Apple Watch is Released - Good or Bad for Vintage SEIKO?

[holgate]

Mar 10, 2015 4:20:26 GMT -8 saul said:

This is not a watch anymore than the Samsung gizmo was a watch. It is one more piece of annoying wearable tech.

Of course it's a watch, just as much as the Pulsar P2 was a watch. We're well past the point at which people laughed at LED digitals -- or 70s Seiko quartzes -- as "not watches" so we ought to be able to see this in historical context.

Mar 10, 2015 6:16:42 GMT -8 earthphase said:

There is something fundamentally wrong with a watch that needs to be plugged in every "12" (probably more like 6) hours.

Just as there was something fundamentally wrong with an early Seiko quartz needing a battery change every year or so, or LED watches needing a button to be pressed in order to show the time. We know what not-quite-there watch technology looks like. Examples are now collectible.

It'll affect the Fossil / Michael Kors market for new watches, which is no bad thing. It does genuinely innovative things with straps and fastenings, in a way that's respectful of watch history. (Again, the vibe there is retro, focusing on the 70s.) It may actually direct a few people towards 70s Seikos: what are the Apple Watch's aesthetic ancestors, in the way that Braun was an ancestor to other Apple designs?

[estrickland]

As one data point, after coming back from a dinner with her friends tonight, my wife made it clear it was my job to get her an Apple Watch.

I thought 'sure' - she puts up with my watch collecting, and I'd like to play with it, so okay.

I asked her which one and she responded "the gold one." Um...

She doesn't know what it does, didn't know that the gold model was actual gold, didn't know about the 2 sizes, the matrix of metals and straps, or really anything about the watch. 

She just knows she likes watches and Apple products, so the 10 seconds of a commercial without audio she saw at the bar before dinner was plenty. 

Behold the power of Apple. A little scary.

-

After talking her through/showing her the matrix, I'm now on notice to preorder the stainless 38mm on the Milanese metal strap the moment it becomes available.

[Rod]

The big question is, will it look better on a Bond or Nato!








It's here, we're talking about it, that's what Apple wants

[Rod]

Within 6 months the big watch sellers will have an app out for their watch dial's, you'll pay $10 for a Rolex dial or $100 for Patek Philippe. And then there is a whole new world of fashion for the young hipster dudes  Bring it on i say.

[scubarob99]

Embrace it. It's here to stay. I will not be getting one, but it will become a common sight.

Rob

[saul]

Mar 10, 2015 20:54:49 GMT -8 holgate said:

Mar 10, 2015 4:20:26 GMT -8 saul said:

This is not a watch anymore than the Samsung gizmo was a watch. It is one more piece of annoying wearable tech.

Of course it's a watch, just as much as the Pulsar P2 was a watch. We're well past the point at which people laughed at LED digitals -- or 70s Seiko quartzes -- as "not watches" so we ought to be able to see this in historical context.

Agree to disagree.  Digital watches and 1st gen quartz were still designed to be...watches, time keepers, despite what they may have represented to the traditional mechanical watch.

This is a limited function, limited battery life, computer; designed to worn on the wrist.  It doesn't even work independently but needs to be tethered to an iphone (just as the Samsung needs to be tethered).

Like all computers, it can provide a time source.  By my definition it is not a watch - esp as nobody buying one will be thinking "Oh goody, now I can tell the time at a glance instead of dragging this annoying special use communication computer out of my pocket to see what time it is."

Disclaimer - I have no love of "smart" phones.  I don't even think of them as phones, they are inconvenient computers that can handle voice communications.  I do think the processing power and form factor is amazing tech given that my first computer interactions involved punch cards.

EDIT: P.S. - I also think things like Casio Pathfinders push the limit of "Is it a watch?".  I still say yes it is but only because it evolved from a single purpose platform (the digital watch) but added more capability as technology progressed.  One significant difference for me as regards digital watches is that when I wear one (a basic G-Shock) looking at it to tell time feels inorganic, like my brain is doing math, not "seeing" time.  I feel this way for all digital time sources but more so when it is on the sacred real estate of my body.

[69ChevelleSS]

I'm not an Apple customer (have a Samsung Android) but either way my darned eyes have trouble reading the fonts on my phone . . . how the heck am I going to see the screen of a watch that is probably 1/8th the size of my phone screen?

[Adrian-VTA]

As much as most of us probably dislike ARCHIELUXURY, his advice on how to make investments in watches and his opinion on the Apple watch I think sum up the technical issues with it. Just remember he makes these videos as a parody character, they're not 100% serious.

To buy a watch that's obsolete in 2 years? Yeah no thanks. Works OK for a gadget fiend but not my flavour. But like I said before, if it gets more attention to wearing cool stuff on your arm then it's a great thing.

[doomguy10011]

Two completely different markets if you ask me. I personally would never own a smart watch.

[bladedogg]

I just have to say, more Seikos for us!  :party:

[bertnet]

I wear à samsung gear during several month ,it's not the same use than à classic watch it's difficult to compare ,but now i'M back to my 6139 water proof for pleasure .Perhaps the next Step will be one on the left the other on the right!