@Inspiration: I think a watch is a bit special. There's a reason why Apple wants to sell a gold version. They want to appeal to people on aesthetic/snob level, too. People are already willing to suffer in the name of fashion more than just fiddle with a circle screen instead of a rectangular one. But as you said, time will tell.

.... but time has "told". Most manufacturers had a Gen 1 square watch and many have now moved onto Gen 2/Gen 3 round watches. These are people who have experienced the watches for a period of time. Have you done this ? if not, what are you basing your experience on ?

Would you care to have a little side-bet on whether Gen 2 or 3 or 4 of the Apple Watch moves to a round face ?

It will sell in vast numbers. thats pretty much a dead cert. How many end up in drawers might be debateable. I think the "18 hours" quoted battery life will be the achilles heel. Also the fact that it doesnt have an "always on" time display seems dubious. And I suspect that the lack of waterproofing may frustrate many.

ummmmm.

You may want to think again. Apple are quoting separate weights for "case" and "band".

And then you have different size models too ....

Gold, with biggest screen is 69g for the case and 42g for the band. unless im mistaken that means a total of 111g ?

The smallest aluminium unit is 25g for the case and 47g for the band giving a total of 72g ?

or am i missing something ??

Plus they all have a depth of 10.5 mm (compared to the already "chunky" LG Watch R at 9.7 mm) so another dimension that it may be considered "large").

One thing for sure, with its '10 seconds on' screen, they will be doing a 'replacement inners' service for this curiosity. $250 a pop for a next gen inner anyone ?

e-ink or that similar to that next-gen Sony Smartwatch 3 is the way decent things will all likely go. I quite imagine Apple could not find any supplier able to make enough of the more expensive transflective screens on Apple contract terms.

So where are the round transflective screens for non cheapskates?

Presumably the user experience was part of that - its entirely possible that the user experience on early smart watches weren't all that great. So if they couldn't create a compelling user experience, they moved to plan B - make the device more watch like.

It remains to be seen if Apple's user experience is more compelling - but they certainly have a good track record when it comes to user experience.

Some of the apps here look vaguely useful though - Apple watch apps. Whether any of them justify the cost is debatable, but I can definitely imagine a point in the future when they do catch on (smartwatches generally) when there enough worthwhile use case scenarios for use, and enough well done apps that make using them a good experience.

The always on thing doesn't seem that big an issue - doesn't it come on automatically when you raise your arm? I wouldn't see not being able to see the screen when the screen isn't in front of me as an issue.

I don't think the screen coming on automatically whenever the user is looking at it and off when not being looked at is a problem at all as long as it's implemented very well. No one should even notice.

That's fine, but there's a 10 seconds limit on apps. Not sure if it is a recommendation or if it cuts you off if you are too slow

But that means that unless you tilt your wrist (or raise it) then the screen shows nothing. Its only one-up from the old 80's digitals where you had to press a button

experience has shown me that always on is very useful (although im sure not crucial - nothing really is) in so far as i can see the time without having to move my wrist, or i can show someone else the time (as you might do with a standard watch), or if ive taken my watch off and its on the side then i can still see the time. If i disable the "always on" then i have to make a conscious movement to display the time which just seems odd.

For me one of the nice things about having a smartwatch is the fact that you can have your own, potentially unique, watch faces. its noce to have those as "always on" rather than only seen for a few brief seconds after a wrist movement .....

But each to their own

So when would you want to look at it other than when you tilted or raised your wrist?

Those rare occasions when you want to look at your watch whilst your arm is by your side?

Well Im typing now and I can see the time quite clearly without having to twist or raise my wrist .....

Im not talking yoga scenarios here calico Im just stating that for those of you wearing a "non-smart" watch count the number of times you actively raise your hand into the optimum viewing position or whether you just have an occassional glance at your wrist. Or when the phone is off your wrist (especially when its not waterproof) you will have to pick it up to see the time. Back to the cycling example, or driving, its a glance or a lift. i know which one is easier.

As I say its not a crucial feature but I would consider it a pain to lose the "always on".

At those weights you might as well strap a Galaxy S3 Mini to your wrist. 111g too, about £80 new, and it even functions a bit like a smartwatch.

I can't believe no top manufacturer missed that 'small smartwatch' trick.
And that Project Ara surely needs to embrace the smartwatch as a screen module.

However, what's good for the consumer is not often of long term good for the manufacturer.

I wonder if they considered non retina screen, with other devices they want to motivate you to buy them at least twice, so why not with the watch. Also using an OLED screen with dark backgrounds could be beneficial for the battery life. It could even make 'always on' watch face possible.

This is actually quite a good discussion.

I find the square v round face aspect an interesting one. Apple have been accused before of putting form before function. However, in this case it makes no sense for the device to be round.

This isn't a watch, it is a smart watch and needs as much screen real estate as possible.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/12..._of_the_world/

24 million sales. Just think what will happen when they finally actually make one worth having.

It's possible that other manufacturers switched to round face because they thought they would attract more people while people are just not interested at all. But I know what I like and dislike and I have a stronger opinion on how my watch should look like. I spent quite some time looking for a watch I have now, so I am not going to wear just anything. Watch is something else than a phone, it's a fashion accessory, too. Personally I think Apple made it too easy for themselves. Arranging touch buttons on the watch face into a spiral or circles would work rather well I think. Using curves instead of straight lines would work and may even look more interesting. You could use your finger to rotate the round texts around the center. Useless, but pretty, I think

I reckon if the Apple Watch does very well it will a positive effect on the competition too. Might generate more interest amongst the public at large, for what up to now has been a fairly niche market. There's lots of scope for alternatives to Apple to bring out new models.

I'm not disagreeing, however, as I said, we are talking about a smartwatch, not a watch.

I don't think apple have been lazy (just like I don't think samsung have been lazy), they have been practical .

I can't remember having the square vs round debate in the pub when the digital watch first came out

Maybe that's the problem, it's like 70s and digital LED watches are back, only thing missing is a button to press to turn on the display for a moment. Also we are more jaded now, we have seen and have an opinion on everything. It was all new back then.

I'd definitely agree with that - might even have a positive effect on traditional watches.

I was pretty sure I didn't want an Apple Watch (at least not yet), but very possibly did want to get a Fitbit Charge HR.

But the more I thought about it, the more I thought if I'm going to start wearing something on my wrist again, I'd actually just want to get a fairly nice new analogue watch to replace my 18 year old one that I stopped wearing ages ago because I use my phone. So if I buy anything in the next few weeks / months, it'll probably be one of these.

But then I'm a sucker for great little promo clips like this one.

Fair enough, but I think its splitting hairs, and a lot will depend on how much motion is required for the watch to come on - even glancing at a watch usually involves a bit of a turn in the wrist.

And scenarios where the watch is not on your wrist, but you do want to check the time on it, but want to do so without picking it up.... very specific.

You would not want it too sensitive, Cook might tell you that you are walking wrong You could probably say 'Siri, wake up', but you'd look like a tit.

I'm liking our sensible debate

But what you may find (I have) is that real estate isn't as important as you think. Most of the time your smartphone is a watch. And most watches are round. If I want to use eBay or Facebook or twitter I will get my phone out. If I want to play games I will get my phone out. The smartwatch is great for a watch with a variety of faces (hence my preference for always on) and to let me know who has just texted/mailed me (so I know if its important enough to get my phone out). Its useful for map directions (arrows etc) but I wouldn't use it for maps themselves. Its great to show heartbeat or to provide a button to trigger the camera but real estate isn't as important as you might imagine. I "can" open a browser on my watch. I don't tend to do it though ....

I'd put money on apple moving to a round face at some point.

Not as specific as you think. Shaving, in the bath, gardening, anything that could involve the watch getting scratched or battered.

Interesting to see how much movement is required to be honest. Too little movement and its going to eat up your already limited battery life (and look like a disco on your wrist ) whereas too little and you will look like a French mime every time you want to look at your watch

My Pebble has that problem sadly when out at night and want the backlight to come on. I have to wave my arm to get the darn thing to detect the movement. Still I do really like the Pebble with its unbeatable battery life!

Motorola hasn't stood still. They have just introduced a 'Moto Maker' tool on their website which allows a load of customisation options if you want to buy a new 360. https://www.motorola.com/us/motomake...tion=designNew