Square vs Round Screen - Edited image is surprising

[Mac 128]

What is your source that Apple could have gone with a bezel-less display but purposely chose not to? iPhones and iPads have bezels but somehow the Watch could not have one if Apple really didn't want it to?

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/23/shape-things-come

Further, the watch uses different display technology than the iPad, and most other smart watches. The iPad in particular needs a frame bezel to hold the device without covering the screen, and considerably more light over a much greater area. Besides, how other devices displays were engineered is of no consequence here, as Apple tends to invent their own solutions when they want to accomplish something. Since they made the decision to incorporate a frame bezel, I wouldn't expect to see that in the current watch. But since they clearly discussed the option, then it's in the realm of possibility. Since when has an Android device ever achieved something more impressive than Apple?

 

[Piggie]

There is absolutely no reason to make the watch round.

There is absolutely no reason to print a NIKE logo on a T-Shirt.

Why can you not understand, there is no "REASON" for almost anything, other than some human beings want things.

There is no reason for an iPhone to exist, plenty of other phones.

Try to grasp this if you can.
People like different things.

Go into a womens dress shop and take a look see.

Why don't we all drive little cars? No REASON for big powerful ones.

 

[Rogifan]

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/02/23/shape-things-come

Further, the watch uses different display technology than the iPad, and most other smart watches. The iPad in particular needs a frame bezel to hold the device without covering the screen, and considerably more light over a much greater area. Besides, how other devices displays were engineered is of no consequence here, as Apple tends to invent their own solutions when they want to accomplish something. Since they made the decision to incorporate a frame bezel, I wouldn't expect to see that in the current watch. But since they clearly discussed the option, then it's in the realm of possibility. Since when has an Android device ever achieved something more impressive than Apple?

Really? So if Apple wanted, their watch could have no bezels even though companies they source their displays from aren't selling watches without bezels? I'll ask again, why would Apple's HIG tell developers to use a black background to give the appearance of a bezel-less display if they really wanted the bezel to be visible?

From the same New Yorker interview you've been quoting:

Under normal circumstances, the screen will then show one of nine watch faces, each customizable. One will show the time alongside a brightly lit flower, butterfly, or jellyfish; these will be in motion, against a black background. This imagery had dominated the launch, and Ive now explained his enthusiasm for it. He picked up his iPhone 6 and pressed the home button. “The whole of the display comes on,” he said. “That, to me, feels very, very old.” (The iPhone 6 reached stores two weeks later.) He went on to explain that an Apple Watch uses a new display technology whose blacks are blacker than those in an iPhone’s L.E.D. display. This makes it easier to mask the point where, beneath a glass surface, a display ends and its frame begins. An Apple Watch jellyfish swims in deep space, and becomes, Ive said, as much an attribute of the watch as an image. On a current iPhone screen, a jellyfish would be pinned against dark gray, and framed in black, and, Ive said, have “much less magic.”

That sure sounds to me like Ive wants to mask the bezel as much as possible.

 

[mightyjabba]

I don't understand what Mac 128 is talking about. Clearly, Apple would like for there to be no bezels. They are bending over backwards to make it look like there are no bezels by basing the entire OS on a black theme that will seamlessly blend in with the bezels around the screen, giving a bezel-free appearance. Why go to these extremes if they could literally just use a screen with no bezels? It literally makes no sense to claim that they intentionly added a bezel and then went to these lengths to hide it.

 

[dwreck]

The Moto 360 probably has THE strongest following at the moment...

Go home, you're drunk

 

[dwreck]

How about this then:

Given a free choice. People prefer round faced watches

Before the iPhone, people preferred smartphones with keyboards.

In both the case of the iPhone, and now with the Watch, Apple had a choice: either conform to what people thought they wanted, or show them that what they really wanted was something else. In the case of the iPhone, they did it in maybe two product generations. In the case of the Watch, they'll have it done within the same amount of time or less--that is to say that I believe that there will be no new round smartwatches introduced after this time next year.

 

[Mac 128]

So if Apple wanted, their watch could have no bezels even though companies they source their displays from aren't selling watches without bezels? I'll ask again, why would Apple's HIG tell developers to use a black background to give the appearance of a bezel-less display if they really wanted the bezel to be visible?

From the same New Yorker interview you've been quoting:

That sure sounds to me like Ive wants to mask the bezel as much as possible.

I quoted that passage myself earlier. You can "hear" it any way you like. It's clear you are against round smartwatches and you're not interested in seeing it any other way. However in context I read it this way:

Dye & Ive made an aesthetic decision to keep a prominent bezel around the display to frame the software, resulting from the team's fondness for viewing pictures on the watch. Prior to that they were unsure of whether to have a bezel or not, and how much and what kind if they did. This quote: “to avoid the edge of the screen as much as possible...The studio stopped short of banishing screen edges altogether", would be impossible to say if it had not been possible to extend the display to the screen edge. Once the aesthetic decision was made, Ive set about creating design rules to mitigate what he thought was old looking technology now that they a better display. Indeed, they may not have even come to the decision to incorporate the frame bezel as it is had the display technology not been so seamless. So yes, to say they are attempting to eliminate the appearance of the bezel is accurate, but with respect to their design solution. Prior to that, if the display had gone all the way to the edge, they clearly state in the article they were having trouble framing the UI elegantly, only once they decided to adopt the frame around photos did they translate their solution for the rest of the software.

That of course is an aesthetic style decision, not a necessarily a hardware based decision.

It is interesting to note that Apple manufactures very few of the components they assemble in their products themselves, and rely on third party suppliers, who are often competitors against their own products, yet despite this, Apple routinely stuns those very supplier/competitors with new products that incorporate things their competitors supply, but that the competitors don't themselves incorporate into their own products. Now how could that be?

----------

Why go to these extremes if they could literally just use a screen with no bezels? It literally makes no sense to claim that they intentionly added a bezel and then went to these lengths to hide it.

Because there are other design issues which I have already quoted.

We've clearly hit an impasse. I've quoted all the relevant statements and provided the original source regarding the Apple design teams decision to first have no bezel, then move forward with a bezel, which the new technology allowed them to do more seamlessly with the UI than anything they were previously attempting by not having a bezel. It's very simple -- do you want frames to pop into existence for some of the interface, and disappear in others? Or do you want the frames to flow as part of the overall design? Dye and Ive chose the latter. It was an aesthetic compromise.

----------

Before the iPhone, people preferred smartphones with keyboards. In both the case of the iPhone, and now with the Watch, Apple had a choice: either conform to what people thought they wanted, or show them that what they really wanted was something else....I believe that there will be no new round smartwatches introduced after this time next year.

This is not the same argument at all. People didn't wear their phones as part of their outfits. A woman who is wearing hoop earrings, a round necklace, round buttons, and a round belt buckle is not going to wear a square watch, no matter what it does for her.

Ive has already stated that when people wear something they have the expectation of choice. People are not going to stop wearing round watches within a year or two, because Apple has shown them the light, no more than people who bought the Galaxy Note 4 anyway, despite Apple showing them how it was best to be done.

 

[Lloydbm41]

The Apple Watch really looks crappy in this comparison. The Milanese Loop should have been used for this side by side.

But it also demonstrates how tiny a watch face looks on an Apple Watch compared to the Moto and LG round watches.

 

[Rogifan]

It is interesting to note that Apple manufactures very few of the components they assemble in their products themselves, and rely on third party suppliers, who are often competitors against their own products, yet despite this, Apple routinely stuns those very supplier/competitors with new products that incorporate things their competitors supply, but that the competitors don't themselves incorporate into their own products. Now how could that be?

Do you have an example of something Samsung or LG are supplying Apple that they're not using themselves? I chose those two competitors since we're talking about displays.

 

[Rogifan]

I don't understand what Mac 128 is talking about. Clearly, Apple would like for there to be no bezels. They are bending over backwards to make it look like there are no bezels by basing the entire OS on a black theme that will seamlessly blend in with the bezels around the screen, giving a bezel-free appearance. Why go to these extremes if they could literally just use a screen with no bezels? It literally makes no sense to claim that they intentionly added a bezel and then went to these lengths to hide it.

Exactly. Why would they intentionally add something and then go to lengths to hide it? The HIG specifically states that developers should use a black background to blend in with the bezel as much as possible. All the 3rd party apps featured on Apple's website have a black background. Considering Alan Dye is head of Human Inferface at Apple one would assume he was involved with and/or signed off on the HIG before it was published.

 

[dwreck]

The Apple Watch really looks crappy in this comparison. The Milanese Loop should have been used for this side by side.

But it also demonstrates how tiny a watch face looks on an Apple Watch compared to the Moto and LG round watches.

Image

The Moto watch looks ok there, except for the way that the strap connects to the watch, which looks poorly thought-out, and likely to catch on things. (I'd like to see someone try to put on a cable-knit sweater while wearing one.) Also, I just can't get past the flat-tire; I'd rather have a bezel.

 

[Rogifan]

The Apple Watch really looks crappy in this comparison. The Milanese Loop should have been used for this side by side.

But it also demonstrates how tiny a watch face looks on an Apple Watch compared to the Moto and LG round watches.

Image

Right because Apple didn't just design the watch for men.

 

[dwreck]

Obviously people are dying for a round smartwatch.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/02/11/mo...id-wear-devices-shipped-in-2014-says-canalys/

 

[Lloydbm41]

The Moto watch looks ok there, except for the way that the strap connects to the watch, which looks poorly thought-out, and likely to catch on things. (I'd like to see someone try to put on a cable-knit sweater while wearing one.) Also, I just can't get past the flat-tire; I'd rather have a bezel.

Large black bezel all the way around or one small area and no bezel. Hmmm???

P.S. surprisingly I haven't had any issues with the watch catching on anything (shirt-wise), buy I also purchased some steel connect lugs for the 360 in order to change straps in a few seconds (I have a black Milanese strap, a black leather carbon strap and the stock black leather). Also makes the watch look better, because I agree that the way the strap connects to the 360 does not look right.

----------

Obviously people are dying for a round smartwatch.

http://techcrunch.com/2015/02/11/mo...id-wear-devices-shipped-in-2014-says-canalys/

So when round Android wear watch sales eclipse Apple watch sales, just like with phones, tablets, set top boxes, laptops and so on, will your comment still mean something? Just curious.

 

[Mac 128]

Do you have an example of something Samsung or LG are supplying Apple that they're not using themselves? I chose those two competitors since we're talking about displays.

I don't recall Samsung products using retina displays in their smartphones before Apple started using them, even though Samsung makes them for Apple. For instance.

----------

Exactly. Why would they intentionally add something and then go to lengths to hide it? The HIG specifically states that developers should use a black background to blend in with the bezel as much as possible. All the 3rd party apps featured on Apple's website have a black background. Considering Alan Dye is head of Human Inferface at Apple one would assume he was involved with and/or signed off on the HIG before it was published.

I explained this, with supporting quotes. We're done here.

----------

Right because Apple didn't just design the watch for men.

No they designed a unisex watch in two sizes, for customers who prefer a smaller or larger watch. Because you know, men don't just wear large watches, and women don't all wear small watches. Moto could do the same thing and subject their customers to tiny display screens as well.

 

[mightyjabba]

I explained this, with supporting quotes. We're done here.

The thing is, your supporting quotes appear to undermine your point. Here's the passage you say means that they could've had a bezel-less screen. It means nothing of the kind.

The studio stopped short of banishing screen edges altogether, Dye said, “when we discovered we loved looking at photos on the watch, and you can’t not show the edge of a photo.” He laughed. “Don’t get me wrong, we tried! I could list a number of terrible ideas.” They attempted to blur edges, and squeeze images into circles. There was “a lot of vignetting”—the darkening of a photograph’s corners. “In the end, it was maybe putting ourselves first,” he said.

The passage up to that point is talking about their attempt to hide the bezels, and make them blend in with the UI:

He went on to explain that an Apple Watch uses a new display technology whose blacks are blacker than those in an iPhone’s L.E.D. display. This makes it easier to mask the point where, beneath a glass surface, a display ends and its frame begins.

In other words, to hide the bezels! But they couldn't completely do this because they wanted to be able to view photos on the screen. And as you know if you've displayed a photo on the screen, it becomes immediately obvious where the screen stops and the bezel begins. They tried a lot of things to hide this, like having the edges of the photo blur out, or use vignetting, but in the end they decided it wasn't working.

Do you really not see this?

 

[Fanaticalism]

I quoted that passage myself earlier. You can "hear" it any way you like. It's clear you are against round smartwatches and you're not interested in seeing it any other way. However in context I read it this way:

Heh, when Android Wear was rumored, Rogifan was completely against smartwatches and found them entirely unnecessary. The moment Apple announced theirs? She made it her Avatar...

 

[Mac 128]

Here's the passage you say means that they could've had a bezel-less screen. It means nothing of the kind. The passage up to that point is talking about their attempt to hide the bezels, and make them blend in with the UI

Just because you see the dress as gold and white, doesn't mean it's not actually black and blue.

I say again: How on Earth could they have even considered "banishing screen edges altogether" if it weren't techincally possible to take the screen all the way to edge, just as the Moto 360 does? Why would they need to consciously "avoid the edge"?

[Dye] and Ive decided “to avoid the edge of the screen as much as possible.” The studio stopped short of banishing screen edges altogether

This of course was all prior to discussing photos at all.

So we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[mightyjabba]

I say again: How on Earth could they have even considered "banishing screen edges altogether" if it weren't techincally possible to take the screen all the way to edge, just as the Moto 360 does? Why would they need to consciously "avoid the edge"?

You're very seriously misinterpreting this paragraph. In fact, you're literally only quoting half the sentence!

The studio stopped short of banishing screen edges altogether, Dye said, “when we discovered we loved looking at photos on the watch, and you can’t not show the edge of a photo.”

They avoided the edges of the screen so they could create the illusion that it was all one bezel-less surface. They stopped short of "banishing screen edges altogether" because they found that the illusion didn't work well with photos. It's really quite clear, and has absolutely nothing to do with them being able to technically use a screen with no bezels. If you can't see that, well... I'm not sure what to say.

 

[dwreck]

Large black bezel all the way around or one small area and no bezel. Hmmm???

I actually rather admire the 360, but the issue isn't how large the bezel is, it's how well the bezel is concealed. I look at my own Apple Watch, and don't really see a bezel. With the 360, the chopped-off bottom (which exists for the same reason as Apple's Bezel) is all I see.

So when round Android wear watch sales eclipse Apple watch sales, just like with phones, tablets, set top boxes, laptops and so on, will your comment still mean something? Just curious.

No, my comment won't mean anything then, and that will likely happen. Android Wear will likely take marketshare from Swatch on one end, and Apple on the other by pitching $99 watches (yours free with a Galaxy Note 8). Apple will sell fewer watches to the Movado and Rolex set at much higher ASP. It's so predictable it's boring. But it definitely means something today, when the lowest estimates of the number of Apple Watch pre-orders were about 33% higher than what the Android OEMs sold in Android devices in all of 2014.

 

[Lloydbm41]

I actually rather admire the 360, but the issue isn't how large the bezel is, it's how well the bezel is concealed. I look at my own Apple Watch, and don't really see a bezel. With the 360, the chopped-off bottom (which exists for the same reason as Apple's Bezel) is all I see.

Really? You don't see a bezel? Cause I see a huge bezel.

But, I can also show you watch faces that make the small flat tire disappear on the 360, to give the same impression you are talking about.

No, my comment won't mean anything then, and that will likely happen. Android Wear will likely take marketshare from Swatch on one end, and Apple on the other by pitching $99 watches (yours free with a Galaxy Note 8). Apple will sell fewer watches to the Movado and Rolex set at much higher ASP. It's so predictable it's boring. But it definitely means something today, when the lowest estimates of the number of Apple Watch pre-orders were about 33% higher than what the Android OEMs sold in Android devices in all of 2014.

Well, if you mean sold in "all of 2014" meaning the last 3-4 months of 2014, then sure, go ahead and say that. Kind of like me saying, Android phones sold more phones than Apple in the first day of 2015, than Apple did all of last year. Apple pretty much has a lock on iPhone users, so it wasn't a surprise to see them outsell Android Wear watches on the first day. Let's see how sales look between the 2 watches after June. Apple should be out of back order status by then and Google wil have Android Wear 5.1 out and round watches from Huawei, LG, Moto 360 part duex will be out. That will be the true test of the smartwatch sales stats.

As for profits. Apple makes 70% of its profits from the iPhone. The Apple Watch won't make them a hundreth of what the iPhone does. Put the Apple Watch in the Apple TV/iPad category for sales figures and profit margins.

 

[ksuyen]

How about this then:

Given a free choice. People prefer round faced watches

You are of course fully entitled to you preference and you opinion, as am I and everyone else on these forums.

Interesting.

And as you said, people are entitled to their preference / opinion. In my humble opinion, people have different tastes. You can't group them into one single entity whose preference is round watches. Just an observation .

 

[SHNXX]

Really? You don't see a bezel? Cause I see a huge bezel.
Image

But, I can also show you watch faces that make the small flat tire disappear on the 360, to give the same impression you are talking about.

Image




Well, if you mean sold in "all of 2014" meaning the last 3-4 months of 2014, then sure, go ahead and say that. Kind of like me saying, Android phones sold more phones than Apple in the first day of 2015, than Apple did all of last year. Apple pretty much has a lock on iPhone users, so it wasn't a surprise to see them outsell Android Wear watches on the first day. Let's see how sales look between the 2 watches after June. Apple should be out of back order status by then and Google wil have Android Wear 5.1 out and round watches from Huawei, LG, Moto 360 part duex will be out. That will be the true test of the smartwatch sales stats.

As for profits. Apple makes 70% of its profits from the iPhone. The Apple Watch won't make them a hundreth of what the iPhone does. Put the Apple Watch in the Apple TV/iPad category for sales figures and profit margins.

We are taking about watches, not phones or monitors right?

Bezels are often a design feature for men's watches, not a flaw.
Bezel-less watch cases do not look good on human wrists, which is why most men's watches have prominent, often decorated bezels (see Rolex, Audemars Piguet, etc).
Even on thin dress watches, bezels are thick and visible place for designers to show their craft with polishing and curves.

 

[roland.g]

But if they go round, then Flavor Flav would probably end up with one.

Is that the product placement they're after?

 

[Piggie]

Interesting.

And as you said, people are entitled to their preference / opinion. In my humble opinion, people have different tastes. You can't group them into one single entity whose preference is round watches. Just an observation .

I agree, which is why I tell people who say Smart Watches should be Square and Round is wrong ARE talking out their ASS.

There is no RIGHT way, there is the way YOU PREFER.

Some may like the square look, some may love the round look.
It's not for those who like the square look, to tell those who like the round like that they are wrong.

And, irrespective of anything, anyone says here.
If (and it's a BIG IF) If the Apple watch had turned out to be round, with a UI designed to take advantage of the round screen.
All these same people would be falling over themselves to argue the case that round is the shape they should be, and all these LG, Samsung, Sony square ones are junk and wrong.

That's the sad truth about these forums.