Apple Watch? Get serious!!!

[UnseenParticipant]

I have worn wristwatches all of my adult life, but it was only about 10 years ago that I seriously got into watches with a lowly Seiko 5 field watch. It was my first “automatic” (self-winding) watch.

With a few relatively rare exceptions, there are three watch movements (the guts of a watch that make it go). These are mechanical watches with gears and bearings and other parts powered by a spring, quartz watches powered by a vibrating quartz crystal, and the new kid on the block, Seiko’s spring drive movement which might be described, fairly accurately, as a hybrid.

I love mechanical watches and have three self-winders that I wear in rotation. Here they are:

This is an Orient “Open Heart” watch. “Open heart” refers to the obvious porthole giving one a view of the oscillating balance wheel, the “heart” of the watch.

I have an Orient “dive watch.” The most revered and well-known watch in the world is a dive watch, the Rolex Submariner. This one is Orient’s Ray 2:

My next two watches are “homage” watches based on Rolex models. This is a Benyar (Chinese company) watch mimicking the Rolex Milgauss, a very simple watch designed to resist strong magnetic fields. It’s a pretty but plain design that can’t even tell you the day or date but just the time. It is, unlike the Rolex, not resistant to magnetism. The lightning bolt second hand is a fun feature:

Finally, another Benyar homage watch. This one mimics a recent colorful variant of the popular Tudor Black Bay. It’s less of an outright copy than the Milgauss homage, though, because it also has features of the dial copied from another Tudor model, the Pelagos. Specifically, it looks exactly like a Tudor Black Bay except it has the aPelagos’s square 5-minute markers.

Anyone here also interested in “real” watches rather than Apple-style Dick Tracy wrist radios?

[PopeBeanieModerator]

LOL, my definition of a “real watch” is one that keeps updating its accuracy, e.g. one that adjusts itself daily based on the WWVB signal transmitted from Fort Collins, CO. Such watches and some “atomic” wall and desk clocks also have this feature. Of course, “atomic” is a common misnomer for timepieces using WWVB receivers, as the only atomic input source might be what’s used as a reference by the WWVB transmitter. I don’t even know for sure if that’s the actual WWVB source of time data. And it might vary around the world, as other countries standardize on different signals to transmit.

I’m a geek wrt this, because I’m one of the few people I know who knows a neat trick that amplifies the WWVB signal, in areas of the country where the signal is typically weak. I have three or four such timepieces, and got them all to work every day 90% of the time, instead of failing 90% to 100% of the time, depending on the season. The season affects the latitudes that the sun shines on, which affects ionic dynamics in the atmospheric layers, which affects how well WWVB signals can or cannot propagate across the country. (The ionic dynamics are also affected by time of day, so east coast vs west coast signal reception times of the day can differ by three or four hours. And transmissibility is also a factor at the Ft. Collins transmitter.)

After a couple of beers, I just love writing this kind of TMI, that probably irritates some people. 🙂

The trick to drastically increasing the signal available to a nearby WWVB device: A conductive metal bar. I hang my watch from a metal tie rack, which works maybe 95% of the time, no matter what season it is. Without the tie rack, it used to fail 95% of the time. (Those numbers are just estimates, but still very meaningful.) Even if the watch’s reception fails for one night, you just won’t notice fraction of a second inaccuracy, as it almost always updates properly the next night.

The G-Shock GWM530 is a digital watch with a black resin band and a neutral face. It is water resistant up to 200 meters and has a shock resistant construction. The watch is solar powered and has a full auto EL backlight with afterglow. It also has four daily alarms and one snooze alarm.

Casio G-Shock GWM530

Multi-bar metal tie rack, on my front door

 

 

 

 

[UnseenParticipant]

PopeBeanie wrote:

LOL, my definition of a “real watch” is one that keeps updating its accuracy, e.g. one that adjusts itself daily based on the WWVB signal transmitted from Fort Collins, CO. Such watches and some “atomic” wall and desk clocks also have this feature. Of course, “atomic” is a common misnomer for timepieces using WWVB receivers, as the only atomic input source might be what’s used as a reference by the WWVB transmitter. I don’t even know for sure if that’s the actual WWVB source of time data. And it might vary around the world, as other countries standardize on different signals to transmit.

I guess, like most people, I have little need for that sort of accuracy. I cycle through the four watches I showed above, so I need to restart and reset it  each time I want to wear one. When I do get an opportunity to see if they’ve lost some accuracy, they are off so slightly that it’s negligible, and that includes the much cheaper Benyars. In fact, when I used a cell phone app to test the accuracy of my watches, the Benyar Milgauss homage was dead on.

Out of curiosity, is super accuracy necessary for you in some way? Is it useful or just a “thing” that you like?

BTW, for those who don’t know, while Casio and its Chinese imitators dominate the low end of the quartz watch market, Casio, with its G-Shock family, also dominates the high end of the quartz sports watch market. Watches made of plasticky/rubbery materials like the one you showed. They can easily cost hundreds of dollars/pounds. Of course, a quartz watch from Seiko, Bulova, Breitling, Tag Heuer or any other luxury watch brand will often cost in the cost in the thousands of dollars/pounds.

 

[UnseenParticipant]

Why do I like mechanical watches so much?

While quartz watches use high technology and electronics for near-perfect accuracy, I’m fascinated that a little machine, weighing about 150 grams, with precision-manufactured parts including screws so small they are around the size of coffee grounds, and using jewels as bearings, can keep time to a satisfactory and useful accuracy for almost any imaginable purpose.

And they cannot be 100% produced using automation. Even the cheapest mechanical watch will have some human involved in the assembly at least, if not in manufacturing the components.

 

[AutumnParticipant]

If I had the money for statement pieces, I’d be happy to invest in a quality watch, but even at the entry level that’s hundreds of dollars I don’t have to spend. I have a jewelry watch from Bulova that fits my needs, and a Citizen Eco-Drive Axiom that I had bought as a watch for daily wear (though it needs a new strap). There is nothing super special about the movement of either. I’ve just never had the money for that, and these days, mostly I do wear a smart watch.

Comparing a quality time piece with an Apple watch is… bizarre. They are different devices for different uses. While there are hybrids from Fossil, Garmin, and a few other companies, it sort of seems like the worst of both worlds. But my FitBit Versa 3 isn’t really for style or even for use as a time piece. It’s predominately an activity tracker, and the the heart rate tracker and gps tracking are useful to me. Had I the money, I’d upgrade to an Apple Watch or a Garmin (I got the FitBit for free). Fitness trackers have their downsides. Their estimated calorie burns are often off and their accuracy is dodgy, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have their usefulness.

[RichRaelianParticipant]

Hi! A Raelian is never serious our ET creators the Elohim made us to make fun of a serious world that is screaming out to be made fun of not just by comedians but ordinary people too.

[RichRaelianParticipant]

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Fellow Unbelievers,

Watches??? My mobile phone has been my watch for as long as I’ve used mobile phones, which is now 20 years. 😁

On a more serious note, one benefit of watches or clocks with hands is that, when fully wound and accurate, you can put a matchstick at the center while in the Sun and the shadow cast mid-way between the hour hand and the minute hand will face North. And once you know one direction, you know all four. Good orienteering tip to know if the GPS is uncharged or broken in a SHTF scenario.

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Autumn,

I saw a birthday card with a cat and a cake and the cat was saying: “Yeah, I’m into Fitbit…Imma fit every bit of this cake right into my mouth!😹😁😉

Much obliged on your evaluation of Fitbit from personal experience. I’ll account for that when or if I get one.

I recently got an Equate wrist blood pressure monitor but had to return it. It constantly registered my Systolic pressure in the 190-200 range and the Diastolic pressure in the 90-100 range. Basically, it kept saying I was dead! I knew it wasn’t accurate because my Relion home desktop monitor read much lower.

That and, of course, I was alive with no “moving toward the light” in on form or another.🎇🔥😁

I’m waiting for a wristwatch blood sugar monitor for Type 2 Diabetics. The ones they have now are for Type 1 only. Other vital compounds and hormones would be great to monitor as well.

[_Robert_Participant]

That Orient “Open Heart” watch is beautiful. I never have worn a watch. I have a time awareness that serves well enough or I have a phone or a car clock.

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

PopeBeanie,

Fun fact: An atomic clock on board a satellite confirmed Einstein’s Theory of Relativity on time and gravity.

After botched launch, orbiting atomic clocks confirm Einstein’s theory of relativity
Goofed up satellites confirm prediction that time runs slower closer to a massive body
7 DEC 2018 BY ADRIAN CHO
https://www.science.org/content/article/after-botched-launch-orbiting-atomic-clocks-confirm-einsteins-theory-relativity

[AutumnParticipant]

TheEncogitationer wrote:

Autumn, I saw a birthday card with a cat and a cake and the cat was saying: “Yeah, I’m into Fitbit…Imma fit every bit of this cake right into my mouth!😹😁😉 Much obliged on your evaluation of Fitbit from personal experience.

Most of these devices overstate their capabilities. For me, the main thing is that it is fairly consistent. For instance, my device will say I burned 500 calories on a 45 min walk at moderate to fast pace. It’s almost certainly a considerable overestimate even accounting for the fact that I am overweight; however, it does give me a relative sense of how active I have been. It’s just, for managing a caloric deficit, I can’t take the exact number provided by the device at face value. The pedometer is fairly accurate, the sleep tracker is reasonably accurate for me, heart rate monitor is decent. None of it, of course, is right on the money.

Likewise, I have a ‘smart scale’. I wanted the one with fewer features, but it was sold out. I specifically didn’t want it to measure body fat and muscle mass because bioelectric impedance isn’t super accurate, especially not on a simple bathroom scale. I mean, it will tell me I have gained or lost an appreciable amount of muscle mass just from having a bowel movement. It can tell the difference between 40% body fat and 30% body fat, but it can’t actually give you accurate readings the way it claims to.

Some devices are absolute garbage. It sounds like your blood pressure monitor didn’t work as claimed at all. Many are okay-ish as long as you can keep perspective on the numbers and understand the limitations of the devices and their measurement methods.

[UnseenParticipant]

Autumn wrote:

If I had the money for statement pieces, I’d be happy to invest in a quality watch, but even at the entry level that’s hundreds of dollars I don’t have to spend. I have a jewelry watch from Bulova that fits my needs, and a Citizen Eco-Drive Axiom that I had bought as a watch for daily wear (though it needs a new strap). There is nothing super special about the movement of either. I’ve just never had the money for that, and these days, mostly I do wear a smart watch.

Comparing a quality time piece with an Apple watch is… bizarre. They are different devices for different uses.

Orient is a sister brand to Seiko, existing independently under the Seiko/Epson corporate umbrella. It is a very respected brand even though their mechanical watches can be quite affordable. I acquired my two Orients for $185 and $160, so less than $200 each. Both watches have received rave reviews from experts who also review $10,000+ luxury watches. The two Benyars are inexpensive enough, about $55 each, that when they stop running, rather than paying for repairs, I’ll just replace them with a couple more similarly priced models.

I refer to my mechanical watches as “real watches” in part because of what they don’t do. They don’t annoy or interrupt me while I’m trying to concentrate. They don’t cost me hundreds of dollars to basically duplicate what my smartphone can do. They don’t give me battery level anxiety or go off my wrist for charging. Finally, they don’t tie me to Apple, an unscrupulous (in my view) company whose entire business is based on planned obsolescence. Hooking you and then reeling you back in every two or three years to buy an updated product with new features you probably won’t use. When I see people in line, having been there overnight, to be able to buy the latest Apple product, I realize it’s an addiction.

In short, akin to that famous answer to “What is a boat?” Answer: “It’s a hole in the water you throw money into,” committing to Apple’s watch concept guarantees that you’ll be sucking off Apple’s teat from then on…unless you get smart and realize that all you really need is to know what time it is whenever you need it, which a $12 basic Casio watch can do. The rest can be handled by your smart phone.

[AutumnParticipant]

Again, wearables serve a different function to time pieces despite the fact that they also function as watches. I get it’s called the Apple Watch, so it would make it seem like that is the primary distinguishing feature is how it functions as a watch, but it’s not really. The issue with Apple is they’ve been good at making themselves a status symbol for the middle class, so people buy what they don’t need. It makes devices seem superfluous because people are spending on features that are unnecessary for them. But the functionality of the device is ultimately different from a phone and different from a watch despite its overlap between the two.

[UnseenParticipant]

_Robert_ wrote:

That Orient “Open Heart” watch is beautiful. I never have worn a watch. I have a time awareness that serves well enough or I have a phone or a car clock.

I get that view. For me, a nice mechanical watch is a thing of beauty and a bit of horological history. Are you aware of how one clock changed history? Quite possibly, without solving the so-called “longitude problem,” which required knowing the time with tolerable accuracy, England would never have colonized India, for example.

• This reply was modified 1 month, 1 week ago by  Unseen.

[Author]

Posts