Stainless steel vs Aluminium

[MileHighPilot]

The S4 hasn't even been out a year yet. S5? Are you from the future?

i thought i missed something when the s5 was mentioned

I agree. And the Sapphire is a major selling point when you want to protect a display that small with the Apple Watch. The only time they really have discussed the Sapphire display, has been during their keynotes, but zero marketing behind it, and I think it would also help justify the price for some of Apple would actually discuss it. It’s kind of like 3D Touch and Live Photos, great features to use, but no one really knows they exist or how to use it.

the only reason i am considering the stainless steel over the aluminum is the sapphire display due to how durable it is
im rough on watches and anything to protect them might be worth considering

 

[newellj]

The S4 hasn't even been out a year yet. S5? Are you from the future?

You're right, should have been an S3 and an S4. Edited to correct.
[doublepost=1558626386][/doublepost]

i thought i missed something when the s5 was mentioned

the only reason i am considering the stainless steel over the aluminum is the sapphire display due to how durable it is
im rough on watches and anything to protect them might be worth considering

It's a mixed bag. One of the things I didn't like about the sapphire display was that it was much more reflective than the ion glass. The other thing to consider is that sapphire glass is more scratch-resistant because it's harder, but that also means more likely to shatter if really smacked. And the sapphire glass is by no means scratch-proof. There are a lot of threads from SS owners whose Milanese bands scratched the display.

 

[BillGates1969]

I had a S0 SS, a S2 SS, a S3 SBSS and now a S4 Nike space grey.

Which is my favourite?

Silver Stainless hands down for me. My S4 has 2 or three scratches that annoy me on the screen. It doesn’t feel as premium as the SS...but then frankly it isn’t - it is £300 cheaper! I do use Cellular, so will 100% go back to Stainless for the S5. The financial hit is a lot on resale, but I am going to try to keep the S5 for two years to soften the blow.

The financial blow will also be helped by the fact that it’s my 50th in September and my daughter has said she will buy me the new AW5 SS if it comes out then .

 

[tonoboon]

For me Stainless and Edition /

 

[nikkisharif]

I’m a watch person, so I dove in pretty late. My first watch was a S4 40mm SG Aluminum that I purchased in October. I wasn’t sure how I’d like it, so I got the one that was immediately available. After I decided I really liked the features, I traded it in & ended up getting a 44mm GSS. I love the weight because it feels more like a mechanical watch & I wanted something that can be dressed up or down. Plus the gold looks great on my skin tone..much better than the silver. No matter what I did, the aluminum didn’t work for my less casual days. I don’t buy tech based on resale value because all that matters is if I feel it’s worth it. My plans are to keep it until I feel the need to get a new one...whether that’s in a few years, next week, or when the S5 is dropped.

 

[keeper]

Does the SS feel as robust as a Omega Seamaster?
I wear my Omega to do anything and it has no marks, I’ve bashed the screen and it’s perfect.
My Apple Watch 3 has a scratch on the screen and feels fragile compared to the Omega.

Would I get the same robust feeling with a SS?

 

[nikkisharif]

Does the SS feel as robust as a Omega Seamaster?
I wear my Omega to do anything and it has no marks, I’ve bashed the screen and it’s perfect.
My Apple Watch 3 has a scratch on the screen and feels fragile compared to the Omega.

Would I get the same robust feeling with a SS?

Not even close. It will definitely feel more substantial than the aluminum version, but nothing like an Omega. You could put a heavier metal band on it to increase the weight, though. All in all, the stainless is a great device.

 

[212rikanmofo]

Chiming in on this. Battery life is one the most subjective features on any tech device, why? Because if you have irregular charging patterns or you don’t charge the device frequently, let it drain completely regularly (Which is not recommended FYI), then over the course of time, the battery life will be shortened.

One of my rituals with Apple products, let alone any tech product, I try to charge it frequently, never let it completely drain, and my lithium-ion batteries have lasted for years well past there expectancy. It’s all about battery maintenance.

I thought it was good practice to drain the battery every now n then for proper maintenance? Who told you that it wasn't? You're the 1st one that I've heard to say that. Can someone please confirm what is the proper way? To drain or not to drain?

 

[44267547]

I thought it was good practice to drain the battery every now n then for proper maintenance?

If that’s what you think, then please provide a literal example of why someone would drain their battery on the Watch? Lithium ion batteries don’t need to be drained for ‘maintenance reasons’.

Who told you that it wasn't? You're the 1st one that I've heard to say that.

Perhaps try researching Apple versus Assuming, because that’s directly what Apple states, there’s _no_ need to completely drain your battery.

Hence: (See link below)

“Charge your Apple lithium-ion battery whenever you want. There’s no need to let it discharge 100% before recharging. Apple lithium-ion batteries work in charge cycles. You complete one charge cycle when you’ve used (discharged) an amount that equals 100% of your battery’s capacity — but not necessarily all from one charge. For instance, you might use 75% of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25% the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100%, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle. The capacity of any type of battery will diminish after a certain amount of recharging. With lithium-ion batteries, the capacity diminishes slightly with each complete charge cycle. Apple lithium-ion batteries are designed to hold at least 80% of their original capacity for a high number of charge cycles, which varies depending on the product.”

Can someone please confirm what is the proper way?

A 30 second research would show you results direct what Apple says:

https://www.apple.com/batteries/why-lithium-ion/

 

[212rikanmofo]

If that’s what you think, then please provide a literal example of why someone would drain their battery on the Watch? Lithium ion batteries don’t need to be drained for ‘maintenance reasons’.



Perhaps try researching Apple versus Assuming, because that’s directly what Apple states, there’s _no_ need to completely drain your battery.

Hence: (See link below)

“Charge your Apple lithium-ion battery whenever you want. There’s no need to let it discharge 100% before recharging. Apple lithium-ion batteries work in charge cycles. You complete one charge cycle when you’ve used (discharged) an amount that equals 100% of your battery’s capacity — but not necessarily all from one charge. For instance, you might use 75% of your battery’s capacity one day, then recharge it fully overnight. If you use 25% the next day, you will have discharged a total of 100%, and the two days will add up to one charge cycle. It could take several days to complete a cycle. The capacity of any type of battery will diminish after a certain amount of recharging. With lithium-ion batteries, the capacity diminishes slightly with each complete charge cycle. Apple lithium-ion batteries are designed to hold at least 80% of their original capacity for a high number of charge cycles, which varies depending on the product.”



A 30 second research would show you results direct what Apple says:

https://www.apple.com/batteries/why-lithium-ion/

Thanks for confirming. I didn't know that. Does the same apply to other Apple products such as MacBooks, iPhone, iPads?

 

[CWallace]

Thanks for confirming. I didn't know that. Does the same apply to other Apple products such as MacBooks, iPhone, iPads?

Yes, as they all use Lithium-Ion batteries.

 

[Glideslope]

Does the SS feel as robust as a Omega Seamaster?
I wear my Omega to do anything and it has no marks, I’ve bashed the screen and it’s perfect.
My Apple Watch 3 has a scratch on the screen and feels fragile compared to the Omega.

Would I get the same robust feeling with a SS?

Not even in the same Universe.

 

[jagolden]

Just moved from series 0 to series 4 today. Both aluminum.
The aluminum and ss were the same price so no factor there.
Prefer the sportier look of the aluminum. Prefer dungarees and cargo shorts over chinos or dress slacks, so for me the choice will always be a no-brainer. I too am hard on watches. No scratches ever on case or screen.
To me the ss looks too glossy and the color too easy to scratch, and IMO the scratch would look more unsightly than on the aluminum.

But, the decision is what you want. Go see them and decide which is right for you.
Think about your lifestyle and how you like to project yourself. The only person to please is yourself.
No matter which you buy, you can always get a thin, clear protective case and/or a screen protector.
Good luck!

 

[ChrisChaval]

I've got both and the ion X screen on the aluminum watch gets scratched way too easily

You look at it wrong --- and it's already scratched

That kind of material is OK for a smartphone, not for a watch, even less for a sports version of a watch and certainly not for a watch at the price point it is being offered

the sapphire glass on the SS is much, much more durable, in fact it should be standard for each and every watch model

even more so, I would expect a sports watch to be able to take more hits than an "office" watch, to be much, much more rugged and durable, but strangely it is vice versa ..

that being said, I do prefer the SS (because I have to)

 

[MileHighPilot]

I've got both and the ion X screen on the aluminum watch gets scratched way too easily

You look at it wrong --- and it's already scratched

That kind of material is OK for a smartphone, not for a watch, even less for a sports version of a watch and certainly not for a watch at the price point it is being offered

the sapphire glass on the SS is much, much more durable, in fact it should be standard for each and every watch model

even more so, I would expect a sports watch to be able to take more hits than an "office" watch, to be much, much more rugged and durable, but strangely it is vice versa ..

that being said, I do prefer the SS (because I have to)

thanks that was enough to make me decide on the stainless steel version

 

[bambooshots]

Going on two week since I switched from my SBSS S3 (with scratches on body and screen) to aluminum S4.
So far, so good. No damage yet.

Still early in the ownership as my SBSS didn’t get damaged until a few months in, but perhaps the aluminum models are more durable than many here give it credit for.

 

[GomerBoy]

If you wanted a Nike Plus Apple Watch (like me), your only option was aluminum.

 

[Thai]

After seeing my father's Series 4 and coworker's Series 3 ALUM having scratched glass, there is no doubt in my mind the value of sapphire. My sapphire on Series 0 from 4 years ago (now son wearing it) is perfect. Enough said.

 

[44267547]

If you wanted a Nike Plus Apple Watch (like me), your only option was aluminum.

Understandable, but the Nike watch appeal seems to have waned somewhat, especially for those who really don’t see past the band options, and the stainless is far more expensive, but the protection of the sapphire display is unmatched.

 

[The Game 161]

Think i’m Leaning to SS as my next Apple Watch but not sure wether to go space black SS or normal. Normal SS just looks better to me and you can tell the difference with space black from a distance hard to tell if it is really SS or not.

 

[Thai]

Think i’m Leaning to SS as my next Apple Watch but not sure wether to go space black SS or normal. Normal SS just looks better to me and you can tell the difference with space black from a distance hard to tell if it is really SS or not.

While true that SS is classic and shiny. I had SS with my Series 0. Love it. It is a scratch magnet however.

For S4, i picked Space Black because it looks like monolith...you just don’t see where the screen and case begins and ends. DLC coating is very polish...so, blends nicely with the glass.

With the sapphire glass in front, ceramic back, sapphire over lens on back, and then add in DLC coating, you have a watch that is ENTIRELY very scratch resistant.

 

[The Game 161]

While true that SS is classic and shiny. I had SS with my Series 0. Love it. It is a scratch magnet however.

For S4, i picked Space Black because it looks like monolith...you just don’t see where the screen and case begins and ends. DLC coating is very polish...so, blends nicely with the glass.

With the sapphire glass in front, ceramic back, sapphire over lens on back, and then add in DLC coating, you have a watch that is ENTIRELY very scratch resistant.

From that angle it looks very classy

Hard decision lol

 

[CWallace]

I have owned both and I prefer the Space Black.

My only real issue is non-matching band lugs, but I have swapped the silver for black on my bands where necessary. Pretty straight-forward on third-party bands, but admittedly a bit of a nightmare on Apple bands due to the thread-lock compound they use.

 

[Seanm87]

I went from series 0 stainless steel to series 4 aluminium. I actually prefer the aluminium.

 

[44267547]

I have owned both and I prefer the Space Black.

My only real issue is non-matching band lugs, but I have swapped the silver for black on my bands where necessary. Pretty straight-forward on third-party bands, but admittedly a bit of a nightmare on Apple bands due to the thread-lock compound they use.

Pro Tip:

Use a blow dryer, heat up the end of the lug that you’re trying to remove, (Low heat/1 minute) The heat will allow for the exchange to be much easier for the lugs.