Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

richCB

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Sep 4, 2015
19
2
Surrey, UK
Apologies if this has been asked already but is there any significance to the time '10:09' that all AW faces revert to in settings? Is it just an arbitrary time or does it mean something to someone somewhere? Just curious.
 

JayLenochiniMac

macrumors G5
Nov 7, 2007
12,819
2,389
New Sanfrakota
i think apple just wanted to be one min ahead of the competitors...

Not necessarily. It might be that they didn't want the minute hand to block the 2 (at :10) on analog faces in the marketing pics so they moved it out of the way, and they wanted to be consistent with it in the digital format.
 
Last edited:

JayLenochiniMac

macrumors G5
Nov 7, 2007
12,819
2,389
New Sanfrakota

The article is still speculative. Notice that the article offered an alternative explanation from The Loop's Dave Mark.

That's why I wrote "Not necessarily," as I'm recognizing that my theory is also speculative with regards to visual effects. If it were 10:10, the minute hand would be blocking the 2 in marketing pics. They're also doing the same thing with the second hand right between 1 and 2 in 12, and ditto for the complications.

og_apple_watch.jpg
 
Last edited:

Enygmatic

macrumors 65816
Jan 27, 2015
1,019
1,177
Various
The article is still speculative. Notice that the article offered an alternative explanation from The Loop's Dave Mark.

That's why I wrote "Not necessarily," as I'm recognizing that my theory is also speculative in terms of visual effects. If it were 10:10, the minute hand would be blocking the 2 in marketing pics. They're also doing the same thing with the second hand right between 1 and 2 in 12, and ditto for the complications.

og_apple_watch.jpg
I get that... and I know what "necessarily" means... it's just that the consensus (multiple articles) points to Apple being a bit cheeky. There are hundreds of time combinations they could use that don't block any numbers - why enter a market and coincidentally use a time stamp that's in line with - but just before - all of the traditional major players in the space? Why not 9:09:14 (announcement date)? Or 10:57:14 (reveal time)?
 

JayLenochiniMac

macrumors G5
Nov 7, 2007
12,819
2,389
New Sanfrakota
I get that... and I know what "necessarily" means... it's just that the consensus (multiple articles) points to Apple being a bit cheeky. There are hundreds of time combinations they could use that don't block any numbers - why enter a market and coincidentally use a time stamp that's in line with - but just before - all of the traditional major players in the space? Why not 9:09:14? Or 10:57:14?

Umm, the digital format doesn't display seconds anyway.

The significance is most likely a combination of many things listed in this thread, rather than any one reason as the sole significance, including paying homage to horology and the history of watchmaking. Apple isn't the only one using 10:09, and some even display 10:12.

ScreenShot2015-01-31at81523PM_zpseaba93b3.jpg
 

Cayden

macrumors 6502a
Jul 10, 2014
926
544
Utah
Well when the watch is at 10:10 it shows the golden ratio, which is appealing to the eyes. I'm guessing apple did 10:09 just to be different and show they are "ahead" of the competition
 

Four oF NINE

macrumors 68000
Sep 28, 2011
1,931
896
Hell's Kitchen
Well when the watch is at 10:10 it shows the golden ratio, which is appealing to the eyes. I'm guessing apple did 10:09 just to be different and show they are "ahead" of the competition

Except it's not "Different" to be at 10:09 according to the link:

According to the folks at Timex (who set their products at 10:09:36 exactly)

Bottom line, it's aesthetics as the article mentioned.
 

BarracksSi

Suspended
Jul 14, 2015
3,902
2,663
Those are all good theories but it's actually a little part of apple history. It's the time of day that Steve Jobs announced the first iPhone.
(I'm risking out-nerding you here ;)

Nope. 9:41 was the time of day of the first iPhone announcement.

10:09 (or 10:10, or 10:08, etc) is common for watch catalog photos because it's a smiley, happy face. I'm sure this was mentioned in the links posted earlier.
 

kmj2318

macrumors 68000
Aug 22, 2007
1,669
712
Naples, FL
I think the choice for something near 10:09, 10:10, or 10:11 for aesthetic reasons for analog faces. But they chose 10:09 because it's the most aesthetic for digital faces. 10:10 looks weird digitally.
 

mattopotamus

macrumors G5
Jun 12, 2012
14,666
5,879
I think the choice for something near 10:09, 10:10, or 10:11 for aesthetic reasons for analog faces. But they chose 10:09 because it's the most aesthetic for digital faces. 10:10 looks weird digitally.

This. It is for aesthetic reasons. For watches like "rolex" it does not block the name.
 

shortcrust

macrumors 6502
Aug 7, 2008
476
105
Or could it be that a group of people discussed all of these factors before arriving at 10:09. "Hey, we'll be a minute ahead!" "..yeah, and 10:09 looks better than 10:10 on digital displays..."
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.