The Apple Watch Reviewby Joshua Ho & Brandon Chester on July 20, 2015 8:00 AM EST
- Posted in
- Apple Watch
With a new form factor comes the need to deeply analyze design, and in the case of a smartwatch it really becomes more important than ever before. Like clothing, watches are deeply personal in a way that smartphones weren’t. The most immediate aspect of the Apple Watch is the size. I’ve used the Moto 360 before, and while I didn’t think it was too big for me, people with smaller wrists can look rather ridiculous wearing the Moto 360 or many other smartwatches. Even in the 42mm variant, the Apple Watch is surprisingly small for a smartwatch. The 38mm variant is definitely sized for people with smaller wrists.
Outside of height and width, the thickness of the watch is definitely a bit more than what one might expect from a regular watch, but it isn’t really all that noticeable due to the rounded curves of the casing. When looking at the display, the display’s cover glass also blends seamlessly into the metal case of the watch, which really looks impressive indoors, although the illusion is somewhat lost in strong sunlight as it becomes obvious where the display ends and the bezel begins. This really helps with analog watchfaces, but in practice I found I was never really bothered by rectangular watch displays. If anything, I’ve found round watch display to lack information density; round watch displays just aren’t pragmatic for general purpose computing.
In order to really give a sense of what the watch looks and feels like when it’s on the wrist, I’m going to start by assuming that most people will wear this watch on their left hand. This places the side button and digital crown on the right. If you read nothing else in this entire article, you should know that the digital crown is probably the best solution I’ve seen to the smartwatch input problem yet. The digital crown manages to have just the right amount of friction to the knob so input feels deliberate without being difficult. The notches that surround the crown really help with gripping the crown and improve the precision of input with the digital crown. Both the digital crown and side button have a solid, clicky action, but it’s probably not a surprise at this point given that Apple seems to consistently nail down details like button feel on their iPads and iPhones.
On the left side of the watch, the only notable interruptions are the speaker and microphone holes. As far as I can tell there’s only a single microphone hole, but it seems that Apple has some form of noise cancellation as background noise is generally well-muffled.
The top and bottom of the watch are just the attachment points for the bands of the watch, but from a design perspective this is probably one of the most crucial. The interchangeable bands work incredibly well because of just how easy it is to attach and detach bands. Attaching a band is as simple as matching with the slot and sliding it in, although it is possible to get it wrong by putting a band in upside-down. The fit and finish of both the Milanese loop and sport band that I received were both essentially perfect here, and the Milanese loop band has a glossy finish on the side that helps the band to blend in with the casing of the watch.
The bands themselves are probably the most important aspect of the Apple Watch's design. While Apple definitely hopes that users will be purchasing bands in addition to the one that comes with their watch, it's a safe bet that most users will be using the fluoroelastomer bands that ship with the Apple Watch Sport and the entry level Apple Watch and Apple Watch Edition models. Because the fluoroelastomer band ships with the Sport version of the watch and has to fit every wrist size the fluoroelastomer band actually is more like one and a half bands. Included in the package is the section of the strap with the metal pin, and two pieces of different lengths with holes in them. The longer one is meant for users with larger wrists, and the smaller one for users with smaller wrists.
As for the band itself, the feel of it can be difficult to describe. When they were first revealed, my initial thought was that they would have a somewhat firm and rubbery feel. It turns out that the bands are very flexible, and also very soft. The best description I could give is that it feels similar to the soft touch back of the black Nexus 5 and Nexus 9, but much smoother and very resistant to smudges. Water also tends to roll right off of it which makes it very well suited to fitness activities. Since it's not infinitely adjustable there's always a small mismatch between the size of the band and the size of your wrist, but there's not much that can be done to solve that with a pin and tuck design.
In the case of the Milanese loop, the infinitely adjustable design has basically solved the teething issues I have with wearing most watches. The band manages to deal with the issues I’ve always had with wristbands that always seemed to be either too tight or too loose. The fabric-like pattern of the metal links also helps to distribute pressure while allowing for ventilation, so I don’t feel the need to constantly take off the watch due to trapped sweat or some similar issue. It’s also easy to clean the metal bands if they get dirty, although I suspect the leather bands will be rather difficult to deal with in this regard. There is some potential to pinch hairs, but in my experience this is pretty unlikely and I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve noticed this problem in the past few months. As a result, this is probably the only watch I’ve ever worn that is consistently comfortable regardless of weather conditions. Independent of how good the wearable is from a digital logic/software standpoint, I’ve noticed that these aspects of the design are far, far more crucial than anyone seems to notice. In the case of Apple Watch, the bands are pretty much as good as it gets.
Moving past the bands, the back of the watch is somewhat unremarkable. There’s a rounded crystal that houses the heart rate LEDs and sensors, and serves as an attachment point for the MagSafe wireless charger. In practice, the only notable issue here is that the crystal seems to act as a pressure point when wearing the Watch, but it’s likely that this is done to ensure proper contact for the heart rate monitor.
Overall, Apple has pretty much nailed the design of the watch. The controls are well-executed and placed in a pragmatic position, in a way that I haven’t really seen anyone else achieve yet. The only real objection I have to the design is that the stainless steel casing seems to be a magnet for small scratches. They’re tough to see in most conditions, but with strong lighting it becomes pretty obvious that it’s pretty easy to scratch the watch casing. I suspect the only solution here is to regularly buff out scratches from the casing like most any stainless steel watch. As for the Apple Watch Sport, the 7000 series aluminum seems to hold up to daily use without any sign of scratches or chips on the casing of the watch. At 25g and 30g for the 38mm and 42mm respectively it's also lighter than the 40g and 50g masses of the stainless steel models. Since the Sport edition uses Ion-X glass like the iPhone 6 instead of the Sapphire crystal of the normal Apple Watch and Apple Watch Edition, the display cover glass is much more susceptible to scratching. While I haven't encountered any scratches at this point, the sapphire glass editions will undoubtedly better stand the test of time.
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
sachouba - Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - linkStill, if you had reproached the Apple Watch with anything, you wouldn't be able to get your hand on any Apple product anymore.
You've not even compared the Apple Watch with Samsung's smartwatches, which have a better display, way better battery life, and so on.
Keep worshipping Apple, you're the only website which finds the Apple iPhone 6 has a better battery life than the Galaxy S5, which is obviously not true...
twanto - Monday, July 20, 2015 - linkAnother idiot who knows nothing about photography. They didn't take these photos with an iPhone..... some people still buy real cameras with real lenses, no surprise here: IT'S A TECHNOLOGY WEBSITE!
Lord of the Bored - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link" bokeh added"
Ayup, that's totally what it is. Definitely not because close-up photos have less depth-of-field than distant ones(as a loose rule). It's totally 'shopped to add the cool word for out-of-focus backgrounds.
dsumanik - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkActually bud i am an accomplished photographer myself, Mr. Ho was using a d7000 shooting the 35mm dx prime wide open. I own a d7100 and same lens, i recognized it right away....i used the phrase 'bokeh added' to troll a reaction and it worked.
The bottome line is that the photos are enhanced, the only way to prove otherwise would be to post the original RAW files, not jpegs. There is nothing wrong with enhancing photos for your article, but claiming you didn't when you did just proves how far you are willing to go to lie about the silliest detail.
Heres the bottom line:
- they presented the product in question in the most positive light possible
- the article was meandering and incoherent and 100% opinion based - but overall positive
- can someone link me a negative apple product review written by anandtech, ever?
- has every apple product, 100% of the time, been perfect?
- if the apple watch is so awesome, why did the reviewers never own one until this review?
- how many people wear a watch perfectly draped over thier wrist
- why were there so many unboxing shots?
- Mr. Smith did not answer my questions of whether or not scathing apple product review that went viral would be good for his website and career as a whole.
Ill tell yah why, apple wouldnt be very happy with mr smith writing a crappy review of thier product, and there would be repurcussions to his career because of it,
And that my friends is exactly the problem.
This website has become a huge commercial, as with a large majority o the internet and i will continue to embarass and troll authors of this kind of junk whenever possible,
Like i said, just call a turd a turd..
...the watch sucks dudes, its not a maybe, it sucks...go look for yourself.
Samus - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkI'm not an Apple person, but the iPhone 4S just happened to be the best smartphone I ever owned (except perhaps my HP\Palm Veer...I like small gadgets)
Just like the Apple Watch is the best smartwatch I've ever had. The Pebble will always have a place in my heart as the first smartwatch I owned (unless my 1996 Timex Datalink counts?) but it is clearly outclassed by even competitively priced smartwatches (a LG G watch is $80 refurbished, the same price as a new Pebble, and the Pebble Time Steel is nearly as expensive as the Apple Watch)
dsumanik - Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - linkhigh five, for you
I'll wait till iWatch 3 or 4 thats has integrated LTE modem and actually allows me to jog without a phone.
Like i said, this one still sucks, I've seen it, tried it, and it's overpriced (unsuprising from apple) and slow. Literally the only cool thing i can think of that it does is the wrist tap navigation, or the the tapping u get from sms ... would be good for unobtrusive communication in a meeting, or flirting with your girlfriend.
Jobs wouldn't have allowed this.
He would have waited another generation for the required technology, or engineered it himself.
Even the most die hard apple lover has to admit that.
WinterCharm - Saturday, July 25, 2015 - linkThe butthurt is strong in this one.
The apple watch is currently the *best* smartwatch out. There's a reason it has 75% market share of all wearables.
superflex - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkI guess you've never experienced a watch band pulling out hairs on your wrist then.
I had one that would do that. I never wear it.
Arm hair does matter.
JoshHo - Monday, July 20, 2015 - linkIf someone has been secretly shaving my arms, please let me know.
Ryan Smith - Monday, July 20, 2015 - linkI may have had Stephen replace your shower water with Nair...