Why A Die-Hard Mechanical Watch Lover Can't Get The Apple Watch Off His Wrist (And Why That Matters)

[Thai]

I'm not "bragging" about anything. Nor looking for an "argument".

Your contention is that the Apple Watch is convenient. Mine is simply that a real watch is rather more convenient.

Do you see?

Actually no. If your convenience is based solely on wearing a watch continuously for 24 hours/7 days a week, then OK. But you wear your watch 24 hrs a day x 7 days?

Yet you ignore the many other benefits/convenience of AW while your Swiss can only tell time and date...rather inaccurately too when compared with AW. So your argument fails.

 

[BarracksSi]

My Omega, Rado, and Seiko automatics will run for decades nonstop if I wear them all the time. My Seiko can't even be wound by hand, so it lives by wrist motion alone.

My Watch can't boast the same, and it takes longer to recharge if I let the battery run down. All of my mechanicals can restart from a dead stop as quickly as it takes to reset their time hands. My solar-powered quartz watches can do better, too, especially as they auto-sync with the atomic clock in Colorado.

The "power reserve" argument is just plain stupid. I can't believe so many posts were fired off about it (and I can't believe I just added to this tangent, either).

 

[BarracksSi]

Actually no. If your convenience is based solely on wearing a watch continuously for 24 hours/7 days a week, then OK. But you wear your watch 24 hrs a day x 7 days?

I do.

Yeah, I wear it to bed, too, because my eyes are so bad that I can't read a clock radio without climbing out of bed.

 

[jasie02]

I'm not "bragging" about anything. Nor looking for an "argument".

Your contention is that the Apple Watch is convenient. Mine is simply that a real watch is rather more convenient.

Do you see?

What is a real watch, in 20 years?
I bet most of watch wear in 20 years by teenager has not been born today yet, is going to be smart watch, not mechanical watch. As much as we all want to hold on to the romance of the past, it will be history in the future.

Just like 12 button analog cellphone, 8-tack, cassette, steam boat, steam train, they were all real before, but they are all history if not almost, in current teenager and future adult's knowledge.

Only change is constant.

 

[Thai]

My Omega, Rado, and Seiko automatics will run for decades nonstop if I wear them all the time. My Seiko can't even be wound by hand, so it lives by wrist motion alone.

My Watch can't boast the same, and it takes longer to recharge if I let the battery run down. All of my mechanicals can restart from a dead stop as quickly as it takes to reset their time hands. My solar-powered quartz watches can do better, too, especially as they auto-sync with the atomic clock in Colorado.

The "power reserve" argument is just plain stupid. I can't believe so many posts were fired off about it (and I can't believe I just added to this tangent, either).

Your Seiko is a Kinetic i assume? Good tech, but you need to really swing your arms initially to start it. I have a relatively rare Kinetic with sapphlex crystal.

Your Rado auto-sync how often? Most atomic sync only once a day and if you're inside your house, then it does not sync consistently.

Ok, so, YOUR watches do good on endurance...and? What else can it do to make your life easier?

Why is Power Reserve argument stupid? With it on, you can get 5 days or more on one charge and gives you the time of day just like your "traditional" watches.

Maybe convenience in my world is different from a few here....
[doublepost=1455485756][/doublepost]

I do.

Yeah, I wear it to bed, too, because my eyes are so bad that I can't read a clock radio without climbing out of bed.

Me too. I charge my AW during dinner and shower after work then wear it. I can live without my Watch for 1 hour a day.

Actually, i use HeartWatch to track my sleep and heart rate while sleeping. Can your dumbwatches do that?

 

[BarracksSi]

The Seiko is a mechanical, running a 7S26 movement. Very basic, but it's an outlier -- it achieved better than 1 sec/day average the last time I checked.

The Rado runs an elaborè grade ETA 2824-2, as best as we can figure. It runs a steady +5 sec/day no matter the conditions.

The Omega runs a US-market 550, and I think it did about +10/day. Good enough for a dress watch over 48 years old.

The solar-atomic watches are a Citizen and a G-Shock.

There are some others in the pic. I don't own a Seiko Kinetic because their reliability reputation isn't very good, at least when they don't get worn often enough to keep the power cell charged.

 

[BarracksSi]

^^^^^^ My post and pic is just to show that I'm not talking out of my ass. I've had enough experience with most watch styles to make an informed decision.

 

[Uofmtiger]

To be honest, a cheap Timex/Casio will require less work if all I want is something convenient to show the time without using electricity. The time is as accurate as pricey mechanical watches, doesn't require chargers or winders to stay close to accurate when off the wrist for a couple days, and can be replaced (or the battery can be replaced) for very little money when the battery dies. In addition to paying a lot of money up front, the cost of servicing a mechanical watch on the recommended 5 year schedule can cost quite a bit of money, as well. For example, Omega suggests a 4 to 5 year servicing that cost around $500. If it is simply about convenience, might as well pick up a digital watch at Walgreens or Walmart.

My mechanical is much more of a pain when it is off the wrist. I have to put it in a winder or deal with adjusting the time when I wear it. It is more convenient in the one situation where you never take it off, but I could never sleep with the heavy metal band on mine. If I want to sleep in a watch, I would rather use an AW with apps like Sleep++.

I love the look of it, though.

 

[Thai]

If I want to sleep in a watch, I would rather use an AW with apps like Sleep++.

Try Heart Watch for sleep tracking...much better than Sleep++ which i also had. But it is not free.
[doublepost=1455487012][/doublepost]

^^^^^^ My post and pic is just to show that I'm not talking out of my ass. I've had enough experience with most watch styles to make an informed decision.

Like you, a lot of folks here are also experienced with watches of all kind, including me.

 

[Uofmtiger]

What is a real watch, in 20 years?
I bet most of watch wear in 20 years by teenager has not been born today yet, is going to be smart watch, not mechanical watch. As much as we all want to hold on to the romance of the past, it will be history in the future.

Just like 12 button analog cellphone, 8-tack, cassette, steam boat, steam train, they were all real before, but they are all history if not almost, in current teenager and future adult's knowledge.

Only change is constant.

I think it will be more like vinyl and live alongside the smart watches as a nostalgic, classy departure from the norm.

 

[BarracksSi]

Like you, a lot of folks here are also experienced with watches of all kind, including me.

You don't have to be so rude about it, then.

I'll give you one guess about which of the watches I wear the most now. Hint: it's not the Honda watch in the upper left corner.

 

[Thai]

You don't have to be so rude about it, then.

I'll give you one guess about which of the watches I wear the most now. Hint: it's not the Honda watch in the upper left corner.

Well, you did call one of my argument stupid, remember?

Actually, I have no idea what you were arguing with me about.

 

[BarracksSi]

Well, you did call one of my argument stupid, remember?

Actually, I have no idea what you were arguing with me about.

Half the posts in this thread are between you and everyone else, going on and on about trying to compare an unworn automatic self-winding mechanical watch to an Watch.

Worn regularly, an automatic will run and run and run. You know this. Everybody knows this. Off-wrist, they'll still be ticking in the morning. The 36-48-hour power reserve isn't universal, either. There are some recent models from Swatch Group being sold under their Hamilton and Tissot brands that'll run for a good 80 hours off-wrist; Swatch's own Sistem51 will do 90 hours, and for just $150.

But everybody here knows, right? Why were there so many back-and-forth posts about "power reserve"?

 

[douglasf13]

I'm not "bragging" about anything. Nor looking for an "argument".

Your contention is that the Apple Watch is convenient. Mine is simply that a real watch is rather more convenient.

Do you see?

It depends on which conveniences you're talking about. I also own a Sub Date, an Omega Aqua Terra, and several other mechanicals, and while, yes, you don't have to wind an auto if you wear the same watch everyday, you do have to wind the watch if rotating between a few watches, you do have to adjust the date, you do have to adjust the time when even a chronometer gains or looses time every day or week, you do have to get it regulated if it becomes magnetized, etc. Plus, the Apple Watch adds a host of notification and app conveniences that a mechanical watch doesn't offer.

Last month, I only brought the Apple Watch on week long trip to Hawaii. I charged it right alongside my iPhone and laptop every night. I wore it in the pool and ocean every day, and it functioned just like my Sub would and more, since I'm not a scuba diver. All one needs to do is buy a USB charger with two slots, and traveling with an Apple Watch is no less convenient than charging an iPhone every night. If I brought my Sub along, I'd still set in on the bedside table when I go to sleep. It's no big deal.

I understand that if someone were to drop you off in the middle of the Amazon for a month, you'd be better off with a Sub, but that's an unlikely scenario. Even if that were the case, one would be better off with the G-Shock that I own. It's waterproof, mudproof, solar powered, and it connects to the atomic clock to sync time every day. That's a true watch for the worst case scenario that requires no attention.
[doublepost=1455494602][/doublepost]

That gushing puff piece read like it was written by Apple’s marketing department. My SS Apple Watch was nice. But too much like a gadget to be compelling. So glad I bought it so I didn't have to rely on others opinions.

Also quite happy to have 14 days to give it a fair evaluation, tried to like it but nothing it did really worked to my liking so I sent it back. The plethora of Apple products I have each have lots of value and fit my lifestyle, Apple Watch simply didn't cut it.

Glad some people like it. Even with modest sales Apple can afford to keep it alive forever.

Jack Forster is one of the preeminent experts on mechanical watches, and his writing style in this piece is no different than any of the mechanical watch reviews that he writes. He's certainly not in Apple's pocket. If anything, writing a review like this is counter to his long term success. I've been reading Hodinkee for years, and I've been surprised about how open they've been about the quality of the Apple Watch, both Jack and Benjamin. It speaks to how good the Watch is.

 

[Thai]

Half the posts in this thread are between you and everyone else, going on and on about trying to compare an unworn automatic self-winding mechanical watch to an Watch.

Worn regularly, an automatic will run and run and run. You know this. Everybody knows this. Off-wrist, they'll still be ticking in the morning. The 36-48-hour power reserve isn't universal, either. There are some recent models from Swatch Group being sold under their Hamilton and Tissot brands that'll run for a good 80 hours off-wrist; Swatch's own Sistem51 will do 90 hours, and for just $150.

But everybody here knows, right? Why were there so many back-and-forth posts about "power reserve"?

Worn? Unworn? Was that mentioned initially? No. Actually, in my post (#17), i specifically mention the 36-48 hours time limit if you do NOT wear your mechanical. So, yes, i did set the criteria...which was subsequently changed to worn. Did i complain like YOU now? No. Conversation changes topic.

So, you're telling me that MOST Swiss are 80 hours ? No. Most Swiss fall in the 36-48 hours. So, unless you give me a specific example, i assume what applies to MOST Swiss. Fair?

Hey, i have a Kinetic that is accurate AND runs forever...beat that! And it can be had for under $80!!! Or a solar Casio that can do the same for under $50!!!

Wow...i never knew that money buys endurance! Hell, my $6k+ Rolex has only 46 hours...yet a System51 has 90 hours!! Man, my Rolex must suck!

Why is power reserve mentioned? Because AW does not just die after 18 hours...or 2 days as Seamaster mentioned in post #18. It depends on a lot of things. And if you just want TIME (like what traditional watches provide), then AW can go beyond 5 days one ONE charge telling time. Is that hard for you to comprehend?

You still with me? Anything else i can clarify for you?

BTW, you mentioned your poor eyesight at night. Which watch do you wear to sleep????

 

[BarracksSi]

Anyway, to get back to the original point of the thread...

I read whole article... pretty good, almost all things that guy wrote are truth, especially about link bracelet, it is really piece of mechanic art

Yup, especially the bracelet. He speaks for a while about the attention to detail in the bracelet (and the watch body, too).

Nobody else, whether it's the Swiss or the Japanese, has bothered to try to make a bracelet which combines tight engineering and good looks with exceptional user-friendliness.


When most people want to size their watch bracelet, they take it to a jewelry shop or mall kiosk and hope it doesn't get scratched up or the pins don't get destroyed. Some people never think a bracelet can be sized, either -- you'll see them with the watch flopping against the back of their hand.

But when he's talking about how Apple understands luxury, he's talking about how Apple (specifically Ive, Newson, and their crew) made an effort to make everything easier for the owner. You can swap bands and resize the bracelet on your Watch in mere seconds. Convenience itself is a luxury, but for whatever reason, luxury watch brands haven't played along. You can change the channels on your TV and start your car and order food without leaving your chair, but with some watch brands, heaven forbid if you let anyone but an Authorized Dealer work on your watch.

 

[matrix07]

Agreed. Water resistance, not having to carry a charger, no dependence on another device ... all much more convenient.

I wear my Watch to shower quite often. I never carry a charger to my office. And when I go to the gym (in my condo) I leave my phone behind.
Have you ever used an Apple Watch?

 

[douglasf13]

I wear my Watch to shower quite often. I never carry a charger to my office. And when I go to the gym (in my condo) I leave my phone behind.
Have you ever used an Apple Watch?

I was surprised that, when at a large resort in Hawaii last month, I was able to leave my iPhone in the room, and my Watch still remained connected to it over wifi. It obviously works like that in my house and office every day, but I figured the network system at the resort wouldn't allow it. It was a nice discovery.

 

[lg251]

I think this post lost it's essence. This whole debate will not give anyone a trophy in the end. Both mechanical watches and the AW have pros and cons.

The article outlines the uniqueness of the AW in it's category, and how Apple has managed to enter the market watch with an interesting product. With their product presentation, the aesthetic, their ease of use (i.e. changing bracelets) they have set a new bar for others to surpass. It's clear that reknown watch makers like AP, Omega, Hublot, Patek Philippe, just to name a few, need to stop "looking down" on the AW.

Apple entering the market watch is beneficial to them all. Just like McDonalds did back in the days when they entered the fast food venture, it created traffic to all others around them, despite the initial controversy (at least in Canada) that said it would hurt local enterprise.

 

[redman042]

Yup, especially the bracelet. He speaks for a while about the attention to detail in the bracelet (and the watch body, too).

Nobody else, whether it's the Swiss or the Japanese, has bothered to try to make a bracelet which combines tight engineering and good looks with exceptional user-friendliness.

Had Apple not come along with the iPhone, the first Andriod would have been released with a small screen and a plastic keyboard. Apple made all smartphones better by showing up and raising the bar.

Perhaps they will have the same effect on the watch industry. Maybe traditional watch enthusiasts will have something to thank Apple for one day.

By the way, the link bracelet is unbelievably nice. I made the mistake of trying one on, thinking I was just there to "check it out". The rest is history.

 

[Seamaster]

Have you ever used an Apple Watch?

I'm wearing mine right now.

 

[0940732]

anyway, its obvious that mechanical watch can only tell the time (and even that is less precise than apple watch), so from that point of view, its not a big deal, but someday I really like to buy myself omega speedmaster professional moonwatch... sometime its good to a be bit oldschool and cut a tech **** for a few days, you know weekend somewhere in mountains..

 

[thewap]

Besides time, A mechanical watch can also be used as a compass and navigation tool.

 

[matrix07]

I'm wearing mine right now.

It doesn't seem you get used to it.

 

[xDKP]

I wore it in the pool and ocean every day, and it functioned just like my Sub would and more, since I'm not a scuba diver.

I just came home from a weeks holiday in Oman - I left my AW at home and brought my SKX, because I knew the connectivity would be bad and that dust/water might be a theme during the week - Swimming, snorkling, trips to the desert etc.

Did you just jump in the pool/ocean with your AW without any further protection? I knew it could tackle a shower, but thats pretty impressive!