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.
Square vs Round Screen - Edited image is surprising
- Thread starter Piggie
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thank you for the sensible reply
Of course, I agree this is all personal taste.
I also accept we are mostly smart enough here to realise if the Apple watch was like the one of the right, I could post the above in reverse order, and be told I was wrong for suggesting they should have made is square
And anyone who does not belief that would be the case on the forums is not being honest
I will tell you what I would love, and I said the same thing about the larger iPhone, and I know I was right also then, as has been proven.
If Apple actually made both designs above. Tweaked the UI in places here and there to allow for the screen shape change, and put them up for sale right next to each other.
I'd guarantee you, without question, the round model would sell more.
The physical size is the same height wise, only a fraction wider.
It can display ANYTHING the square version does without compromise.
It also has the advantage of when displaying anything other than plain text (which is most of the time) the screen and graphics are physically larger, making is easier to see and interact with.
Of course classic watch faces also look a million time better
As I say, I am 100% certain, given the free choice, and seeing on screen items, general customers would go for the right hand model.
Others here will of course disagree as is the nature of these forums, just as they did over a larger iPhone, and smaller iPad
----------
Are you having difficulty understanding, that the issues you have shown on "your" photo's have nothing to do with the screen being physically round.
It's how the software uses the screen.
I could just as easy show a round face on an Apple screen with the edges of the circle cut off to try and prove a point.
But so that did not happen, Apple just shrunk the circle right down to it would fit inside a smaller square shape.
And this is why I did the original photoshop to try and help you understand it's not the "Shape" that's the issue, it's how you use it.
Please stop, think, and try to understand what I'm saying.
A circular face just isn't optimal for most use cases of the watch. Apple made the right choice, no matter how anyone tries to justify the round screen.
I don't accept either is RIGHT
Either can be preferred and look better depending or worse on how you use it.
And again, regardless of the "haters" here, I can guarantee 100% if it WAS Round, them the vast majority here would be saying, of course it should be round, not like those stupid clunky square Casio things.
If anything, the many many pre-render/concepts being round shows you what many expected and hoped for, before we knew it's RL shape, when suddenly many flipped their opinion, and despite many renders being loved, now square was instantly better
Either can be preferred and look better depending or worse on how you use it.
And again, regardless of the "haters" here, I can guarantee 100% if it WAS Round, them the vast majority here would be saying, of course it should be round, not like those stupid clunky square Casio things.
If anything, the many many pre-render/concepts being round shows you what many expected and hoped for, before we knew it's RL shape, when suddenly many flipped their opinion, and despite many renders being loved, now square was instantly better
Well, I can't argue with that at all.
Apple as we know just buys these things in, for a very low price.
I can only presume it was down to price or volume that they could not find a nicer screen for the price they wanted to pay the supplier.
I love to hear people here say, NO. The bezel is just right.
It's always fun when people say such things, to see what they then say as time does on when Apple can source a screen with less bezel.
We all know these same people will then not jump up and down and say how much they hate the new reduced bezel
Circular screen only works for the watch face. Even then, there wouldn't be room to display the complications like they did with the round watch face on the rectangle screen.
Now imagine the Instagram app on a circular face.
Now imagine the Instagram app on a circular face.
So how do they place "complications" on a normal round mechanical watch face?
I know the answer, just asking you
-----------
Listen......
At the end of the day, all I am saying is that.
Some people like Square face watches
Some people like Round face watches
Many thought the Apple watch was going to be round (see many of the concepts)
Both have their pro's and con's and you can argue for either shape
People now say square is correct as Apple decided to go with it. If they had decided round was best these same people would be saying round was best.
It would be nice for customers to have a choice
The problem I have with a round screen relates to the arc of other products.
What's the main use of your smart phone? For most people, it certainly isn't making phone calls so, Blackberrys aside, we've shed specific physical buttons for making and answering calls. Equally, a traditional phone is bent around so it can be close to both your ear and your mouth. Ignoring stuff like the LG curve, we've shed that also.
So, the smart watch. Is its main purpose to tell the time? Sure, it will be used for that, quite a lot most likely, but that's not why people are buying it is it? It's to allow the control of and display of information (lists!) that previously were only available on a smart phone. Ignoring fringe cases like childrens books or LCD displays for promotional or specific purposes, we don't read round books, watch round television or have round computer monitors do we? As such, having a square or rectangular smartwatch means we have, imo, thankfully skipped at least one stage of skeuomorphism.
Doesn't mean it's free of skeuomorphism, the digital crown being the obvious example, but at least it's "one less" as it were. The digital crown is likely a convenient bodge until a better UI is imagined, and I'd be surprised if it's still there in 6 or 7 years. Convenient, in that it ties into exisiting ideas of what a watch is, but doesn't seriously inhibit it like a round screen arguably would.
Outside of aesthetics, I truly see zero benefit of a round screen for the main purposes of the device. If the main purpose of a smart watch is fashion - which I struggle with tbh - then sure, a round screen could be "better" (subjective), but is fashion really the main purpose? When there's a large, existing, highly marketed industry selling an infinite variety of watches that look exponentially better in fashion terms?
What's the main use of your smart phone? For most people, it certainly isn't making phone calls so, Blackberrys aside, we've shed specific physical buttons for making and answering calls. Equally, a traditional phone is bent around so it can be close to both your ear and your mouth. Ignoring stuff like the LG curve, we've shed that also.
So, the smart watch. Is its main purpose to tell the time? Sure, it will be used for that, quite a lot most likely, but that's not why people are buying it is it? It's to allow the control of and display of information (lists!) that previously were only available on a smart phone. Ignoring fringe cases like childrens books or LCD displays for promotional or specific purposes, we don't read round books, watch round television or have round computer monitors do we? As such, having a square or rectangular smartwatch means we have, imo, thankfully skipped at least one stage of skeuomorphism.
Doesn't mean it's free of skeuomorphism, the digital crown being the obvious example, but at least it's "one less" as it were. The digital crown is likely a convenient bodge until a better UI is imagined, and I'd be surprised if it's still there in 6 or 7 years. Convenient, in that it ties into exisiting ideas of what a watch is, but doesn't seriously inhibit it like a round screen arguably would.
Outside of aesthetics, I truly see zero benefit of a round screen for the main purposes of the device. If the main purpose of a smart watch is fashion - which I struggle with tbh - then sure, a round screen could be "better" (subjective), but is fashion really the main purpose? When there's a large, existing, highly marketed industry selling an infinite variety of watches that look exponentially better in fashion terms?
Last edited:
So how do they place "complications" on a normal round mechanical watch face?
I know the answer, just asking you
It would look too busy putting them inside the watch face. it just wouldn't work well.
I will echo what has already been said. I was initially disappointed when the watch was unveiled with a square face, but then thought about the design more intelligently, realizing the paradigm that originally governed watch design was based on the premise of the analog watch.
With analog watches, it would have been impractical to have a square face as the hands rotate in a circle. Had analog watches never existed and the first timepieces been digital, we would have seen very few watches with round faces.
So, with that in mind, it should seem nonsensical to have a digital watch, used for reading lines of text, with a round face. Apple is correcting our outdated perception of what a watch should look like.
With analog watches, it would have been impractical to have a square face as the hands rotate in a circle. Had analog watches never existed and the first timepieces been digital, we would have seen very few watches with round faces.
So, with that in mind, it should seem nonsensical to have a digital watch, used for reading lines of text, with a round face. Apple is correcting our outdated perception of what a watch should look like.
Last edited:
Very interesting demonstration.
What's particularly interesting to me is how the visual weight of both seem similar, even though the black area inside the circle has considerably greater area. That's really quite fascinating.
This sort-of reminds me of a Nest thermostat. Its screen is circular and they've done a pretty good job of adapting the UI to it.
What's particularly interesting to me is how the visual weight of both seem similar, even though the black area inside the circle has considerably greater area. That's really quite fascinating.
This sort-of reminds me of a Nest thermostat. Its screen is circular and they've done a pretty good job of adapting the UI to it.
Too bad though that the display is permanently fused to the front crystal. You're going to be stuck with the original forever, and it would look very odd set into a round body. Also, who knows how disassembleable the watch really is. Could you get the pulse sensors out of the original body and into a theoretical after-market one? We know how fond Apple is of its magic glue, and there's no screw holes in the original case, anywhere, so it's all going to be glued together. Sadly.
This whole thread is ridiculous - "look, if I make the display round but so huge that the entire rectangular screen can fit inside it, then nothing gets cut off!" If Apple had made the screen that huge it would have been crucified.
The point of using a rectangular screen is that every pixel is usable. Round screens have large amounts of "awkward" pixels that are difficult or impossible to use effectively in most cases. Yes, showing traditional watch faces is one case where a round screen would work well, but there aren't many others.
The point of using a rectangular screen is that every pixel is usable. Round screens have large amounts of "awkward" pixels that are difficult or impossible to use effectively in most cases. Yes, showing traditional watch faces is one case where a round screen would work well, but there aren't many others.
Interesting viewpoint.
Do you think the circular version image I posted at the very start of this thread is HUGE.
It's the same height as the square face is now, just a little wider at it's widest point.
Does that make it HUGE?
Perhaps it's a bit of an optical illusion to you, and it just looks that way to you, as you get so much more usable screen space for the watch body being virtually the same physical size?
These photos are incredibly deceiving. Where is the bezel on the round watch? All the round watches have them. Moto Almost 360 has the little black bar and others have a hardware frame covering the bezel to fool you into thinking it doesn't exist. Also with these photos it's clear the only thing that looks good on a round face is an analog watch face. But then where would you put complicafions? On Watch they're in the corners. I guess you could put them inside the Watch face but that would look pretty cluttered imo. No one has said why round is better except that they like it better aesthetically.
Funny how people forget that one of the most popular iWatch concepts was this one:
And yes, it looks GREAT with watch faces as a timepiece. Which of course, is what Apple claims their Watch is first, and foremost. (Not a wrist computer.)
Sorry, that thing looks fat and dumb. It would look fatter and dumber still when you increase its thickness significantly to fit the actual watch hardware inside of it, as well as allow for some sort of fastening mechanism for the armband.
If you make a watch round, with a screen large enough to fit the current Watch screen inside of it, it will get significantly wider. Wider watch = heavier watch. More materials in casing, bigger battery required and so on. The display would also be more expensive (and perhaps also more difficult) to manufacture.
I'm pretty sure Apple studied round bodies, and it would not surprise me if they went rectangular because a majority preferred the slimmer form factor. A fat wrist computer doesn't look very fashionable.
While it is true that high-end mechanical wristwatches are also fairly hefty, size- and weight-wise, those aren't for everybody. Especially women. Apple wants mass-market appeal.
It is likely that Apple couldn't get a round watch to work the way they wanted. You can see the remnants of the idea with the health screen. It is likely that that information could be better presented in a square/list format instead of a round one.
Indeed, I remember it well.
I also remember all the Phablets like Samsung make are so dumb, Apples 4" is the perfect size.
I also remember, tablets smaller than 10" are dumb and unusable.
The thing that makes me smile the most is thinking, all the people in this thread, who are saying round watches are dumb, wrong and stupid.
If we rewind the clock back a few months, and Apple had revealed their round Apple Watch.
Makes me smile as would I expect these same people to now, on this very forums to be saying how wrong apple was, and their round watch is dumb, wrong and stupid?
No of course not, they would be saying how amazing it looks, and how right Apple was to go with this shape, when almost all other makers have no imagination and just gone with a dumb square look.
Of course, they will never admit to this.
As I say, I'm happy for both forms to exist.
We all have our preferences.
The Moto 360 probably has THE strongest following at the moment, and, for people who like that look, and there are many, I hope Motorola, and/or others continue with that design so that people have the widest choice possible.
Free choice for people, is all I have ever advocated.
Not telling people this is how it must be, if you don't like it, tough luck, we are offering you nothing else.
----------
I do agree with you there.
If you look at the many many screens of the current watch, so many things look like they were built for a round screen, and then at the last minute modified.
Ridiculous. You can pick and choose. As a designer, you MUST pick and choose. That's what it means to be judicious as Jony says. Not wishing to pick and choose is being dogmatic, being more concerned with the name of a thing than the use of the thing.
If you read the posting I said "Pick and Choose" in.
I was not referring to a designer making a choice about a product.
I was remarking on the silly poster I was replying to, saying OMG A round watch face reeks of skeuomorphism, whilst this same poster was totally ignoring the even more skeuomorphism aspect of a fake watch winder and face hands on a screen, both just to try and pretend it looks like an old watch.
Hence my comment of "pick and choose"
The poster was only picking on some aspects, and ignoring other even more blatant ones in a weak attempt to prove a point.
If skeuomorphism really annoys this poster so much, then they should be equally critical of other, even more blatant skeuomorphism aspects of the current design.
There'll always be people who only go with what Apple decides, of course.
I've always preferred Apple stuff, but wanted a large screen so dallied with a Galaxy Note 1 for about year, concurrently with an iPhone 4 - I'm now very happy with my 6 Plus. I wanted a smaller tablet for travel purposes long before the Mini came along, so bought a Galaxy Tab 7.7", the good one with the SAMOLED+ screen, not the garbage Tab 7. Replaced it with a Mini when that arrived as I'd much prefer iOS (although these days I'm strictly 6 Plus and Air 2, no need of a small tablet personally).
I'm firmly of the opinion that a square/rectangle screen is a significantly better choice than a circular one, for a lot of considered reasons I've expressed in a previous post. Again, I struggle to see the benefit of a circular screen for control, notification & list related activities, which is ultimately what the Watch is for outside the fashion aspects of it.
Point is, don't lump everyone who is anti-circular as a fanboy, its too sweeping of a generalisation.
I've always preferred Apple stuff, but wanted a large screen so dallied with a Galaxy Note 1 for about year, concurrently with an iPhone 4 - I'm now very happy with my 6 Plus. I wanted a smaller tablet for travel purposes long before the Mini came along, so bought a Galaxy Tab 7.7", the good one with the SAMOLED+ screen, not the garbage Tab 7. Replaced it with a Mini when that arrived as I'd much prefer iOS (although these days I'm strictly 6 Plus and Air 2, no need of a small tablet personally).
I'm firmly of the opinion that a square/rectangle screen is a significantly better choice than a circular one, for a lot of considered reasons I've expressed in a previous post. Again, I struggle to see the benefit of a circular screen for control, notification & list related activities, which is ultimately what the Watch is for outside the fashion aspects of it.
Point is, don't lump everyone who is anti-circular as a fanboy, its too sweeping of a generalisation.
Yes, I agree. The digital crown doesn't harm the UI, and arguably makes it easier to use. Round design creates lot of empty space when displaying text.
It's just your subjective opinion which skeuomorphism is more "blatant" than the other. To me they seem both about equally "blatant." I'm sure some people would say that the round face is the more egregious.
The argument that a round wrist watch is skeuomorphic, and therefore "bad" is spurious. Rectangle watchs have been around ages. The Cartier Tank was introduced in 1917, the Tag Heuer Monaco in 1969.