I've been wondering the price of the Stainless Steel version. I like the Sport just fine, but I would like some metal bands to have along the sport bands. So far there haven't been any shown for the Sport. That worries me, since I would rather not pay much more than $350.
I wish we could get more votes. I'm genuinely interested in the consensus here. My opinion: the Apple Watch looks like garbage. I was SO excited about it and just KNEW Apple was gonna design something that put all other smartwatches to shame. Unfortunately, this watch looks no different from all the others. The Moto 360 DESTROYS this design (I've never owned an Android phone and don't plan on it, for the record). I suspect when Apple saw it, they sh$t themselves! If only Motorola had spent a little more time on it (outdated hardware, poor battery life, no iPhone support), I'd buy it in a heartbeat. The Moto 360 is what I would expect Apple to design.
Image
Damn that's a sexy watch!
I don't think you are far off there.
I think some people are living in a fantasy land with their gold prices
I must say though, Stainless Steel is cheap.
Perhaps there are other things the steel comes with, but apart from a little more machining time, Stainless should not be THAT much more than Aluminium.
I've been wondering the price of the Stainless Steel version. I like the Sport just fine, but I would like some metal bands to have along the sport bands. So far there haven't been any shown for the Sport. That worries me, since I would rather not pay much more than $350.
Just a reminder that in an early iPad poll, the majority of voters said they weren't planning on getting one.
And they didn't. Remember, it was a poll in an iPhone forum, so it was mostly answered by iPhone owners.
Sure enough, iPad sales per quarter have usually been a little less than half of iPhone sales.
But that's still more than one would expect. Most of the time, "will you buy" polls are way too optimistic, because it costs nothing to say "yes I will"![]()
No, it was a poll on the front page of Macrumors' website.
Yeah, but the bands I have seen don't actually match the Sport Watch. So it would look weird. It'd be nice to just see an space grey, aluminum band to go with the Sport Watch. If I see that, the question of which to buy would be answered for me.General consensus is that bands are interchangeable and you can buy any band to go with any watch. The only possible difference is that you may have to make sure you buy the right size band depending on which size watch you have.
Hmm. $500 may work for me, but $1100 is out of the question. I'm not sure how often Apple plans on updating this thing, but I know I'll want to upgrade it when they start adding in additional features (Maybe they'll have some form of upgrades the user can perform).My guess is that the standard will range from $500-$1000 depending on whether it has leather or metal bands. It's quite easy to get up to $1100 for a "mall brand" like Tissot or Movado with a stainless steel band.
<snip> My opinion: the Apple Watch looks like garbage. <snip> The Moto 360 DESTROYS this design <snip>
Damn that's a sexy watch!
The Moto 360 might look nice as a piece of hardware, but it is way too thick and a severe problem is that the OS and general use cases for information are not intended and suitable for round screens.
We might all agree that round screens look more stylish and more like traditional watches, but for a smart watches a round screen doesn't make any sense.
Let's be honest.
It's all down to how the UI is created.
.
Perhaps...
But I think there is a reason why Cinema screens, TV screens, desktops, tablets, mobile phones and so on and on have a square display and not circular. Because displaying content makes more sense in square then circular IMO.
Round is a more natural shape, nature wise, I don't think anyone can deny that. Square is a more artifial man made shape.
Perhaps this is why many like a round watch without really knowing why. It just feels and looks more natural.
When it comes to displaying man made data, most man made things are square, often for ease of manufacture, it's always easier to cut and to store square things than nice round things.
Human view wise, everything shoul be widescreen, even the watch, people have rubbished the round electronic watch idea, saying its only round because if the mechanics of hands and a watch face.
But such a display would be far far better firm the human field of view.
Also for displaying text and photos etc ect.
Perhaps a 4:3 landscape display would be far more sensible and practical when leaving mechanical watch hands behind and moving to a screen based watch.
I am sad apple has played it so very safe and was frightened to actually set a new display standard that could of taken us forward for a new decade or more.
Now all your apps, text, photos etc etc are going to have to be hacked to fit this aspect ratio they are going to use.
Sign.
A widescreen watch would look silly. Square mechanical watches exist and are actually fairly common. Apple tried to stay as true to the watch as they could. I'm sure they considered a round design but likely concluded that the design compromises necessary today were too much. If this takes off, I'm sure we'll see more variations in the future, just as we saw with the iPod.
Round is a more natural shape, nature wise, I don't think anyone can deny that. Square is a more artifial man made shape.
Perhaps this is why many like a round watch without really knowing why. It just feels and looks more natural.
Why silly?
I'd suggest its only silly as it's something new you are not used to.
Note: I did not say widescreen 4:3 would be acceptable, and offer more to view, but still be a practical shape.
Silly just means different to what we are used to.
I'm sure a car looked silly to horse riders, and a 5" mobile phone that needed charging every day would sound totally stupid 10 year ago, then phones were nice and small, slipped in the pocket and lasted 2 weeks.
The difference is that a phone back then was and still is today something that you put in your pocket or purse when not using it. Perhaps it sits on your desk during the day charging up. A watch is a wearable item, and by definition looks are important. That's why Google Glass hasn't caught on. It doesn't look remotely fashionable.
Sorry, but this makes no sense at all. There is nothing more "natural" about a round shape for a watch. The reason most watches are round is because the hands move in a circle over the dial. Adding corners didn't make sense at the time and still don't. Look at the hideous Bell & Ross watches.
Whether square is an artificial man made shape is totally irrelevant. Smart watches need to display information such as text, photos, notifications etc, which are best displayed in a right angled fashion. Why? Because since the beginning of time man has consumed textual information in that fashion. It is therefore more natural.
Pushing it into a circular shape, just because watches originally used round dials and hands, doesn't make sense in terms of the purpose that smart watches need to fulfil.
I'm sure Apple could come up with a great user interface that is probably better suited for round screens than Android, but even Apple would not be able to get around the fact that for the purpose of information consumption a square or rectangled screen just makes more sense.
Only that I am honest enough to admit (unlike many here) that "IF" The Apple watch was round, almost everyone would be saying how it's way better than the boring rectangle shapes attempted by Samsung etc.
That is part of the problem on these forums.
People will agree and defend whatever is presented to them.
Only that I am honest enough to admit (unlike many here) that "IF" The Apple watch was round, almost everyone would be saying how it's way better than the boring rectangle shapes attempted by Samsung etc.
I don't think that is true at all, that's just something you assume. There are a lot of Apple fans on this forum disappointed of not having an iPhone 6 with 4" screen and not liking the 4.7 or 5.5" iPhones or not liking the latest macs, or latest iOS versions and so on. And lot of people in here were very quick to dismiss the Apple watch as ugly product without owning one or seeing one in person. And yes, I still believe if Apple would have gone rectangular with it's watch it would have designed better then Motorola.
Perhaps, though I remember, and anyone can go find if they like, pictures on MacRumours of round faced Apple Watch mockups and many people saying how amazing such a device would be if it looked just like that.
I'm sure if the Apple watch was round, And, naturally Apple had created a UI to fully take advantage of the round display area, we would not see THAT many people slagging it off as being totally wrong, and that they won't be buying it, and it should of been square.