Smart watches - pointless?

rodgers73

What niche are these things serving? They seem quite pointless yet they're getting a lot of money and hype thrown at them.

Ride hard

Yep

viewtopic.php?f=40012&t=12940049

Giraffoto

Two words - Dick Tracey

paul_mck

Id have thought as cyclists the benefits would be obvious.

Pituophis

I would have thought that keeping the correct time would be the smartest thing a watch would need to do! :roll:
But I'm sure 1000's of blokes will buy one (Just like 3D Tv's :shock: )

VTech

Almost everything in the tech world is pointless but these companies survive on the layman who strives to have the latest tech. The regurgitation of cash keeps the world spinning.

ballysmate

I seem to recall someone saying on here that a person's watch says a lot about them :roll:

paul_mck

better topic here: viewtopic.php?f=40012&t=12940049

Giraffoto

Ballysmate wrote:

I seem to recall someone saying on here that a person's watch says a lot about them :roll:

People who think that there possessions say a lot about them generally find it's the same sort of thing that disgruntled former partners say about them

arran77

Giraffoto wrote:

Two words - Dick Tracey

Why, is she fit?

:P

arran77

VTech wrote:

Almost everything in the tech world is pointless but these companies survive on the layman who strives to have the latest tech. The regurgitation of cash keeps the world spinning.

Got one yourself then VTech?

apreading

I have a MotoActv which is really useful for running when you dont want to lug a smartphone or garmin computer with you, which are bigger and bounce around in your pocket. So I can track my route on the GPS, could use it for planning a route but unlikely to, and listen to music. Also use it at the gym if I dont like the music they are playing. Can wear it as a watch or on an armband which is better if using headphones with it.

On the bike I have a garmin 800 and only consider the MotoActv as a backup in case my batteries run out or the garmin fails for some reason.

team47b

Are they self winding - based on wrist movements?

Otherwise they have missed an opportunity for their target audience

VTech

@ballysmate, I do think a nice watch says a lot about someone, just as a decent pair of shoes. If you cant look after yourself how could you look after someone else. If your not bothered by your own appearance would you be bothered about doing a good job for someone ?

You may not like or agree with the above but thats how a lot of people think, I wouldnt give a big contract to a guy in a dirty suit with dog hairs and scruffy dirty shoes.

@arran77, No, not my cup of tea. I prefer mechanical watches myself.

team47b

whoooooooosh.

ballysmate

VTech, on a recent thread, there was a debate about the validity if an Oxbridge degree. There then followed a discussion which listed universities and their standing in various spheres of academia.
Would you be kind enough to do all of us jobseekers a huge benefit, by listing by make, the watches that are of keenest interest to interviewers. I mean, I wouldn't like someone who managed to get a first from Cambridge, blow their interview for the sake of the wrong watch.
I agree to some extent regarding appearance. I would expect anyone going for an interview or to seal a contract to be smartly turned out.
But as far as I am concerned, someone who makes snap judgments on the character of a person by the watch they wear, is marked out as being a pretentious tw@t.

VTech

Ballysmate wrote:

VTech, on a recent thread, there was a debate about the validity if an Oxbridge degree. There then followed a discussion which listed universities and their standing in various spheres of academia.
Would you be kind enough to do all of us jobseekers a huge benefit, by listing by make, the watches that are of keenest interest to interviewers. I mean, I wouldn't like someone who managed to get a first from Cambridge, blow their interview for the sake of the wrong watch.
I agree to some extent regarding appearance. I would expect anyone going for an interview or to seal a contract to be smartly turned out.
But as far as I am concerned, someone who makes snap judgments on the character of a person by the watch they wear, is marked out as being a pretentious tw@t.

I didnt suggest nor imply that I would hire anyone due to the watch they wear. That was just another sample of how people act here, or maybe on forums ?
I said it says a lot about a person and I stick by that, I really do think having a nice watch (I have said several times that this doesnt mean valuable) is a decent thing, why do you think it was given as gifts of service and at weddings for so long ? Ill tell you, because its a possession that will often stick with someone.

I would suggest that your attitude may be the defining factor although I do think you leave that for the forum as I couldnt see anyone acting like that in real life ?
Your like a bipolar spouse, sometimes great pleasure in reading your posts and other times unable to understand.

chrisaonabike

VTech wrote:

...I do think a nice watch says a lot about someone, just as a decent pair of shoes. If you cant look after yourself how could you look after someone else. If your not bothered by your own appearance would you be bothered about doing a good job for someone ?

You may not like or agree with the above but thats how a lot of people think, I wouldnt give a big contract to a guy in a dirty suit with dog hairs and scruffy dirty shoes.

Not sure I'd jump at the chance of giving a big contract to someone with a flashy watch and shoes, but whose spelling and grammar were poor. It implies a preference for the superficial rather than substance.

As well as a lack of care for others - if you can't be bothered to write well, maybe it implies that you believe your writing time is more valuable than others' reading time.

Just as well we don't stereotype people here...

Pituophis

VTech wrote:

@ballysmate, I do think a nice watch says a lot about someone, just as a decent pair of shoes. If you cant look after yourself how could you look after someone else. If your not bothered by your own appearance would you be bothered about doing a good job for someone ?

Are you seriously saying that someone who doesn't have a decent watch or shoes can't be trusted to look after another person? Any other person in particular, children, dissabled, elderly?
I'm pretty sure there are people who don't even wear a watch who have done a pretty fine job of looking after other people!
I like a nice watch myself, but can't really justify one to be honest. This has absolutely no bearing on how I treat other people though. When I walk by old ladies, they don't look at my wrist an cower away!

You always complain that people missquote you. Well, there it is, just read it your self.

VTech

ChrisAOnABike wrote:

VTech wrote:

...I do think a nice watch says a lot about someone, just as a decent pair of shoes. If you cant look after yourself how could you look after someone else. If your not bothered by your own appearance would you be bothered about doing a good job for someone ?

You may not like or agree with the above but thats how a lot of people think, I wouldnt give a big contract to a guy in a dirty suit with dog hairs and scruffy dirty shoes.

Not sure I'd jump at the chance of giving a big contract to someone with a flashy watch and shoes, but whose spelling and grammar were poor. It implies a preference for the superficial rather than substance.

As well as a lack of care for others - if you can't be bothered to write well, maybe it implies that you believe your writing time is more valuable than others' reading time.

Just as well we don't stereotype people here...

Thats an excellent reply but arguing with me wont change the fact that im right.
Do you honestly believe the best person gets the job every time ?
If you do then fine, its a great place to be but id put a 50p piece on it that this isnt the case.

I love it when people argue with me here when they KNOW im right, just because I speak the truth doesnt mean I agree with it by the way, Im just keeping it real

rodgers73

I think your judgement is probably correct but only in certain circumstances and with a certain type of person. I'd guess that that sort of person is one that you deal with a lot. There will be arenas in which wearing the "right" kind of watch/shoes etc will put people off rather than draw them in.

VTech

rodgers73 wrote:

I think your judgement is probably correct but only in certain circumstances and with a certain type of person. I'd guess that that sort of person is one that you deal with a lot. There will be arenas in which wearing the "right" kind of watch/shoes etc will put people off rather than draw them in.

Yes I completely agree, my comment based on clothes/shoes etc was based initially from the graduate thread of which I would think most would be going for non-labour type work.
Personally I am a jeans a T-Shirt guy, I rarely attend meetings in a suit as I feel uncomfortable in them.

ballysmate

VTech wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

VTech, on a recent thread, there was a debate about the validity if an Oxbridge degree. There then followed a discussion which listed universities and their standing in various spheres of academia.
Would you be kind enough to do all of us jobseekers a huge benefit, by listing by make, the watches that are of keenest interest to interviewers. I mean, I wouldn't like someone who managed to get a first from Cambridge, blow their interview for the sake of the wrong watch.
I agree to some extent regarding appearance. I would expect anyone going for an interview or to seal a contract to be smartly turned out.
But as far as I am concerned, someone who makes snap judgments on the character of a person by the watch they wear, is marked out as being a pretentious tw@t.

I didnt suggest nor imply that I would hire anyone due to the watch they wear. That was just another sample of how people act here, or maybe on forums ?
I said it says a lot about a person and I stick by that, I really do think having a nice watch (I have said several times that this doesnt mean valuable) is a decent thing, why do you think it was given as gifts of service and at weddings for so long ? Ill tell you, because its a possession that will often stick with someone.

I would suggest that your attitude may be the defining factor although I do think you leave that for the forum as I couldnt see anyone acting like that in real life ?
Your like a bipolar spouse, sometimes great pleasure in reading your posts and other times unable to understand.

Bipolar? Me?
If David Beckham, whom you regard as being a very nice man, and John Terry, whom most people don't, turned up at a track day, sporting the same watch, the only thing that you could infer is that they are both wealthy. Their choice of timepiece would say nothing about them as individuals.

I am glad I am able to bring pleasure in some small manner.
I agree with your views when you post on such topics as taking personal responsibility for your life and admire your work ethic. But sometimes you submit posts that I find unfathomable.

VTech

I think when you k ow someone is rich you can't judge the same simply because on the whole maybe they could afford anything they want anyway. ?
The watch comment was only my opinion, I can't help thinking that someone wearing a nice watch thinks more of themself ? I seriously do not understand why someone in a suit would wear a cheap digital watch, they do nothing and although I agree that many people have different opinions on personal items I can only comment on mine.
Again, value isn't important. A nice watch can be cheap, just as an expensive watch can look nasty.

ballysmate

VTech wrote:

I think when you k ow someone is rich you can't judge the same simply because on the whole maybe they could afford anything they want anyway. ?
The watch comment was only my opinion, I can't help thinking that someone wearing a nice watch thinks more of themself ? I seriously do not understand why someone in a suit would wear a cheap digital watch, they do nothing and although I agree that many people have different opinions on personal items I can only comment on mine.
Again, value isn't important. A nice watch can be cheap, just as an expensive watch can look nasty.

Surely the opposite is true. If you have wealthy people, who can afford anything, and both pick the same watch, by your reckoning, they would share similar traits. I can't afford to scour the same end of the market as Beckham nor Terry, so my comparison to them would be meaningless.
Surely you didn't mean that your rule of thumb (wrist) only applies to poor people? :roll:

VTech

There are plenty of poor people with a nice watch and polished shoes.

MattC59

VTech wrote:

Almost everything in the tech world is pointless but these companies survive on the layman who strives to have the latest tech. The regurgitation of cash keeps the world spinning.

Genius!

VTech

MattC59 wrote:

VTech wrote:

Almost everything in the tech world is pointless but these companies survive on the layman who strives to have the latest tech. The regurgitation of cash keeps the world spinning.

Genius!

Thank you, I knew you would come round to me eventually.

MattC59

VTech wrote:

MattC59 wrote:

VTech wrote:

Almost everything in the tech world is pointless but these companies survive on the layman who strives to have the latest tech. The regurgitation of cash keeps the world spinning.

Genius!

Thank you, I knew you would come round to me eventually.

Come in Tower.....

team47b

Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social enviroment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.

Mr Einstein was right IMO

VTech

team47b wrote:

Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social enviroment. Most people are incapable of forming such opinions.

Mr Einstein was right IMO

But he had polished shoes (even though he never worse socks) and wore a gold Longiner watch.