Show us some attractive examples which aren't also copies of existing watch brands.
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.
Watch face, visual vs. functional
- Thread starter Skylitfly
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Everyone has their own sense of what's "attractive".
The point is to allow more choices and customization.
Same thought here, I often found myself wishing the time could be displayed in the center on the modular.I prefer the visual aesthetics of an analogue watch face, but I also prefer a digital watch face for ease of readout. As a result I now have the Simple watch fave with a small digital readout complication on top of it
I really want to like modular but I can't. I just don't like the design. I don't like that you can't put the time in the center, for example. Being able to add a wallpaper would be awesome as well.
I hope we will see some more face designs in watch os 3.
I think this thread is more about the visual vs. functional qualities of the existing watch faces, rather than the lack of options. You could have the same discussion whether you are talking about ten watch faces or a thousand watch faces.
I agree that we should have the option for third-party watch faces, but I'd bet many Apple Watch owners would never bother to install one. Even among those who do, I would expect to see what we already see: Most seem to stick to the same three or four watch faces 99% of the time. That doesn't mean one of those three or four watch faces wouldn't be a custom one though. Many of us would choose a third party face that we feel fits our style and sets our Apple Watch apart from others... making Apple's "most personal device ever" even more personalized. But the question would remain: Do you choose to use a watch face (custom or stock) that is more about style or more about function? Of course some faces would cover both, but not all.
Sean
Half the thread is about wishing to be able to combine visual and functional in ways that are not yet possible.
I'll have to respectfully disagree.
That's like saying many iPhone owners would never bother to install third party wallpapers or apps.
I think a watchface store would be incredibly popular. After all, look at how much people want to have different watchbands.
Sure. Heck, maybe even less, since then everyone might be even be able to choose / customize two or even one face that fits exactly what they want
One of the many reasons I increasingly wonder if Apple gives a ****. This is such an obvious thing to want to do.
It's a feature I've said I'd like to be added. But, I've been trying to think of a way to do it without requiring the phone, and I'm coming up short.
More complex settings need the phone -- which apps get loaded, notification and Glances options, etc -- but the basic interface can be changed from the watch itself, whether you want to move apps around or configure watch faces. I think it would be necessary to re-order the faces without assistance from the phone.
What's your idea? How should it be done?
Slide them around to rearrange. If you slide up it deletes the watch face, so that's already there. Just allow sliding sideways to rearrange.
Apple could do it easily if it could be bothered.
But given what a disaster iTunes is and has been for years, I'm holding out no hope. It feels like Apple is very much asleep at the wheel right now.
How do you tell the watch you want to slide something? Force Press is already taken; maybe a "long press", like when you want to rearrange apps?
Seems cumbersome on such a small screen. I see no reason why they can't make it possible to re-order faces right on the AW app (just like re-arranging apps). The AW app already knows what faces you have.
95% of the time, I use Utility. I get three complications (one for Dark Sky, one for Fantastical, and one for Alarm) plus analog hands which, for me, are quicker/easier to read than a digital display. Somehow my brain has a slightly easier time processing things like "I have 20 min left before the meeting starts" when looking at analog hands vs. a digital readout.
On the weekends or when I don't have a lot going on, I sometimes switch to Solar (my second favorite), Photo (I made some cool Live Photos of my daughter, one of her delivering a Tae Kwon Do kick), and Motion. When I'm on one of those faces, I rely on Glances to take the place of complications. I've reduced my number of glances to just the absolutely essential ones.
On the weekends or when I don't have a lot going on, I sometimes switch to Solar (my second favorite), Photo (I made some cool Live Photos of my daughter, one of her delivering a Tae Kwon Do kick), and Motion. When I'm on one of those faces, I rely on Glances to take the place of complications. I've reduced my number of glances to just the absolutely essential ones.
My buddy has a Samsung Gear S2 watch. Some of the 3rd party watch faces are pretty cool but there is one thing I can't get over. There is a "always on" crappy watch face that stays on the screen until you lift your wrist and then it transitions into the nicer watch face. there is no way to turn this feature off. Takes away from the look/feel I think.
redman042, if you count the date display, you get four complications in the Utility dial. The date, although it doesn't show appointments in its complication like it can in Modular, can be tapped to take you straight to the Calendar.
Yes, a lot of them show a skeleton face all the time, which saves power... yet you can still see the time without having to move your wrist. Which is better by far than not having that choice.
Some let you override that if you wish, and keep the full fancy screen on all the time. (Heck, the LG-R stock face is on all the time.) But that's up to the user, whether they want to use up battery for that.