Why doesn't apple have very high resolution, realistic watch faces?

[ArchEtech]

I've had a S6 SS, S7 Ti, and now the Ultra. Whatever bad there is I still prefer everything about the apple watch to other platforms, especially when used with the iphone and part of the apple ecosystem.

One of the things I really liked about Samsung Tizen is the watch faces. It has way higher resolution, and realistic watch faces than apple. It has a native custom watch face builder, well at least it used to, it been 5 years or so since I've used on.

Yes, you can use 3rd party sort of simulator app and they look fantastic but you don't get the use of complication in the same way. For me its worth it so the always on mode looks so great. Its a simple click to get to the "real" face.

My question is, with apple being such brilliant product designers, why suck a lack of effort on the watch faces? A couple of realistic, high res faces with depth, that fits the square screen would be just perfect. I hate the round faces floating in blank space. At first I could see it being a battery issue sure, but I think we are past that now with AOD and pretty good battery life for all versions. Why not a lux dressy face, a legit square face chronograph, maybe a couple very classic looking full res watch faces with depth? I could deal without animations, those drain battery ( I like them and would like the option but I get it) but there is so much potential now to go way past the super flat blah faces.

Whats the resistance?

 

[wilberforce]

Apple has deliberately moved away from skeuomorphic design, especially under Jony Ive.

Skeuomorphic design is where you make a displayed object mimic a real object, like making a button icon look like a real physical push button

 

[ArchEtech]

Fine don’t mimic, but give them some depth.

 

[bds]

.

 

[Mr.Blacky]

Because they (the analog ones) look like cr*** and anyone who says other wise should get their eyes and taste checked. Recreating the beauty of an analog watch face with digital methods is almost impossible and is not what a smart watch should do.

EDIT:
And the Moon, Earth, Jellyfishs, Butterflies and Flowers on the watch faces look very realistic. So there you have it.

 

[ArchEtech]

Because they (the analog ones) look like cr*** and anyone who says other wise should get their eyes and taste checked. Recreating the beauty of an analog watch face with digital methods is almost impossible and is not what a smart watch should do.

EDIT:
And the Moon, Earth, Jellyfishs, Butterflies and Flowers on the watch faces look very realistic. So there you have it.

Lots of people would disgree on if they look good or not, and that is supported by the fact that people are creating them.

There are also lots of very nice looking, finished looking faces that don’t have analog faces, nor try to “fake” them. The retro Casio example I posted for example. You could create similar faces without copyright infringement.

Apple should hire some of these people.

 

[ArchEtech]

I actually like some of the Nike faces, but in the past you had to get a Nike watch to get them.

But in all reality I don’t feel like there has been much thought out into the faces as compared to the thought apple puts in their product aesthetics, while at the same time being very limiting in what you’re allowed to customize with many of their native faces. They are also just slightly different versions of the same chronograph - ok let’s put a moon or sun dial on it and call it a new face.

So Instead we get:

 

[Cbarnett202]

I do not care (at all) for any of the faces shared by the OP. They also do not seem on brand for Apple.

 

[ArchEtech]

I do not care (at all) for any of the faces shared by the OP. They also do not seem on brand for Apple.

Well that’s one reason for me asking why don’t they get some on brand developed faces, though the beauty is, there are 1000s of watch faces you can find if you don’t like what I posted…..


The old lady face is on brand? Mickey Mouse is in brand? I don’t think any of the native faces are in brand or developed. That’s my main point.

How about these? I’d say pretty on brand.

 

[Fiona FTW]

Those faces look like the ones I would have worn in the 7th grade. Awful and sophomoric. But to each his own. This is why Apple should open up watch faces to at least select trusted developers - if security is what it's concerned about. If the AW is about customization and individualism then give users a real choice on watch faces rather than the current "state sanctioned" options. Some of Apple's faces are great, but then they leave out the ability to place complications on them, defeating the whole point (in my mind) of even wearing an AW. I think the free market would fix that problem.

 

[ArchEtech]

Obviously I’m not going to handpick a custom watch face that is going to appeal to every person looking at this thread…..that is missing the point. If YOU looked, you could find one that would appeal to you.

Apple should be able to have a watch face selection that could appeal to everyone, and something more developed and on brand.

I don’t know how anyone who hates what I posted wouldn’t agree apples current lineup looks…..”awful, and sophomoric.”

I don’t think apple native face are awful myself, I just think they haven’t changed more since S0 and could be sooooo much better with the talent available inside of apple.

 

[Fiona FTW]

Obviously I’m not going to handpick a custom watch face that is going to appeal to every person looking at this thread…..that is missing the point. If YOU looked, you could find one that would appeal to you.

Apple should be able to have a watch face selection that could appeal to everyone, and something more developed and on brand.

I don’t know how anyone who hates what I posted wouldn’t agree apples current lineup looks…..”awful, and sophomoric.”

I don’t think apple native face are awful myself, I just think they haven’t changed more since S0 and could be sooooo much better with the talent available inside of apple.

You missed my point 100%. Yes, I don't like your taste in faces. Don't take that personally. I don't really care for Apple's forced choices either b/c most of the designs I like don't support complications well or at all. Everyone has their own likes and dislikes because we are all human, not bots. This is why Apple should open up the faces to at least a few developers or artists that are known and trusted so that everyone can find an officially supported face they really like.

 

[Graham Caracas]

The types of faces you describe would send battery life from appalling to unacceptable. The AW is the bottom shelf of smart watches, all sizzle and no steak.

 

[Farrellcollie]

I just want the old ones back that I could read- like I don't need a range for the temperature I just want to know the current temperature. I want the date in the middle without having to have my entire calendar flashed on my wrist all day -that sort of thing

 

[Howard2k]

I just want the old ones back that I could read- like I don't need a range for the temperature I just want to know the current temperature. I want the date in the middle without having to have my entire calendar flashed on my wrist all day -that sort of thing

Did you submit to Apple Feedback?

 

[ArchEtech]

The types of faces you describe would send battery life from appalling to unacceptable. The AW is the bottom shelf of smart watches, all sizzle and no steak.

Incorrect. Running a secondary app in the background for these faces drains very little battery. If they were native faces it would drain less. There is less than 10% difference running clockology. That might be a lot of batter on an S3, but for an S6 on up not significant. I would guess apple could figure out how to make them not drain batter.

There is no difference running the some minimalistic native apple face with no complications, vs. one of their native apps with 6 complications. Not in my experience anyway. I don't know what faces I've described that would make battery life appalling. I've posted some examples that don't drain battery even as a secondary app. What am I describing that would suck battery? An image with some 3d depth, and design thought put into it? That wouldn't drain battery more than the old lady face, or the fisher price animated numbers that look like a toddler would love.

 

[Howard2k]

Incorrect. Running a secondary app in the background for these faces drains very little battery. If they were native faces it would drain less. There is less than 10% difference running clockology. That might be a lot of batter on an S3, but for an S6 on up not significant. I would guess apple could figure out how to make them not drain batter.

There is no difference running the some minimalistic native apple face with no complications, vs. one of their native apps with 6 complications. Not in my experience anyway. I don't know what faces I've described that would make battery life appalling. I've posted some examples that don't drain battery even as a secondary app. What am I describing that would suck battery? An image with some 3d depth, and design thought put into it? That wouldn't drain battery more than the old lady face, or the fisher price animated numbers that look like a toddler would love.

I wouldn't bother - dude is a troll. Never contributes anything of value.

 

[Farrellcollie]

Did you submit to Apple Feedback?

Yes

 

[jr5x]

The reason is chiefly that Apple wants its watches to be recognizable as an Apple Watch.

 

[ArchEtech]

There is nothing recognizable about native Apple Watch faces and their brand. They are completely generic. With that in mind the design of the Watch, with well thought out faces, branded and recognizable as apple design aesthetics would even more so, make the Apple Watch recognizable.

 

[Craigf56]

I actually like some of the Nike faces, but in the past you had to get a Nike watch to get them.

But in all reality I don’t feel like there has been much thought out into the faces as compared to the thought apple puts in their product aesthetics, while at the same time being very limiting in what you’re allowed to customize with many of their native faces. They are also just slightly different versions of the same chronograph - ok let’s put a moon or sun dial on it and call it a new face.

So Instead we get:

Which face is the middle one - white circular dial with yellow hands and four complications inside / outside the face?

Looks awesome.

 

[ArchEtech]

I think that’s the new Wayfinder in the Ultra only platform.

 

[spiderman0616]

There is nothing recognizable about native Apple Watch faces and their brand. They are completely generic. With that in mind the design of the Watch, with well thought out faces, branded and recognizable as apple design aesthetics would even more so, make the Apple Watch recognizable.

Not saying you're not entitled to your opinion, but I'm not sure I agree at all here. Bear with me:

1) There is a recognizable set of watch faces. One of them, Infograph Modular, is being used right now on Apple.com to promote the Apple Watch Series 8. Infograph and Infograph Modular have been popular mainstays since the Series 4 screen increase. To my eye, they are instantly recognizable as quintessential Apple Watch faces if the design of the hardware itself didn't already give it away. I would also argue that the butterfly, flower, and Mickey Mouse faces continue to be classics from days of the original model and are instantly recognizable at least as part of the original idea even though I don't see people using them much anymore. I'm also willing to bet that the Navigator face will be the signature Ultra face for years to come.

2) The Apple Watch has always had an OLED screen and I've always found animations to be fluid and realistic looking. Not sure where you're going with that. Maybe I just don't know what I'm missing.

3) Now that most available models have an always-on display, I can see Apple wanting to continue to control what faces can be used for the time being. Hopefully they open this up more and more in the future, but I wouldn't want them to do it in the name of battery life.

 

[ArchEtech]

1) There is nothing recognizable about any of the apple watch faces. An apple water user might recognize them. Well have to agree to disagree. No one that doesn't have an apple watch would recognize any apple face as an apple product.

2) I agree, but they basically don't take advantage of it. They don't utilize the colors, the 3d depth, and what they do have for animations looks like a Toddler might have created it (kaleidoscope, weird morphine colors smushes crap). The screen is fantastic.

3) I would be cool for them to open it up more, but they wouldn't necessarily have to. The Hermes faces look really good. Why not offer a couple nice sophisticated faces like that. I Agree with the always on display and good battery life now, they have the ability to do better and should. Thats my main point. I don't think Apple needs to have big gaudy looking fake analogue faces. Those pictures are just to show potential. Hermes is a better example of some really nice font and image artifacts to create very classy looks faces with some subtle depth.

 

[Hankster]

It's laughable you don't think Apple Watches are "recognizable". 99% of people I see who wear smart watches have an Apple Watch. Very easy to spot. Unsure what you want from Apple. They already have the market cornered with watches and smartphones.

I don't need a "fancy" watch to show off. I have real watches for that.