The Apple Watch isn't a watch.

This isn't a post to bash the Apple Watch.  It isn't a post about how the Apple Watch is soulless or boring.  It's not a post telling anyone they shouldn't buy/wear/enjoy an Apple Watch.  What it IS is a post about how the Apple Watch, as brilliant as it may be, isn't actually a watch.

Now I and others have covered this many, many times, so I'll try not to bore you with arguments you've heard before.  But it occurred to me today that an argument I hadn't heard (and yeah, sorry if you've said/heard this one before) regards planned obsolescence.  

Humor me for a minute more, and I'll get to the point.  I just bought a vintage Timex and discovered that I'd probably have to fix the movement myself as most watchmakers don't think it's worth their time to fix a "throw-away" movement.  This got me thinking about how old Timexes were made to be disposable.  Now, I say "disposable" in terms of lasting decades before they break down.  They were cheaply made and nobody thought anyone would want to fix them.  Obviously, like all computers, the Apple Watch is meant to last a few years and then be replaced.  Computer technology changes fast enough that this makes sense.  What does this have to do with "real" watches?

In my time on Watchcrunch, I've never seen anyone refer to a watch as disposable.  I've never seen anyone say "as long as it lasts a few years, that's fine".  We, every one of us, expect our watches to last decades.  We expect them to last for the rest of our lives.  We expect to pass them on to children if they want them or not.  Part of our love of watches is the story about where they've been and about where they might go in the future.

My point here is that durability is part of what makes a watch a watch, at least in the sense that we mean it.  Sure, there are still $5 watches that will break in the next 19 minutes, but none of us are posting pics of or talking about those.  We talk about things like "heritage".  We glory in the stories we have about our watches and the times we've seen with them.  Nobody buys a watch to commemorate the birth of a child expecting the watch to stop working before the child does.  Like the marriage itself, nobody buys a wedding watch thinking, "hell, if this thing makes it 5 years I'll be lucky".

So yeah, old Timex watches weren't built to be serviced, but they were built to last a reasonable time.  You didn't buy one to pass on, but you did expect it would last the next 30 years.  And it did.  Not so the Apple Watch.  Yeah, it'll still work 10 years from now, but will any apps still work on it?  Probably not.

So maybe the Apple Watch is a watch in fact, but it doesn't have the soul of a watch.  We don't connect with it in the same way.  Hell, we don't connect with it at all or we wouldn't be willing to give it up when the next gen comes out.  To me, and I suspect many of you, it's that connection that makes a watch a watch.

Reply
·

I don't like that they are connected to your phone. Our phones already play an enormous part in our lives. They track us and distract us.

I was a late adopter of cell phones but my work required one. I write with a fountain pen and collect old watches. I don't want to be that connected. We can't put the genie back in the bottle but we can try to salvage some bit of sanity.

Edit:  the real question is "does it look good with a navy blue suit?"

·

It's a gadget designed to get you to buy more gadgets & track your every move. The fact that it tells time is a coincidence... or is it? These things are getting to price out over 1K. That's a decent watch

·
TimeJunkie

It's a gadget designed to get you to buy more gadgets & track your every move. The fact that it tells time is a coincidence... or is it? These things are getting to price out over 1K. That's a decent watch

Yeah, if what you wanted a watch, there are a ton of great ones fro less than $1,000.

·

Yea, this reason of tech becoming obsolete is one the reasons I am staying away from the new bluetooth enabled watches. I really like the Casioak's and have a couple, but the new ones with Bluetooth just make me stay away.  Bluetooth, like every other tech, keeps changing and in a few years the version in that watch is not gonna be compatible with anything (phones, tablets, desktops, etc). Then how many features on that phone are gonna be gone? They would have to plan/promise to provide firmware upgrades. Even then there would be limitations on how long they could do that. Look at how cell service providers had to get all the older 3G phones off the market because they just weren't compatible with the newer 5G networks they were rolling out. So now the Gshock that doesn't die just can't connect or update to anything.

·

I think it is still fair to call it a watch and I’d argue it has the same amount of soul as any other disposable watch. Anyone truly think a Pagani Design, San Martin or any of the Ali famous brands will outlast an average Apple Watch? As for the soul of a a smart watch, I ran about 50 OCRs with a Fenix all over the country and it is still running today no matter how hard I beat on it. Those are some amazing memories tied to that piece I would not even try to do with a mechanical watch, simply because a mechanical watch cannot do what I need it to do comparatively. I could have equally used an Apple Watch, but prefer the battery of the Fenix.

Lastly, to be fair, earlier today I believe I mentioned the new Tag was disposable and many new hot brands (cough Baltic) are using movements that make them absolutely disposable. 

·

No one expects a cheap Casio or a swatch to last decades. They are still watches though.

·
Chronomaster

No one expects a cheap Casio or a swatch to last decades. They are still watches though.

I do. The watch straps of my swatches didn't last, but the watches kept on going. I have no idea what my wife did with them, though. If you can avoid water damage or a leaking battery, the expectation that a cheap quartz watch will last decades is not unreasonable. 

·

I love my Apple Watch… when I go to the gym. there’s a perfect watch for every occasion 

·

What is a definition of a watch? It’s a timepiece worn on the wrist or for some ankles, so for me it’s a watch. But really would it look good in a suit though??! 🤔

·

I'm here to be the first on Watchcrunch to tell you that watches were in fact disposable back in the day and barely different from current views on smartwatches. 

In reporting from older people/relatives who wore mechanical watches from the pre-quartz era: Yes, watches were often disposable. One of my relatives used to routinely smash her watch or get it wet, and hers died every few years at most. She had a box full of broken mechanical watches, including high quality gift watches received on memorable occasions. With the arrival of quartz, daily use watches became more durable and long lived. 

I myself have purchased digital watches as disposable items, with no intention of ever replacing the battery. This included what are now considered classic Casio models. When digital watches first came out in the 1970s they were pricy cutting-edge tech, but in the 1980s they became disposable commodities and got better every year. Casio crammed all sorts of new functions into those watches, including world time, alarms, primitive games, lights, radio atomic time, and more. So these WERE the smartwatches of the day, just awkward and weak ones versus Apple Watches and others. 

In sum, I think of watches falling into either a (1) functional / tool group versus a (2) fashion / art / gadget / collectable group. When any generation of watch tech is heavily used it'll break. This includes hand-wind, automatic, quartz, or smartwatches. The least reliable are probably mechanical chronographs -- certainly if used for abusive sports such as diving, skiing, cycling, shooting, or simple manual labor. One can look at the amazing craftsmanship of a Swiss chrono...as it fails to function after a single impact or dunk underwater...and then pay more than the price of a smartwatch to have it repaired. The Apple Watch has a water purge feature and is fully capable of surviving many abusive sports, even if not close to a G-Shock for diving. 

All hobby items go through "new tech" to "old junk" and then back to "nostalgic collectable" phases. Smartwatches haven't yet reached the nostalgia phase. They will in a few decades. 

·
AllTheWatches

I think it is still fair to call it a watch and I’d argue it has the same amount of soul as any other disposable watch. Anyone truly think a Pagani Design, San Martin or any of the Ali famous brands will outlast an average Apple Watch? As for the soul of a a smart watch, I ran about 50 OCRs with a Fenix all over the country and it is still running today no matter how hard I beat on it. Those are some amazing memories tied to that piece I would not even try to do with a mechanical watch, simply because a mechanical watch cannot do what I need it to do comparatively. I could have equally used an Apple Watch, but prefer the battery of the Fenix.

Lastly, to be fair, earlier today I believe I mentioned the new Tag was disposable and many new hot brands (cough Baltic) are using movements that make them absolutely disposable. 

While you may not think much of the quality of mechanical watches, I don’t believe they are built with the intention of replacjng them in a few years, but maybe I misunderstand the watch industry. 
 

And I was speaking specifically of the Apple Watch, but anything that needs updates would be the same. At some point Apple expects you to trade in your watch for another that is visually identical but will have better internals. I guess that’s my point, they are built to be rapidly obsolete. Not that they’ll break, but the stuff inside will no longer be viable. Even if I buy one and keep it in the safe, Apple will eventually stop supporting that version and it won’t be able to function as intended, even though I never used it. Even a Baltic can be left in a safe for 50 years and function with a service. 

·
Chronomaster

No one expects a cheap Casio or a swatch to last decades. They are still watches though.

There’s a difference between being made out of cheap parts and being actually obsolete. As I’ve mentioned to others, you can store that Casio for 59 years, pop in a battery and it will work. That Apple Watch won’t do its job in 10 years even if I kept it in the original package all that time. 

·

A Tesla isn’t a real car

A Sonos Soundbar isn’t a real hifi

Pop art isn’t real art 

We can go on and on can’t we? Humanity and it’s products evolve and the new become just another part of broadening ecospheres where enthusiasts (quite rightly) cling to and value the heritage and traditions of the past.

The Apple Watch is watch because people buy it to be one. It’s different to an original manual wind vintage Rolex. But so too were the first automatics, chronos, digitals, calculator watches, and databank watches. Many of those no longer work - and yet have a following.

I think we sometimes overinvest in definitions for our personal gratification and defence of our own choices. If someone wants to put an Apple Watch in their box next to their patek and their timex - all power to them. Their watch box still holds a true “watch collection”.

Yes - I was triggered lol 

·
KiwiWayne

A Tesla isn’t a real car

A Sonos Soundbar isn’t a real hifi

Pop art isn’t real art 

We can go on and on can’t we? Humanity and it’s products evolve and the new become just another part of broadening ecospheres where enthusiasts (quite rightly) cling to and value the heritage and traditions of the past.

The Apple Watch is watch because people buy it to be one. It’s different to an original manual wind vintage Rolex. But so too were the first automatics, chronos, digitals, calculator watches, and databank watches. Many of those no longer work - and yet have a following.

I think we sometimes overinvest in definitions for our personal gratification and defence of our own choices. If someone wants to put an Apple Watch in their box next to their patek and their timex - all power to them. Their watch box still holds a true “watch collection”.

Yes - I was triggered lol 

Again, I've made no argument that the Apple Watch doesn't have value or that people shouldn't buy them.  I've simply stated that it lacks what I believe to be a defining characteristic of watches, at least for collectors.  It doesn't have longevity.  And before you say it, that's not the same as a cheap watch.  That $5 watch can be kept in the packaging for 50 years, pulled out and used as intended, the Apple Watch connot.

None of the products you mentioned will simply stop doing their jobs even if the hardware they're made of is sound.  With proper maintenance, you should be able to drive a Tesla in 10 years.  Technology will change, but your sound bar will still make sound in 10 years.  However, the Apple watch will not function as intended in 10 years, because Apple will force it to be obsolete.

·

I understand that the Apple watch was made to do more than just tell the time but -

If we were to use for just that, telling the time, couldn't the watch technically last for many decades? Assuming the battery is changed every so often, as it won't hold charges.

·
CaptainD

I went surfing the other day and guy 1 paddled by and asked guy 2 if he knew the time.  Guy 2 peeled back his wetsuit sleeve, looked at his wrist and told the guy it was 7:50.  A couple minutes later I saw guy 2 peel back his sleeve again, but this time he answered a call on his "watch".  I don't have an Apple Watch and I don't really like them (and you may not either), but I (you) have to admit that that is pretty fricken amazing!  Later in the session I looked at my Seiko diver and realized it was time to go in to shore.  

 At least once a week I'm reminded that we're living in the future.  No doubt it's an amazing device.

·
wilfried

 A $10 watch from Amazon might last a year or two. Is it not a watch? There are lots of fashion watches that are not meant to last more than a season before fashion moves on. Longevity is not the definition of a watch. Do they have "soul?" There are plenty of bog standard mechanical watches that I think are soulless. The only definition of a watch that makes any sense is: a device you wear on your wrist that tells the time. The Apple Watch is a watch. Trying to define it away because it offends your sensibilities, or you think it's a threat to the "real" watches you love so much, doesn't change the fact that it exists,  isn't going away, and nobody cares about your attempt to redefine "watch." At the end of the day, there are watches you like, and watches you don't like. Trying to justify your dislike by calling a watch you don't like not a watch is disingenuous and futile.

You and some others are for some reason getting confused about what I am saying, so let me clarify:

  1.  It does not offend my sensibilities in any way.
  2.  I don't think it's a threat to real watches.  As everybody here knows, there's no need for watches anymore, so they aren't about practicality so I don't think they're going anywhere.
  3.  I was under no illusions that the Apple Watch was going away or people would stop liking them.  It will go away when somebody invents something better, and whatever that is it won't be a watch of any type.
  4.  I'm glad nobody cares about me redefining "watch", because that is in no way what I've tried to do here.  I'm using a more classic, nerd-centric definition of "watch" involving our feelings towards watches that has been around for long before I was alive.  
  5.  Again, I don't in any way dislike the Apple Watch, I just don't think it's a watch.  It's a device just like my phone.  The only thing that makes people think it's a watch is that it sits on your wrist...funny nobody thinks it's a bracelet.

Bottom line is that the primary focus of the thing isn't telling time.  It's just not.  It's a device for finding information, contacting others, playing games, reminding us of meetings, and doing all the other things we rely on our phones for these days.  The fact it tells you the time is incidental.  As detailed in several other posts, most of my appliences, my car, and my phone will all tell me the time, and yet none of them are clocks.

·

Spot on! Well said! Hopefully that puts it to bed?

·

There is a difference between the disposability of a cheap watch and the planned obsolescence you get from some certain intelligent devices.

If I buy a mechanical SanMartin for £250 then one day that mechanical movement will stop working; it is unlikely that this will be serviced then, for mere economic reasons. If I educated myself in watchmaking skills (and buy the necessary kit) I might do the service myself as part of the hobby. Similarly, for my cheapest quartz watches I own, replacing the batteries at my local watchmaker is not economical, because that costs more than the watches are worth. But, I could do this myself, with a lot less investment in equipment and training than for mechanical watches.

Intelligent devices can fail mechanically, i.e. in terms of hardware, and we have a similar situation. But, more often, their software support ceases. Repair is not an option. My mobile phone is getting on a bit, and it is just about still working, but quite a few of the apps it came with are no longer supported - and I cannot even remove them. There were app-based chess computers in the 1990s who would still work as mechanical devices, but whose website is no longer with us.

The other difference in smart watches and phones is their constant need of charging. If we lose our connection to a working electricity grid these devices stop working after a couple of days. Your nonsmart watch, mechanical or quartz or solar or kinetic, is simply not affected in the same way, and you can measure after how many hours of powercut a GenZer would go into meltdown.

·
thekris

I agree that people probably thought the same things when quartz watches were new and that most of us have changed our perspective to some degree since then. That said, I stand by my point. A quartz watch lacks some of what humans connect with in a mechanical watch, and a smartwatch lacks even more of that. 

However, we can criticize it endlessly, I may agree, but we cannot deny the reality that it is a wristwatch, love it or hate it.

By the way Apple Watch is in the book: “Fifty Watches That Changed the World”

·
JAWS80

However, we can criticize it endlessly, I may agree, but we cannot deny the reality that it is a wristwatch, love it or hate it.

By the way Apple Watch is in the book: “Fifty Watches That Changed the World”

Ah, but that's the beauty of my argument.  I can claim it's not a watch, because I'm talking about subjective qualities like "making memories" and "handing it down to future generations".  I have yet to find a person who gets all misty thinking of their son remembering them as they pass an Apple Watch on to their own son.

And I don't feel I'm criticizing the Apple Watch, it's brilliant at what it does and is more accurate than any of my watches.  I'm just saying it lacks something.  If this is the future, something has been lost.

·
thekris

Ah, but that's the beauty of my argument.  I can claim it's not a watch, because I'm talking about subjective qualities like "making memories" and "handing it down to future generations".  I have yet to find a person who gets all misty thinking of their son remembering them as they pass an Apple Watch on to their own son.

And I don't feel I'm criticizing the Apple Watch, it's brilliant at what it does and is more accurate than any of my watches.  I'm just saying it lacks something.  If this is the future, something has been lost.

Like I said before, silly discussion and I just wasted my time.

Mechanical watches are more beautiful, romantic and will forever be more prestigious, but Apple Watch is also a watch. Reality is beautiful as it should be, denying it doesn't help at all.

Have a great day!

·

Smartwatch. The clue is in the name.

·

I'm reminded of a gadget in an old movie:

Image

Spy Watch - Spy Kids 2: The Island of Lost Dreams. The watch is a cellphone, has internet access and satelite television, etc. It, however, cannot tell time. It was worn by Carmen and Juni.

–https://spykids.fandom.com/wiki/Gadgets

It is by (I think) every definition not a "watch". Yet it is called a watch, by means of linguistic shorthand, because it resembles a wrist watch.

The "Apple Watch" is a smart watch. Same as an iPhone or Android phone is a smart phone.

There is certainly an argument to be made for how the smart watch has inherited more functionality from the smart phone, tablet computer and fitness trackers, and should as a result be called something else, to separate it from the category of watch.

I suspect the argument falls on deaf ears though, exactly because of this linguistic shorthand, the categorization largely having been accepted, and humans being lazy.

·
coldkey

I'm reminded of a gadget in an old movie:

Image

Spy Watch - Spy Kids 2: The Island of Lost Dreams. The watch is a cellphone, has internet access and satelite television, etc. It, however, cannot tell time. It was worn by Carmen and Juni.

–https://spykids.fandom.com/wiki/Gadgets

It is by (I think) every definition not a "watch". Yet it is called a watch, by means of linguistic shorthand, because it resembles a wrist watch.

The "Apple Watch" is a smart watch. Same as an iPhone or Android phone is a smart phone.

There is certainly an argument to be made for how the smart watch has inherited more functionality from the smart phone, tablet computer and fitness trackers, and should as a result be called something else, to separate it from the category of watch.

I suspect the argument falls on deaf ears though, exactly because of this linguistic shorthand, the categorization largely having been accepted, and humans being lazy.

I don't mind calling the Apple thing a watch.  It's close enough and I'm lazy enough to not want the verbal gymnastics that go into renaming something like that.  Even if Apple insisted, I will never call it a "Wrist Mounted Data Rich Personal Assistive Device".  

With a bunch of watch nerds, I think it's interesting to have these discussions, but in day-to-day life, I just can't be bothered to get offended at calling it a watch.  It fulfills the role well enough to be called a watch the way a smartphone fulfills the role of telephone well enough be called one.

·

I wouldn`t go as far to say the Apple Watch isn`t a watch, but you have some interesting points, yeah it`s going to be obsolete ib a few years, ask how those people that bought the Gold 1st Gen Apple watch are using it and batteries will stop working in a few years as well, given most Apple watches are charged every two days if not daily, but my main gripe with Smartwatches in gereal is how much phone already command our lives and comapnies are actively trying to lock users in further overtime, there`s also the privacy concern given that those devices are actively collecting biometric data and how this data is used by companies, not a fan of being tracked physically and having the biometric data to go along at the end of the day, that`s too much power over the users live, whatever the company you chose to do so, but yeah an Apple Watch won`t lost as even a Seiko 5 or a Casio G-shock, they are disposabale are problably fancy paper weight in a few years but they are still watches in their own right, i personally don`t think they are a good value to begin with, for 400 dollars you can get some really cool watches, quartz or mechanical and have it for a long while, it's a choice that seems many of us here seem to make.

·

I don't have an apple watch, but i have a Sony smartwatch 3. I bought if for running, and it was great. Untill my phone died and I had to buy a new one. Everything smart about the watch is not working anymore, no running app, no music, basically its now just a watch that can tell you you received a text and needs to be charged every night. 

Its sitting in a drawer and I'm pretty sure I will never wear it again. I'm 100% sure I will never buy a smart watch again. 

·
Aurelian

I don't like that they are connected to your phone. Our phones already play an enormous part in our lives. They track us and distract us.

I was a late adopter of cell phones but my work required one. I write with a fountain pen and collect old watches. I don't want to be that connected. We can't put the genie back in the bottle but we can try to salvage some bit of sanity.

Edit:  the real question is "does it look good with a navy blue suit?"

I'm the same. When they get it to the point of a Star Trek-esque all-in-one communication device where you don't it AND an iPhone maybe I'd consider ditching my iPhone. Yet, even though I work in the tech industry as I get older the less "connected" I want to be. 

·

The reason I don’t have one is that it doesn’t take the place of my phone, it’s just an extra thing. I wouldn’t wear it as a watch, but if I could ditch my phone I’d get one. Maybe it’s just me, but it’s not much trouble to get my phone out of my pocket. 

·

Great post