8 ms·

I'm big into mechanical watches and I find it surprising that more software developer types are not into watches. They're the mechanical parallel that completes

• runeks 9y ago
  > I'm big into mechanical watches and I find it surprising that more software developer types are not into watches. They're the mechanical parallel that completes my otherwise purely digital world. The lack of interest from my side is due to the inferiority of mechanical watches in accomplishing their main purpose: keeping time. I know my smartphone always has the right time, because it's internet-connected and uses NTP. For a mechanical watch, that trust just isn't there: either it has the right time, or it's run out of power. Surely, I can appreciate the craftsmanship, but when it comes to knowing what time it is, this is not relevant for me at all. When I look at a clock, I really appreciate knowing that if it has run out of power it doesn't display the wrong time, as opposed to a mechanical watch.
  • richardw 9y ago
    Same. I seem to consider them a Rube Goldberg machine that people use to indicate status. I was partly reading the comments here to see what I'm missing. I'm sure there's a lot. My wife loves watches (for the design). I'd rather have a nice bike.
    • eo3x0 9y ago
      Anyone who buys a watch for the status is going to be disappointed. A $200,000 car will get you laid quick. A $200,000 watch wouldn't get noticed except by geeks you wouldn't want to bed down anyway. Fortunately, in 10 years, at least the latter will still be worth roughly just as much if not more while the former would be depreciated to less than half the value if that.
    • craigsmansion 9y ago
      By the same rationale, bikes could be considered a Rube Goldberg machine that people use to indicate status. Maybe not extreme wealth, but signalling physical fitness, plenty of leisure time, disposable income, etc. Of course that's probably not the case with you. It's likely you personally have deeper motivations than simply indicating status. That's why it's called actor-observer bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80%93observer_asymmetry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80%93observer_asymmet... I'm not trying to corner you here, and I hope you see how these explanations of the situations are the same except in one case you're the actor, in the other you're the observer.
  • kweinber 9y ago
    Perhaps you should be interested in the mechanism ntp is syncing you to then.... atomic clocks are fascinating too.
  • kweinber 9y ago
    Perhaps you should be interested in the mechanism ntp is syncing you to then.... atomic clocks are fascinating too.
  • craigsmansion 9y ago
    > I know my smartphone always has the right time Unless it's dropped in the toilet, or runs out of battery, or the software gets compromised, or you simply lose it. Reliability is it's own feature, a thing that often gets overlooked in software development. Software is that which is disposable enough not to bother building hardware for.
  • 8note 9y ago
    my mechanical watch keeps telling good time for days when I go out camping, whereas my phone will be dead or out of service. Otherwise, generally when I need to know the time, it's at the end of a night out and I'd like to catch the bus, or at least know if theres still another bus coming. My phone tends to be on its last legs by that point, and frequently is dead another benefit is charging -- when I'm wearing a watch, I wind it instead of fidgeting, and I'm not stuck waiting at an outlet for my phone to charge.
• qarioz 9y ago
  Because it's inaccurate. After a while it's going to gain or loose a couple of seconds. I have a couple of G Shock, some with solar rechargeable and atomic radio sync. Even when in countries with no atomic radio signal I can sync my laptop using ntp and use a Java program + headset / speaker to mimic atomic radio signal to sync my clock automatically.
• microcolonel 9y ago
  As an computing professional, I find mechanical watches to be inelegant and ugly. I mean, they're basically designed to be inelegant, the word "complication" is used as a positive description. I just can't get into it. I think an impressive electronic watch is more interesting to me; though there doesn't seem to be much interest in these being made, so the most fun I can have is with Timex. I think smartwatches are the electronic equivalent of mechanical watches: inelegant, gaudy, and utterly pointless.
  • Cookingboy 9y ago
    No, they are not designed to be inelegant and "ugly", they are designed to function without the need for electricity. A digital watch like Casio or Timex are designed to be practical, but your taste is pretty....unorthodox if you think a Timex or Casio looks better than a beautifully crafted mechanical piece. Your statement about smartwatche is also...bizarre, especially since you just praised Timex. But again, I think you have a very different definition for words such as "elegant" and "gaudy" than most people out there.
    • microcolonel 9y ago
      > No, they are not designed to be inelegant and "ugly", they are designed to function without the need for electricity. Yeah, and electronic watches are designed to function without mechanical intervention. You say this like electrical systems are somehow less reliable than mechanical systems; and it couldn't be further from the truth. Complication is inelegant. Adding jewels to hidden parts of your mechanism is bound to make it more prone to failure, considerably harder to build, and with no tangible benefit. It's a status thing, like pouring champagne on the floor or having a seven-car garage full of vintages and imports. In my opinion, all this flaunting shows a lack of class. It becomes about how much of your income you put toward useless nonsense. I put complicated mechanical watches right up there with oxygen-free all-silver HDMI cables, pretending that vinyl sounds better than CD, and using "organic" household cleaners.
      • Cookingboy 9y ago
• Cookingboy 9y ago
  >I find it surprising that more software developer types are not into watches Hopefully I don't offend anyone, but I have noticed that many software devs these says are just that, software devs, instead of being engineers with a passion for designing and building amazingly complex machines/systems. If you call yourself an engineer and can't bring yourself to appreciate the beauty of a jet engine or the construction of a F1 race car or the craftsmanship of a Patek Philippe watch, then I actually lose a bit of respect for you.
  • _nedR 9y ago
    If a Chinese sweatshop in Hangzhou, was able to make a perfect replica of a F1 race car or a jet engine (that performed to the same standards as their contemporaries) i would be in complete awe and give total respect. If a similar Chinese sweatshop were to make a perfect functional replica of this Patek Philippe watch (without having had physical access to it) at 1/100th the cost would you express similar appreciation? Would you wear it with the same level of pride as you would a Patek Philippe watch?
    • eo3x0 9y ago
      I know you're asking this question as a rhetorical but the answer is not what you think it is. The answer is "yes" of course a Chinese made Patek Philippe would be an object of appreciation. But there isn't one. There's actually a rich history of Chinese watch making and it's worth reading up on if you're into mechanical watches at all: http://chinesewatchwiki.net/History_of_Chinese_watchmaking http://chinesewatchwiki.net/History_of_Chinese_watchmaking In fact the project 304 chronograph is still considered collectible, even the reissues: http://forums.watchuseek.com/f71/review-ed1963-chinese-military-chronograph-reissue-3361546.html http://forums.watchuseek.com/f71/review-ed1963-chinese-milit... However, back to answer your question precisely, China simply doesn't have an industry or heritage or history that can support a Patek, which is why it doesn't exist. Even with the history I've linked to above, the Swiss industry is light years ahead and it's not even close. I don't think you should let your bias, if any, of the very inferior counterfeit movements and counterfeit casing industry color your opinion of watches. Anyone in the know would trivially identify the differences. To your analogy it would be like producing a cheap engine and simply calling it an F1 engine. That's not how it works. Furthermore, if you asked this theoretical Chinese sweatshop to build a modern highly complicated Patek Philippe, it wouldn't cost 1/100 the price, it would cost 100x the price if not more. They'd have to start by sourcing synthetic materials, reinventing tools, or recreating components that a theoretical sweatshop wouldn't even have access to. Part of why counterfeits are so cheap is because they source really cheap Japanese or local Chinese movements that have had decades of build up to scale to the current counterfeit prices. Meanwhile, the real deal modern watch movements are decades more advanced.
• dsacco 9y ago
  It's a shame Rolex has such a reputation for being showy jewelry. Their manufacturing rigor is one of the best in the mechanical watch industry. But good luck convincing someone of that when the first thing you see on the dial is "Rolex." It's often said among watch collectors that you start out wanting a Rolex because it's all you know of in haute horlogerie. Then you learn more and want nothing to do with the brand, and finally you settle in and appreciate it for the legitimate workmanship.
  • lunaru 9y ago
    Rolex has it figured it out by segmenting their products with their marketing. You have the SKUs that are 18k solid gold fitted with precious stones and on the other extreme you have the stainless steel professional line. In many ways, the volume of sales in the former helps fund the research and manufacturing prowess in the latter, and overall it's a win-win for everyone. Kind of like how iPhone and blingy Apple Watch sales used to fund great work in Apple's professional line of laptops. (Low blow, I know, but I couldn't help it)
    • LeoPanthera 9y ago
      What is the point of a "professional" mechanical watch? What can it do that quartz can't?
      • Cookingboy 9y ago
        They never need battery, for example. And due to the high beat movement, the second hand moves in a much smoother way than the jump seconds on quartz movements, which a lot of people prefers.
      • eo3x0 9y ago
        Nowadays, there is very little functional purpose. But historically, they were used widely and the robustness of the watch mattered a lot. There's a very good reason the Omega Speedmaster was sent to space. Today's mechanical watches are a celebration of that tradition. You have to have an appreciation for that as well as the historical significance in timekeeping as part of civilization's endeavors into transoceanic navigation, extreme mountaineering and ultimately into space as a prerequisite for truly appreciating mechanical watches. The best manufactures today, like Rolex, uphold that tradition in their professional line. You can read about the history of the GMT, the Explorer and the Subminariner (in particular the Milsub) to get a glimpse of the historical significance. In some way, a mechanical watch is a miniature museum and houses some very significant advancements. Modern watchmakers continue to push mechanical and material boundaries. This is to be appreciated if only as an art, even if outdated.
• icantdrive55 9y ago
  I repair watches. I started out just loving Rolex Bubblebacks--years ago. I loved all watches. I started learning about the repair of watches. It took me a awhile to accumulate the right tools, at the right price. In order to be be efficent, it did take me a few years, but it was a hobby for myself. The love of mechanical watches will just come around for a lot of people. I haven't figured if it's because certain people like precisely engineered items, like Apple products, or it's kinda the only acceptable form of adornment for men in all cultures, or men are subconsciously aware they die earlier than females.(Yes--some women just love all aspects of horology, but in my experience, it a different passion than men. Plus--I can't sell women's high end watches. It's so difficult, I don't even buy them for resale anymore. It's changing a bit though, especially with the Fitbit, and even female Rolexes are not sitting on a website for years anymore. That said, once you imerce yourself in watch repair, there's a moment where you look at an older Rolex movement, and a say a modified(usually just engine work on the movement) on a better ETA movement, and don't see why a Rolex costs so much more. Yes, their are differences quality differences, but not to the tune of thousand of dollars more. Basically, a Rolex, Patek, IWC, etc., were machined to be easily taken apart. A lot of thought was put into ease of repair. It's ironic you can't buy parts for said watches from the factory? And here I go, that Rolex some of you are wearing on your wrist, when it goes out of warranty, you won't be able to have just anyone repair it. Rolex, the Swatch Group, along with most of the other watch brands will have you send your timepiece back to the factory when it needs a service, or repair. At factory prices. I refuse to spend $800 on a clean, and lube. See, when you buy that $10,000 watch, even if you spent years learning how to repair, they won't sell you parts, or even offer service diagrams. It's like buying a car, and having to take it to the dealership fir repairs forever, and not being able to buy parts for it. Seiko is one watch company that still sells parts to consumers. O.k.--what's my point? Certain high end watch companies, appear to be guilty of The Sherman Anti-trust Act. Yes--the federal government looked into it, but figured it wasen't a top priority, and called it a rich man's problem. To those interested, a grey market watch, like those at Costco, were bought overseas at overseas prices. Rolex warranty will not honor those watches if they stop, even if under warranty.). I just read the post about GI's not being able to code. If you happen to like watches, there's a few watch repair schools left on the world. Rolex is sponsoring many of them. They need technicians at their factories. Many schools offer free tuition, but not boarding. It's not a bad deal. And again--if you're about to spend thousands on a fine watch, call the watch company and ask about parts, and "just what will happen when it goes out of warranty, and needs a service?".
• seanp2k2 9y ago
  I like watches but if you consider silicon as a tiny electromechanical movement, stuff like the Garmin Fenix 5 totally blows away even the most complex movements which are purely physical. It might be neat to combine old+new and make something like a watch with a physical step-counter mechanism but also Bluetooth (which would somehow read the mechanical step counter and sync with your phone).