I rarely ask questions like this, but I am curious about this. In many ways, the watch is an anachronistic fashion accessory. For those that choose to wear one in the age of mobile devices, I'd be interested to hear the reasoning behind it.
I wear a Casio Illuminator. I've been wearing the same watch for more than a decade, and this is my third one.
As a fashion statement, it is a nod to the popularity of digital watches in my youth, and a rejection of expensive watches. It also has some 'physicist fashion', I think, and as a working biologist, I like to remember my roots.
As a practical device, I often use it to keep time when I am doing experiments and my hands are gloved and typically in a cell culture hood.
I wear the face on my wrist on my right on-hand. That might be a statement as well, but it's mostly a comfort decision.
fistbump The only other watch I own is a Longines that was my grandfather's. I got the movement tuned up, but the place that did it didn't clean the face as well. I've been meaning to get that done. It's a pale gold, but I don't think it counts as white gold. The repair guy thought it was made in the 50's.
Yes, and I collect watches. I have a few casios, a handful of Seiko autos, couple of Orients, an Oris Frank Sinatra, and an Omega SMP (moon watch) because I'm a space nerd. It's one of the few pieces of jewelry a man can wear, and on top of that, a good automatic watch is one of the most complicated non-electrical devices men have ever built. My SMP chrono was used on the moon missions to time rocket burns and descents and critical stages of the mission... and it's just a manual wound watch operated with a spring that kept better time than any other watch of the time (NASA tested them all). I'm fascinated with some of the REALLY expensive brands and have an admiration for fine watchmaking and complicated movements in general. If I had unlimited funds I'd have a Patek moon phase, and have zero problems dropping $40,000+ on it. I'm fascinated by the tech, what watches brought to the world in terms of navigating and innovation, and how they are a very classy and subtle way to check the time as opposed to whipping out a huge smartphone just to check the time. TL;DR: Not only do I wear watches I LOVE watches.
This will be long. I have worn a Yes of one form or another since 2002. They were first advertised in the back of American Cinematographer as a way of knowing how much light you have left - these things matter to cinematographers and photographers. But it's so much more than that. Yes is a one-man operation. His name is Bjorn and he lives in La Jolla, CA. I saw a Yes for sale on eBay exactly once, and I bought it. That was in 2002 and I haven't seen one since. Adam Savage wears one, as does Complexity. They've been to the ISS twice. And here's the thing: Any device can tell time. The Yes is so much more than that. Hours and minutes and seconds have always seemed so arbitrary to me because we're completely divorced from them. You'll be interested to know that we have 24-hour days because the Babylonians noticed that 12 constellations rose during the course of a night and just multiplied by two; we have twelve months because that's how many cycles the moon has (about). Yet nobody has made the barest attempt to anchor our time schedules to anything that isn't arbitrary. I like having a 24-hour day. It makes a lot more sense to me. I like knowing how much daylight we have left. I like watching the wedge of darkness ebb and flow over the course of a year. I like watching the moonrise and moonset precess around the outside (although when I first bought my Yeswatch that wasn't even an option). And I like relating my day to the natural processes of the outside world because it's good to feel connected to something utterly beyond the ability of daylight savings time to fuck with. Doesn't matter who's in office, doesn't matter what Arizona does, the moon rises when the moon rises and the sun sets when the sun sets. Certain members of our community can't handle this. Let's be honest: 'pablo is apologizing for owning a hand-me-down Burberry. A Tati costs that much and it doesn't even have a mechanical movement. But I don't wear a lot of jewelry - I've got my bitchin' iron'n'gold Mokume Gane wedding ring, I've got a titanium and silver byzantine chain bracelet my wife made and I've got one or the other of the watches. One of 'em is stainless, the other is titanium and gold. And Cee-Lo Green struck up a conversation with me over my watch and he was wearing a $50k Arctica. Things that I put on every day I value. And owning a hand-made unique timepiece counts. If Bjorn didn't make watches I'd own a Seiko Astron: Or I'd own an Omega speedmaster. Why? EDIT: The last time we talked about watches, b_b suggested shinola. I could totally go that way, too.
It's ghetto chic. Very popular around here. Building a brand around being "gritty", which is euphemism for "There's black people all over where we work." Chrysler has the same thing, but at least they aren't a luxury brand. I guess pretty much all ad campaigns seek to exploit someone. I got a bad taste with Shinola in particular, because of their audacity to sell $400 tennis shoes on a block where people starve and freeze routinely. I'm not going to defend myself to vigorously. Not sure my feelings are entirely rational on the issue.
You know what, you can't have your cake and eat it too. How dare Dan Gilbert sell home loans from downtown Detroit when people don't have homes? How dare anyone sell anything in Detroit when so many have so little? As for using Detroit as a brand, I never, ever think of "black people" when people reference the "grit" of Detroit, but I do think of hard working people, black, white, brown etc. As you know, Detroit was once the epicenter of business and culture, I think brands like Shinola are harkening to that. Brands like "Made in Detroit" are "exploiting" the work ethic that was synonymous with pre-labor union craziness Detroit. "Built Ford Tough" is the same way. The city was once known for building the highest quality machines in the world. How dare a brand try to hitch it's wagon to that. Actually, what they're doing is rebuilding that wagon and to be pissed about that is fucked up.
Yes, but I think the unions themselves started getting crazy.
Were you able to abscond any of the riches from that errant abbey? I have had a number of "jobs" over the years leading up to my life in Business Development and it occurs to me that I've never belonged to a union.
Dude, I think you're putting some words in my mouth there. All I said was that their ad campaign was lame, while also saying that I like their products (what I should have said was that I like their watches; their bikes are hella lame). It's a pretty big stretch from there to me being pissed off about anyone making money in Detroit.
their audacity to sell $400 tennis shoes on a block where people starve and freeze routinely
is what I was responding to. Are there restaurants on that street too? Stores that sell blankets? That would be criminal.
Ah. That. I owe you a clarification. Shinola maintains a store in Detroit, but only for cred. They don't intend to make money off it. They make money off selling things in, for example, NYC. Their "flagship" store in midtown detroit exists solely to import celebrities to do photo shoots and other marketing events. It feels like they're making fun of the neighborhood. At least it did in the beginning. I will give them credit that they have recently donated a bunch of money to build a green space near their store. That I applaud.
Well thank you pal, I dig it. As for the ghetto chic, it's a bit derivative don't you think? Did you go white gold or yellow?
Apology accepted. I've worked in Detroit for a decade, and I lived in downtown for 7 of those years. It would be fair to say that I have a love/hate relationship with the city. What is offensive about referring to capitalizing on Detroit's downtrodden image as "ghetto chic"?
I feel like it implies that all Detroit is is a ghetto. I've lived in Detroit or in the Metro Detroit area all my life, and I get mad when the conversation can only come back to "Lel Detroit is a warzone." I thought that was what you were doing. Besides, the ad says "This is how you stuff a stocking in Detroit." I didn't (and don't) see how that even goes into exploitation of the poor when all it does is mention Detroit. Then later you mentioned "Ghetto chic," and I lost sight of things for a bit. The answer to your question might just be that I don't see where poverty comes into it.
That specific ad isn't bad. They, in my opinion, have used the decaying image of Detroit to their advantage, and that kind of thing annoys me. How many photographers have made careers out of capturing the "beautiful" ruins of Detroit? Too many. Each of them sucks the soul out of the city just a little bit more. There's a reason that you're not allowed to photograph prisoners of war--it's dehumanizing to exploit tragedy. I'm not against Detroit. I'm for Detroit, and I want to see it and its people treated with dignity. Where in Detroit do/did you live?
I was pretty young when my family moved to where we are now, but I live in Waterford. I can't remember where in the city we were before we moved. And yeah, fuck those guys. They come to Detroit with the same mentality as they go to Brazilian slums or to villages in Africa. Drum up sympathy, but do nothing.
I know nothing of their shtick, I had never seen an advert for them prior to the newspaper ad wasoxygen posted above in the comment. The ref is from the ad on the left of the paper. It's a joke.
My Zulu is currently (finally) wending its way to Bjorn for a repair wherein he'll probably have to replace its poor water-damaged electronic brains. Godspeed, my fallen warrior. You will return to me soon. Edit: Hah. Bjorn took receipt of my Zulu and his diagnosis and assessment of my treatment of it could basically be boiled down to: ಠ_ಠI think he loves them like children. Either way, he's fixing it up and sending it back to me asap.
We moved to wrist watches because it was easier than reaching in ones pocket for a pocket watch. I see no reason for society to move backwards. I have several, of which these are a few :) I also love NATO straps.
Second from the right is a Casio. It has a compass, but not solar powered.
I have been wearing Swatches since 1986. I was in the seventh grade when this started. They're comfy, they don't catch on my hirsute arms, and they can be worn in the shower. They also let me know what time it is inconspicuously, last a decade, and only cost $40. It's an analog face on a digital time keeper. I still perceive time as the circles on the analog face -- I need to see the arms pointing at angles, the divisibility of wedges, time in pieces of eight (7 and a half minutes). 60 is a ridiculously divisible number: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 15, 20, 30. Digital displays for watches hide that relationship, remove the visible value of timing out. I dispute the "anachronistic fashion accessory" notion. Reaching into a pocket to get the time is the anachronism. I can see whether I'll catch the train even though I haven't reached the parking lot yet -- my arms swing and show me time. I can tell you what time it is while we're taking off or landing and cell devices must be sheathed.
I have always worn a watch. I wear it because I love looking at my watch and knowing the time. Also having a timer and such is very useful. I recently bought a pebble watch: It is absolutely amazing, I always have my phone muted now and I never worry if any messages I get are important. Also it is amazing when controlling the phone's music while I am driving, without looking away from the road.
I prefer Arabic numerals, and I'm not a fan of digital. Clean face, easily replaceable and just plain functional. Honestly, I don't want any clunky metal. Simply put, I don't see the value in a complex watch; I find it easier to check the time this way than to risk being glued in by my phone.
You might like this one: http://www.amazon.com/Timex-T2N065-Elevated-Classics-Leather/dp/B004X3ZDJS/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1415493797&sr=8-2-fkmr0&keywords=timexclassicband+T204914C2
I suppose it is somewhere between http://timex.ca/watches/classics-t2h311gp and http://timex.ca/watches/classics-20491
I wear a watch because I've done so since I was in high school. I'm 31. It's convenient to glance at my wrist and leaving the house without some familiar weight on my wrist causes me anxiety. People ask me what time it is so the utility isn't lost on people with phones in their pocket.
No, I don't, and because not only do I have a cell phone but I work in an industry in which it is perfectly acceptable to pull out and check said phone - not a physical labor industry for instance, or some similar circumstance where it would be stupid to bring the phone on the job. For instance If I were a teacher I would probably totally wear a watch, but it would be bare basics. I don't wear a watch because I don't find I have any need to, probably in part due to becoming accustomed to relying on a cell phone for the time since high school. Also, I tend to kill the things I wear with regularity. So for me a fancy watch doesn't make sense as I'll still just scratch and burn through it. I do like them though - but conversely, I wouldn't be able to recognize a watch as indicator of status symbol, which I think they often are or can be. Everyone else who commented seemed to wear a watch so I thought I would offer up a different perspective. Unless I slept in it I would forget a watch probably about a quarter of the time.
A real problem with women's watches is they're fashion accessories, so much more than men's watches. Well, wait a minute. Let me rephrase that. So when a dude buys shoes, they're going to look like shoes. They're going to come in shoe-like colors, and be shaped fundamentally like shoes. They might be boots. They might even be cowboy boots. But the variation from shoe-to-shoe is going to be pretty minimal. More than that, the majority of a man's shoes will match the majority of a man's wardrobe: All of his dress shoes are likely to match most-or-all of his suits. All of his athletic shoes are likely to match most-or-all of his athletic gear. Women's watches are like women's shoes. A guy can buy a watch and wear it with almost anything. He can buy several watches and mix'n'match. A girl doesn't have that luxury. I can see why "opting out" is a much more efficient solution.
Yeah. Fashion can become an extremely personal choice and I know I myself have strict color rules I follow (no brown with black, no navy and black) which may seem nonsensical but adhere to my personal aesthetic. It is interesting, making sure I am wearing the "right pair" of shoes with a given work outfit. It's not necessarily something I naturally am inclined to care about but at work in a professional environment you kind of have to. I got called out for not wearing matching socks at one job. Makes you really aware of social conditioning. Personally, I don't care if my socks match so long as they feel about the same but gosh, do other people care. I wear the same earrings every day, ears, nose and eyebrow, unless it's a special occasion or I am "dressing up." I'm in general a big favor of maintaining simple, repetitive life routines - my diet is similar. It would infuriate me to spend an hour getting ready for work. Thank god for my current employer - there are other companies where people would actually care if I have visible tattoos or am wearing makeup. My mother still insists that makeup makes one look more "professional." I don't want to deal with it. I don't want to blow dry or style my hair. I try to keep it as simple as possible and STILL find myself at the last minute switching shoes, etc, because "these don't match." I can't understand women who change purses to match their outfits. Invariably i forget to move important things from one to the other. I buy something that works with everything and I use it Til it dies.
I did a lot of searching before I bought my wife her watch. The one that I bought for her can be worn in both formal and casual circumstances, it's feminine but also looks strong and well built. If it were a "shoe" it would be the kind you could wear to a black tie affair or a casual lunch, the only shoe it wouldn't be is a tennis shoe. It's definitely not made for exercise. Also, per your other comment, I am definitely interested in owning a Shinola watch. I like them and I like that they're so heavily tied to Detroit.
This is the watch that I gave to my wife when she graduated from med school. My thought is that someday it can be handed down to my daughter when she graduates from med school, or when she plays carnegie hall for the first time. Either one. No pressure though.
Well, there's a reason I didn't post the photo and just the link. From a percent to purchase standpoint, it will likely retain it's value more than any other watch in this thread. Therefore, it's less frivolous than it may seem. Should we ever fall on hard times, that thing can fetch us some mortgage payments, a Casio.. not so much.
I remember you telling me the story of how that watch came to be in your possession. -couldn't really have a watch thread without that link.
I wear an incredibly cheap Casio, $10 from Walmart. It looks sort of like this, but with a cloth band and sans-serif type: I wear it on my right hand, with the face directed inwards (doctor/nurse style). Wearing an incredibly cheap watch is a hold over from the days of my first real job a long time ago: material handling. I found that I would break watches when going through palettes and shelves (the shelves were themselves built from repurposed palettes). The facing-inwards bit comes from efficiency: it's faster for me to flick my wrist over than to turn my arm. I plan on replacing that Casio with a Timex Weekender at some point in the future. I'm a very utilitarian person, and I don't need anything fancy with my watch. I like a simple face without any added crap: no date, no barometer, no altitude, none of that. I own some fancier watches, both purchased and received after family deaths (grandpa watches are a wonderful thing, by the way). I wore them before I had that job, but it broke me of it. I also own a nice watch that has to be wound, with the exposed gears and all of that gimmicky stuff that I also love - but I'd never wear it because it's too much. I don't make any fashion statements with my wardrobe, let alone my watch. I find smart watches to be interesting, but I won't own one for a long time. I don't need my watch to do that stuff.
Funny timing on this thread. I haven't worn a watch in a coupla years. I was just this morning looking at my old (nice) watch with a busted chrono button and a dead battery thinking, "I really like this watch. I'll take it in today for a new battery and start wearing this thing again." Now I have a public commitment!
Diesel watches have always been my favorite by far in terms of design. Some of them are freakin' enormous which I personally don't dig, but I get how it could be someone's style as an "alternative" thing with designs like these. Definitely my favorite brand of horlogerie to wear if you're showing off some slick urban style. On my grandfather's 70th, my mother bought him a Burberry watch to this effect, without the rectangles on the face of it. He died four years later, and my family decided to pass it on to me, and costs more than the combined total of everything else I'm wearing. Now, mind you, that is a handsome, sharp, and mature watch; my grandfather was a handsome, sharp, and 70-year-old man. But I'm not. So I can't wear it, because it looks ridiculous on me. I've kept it in its box in my drawer, maybe one day in the future it'll be my time to put it on. Put it on my left hand, of course. Only way it feels natural. And I absolutely use a watch, when I have it on, because no 4G LTE satellite-coordinating super-phone in my pocket is going to beat the speed of a glance at the wrist.
That's the watch I ordered yesterday on Amazon. I had the same one in silver for 3 years and it broke not long ago. I wear it mostly for convenience, not a statement. I like it because at night/ a party it really easy to tell the time. Just press on the illumination button! Also, I really like the stretch band on it.
I wear a FuelBand SE, but I don't have any particular attachment to it.
For some reason, my phone refuses to take a non-blurry photo right now. Anyways, I have been wearing my Swiss Army Victorinox watch for more than 10 years. It was an engagement gift from my then fiancé. It has sentimental value, it looks nice IMO, and I do like not having to pull out my phone to see what time it is. I'm pathologically punctual. In fact, I'm almost always 5-10 minutes early for everything. I like watches too, I like the precision and craftsmanship involved. When my wife graduated from medical school, I bought her a fancy watch. It's a symbolic gift, it will retain it's value and can be a family heirloom. 