Related
I would like to get a new smart watch. My Friend has the 360 which I think looks awesome. But that flat tire thing really bugs me. I hate the way that looks. I though with the Moto 360 2 they would have removed that but they didn't. So now I am also looking at the new Huawei watch. Which to me looks pretty much identical to the 360 but without the flat tire thing. Are the android versions pretty much the same thing on all watches? I've read the Huawei is slightly thinner than the 360. Both are the same price $350. Just not sure which one to get....
falcon26 said:
I would like to get a new smart watch. My Friend has the 360 which I think looks awesome. But that flat tire thing really bugs me. I hate the way that looks. I though with the Moto 360 2 they would have removed that but they didn't. So now I am also looking at the new Huawei watch. Which to me looks pretty much identical to the 360 but without the flat tire thing. Are the android versions pretty much the same thing on all watches? I've read the Huawei is slightly thinner than the 360. Both are the same price $350. Just not sure which one to get....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The flat area is really a non-issue after the first 10 minutes with the watch.
Keep in mind that the Huawei has a 300mAh battery (and an AMOLED screen) while Moto 360 v2 has 400mAh battery (but LCD screen). I think the 360 V2 will have better battery life - in part due to their experience with V1 (while the Huawei has none) - and this is important. Also, the Moto 360 has a 1.56" screen while the Huawei has a 1.4" screen. Screen size matters on such a small device. The less bezel area, the better.
That flat tire thing as much as I tried to ignore it just bugs the heck out of me. I think it looks really really lame. I would gladly give up a little space to have it gone.
Any reason you don't want the LG Urbane?
I don't like the bezel on it...
falcon26 said:
I don't like the bezel on it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then you've already made your decision. You don't like the flat tire on the 360s, you don't like the LG models and you have nothing negative from your POV about the Huawei watch. They all run the same Android Wear, so functionally they are identical. Although they have some differences in hardware. This leaves you with no choice, but the Huawei watch.
falcon26 said:
I don't like the bezel on it...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure why the flat tire is an issue. With a small battery like that you'd only look at the screen less than a minute every time, and if you're not admiring the watch but actually take a glance at the screen you will not notice and forget about the flat tire being there. Pretty sure practicality matters more than fashion (not like the 360 is ugly or anything).
On a side note, from my experience at least I have to look at the watch twice to tell the time, because it displays more information than a normal watch would I forget to look at the time.
Sent from my C6833 using Tapatalk
I'm sorry but I'd rather have a screen with a flat tire than a small screen like the Huawei watch.
Seriously people complain about the flat tire but the truth is that all the other models have a huge bezel around and smaller screens.
The 360's screen is actually 20% bigger than the huawei watch.
raundown said:
Not sure why the flat tire is an issue. With a small battery like that you'd only look at the screen less than a minute every time, and if you're not admiring the watch but actually take a glance at the screen you will not notice and forget about the flat tire being there. Pretty sure practicality matters more than fashion (not like the 360 is ugly or anything).
On a side note, from my experience at least I have to look at the watch twice to tell the time, because it displays more information than a normal watch would I forget to look at the time.
Sent from my C6833 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree 100%. I didn't care for it and really put off getting it, but ended up getting one and now it's totally a non issue. Never even notice it anymore and there is a watch gave that actually used it in its design.
Sony Smart Watch 3 Review
TLDR? Quick version here.
First Impressions: A small plain little box, clear plastic and the rather plain looking watch. It’s all quite an non-fancy affair, simple and nondescript. The watch is just like the box, plain and simple looking. Actually I like it in the flesh more than in photos, the matte black strap with the silver clasp and the black face. Mind you in photos the metal silver one looks considerably more fancy. I’ve seen it said that you should be able to buy the silver strap and transfer the watch face into it. That is something I certainly fancy the idea of.
Specifications: OS Android Wear, Display Resolution 320 x 320, Colors 16 bit, Diagonal Size 1.6", Transflective TFT LCD, Dimensions 36mm x 10mm x 51mm, Weight Watch Module 38g, Sport armband 36g, Battery 420mAh, Processor 1.2 GHz, Quad-core ARM® Cortex™ A7, Water and Dust Resistance IP68, Memory 4GB eMMC with 512 MB RAM, Ports & Connectors Micro USB, Connectivity Bluetooth 4.0, WiFi ready, Sensors Ambient Light, Accelerometer, Magnetometer, Gyro, GPS, Vibration Motor, Microphone
Okay that’s a lot of spec’s. so what bits of it matter? Well it’s pretty similar to most Android Wear watches. The RAM, the CPU, the storage space, the screen size and resolution are pretty much all the some as every other one. So why did I buy this one? Well that’s easy but unless you know about screen technologies you won’t have picked up what makes the Sony Smartwatch 3 different.
Accessories: Well the 3 comes in an assortment of coloured strap options. It also can come in metal and personally I think the metal one one looks freekin’ awesome. Sony did once say they were going to make the metal band available……… yeah they still haven’t and at this point I don’t see it coming. You can buy the rubber straps, they do black, white, luminous yellow or bright pink. Yet those straps seem to go for over £30. Errr no. Ebay also seems largely bereft of things, other than screen protectors. They also curiously do a universal holder thing. You put the watch facing into a rather unattractive black plastic holder and that then attaches to standard fitting watch straps. If it was metal and not black plastic I’d be all over that but as it stands, na, it’s pretty ugly.
Fit/Comfort: Excellent on both accounts. Now for charging the snap shut strap band thingy may be a pain in that it doesn’t separate but for use on the arm? Great stuff. Set to the size I wanted, hand goes in, snap the thing closed and voilà. I’m normally not wild about plastic/rubber straps as I find it traps sweat and you can get a bit of skin irritation. Though its easily cleaned and because the strap comes away from the electronic bit you can stick it under a running tap.
Screen: Some Android wear watches use AMOLED which only consumes power as it lights up individual pixels. So a mostly black screen will use relatively little power, a mostly white and it’ll eat much more. Then there is a normal LCD display. They work by shining a light behind the screen then the screen blocks out colours to make a picture. The whole screen is powered up no matter if you show a mostly black face or mostly white. The key similarity with both technologies is that they need to consume power to light up in order to be visible.
The Sony watch uses a transflective screen. If you don’t know what that means I’ll explain. An AMOLED screen is emissive, each pixel emits its own light. A normal LCD is a transmisive screen, allowing light to pass through the screen and it has to be bright enough to be visible, which is why LCD screens are pretty rubbish in the sunshine. A transflective is different. Transflective screens have a backlight just like a normal LCD but it also is reflective. That means with the back light (the power hungry backlight) is off you can still see what’s on the screen by utilising the ambient light of where you are. This makes is possible to permanently have the time showing on the display! Something that is kinda handy for a watch. It also means that in the brightest sunshine you can still read the screen too, in fact the brighter the environment the more light there is for it to reflect, just like an e-ink screen would. A feature I for one think rather useful in a watch.
Simply put this screen is what makes it a viable device to use in real, normal life.
UI: The user interface is the standard Android Wear one. Everything is a sequence of up/down to get to new cards. Then scrolling left to progressively go into that cards details. So the weather one, first card tells you the weather right now. The next card to the right tells the weather for the next series of hours then the next one gives you the option to open the app on your phone. The cards you have available changes based on what Google Now cards Google thinks are appropriate. Oh and of course any notifications you have outstanding. Personally I’d like the weather card to be always available. So I have to not sweep it away and sometimes you just do it without thinking.
It is actually a bit complex when you start adding in all the different notifications and different apps that add cards, you can over load yourself. You can fill it up and make it practically as complex to use as your phone is. Add in your own app drawer and everything, Wear Mini Launcher is so freekin’ awesome!!! Sure it’s not for everyone but if you want complexity and having every imaginable option in the world available to you then it’s just fantastic. I personally love it and the interface to all my apps it provides. However in many ways it’s not what you want for a watch and I understand that. It’s not for everyone and as is shown by the Iphone popularity, mind numbingly locked down and limited is a boon to many.
In short the UI can be as complicated as you like, though it can still be fairly simple if you want it that way but it require you to remember what commands you have available to you so it may not be for everyone.
Features: Erm anything and everything just about. In terms of what’s common in a smart watch the things it doesn’t have is Qi charging and more oddly, no heart Rate monitor function. Now given I have things that can do that, I’m aware just how not super useful that functionality is, they don’t monitor you continuously because it would destroy the battery so it’s only read when you tell it to. Sony for some reason, in might I add its very sporty looking watch, did not include it. The trade-off it seems is that it has built in GPS rather than simply relying on the phone (which may be in a pocket or at home) so the watch can chart your outdoors run itself. Yeah I live in Edinburgh and don’t run so it’s not such a boon to me.
The other lacking item, no Qi means that you have an awkwardly placed micro USB slot to charge it underneath a rubber flap. This is so awkward to use, I immediately hit up old ebay and got a right angle adapter for the damn thing. Seriously Sony what the F were you thinking? I know it does have a better water proof rating, IP68, which has been said is thanks to the rubber flap but I don’t see how Qi would have made that worse?
The thing also has not just Bluetooth but Wi-Fi too so….. what that means is you can use the watch without a phone. Stream Google Music directly to your Bluetooth headphones while on your run outside that the built in GPS can track for you. You can leave your gigantic phone at home. Though where you’re getting Wi-fi that you wouldn’t be wanting your phone with you anyway, yeah I don’t know. A gym that bans phones maybe?
Frankly, far and away the best “feature” on the 3 is that transflective screen. Words can’t express how useful it is over the highly pretty but battery destroying AMOLED on the 360. Personally having used both, I don’t think I’d buy a non transflective screened watch. Well e-ink maybe.
Build Quality: Very good. I have mixed thoughts on the rubbery strap, that may be because Sony swore the Silvery metal one would be coming separately and it yet has to. Still it’s nice so ignore my bitter grumble. Its everything you would just expect from something Sony stamped on it.
Usability: Well its really up to you. If you want it nice and simple you can keep it pretty simple. If you don’t then you can add it full of everything and have it tell you whatever you like. It really was a joy to use, I vastly preferred it over my Moto 360 and its retarded circularish screen. While the almost round screen looks great and watch like but the fact is square is more functionally useful. It just is better to use. Seriously, everything is made squareish, try imaging what a round monitor, round TV or round book would be to use. Square make it so easy to just swipe in or out across the screen. Round is awkward and frustrating. I really cannot emphasis enough how nice to use the Smart Watch 3 is. It’s so pleasant and easy, straight forward and really what I would hope all Android Wear things to be.
Battery: When it’s behaving, 2 days and maybe into a third depending on how much you use the thing. That’s what it’s like on a good days however, since the last update it got, I think that turned on the Wi-Fi direct thing the battery sometimes seem to just tear through the battery. I mean in half a day its gone. I don’t know what causes this battery abuse and thus I don’t have any way to avoid the circumstances that cause the battery destruction. Its entirely unpredictable and thus when it happens the first you may know of it is when you go to use the thing and it’s just dead. Very frustrating, VERY VERY VERY, get it fixed Sony, Google whoever is to blame.
N.B. So of course just after writing there was an update, seemingly it has cured the random battery drain issue so it’s back to being great. Still I’m not giving it weeks to time to test and confirm it’s cured so that’s why I’m leaving this as is.
Connectivity: It has Bluetooth® 4.0, NFC, Micro USB and Wi-Fi. It doesn’t specify the WiFi so I have taken it to be 802.11G. NFC doesn’t seem to do much but assist in pairing super easily. Though I suppose that if Google Pay is less utterly useless than Google Wallet was then maybe one day you might be able to pay for things with it. I however, would certainly not hold my breath on that one. (Frowny face at Google.) Otherwise Bluetooth worked just perfectly and without the faintest whiff of an issue. Paired easy, stayed connected, always reconnected easily and range was great.
Value: The metal one is currently going for about £185ish which is roughly what the Rubberbanded ones started at. They however have since plummeted to about £110. I look at the Smart Watch 3, at the £60 odd fit bit and my god, the 3 is vastly, vastly, vastly better and more feature filled. If you want it to be just a pedometer it’ll do that and act as a watch should and tell you the time. That’s already double what the Flex can. The other reason why this is super good value is that transflective screen. There is no way you can quite grasp how important that screen is. It stays visible not just in the blazing sunshine but it can be always on with negligible power consumption. You can glance at your arm and see the time!!!! Trust me these sound so stupid and trivial and they are too. They are right up until you use an Android Wear watch that has a normal type of emissive display. Just trust me on this.
Conclusion: The Smart Watch 3 isn’t a faultless device. That wonky battery issue is the most glaring thing but it’s only a software issue as it didn’t do it before. At present it seems cured however. The lack of Qi, well with the right angled adapter I bought it’s not so bad anymore and the rubber cover flap thing, well I’ve just gotten used to it. The positives waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than make up for it. That screen. That tranflective screen is the star feature of the 3. Sure when you first see it, it won’t wow you. It does look a little washed out in comparison to the stunning OLED one of the 360. It looks so lacking in colour and mildly greyed out. Ahhh but then you walk outside. You can see the 3 perfectly, it is perfectly clear somewhat like those of e-ink screens. The 360 in comparison may as well be a mirror attached to your arm.
So what about indoors then? It not like Edinburgh is blessed with endless days of brilliant sunshine. So the watch, on your arm, you flick it ever so slightly and glance down. With the 3 you can read the display and see the time, all the time. In theory the 360 can light up with a wrist flick but it’s not a subtle wrist flick or you can have it always, dimly lit. That destroys the battery like you would not believe. The transflective one on the 3 is the screen type that ALL Android Wear watched ought to use. Google needs to mandate its use. Yes it really is that good over normal display types.
The rest, well that’s really a question of if you want an Android Wear watch. I’d say you do if you have bothered to read this. It’s not something you will ever need but it’s so convenient glancing at your wrist rather than pulling out your ginganto phone just to see the time or to see who it was that just texted you. The little vibration on the wrist I found super helpful in actually noticing notifications too. That and telling the time was worth it for me. You? Well only you can answer that but if you have read this far, you clearly want one and the Smart Watch 3 is no question, THE Android Wear watch to get.
N.B. i did have photos but it seems to be a total arse to add them to XDA, that is why there is none showing.
Nice review. I believe that the usb charge option is great as i can charge it in most places. Nowadays microusb is everywhere. QI charging cannot even use the phone equivalent version so I need to carry the mobile one which is kind of irritating.
Nice review. I am new to the SW3 and currently have an iphone 5s so I'm using with the new iOS Android Wear (I'm hoping to change my phone to a OP2 soon) The functionality on iOS is currently very limited so I'm definitely not getting the most out the device but that aside I'm enjoying the experience.
Do you really thing NFC will not be able to be use for Android pay? I really hope it will.
Motorola Moto 360 (2014) Smart Watch Review
First off, yes you read the title correctly. This is a review of the original 360 and not the brand new one. Why you may ask, well in part because I’ve been meaning to write this for ages and partly because there are simply somethings that you do not pick up on if you have used a device for 2 weeks. Something’s you discover only when you have lived with something for a long time and its only then you discover that there are things, had you been aware of, you may not have bothered getting one. Think of it like a marriage. The first while is all fun and laughter but time can breed contempt. So how well has the 360 held up? Should you snap one up cheap and what lessons have we learnt going forward? Let’s see shall we.
First Impressions: Ahhh casting the mind far back into the depths and it arriving in its round box. Ooh so pretty. Inside the watch itself, round too sitting there, it looks bloody good. They have gone out of their way to make you think that the 360 is a watch, not a smart phone or tiny computer, it’s a watch, round and above all a joy for the eyes to behold and well…………… they pretty much nailed it. The 360 was pretty much the unquestioned pretty one among the first wave of Android Wear devices. It is deserved.
Picking it up and it feels so plush and quality. The strap is real dead cow and feels nice to the touch, the facia with its bare metal glass. So much pretty and quality to the touch. I’m not wild about leather straps, I’d rather metal but it seems that Motorola decided that they couldn’t use standard watch strap fittings. I don’t know if it’s just to be awkward but it’s a bloody annoyance. Something that the new one has corrected so clearly Moto picked up on the feedback. Additionally while the leather strap looks nice it has a traditional buckle mechanism, which is not the most straightforward for taking on and off with regularity. This is going to be an issue going forward.
Specifications: Display 1.56” 320 x 290, 205 ppi, Backlit LCD IPS, Corning® Gorilla® Glass 3, Watch Case Dimensions, 46 mm diameter x 11.5 mm high, Weight 60 g (without strap), Battery 320 mAh Wireless charging with charging dock included, Processor TI OMAP™ 3, Memory 4 GB internal storage with 512 MB RAM, Connectivity Bluetooth 4.0 Low Energy, Wi-Fi, Sensors Pedometer (9-axis sensor), Ambient light sensor, Optical heart rate monitor (PPG), Water Resistance IP67
It also comes in 2 colours, black or silver and a few strap combos too. Though they are proprietary watch straps which is just odd. I mean why do it, urgh.
Accessories: It came with a charger with a built in USB cable, grr. It also came with its little charging dock and a normal micro USB cable for it. If you want more things, like more straps or screen covers, as ever hit up eBay. Sad that they didn’t use normal watch strap attachments but for a bit more money you can still get a fair assortment of straps.
Fit/Comfort: Perfectly fine. It’s a watch, granted it’s a little big for a watch but not wildly so. On it went, and that was basically it. I’d have preferred a metal strap but not enough to go to the bother of actually changing the strap myself.
Screen: AMOLED lovely gorgeous prettiness. The screen is also mostly round, with what’s been dubbed the “flat tire” at the bottom. When the 360 first came out feelings were mixed, some didn’t mind and that thought that it was a good trade-off for having super thin bezels. It’s a shame both perfectly round and thin bezels can’t be had but……. in use you just pick a facia that doesn’t light up the whole screen. Something that isn’t noticeably missing the bottom and then honestly, I didn’t really miss it. Sure when playing with watch faces, perfectly round ones with something obviously missing was the only time it bothered me. Most of the time in use, I didn’t only not mind but I never really even noticed it was there. You just forget that there is anything missing.
However……………… while the “flat tire” thing didn’t bother me what did was the round screen. Does a round screen look pretty, oh god yes it does. Then it’s an AMOLED which just looks sooooooooooooooo pretty it’s just gorgeous, there is just no way around the fact that the 360 is a lovely, super pretty thing. Thing is, there is a reason why we use rectangular monitors and TV’s. A round screen is just stupid. The UI clearly wants things to be square and text especially gets partially cut off at the top and bottom of the screen where it rounds off. It just hammers the functionality and having a Moto 360 and a Sony Smart Watch 3, the Sony is the one I pick up and want to use every day.
UI: Android Wear is Android Wear. It’s in a reasonably rapid state of development still being only a year old. On the whole it’s good, however there is still the screen, rounded and thus missing bits from the top and bottom, issue. The UI is just simply not made with round screens in mind and thus it’s a pain. However the problem is the round face and not the UI in my opinion. Trying not to turn this into an Android Wear review which is a different article entirely. However expect things like swiping in from the upper left to be regularly, mildly frustrating. It’s not terrible but I did get on my nerves.
Features: So the stand out things on the 360, for me, are the round screen, its stunningly good looks, its heart rate sensor and lastly its Qi charging. Now if you are in the know you’ll notice that those are basically the differentiation points between the 360 and the Sony 3.
So that round screen. See above frankly. Pretty but at the price of usability. It really is very pretty but the cost for me is just too high. However if you kept this maybe just for going out of an evening, when pretty really matters then great. It is such a pretty thing.
Heart rate, well it kinda works but it doesn’t seem to continuously monitor so while it is interesting, if you’re a fitness freak why would you be using this device? It would be like wearing dress evening shoes for running. It’ll do the job but it’s clearly the wrong tool for activity.
Qi. Ahhh you know I love Qi charging and I can tell you that every watch should have it. That you slap it down in its little dock, you can instantly see that it’s charging, that any Qi charger works are all boons. It makes charging the thing every night (and you will be charging it every night) not just into a requirement but it turns into a little clock. It lights up with a clock face in the right orientation. Just perfect for living on a bedside table. All Wear watches should have Qi charging.
Build Quality: On the surface, its perfect. The construction quality is exemplary and it’s simply beauteous to behold to both the eye and the fingers. Note that while perfectly built it doesn’t mean you can’t break it. The watch straps and put under pressure can shatter the back screen. While that’s fairly rare it’s a stupid design flaw not a manufacturing issue.
Usability: Take a wild guess what causes a usability issue? Yep that round screen. While it wasn’t as awkward as the Sun S2 with its bevelled edge making it hard to touch things near the edges. The 360 is clean glass right to the edge so you can access it all perfectly. The issue is that the UI is clearly intended for a rectangular screen. So that isn’t really the 360’s fault per say but you get the idea. It doesn’t make anything impossible to do or really much different but a square screen would just be better.
Battery: Well it has a 360mAh battery. The battery is not the issue though, the issue is the screen. That super pretty AMOLED screen you see, needs to be actively transmitting light to be seen. It is an emissive screen and its battery hungry. Then you have the option to have it auto light up with a flick of the wrist or you can have it run in a dim passive mode most of the time so it’s something you can glance at and see. This however is battery destroying. Leaving the screen on and the battery life just plummets like a lead weight. If you make use of the thing or have the dim always lit up feature in use then expect to start charging the thing halfway through your day. I get that the battery itself isn’t the problem, nor can it really grew much physically but that’s not my problem, it’s for Moto engineers to solve. Even if you use it without passively being on still expect the thing to want charged every single night.
Connectivity: So its main method of world communication is via Bluetooth 4.0 Low Energy. That’s great, it pairs to your phone, the phone does the thinking and data transmission all over that power sipping Bluetooth connection. You also have the option to use Wi-Fi. You can use it to keep your phone and watch in communication, via Wi-Fi and the internet. You know, for when your phone is out of Bluetooth range yet you still need to be connected to it, if not physically near it. Why you may wonder, I certainly did. The only scenario I can see it popping up is if at work you go to the bathroom, leaving your phone behind but are waiting for some urgent email. You need that notification that it’s come in. It’s a stretch I know, mostly it’s a stupid feature that just further hammers the battery. Of course you can just leave Wi-Fi off which is what I do.
Value: When it launched it was what, £200. So pretty but yeah that battery life. Now with its successor just announced, this will have practically identical functionality and features. Seriously they changed almost nothing, as I see it they have added a smaller one for girls, moved the button up a bit and altered the strap attachment to that of a normal standard watch. Like every other watch on earth. Price though, well this one’s fallen so I saw somewhere selling it for £113. The New one is retailing for US$300, that’s £200 and that’s before VAT and the obligatory you’re not an American price hike. So that makes the old one probably less than half the price of the new one. To me that seems like pretty reasonable value in comparison to the new one.
Conclusion: So what have I learned from the Moto 360 (2014.) I’ve learned that pretty only gets you so far. The 360 is pretty, it’s the prettiest Android Wear device I have seen and the old one, to me is still better looking than the new one. I get that while I *****ed about the straps being some weird proprietary thing and that it can break the glass back of you put them under pressure but…… damn it’s a good looking device. If you want a Wear watch for going out, to look great in a business meeting to impress someone for whatever reason or situation the old 360 is a damn fine looking machine. Oh and that AMOLED, ooooooh just soooooooooooooooooo much pretty.
However, those good looks have left it compromised. Round screen, they are just awkward and there is a reason we don’t use round screens or round sheets of paper, it’s a pain. That strap, the weird fit attachment. Yeah, so for me that means I’m pretty much not changing the strap. I’d really like one with a clasp rather than a buckle because the battery life is such that you need to take the damn thing off every 20 min to charge it. Granted its little dock is cool but you really need one for the office and one for your bedside. Though in fairness any old Qi charger will do fine. AMOLED, it’s just the wrong tech for a watch. I need always on to glance ta the thing and that while better than lighting up a whole LCD screen it is still too battery heavy.
So should you buy one? Well I’d easily buy this over its successor, its price slash makes it waaaaaaaaay better value and offers practically identical functionality and features. Still you have to want to sacrifice usability to get that super pretty round screen. for me, na I’ll take the Sony but if you want something to visually impress on a budget, the old Moto 360 is pretty (oh so pretty) option that won’t destroy your wallet.
The screen on Moto 360 is LCD and not AMOLED. AMOLED will be better for a watch because it consume less battery for always on screen with mainly dark background.
Moto 360 1nd and 2nd are LCD IPS
LG Watch R / Urbane are P-OLED
Huawei Watch are OMOLED
Hello,
I'm trying to decide between which v2 to get between the 42mm and the 46mm men's versions. I've printed the cutouts and the 46mm does appear quite large, particularly when I try and imagine adding thickness on top of that. That has me leaning towards the 42mm. I've got a 7" flat-top wrist.
I have not been able to gauge the 46mm size in person as none of the Bestbuy's in my area ever have the v1 on display.
For those who have v1, I'm wondering what the consensus is with respect to the size, especially over time. Did people find the v1 too big relative to their wrist size? If you could do it again, would you get the 42mm instead? Curious to know your opinion, relative to your wrist size also.
Thanks.
I have the large one now and I don't find it to large however I did order the smaller one, for what I use it for I don't need the larger size so I went smaller.
In the world of mechanical watches, this is the kind of size associated with actual diving watches (not just mere swimming). And there's a reason for that: 42mm already is big (ie too big for a dress watch: it's already in the sports watch domain).
It's not a matter of whether your wrist is big or not. It's a matter of bling (that bling may be fashionable is another matter). Or for watches this big, traditionally a matter of being designed to be worn over a thick diving suit, and still be readable with a diving mask and poor lighting.
Cst79 said:
remember that the 46mm has a 400mAh battery while the 42mm has ony a 300mAh one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Battery is 33% bigger, but screen is 32% bigger as well (assumed pixels are squares, and took account of the flat tyre)... There's also the SOC power usage (don't see why it would differ on both models), so the 46mm will surely get a bit better mileage, but far from one third, I guess.
For what those are worth, ambient mode battery lives for both models are quoted as being the same. Useless as sheer numbers, but I guess they're at least comparable to one another.
The interesting point would be the battery life gained with the much better (though still not particularly fit for the job) SOC, compared to previous generation.
noraef said:
In the world of mechanical watches, this is the kind of size associated with actual diving watches (not just mere swimming). And there's a reason for that: 42mm already is big (ie too big for a dress watch: it's already in the sports watch domain). It's not a matter of whether your wrist is big or not. It's a matter of bling (that bling may be fashionable is another matter). Or for watches this big, traditionally a matter of being designed to be worn over a thick diving suit, and still be readable with a diving mask and poor lighting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about ?? Moto 360 V1 has a diameter of 46mm and looks perfect at my wrist, and looks perfectly fine even at my GF's wrist, and also at every reviewer's wrist...didn't read about size complaints.
I'm telling about the sentiment among people having been interested in watches long, long before smartwatches:
- dress watches : <=39mm
- sports watches: <=42mm
- big ass watches (divers, jet pilots, clowns, 80's rappers, former hollywood star and bodybuilder governors): anything bigger
People may wear what they want for all I care. But 42mm is not a small watch. And 46mm is a huge watch (and that's going to be amplified by lugs, granted).
Don't mean to intercept,
But the 360 version 1 is already 46 mm yes?
I have big wrists so the 46 is fine for me. I don't like the thought of going to a smaller screen. The only thing I don't like about the v1 is the lack of lugs and overall bland bezel and case which are fixed on v2. The better SoC and battery are a huge perk. I need a nice looking watch due to being a tech business owner and this was the first step. It's still one of the best lookers out there till gen 2 hits. The options on moto maker for v2 are great. Just to compare, here is a side by side with my v1 and my fossil watch. It's an average sized fossil. Bezel and case are about the same size.
marctronixx said:
Don't mean to intercept,
But the 360 version 1 is already 46 mm yes?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.
FusionTechFTS said:
I have big wrists so the 46 is fine for me. I don't like the thought of going to a smaller screen. The only thing I don't like about the v1 is the lack of lugs and overall bland bezel and case which are fixed on v2. The better SoC and battery are a huge perk. I need a nice looking watch due to being a tech business owner and this was the first step. It's still one of the best lookers out there till gen 2 hits. The options on moto maker for v2 are great. Just to compare, here is a side by side with my v1 and my fossil watch. It's an average sized fossil. Bezel and case are about the same size.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you mind telling us how big your wrist measurement is?
Moved to Q&A and one post deleted.
Racial stereotypes have no place on XDA.
Thanks,
Darth
Forum Moderator
Two sizes on my small wrist
SergioA said:
Two sizes on my small wrist
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the black one looks sick
I'm getting my very first smartwatch and it would be the Galaxy Watch 5. However, I'm confused as to which one to get between the 40mm vs 44mm. My wrist circumference is around 6in./15cm and its width is around 48mm. It feels like the 40mm is the perfect fit for me but I would want the bigger screen real estate of the 44mm. The price difference is negligible between the two.
Thoughts?
have you bought the watch? Im in same exact situationwith 16cm wrist and 50mm width. been researching and the lug to lug (distance including the arm that holds the strap) is 51mm for the 44mm version. and I've tried the watch itself in store. the stock strap ti comes with doesnt bend right away too after connecting to the watch. thus making the lug and strap hangs wider than my wrist by alot.
I did wanted the 44mm too and been trying to find reason to get the bigger one. but still I do think the bigger one looks too big on my small wrist. its so weird that this generation they made it so much wider. I had watch active 2 44mm and that one fits me well.
and I read the fashion police will judge you if your watch + lug hangs wider than your wrist. but in the end its what makes you comfortable.
ps: the lug to lug for 40mm version is 47mm. so at least that one still managable.
I did, yes. I received the watch just two days ago. I went with the 40mm.
When I went to the store to try both out, here's the 40mm on my wrist:
https://imgur.com/QNezn1p
And here's the 44mm:
https://imgur.com/gAvZeqx
I'm pretty sure that the 44mm is too big for my wrist too so I had no choice. I would've gotten the 44mm because of the better battery alone. The screen estate was just a secondary reason for me wanting it.