# Do you believe smart watches will replace mechanical watches in future?



## Scott222

In my opinion they won't for some reasons.


Smart watches are a consumer product and mechanical watches are for watch collectors
Smart watches tend to get outdated in less than a couple of years while a mechanical watch will work as long as serviced
Smart watches can not be passed as a heirloom time piece while a mechanical watch can
With this I still think that smart watches will increase market share in future and mechanical watches will be a niche market though not much different from nowadays as mostly only watch collectors or WIS do understand the importance of having a mechanical watch and its intricate appeal.

What are your thoughts on this?


----------



## lvt

Scott222 said:


> [*]Smart watches can not be passed as a heirloom time piece while a mechanical watch can


What prevents you from passing a smartwatch as heirloom?


----------



## JSnipes

Nope...if quartz didn't kill them, nothing will.


----------



## jmnav

By means of counter examples...



Scott222 said:


> In my opinion they won't for some reasons.


In my opinion they will for some reasons.



Scott222 said:


> Smart watches are a consumer product and mechanical watches are for watch collectors



Wristwatches are a consumer product and pocket watches are for watch collectors -and yet, pocket watches market is basically an anecdote.
Wearing hat is the epitome of gentleman's elegance while a nude head is for peasants -and yet, wearing hat is basically an anecdote.



Scott222 said:


> Smart watches tend to get outdated in less than a couple of years while a mechanical watch will work as long as serviced



As people stops wearing mechanical wristwatches, it will be increasingly difficult to have your wristwatch serviced, both because lack of watchmakers and because the lower abilities of those very short numbers entering the market. On top of that, brand services will be increasingly more expensive because of their basically monopolist situation and scarcity (heck! even today that's already obvious: while 40 years ago you could find a decent watchmaker within your neighborhood, now it's almost impossibly, and those you can find are a risky bet).
As people stops wearing hats, society stops supporting them. You can't go into your car with your hat on anymore; you can't go into an office, or pub, and put your hat on a hat holder...



Scott222 said:


> Smart watches can not be passed as a heirloom time piece while a mechanical watch can


You can also pass your fine gramophone made of noble woods and metals as a heirloom while you can't do the same with your iPod-based home-system -and know what? Your heirs won't give a damn about your gramophone -nor your wristwatches.



Scott222 said:


> With this I still think that smart watches will increase market share in future and mechanical watches will be a niche market though not much different from nowadays as mostly only watch collectors or WIS do understand the importance of having a mechanical watch and its intricate appeal.


There will most possibly be a niche market for mechanical wristwatches just like there are for pocket watches or hats -but forget about high orology as, paradoxically, it needs a wide user base to survive at the long tail of the curve (just like there are no high quality fountain pens anymore -expensive? yes, high quality? no). And forget about ridicule prices for wristwatches that objectively don't deserve it (three arrows steel Rolexes? I'm looking at you) since the lack of interest will put that kind of tulips back to their intrinsic value (which is quite low).


----------



## Black5

They don't need to replace mechanical watches. They can all co-exist as they serve different purposes for different consumers at different times in different markets.

If anything, as the prices continue to drop, basic quartz watches are more at risk from smart watches than mechanical watches are, but each type will find an appropriate niche...

SoOoO many watches, SoOoO little time...


----------



## brash47

lvt said:


> What prevents you from passing a smartwatch as heirloom?


It can be passed, but probably not used. Smartwatches are obsolete within a couple of years. It's like passing a floppy disk or zip-drive to your heirs. It's got some info, but not really usable unless you buy a bunch of obsolete stuff to use it with, and then, you see the road I'm going down. Certain things stick around.

I think watches will stick around. Vinyl albums will remain popular. Vintage cars. Etc.... I think watches have this kind of staying power. Wearable tech comes and goes with popularity, for some reason, certain things stay...and most aren't electronic.


----------



## plohmann




----------



## toph

nope. Smart watches are about digital technology 
The mechanical watches we know, love, enjoy and admire are a different art form 

Two very seperate things. I would struggle to wear a smart watch if my life depended on it 😂


----------



## cheu_f50

No


----------



## caribiner23

Smartwatches are not watches: they are computers. 

By its nature and design, computer technology goes out of date within a relatively short timespan, thus rendering it a mostly-useless piece of plastic after a couple years. Watches and watch technology are simple enough to continue serving their simple purpose indefinitely.


----------



## composer

Smart watch will still be popular. But mechanical watches will never be a tiny market imho.


----------



## Ptmd

You can apply that to quartz watches too, not just Mechanical.


----------



## dfwcowboy

Old dogs are gold.


----------



## NC_Hager626

Q. Do you believe smart watches will replace mechanical watches in future?
A. No I don't for there will always be a requirement for something non-technical that can be relied on. The question you should be asking is: _what will be replacing the smart watches in the future_?


----------



## dglessner

No. 

I predict peaceful coexistence - the ebb and flow will continue between the art form engineering brilliance of a mechanical watch, and the latest/greatest technology.


----------



## FBPB

Pocket watches used to be worn with suit jackets / waistcoats, which is no longer in fashion, which has likely added significantly to a decline in their popularity.

Humans are not likely to stop having wrists for a few million more years, so the wrist watch is likely to remain popular for a while yet.

Whether it is digital or mechanical is down to personal choice... I could see quartz movements going away as few consider them desirable and they are found almost exclusively in cheap fashion watches or as entry level watches for lower tier watch brands.


----------



## smokyrich

Not at all.


----------



## Medusa

No. All smartwatches end up in the garbage and I don't like disposable watches. I bet there is not a member here who does not have a box of dead and/or outdated smartphones. 

I have two dead outdated smartwatches in my dead smartphone box. 

I do not consider smart watches to be watches. They are electronic consumer products.


----------



## longtimelurker

How far into the future? 
Mechs have managed to wiggle and dodge their way into collectibles, jewelry, curiosities, and some other categories for survival. But I don't know of any outmoded product that can do that forever. 

In any case, smart watches are replacing quartz watches as informational devices. In that area, mechs are already dead. Killed off by the digital multifunction module. So, I don't see smartwatches replacing the mechanical per se. Mechanical watches will die, but not because of the smartwatch.


----------



## viknijjar

Oh, they already have. Watches are just jewelry. Nobody needs a watch, much less a mechanical watch. And for those rare occupations that actually rely on timekeeping 100% of those needs are met by electronic devices, because…you know, when it actually matters then it HAS to work.

The Olympics are a good example. Omega is the sponsor and they have plenty of mechanical SE coming out….but when it comes to actually timing events, if course they use ultra precise electronic timekeeping. 

So yeah…enjoy your jewelry…and pass it down like any other jewelry. And expect for it to be left in a drawer and sold off as soon as you kick the bucket.


----------



## cfracing

I think it is a distinct possibility. As the years advance and each new generation appears, I believe there are fewer and fewer mechanical watch fans and collectors. It is becoming more about technology and connectivity. My son has inherited my love of watches but my son-in-law could care less. The jury is still out on my 4 year old grandson (son of my son-in-law and daughter) but he is at least fascinated with flipping my Reverso.


----------



## Docrwm




----------



## cheu_f50

jtlynn23 said:


> Smartwatches are not watches: they are computers.
> 
> By its nature and design, computer technology goes out of date within a relatively short timespan, thus rendering it a mostly-useless piece of plastic after a couple years. Watches and watch technology are simple enough to continue serving their simple purpose indefinitely.


And watches are jewelry anyway. Smart watches are definitely not in the same market.


----------



## Nokie

Nope.

But soon it will just be a chip implanted in the skull of the next generation that will render all timepieces useless............


----------



## kramer5150

No I think they will continue to co-exist, neither will completely obliterate the other.


----------



## viknijjar

Brands like Rolex, Omega (and the like) are more status symbol signifiers so they are relatively insulated especially since they are trying to be more “fashion” oriented. Two-tone Explorer anyone? Yet another LE Speedy perhaps? Seiko is trying hard to move into the same aspirational market with their GS line and collaborations and fun colors. Anything below $1000 though: Tissot and the like are on borrowed time. My poor Casio has an existential dilemma and they need to try hard on their MR-G lineup.


----------



## fjblair

Not sure if we are being trolled, but I have my suspicions.


----------



## FredLanc09

I sure hope not, and don't think so. I don't need another screen in my life, but I do like having the time (and date) on my wrist.


----------



## catspispenguins

Mechanical watches are no longer for telling time. They are not in competition with smart watches.

Mechanical watches are now in competition with sports cars and in some cases vacation homes.

Maybe even trophy wives.

And other status oriented junk.


----------



## BarracksSi

viknijjar said:


> Oh, they already have. *Watches are just jewelry.* Nobody needs a watch, much less a mechanical watch. And for those rare occupations that actually rely on timekeeping 100% of those needs are met by electronic devices, because&#8230;you know, when it actually matters then it HAS to work.
> 
> The Olympics are a good example. Omega is the sponsor and they have plenty of mechanical SE coming out&#8230;.but when it comes to actually timing events, if course they use ultra precise electronic timekeeping.
> 
> So yeah&#8230;enjoy your jewelry&#8230;and pass it down like any other jewelry. And expect for it to be left in a drawer and sold off as soon as you kick the bucket.





cheu_f50 said:


> And *watches are jewelry* anyway. Smart watches are definitely not in the same market.





catspispenguins said:


> Mechanical watches are no longer for telling time. They are not in competition with smart watches.
> 
> *Mechanical watches are now in competition with sports cars and in some cases vacation homes.
> 
> Maybe even trophy wives.*
> 
> And other status oriented junk.


Uncomfortable truths here.

They compete for the same real estate, but don't think for a minute think that people shopping in the four-figures-and-up range are expecting that they'll get the same "buzz" from a smartwatch.

On the other hand, a LOT of people do NOT spend that much on a watch in the first place, and they already find enough utility in a $300 smartwatch that they lose interest in $300 regular watches.


----------



## dirtvictim

If smart watches were so smart then why do they have built it software and hardware obsolescence? Oh it's to scam the buyers into buying more. Answered my own question.


----------



## Mediocre

I think they already have for many 

Will mechanical watches disappear from production completely? Maybe one day, when resources become rationed, time is reinvented, or the world ends


----------



## Perfectionist

Will a 15 year old wearing an Apple Watch today - become a 50 year old wearing a Rolex tomorrow... I think, probably not

I'll go ahead and guess - over the next few decades, the market will decrease by 80%... the remaining 20% buying only the high-end luxury brands as symbols of status 

The generation after that though, will purely buy these as rare pieces of Art, sold only through auction houses etc...

I reckon we are living through a watch industry Peak right now... with the decline slowly starting from 2030 onwards

Ofcourse, some of the bigger brands might survive if they merge Mech with Smart and join the growing number of Hybrid watch models... which they will be forced to do when Apple inevitably decides to buy them!


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Ofcourse, some of the bigger brands might survive if they merge Mech with Smart and join the growing number of Hybrid watch models... which they will be forced to do when Apple inevitably decides to buy them!


Neither of these are going to happen.

"Hybrid" smart watches come and go, over and over. They keep trying, but the watches themselves don't do enough to be worth the extra hassle. And when the brand fails to understand what it means to continue supporting the software platform, the watch becomes useless overnight. There's barely a handful of manufacturers that are stable enough to be worth buying into - Apple, Google, Garmin, and Fitbit are the only four that come to my mind. If you're going to say "but Fossil...", they only exist because Google bought them out; and Samsung is abandoning its homebuilt Tizen platform to switch to Google's WearOS.

And what would Apple gain from buying a smartwatch platform that does less than their own? More liability? A software stack that they have no interest in maintaining? Watch designs that don't have any advantages for app developers? Yeah... not gonna happen.


----------



## Ticktocker

I don't think so. There are so many threads from years ago with the same question and current watches are still going strong. I don't think it's equivalent to cell phone replacing land lines. 
People into watches might have a smart watch along with their mechanical watches but they are two different animals. 
I may come back to this thread 20 years from now and find that I was completely wrong.


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> "Hybrid" smart watches come and go, over and over. They keep trying, but the watches themselves don't do enough to be worth the extra hassle. And when the brand fails to understand what it means to continue supporting the software platform, the watch becomes useless overnight. There's barely a handful of manufacturers that are stable enough to be worth buying into - Apple, Google, Garmin, and Fitbit are the only four that come to my mind. If you're going to say "but Fossil...", they only exist because Google bought them out; and Samsung is abandoning its homebuilt Tizen platform to switch to Google's WearOS.


I've been buying these Hybrids since they started coming on to the market years ago - most were a major disappointment lol... however the two I have now (Tissot, F.Constant) are quite impressive in their own way, and will no doubt get much better in the future.

Eventually things will consolidate in to just a couple of well supported platforms - aka Apple and Google...



> And what would Apple gain from buying a smartwatch platform that does less than their own? More liability? A software stack that they have no interest in maintaining? Watch designs that don't have any advantages for app developers? Yeah... not gonna happen.


Around 2030, Apple won't buy a platform - they will buy a Swiss Brand...

Rolex is a Charitable Trust, so maybe Omega will be their target - which they will buy for peanuts as watch industry revenues take a dive...

By then, a fully functional smartwatch will fit in to a module only a couple of mm thick...

Omega will then offer, slightly thicker "Apple Enabled" models across their entire range...

A decade later, most of the surviving European watch brands will be owned by the Tech Giants and all their watches will be Hybrid...

The Japanese brands will probably manage to stay independent as they are more adaptable and tech savvy so will evolve in to this new market environment...

The super high-end firms like Patek, Audemars, Vacheron etc may continue making purely mechanicals, but their sales will be a fraction of what they are today - and prices even higher!

I rest my case lol


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Around 2030, Apple won't buy a platform - they will buy a Swiss Brand...


lol why


----------



## fransiscus

No, I don't think so.

Sent from my SM-G980F using Tapatalk


----------



## utzelu

Scott222 said:


> In my opinion they won't for some reasons.
> 
> 
> Smart watches are a consumer product and mechanical watches are for watch collectors
> Smart watches tend to get outdated in less than a couple of years while a mechanical watch will work as long as serviced
> Smart watches can not be passed as a heirloom time piece while a mechanical watch can
> With this I still think that smart watches will increase market share in future and mechanical watches will be a niche market though not much different from nowadays as mostly only watch collectors or WIS do understand the importance of having a mechanical watch and its intricate appeal.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this?


They already started replacing the mechanical and quartz watches for the past 5 years. Slowly slowly, the sales volumes are decreasing until the industry will be in trouble. I see more and more people wearing smart watches instead of traditional.

The vast majority of watch buyers are regular consumers, not collectors, and they don't care about longevity, heirlooms or art. Currently the mechanical watches are in the same category as jewelries.


----------



## jmnav

FBPB said:


> Humans are not likely to stop having wrists for a few million more years, so the wrist watch is likely to remain popular for a while yet.


People haven't used wristwatches for a few million years minus 100 or so... also, people have had heads for million years and they stopped systematically covering them in the last 50 or so... can't see your argument holding water.


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> lol why


Apple buys Beats = to sell more Headphones...
Apple buys Omega = to sell more Smartwatches...


----------



## jkpa

I seriously doubt mechanical watches will be of interest to anyone except the very very few in 50 years.


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Apple buys Beats = to sell more Headphones...
> Apple buys Omega = to sell more Smartwatches...


Beats not only had headphones - they were a music service. That's why Apple bought them.

Nothing about that transaction can relate to Omega (or more precisely, Swatch Group).


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> Beats not only had headphones - they were a music service. That's why Apple bought them.
> 
> Nothing about that transaction can relate to Omega (or more precisely, Swatch Group).


Apple buys Beats Music = to dominate Streaming Music market...
Apple buys Swatch Group = to dominate Hybrid Watch market...


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Apple buys Beats Music = to dominate Streaming Music market...
> Apple buys Swatch Group = to dominate Hybrid Watch market...


There is no worthwhile hybrid watch market.

Swatch Group doesn't even make any of the danged things.


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> There is no worthwhile hybrid watch market.


Not yet bro... just like there wasn't a worthwhile Streaming market a couple of decades ago...



> Swatch Group doesn't even make any of the danged things.


They must make at least a couple dude - cos I've bought one lol! = Tissot T-Touch Connect Solar


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Not yet bro... just like there wasn't a worthwhile Streaming market a couple of decades ago...
> 
> They must make at least a couple dude - cos I've bought one lol! = Tissot T-Touch Connect Solar


See, even I forgot that that thing exists.

What makes you think it'll fit in with the Apple ecosystem? What SDK do they have for devs?


----------



## fish70

Yes.


----------



## FBPB

jmnav said:


> People haven't used wristwatches for a few million years minus 100 or so... also, people have had heads for million years and they stopped systematically covering them in the last 50 or so... can't see your argument holding water.


What part of "for a while yet" did you not understand ?


----------



## utzelu

Perfectionist said:


> Not yet bro... just like there wasn't a worthwhile Streaming market a couple of decades ago...
> 
> They must make at least a couple dude - cos I've bought one lol! = Tissot T-Touch Connect Solar


I also believe there is no significant size market for hybrid watches. They lack the versatility of full fledged smart watches, where you can install apps and the usability is very poor.


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> See, even I forgot that that thing exists.


Nobody remembers this one either lol - it isn't exactly a "smartwatch" Hybrid, but does show that Omega is looking to broaden it's horizons...









Speedmaster Skywalker X-33 | OMEGA®


Discover all the Skywalker X-33 - Skywalker X-33. See all the watches and enjoy a legacy of horological quality and innovation!




www.omegawatches.com














> What makes you think it'll fit in with the Apple ecosystem? What SDK do they have for devs?


Apple has no interest in the software any watch brand develops - they will simply transfer their own proprietary tech across... like I said "Apple Enabled" or maybe copy Intel with "Apple Inside" lol


----------



## bhoffman28

Definitely not! Mechanical watches are an art!


----------



## carbon_dragon

bhoffman28 said:


> Definitely not! Mechanical watches are an art!


Yes. Though I have (currently) a Polar Ignite 2 on my right wrist and a mechanical watch on my left. I had a fitbit before that to count steps. The value of the ignite is that I use it in the pool to measure my heart rate while swimming. I think the Apple watches are mostly being bought by people who weren't wearing ANY watch.


----------



## simplediver

Scott222 said:


> In my opinion they won't for some reasons.
> 
> 
> Smart watches are a consumer product and mechanical watches are for watch collectors
> Smart watches tend to get outdated in less than a couple of years while a mechanical watch will work as long as serviced
> Smart watches can not be passed as a heirloom time piece while a mechanical watch can
> With this I still think that smart watches will increase market share in future and mechanical watches will be a niche market though not much different from nowadays as mostly only watch collectors or WIS do understand the importance of having a mechanical watch and its intricate appeal.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this?


I ditched my smartwatch as soon as I realized it's tracking everything you do down to your heart rate / pulse. Hi Tech Tracking Device Selling Your Data .. It was a pain having to put it on a charge every day / other day. Love my Casio Titanium ProTrek and Zeno Hercules 1 Chronograph


----------



## Perfectionist

utzelu said:


> I also believe there is no significant size market for hybrid watches. They lack the versatility of full fledged smart watches, where you can install apps and the usability is very poor.


I agree - they still have a long way to go... but in technological terms, that's merely 2 or 3 generations, so will be "fully fledged" within 5 years...

The market will have grown significantly by then - and afterwards will grow exponentially...

I see Hybrids as "Electric Watches" - comparable to "Electric Cars" years ago... they would never take off and were laughed at... what a difference a decade makes lol!


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Nobody remembers this one either lol - it isn't exactly a "smartwatch" Hybrid, but does show that Omega is looking to broaden it's horizons...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speedmaster Skywalker X-33 | OMEGA®
> 
> 
> Discover all the Skywalker X-33 - Skywalker X-33. See all the watches and enjoy a legacy of horological quality and innovation!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.omegawatches.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apple has no interest in the software any watch brand develops - they will simply transfer their own proprietary tech across... like I said "Apple Enabled" or maybe copy Intel with "Apple Inside" lol


The more you try to sell this idea, the less it makes sense.


----------



## djgallo

There will always be mechanical watches. They don’t have to compete with smart watches. Apples and oranges….

Hybrid watches, don’t see them catching on, on the other hand, Hybrid cars that regenerate their own electric power are fine and will continue to be viable.

Straight up electric cars aren’t going anywhere…they need to be charged…..charged from what….electricity and where do we get the electricity? Won’t be enough from solar/wind…. population growth and competition for electric power will continue to grow….don’t see the affordability of electric cars, as time progresses you won’t be able to afford to charge them….so it’s just a fad. IMO


----------



## Rocket1991

I am looking at this thread and trying to come out with sensible thing to say.
And it's hard.

Whole thing seem so obvious for some and windmill in a same package.


Perfectionist said:


> Nobody remembers this one either lol - it isn't exactly a "smartwatch" Hybrid, but does show that Omega is looking to broaden it's horizons...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Speedmaster Skywalker X-33 | OMEGA®
> 
> 
> Discover all the Skywalker X-33 - Skywalker X-33. See all the watches and enjoy a legacy of horological quality and innovation!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.omegawatches.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apple has no interest in the software any watch brand develops - they will simply transfer their own proprietary tech across... like I said "Apple Enabled" or maybe copy Intel with "Apple Inside" lol


I think it's a stretch with has tear in it. This omega is not Hybrid by any means.








This is hybrid watch and frankly very good one since it's solar.
Still did not made any significant splash.
The reason for their minimal success is limited functionality, no customization whatsoever and often tacky execution.
A lot of Swiss brands offer either smartwatch or hybrid.
There are even mechanical/smartwatch combos





In a way they are tricycles in motorcycle world. Yes they there but hardly make any volume and never will. 
Citizen get my thumbs up because it's solar and fresh design. Most of them are not even worthy mentioning.
Regular smartwatch outperforms them in any possible way.

I like good sidecar motorcycle but it's hardly same fun in the corners and romance of moving between soviet collective farms is died long time ago. So i won't buy it. Thing is in many cases either 2 wheel motorcycle or 4 wheel roadster car make far more compelling propositions.

If you like hybrid watches and it's working for you. Kudos! I am not here to rain on your passion. If i see someone driving side car motorcycle pass me i thumb up them!


----------



## BarracksSi

Rocket1991 said:


> View attachment 15985862
> 
> This is hybrid watch and frankly very good one since it's solar.
> Still did not made any significant splash.
> The reason for their minimal success is *limited functionality, *no customization whatsoever and often tacky execution.


The limited functionality is what keeps them off my wrist. All of the hassle of a smartwatch but with very little gain.

What these Citizens can't do that my AW can: read _and write_ texts, set timers by voice, tell me when we've walked at least four miles (my wife's preference), give me weather alerts (like a tornado warning last year), skim through emails, screen calls, help give directions while navigating, show a graph of my HR when I was sick a couple months ago, let me check the weather forecast with a single tap, control the music player on my laptop, remotely trigger my phone's camera...

The Citizen that I have now, besides solar charging, already syncs itself with the radio signal from Fort Collins. That's the best I can ask of a regular watch, to be as hands-off as possible, no app needed for managing it. And if I'm going to deal with a smartwatch, I'd rather that it go all the way, not some half-executed thing like these hybrids. AND, if I'm going to invest my time in _the platform as a whole_, which includes all the gadgets from my wrist to my desk, a traditional watch brand isn't going to get very far.


----------



## utzelu

Perfectionist said:


> I agree - they still have a long way to go... but in technological terms, that's merely 2 or 3 generations, so will be "fully fledged" within 5 years...
> 
> The market will have grown significantly by then - and afterwards will grow exponentially...
> 
> I see Hybrids as "Electric Watches" - comparable to "Electric Cars" years ago... they would never take off and were laughed at... what a difference a decade makes lol!


No tech company is investing in hybrid watches, so I am not sure how can the market grow, and even exponentially.

The hybrid watches are like hybrid cars, they don't give any significant electric only range, but they have all the downsides of ICE cars: high complexity, high service cost and pollution. I don't expect hybrid cars market to grow significantly either in the next few years, once EVs reach good range and price.


----------



## utzelu

djgallo said:


> There will always be mechanical watches. They don't have to compete with smart watches. Apples and oranges&#8230;.


I do hope there will always be mechanical watches. But for them to be produced, a large industrial base has to exist. And that requires volumes, which is constantly decreasing for the past few years.

A lot of people are replacing their traditional watches (quartz/mechanical) with smart watches, due to the functionality they offer and mostly due to the active lifestyle people are adopting. Even the watch brands CEOs admit of wearing smart watches during weekends.


----------



## Rocket1991

BarracksSi said:


> The limited functionality is what keeps them off my wrist. All of the hassle of a smartwatch but with very little gain.
> 
> What these Citizens can't do that my AW can: read _and write_ texts, set timers by voice, tell me when we've walked at least four miles (my wife's preference), give me weather alerts (like a tornado warning last year), skim through emails, screen calls, help give directions while navigating, show a graph of my HR when I was sick a couple months ago, let me check the weather forecast with a single tap, control the music player on my laptop, remotely trigger my phone's camera...
> 
> The Citizen that I have now, besides solar charging, already syncs itself with the radio signal from Fort Collins. That's the best I can ask of a regular watch, to be as hands-off as possible, no app needed for managing it. And if I'm going to deal with a smartwatch, I'd rather that it go all the way, not some half-executed thing like these hybrids. AND, if I'm going to invest my time in _the platform as a whole_, which includes all the gadgets from my wrist to my desk, a traditional watch brand isn't going to get very far.


I totally agree. Posted Citizen as technically best hybrid watch in my opinion. At least you don't need to pop new cell into it any 4-6 months. Casio pushing technically hybrid digital watches and they cost about 100$. For 150$ you can have full GPS enabled, HR equipped fitness band. It's OK if you see it as watch with some little bonus but it totally fails if you want smartwatch in a first place. Extra 50$ give you so much....
Whole premise of no universal display and very low power consumption limits them to notification of yeah you got message and yeah you walked X steps. Some rudimentary fitness tracking is possible which without HR zones and GPS don't make any sense for me but i am not pushing it as universal opinion. Just saying it. Loudly.

Many people here and in general don't understand what is difference between Gamin and AW with later been full smartwatch with all flexibility of universal computing device while former been yes great tool but comes with bunch of limitations. Thus multiple models.

Been bringing same argument about e-mails and such in other discussion.


----------



## BarracksSi

Rocket1991 said:


> Whole premise of no universal display and very low power consumption limits them to notification of *yeah you got message* and yeah you walked X steps.


Right, and I don't think many people understand how this limited notification style can be more annoying. It's not enough to make a hand point to a symbol or number - I want to know _who_ is messaging me.

The reason I still use a smartwatch is so that I don't need to grab my phone all the time. If my watch only says "you have a message", then I have to go see my phone to find out who it is. But because my watch shows the sender's name, I can decide right away whether I need to do anything else or if it can wait until later.


----------



## Rocket1991

BarracksSi said:


> Right, and I don't think many people understand how this limited notification style can be more annoying. It's not enough to make a hand point to a symbol or number - I want to know _who_ is messaging me.
> 
> The reason I still use a smartwatch is so that I don't need to grab my phone all the time. If my watch only says "you have a message", then I have to go see my phone to find out who it is. But because my watch shows the sender's name, I can decide right away whether I need to do anything else or if it can wait until later.


Same here i got to love this ability to glance and be able to respond on a spot.


----------



## djgallo

utzelu said:


> No tech company is investing in hybrid watches, so I am not sure how can the market grow, and even exponentially.
> 
> I don't expect hybrid cars market to grow significantly either in the next few years, once EVs reach good range and price.


Hybrid watches&#8230;.I agree not a good future. It looks like it will be smart watch - for the tech, and the mechanical watch for the jewelry/art aspect.

Hybrid cars&#8230;.I think will have a good future.

All EV cars no&#8230;..were is the electric power going to come from to charge all the EV's? We have power outages all the time when electric demand goes up&#8230;.can you imagine adding all the EV cars to the electrical supply network&#8230;..people are dreaming about this electric car world.


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> The more you try to sell this idea, the less it makes sense.


Not selling anything dude - I'm not in the watch business, hybrid or not lol!

I simply have an opinion/speculation - and nothing I've read here (so far!) has convinced me to change my mind... clearly you're the same too!

We will know who was right as time passes - hopefully I'll still be alive to say I told you so haha!

Actually, let me make some definitive predictions for you to laugh at lol:

By 2030 - Smart stealing Quartz sales and Hybrid gaining traction
Mech = 25% of the market
Quartz = 15% of the market
Smart = 50% of the market
Hybrid = 10% of the market

By 2040 - Quartz is dead and Mech losing ground to Hybrid
Mech = 10% 
Quartz = 0%
Smart = 60%
Hybrid = 30%

By 2050 - Smart/Hybrid dominate leaving Mech for Art Collectors
Mech = 1% 
Quartz = 0%
Smart = 60%
Hybrid = 39%


----------



## Perfectionist

djgallo said:


> There will always be mechanical watches. They don't have to compete with smart watches. Apples and oranges&#8230;.
> 
> Hybrid watches, don't see them catching on, on the other hand, Hybrid cars that regenerate their own electric power are fine and will continue to be viable.
> 
> Straight up electric cars aren't going anywhere&#8230;they need to be charged&#8230;..charged from what&#8230;.electricity and where do we get the electricity? Won't be enough from solar/wind&#8230;. population growth and competition for electric power will continue to grow&#8230;.don't see the affordability of electric cars, as time progresses you won't be able to afford to charge them&#8230;.so it's just a fad. IMO


Electricity can be generated in many ways, not just renewable - and pricing is continuously getting cheaper... will eventually make it more affordable than ICE engines...

If it is indeed a fad... then these major players are making an absolutely fatal mistake!









Volvo to be electric-only by 2030, CEO says


Volvo CEO Hakan Samuelsson envisions the automaker becoming an electric-only brand within the next 10 years.




europe.autonews.com












Jaguar will become all-electric brand as part of new turnaround plan


The brand will be a direct Tesla rival. Land Rover will gradually follow Jaguar down the electric-only road.




europe.autonews.com












Bentley plans to become electric-only


Bentley’s strategy is to position itself as an ethical company with the aim of being climate neutral by 2030.




europe.autonews.com












Ford will only sell full-electric cars in Europe by 2030


The move will be supported by its strategic alliance with Volkswagen Group to use VW's MEB electric-car platform, Ford said.




europe.autonews.com


----------



## Perfectionist

utzelu said:


> No tech company is investing in hybrid watches, so I am not sure how can the market grow, and even exponentially.


Too early for Big Tech to get involved yet - they will enter when the current market is saturated and they want a piece of the Mechanical pie...
Meanwhile, the more dynamic watch brands will keep experimenting on a small scale...



> I don't expect hybrid cars market to grow significantly either in the next few years, once EVs reach good range and price.


I agree - ICE will be ancient history within our lifetime - but rich collectors will still pay a fortune for classic cars, just like they will for classic watches...


----------



## Perfectionist

Rocket1991 said:


> This omega is not Hybrid by any means.


Which is what I said lol = "it isn't exactly a "smartwatch" Hybrid, but does show that Omega is looking to broaden it's horizons..."



> Yes they there but hardly make any volume and never will.


I think they will - once the technology has been perfected... in about 10 years or so...



> If you like hybrid watches and it's working for you. Kudos! I am not here to rain on your passion.


Mechanical watches with Perpetual Calendars are my (unaffordable!) passion - I'm just posting on this thread because it's an interesting topic!


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> Right, and I don't think many people understand how this limited notification style can be more annoying. It's not enough to make a hand point to a symbol or number - I want to know _who_ is messaging me.
> 
> The reason I still use a smartwatch is so that I don't need to grab my phone all the time. If my watch only says "you have a message", then I have to go see my phone to find out who it is. But because my watch shows the sender's name, I can decide right away whether I need to do anything else or if it can wait until later.


True - even the best ones today have major weaknesses - the dial/screen being one of the biggest, (together with battery longevity)...

However, they will solve this in a couple of years by creating a perfectly see-through crystal that also shows a full resolution screen when needed =


----------



## notnathan

Luxury watches, absolutely not. Cheapo quartz watches? I could see it especially as battery tech improves.

Luxury watches are more like fine jewelry than anything and will likely always have some sartorial relevance.

What I'm most surprised by is that with the exception of Tag Heuer, non of the luxury brands have even experimented with smart watch technology. I could see technology like Heuer's smart band becoming more common.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Not selling anything dude - I'm not in the watch business, hybrid or not lol!
> 
> I simply have an opinion/speculation - and nothing I've read here (so far!) has convinced me to change my mind... clearly you're the same too!
> 
> We will know who was right as time passes - hopefully I'll still be alive to say I told you so haha!
> 
> Actually, let me make some definitive predictions for you to laugh at lol:
> 
> By 2030 - Smart stealing Quartz sales and Hybrid gaining traction
> Mech = 25% of the market
> Quartz = 15% of the market
> Smart = 50% of the market
> Hybrid = 10% of the market
> 
> By 2040 - Quartz is dead and Mech losing ground to Hybrid
> Mech = 10%
> Quartz = 0%
> Smart = 60%
> Hybrid = 30%
> 
> By 2050 - Smart/Hybrid dominate leaving Mech for Art Collectors
> Mech = 1%
> Quartz = 0%
> Smart = 60%
> Hybrid = 39%





Perfectionist said:


> Electricity can be generated in many ways, not just renewable - and pricing is continuously getting cheaper... will eventually make it more affordable than ICE engines...
> 
> If it is indeed a fad... then these major players are making an absolutely fatal mistake!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Volvo to be electric-only by 2030, CEO says
> 
> 
> Volvo CEO Hakan Samuelsson envisions the automaker becoming an electric-only brand within the next 10 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> europe.autonews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jaguar will become all-electric brand as part of new turnaround plan
> 
> 
> The brand will be a direct Tesla rival. Land Rover will gradually follow Jaguar down the electric-only road.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> europe.autonews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bentley plans to become electric-only
> 
> 
> Bentley’s strategy is to position itself as an ethical company with the aim of being climate neutral by 2030.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> europe.autonews.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ford will only sell full-electric cars in Europe by 2030
> 
> 
> The move will be supported by its strategic alliance with Volkswagen Group to use VW's MEB electric-car platform, Ford said.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> europe.autonews.com





Perfectionist said:


> Too early for Big Tech to get involved yet - they will enter when the current market is saturated and they want a piece of the Mechanical pie...
> Meanwhile, the more dynamic watch brands will keep experimenting on a small scale...
> 
> I agree - ICE will be ancient history within our lifetime - but rich collectors will still pay a fortune for classic cars, just like they will for classic watches...





Perfectionist said:


> Which is what I said lol = "it isn't exactly a "smartwatch" Hybrid, but does show that Omega is looking to broaden it's horizons..."
> 
> I think they will - once the technology has been perfected... in about 10 years or so...
> 
> Mechanical watches with Perpetual Calendars are my (unaffordable!) passion - I'm just posting on this thread because it's an interesting topic!





Perfectionist said:


> True - even the best ones today have major weaknesses - the dial/screen being one of the biggest, (together with battery longevity)...
> 
> However, they will solve this in a couple of years by creating a perfectly see-through crystal that also shows a full resolution screen when needed =


SHTAAAHHHPPP


----------



## Snyde

No doubt 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## utzelu

Perfectionist said:


> Too early for Big Tech to get involved yet - they will enter when the current market is saturated and they want a piece of the Mechanical pie...


The value of mechanical watches market is peanuts for tech giants. We forget that the watch industry is quite small overall.


----------



## peagreen

cheu_f50 said:


> And watches are jewelry anyway. Smart watches are definitely not in the same market.


The ability to change watch faces does give smart watches more flexibilty in the jewellery/fashion aspect than non-smart watches. 
Until we get some way to query the time built in to our heads (Yes, I like speculative fiction) I think there is a good reason to continue to wear a watch and the choice of smart or non smart is entirely up to the individual.


----------



## JLittle

Not in my future.


----------



## Rocket1991

Perfectionist said:


> Which is what I said lol = "it isn't exactly a "smartwatch" Hybrid, but does show that Omega is looking to broaden it's horizons..."
> 
> I think they will - once the technology has been perfected... in about 10 years or so...
> 
> Mechanical watches with Perpetual Calendars are my (unaffordable!) passion - I'm just posting on this thread because it's an interesting topic!


Analog digital is not equal hybrid.
Omega is a great watch but hardly hybrid by any means








That is a hybrid and again very good for what it is and also better than model it replaces. 
There are plenty of quartz analog perpetual calendars. Unless you mean these showing month, year etc.. Very affordable and clever.
There is one huge problem with hybrid watches which been pointed out. Market either wants full experience or full traditional. In between is not the thing. Especially expensive thing which will be obsolete in 3-5 years. Hell, most of them are obsolete even before you buy them. Counting steps and giving it to the phone is hardly the most needed function.

Market of *connected watches* will grow and i see a lot of merit in it. There are plenty of things to gain from having phone once in while do the job, but t*hese are not truly smartwatches*. On other hand it requires a lot of dedication from company which in many cases we don't see.

Everyone point to Apple but Apple is exemplary company. 99% of others don't live even to 5% of what apple does in terms of support, design and integration. Frankly putting something and hinting it's like it, more of sales trick when econobox car standing in showroom next to supercar and hinting "ahem, company which made this made also this and technology... " Yes, technology used in supercar was in next room but never entered one where econo SUV was designed.

Calling thing hybrid smartwatch is exactly this trick.


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> SHTAAAHHHPPP





Snyde said:


> No doubt


----------



## Perfectionist

utzelu said:


> The value of mechanical watches market is peanuts for tech giants. We forget that the watch industry is quite small overall.


The market is surprisingly big dude... 40-50 Billion a year = Luxury Watches Market Size, Share & Trends | Analysis Forecast, 2027

Add in the non-luxury and pre-owned and even counterfeit watch revenues - and it may well be up to 100 Billion a year!

This article from Monochrome is even more interesting using stats from Morgan Stanley = Top 50 Swiss Watch Brands of 2020 Market Share - Editorial









Rolex really is a force of nature, DANG!


----------



## Perfectionist

Rocket1991 said:


> There is one huge problem with hybrid watches which been pointed out. Market either wants full experience or full traditional. In between is not the thing.


Agreed! Which is why there are so few Hybrid models around today - but this will change when the technology has matured/miniaturised...



> Especially expensive thing which will be obsolete in 3-5 years. Hell, most of them are obsolete even before you buy them.


True and probably the biggest obstacle to overcome...

Tech will always keep improving - but is bound to plateau in 5-10 years, as far as features and functionality of a smartwatch are concerned... plus Mechanical watches will still need servicing every few years, at which time they can have their "smart module" upgraded too...


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> The market is surprisingly big dude... 40-50 Billion a year = Luxury Watches Market Size, Share & Trends | Analysis Forecast, 2027
> 
> Add in the non-luxury and pre-owned and even counterfeit watch revenues - and it may well be up to 100 Billion a year!
> 
> This article from Monochrome is even more interesting using stats from Morgan Stanley = Top 50 Swiss Watch Brands of 2020 Market Share - Editorial
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rolex really is a force of nature, DANG!


Well, gosh, that beats out Apple's latest earnings report of $89 billion&#8230;

Oh wait, that's $89b for just last _quarter&#8230;_

(not including the other tech big hitters)


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Agreed! Which is why there are so few Hybrid models around today - but this will change when the technology has matured/miniaturised...


It's already as miniaturized as it's going to get.

What's holding hybrid smartwatches back isn't miniaturization, it's the UI itself - mechanical hands punching a hole in the display, and the hands will always be there no matter how you write an application for the watch.

Or the hybrids that just have a subdial that shows&#8230; what, step count?&#8230;. That's all, right? How is a little analog pointer going to show me a text message?

Look - a couple dozen different companies have been trying the whole spectrum of wearables for close to ten years, and many of them have packed up and gone away. Not a single point you're trying to make hasn't been attempted already.


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> Well, gosh, that beats out Apple's latest earnings report of $89 billion&#8230;
> 
> Oh wait, that's $89b for just last _quarter&#8230;_
> 
> (not including the other tech big hitters)


Global Smartwatch sales are worth (a measly!) 20+ Billion a year so far = Smartwatch Market Size, Share & Industry Growth | Analysis - 2027

Yet Apple still entered this (puny little!) market and now dominates...

Is Tim Cook a dumbass for chasing, what you consider is, peanuts ?!


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> It's already as miniaturized as it's going to get.


Are you honestly saying technology has reached it's limit now... I don't think your post is gonna age well bro!



> What's holding hybrid smartwatches back isn't miniaturization, it's the UI itself - mechanical hands punching a hole in the display, and the hands will always be there no matter how you write an application for the watch.


Like I've already said - this can/will be solved by the crystal becoming the display instead of the dial underneath...



> Look - a couple dozen different companies have been trying the whole spectrum of wearables for close to ten years, and many of them have packed up and gone away.


Really? Never heard of them - which means they were probably small-time start-ups who would never have succeeded anyway...

As long as the Smartwatch market continues to grow (you do agree with that at least dude or not?) then the major players will eventually look to produce a "Premium" range - which will inevitably involve purchase or partnership with an established luxury watch brand... while at the same time, these same brands will be looking to survive the onslaught of dwindling sales so will be desperately looking for a buyer or a joint venture...

Apple and Rolex would be a match made in heaven lol, but is unlikely... so I reckon Samsung and Grand Seiko will be the first movers...



> Not a single point you're trying to make hasn't been attempted already.


The point I'm making is that the winds of change are most definitely coming... you seem to think otherwise, which is as admirable as it is fascinating!


----------



## Snyde

Perfectionist said:


> Are you honestly saying technology has reached it's limit now... I don't think your post is gonna age well bro!
> 
> Like I've already said - this can/will be solved by the crystal becoming the display instead of the dial underneath...
> 
> Really? Never heard of them - which means they were probably small-time start-ups who never would have succeeded anyway...
> 
> As long as the Smartwatch market continues to grow (you do agree with that at least dude or not?) then the major players will eventually look to produce a "Premium" range - which will inevitably involve purchase or partnership with an established luxury watch brand... while at the same time, these same brands will be looking to survive the onslaught of dwindling sales so will be desperately looking for a buyer or a joint venture...
> 
> Apple and Rolex would be a match made in heaven lol, but is unlikely... so I reckon Samsung and Grand Seiko will be the first movers...
> 
> The point I'm making is that the winds of change are most definitely coming... you seem to think otherwise, which is as admirable as it is fascinating!


He actually has a point. Transistors are so small that there's a problem with quantum tunneling. I'm not an expert but look up quantum tunneling or transistor tunneling for more info.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rocket1991

Snyde said:


> He actually has a point. Transistors are so small that there's a problem with quantum tunneling. I'm not an expert but look up quantum tunneling or transistor tunneling for more info.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Main problem is once you get full smartwatch (how it described in upcoming future) it kind of stops been what is defined like hybrid now.
Also it all need to live in word where you either can dump it or meaningfully upgrade.
Also there some technical issues with presentation but i am not here to talk about them.
Current Hybrid watch is something which does not have screen and shows all with hands, has limited functionality due to low grade internals. No GPS, no HR and no OS as such.
These don't need much miniaturization neither give public what they want. Also 0 customization.

Smartwach is something what evolves constantly yet market is somehow answered all questions about what people want.

Thing is many people want either full mechanical uber expensive watch filled with holistic soul nature and ability to brag or just feel good about how exclusive this masterpiece of craftsmanship (partially made in china in many cases and in millions) or full digital, customizable, connected, fitness, health, music, navigation... whatever you want at mere 300-400$ ...
Even people who have or can have Rolex opt for same Apple Watch if they want one. They don't opt in masses for anything in between.
Some do but they don't represent majority.

Also one is kind of stock market/real estate bubble for people who have more money compared to these who buy AW,GW or Fitbit/Fossil. These are not wealthy. *They also don't care even single bit about Rolex and it's role in horological world.* It has nothing to do with quantum or any advances in semiconductor tech. Both Apple and Samsung actually are on cutting edge of it and it's as small as it gets semiconductor vise.


----------



## utzelu

Perfectionist said:


> The point I'm making is that the winds of change are most definitely coming... you seem to think otherwise, which is as admirable as it is fascinating!


What would be the main use case of a hybrid watch? Is it that it looks classic compared with a smart watch? Remember that Apple Watch struggled to catch on during the first couple of years, when the emphasis was on fashion and being a watch. Only later, when Apple found that fitness and activity tracking is the main use case, sales took off. So I am still skeptical that a hybrid smart watch would fill some need that a true smart watch can't do better.


----------



## Snyde

Rocket1991 said:


> Main problem is once you get full smartwatch (how it described in upcoming future) it kind of stops been what is defined like hybrid now.
> Also it all need to live in word where you either can dump it or meaningfully upgrade.
> Also there some technical issues with presentation but i am not here to talk about them.
> Current Hybrid watch is something which does not have screen and shows all with hands, has limited functionality due to low grade internals. No GPS, no HR and no OS as such.
> These don't need much miniaturization neither give public what they want. Also 0 customization.
> 
> Smartwach is something what evolves constantly yet market is somehow answered all questions about what people want.
> 
> Thing is many people want either full mechanical uber expensive watch filled with holistic soul nature and ability to brag or just feel good about how exclusive this masterpiece of craftsmanship (partially made in china in many cases and in millions) or full digital, customizable, connected, fitness, health, music, navigation... whatever you want at mere 300-400$ ...
> Even people who have or can have Rolex opt for same Apple Watch if they want one. They don't opt in masses for anything in between.
> Some do but they don't represent majority.
> 
> Also one is kind of stock market/real estate bubble for people who have more money compared to these who buy AW,GW or Fitbit/Fossil. These are not wealthy. *They also don't care even single bit about Rolex and it's role in horological world.* It has nothing to do with quantum or any advances in semiconductor tech. Both Apple and Samsung actually are on cutting edge of it and it's as small as it gets semiconductor vise.


I think the mechanical watch market will inevitably shrink with or without smart watches. It was always going to be a challenge to remain relevant with the younger generations and now it's a much bigger challenge.

50 years from now people will have grown up wearing a smart watch. It's silly to expect them to trade that in for a heavy stainless steel mechanical watch. It's going to be less charming to wear a watch that loses time and isn't capable of reading your heart rate. (That's before you factor in the price difference)

With all that being said it make sense that current trends point to certain brands relying on exclusivity as a long term strategy.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RAA68

I also think that mechanical watches will remain a novelty for a shrinking number of people who wear them as jewelry rather than timepieces. But as smart watches get more and more sophisticated and compete for wrist time, people will feel less of a need to have a mechanical watch.

Also, as mentioned above, the last generation that grew up wearing a mechanical watch will pass on. Heck, if you need to know the time today, you just pull out your phone. Us older folks needed a watch to be on time. That’s no longer the case.

There are many other examples of everyday items that are slowly (or rapidly) yielding to technology, or lost that battle already. Gas vs electric cars, streaming vs hard media (who buys CDs anymore, some are still buying vinyl because of nostalgia), cameras vs cellphones ….


----------



## Rocket1991

Snyde said:


> I think the mechanical watch market will inevitably shrink with or without smart watches. It was always going to be a challenge to remain relevant with the younger generations and now it's a much bigger challenge.
> 
> 50 years from now people will have grown up wearing a smart watch. It's silly to expect them to trade that in for a heavy stainless steel mechanical watch. It's going to be less charming to wear a watch that loses time and isn't capable of reading your heart rate. (That's before you factor in the price difference)
> 
> With all that being said it make sense that current trends point to certain brands relying on exclusivity as a long term strategy.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I spoke with my former colleague and he is now in small company making lifestyle items. He in particular is designer, inventor and main production person (frankly the only one). All made in China. Here 3 other confounders are living a high life. BMW M5 for a lease but is not as cool and don't deliver 0-60 as good as Porsche so Porsche it is.
Around Toronto market of real estate commissions is between 5-7 *billions* yearly. Commissions to real estate agents.
So these folks do buy Rolex, Omega or whatever just because they have cash to burn and nobody thinks about putting these money into business or "old school" investment.

There are plenty of such people and it fuels trend. Not people who love horology in real sense of it and have appreciation of how it works.

Frankly Rolex has historically most .... image of been associated with organized crime (golden Rolex), traders and other people who need the status symbol. They are still around.
So it's more than a watch or to be exact it's not a watch in terms of how this commodity bought, handled etc. This market can survive rather intact. Rest will perish.

I totally agree with you about utility and new generation which is accustomed to new technology. But it's not only younger people. Fitness and health winning customers among senior folks too and i see it as a great trend. If used right it can become very important tool in improving health of individuals and nations alike.

I had few conversations with my old prof and hew is 65 years old and he is interested in smartwatch (Garmin) to accompany him on his hikes and whatever he is planning to do. He can afford almost anything reasonable so it's fueled by need of functionality.

Health is Huge Deal. Apple is really breaking the waves here and i really applaud their vision.

If you look at people who run half marathon or marathon they don't run with mechanical watches. Smartwatches changed how they train in a big way.

There are plenty of things which are absolutely unique to smartwatches and as much as love any other type of watches in terms of pure function covering all aspects of life they are winning. In terms of status and message they sending it's very positive one. I do see a lot of people who wearing them and number only growing.

None of the people i talked to about getting one or who own one are interested in a "hybrid".


----------



## Perfectionist

Snyde said:


> He actually has a point. Transistors are so small that there's a problem with quantum tunneling. I'm not an expert but look up quantum tunneling or transistor tunneling for more info


True, which is why I said tech will reach a plateau over the next few years - QT becomes insurmountable at about 3-4nm, hell by that stage even Background Cosmic Radiation becomes an issue lol... but we still have a cycle or two left before hitting the wall, although Apple's new M1 silicon is pretty close at 5nm already!

However I doubt this will grind everything to a halt - it'll just slow progress down for at most a decade... until we get the next ground-breaking discovery which kickstarts Moores "Law" back in to action all over again!

Mankind will always find a way when there is money to be made lol - which in this case is Trillions of dollars...


----------



## Perfectionist

utzelu said:


> What would be the main use case of a hybrid watch? Is it that it looks classic compared with a smart watch? Remember that Apple Watch struggled to catch on during the first couple of years, when the emphasis was on fashion and being a watch. Only later, when Apple found that fitness and activity tracking is the main use case, sales took off. So I am still skeptical that a hybrid smart watch would fill some need that a true smart watch can't do better.


I don't see it as a "use case" scenario at all - instead, more like a way of differentiating cheap smartwatches from expensive smartwatches...

The future will make using technology virtually unavoidable - the same way that nobody can live without a phone today... so the only people buying Mechanical watches will be rich art collectors and hermits lol!

Therefore, given the choice - would your typical Rolex wearing Doctor:
A) buy a regular Apple/Android watch, for a few hundred bucks (like his teenage son and his brother who flunked out of law school and his house cleaner and all the average Joes in the world!)
B) buy a Rolex which has Apple/Android tech built inside, for tens of thousands (so he can display his wealth and status and show everyone he knows/enjoys the finer things in life lol!)

In other words - the basic Human Condition of Snobbery and Swagger... is why there will most certainly be a big Hybrid market... sad but true!

PS: No offence to Doctors or Rolex owners... I used to have one myself haha!


----------



## Saswatch

Smart watches will not replace mechanical watches because one is wearable tech and the other is an artisanal product. 

Ironically the evolution of wearable tech driven by IoT is the real threat to “smart watches”. AR glasses, HR fitness trackers, and down the road modular devices.

With the prevalence of technology at every nook and corner, the future is watches with stronger anti-magnetic properties.


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> I don't see it as a "use case" scenario at all - instead, more like a way of differentiating cheap smartwatches from expensive smartwatches...
> 
> &#8230;
> 
> Therefore, given the choice - would your typical Rolex wearing Doctor:
> A) buy a regular Apple/Android watch, for a few hundred bucks (like his teenage son and his brother who flunked out of law school and his house cleaner and all the average Joes in the world!)
> B) buy a Rolex which has Apple/Android tech built inside, for tens of thousands (so he can display his wealth and status and show everyone he knows/enjoys the finer things in life lol!)


Remember that Hublot already announced a smartwatch? Priced at around $8k or whatever? With the guts of a typical $200 Android smartwatch?

How's that one going?


----------



## RAA68

BarracksSi said:


> Remember that Hublot already announced a smartwatch? Priced at around $8k or whatever? With the guts of a typical $200 Android smartwatch?
> 
> How's that one going?


----------



## RAA68

Perfectionist said:


> I don't see it as a "use case" scenario at all - instead, more like a way of differentiating cheap smartwatches from expensive smartwatches...
> 
> The future will make using technology virtually unavoidable - the same way that nobody can live without a phone today... so the only people buying Mechanical watches will be rich art collectors and hermits lol!
> 
> Therefore, given the choice - would your typical Rolex wearing Doctor:
> A) buy a regular Apple/Android watch, for a few hundred bucks (like his teenage son and his brother who flunked out of law school and his house cleaner and all the average Joes in the world!)
> B) buy a Rolex which has Apple/Android tech built inside, for tens of thousands (so he can display his wealth and status and show everyone he knows/enjoys the finer things in life lol!)
> 
> In other words - the basic Human Condition of Snobbery and Swagger... is why there will most certainly be a big Hybrid market... sad but true!
> 
> PS: No offence to Doctors or Rolex owners... I used to have one myself haha!


Very interesting perspective. Totally agree. Like with other products, brands that get with the times and offer modern high-end solutions to their customers will survive and those who remain in the past, may just disappear. Wealthy people want luxury. That won't change.


----------



## utzelu

Perfectionist said:


> I don't see it as a "use case" scenario at all - instead, more like a way of differentiating cheap smartwatches from expensive smartwatches...
> 
> The future will make using technology virtually unavoidable - the same way that nobody can live without a phone today... so the only people buying Mechanical watches will be rich art collectors and hermits lol!
> 
> Therefore, given the choice - would your typical Rolex wearing Doctor:
> A) buy a regular Apple/Android watch, for a few hundred bucks (like his teenage son and his brother who flunked out of law school and his house cleaner and all the average Joes in the world!)
> B) buy a Rolex which has Apple/Android tech built inside, for tens of thousands (so he can display his wealth and status and show everyone he knows/enjoys the finer things in life lol!)
> 
> In other words - the basic Human Condition of Snobbery and Swagger... is why there will most certainly be a big Hybrid market... sad but true!
> 
> PS: No offence to Doctors or Rolex owners... I used to have one myself haha!


I am not sure about it. Could be. So far I have seen 1st hand how wealthy people have migrated from luxury mechanical watches to Apple, Samsung and Garmin and not to Tag Heuer, Hublot, Montblanc or hybrids like Frederique Constant. They understand that they would need to upgrade the watch in few years, so they are not spending stupid money on throw-away luxury smart watches. With technology, the usability experience is everything. Also, the big tech brands are much better known worldwide than luxury watch brands.


----------



## Perfectionist

Saswatch said:


> Smart watches will not replace mechanical watches because one is wearable tech and the other is an artisanal product.


Which is precisely why they will merge!



> Ironically the evolution of wearable tech driven by IoT is the real threat to "smart watches". AR glasses, HR fitness trackers, and down the road modular devices.


You're my kinda guy dude! Yes, technology is gonna run through a number of rapidly changing phases this century... science fiction turning in to science fact!

AR glasses, eventually turning in to AR contact lenses... could well make many "material possessions" a thing of the past!


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> Remember that Hublot already announced a smartwatch? Priced at around $8k or whatever? With the guts of a typical $200 Android smartwatch?
> 
> How's that one going?


I have no idea how that one is going - clearly you do, so please enlighten...


----------



## Perfectionist

RAA68 said:


> Very interesting perspective. Totally agree. Like with other products, brands that get with the times and offer modern high-end solutions to their customers will survive and those who remain in the past, may just disappear. Wealthy people want luxury. That won't change.


Yup, the "Quartz Crisis" buried quite a few companies - no doubt the "Smart Crisis" will do the same...


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> I have no idea how that one is going - clearly you do, so please enlighten...


I don't even remember if it was introduced last year or the year before.

But you seem to boast that you've got your finger on the pulse of the smartwatch industry better than the rest of us, so you should be able to find out. Right?


----------



## Perfectionist

utzelu said:


> I am not sure about it. Could be. So far I have seen 1st hand how wealthy people have migrated from luxury mechanical watches to Apple, Samsung and Garmin and not to Tag Heuer, Hublot, Montblanc or hybrids like Frederique Constant. They understand that they would need to upgrade the watch in few years, so they are not spending stupid money on throw-away luxury smart watches. With technology, the usability experience is everything. Also, the big tech brands are much better known worldwide than luxury watch brands.


True! Hybrids are not really worth buying right now, nor are any of the luxury smartwatches... they still have major weaknesses, and don't hold much value for resale (which I can confirm personally lol!)

But, this will change once the tech advances have stabilised - kinda like Casio's G-Shock line, which started off as cheap gadget watches that kept improving/upgrading almost every week lol... no point spending big money

When things slowed down though, Casio launched Premium and Ultra Premium ranges which sell very well... same will happen with Hybrids!


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> But, this will change once the tech advances have stabilised...


Like what?

Here's a hybrid smartwatch. What tech advancement will improve it without fundamentally fixing how it delivers information?


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> I don't even remember if it was introduced last year or the year before.
> 
> But you seem to boast that you've got your finger on the pulse of the smartwatch industry better than the rest of us, so you should be able to find out. Right?


I can Google if you want (although I'd rather not as I find Hublot watches too ugly lol!) however, you must have had a point if you asked the question... what point would that be dude?

Besides, I haven't boasted any such thing, in fact quite the opposite, saying it's merely speculation - you however... are most definitely the one and only Tim Cook!


----------



## Perfectionist

BarracksSi said:


> Like what?
> 
> Here's a hybrid smartwatch. What tech advancement will improve it without fundamentally fixing how it delivers information?
> View attachment 15994847


Come on Mr Cook, please try and keep up = Do you believe smart watches will replace mechanical...


----------



## Rocket1991

Perfectionist said:


> Come on Mr Cook, please try and keep up = Do you believe smart watches will replace mechanical...


----------



## peagreen

utzelu said:


> I am not sure about it. Could be. So far I have seen 1st hand how wealthy people have migrated from luxury mechanical watches to Apple, Samsung and Garmin and not to Tag Heuer, Hublot, Montblanc or hybrids like Frederique Constant. They understand that they would need to upgrade the watch in few years, so they are not spending stupid money on throw-away luxury smart watches. With technology, the usability experience is everything. Also, the big tech brands are much better known worldwide than luxury watch brands.


You could almost start to suspect that those people did not become wealthy through being stupid. 
I'm not normally a football spectator, but my wife was watching last Sunday evening. All I really noticed was that Gareth Southgate was wearing a huge wristwatch. When I did a search for "Gareth Southgate wristwatch" I learnt that it was a Hublot special edition smartwatch especially made for the UEFA 2020 competition and had a price tag of 4800 pounds sterling. On hublot.com I see their "Big Bang" watch has a Qualcomm 3100 so it's yet to be determined whether it will or will not be able to run the next version of Wear OS and could be just junk by the end of this year. 
(I don't believe mister Southgate had to pay the GBP 4800 himself.)


----------



## utzelu

peagreen said:


> I'm not normally a football spectator, but my wife was watching last Sunday evening. All I really noticed was that Gareth Southgate was wearing a huge wristwatch. When I did a search for "Gareth Southgate wristwatch" I learnt that it was a Hublot special edition smartwatch especially made for the UEFA 2020 competition and had a price tag of 4800 pounds sterling. On hublot.com I see their "Big Bang" watch has a Qualcomm 3100 so it's yet to be determined whether it will or will not be able to run the next version of Wear OS and could be just junk by the end of this year.
> (I don't believe mister Southgate had to pay the GBP 4800 himself.)


Yeah I also noticed that some coaches were wearing the Hublot smartwatch at the UEFA games. It was given to them as a special edition for sure.

While I would like to have a luxury smartwatch, I cannot justify even spending close to $1000 for one, knowing that it would be thrown to the bin in 2-3 years max. Garmin, Tag, Montblanc all make some nice looking ones. I paid 200 EUR for my AW5 I got used from a friend last year.


----------



## anonymousmoose

lvt said:


> What prevents you from passing a smartwatch as heirloom?


Common sense. Something that needs updating and becomes redundant after no further firmware is issued, isn't the greatest heirloom.


----------



## BarracksSi

anonymousmoose said:


> Common sense. Something that needs updating and becomes redundant after no further firmware is issued, isn't the greatest heirloom.


It's such an obvious answer, isn't it? Can't believe it was the first response in this thread. I use my AW all the time, but it'd be stupid to pass it down to my nephew.


----------



## Rocket1991

anonymousmoose said:


> Common sense. Something that needs updating and becomes redundant after no further firmware is issued, isn't the greatest heirloom.


What amount of watches never ever.... never never .... never never never ... passed as any type of heirloom?
My wild guess will be 99.99% of them. So from this standpoint , conventional time pieces just as non heirloom-able as smartwatches.
For sure there are many of fine examples on this forum by first time posters left by their late... put whatever you like....yet strong smell of fish i think negates their value both as authentic watches and as proof of mass practice of leaving something as heirloom.


----------



## BarracksSi

Rocket1991 said:


> What amount of watches never ever.... never never .... never never never ... passed as any type of heirloom?
> My wild guess will be 99.99% of them. So from this standpoint , conventional time pieces just as non heirloom-able as smartwatches.
> For sure there are many of fine examples on this forum by first time posters left by their late... put whatever you like....yet strong smell of fish i think negates their value both as authentic watches and as proof of mass practice of leaving something as heirloom.


🤦‍♂️


----------



## Rocket1991

BarracksSi said:


> 🤦‍♂️


To say short, i am very sick of several types of arguments against smartwatches. 
Giving them to your heirs is one of them. Probably could go along with they don't increase stamina and don't detect xenomorphs.


----------



## utzelu

The heirloom argument is weak. I can invest the same $10k into a fund and leave that to my kids. Much more valuable than a watch. For sentimental value, there is nothing better than family photos and videos.


----------



## BarracksSi

Rocket1991 said:


> To say short, i am very sick of several types of arguments against smartwatches.
> Giving them to your heirs is one of them. Probably could go along with they don't increase stamina and don't detect xenomorphs.


You're not making any sense today.

Some people like to buy watches that'll last for years, build a personal connection with, and then pass down through the family. They see no such value in smartwatches.

That's it - that's their justification against buying smartwatches. Simple.


----------



## Rocket1991

BarracksSi said:


> You're not making any sense today.
> 
> Some people like to buy watches that'll last for years, build a personal connection with, and then pass down through the family. They see no such value in smartwatches.
> 
> That's it - that's their justification against buying smartwatches. Simple.


I was saying number of people who do pass watches is rather small and among these who buy smartwatches this not even considered. 
Some people on the forum argue, smartwatches are bad because of that... i disagree with them. 
I can put whole argument against mechanical watches as incapable of receiving notification from your phone, answering e-mails and not even remotely capable of measuring HR. 
In my eyes argument about mechanical watch lacking HR sensor (mechanical for course) is same as argument of smartwatches not lasting to be given as heirloom. 
Both picking on rather obvious and inherited by design qualities of the watch.


----------



## Rocket1991

utzelu said:


> The heirloom argument is weak. I can invest the same $10k into a fund and leave that to my kids. Much more valuable than a watch. For sentimental value, there is nothing better than family photos and videos.


Agree


----------



## BarracksSi

Rocket1991 said:


> I was saying *number of people who do pass watches is rather small* and among these who buy smartwatches this not even considered.
> Some people on the forum argue, smartwatches are bad because of that... i disagree with them.
> I can put whole argument against mechanical watches as incapable of receiving notification from your phone, answering e-mails and not even remotely capable of measuring HR.
> In my eyes argument about mechanical watch lacking HR sensor (mechanical for course) is same as argument of smartwatches not lasting to be given as heirloom.
> Both picking on rather obvious and inherited by design qualities of the watch.


But they _do_ exist, and they write about it here on this very forum - which, of course, is a subset of watch nerdery.

I'm saying that it's a reason that they give, and you're saying... what, that the reason doesn't exist? It's their opinion, and they're free to have it.


----------



## Rocket1991

BarracksSi said:


> But they _do_ exist, and they write about it here on this very forum - which, of course, is a subset of watch nerdery.
> 
> I'm saying that it's a reason that they give, and you're saying... what, that the reason doesn't exist? It's their opinion, and they're free to have it.


I don't dismiss it. Just saying it's rather small and unrepresentative. Plus, same people are uncomfortable spending "Heritage" money on quartz so i don't think they will ever consider smartwatches anyway in this price category. So i really see their point.


----------



## ultra.amit

Scott222 said:


> In my opinion they won't for some reasons.
> 
> 
> Smart watches are a consumer product and mechanical watches are for watch collectors
> Smart watches tend to get outdated in less than a couple of years while a mechanical watch will work as long as serviced
> Smart watches can not be passed as a heirloom time piece while a mechanical watch can
> With this I still think that smart watches will increase market share in future and mechanical watches will be a niche market though not much different from nowadays as mostly only watch collectors or WIS do understand the importance of having a mechanical watch and its intricate appeal.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this?


mechanical watch is not that thing which people used to wear for its feature value. the classical mechanical watch is the absolute fashion time peace. you can visit here to checkout Seiko Mechanical M500


----------



## Perfectionist

peagreen said:


> You could almost start to suspect that those people did not become wealthy through being stupid.
> I'm not normally a football spectator, but my wife was watching last Sunday evening. All I really noticed was that Gareth Southgate was wearing a huge wristwatch. When I did a search for "Gareth Southgate wristwatch" I learnt that it was a Hublot special edition smartwatch especially made for the UEFA 2020 competition and had a price tag of 4800 pounds sterling. On hublot.com I see their "Big Bang" watch has a Qualcomm 3100 so it's yet to be determined whether it will or will not be able to run the next version of Wear OS and could be just junk by the end of this year.
> (I don't believe mister Southgate had to pay the GBP 4800 himself.)


Yeah I noticed the fugly Hublot too lol - surprising, as us Brits have much better taste haha... therefore he was probably given it for free and paid to wear it!

Gotta admit though, it was great marketing - shame Bremont didn't make a move first...


----------



## Perfectionist

utzelu said:


> While I would like to have a luxury smartwatch, I cannot justify even spending close to $1000 for one, knowing that it would be thrown to the bin in 2-3 years max. Garmin, Tag, Montblanc all make some nice looking ones. I paid 200 EUR for my AW5 I got used from a friend last year.


True, spending more than a Grand on the current batch of Smartwatches is a waste of money and serves no practical purpose - unless you are an enthusiast or collector lol!

Ultimately this entire hobby is kinda silly - why does anybody really need more than one watch anyway haha... unless you buy a select few high-end models, you may as well flush half your money down the drain!

Still, I'd much rather wear an overpriced, and soon to be obsolete, watch made by a reputable watch manufacturer... then an overpriced, and soon to be obsolete, watch made by a disposable gadgets manufacturer!


----------



## Perfectionist

Rocket1991 said:


> What amount of watches never ever.... never never .... never never never ... passed as any type of heirloom?
> My wild guess will be 99.99% of them. So from this standpoint , conventional time pieces just as non heirloom-able as smartwatches.
> For sure there are many of fine examples on this forum by first time posters left by their late... put whatever you like....yet strong smell of fish i think negates their value both as authentic watches and as proof of mass practice of leaving something as heirloom.


If I ever received a watch as an heirloom - it better be worth a decent amount of cash... otherwise I might turn in to Tom Cruise!

Oh I definitely got the Sekonda, I definitely got Sekonda haha!






The truth is, except for the top models from a handful of brands - old watches are worth peanuts...

Their only real value is sentimental - and in this regard a Smartwatch is as good as any other watch... right up to the point where it's battery no longer holds charge, or the software/hardware fails lol!

Which is another feather in the cap of Hybrids, because the Mech movement will keep on ticking!


----------



## peagreen

utzelu said:


> The heirloom argument is weak. I can invest the same $10k into a fund and leave that to my kids. Much more valuable than a watch. For sentimental value, there is nothing better than family photos and videos.


Be sure to put your digital photos and videos into cloud storage and give the access codes to your relatives.


----------



## Perfectionist

Well dang it all to hell - Teddy just dropped a video about watches as heirlooms... coincidence or conspiracy lol ?!


----------



## Antb21

I’ve noticed this myself even on a smaller scale. People I work with no ditched their watches for smart watches mainly Apple ones. Got me noticing when I go out the decline in people wearing tradional watches. However when I visited a watch store a couple of weeks back it was incredibly busy with people buying luxury watches. So maybe it’s down to what you focus on more when looking


----------



## Rocket1991

Antb21 said:


> I've noticed this myself even on a smaller scale. People I work with no ditched their watches for smart watches mainly Apple ones. Got me noticing when I go out the decline in people wearing tradional watches. However when I visited a watch store a couple of weeks back it was incredibly busy with people buying luxury watches. So maybe it's down to what you focus on more when looking


It always down to focus and smartwatches in bulk not replacing luxury. For some yes but less typical than replacing everyday watch.


----------



## Antb21

Rocket1991 said:


> It always down to focus and smartwatches in bulk not replacing luxury. For some yes but less typical than replacing everyday watch.


I also think that once the novelty wears off for some they will end up in a draw. I have to admit I tried one before but found the apple heart rate monitor very uncomfortable.


----------



## cfracing

Here an update to my earlier post. Previously I had reported that my son had inherited my love for mechanical watches while my son-in-law never owned a watch of any kind. I forgot to mention that both my daughter and daughter-in-law wear Apple Watches. They are all 30-somethings. Just an observation.

Of course, my son is the only one of them who visits watch forums, if only occasionally, because he also has other interests.


----------



## Rocket1991

Antb21 said:


> I also think that once the novelty wears off for some they will end up in a draw. I have to admit I tried one before but found the apple heart rate monitor very uncomfortable.


I meant smartwatches don't compete directly with luxury in terms of what kind of customer they target. At all.
Person who was or is into these kinds of watches may pick (and they do) let say Apple Watch or Samsung or even TAG. Many choose Garmin by the way. I am surprised how sooo expensive smart watches sell but they do sell. Owning smartwatch does not negate your love for other types of watches. Just saying. 
Smartwatches been selling very well in 200-500$ category and you do see them a lot. In some instances more than traditional watches. So it's down to focus in terms if you looking for smartwatches you may be inclined to claim they are more prevalent. If you looking at folks at Rolex boutique for sure it's different crowd.

One thing for sure they not going away. They steadily conquering market and have a lot of potential to grow. In areas which totally in infancy now but in 10 years time they may become integral part of how you shop, how your doctor sees you, how you open your car, turn light on etc.

I am not saying all things are good and each technology has it's strength. Mechanical watches gave way for quartz revolution for a reason. Similarly there are reasons to choose smartwatches too.

Nothing is for everyone. Even Rolex Submariner.


----------



## Antb21

Rocket1991 said:


> I meant smartwatches don't compete directly with luxury in terms of what kind of customer they target. At all.
> Person who was or is into these kinds of watches may pick (and they do) let say Apple Watch or Samsung or even TAG. Many choose Garmin by the way. I am surprised how sooo expensive smart watches sell but they do sell. Owning smartwatch does not negate your love for other types of watches. Just saying.
> Smartwatches been selling very well in 200-500$ category and you do see them a lot. In some instances more than traditional watches. So it's down to focus in terms if you looking for smartwatches you may be inclined to claim they are more prevalent. If you looking at folks at Rolex boutique for sure it's different crowd.
> 
> One thing for sure they not going away. They steadily conquering market and have a lot of potential to grow. In areas which totally in infancy now but in 10 years time they may become integral part of how you shop, how your doctor sees you, how you open your car, turn light on etc.
> 
> I am not saying all things are good and each technology has it's strength. Mechanical watches gave way for quartz revolution for a reason. Similarly there are reasons to choose smartwatches too.
> 
> Nothing is for everyone. Even Rolex Submariner.


I def go through phases of wanting one myself. I get fed up of loosing money on watches tbh. Sometimes wonder if to give it up and buy something cheap.


----------



## Rocket1991

Antb21 said:


> I def go through phases of wanting one myself. I get fed up of loosing money on watches tbh. Sometimes wonder if to give it up and buy something cheap.


I got my Samsung at 50% off so it was around 150$ new in the box all stickers included.
Plenty of Samsung/Fossil watches are on sale and they very much top of the line for non Apple market.
It won't cost fortune. They sell for 100$ easy so even if you don't like it you can sell it at very little loss.
For sports watches you can pick Garmin Instinct or Garmin forerunner but they are sports watches and geared towards yeah sport use where they brilliant but not like general smartwatch which you can use for calls, messages, fitness, music... pretty much everything but at the price of battery life. If you not into sports don't get Garmin.
Fossil sold out all their stock but Samsung is still available. Open box Samsung Galaxy Watch 1st gen is somewhere between 100-130$. Not the latest but for sure you can try it. 100$ are not cheap but hardly anything significant compared to Swiss Mechanical Wonders.

My point you can try it and it won't brake your wallet at all. Used Fossil Gen 5 on e-bay was going for 80$ or so. I won't pay more but at 80$ it's neat thing to try. Cool thing about them is customization and trying different watch faces. Many of them are free and very cool looking. that in itself can keep you occupied and refresh look of the watch as much as you like.

Yes i am talking about models which will be replaced soon or already replaced but they work. they fine and you will get 2-3 years of useful time. During this time you will know for sure is there something for you in it or not.


----------



## Sennelier

No way mechanical watches will disappear. Speaking anecdotally, I tried wearing my Garmin Forerunner for a couple of months. It's pretty much a smartwatch but aimed at runners. It was a wholly unsatisfying experience. A great device for running, but horrible to wear daily. Also, the constant notifications were driving me nuts!


----------



## eddieo396

caribiner23 said:


> Smartwatches are not watches: they are computers.
> 
> By its nature and design, computer technology goes out of date within a relatively short timespan, thus rendering it a mostly-useless piece of plastic after a couple years. Watches and watch technology are simple enough to continue serving their simple purpose indefinitely.


Great reply I made the same argument and received many angry rebuttals. Good for you


----------



## Perfectionist

Antb21 said:


> I also think that once the novelty wears off for some they will end up in a draw. I have to admit I tried one before but found the apple heart rate monitor very uncomfortable.


I'm not so sure - Smartwatches may well be a novelty for some of us here... but most people (especially the young) are quickly finding them to be an essential part of their lives now!


----------



## Antb21

Perfectionist said:


> I'm not so sure - Smartwatches may well be a novelty for some of us here... but most people (especially the young) are quickly finding them to be an essential part of their lives now!


Tbh I think I agree it takes care of simply knowing the time and also certainly for friends I know gives them a boost for healthy life style.


----------



## eddieo396

NO never because smart watches are NOT TRUE watches they are litle computers or extensions of the smart phone period...


----------



## Rocket1991

eddieo396 said:


> NO never because smart watches are NOT TRUE watches they are litle computers or extensions of the smart phone period...


You so wrong!
You know mechanical watch is in the essence calculation machine too? Unlike sundials which truly reflect passage of time.
Mechanical watches are not true watches they substitute to real time exhibiting tech made with gears counting predetermined types of calculations and unconnected to nature.









That what mechanical watch is.

What you think any watch does nowadays? Tells time? But how?


----------



## eddieo396

Rocket1991 said:


> You so wrong!
> You know mechanical watch is in the essence calculation machine too? Unlike sundials which truly reflect passage of time.
> Mechanical watches are not true watches they substitute to real time exhibiting tech made with gears counting predetermined types of calculations and unconnected to nature.
> View attachment 16048128
> 
> 
> That what mechanical watch is.
> 
> What you think any watch does nowadays? Tells time? But how?


You funny I doubt very many people will agree with you . Have a fab day with you sun dial 😂


----------



## Rocket1991

eddieo396 said:


> You funny I doubt very many people will agree with you . Have a fab day with you sun dial 😂


Think about what watch does. Any watch. It counts ticks. 3hz, 4 hz, 8/10 Hz, 32768 ish. 264000 ish and whatever cesium atom has. Then recalculates it into minutes, hours, days, days of the week and so forth. that the essence of all modern clocks and watches since whatever they became mechanical. That what gears do.
so 14000 pulses equate to one 360 turn of one gear and so on another gear is 24hr another gear is one week (in case there is day of the week and last one is for date which is 31 days for 360.
Same as machine i posted which once one gear made full circle it moves next one one tick and than again and again adding mechanically.
Analog quartz does the same with difference portion of calculations done electronically later completed by same mechanical calculation. 
Full digital is obviously calculates everything digitally with simplest been almost like gears and new ones been more or less embedded controllers AKA computers. But down the road they still add pulses and then calculate time passage based on that.


----------



## eddieo396

Rocket1991 said:


> Think about what watch does. Any watch. It counts ticks. 3hz, 4 hz, 8/10 Hz, 32768 ish. 264000 ish and whatever cesium atom has. Then recalculates it into minutes, hours, days, days of the week and so forth. that the essence of all modern clocks and watches since whatever they became mechanical. That what gears do.
> so 14000 pulses equate to one 360 turn of one gear and so on another gear is 24hr another gear is one week (in case there is day of the week and last one is for date which is 31 days for 360.
> Same as machine i posted which once one gear made full circle it moves next one one tick and than again and again adding mechanically.
> Analog quartz does the same with difference portion of calculations done electronically later completed by same mechanical calculation.
> Full digital is obviously calculates everything digitally with simplest been almost like gears and new ones been more or less embedded controllers AKA computers. But down the road they still add pulses and then calculate time passage based on that.
> [/I fell asleep while reading your reply kind of like what I think of smart watches.


----------



## Shmockiebaby

BarracksSi said:


> It's such an obvious answer, isn't it? Can't believe it was the first response in this thread. I use my AW all the time, but it'd be stupid to pass it down to my nephew.


I have my original Apple Watch "Sport" - the very first generation. I've offered it to family members with Apple iPhones, they're not interested. It's useless without an iPhone. So it sits on the charger, unused, until I finally throw it out.


----------



## JackDash

Shmockiebaby said:


> I have my original Apple Watch "Sport" - the very first generation. I've offered it to family members with Apple iPhones, they're not interested. It's useless without an iPhone. So it sits on the charger, unused, until I finally throw it out.


Throw it out with the rest of the trash


----------



## Seabee1

Okay so let me get this straight, the heavy piece of metal you have strapped to your wrist _only_ tells time? Really, just the time? Oh...I see, phases of the moon too, and you need that why? Can you at least make a phone call with....I see, it doesn't make phone calls. What about text mes...not them either. So news and emails are out as well? Right, just the time. Can it tell you where you are? No hmm. But it's accurate you say. Really, a couple of seconds a day...at best...so long as you do...what to it? Wind it? What the hell, you mean like a toy? Okay grandpa you have a good day. You're what? How old? My age?


----------



## carbon_dragon

Seabee1 said:


> Okay so let me get this straight, the heavy piece of metal you have strapped to your wrist _only_ tells time? Really, just the time? Oh...I see, phases of the moon too, and you need that why? Can you at least make a phone call with....I see, it doesn't make phone calls. What about text mes...not them either. So news and emails are out as well? Right, just the time. Can it tell you where you are? No hmm. But it's accurate you say. Really, a couple of seconds a day...at best...so long as you do...what to it? Wind it? What the hell, you mean like a toy? Okay grandpa you have a good day. You're what? How old? My age?


It's not the functionality, it's the style.


----------



## Seabee1

carbon_dragon said:


> It's not the functionality, it's the style.


Well then you missed the point. As technology advances and (in this discussion) smart phones advance, kids growing up with all of the available technology are not going to be interested in wearing a chunk of steel that only tells time.

Sure there will be those oddball kids who become fascinated with their grandparents 'technology' and will wear a watch, there will be those that will wear them ironically, a few who will wear them for what they think will pass as style and class and the rest will see no practical use for an item that only tells time. Style got nothing to do with, it is and will be about functionality.


----------



## Rocket1991

Seabee1 said:


> Well then you missed the point. As technology advances and (in this discussion) smart phones advance, kids growing up with all of the available technology are not going to be interested in wearing a chunk of steel that only tells time.
> 
> Sure there will be those oddball kids who become fascinated with their grandparents 'technology' and will wear a watch, there will be those that will wear them ironically, a few who will wear them for what they think will pass as style and class and the rest will see no practical use for an item that only tells time. Style got nothing to do with, it is and will be about functionality.


And the thing is you right on the point.


----------



## Rocket1991

carbon_dragon said:


> It's not the functionality, it's the style.


That's why many opt for fashion watches.
When they choose to wear one.
Not a popular opinion around here.


----------



## carbon_dragon

Rocket1991 said:


> That's why many opt for fashion watches.
> When they choose to wear one.
> Not a popular opinion around here.


That isn't where my personal tastes run. Note I do wear a Polar Ignite 2 for my workouts on my right wrist but not on my left.


----------



## Robinoz

My daughter had a lovely Citizen watch and put it in her drawer when she bought a Garmon Smart Watch.

I have eight watches and I love all of them. I can't live without wearing a watch. My solution is to wear a Fitbit for daily steps etc and wear a watch on the opposite arm. The Fitbit tells me what time it is, but I prefer to use my wristwatch for time and date.

I just can't get rid of my watches.


----------



## Rocket1991

Robinoz said:


> My daughter had a lovely Citizen watch and put it in her drawer when she bought a Garmon Smart Watch.
> 
> I have eight watches and I love all of them. I can't live without wearing a watch. My solution is to wear a Fitbit for daily steps etc and wear a watch on the opposite arm. The Fitbit tells me what time it is, but I prefer to use my wristwatch for time and date.
> 
> I just can't get rid of my watches.


just for steps you don't need fitness tracker. Steps are easiest thing to measure and there were plenty of gimmicks to do so.
Including so called hybrid watches. Just for steps they are perfect.
Ranging from 99$ Casio to whatever Swiss charge.
They are watches in the essence with some added functionality.
Though they don't get much love from customers.
But if your thing is steps only you may explore these.
Smartwatch gives much more and there are several good uses for it:
Fitness/health when you training or loosing weight, tracking health or calorie intake and this area is expanding. recently added ECG, blood pressure, body fat measurements in addition to stress, blood oxygen etc. Glucose in blood will be added in foreseeable future.
Seamless connectivity when you do need to be on call or you like your music without phone.
You like customization and want to add some functions which are not present in any other watch. Don't think people really after it but it is there.

Smartwatch use and capabilities dictate what it is and how it's build. Like you can't expect your laptop to come with calculator like screen because using it as calculator only one of the potential uses. While step tracking and rudimentary fitness tracking is very much like calculator and can be fitted almost anywhere with 2 years worth of battery life.


----------



## BarracksSi

Rocket1991 said:


> just for steps you don't need fitness tracker. Steps are easiest thing to measure and there were plenty of gimmicks to do so.
> Including so called hybrid watches. Just for steps they are perfect.
> Ranging from 99$ Casio to whatever Swiss charge.
> They are watches in the essence with some added functionality.
> Though they don't get much love from customers.
> But if your thing is steps only you may explore these.
> Smartwatch gives much more and there are several good uses for it:
> Fitness/health when you training or loosing weight, tracking health or calorie intake and this area is expanding. recently added ECG, blood pressure, body fat measurements in addition to stress, blood oxygen etc. Glucose in blood will be added in foreseeable future.
> Seamless connectivity when you do need to be on call or you like your music without phone.
> You like customization and want to add some functions which are not present in any other watch. Don't think people really after it but it is there.
> 
> Smartwatch use and capabilities dictate what it is and how it's build. Like you can't expect your laptop to come with calculator like screen because using it as calculator only one of the potential uses. While step tracking and rudimentary fitness tracking is very much like calculator and can be fitted almost anywhere with 2 years worth of battery life.
> View attachment 16057780
> 
> View attachment 16057783
> 
> 
> View attachment 16057788
> 
> View attachment 16057798


You aren't getting it.

He wants to keep wearing his regular watches.

A minimal fitness band lets him do activity tracking without wearing two full-sized watches and without giving up his regular watches.


----------



## Rocket1991

BarracksSi said:


> You aren't getting it.
> 
> He wants to keep wearing his regular watches.
> 
> A minimal fitness band lets him do activity tracking without wearing two full-sized watches and without giving up his regular watches.


Minimal fob will get him step tracking. That not the point. I get his desires and my point was look there are different things too. 
I don't assume people especially these who into regular watches are aware of all options.


----------



## BarracksSi

Rocket1991 said:


> Minimal fob will get him step tracking. That not the point. I get his desires and my point was look there are different things too.
> I don't assume people especially these who into regular watches are aware of all options.


You absolutely did not mention a fob in your post.


----------



## Perfectionist

Antb21 said:


> I've noticed this myself even on a smaller scale. People I work with no ditched their watches for smart watches mainly Apple ones. Got me noticing when I go out the decline in people wearing tradional watches. However when I visited a watch store a couple of weeks back it was incredibly busy with people buying luxury watches. So maybe it's down to what you focus on more when looking


No doubt, Smartwatches are quickly taking over the mainstream consumer market, especially those that never used to wear a watch at all - however the luxury market will keep going strong for a good while yet... right up until truly luxury Smartwatches arrive!


----------



## Perfectionist

cfracing said:


> Here an update to my earlier post. Previously I had reported that my son had inherited my love for mechanical watches while my son-in-law never owned a watch of any kind. I forgot to mention that both my daughter and daughter-in-law wear Apple Watches. They are all 30-somethings. Just an observation.
> 
> Of course, my son is the only one of them who visits watch forums, if only occasionally, because he also has other interests.


Yes, I've noticed this too - Smartwatches are far more popular with females... probably because they care more about health and fitness and looking good... and are more involved with all this social media malarkey?!


----------



## eddieo396

JackDash said:


> Throw it out with the rest of the trash


I love this reply it epitomizes my attitude towards smart watches .


----------



## cfracing

Perfectionist said:


> Yes, I've noticed this too - Smartwatches are far more popular with females... probably because they care more about health and fitness and looking good... and are more involved with all this social media malarkey?!


I just believe there are many of the younger generations who feel the need to be connected (to the internet).


----------



## Perfectionist

cfracing said:


> I just believe there are many of the younger generations who feel the need to be connected (to the internet).


Eventually, we will all feel that need !!


----------



## Rocket1991

cfracing said:


> I just believe there are many of the younger generations who feel the need to be connected (to the internet).


Many smart watches are fitness oriented and one of the best examples is Garmin/Fitbit. 
they not about been connected to internet rather about ability to collect and analyses your fitness data and health metrics. 
they pretty much standalone watches.
Most Garmins don't connect to nay internet apart form one new model. That one out of like 50. 
Also when it connects it's very much limited to call for help and weather updates. More or less like your car GPS with traffic updates. Not sure it going to satisfy any internet connecting need.


----------



## cfracing

Rocket1991 said:


> Many smart watches are fitness oriented and one of the best examples is Garmin/Fitbit.
> they not about been connected to internet rather about ability to collect and analyses your fitness data and health metrics.
> they pretty much standalone watches.
> Most Garmins don't connect to nay internet apart form one new model. That one out of like 50.
> Also when it connects it's very much limited to call for help and weather updates. More or less like your car GPS with traffic updates. Not sure it going to satisfy any internet connecting need.


Curious as to how sales of Garmins compare to what I consider the traditional smart watches. I happen to own a Garmin myself but I only wear it when I am out for a jog or walk. I never thought of it as a smart watch, just a fancy running watch with splits, GPS to measure distance, and a heart monitor that I don't pay attention to..


----------



## cfracing

Perfectionist said:


> Eventually, we will all feel that need !!


I'm in my '70s so I will probably die before that happens.  I feel connected enough with my iPhone and don't feel the need to have something on my wrist telling me I have a phone call or message. Besides I'm just now working myself up to using half of the capabilities of my iPhone.


----------



## lvt

You don't need a smartwatch to replace your automatic watch, any cheap Casio watch with large digits, having some basic sport features will do.


----------



## Rocket1991

cfracing said:


> Curious as to how sales of Garmins compare to what I consider the traditional smart watches. I happen to own a Garmin myself but I only wear it when I am out for a jog or walk. I never thought of it as a smart watch, just a fancy running watch with splits, GPS to measure distance, and a heart monitor that I don't pay attention to..


Shipments of smart watches are up 50 or 54% globally in 2020/21.
Garmin has lower gains but they still in good double digits (25% up or so).
They ship 3.4 million units or more. Considering they sell premium smartwatches that's not bad.
It's within range on brans like Fossil (which is # 1 in WearOS prior to Samsung arrival this August) and for sure way better than many lower volume brands. Only Samsung and Apple are in the serious lead. Probably Chinese brands ship a lot too but they not always make into statistics. Individually only few brands make a cut even in single digits market share. But combined there is 10s of millions if not already 100s market out there.

Individually Garmin in top 5.

Apple is special.


----------



## cmdrdredd

Rocket1991 said:


> I was saying number of people who do pass watches is rather small and among these who buy smartwatches this not even considered.
> Some people on the forum argue, smartwatches are bad because of that... i disagree with them.
> I can put whole argument against mechanical watches as incapable of receiving notification from your phone, answering e-mails and not even remotely capable of measuring HR.
> In my eyes argument about mechanical watch lacking HR sensor (mechanical for course) is same as argument of smartwatches not lasting to be given as heirloom.
> Both picking on rather obvious and inherited by design qualities of the watch.


actually there are people like me who tried to go with Apple Watch full time. I did so for over 2 years and guess what? I ditched it and went back to a traditional watch. Why do you ask? Simply because I didn't care about health tracking, I don't need notifications, the apps for it were way too limiting and I still had to use my phone for most things, I never used it to talk on the phone or text. So basically I used it to tell the time. Guess what happened then? The battery got worse and worse until it wouldn't even last a full day. I got tired of having to charge it or forgetting to charge it. So I ended up with a watch that functioned POORLY as a watch. That's before we get to the bit about the screen that scratches super easily and how I can't go in the water except for light swimming with it. Apple basically says you can't do anything except shallow water swimming and further says the water resistance can't be checked and seals cannot be replaced. Meaning eventually the thing is not going to be very resistant at all as the seals and such wear out.

Now I wear an omega Seamaster instead. You are trying to say people like me don't matter? Who tried a smart watch of some type and found it uninspiring or just not as useful as they thought it would be and ended up going back to a traditional watch because in the roll of timekeeping alone it just doesn't compare to a traditional watch that doesn't need to be replaced because the battery doesn't stay charged anymore?


----------



## cmdrdredd

Perfectionist said:


> I'm not so sure - Smartwatches may well be a novelty for some of us here... but most people (especially the young) are quickly finding them to be an essential part of their lives now!


Most of the people I know who feel it's an essential piece of kit for their day to day life never wore a watch at all before. That means that the traditional watch market isn't exactly losing a customer. They were never going to be a customer.


----------



## Rocket1991

cmdrdredd said:


> actually there are people like me who tried to go with Apple Watch full time. I did so for over 2 years and guess what? I ditched it and went back to a traditional watch. Why do you ask? Simply because I didn't care about health tracking, I don't need notifications, the apps for it were way too limiting and I still had to use my phone for most things, I never used it to talk on the phone or text. So basically I used it to tell the time. Guess what happened then? The battery got worse and worse until it wouldn't even last a full day. I got tired of having to charge it or forgetting to charge it. So I ended up with a watch that functioned POORLY as a watch. That's before we get to the bit about the screen that scratches super easily and how I can't go in the water except for light swimming with it. Apple basically says you can't do anything except shallow water swimming and further says the water resistance can't be checked and seals cannot be replaced. Meaning eventually the thing is not going to be very resistant at all as the seals and such wear out.
> 
> Now I wear an omega Seamaster instead. You are trying to say people like me don't matter? Who tried a smart watch of some type and found it uninspiring or just not as useful as they thought it would be and ended up going back to a traditional watch because in the roll of timekeeping alone it just doesn't compare to a traditional watch that doesn't need to be replaced because the battery doesn't stay charged anymore?


I don't trying to say people like you don't matter. Don't know where this even coming from.
Why some people assume i am saying watch B is bad choice when i defend watch A which was criticized by them?
Or it's just general if you disagree with my opinion it means you against me?
That not the case.

My point smartwatches are popular and i don't like blanket opinion of some people "it's garbage".

And if you ask me should you buy smartwatch to replace normal watch or luxury mechanical watch... if all you need is timekeeping answer is obvious no. 
Only if you do need and have use for advanced features. In any other case no.


----------



## Pongster

For time telling? No.

as wrist trinkets? No.


----------



## BarracksSi

Rocket1991 said:


> I don't trying to say people like you don't matter. Don't know where this even coming from.


It's because you said it's a stupid reason:


Rocket1991 said:


> To say short, i am very sick of several types of arguments against smartwatches.
> Giving them to your heirs is one of them. Probably could go along with they don't increase stamina and don't detect xenomorphs.


"I don't like blanket opinion...", you then said. Well, isn't that a blanket opinion of yours that I quoted?


----------



## Seabee1

Wait...you mean your mechanical watch only tells time? What's the point of that?


----------



## utzelu

Seabee1 said:


> Wait...you mean your mechanical watch only tells time? What's the point of that?


Joking aside, for luxury watches, it doesn't even matter that they tell the time. Primordially, they are bought to convey its owner social status.


----------



## utzelu

cmdrdredd said:


> You are trying to say people like me don't matter? Who tried a smart watch of some type and found it uninspiring or just not as useful as they thought it would be and ended up going back to a traditional watch because in the roll of timekeeping alone it just doesn't compare to a traditional watch that doesn't need to be replaced because the battery doesn't stay charged anymore?


It seems pretty obvious that people who don't need any smart features don't really matter for the smartwatch market. But eventually the brands would find more and more use cases for them and would attract more and more people into the market.


----------



## Seabee1

utzelu said:


> Joking aside, for luxury watches, it doesn't even matter that they tell the time. Primordially, they are bought to convey its owner social status.


Actually, primordially they were bought to tell time.


----------



## BarracksSi

utzelu said:


> Joking aside, for luxury watches, it doesn't even matter that they tell the time. Primordially, they *are* bought to convey its owner social status.





Seabee1 said:


> Actually, primordially they *were* bought to tell time.


Y'all are arguing over "are" versus "were"...


----------



## Rocket1991

BarracksSi said:


> It's because you said it's a stupid reason:
> 
> "I don't like blanket opinion...", you then said. Well, isn't that a blanket opinion of yours that I quoted?


Irony is lost.
Mirroring argument of people who criticizing smartwatches and applying it to mechanical watches in from of humorous analogy. If it offended you it was not intention.

dev·il's ad·vo·cate
/ˈˌdevəlz ˈadvəkət/

_noun_


a person who expresses a contentious opinion in order to provoke debate or test the strength of the opposing arguments.


----------



## Seabee1

BarracksSi said:


> Y'all are arguing over "are" versus "were"...


No, not over are/were but the correct usage of primordially

*pri·mor·di·al*
(prī-môr′dē-əl)
_adj._
*1. * Being or happening first in sequence of time; original.
*2. * Primary or fundamental: play a primordial role.
*3. * _Biology_ Belonging to or characteristic of the earliest stage of development of an organism or a part: primordial cells.
_n._


----------



## BarracksSi

Seabee1 said:


> No, not over are/were but the correct usage of primordially
> 
> *pri·mor·di·al*
> (prī-môr′dē-əl)
> _adj._
> *1. * Being or happening first in sequence of time; original.
> *2. * Primary or fundamental: play a primordial role.
> *3. * _Biology_ Belonging to or characteristic of the earliest stage of development of an organism or a part: primordial cells.
> _n._


By definition #2, it's not even part of the argument.


----------



## utzelu

Seabee1 said:


> Actually, primordially they were bought to tell time.


You're right, they were bought last century to tell time primordially. But not anymore for the past decade. Specialist media and brand CEOs are saying it.


----------



## Seabee1

utzelu said:


> You're right, they were bought last century to tell time primordially. But not anymore for the past decade. Specialist media and brand CEOs are saying it.


I'm gonna say...no. While people may buy specific watches (or brands) specifically to signal status and wealth, I suspect the great majority of people who buy watches do so to tell time (and some may people buy specifically as fashion statements or coordinations)


----------



## Perfectionist

eddieo396 said:


> NO never because smart watches are NOT TRUE watches they are litle computers or extensions of the smart phone period...


Dude, a mechanical watch is very much a simple computer !! Nothing more than a basic counting machine and display !!

As for being an extension of a smartphone - this is not a negative at all... plenty of people don't own a watch, but how many people DON'T own a smartphone these days lol !!


----------



## BarracksSi

Perfectionist said:


> Dude, a mechanical watch is very much a simple computer !! Nothing more than a basic counting machine and display !!


No it's not. It's even dumber. It's a windup toy with an oscillating mechanical brake. They just stuck pointer needles on the axles.


----------



## eddieo396

Perfectionist said:


> Dude, a mechanical watch is very much a simple computer !! Nothing more than a basic counting machine and display !!
> 
> As for being an extension of a smartphone - this is not a negative at all... plenty of people don't own a watch, but how many people DON'T own a smartphone these days lol !!


You can believe a watch is a computer ? f you wish I don't its a free world .


----------



## slim jim

No.


----------



## kramer5150

There was a time when computers were entirely mechanical devices. They were used for military applications, they were a count up and count down device, used for precise timing synchronization. So by this (very old) definition a mechanical watch is a kind of mechanical counting device, it computes (mechanically quantifies) time.

In all practicality though, I don't think anyone today would think of a watch as a computer.


----------



## Black5

Just checking in to make sure this thread is still running.

It will be the future eventually and we will have a definitive answer.
If this thread is still running…


SoOoO many watches SoOoO little time...


----------



## Black5

Scott222 said:


> In my opinion they won't for some reasons.
> 
> 
> Smart watches are a consumer product and mechanical watches are for watch collectors
> Smart watches tend to get outdated in less than a couple of years while a mechanical watch will work as long as serviced
> Smart watches can not be passed as a heirloom time piece while a mechanical watch can
> With this I still think that smart watches will increase market share in future and mechanical watches will be a niche market though not much different from nowadays as mostly only watch collectors or WIS do understand the importance of having a mechanical watch and its intricate appeal.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this?
> https://tplinklogin.info/
> https://indianpin-code.in/


I have to congratulate the OP on a masterfully constructed troll thread.

"Do you believe&#8230;"
"In my opinion&#8230;"
"I still think&#8230;"
"What are your thoughts&#8230;"

Facts, supporting evidence are all off topic.

Arguments and disagreements are unnecessary fodder and feed the troll's need for discord.

Just keep the thread alive&#8230;










SoOoO many watches SoOoO little time...


----------



## spoolmakdays

They'll probably replace quartz watches. You know, all the standard fare stuff sold at malls for the average consumer who just wants a watch and doesn't give a tinker's damn about horology. But mechanical watches are a different beast: antiquated technology still created because a significant group of people still like that particular form of antiquated technology.


----------



## skyboss_4evr

Not a chance. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rocket1991

For Gods sake. It's 10 pages of thread started with clear click bait intent, by some member who only posted once (!!!!) and promoting two websites.


----------



## TgeekB

Rocket1991 said:


> For Gods sake. It's 10 pages of thread started with clear click bait intent, by some member who only posted once (!!!!) and promoting two websites.


Amazing, isn’t it? 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Rocket1991

TgeekB said:


> Amazing, isn’t it?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


As noted by Black5 it is very cleverly crafted one. Way better than many.


----------



## ronalddheld

A moderator can always lock this thread.


----------



## Rocket1991

ronalddheld said:


> A moderator can always lock this thread.


I generally really cautious about threads with links to unknown websites in original post with no explanation to what exactly we should expect in them or any follow ups by OP.
As part of my occupation i often fix whatever "happened by itself" or after "i just clicked on that file/link".

Many of links here likely innocent but usually i am not brave enough to try these unsolicited and unknown links unless i take all steps to limit damage.

First link in OP seem to be for router administration and second to some sort of find your postal cod in India. Both have about 0 connection to contents of original post. and i would assume are spoofed links with some malicious content. Which, i will report to admins right away.

There is whole social engineering template for virus spread here.

I am not claiming it spreads viruses but all signs are present. If i get something like this in e-mail i will delete it immediately.

Reported.


----------

