Hacker News Reader

Comment by amelius | Hacker News Reader

But who likes the design? In my view, Apple tried to cater to the desires of both men and women simultaneously, and ended up with a sex-less watch that looks like it was designed by a committee.

View on HN

I think tens of millions of buyers don't quite mind the design so I'd day they have a strong market...

There is, of course, a difference between "don't quite mind the design" and "like the design".

There are other smart watches on the market and they don't seem to have a fraction of the users as the AW. Android Wear tries to look more like a normal watch but it ends up not looking as nice as a normal watch and not working well as a smart watch due to the round screen.

Why do you need a watch that is designed for a particular sex?

For many, a watch is a fashion accessory. Thus, a watch that fits their style is important. If their fashion style identifies strongly with a particular sex, then a watch that clashes with that style would be less appealing.

> Why do you need a watch that is designed for a particular sex?

If you'd ask that question in a Rolex board-meeting, they'd show you the door ...

Yeah, but Rolex primarily caters to men who are insecure in their masculinity, so they're a special case >:-)

Or maybe Rolex caters to people who have money and like watches?

Two things can be true at once

From what I have seen in the watch scene, a rolex is the equivalent of driving an enormous 4wd, its compensating for insecurity or to show off more than appreciation for watches.

Someone who actually likes watches is more likely to go with something premium from Seiko or Tag Heuer

Why would somebody who likes watches go for something as mind numbingly boring as a Rolex? I truly don't get the appeal.

I'd have accepted that description for Casio G-Shock.

Rolex is for people with more money than taste, and who want you to know it.

It's the most popular watch on the planet now, so... lots of people?

It's a glass brick on my wrist.

...I don't hate it. I'm glad it's not a glass brick on my wrist wearing lipstick, and what else could it be, really?

To my eye, round smartwatches that are all screen look fake, but my Mom has one and loves it. I had a Withings Steel and it looks way better, but it just doesn't do much, and the dealbreaker for me was that the heart rate monitor was seriously inaccurate, probably a compromise for the battery, which lasts weeks.

"Traditional" watch designs differentiate mens and womens watches mostly by size, and there are already two different sizes of Apple Watch.

When you can choose the watch face and change out the band, it's not so much designed by committee as providing options. The watch itself is just a roundish square of metal and glass. Not a bad design for those who are buying it!

It's gotten a lot better since the Series 4 rounded corners, and the bands are excellent. Reception seems mixed with the watch faces that mimic traditional ones.

upvoting because this thread needs a convo on the design. I thought it was weird, but now I have one and I started to like it. I think Apple did right here in choosing one design and sticking to it through generations. My guess is that they will never deprecate this design, so that it becomes an accepted watch design, but instead will introduce a new competing design for the 10y birthday of the Apple watch.

On the contrary, I think it’s a feminine design. I would wager that more watches are sold to women too. Anecdotally it appears to be true.

And when we look at the epidemic of rock-bottom testosterone levels in men, this makes sense.

Really interesting sidebar topic tbh. Haven’t thought of it until now.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com