Not sure where you're finding 25 years. I had an Omega 145.022 stop after ten years, and the 861 is an extremely tough and reliable movement.
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.
Who of you prefers the Apple Watch over his Rolex/Patek/Omega/Breitling/etc?
- Thread starter scarab0
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not sure where you're finding 25 years. I had an Omega 145.022 stop after ten years, and the 861 is an extremely tough and reliable movement.
I've seen some Rolexes go that long including my Fathers. He finally sent it to Rolex and paid about 1k for a full overhaul.
My point is that I'm not sure where you're getting "many people go 25 years." A small sample size doesn't make reliable statistics.
Yeah my $160+ Swiss Army watch from high school (2002) loses 10 seconds in a few weeks. I'm sure it could use a serious tune-up. :/ Now I feel bad for putting a battery in it. lol
Yours may or may not benefit from a tune-up. Ten seconds per month is fine for run-of-the-mill quartz movements (and would be excellent for a mechanical watch). My G-Shock loses exactly 0.2 sec/day if it doesn’t sync with the Fort Collins radio signal. High-accuracy quartz movements have some extra tricks, like custom-tuned ICs matched to that specific quartz crystal, compensation for temperatures (the Apple Watch does this), etc.
It might not be serviceable, either, in the sense that it might not have been designed to be dismantled completely (geartrain removed, etc), cleaned, and re-oiled. Some quartz movements can be overhauled, and a good watchmaker can adjust them for better timekeeping, too.
Basically, yours is running fine. The important maintenance would be keeping a good battery inside and making sure the seals and gaskets are good.
You can ignore servicing if the watch is working fine.
To be honest, that's what puts me off mechanicals - although I still own one - servicing and having to constantly wear it or at least remember to wind it. These days I prefer my Rado.
Nice Rado. That design really appeals to me. Very minimalistic and elegant.
Yup, sounds about right. I have a Sea Dweller I bought in 2003 and send it off last June to an ARSC and the total cost was just less than $700. That included disassembling and cleaning the mv't, new gaskets, re-brushing the band and case and re-testing for WR. Honestly, it came back looking brand new and was well worth it. I don't wear it nearly as much now that I have the Apple Watch but wanted to make sure the movement stays in top shape. I was wearing the SD on one wrist and a Fitbit and various bracelets on the other and I just got tired of all of that. I wouldn't say I prefer the Apple Watch over the SD or vice-versa but since I've lost almost 40lbs wearing the Apple Watch I'm favoring it more.
The last time I sent my GMT-II in for service it cost £300 and came back looking immaculate. It's a beautiful piece of engineering and if I was stuck on a desert island it would of course be preferable, however, before having the Apple Watch I switched to a Casio Pro-Trek for convenient extra info and the Apple Watch was so much more of an upgrade replacing those features, my Withings device (Fitbit also in between) and fulfilled a couple of extras.. I honestly wonder how I could change now to something else.
I always feel guilty when I see my Rolex DateJust on my desk now.
But then again, all it does is tell the time.
How boring
Actually I now do this occasionally
Or this
But then again, all it does is tell the time.
How boring
Actually I now do this occasionally
Or this
Last edited:
Exactly my thoughts guys..as a woman it’s even harder but I still prefer to wear smart watch on right hand and my Rolex or omega on my left hand. Is a “fetish” to have a mechanical watch and clearly cannot be substituted by an Apple Watch. I never use smart watch when I’m dressed etc and never use it to see the time (only for notifications, diary etc). I had in the past another of activity tracker and this will be my first Apple watch but frankly I don’t think this will change now
Even if my friend says it’s ridiculous and clearly prefer his Rolex or panerai instead of Apple Watch is still like the electronic “personal assistant” on my right wrist.
Yeah...The 5 years service for my omega is due on December but yesterday out of the blue I noticed that the date is no longer change. Phones the service, and they just let me know that I will take it back in 3+ months and I will be around 600€ poorer. At least I will wait to receive the Apple Watch
Even if my friend says it’s ridiculous and clearly prefer his Rolex or panerai instead of Apple Watch is still like the electronic “personal assistant” on my right wrist.
Yeah...The 5 years service for my omega is due on December but yesterday out of the blue I noticed that the date is no longer change. Phones the service, and they just let me know that I will take it back in 3+ months and I will be around 600€ poorer. At least I will wait to receive the Apple Watch
Last edited:
Wearing a mechanical watch these days seems a little odd, wearing two watches is just downright strange. The only value a mechanical watch serves is as a piece of jewelry to enhance your look. Wearing two watches defeats that purpose.
Other half sold his Rolex Explorer II after getting the AW3, took around 7 months for him to entirely reverse his position. He loved that watch too, it was simple and was one of the few posh watches today that didn't have a huge bezel. He's at the stage where he considers the dress watch old fashioned, and even said recently he no longer wants his grail (used to lust after a particular IWC Ingenieur.. 3239? Smaller one, again.).
I still do like dress watches, but if Apple, or another smartwatch maker irons out all my gripes with these devices and they become as functional as I'd want, then I can't see me ever taking one off again. Other half had his AW3 glued on, and he was skeptical about getting one (used to think the AW was a joke as it lacked basic GPS and other functionality, so it took time to shake that image off).
The future, in our opinion, is dressy smartwatches. And they'll have to come from an expert of software and chips, as there is no hope in hell Tag, Rolex, IWC etc will ever catch up with any top tier tech firm on functionality. I can see the Apple Watch having a range of upper tiers from £1000 to £5000 and possibly being collaborations with more prestigious watch brands.
New AW4 is nice, but it's ultimately still toyish looking compared to the elegance of traditional dress watches. That can change though. An always-on display would be an overdue positive step there!
Edit: Something to look for could be a flood of mechanical posh watches hitting the market in the medium term. That would drop their value and would give access to a lot of people who previously couldn't have even afforded a poor condition second hand model. That could spark a trend and revival of the dress watch among millennial or younger generations, especially as retro-grouch is perpetually hip. Double watchin' it? Smart and mechanical? Some do it, but not currently considered cool, at all. Not yet, but could happen.
I still do like dress watches, but if Apple, or another smartwatch maker irons out all my gripes with these devices and they become as functional as I'd want, then I can't see me ever taking one off again. Other half had his AW3 glued on, and he was skeptical about getting one (used to think the AW was a joke as it lacked basic GPS and other functionality, so it took time to shake that image off).
The future, in our opinion, is dressy smartwatches. And they'll have to come from an expert of software and chips, as there is no hope in hell Tag, Rolex, IWC etc will ever catch up with any top tier tech firm on functionality. I can see the Apple Watch having a range of upper tiers from £1000 to £5000 and possibly being collaborations with more prestigious watch brands.
New AW4 is nice, but it's ultimately still toyish looking compared to the elegance of traditional dress watches. That can change though. An always-on display would be an overdue positive step there!
Edit: Something to look for could be a flood of mechanical posh watches hitting the market in the medium term. That would drop their value and would give access to a lot of people who previously couldn't have even afforded a poor condition second hand model. That could spark a trend and revival of the dress watch among millennial or younger generations, especially as retro-grouch is perpetually hip. Double watchin' it? Smart and mechanical? Some do it, but not currently considered cool, at all. Not yet, but could happen.
Last edited:
I work in an office setting and I just don’t see it as much anymore. 20 years ago it was common, now not so much. In another 20 years it will be about as common as folks wearing pocket watches.
[doublepost=1537445674][/doublepost]
I disagree with the elegance bit. The majority of watches that watch people lust after look just like my cheap 70 dollar Casio dive watch. The only people who notice this stuff are watch enthusiasts and those are a dying breed.
It's still not odd to wear a normal watch though and smartwatches are still a niche product in comparison. Though they seem to be popular in your office, I've only seen a handful of visitors wearing an Apple Watch at my workplace and I'm the only employee who owns one, so perhaps it's the Apple Watch wearers who are odd.
I wore my Apple Watch yesterday and I'm wearing a mechanical watch today so I've got both bases covered.
Yeah, I had started going down the path of fancier watches (mostly lusting after them because I didn't have the money to spend at the time), but stopped when the Apple Watch rumors started flying. I've worn a stainless steel watch of some sort since third grade. Then I realized that they were just another form of jewelry and I don't like the concept of excessiveness. But at the same time I don't want to completely eschew aesthetic. There needs to be functionality behind it. Sure there is the design and craftsmanship to appreciate, but for me the utility of a smartwatch is worth a lot more. I pick my devices first based on functionality and then closely behind that is aesthetic. I like Apple products because they generally behave how I expect them to. Macs work well with my creative workflow and look great. iPhone is incredibly secure, fluid, easy to use and also looks great. Apple Watch is a great tool that makes doing a lot of little things faster and it's also the best looking in the "real" smartwatch category (IMO). And what I mean by that is smartwatches that have displays and don't look like traditional watches with some sensors hidden underneath that require syncing to a device to read. So for me, it boils down to usefulness > aesthetic but aesthetic is still important. Therefore Apple Watch. John Gruber talks a lot about traditional watches in his Series 4 review, which is worth a read. The niceness of the Apple Watch is improving, but he still doesn't think it can compete with high end watches in terms of how nice they are.
I have a nice Ceramic Daytona and AW. I really cannot compare the 2. The AW is a disposable computer that will be in a landfill in 3-4 years. My Daytona has almost doubled in price since I bought it (grey vs retail). Its a far nicer piece then AW and has no batteries that will expand and pop the face off like we have seen with some Apple watches. I still find the AW pretty unattractive but I'm getting used to it and they have made some nice improvements with the 4.
With that said the AW is a great tool. I love tech so I ordered the SS AW4 but the feeling of wearing each is very different. I know ill be upgrading the AW each year so there is no real attachment or history I can build with it.
I really like mechanical watches but also like wearing the AW at times. The AW has helped me cut back on collecting a bunch of mechanicals. The Daytona and AW is all ill ever need going forward. I don't see high end watches going the way of pocket watches. If anything the demand for fine Swiss watches has gone up big time. Trying going in and buying a SS sport Rolex from an AD. Rolex makes the same amount each year and they cannot come close to meeting the demand recently.
[doublepost=1537462211][/doublepost]Haha but there are a few models like the Leopard Daytona that might make some of us look bad short of Steve Tyler who owns one.
With that said the AW is a great tool. I love tech so I ordered the SS AW4 but the feeling of wearing each is very different. I know ill be upgrading the AW each year so there is no real attachment or history I can build with it.
I really like mechanical watches but also like wearing the AW at times. The AW has helped me cut back on collecting a bunch of mechanicals. The Daytona and AW is all ill ever need going forward. I don't see high end watches going the way of pocket watches. If anything the demand for fine Swiss watches has gone up big time. Trying going in and buying a SS sport Rolex from an AD. Rolex makes the same amount each year and they cannot come close to meeting the demand recently.
[doublepost=1537462211][/doublepost]Haha but there are a few models like the Leopard Daytona that might make some of us look bad short of Steve Tyler who owns one.
I've had a Daytona since the mid 90's, and have paid to have it refurbished once along the way by Rolex. I love that watch, but have hardly worn it since I got my AWS0. Have an Hermes S4 on order.
I personally would feel silly going to an important interview/meeting/seeing my patients wearing an AW. Sure the AW is a great tool, but there's nothing timeless and mature like a mechanical watch IMO (especially when kids are are wearing AW).
Yea I don't see any reason to buy more high end watches but the Daytona is a good investment even if you only wear it on special occasions.
As a patient, I'd have more confidence in a professional who appeared to be modern and in touch. Tech is hard to stay on top off as you age, so being proficient or an early adopter conveys a mental sharpness. The conservative image that many professionals, especially boomers, sometimes cling to is unappealing now. There's a crusty or tweedy middle aged man image which has unfortunately got some problematic negative connotations these days and that's a direction to be avoided. Condescending smile, prideful watch and emotional detachment? May as well wear a beige flasher trench
But again, women and men do see things differently and that's okay. But from a woman's POV, trust this if you want them to trust you - it's better to appear like you're with the times and devoid of conceit.
Bit of a tangent, not saying any of that even remotely applies to your situation! I actually do like dress watches and so does my partner but yes, times are changing and they're not needed to convey authority or position.
There's no comparison between a Rolex/AP etc to an watch. They are very different things. My watch is a workout tool. If you have never owned a timepiece & are not into collecting you wouldn't understand. The same way non tech people don't understand why fans feel that they always need the latest and greatest new product
There's a reason the high fashion world is abound with $10,000+ watches, none of them a "smart" watch.
Ohh. Not sure about this.
There is a very strong comparison between traditional mechanical watches and tech in terms of appreciation. It takes knowledge to appreciate a complicated dress watch, and it takes knowledge to appreciate a piece of modern tech.
A smartwatch is massively more complicated and wonderful than the greatest dress watch. You could take all the greatest ateliers from Audemars, Jaeger etc and they wouldn't have a clue how to make one.
So why isn't the appreciation for smartwatches on par with the appreciation for dress watches? And why are the prices so disparate.
That's all very simple - scale. Smartwatches are made on an industrial scale that requires a planet wide force to produce, but can thereby reduce the cost.
If dress watch makers wanted to increase the scale, they could. But they'd lose their prestigious image. And that's all the dress watch is, an artificially restrained production which keeps costs high. Then you inflate the retail price of course!
In terms of materials costs, you can pad any product with high end materials.
So what's the problem with smartwatches being valuable? It's that this planet wide production force has become too efficient, and the designers have become ambitious, too clever. They can produce anything they want in the millions, then before they're even done, they can design something better and reboot the production line.
So we have disposable 'tech'. Rarity/Value, etc. You know that as well as I do, everyone here does, no lessons are needed. But that shouldn't stop anyone from taking a moment to appreciate how incredible a smartwatch is.
In fact, anyone who has genuine appreciation for the toolmaking that goes into a good dress watch, would also have a true appreciation for the even more advanced toolmaking that goes into a smartwatch and its components.