Tim Cook was right...

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by AppleFan360, May 15, 2015.

  1. AppleFan360 macrumors 68020

    Jan 26, 2008
    He was right about how accurate the watch tells time. If you compare it to http://www.time.gov or call the Coordinated Universal Time number (1-303-499-7111) you will notice that the Apple Watch is pretty much right on the money. This is probably the most accurate time piece I've ever worn even when I use to wear the watches that synced every night with WWV.
  2. jds4300 macrumors member

    Mar 4, 2008
    Wow. The Apple Watch tells time accurately. That's amazing. It is probably the first watch in the world that accurately reflects the time. Another first for Apple.
  3. TheAppleFairy macrumors 68020


    Mar 28, 2013
    The Clinton Archipelago unfortunately

    As long as I am within a few minutes I don't care.
  4. dannyyankou macrumors 604


    Mar 2, 2012
    Scarsdale, NY
    +/- 50 ms is pretty damn accurate.
  5. thomasfxlt58 macrumors regular

    Sep 14, 2014
    Considering that many of the $1000+ watches I've owned have struggled to do this, I suppose it IS good that a product called Watch tells time as best it can.
  6. Subdiv macrumors 6502

    Jan 17, 2014
    Now expecting the "at least you have your watch" comment followed by yet another debate on whether or not Apple botched the launch.
  7. 418 macrumors member

    Apr 21, 2015
    Pennywintingtonfarthingworth, UK
    Extremely accurate... At least until your phone decides that you're in Paris for no apparent reason and updates the time accordingly.
  8. Bryan Bowler macrumors 68040

    Sep 27, 2008
    I greatly appreciate the accuracy. I do things that rely on exact coordinated timing and I hate having to adjust other time mechanisms that continually drift off the mark. It's more common then you think.
  9. wanderfowl macrumors member


    May 6, 2015
    Michigan, US
    The Watch gets the time from your phone, and the phone gets regular timing updates from the cell towers, which get them from Coordinated Universal Time.

    Put differently, the Apple Watch doesn't need to be a good timepiece, it just asks a good source regularly.
  10. dannyyankou macrumors 604


    Mar 2, 2012
    Scarsdale, NY
    It's actually a bit of both that and keeping time on it's own. It initially syncs with the UTC, but it continues to keep track on its'a own. Disconnect your phone and it'll continue keeping track of time.
  11. Branskins macrumors 65816

    Dec 8, 2008
    Well how does this work when you don't have your iPhone on you? The watch still tells the time
  12. orev macrumors 6502

    Apr 22, 2015
    Anything network-connected can use the network time protocol to sync with atomic clocks. This is such an old technology and it's almost a side-benefit of all the other things the Watch can do.
  13. BillyTrimble macrumors 6502a

    Sep 20, 2013
    Semantics? Let's see. I look at my watch. It displays the correct time. Therefore it's the watch that's a great timepiece.
  14. wanderfowl macrumors member


    May 6, 2015
    Michigan, US
    Certainly, it can keep time without a phone, and it's probably good at it. But it just seems a bit funky to call an Apple Watch an "exceptionally accurate timepiece", when it can cheat using the phone to check a remote UTC every few hours. I'd be curious to see how well it keeps time over a longer period in Airplane Mode.

    Particularly when some high-end quartz and mechanical watches lose seconds per year with *no* external input, the conventional standard for "exceptionally accurate", this is an entirely different battle, and I balk at the characterization.

    It's kind of like the difference between the guy who can multiply 4 digit numbers in his head, and the guy who can do it with a calculator. It's the same result, but the situation and methods make it much more meaningful and impressive.
  15. carjakester macrumors 68020


    Oct 21, 2013
    I think its more impressive for a mechanical watch to keep accurate time over a long period of time, any digital watch could just sync and stay accurate.
  16. acctman macrumors 65816


    Oct 26, 2012
    those $1000 don't have a dedicated processor, ram, bluetooth and wifi to sync with regularly. That's expected that the apple watch would be spot on.
  17. Alvi macrumors 65816


    Oct 31, 2008
    It's kind of obvious (because it's a high tech device) but at the same time fascinating to have such a high grade of accuracy on your wrist.

    I usually OCD-ed a few times with an older watch because it kind of lost its accuracy over a certain period of time, it was only a couple of minutes but I guess it's cool to be extremely accurate.
  18. BvizioN macrumors 601


    Mar 16, 2012
    Manchester, UK
    What good woud a product that it's main purpose is to tell the time be, if id didn't do that correctly?


    These you meantioned are mostly there do do other stuff that over $1000 watches can't do, and not to show the time accurately.
  19. cambookpro macrumors 603


    Feb 3, 2010
    United Kingdom
    I don't think you buy a $1000+ watch for accurate time keeping though! A $50 Casio Wave Ceptor would do the trick for much less.

    If you're in the market for a Rolex, Patek etc, I'm guessing you'll be wanting it for the bling and a sort of investment/something to pass down the family.
  20. dacreativeguy macrumors 68020

    Jan 27, 2007
    You do know this isn't such an achievement for a watch connected to your phone which is connected to the internet. I'm happy it is accurate, but don't see the act of periodically contacting the atomic clock such a great feat.
  21. foxkoneko macrumors 6502

    Sep 5, 2011
  22. PedCrossing macrumors 6502


    Apr 3, 2012
    The Loop
    Get two, or more, apple watches; set each to Mickey watch face; put them side by side; be impressed.
  23. McDaddio macrumors 6502a

    Oct 6, 2014
    Well it is more accurate than a Rolex.
    Unless of course you are able to sync a Rolex precisely to the correct time and not be off by even a 1/10th a second.
  24. AppleFan360 thread starter macrumors 68020

    Jan 26, 2008
    You guys are sort of missing the point. The Apple Watch IS a good timepiece simply because it is able to show you the most accurate time possible on your wrist. Just because it gets this information from Universal Time doesn't make it any less of a watch. Heck, with a Rolex you have to set the time yourself which to me is no different.

    If you interpret the word "timepiece" as something that keeps the time on it's own, then sure, my old digital watch does a pretty good job but I would still need to set it myself from time to time or it would get it's time hack from WWV every night. Either way, an external input would still be required just like the Apple Watch.

    I also see many of you taking the technology for granted. When is the last time you had a watch on your wrist that can display time within 100ms and keep it that way for months on end. Not me therefore I'm impressed. :D
  25. SarZ macrumors regular


    Mar 11, 2008
    I wish I had your enthusiasm for a watch keeping accurate time
    You are indeed an Apple Fan ;)

Share This Page