you cell phone homos if you dont like watches dont buy them - dont bug those who appreciate the mechanics of a good wristwatch
*sigh*
You're completely wrong. I'm tired of arguing it, so maybe just go to TimeZone and educate yourself on the topic. To call it merely jewelry is patently false.
We should have an ATOT FAQ on watches. Having these arguments every week or so is really getting annoying. I can summarize the arguments:
1) Just use your cell phone! A watch has no purpose (it's jewelry, etc.).
2) Cheaper watches keep better time!
3) Expensive watches are just for trying to impress others.
All false.
High dollar sunglasses actually provide UV protection that's difficult to find in $5 pairs. That said, you can get excellent UV protection and glare reduction for well below the $300 "top tier" name brands. I myself own two pairs of Oakley's which ran me around $150 each, but the scientific evidence is pretty convincing that regular use of UV protection sunglasses can and does help prevent vision degeneration. I consider it an investment in my health.
An expensive watch does nothing more than a basic model other than tell people "I can afford to purchase an expensive watch."
If the message you need to send to others is that you fill the voids of your inadequacies by trying to purchase your way out of them with expensive, impractical baubles, go right ahead.
There's no point in spending more. Digital watches are more accurate, and you can get one that will hold up to a beating in the 30-50 range.
If you're buying it for some other purpose, once again refer to the dictionary re: jewelry.
Sure. It'd work just fine. But as mentioned, I don't bother with a watch because I have cellular phone which does the timekeeping just fine.
For the record: If anyone, anywhere, ever, made a judgment about me based on my watch, I would never interact with that person again. They're a waste of intellectual time to be focused on such petty things.
Afraid not my friend...you'd be the one who is completely wrong. Although, that's because you've got the arguments wrong. The accurate description would be this:
1) Cell phones tell the same time as expensive watches, just as or more accurately.
2) Cheaper watches tell the same time as expensive watches, just as or more accurately.
3) Therefore, if you're purchasing an expensive watch, it's not to keep accurate time.
4) Thus, if you are still intent on purchasing an expensive watch, it's because it's JEWELRY.
Go purchase a high profit margin wardrobe accessory if you want. Not my problem. Hell, some people even argue they need it because they're in a high-powered career such as MD or lawyer, and need to impress their superficial asshole friends. I've spent enough time around such people to know I want nothing to do with them.
But you live how you want. Just don't try and fool yourself into thinking that extra $100 to $5000 is getting you a "better" watch. You might as well buy diamond studded wingtips if you want something that does the same job as a much cheaper alternative.
No, that's not what I'm telling you. I'm telling you your criteria is incorrect
I can't help but offer up a wine analogy, so I'll say it's analogous to suggesting that a cheaper wine is better because it's all just alcohol. There's a lot more into a quality watch than telling time, and people that appreciate good watches understand this; to simplify its function is to simply your understanding of it.The arguments are the same regurgitated nonsense that we get in all watch threads.
At any rate, these watch-related threads have become trite. My attempt was to get the few misconceptions cleared and to offer light on a subculture of artisans and those that appreciate their work. To distill this into a simple argument of jewelry is to completely misunderstand what I'm saying. The "diamond studded wingtips" is evidence of this.
At any rate, it's not worth the effort. Enjoy your cell phone and be happy. I'll do the same with my preferences.
:wine:
- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,894
- 10,721
- 147
I have a Bulova whose face sports no numbers but just a full color depiction of a Frank Lloyd Wright mobile that hung in the Imperial Hotel in Japan. Gorgeous.
Nominally $100, I got it for $25 with one of those $75 off $100 coupon codes we liberated from a formerly high end watch site back during the boom, when CEO's were stupid and we were ninja pirates, arrrrrrhhhhh! :laugh:
It's supremely elegant, and near one of a kind. Got several Skaagen watches that were also otherwise ~ $100 during the same frenzy. The Skaagen's are almost ALL elegant, but I experienced their build quality as less than first rate.
And Descartes, I feel for you buddy, trying to talk sense to the kiddies.
Nominally $100, I got it for $25 with one of those $75 off $100 coupon codes we liberated from a formerly high end watch site back during the boom, when CEO's were stupid and we were ninja pirates, arrrrrrhhhhh! :laugh:
It's supremely elegant, and near one of a kind. Got several Skaagen watches that were also otherwise ~ $100 during the same frenzy. The Skaagen's are almost ALL elegant, but I experienced their build quality as less than first rate.
And Descartes, I feel for you buddy, trying to talk sense to the kiddies.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
Originally posted by: Descartes
No, that's not what I'm telling you. I'm telling you your criteria is incorrect
no, my criteria is correct for when the original justification of high watch prices were partially rationalized on accuracy. that rationalization got blown away by the development of the quartz clock of course. what you are left with is jewelry. wine is judged on taste, if it had an equivalent to the quartz development then you could develop an awesome tasting wine for cheap, and all the expensive labels would be left with doing is making a fancier bottle to justify their price.
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
Again, just you're lame opinion. Please find the dictionary definition of a watch that matches yours.
And yes, watches have other features that will require someone to spend more money. A watch for deep sea diving (your cell phone won't help). Watches with altimeters, heart-rate monitors, gps's etc...
I wear a Seiko for work that I've had for 15+ years. None of my Timex watches have lasted that long.
Originally posted by: Descartes
No, that's not what I'm telling you. I'm telling you your criteria is incorrect
Wine snobs are boring, elitist morons who take themselves way too seriously as well.
"appreciate good watches"... seriously? Really? I mean you actually just said that out loud without irony? How bored do you have to be to make a hobby out of watching time pass?
You people need more compelling after-job activities. I recommend taking up arguing on the internet.
Yeah, you're totally defending under-appreciated artisans :roll:
I hear that other areas of craftsmanship that time and technology have passed by, like building horse-drawn carriages, have retreated into insular "enthusiast" sects as well. If you like watches, fine, but you're into jewelry, end of story. I love rock climbing, but at least I'm rational enough to know that it's just taking the hard way to the top of the cliff on purpose, and don't pretend it's something more.
Definition 6 under noun.
If you're spending additional money for additional features, fine. No argument. You have a purpose. If you're buying a watch that costs more than 50 bucks to tell time, you're really buying jewelry.
Obviously your empirical observation on your own Seiko and Timex watches is a completely accurate outcome, because there's so many controls and a randomized population. Please spare me.
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
Okay, where is the definition of a watch that matches your description meaning that it has to be digital and $30?
You keep on failing. At least I have an example.
You have an opinion, that's it. Get over yourself.
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
u...are..pretty..thick.
Explain? The OP asked for an opinion on two different brand of watches and ja1484 butts in with his lame opinion that's irrelevant to the OP.
Look in the mirror please.
- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,894
- 10,721
- 147
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
u...are..pretty..thick.
I'd recommend an ultra thin watch . . . Skaagen? Oh, that's right, your idiot ideological semantic stand holds that a $100 watch must be jewelery and nothing else but jewelery, even if it's a finely working timepiece. :roll:
Does showering each day and using an anti-perspirant make you a metro-sexual?
How about buying anything more than a base model Chevy Aveo? That automatically make you a gearhead?
Can you possibly see how over-the-top extreme your position is?
I judge you as a person with no culture, poor taste, and not intelligent enough to get beyond your close minded arrogance
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
u...are..pretty..thick.
I'd recommend an ultra thin watch . . . Skaagen? Oh, that's right, your idiot ideological semantic stand holds that a $100 watch must be jewelery and nothing else but jewelery, even if it's a finely working timepiece. :roll:
Does showering each day and using an anti-perspirant make you a metro-sexual?
How about buying anything more than a base model Chevy Aveo? That automatically make you a gearhead?
Can you possibly see how over-the-top extreme your position is?
lol, if you think buying a luxury car makes you a sophisticated person yes, it makes you a douche. but really cars do give more performance when you pay more. if an aveo had 300hp due to new technology that rendered the combustion engine obsolete and the only difference in cars was their exterior trim then yes, it would be a valid comparison.
as for anti antiperspirant. if the only difference was that your stick was encased in a finely crafted jewel encrusted metal case and the actual performance was same or inferior than sure, comparison is dead on.
if you put on airs because you owned such a thing well, people should call you out on it.
its fine to buy because you think something is pretty, but if you pretend its something more than it is, you are simply a pretentious douche bag.
- Jul 19, 2001
- 38,572
- 2
- 91
Of all the threads to go down into threadcrap hell, I would have never thought it would be a thread about watches.
Until someone figures out how to strap a goddamn cell phone to my wrist without looking like a douche, I'm sticking to watches. I'm also not 13 anymore, so I wear nice watches.
Until someone figures out how to strap a goddamn cell phone to my wrist without looking like a douche, I'm sticking to watches. I'm also not 13 anymore, so I wear nice watches.
I stopped wearing a watch because I started to get annoyed having the weight on my wrist. It just felt restricting.
Also the same reason I stopped wearing the bracelet on my other wrist.
Also the same reason I stopped wearing the bracelet on my other wrist.
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,894
- 10,721
- 147
- Oct 9, 1999
- 46,894
- 10,721
- 147
WHOOOOOSH, Granny C, that's the sound of us highfalutin' folk laughing at you trying to tell us any watch that costs a few more dollars than your sad, sad minimum is "putting on airs" -- except you couldn't even get that out properly.
videogames101
Diamond Member
- Aug 24, 2005
- 6,783
- 27
- 91
Everyone here fails. A cell phone normally gets it's time from a server which probably gets it's time from an atomic clock.
Nothing is more accurate.
/thread.
Nothing is more accurate.
/thread.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter