular complications appear in white and whatever other color you've chosen, creating more contrast and viewability.That's why I use modular, most useful with max complications but it's the most boring and ugly design. I wish they had more complications in the utility and chronograph
That's why I use modular, most useful with max complications but it's the most boring and ugly design. I wish they had more complications in the utility and chronograph
But not details and I like knowing the numbers for my Activity App.Use Simple. You get the same number of complications as Modular. 4 at corners and one (date) in the center.
I wonder if there is an association between people who have never worn a watch (or are accustomed to reading a digital clock) using modular versus those who have worn a watch (analog) using one of the analog watch faces?
Cool, not what I expected. I am the opposite-- I like the analog representation because of the spacial visualization. I can process the time and the meaning of the time faster from an analog view than digital. Though, I like all of the other data, but it is not as available on the analog faces.I wore a watch everyday before this Apple Watch, but the point of a smartwatch is to have that instant information at a glance which is why I always go back to modular after using utility or chrono, even though the latter 2 look much nicer
Cool, not what I expected. I am the opposite-- I like the analog representation because of the spacial visualization. I can process the time and the meaning of the time faster from an analog view than digital. Though, I like all of the other data, but it is not as available on the analog faces.
It still annoys me that the screen takes so long to wake up. With my old watch, I was already done looking at the time and lowering my arm long before the AW screen first wakes. I imitated my old look-at-the-watch gesture, and my wrist is turning away just as the screen pops. I hope Apple improves the watch's ability to wake and show its face better.
I agree, it should. The Garmin vívoactive and fēnix 3, a couple of my reference-standard activity tracking smart watch devices, have 3 to 6 week battery lives with screens always on. Apple should be able to get to an always-on screen with a one day battery life. Then, we won't have to wait 1 - 2 seconds for the AW screen to wake up.By Apple Watch 3 or 4, the screen will always be on. I think the responsiveness if pretty great so far with the wrist detection
I wonder if there is an association between people who have never worn a watch (or are accustomed to reading a digital clock) using modular versus those who have worn a watch (analog) using one of the analog watch faces?
I use modular for the same reason as above, it gives a lot of info. In my eyes, I want a smartwatch to give me info at a quick glance.
I agree, it should. The Garmin vívoactive and fēnix 3, a couple of my reference-standard activity tracking smart watch devices, have 3 to 6 week battery lives with screens always on. Apple should be able to get to an always-on screen with a one day battery life. Then, we won't have to wait 1 - 2 seconds for the AW screen to wake up.
I agree, it should. The Garmin vívoactive and fēnix 3, a couple of my reference-standard activity tracking smart watch devices, have 3 to 6 week battery lives with screens always on. Apple should be able to get to an always-on screen with a one day battery life. Then, we won't have to wait 1 - 2 seconds for the AW screen to wake up.
What do you mean by "seeing everyone use the same face"? Are you looking at Apple watches as you walk down the street? Do you mean here, which is far from "everyone"? I use the face I want regardless of what anyone else uses. After all, I'm me, not them. Don't really get your point. And I don't get bored by thinking about watch faces. I actually don't really think about them. I just use them.It's starting get boring seeing everyone use the same face type. Apple not allowing 3rd party watch faces with 2.0 really sucks and the new ones they added just aren't practical in the slightest
I think it's because the complications are larger than the other faces and thus easier to read. Plus it has up to 5 of them, more than most.
What do you mean by "seeing everyone use the same face"? Are you looking at Apple watches as you walk down the street?
Not sure how you guys use your watch, but the instant I raise my wrist the screen is on. I'm not waiting even 1 second.