Vacheron Constantin breaks the world record for most complicated wristwatch

332 pointsposted 10 months ago
by bookofjoe
(hodinkee.com)

359 Comments

staplung

10 months ago

Many moons ago, William Gibson did a piece for Wired about his obsession with mechanical watches[1]. The whole thing is worth a read but this bit is worth quoting:

""" Mechanical watches are so brilliantly unnecessary.

Any Swatch or Casio keeps better time, and high-end contemporary Swiss watches are priced like small cars. But mechanical watches partake of what my friend John Clute calls the Tamagotchi Gesture. They're pointless in a peculiarly needful way; they're comforting precisely because they require tending.

And vintage mechanical watches are among the very finest fossils of the pre-digital age. Each one is a miniature world unto itself, a tiny functioning mechanism, a congeries of minute and mysterious moving parts. Moving parts! And consequently these watches are, in a sense, alive. They have heartbeats. They seem to respond, Tamagotchi-like, to "love," in the form, usually, of the expensive ministrations of specialist technicians. Like ancient steam-tractors or Vincent motorcycles, they can be painstakingly restored from virtually any stage of ruin. """

https://web.archive.org/web/20240930092315/https://www.wired...

nayuki

10 months ago

> mechanical watches are among the very finest fossils of the pre-digital age

Clocks have discrete ticks. They are digital devices. Even a base-60 second hand is digital because the number of states is finite.

Mechanical and digital are not mutually exclusive concepts. For example, "The analytical engine was a proposed digital mechanical general-purpose computer designed by English mathematician and computer pioneer Charles Babbage." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_engine

Going further, I could argue that the digital age is very old. Humans who wrote numbers for accounting purposes were engaging in a digital activity; only the numbers matter, not the medium they were written on or the exact handwriting style of the scribe who wrote those numbers. DNA is a form of digital data conveyed through a sequence of 4 possible symbols, and DNA predates humans by billions of years.

The pedantic phrase substitution for "pre-digital age" would be something like "age before widespread digital electronic computers on solid-state microchips" (thus differentiating from analog electronic computers and vacuum tubes).

tokai

10 months ago

Digital has three meanings; having to do with fingers and toes. Having to do with something discrete. And having to do with computers, with electronic as synonym.

You are arguing from the second definition while the quote is of the third definition.

gweinberg

10 months ago

You're missing the meaning where the display uses the symbols we call digits (rather than hands). I don;t think most people would call an electronic watch "digital" if the display was hands, even if the "hands" are actually an lcd display.

nayuki

10 months ago

> And having to do with computers, with electronic as synonym.

Computers do not have to be electronic. Counterexamples: Mechanical calculators, LEGO logic gates, hydraulic logic valves, electrical (not electronic) relays. Heck, even human meatbags were called "computers" back in the day.

amscanne

10 months ago

You’re being needlessly pedantic. Obviously, “computers” also has varied meanings. In this case, it is referring to systems built with discrete electronics and ICs. That is, its operation is based almost entirely on the manipulation of electrons and their associated fields.

Watches are nice because it’s much less common to have such tiny precise physical machines anymore, since so many of these use cases have been replaced by “computers”.

theamk

10 months ago

Technically correct, but you are being pedantic.

It was pretty clear to me that the 3rd sense of "digital" pertains to modern-ish electronic digital computers. I would not call mechanical calculator, human or hydraulic logic "digital computer". (Relay computer is on the fence)

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

gweinberg

10 months ago

It would be absurd to say an analog electronic computer was digital.

emchammer

10 months ago

GP wrote that a base-60 second hand is digital, but the second hand on a Rolex ticks at 5 steps IIRC. It is not clear to me that the natural numbers would exist at all if human beings did not.

fennecbutt

10 months ago

>Clocks have discrete ticks.

Not always, look at Seiko's spring drive

snovv_crash

10 months ago

I have a feeling we'll feel the same looking back on combustion engine cars.

bigstrat2003

10 months ago

We already do. Lots of people love older cars (say, from the 80s or earlier) because they are a mechanical system without a computer controlling everything. They are something you can understand and work on yourself without having to own a lot of specialized equipment.

CSSer

10 months ago

It reminds me of the Theo Jansen’s Strandbeests

Mainan_Tagonist

10 months ago

I happen to work in this industry, and just a word for those that compare this with an Apple Watch or a Casio, this Vacheron-Constantin will likely be around 200 years from now, it will still be a testimony of the refinement and engineering of a fine craft that few can achieve, a highly valued item with specialist technicians marvelling on the talent of its builders, just as is the case today with 200 year old timepieces.

you'll be very lucky if your Casio can last as long. Your mass commoditised Apple watch will likely be worthless.

Personaly, I like the IWC on my wrist as much as I like my Casio G-Shock, both are wonderful in their own way.

The Apple watch on my wife's wrist is a fine computer i guess, but at some point, it will have the same "quaint charm" as the IBM Thinkpad she owned 23 years ago.

jasode

10 months ago

>I happen to work in this industry, and just a word for those that compare this with an Apple Watch or a Casio, this Vacheron-Constantin will likely be around 200 years from now, it will still be a testimony of the refinement and engineering of a fine craft that few can achieve, a highly valued item [...] The Apple watch on my wife's wrist is a fine computer i guess,

My friend does not work in the watch industry so maybe that's why she came to the opposite conclusion from yours. She has several high-end watches Omega, Ebel, Cartier ... and when she got the Apple Watch almost 10 years ago, it instantly demoted all her expensive jewelry watches to the drawer.

The cheaper "disposable" Apple Watch instantly cured her from wanting any new expensive jewelry watches. She let the batteries die off in the old watches and has never replaced them. Instead, she just loves having the weather, timers, task notifications, etc on her Apple Watch. Sure, the classic watches have "diamond encrusted bezel, gold wristband, Swiss mechanical movement yada yada yada..." but all that is negated by the useful features of the smart watch.

It's a rare situation where a cheap product completely replaces an expensive product.

I had a a similar evolution in thinking when technology made me re-evaluate products I once coveted. When I was young before the internet existed, I drooled over this Geochron illuminated framed wall map $4000 : https://www.geochron.com/clocks/boardroom/

A lot of expensive offices had that and I thought I had to have it too. But then I bought cheap atomic clocks you never had to set and the web had dynamic maps I could explore. Even the new Geochron units don't automatically set to the radio signal from atomic clocks. New technology completely cured me of wanting to buy a Geochron. People used to want tall grandfather clocks in the house foyer as an elegant piece of accent furniture. Now you can't even give away those clocks for free on craigslist. Everybody has clocks on their smartphones so buying a grandfather clock for the house isn't a priority anymore. Even if we romanticize grandfather clocks with descriptions about "heirloom furniture craftsmanship, intricate wood carvings, etc", it still won't entice most people today to want one.

mplanchard

10 months ago

How sad. That wall map is a nice object and a good conversation piece to boot.

I guess you haven’t actually tried to buy a grandfather clock. Quality ones are in the thousands at least, if not tens of thousands. Even cheap ones are hundreds of dollars.

To my mind an apple watch is a fundamentally different product from a watch. They just both happen to be worn on the wrist.

jasode

10 months ago

>How sad. That wall map is a nice object and a good conversation piece to boot.

It shouldn't be sad to avoid adding another artifact of consumerism to one's life. I'm at a stage in my life where I've gotten rid of most of my "conversation pieces". E.g. I once had an expensive antique warship in my office as decoration. (https://www.google.com/search?q=hms+bounty+model&tbm=isch). I thought it looked really nice. But one day as I was cleaning the dust off of every crevice with an art brush to keep it from looking like a junked up antique, I realized it was an example of a possession making me its slave. I got rid of it and don't regret it. I dodged a bullet by not getting the Geochron and saving $4000 but my journey of enlightenment wasn't complete so I still got suckered into the wooden warship.

>I guess you haven’t actually tried to buy a grandfather clock. Quality ones are in the thousands at least, if not tens of thousands.

Yes, I agree that grandfather clocks are expensive and that's why I used it as a parallel example to the expensive wristwatches.

jstanley

10 months ago

How can it be true that they're really expensive and you can't even give them away for free on Craigslist?

Probably if you want a good one it's expensive and nobody wants bad ones.

jasode

10 months ago

>How can it be true that they're really expensive and you can't even give them away for free on Craigslist?

I tried to give away an 30+ year old Ethan Allen grandfather clock (cost about $2500 new) on Craigslist. Nobody was interested in picking it up. To most young people, grandfather clocks are "dated" and it's only something they see at their grandparents house. It used to be a rite of passage to buy a grandfather clock to the house but that trend is gone now. Like expensive china cabinets, it's just not something a lot of people desire these days.

I suppose if I had left the grandfather clock on Craigslist for a year instead of a month, and if I offered to deliver it instead of requiring pick it up, eventually somebody would have wanted it.

The only way I finally got rid of it was bundling it with an old curio cabinets I was selling. Taking the grandfather clock as a complete package was a condition of the sale. Maybe like vinyl records, grandfather clocks are making a comeback and I got rid of it too early.

42772827

10 months ago

> Nobody was interested in picking it up.

When you’re one rent hike away from packing up and moving, this type of thing is not very appealing

SoftTalker

10 months ago

A 30 year old Ethan Allen was probably a quartz movement with a fake pendulum? Yeah that’s not interesting. Or was it still a real mechanical clock with weights or a spring you had to wind?

theamk

10 months ago

Easy. Think specialist equipment: a nice high-speed factory machine to put caps on bottles may be more than $100K new, but I doubt you can give it away for free on craigslist. It is huge, heavy, and has no practical value outside of soft drink factory.

The old clocks are getting the same status: it's specialist equipment for very rare circumstances.

RHSeeger

10 months ago

I think of my watch the same way a lot of people think of jewelry, or suits, or things like that. While it does serve a purpose (telling time), the primary reason I wear it is because I like it. It's functional, but mostly decorative.

I inherited my watch from my father, and I almost certainly wouldn't spend thousands to buy one myself; but I wear it every time I go out to dinner for anything fancier than that.

umanwizard

10 months ago

A watch with batteries that can die is by definition not a mechanical watch like this one.

jaybna

10 months ago

Damn you HN, I went down the rabbit hole on Geochron. No, I don't need this. Yes, I want it, but not the old version - this one: https://www.geochron.com/product/geochron-digital-atlas-2/

Certainly someone has hacked/recreated this with a Raspberry Pi. I must now go waste a weekend...

RHSeeger

10 months ago

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the price on this. $500 up front, _plus_ a subscription, and it doesn't even include the display. What are you getting for that cost? It _feels_ like something you could install as software on an RPi or any other computer.

theamk

10 months ago

Corporate money - if all you have is software engineers getting $250_000/year , the company likely pays ~$250/hour with all the overhead. So you are not paying "$500", you are paying 2 FTE hours. This is pretty small, corporate-wise: a single 1 hour meeting with 10 people in it is 10 FTE hours, and most managers won't think twice before organizing it.

Even DIY solution might not be more economic: sure, if you are familiar with RPi and have one on hand, and someone already wrote the software, you can do it in under 2 hours. But a single problem, like a defective SD card, and the pre-paid solution is now cheaper. Same goes for subscription: $80/year, or 20 FTE minutes. Yes, you can find those layers for free. Will this take you >20 minutes per year to setup and maintain? Probably not.

I was at my first job when I discovered "corporate money" and this was a real eye-opener... That $2000 tool that can only do one super-specific operation? Pays for itself if you can have two fewer defective assemblies.

RHSeeger

10 months ago

Sorry, I didn't ask my question well.

Your answer seems to speak to the idea of "we need this in order for our offices to be able to function, what's the most cost effective way acquire it. I can't imagine _any_ office that would need such a thing. It seems to be purely decorative in nature. And the (quality of the) monitor (which isn't part of that cost) is the majority of the decorative part.

I was asking more from the individual perspective; why someone would spend $500 + subscription on something like this, when it should be relatively trivial to just run software that does something like it yourself. Given that it doesn't come with the display, picking a nice display and hooking it up seems like the majority of the work involved.

theamk

10 months ago

Offices don't only spend money "to be able to function" - there are all sort of expenses which are entirely optional. Workers' morale, manager's morale, "prestige", etc.. Have you ever heard about management ordering pizza for workers when something goes well? Do you know how much this costs? It's $50 in pizza + 10 people x 1 hour = $2500 in wages, for total $2550 for that pizza party. A totally optional spend, which is not required for offices to be able to function. And yet it happens all the time in many many offices. And don't get me started on cost of all-hands meetings.

And that's why most offices won't think twice about buying that $500 box. A random manager, or even a senior programmer wants it? Sure, get it, no need to even get any approval since it is under $1000. There are exceptions, but that's the thought in many US-based software organizations.

From individual perspective, you are right it makes no sense. If this was my house, I'd do it all myself. But this is not marketed to individuals, it is marketed to people working in companies.

jaybna

10 months ago

Found a $1.99 app for Apple TV that's pretty good. Now "screen saver" for downstairs television. Will play around with a spare Pi when time permits. There appear to be several options out there. A fun waste of an hour.

42772827

10 months ago

I want one, but not with that terrible projection! I’d prefer one inverted at least.

Mainan_Tagonist

10 months ago

The fact that she had batteries in those Cartier and Omega says a lot, and explains why the Apple watch had such an appeal.

konart

10 months ago

I have somewhat different store.

Moved to Garmin (for sports and outdoor activities) and Mido as an everyday watch from Apple Watch (had 3 and 7 versions). Can't really imagine going back.

I guess I was sold the idea that I neeed notifications, weather and all this bullshit on my wrist all the time.

At some point I realized I've disabled notifications completely and basically the only thing I was using my Apple watch was paranoidal heart rate monitoring.

>Swiss mechanical movement yada yada yada...

Most swiss mechanical movements cost 50-100$ though.

jasode

10 months ago

>I guess I was sold the idea that I neeed notifications, weather and all this bullshit on my wrist all the time.

I understand your viewpoint but people are different. My friend is almost 80 years old and wasn't drawn to smart watches because of FOMO fear-of-missing-out on some Instagram notification or hustle culture to constantly check emails. Instead, she's always worried about "forgetting something" and the Apple Watch has reminders for medicine, upcoming appointments, etc. It was a total quality-of-life improvement. It caused a total rethink about the old mechanical watches that didn't assist her in that way.

If a mechanical watch that will be "admired 200 years from now instead of being in a landfill" -- doesn't help her take pills -- then she's not going to be attached to the romanticism of it like a watch collector enthusiast.

>Most swiss mechanical movements cost 50-100$ though.

Your clarification means you misinterpreted my comment. I was not insulting mechanical watches such as your Mido or gp's expensive IWC. My point was that it's rare and counterintuitive when a cheap disposable product causes a total rethink of previously valuable items regardless of the older item's "timeless qualities" (e.g. "200 year heirloom").

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

cjpearson

10 months ago

I wouldn't say that's the opposite conclusion. Plenty of people have switched from mechanical or quartz watches to Apple watches for their daily wear. But a decade from now the watches in the jewelry drawer will have retained their value more than the watch that's on her wrist today.

Of course there's nothing wrong with wearing a smart watch. For practical purposes they are better in every way. They just have a different lifetime. It's a similar situation with cars. Some like the constant maintenance that a 60 year old car requires, others want a Toyota that will reliably get them to work, and others want a sports car with engine that can go three times as fast as they'll ever drive.

Also, I think the cheap product winning is pretty typical. CDs replaced vinyl records and were then replaced by music streaming. Few people buy cameras now that smartphones exist. And these mechanical watches were already replaced for the most part decades ago by quartz watches.

Despite the existence of more practical alternatives, there are people who still like to buy grandfather clocks, vinyl records and mechanical watches. They are certainly in the minority and you won't find a grandfather clock or record player in every home, but there is a market there.

(I kind of hate to be that guy, but if there were batteries inside, those weren't Swiss mechanical movements)

WillPostForFood

10 months ago

For practical purposes they are better in every way

Mostly agree, except you have to take the Apple Watch every single day for maintenance (charging). You can buy a Casio F-91W for $20 and go 7-10 years before you have to take off your wrist for a battery change. If you simply want to tell time, digital watches, quartz watches, and arguably mechanical watches beat smart watches.

jasode

10 months ago

>, but if there were batteries inside, those weren't Swiss mechanical movements

Yes. The Cartier Tank watch is mechanical. I just lumped in the other nice jewelry watches with batteries to talk about them as a group because they've all been eliminated from her mindset.

>Also, I think the cheap product winning is pretty typical.

When I wrote "replace", I didn't mean in terms of sales. It was more about the cheaper product replacing the previous thinking in the mind about the old product.

For example, she used to color-coordinate the different jewelry watches with different outfits... If it's a blue outfit, wear the stainless steel watch ... if it's this other dress, wear the gold watch with black face. If the shirt has starfish, wear the seashell theme watch. That whole ritual is eliminated. (I guess one could also change watch bands on Apple Watches for different occasions but she doesn't bother with it. Maybe because arthritis makes it hard to squeeze the band's release mechanism.)

The new Apple Watch alters the psychological relationship with the previous jewelry watches so thoroughly that it makes her impervious to gp's praise such as, "Vacheron-Constantin [...], it will still be a testimony of the refinement and engineering of a fine craft that few can achieve, [...] you'll be very lucky if your Casio can last as long. Your mass commoditised Apple watch will likely be worthless."

Her comeback to the gp's "timeless" qualities is that she likes lifting the Apple Watch to her face and asking, "Hey Siri, how many inches is 5 centimeters? (when sewing clothes) ... Or how many cups in a liter? (when cooking from a recipe with metric quantities)." She thinks it's a miracle that a little watch can understand her voice and give her answers. Yes, everybody at HN is jaded and we all know Apple's Siri is the worst voice assistant technology out there but yet she loves it. If that means it's wearing a mass-produced watch that nobody cares about in 200 years after she's buried in the ground, that doesn't matter at all. Her "dressy watches" phase is over.

That's the type of rare product replacement situation I'm talking about. Usually, the opposite happens: we all get on some hedonistic treadmill with various consumer products and the next better thing we desire is more expensive. In the 1980s, CDs were actually 2x more expensive than vinyl records and cassette tapes. Vinyl was about $6.99. CDs were $15.99+. It took over 10 years for CDs to gradually lower in price such that Walmart was selling them for less than $10. The new CD players themselves were about $1000 in 1980s. Record players were $100.

cjpearson

10 months ago

Perhaps we're reading gp's comment differently. I don't think he's telling your friend she should be wearing this Vacheron Constantin (or any luxury watch) instead of her Apple watch. He's rather defending its achievement in engineering and craftsmanship despite everything it does being trivial for a smart watch. I read it as appreciation rather than a sales pitch.

TimByte

10 months ago

My $40 Casio surviving everything from camping trips to getting dunked in a sink still feels like its own kind of masterpiece

bookofjoe

10 months ago

Iconic F-91W currently costs $16.88 at Amazon AND it now comes in colors: Clear, Pink, Blue, Gray, Green, Gold, White (and Black)

dole

10 months ago

A158 (Obama) for the upgrade to steel, A168 for EL backlight.

helij

10 months ago

Just go for solar radio sync G-Shock square and you're done. No batteries, no setting up, extremely rugged and imo it looks good as well. Since I got that one a few years ago I only wear mechanical watch for various "occasions" - pretty much like a jewellery.

ooterness

10 months ago

Look at moneybags over here paying $30 for a watch. /s

jxjnskkzxxhx

10 months ago

One thing I like about Casio's, especially the cheap ones, is how unpretentious they are.

jxjnskkzxxhx

10 months ago

I went thru a couple of F91W and the bracelet kept breaking. I since got a A158WA-1. Check it out.

tokai

10 months ago

All the F-91Ws I have gotten through Amazon have been fakes.

bookofjoe

10 months ago

Remarkable. I've purchased at least five over the decades, all the real thing.

PeterStuer

10 months ago

Used to have one of those. Survived daily swim practice and saunas for years.

crazygringo

10 months ago

Sure, but I wear watches to tell the time or (mainly) as a fashion accessory. Not as an object to donate to a museum someday...

And 200 years from now, I'm sure there will be a few Apple Watches in museums as well. And some Casios too.

Mainan_Tagonist

10 months ago

I wonder how many of these Casios and Apple watches will be in working order, and as functional as day one.

crazygringo

10 months ago

Museums don't operate objects that are 200 years old, so it doesn't really matter.

But also, it's not like a mechanical watch is going to work for 200 years without maintenance and repair either. Lubrication, springs, bearings... these all degrade over time.

coldtea

10 months ago

>you'll be very lucky if your Casio can last as long

The Casio would last even longer - and would be closer to the right time even without touching it in between.

elorant

10 months ago

Good luck finding a compatible battery for it after 200 years.

coldtea

10 months ago

Adapting to whatever battery exists 200 years from now to the form of a CR2032 battery would be simple. A Casio just takes a round battery shell that contacts with the positive and negative terminals on each side.

Hell, I can make one from scratch in my workshop trivially, from basic materials.

Finding high-end mechanical watch technicians? Not so easy. And hardly so cheap.

WXLCKNO

10 months ago

I'll just ask the ruling AI to summon one into existence from the required atoms?

lm28469

10 months ago

Mostly because it'll be worn by a rich dude who uses it one day per week and sends it for CLAa every 5 years, treating it like some sort of religious idol every step of the way. The most extreme thing it'll go through is the swing of a golf club

bipson

10 months ago

No, because the achievement, the mastery behind it is not obliterated in the next few years, by the upcoming iterations of newer smartwatches.

Smartwatches, Phones, (most) Cars, TVs, ... all of these are mass produced, and as such completely obsolete in a few years, even if they are sold as "premium" products for a month's salary.

Unique, manufactured Design pieces are... timeless. It's a piece of art. And I say this without any inclination to ever join that market.

lm28469

10 months ago

> No, because the achievement, the mastery behind it is not obliterated in the next few years, by the upcoming iterations of newer smartwatches.

Just like a Casio F-91W, or the $50 mechanical Swatch.

> It's a piece of art

Yes, that's the only argument really, it's a good looking wearable piece of art. It won't last longer than a waterproof gshock, it isn't more precise than a $5 quartz watch, &c.

microtherion

10 months ago

> No, because the achievement, the mastery behind it is not obliterated in the next few years, by the upcoming iterations of newer smartwatches.

That's just another way of saying that there is no real innovation in end user benefits in mechanical watches. The marketing is all about how difficult they were to make.

Look at the functionality that the watch described in the article has to offer:

* It can show the time — to an accuracy of 8.5 seconds a day, apparently: https://www.reddit.com/r/VacheronConstantin/comments/1aiyjeb... Technological marvel, innit?

* It can show the date (with squiggly hands, for some unfathomable reason). It probably can even account for different lengths of months, and leap years (I was flabbergasted when I learned that there are watches being sold today for hundreds or thousands who require a manual adjustment at the end of every month that doesn't have 31 days).

* It can show the phase of the moon. Awesome if you're a werewolf running a hedge fund, I guess. It has a ton of other astrological indicators (Zodiac signs, etc.)

* It can chime every hour (presumably to remind the people around you that you exist and wear an overpriced watch).

* It works as a chronograph.

That's it, as far as I can tell. Nothing a $10 watch on Aliexpress could not do. It does not even seem to have an alarm, apparently. You get three actually useful functions (time — inaccurately, date, chrono) in a package that is 15mm thick.

No payment functionality, step counter, agenda, calculator.

But yes, you have a $100K or whatever watch that you can leave to your great-grandchildren so they can be assured that prior generations overpaid for gimmicky crap as well.

wan23

10 months ago

The end user benefits are none of the things you mentioned. Mechanical watches are jewelry. They look nice, and hopefully they remind you of something. For many people it's a connection to something cool. Omega sells a lot of moon watches, and it's not because anyone buying them is going to use the chronograph to time a fuel burn with life or death stakes. You're probably not wearing your Daytona at the race track or using your Longines watch for anything Amelia Earhart or Howard Hughes did. But it's fun to think about how you have a tool with a historical connection - whether that is to history everyone knows, or something more personal to you.

RHSeeger

10 months ago

A $2 print of a picture from the internet serves the same purpose, and provides the same functionality, as a $1,000 piece of art, or a $1,000,000 piece of art. The value isn't in the raw functionality it provides.

WillPostForFood

10 months ago

I was flabbergasted when I learned that there are watches being sold today for hundreds or thousands who require a manual adjustment at the end of every month that doesn't have 31 days

Watchmakers deserve more appreciation for how hard it is to track months/years mechanically in a package small enough to fit on your wrist! It's a lot of expectation for watch in the hundreds of dollars.

davidivadavid

10 months ago

The fact you think this is a $100k watch shows you may not really be looking at it with the right framework?

euroderf

10 months ago

Wristwatches are fetishized but not buggy whips.

To each his own I guess.

userbinator

10 months ago

The Apple Watch has billions of transistors in its microcircuits, mass-produced repeatably at very low cost. It's a different type of engineering but I think it's nonetheless impressive too (and I'm not actually a fan of Apple either.)

LeafItAlone

10 months ago

>this Vacheron-Constantin will likely be around 200 years from now

I’m interested to hear more. Typically things that are “most complicated” and lost lasting don’t go hand-in-hand.

Mainan_Tagonist

10 months ago

You should visit this museum : https://www.patek.com/en/company/patek-philippe-museum/the-m...

Since mechanical watches are, by design, open source, there will always be a technician interested in keeping them going.

theamk

10 months ago

The mechanical watches are not open source at all - most (all?) of them do not come with engineering drawings nor with list of materials.

Even if you have a watch in front of you, it does not mean you can create a copy of it without a lot of work - you need to measure every gear, guess the materials used (how stiff should this spring be?), and re-draw mainplate and dial.

Compare to things like old electronics, which came with full schematics, service manual and sometimes even debugging guide.

benhurmarcel

10 months ago

The people who buy this kind of watches don’t usually wear them much, they store them in a safe environment.

Gud

10 months ago

I've had my Casio g-shock for 20 years, including bringing it to two war zones. I have a physical job and I abuse the shit out of it.

I'll take my chances with my Casio.

throw0101d

10 months ago

> I've had my Casio g-shock for 20 years, including bringing it to two war zones.

Watch aficionados appreciate G-Shocks just as much as an A. Lange & Söhne. If you visit their Youtube channels and web sites you'll often see things like Seiko SKXes were recommended for years (pre-discontinuation) as good value and great for day-to-day wear (beach going, gardening, etc).

LandR

10 months ago

Yep. I have 40 watches, from tudors, omegas, iwc, zenith, dunhill, nomos, oris, grand seiko, panerai.

I still love the shit out of my g shock. The only reason it doesn't get worn much is it was replaced by my garmin.

StopDisinfo910

10 months ago

> this Vacheron-Constantin will likely be around 200 years from now, it will still be a testimony of the refinement and engineering

Usual playbook of the luxury watch market since marketing somehow made it relevant in the mid to end of the 20th century. Thank Haye for not being able to stand near a Swiss mechanical watch without someone uttering the world "timeless". This is the second best achievement of marketing after making people believing that diamonds are valuable.

These watches use small mechanical pieces (which are still very far away from the state of the art - a watch is an engineering achievement by the standard of 200 years ago). They require very regular maintenance to keep working and this maintenance is very expensive. They are not in anyway "timeless".

This is an expensive piece of jewellery, subject to everything related to expensive pieces of jewellery including fashion. It’s basically a Veblen good signalling wealth.

HarHarVeryFunny

10 months ago

Jewellery, masterpiece of craftsmanship, wealth signaling ... and least importantly a time keeping device!

It is a nice looking watch!

milesrout

10 months ago

Mechanical watches don't require much maintenance. They need reoiling every decade or so. They also aren't usually very expensive. You wouldn't say that clothes are a Veblen good just because there are expensive clothing brands that are. Most mechanical watches are not this kind of luxury example.

StopDisinfo910

10 months ago

Cheap mechanical watches are not generally what people talk about when they brandy the usual marketing points.

They are poor timekeeping pieces bottom feeding from the expensive brand marketing. A quartz movement in the same body is an all around improvement except for the smugness.

DennisP

10 months ago

I agree that the marketing of some very expensive watch brands is over the top, and that some of the people wearing those might be rather smug. But you're overlooking a large market of watch enthusiasts who just like mechanical watches because they think they're cool, who buy decent quality watches that don't cost that much.

I got into it after reading the book Longitude. As someone who grew up sailing, who'd learned celestial navigation as a kid, I thought it'd be nifty to have that tech on my wrist. Plus I like that it's possible to understand exactly how it works. Now I have a small collection.

One of my watches, a Hamilton, cost me $700 and as long as I wear it, keeps time within a couple seconds a day, which was good enough to win the Longitude Prize in the 1700s with essentially the same tech. Lots of really expensive watches don't do any better. Hamilton is a brand that goes back to the 1800s, just like the expensive guys.

My only watch that cost over $1000 is from a guy in Denmark, a watch reviewer who decided to make his perfect watch. He hired a designer, spent a couple years blogging about the whole process, made it the best quality he could, produced 300 watches, and sold them at at a modest profit for $2700 each. I wore it in my wedding. To anyone else it's just another anonymous watch.

Lots of mechanical watch enthusiasts like quartz watches too. I have one I quite like that's solar powered. Just like a mechanical, I won't have to replace the battery in a few years.

I usually don't need to know the time to the exact second, and I generally have my phone with me anyway. But when I wear the Hamilton, for fun I usually check against time.gov every day or two to see how it's doing, and adjust to the exact time if it's off by more than a few seconds. I've seen it be exactly accurate after a week.

StopDisinfo910

10 months ago

Yes, that’s the marketing working. People are basically purchasing a dream in the same way Rolex actually sell the idea of James Bond and Roger Federer. The brand wants people to somehow think that owning a random bunch of expensive metal connects them to people who did compete from the Longitude Prize more than just thinking about them.

It’s completely fine if it makes people happy but it’s also in a lot of way manipulative and disingenuous. That’s why I hate industries which are purely marketing based.

DennisP

10 months ago

I don't think I'm connected to those people. I think it's a nifty device and I like how it looks. I learned about the Longitude Prize from a history book, and I doubt that it was commissioned by the watch industry.

Not everything is some ugly marketing conspiracy. People have appreciated beautiful, clever things for as long as they've been making them.

mplanchard

10 months ago

I like watches where I don’t have to change the battery. I have a kit to change them, but I appreciate the elegance of the purely mechanical solution, and my mechanical watches are generally my favorites for that reason. None of them are luxury goods or particularly expensive.

Even though I am not the kind of person who would spend an insane amount of money on a watch, I still think the elegance of the manufacturing of a piece like the one under discussion is really impressive and interesting.

chuckadams

10 months ago

Having to change the battery every now and then doesn't bother me, but I'm not at all jazzed at having to charge my watch every day or or so. Plus I just don't like wearing watches: I'm no steampunk, but they do need to bring back the form factor of a pocketwatch on a chain.

theamk

10 months ago

Don't you trade battery-every-5-years to "adjust time weekly"?

In the other comment, someone mention Vacheron Constantin watches can be off by as much as a minute per week! This is bad enough that I'd call a watch like that "unusable".

mplanchard

10 months ago

Yeah, I mean, I'm not claiming it's generally better in any objective sense, just that I prefer it.

I don't think mine loses a minute per week, but it isn't perfect. Noticing the watch is a minute or two behind once a month and quickly popping out the dial to roll it forward is not a meaningful hassle for me.

Relative to a battery watch, it's nice that the watch is a self-contained functional unit. It will "always" be functional, even if I've left it in a drawer for a few years (always in quotes because of course anything can break).

Part of it is also just that I like to think about the mechanical complexity and elegance of it. It gives me a little bit more joy than my battery watches (but I still have plenty of battery watches that I like!), and that's something I appreciate.

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

ZiiS

10 months ago

But I can buy an Apple Watch Ultra every year for the next 200 years for less.

Mainan_Tagonist

10 months ago

So, 199 Apple watches Ultra in landfills 200 years from now. Congrats.

ZiiS

10 months ago

A very worthy concen, but I don't think you want to go too deep on the morality if luxury goods. An Apple watch a decade leaves a lot of charitable giving.

PeterStuer

10 months ago

499 actually. Can't let our unsold overproduction dilute the demand for the next model, so straight to the landfill it is.

sorokod

10 months ago

Apple watches are unlikely to exist then

Apple is unlikely to exist then

You... well you already know.

threeseed

10 months ago

Apple will likely exist in 200 years. It has $86B in cash on hand and could easily have had $1T if shareholders didn't kick up a fuss a few years ago.

I wouldn't bet on the Swiss watch market being necessarily around given that many young people aren't being taught how to tell the time and have little appreciation for watches.

chuckadams

10 months ago

The shareholders will kick up another fuss someday, probably led by some Carl Icahn type, and loot the company until selling off the corpse. Berkshire Hathaway may be around in 200 years if civilization still is. I don't see the same for any tech company.

bookofjoe

10 months ago

Perplexity Pro's list of companies that have been around since 1825 (200 years ago):

1. Kongo Gumi (578 AD, Japan) 3. Specializing in temple construction for over 1,400 years, it was acquired in 2006 but still operates under Takamatsu Construction Group. 2. Drohobych Saltworks (1250, Ukraine) State-owned and Europe’s oldest salt producer, now also a cultural heritage site. 3. Shirley Plantation (1613, USA) Virginia’s oldest family-owned business, operating as a historic farm and museum. 4. Avedis Zildjian Company (1623, USA) The world’s premier cymbal manufacturer, founded in Istanbul and relocated to Massachusetts in 1929. 5. Hudson’s Bay Company (1670, Canada/USA) Originally a fur-trade monopoly, it now operates department stores like Saks Fifth Avenue. 6. White Horse Tavern (1673, USA) America’s oldest continuously running restaurant, serving patrons in Newport, Rhode Island. 7. Baker’s Chocolate (1765, USA) Launched by James Baker in Massachusetts, it remains a baking staple under Kraft Heinz ownership. 8. Laird & Company (1780, USA) The oldest licensed distillery in the U.S., producing applejack since the American Revolution. 9. King Arthur Baking Company (1790, USA) Founded in Boston, it’s now a Vermont-based leader in flour and baking products. 10. Brooks Brothers (1818, USA) America’s oldest clothing retailer, surviving bankruptcy in 2020 and continuing under new ownership.

cmenge

10 months ago

This list seems very wrong. The US is overrepresented given its relatively short history. The number of breweries in Europe that are older than the US is probably over 100.

While there are a lot of tricky questions around the exact definition, I feel this Wikipedia list seems more believable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_companies

bookofjoe

10 months ago

I agree. So much for my $20/month AI. BUT — it did a great job of guiding me to the perfect Jump/Carry/Charge device for my car....

theamk

10 months ago

You sure it was "perfect"? Or was it just like that advice - realstic looking but actually not the best...

bookofjoe

10 months ago

It has become clear to me that using an AI in ANY capacity to add to a discussion here results in guaranteed downvotes.

threeseed

10 months ago

Because it is an unreliable source and so you are just wasting everyone's time.

xvokcarts

10 months ago

One could argue that the potential number of complications in any smartwatch is practically limitless, and also that the sophistication and craftsmanship required to make it, including the hardware part, is the ultimate testimony of refinement and engineering.

If you took an Apple Watch and this Vacheron 2000 years in the past, which one would the people of the time find more impressive (until the juice runs out, that is)? In other words - which one looks more like magic?

We're just used to microprocessors we can't see tick and maybe don't always appreciate the complexity.

_xtrimsky

10 months ago

I agree with what you said. But unfortunately I find this watch to have very little use. If I got it for free, I'd love it's value, wear it once or twice a year to some events, but that's pretty much it. On the other hand I sleep with my Garmin smartwatch, and use it every day. Between vibrating alarm clocks, notification synching (which allows me to use my phone less), NFC wallet, and all the fitness tracking for triathlons, it is one of the electronics I use the most.

I got so used to all the value my Garmin provides, I don't think I could handle replacing it with a watch that does nothing. It would be like going from a smartphone to an old nokia. I'd go crazy not being able to flip my wrist just to check the outdoor temperature.

wenc

10 months ago

I own mechanical watches and had the hardest time switching to an Apple Watch.

But one thing sold me on it. Apple Pay. It’s so convenient to be able to wrist tap things without whipping out my phone. I can pay for things in 1 second. With express transit I can tap to ride subways and buses.

I gave up the status of a mechanical watch wearer for this convenience. And the status is often more limited than we think — I realized no one except other mechanical watches enthusiasts really notice what watch I was wearing. You can wear a Vacheron Constantin and realistically 99% of people you meet will not know what it is and likely will not notice it.

hinkley

10 months ago

When I started on a plan of ramping up my walks to half marathon distances, I knew I didn’t want to have to carry a wallet with me. I had Apple Pay already, which gave me the idea, but I was due a new watch so I got the cellular version, so if I got caught in a storm or tweaked a knee I could call someone to pick me up.

I still wish they got better battery life with each new version. You can chew up that whole battery in about 2:30 by running the workout app, music, and Bluetooth headphones. Half the reason I bought a HRM was to improve the battery life.

And sure enough the time I actually did tweak my knee, I had to stop listening to music and the workout app to conserve the battery long enough to ask for a ride and get somewhere that I could be picked up. By the time they arrived my watch was dead.

wenc

10 months ago

Yes battery is definitely a limitation. I’m able to get 15-16 hours on my Series 7 between charges. That works for me because I just charge it when I shower and it takes no time.

I wonder if for your use case a Watch Ultra might work better? It has a bigger battery.

That said, I agree with you that the battery could be better. Other smart watches have battery lives measured in days. (That said, they also do less)

hinkley

10 months ago

Music and workout at the same time seem to have a power law relationship with power drain.

Most batteries produce more juice when discharged at their preferred rate and produce more heat if driven at full tilt.

zx10rse

10 months ago

There is craftsmanship in software.

It is just the reality that we live in you are not gonna exactly hear from A list celebrity talking about what a wizard Ken Thompson is but you are gonna spot the celebrity secure a brand deal wearing some monstrosity like RM.

As much as like and appreciate mechanical watches let's not kid ourselves you are talking about CNC machines and cad models rest of it is marketing from the 70's quartz crisis.

Given that just Apple watch outsold the whole swiss watch industry I am not sure if VC we will be here in 200 years but some piece of software will be probably still running.

diego_moita

10 months ago

> this Vacheron-Constantin will likely be around 200 years from now

And why should I care? I won't be alive 50 years from now.

Besides, right now, what I care about is functionality. And, right now, my old Pebble offers far more of it than this jewelry for millionaires.

This thing is just a stupid Veblen Good[1], like a diamond ring, a Hugo Boss suit or a Porche Carrerra.

Remember, 150 years ago, millionaires used beaver fur top hats to show off. Have you seen any billionaire wearing them?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

Mainan_Tagonist

10 months ago

Nobody asked you to care. As for co fusing soft from hard luxury... a Porsche Carrera or Bugatti Veyron will likely be worthy of consideration 150 years from now, a Hugo Boss suit, not so much..

diego_moita

10 months ago

> Nobody asked you to care.

Well, you did. It is implicit in your comment.

Don't get me wrong, you have every right of fooling the fools, even to the point of believing in the foolishness and fetishism.

But don't expect me to be one of the fools.

Your overcomplicated watch is just another version of "Jackie Kennedy's fake pearls necklace", as in this video[1]. Your "timelessness" of it is just fake sophistication, like Michael Jordan's "signature" in Air Jordan Nike. You are selling illusions, but it is coherent that you believe in them.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=63oErn-gKfU

boznz

10 months ago

Original iPhone 1 is worth quite a lot actually.

light_triad

10 months ago

If you're interested in the functioning of mechanical watches, they're amazing:

https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-watch/

Previously on HN in 2022: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31261533

ecoffey

10 months ago

Bartosz links to it in the Further Reading section, but wanted to highlight the Wristwatch Revival YouTube channel[0] as well. Really great content and very understandable after reading the article!

0: https://www.youtube.com/c/WristwatchRevival/videos

thom

10 months ago

Love this channel, perfect ASMR for nerds. Marshall is of course also one of the foremost Magic: the Gathering podcasters and commentators.

ecoffey

10 months ago

> perfect ASMR for nerds.

Haha yeah I like to have this on it the background when I’m doing other things.

dang

10 months ago

Thanks! Macroexpanded:

Mechanical Watch (2022) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38591084 - Dec 2023 (163 comments)

Mechanical Watch - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31749299 - June 2022 (1 comment)

Mechanical Watch - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31261533 - May 2022 (413 comments)

LeafItAlone

10 months ago

That is one of the coolest demonstration sites I have ever seen. What a neat way to learn about watches. Kudos to whomever created that page

offsky

10 months ago

I became interested in complicated watches several years ago and knew I could never afford one, so I made a website with simulated watch dials. Just for fun and education. It was also a great way for me to learn svg animations. https://www.complication.watch/

eddyg

10 months ago

Nice!

I loved the Emerald Chronometer⁽¹⁾app for iOS / iPadOS and all its various “calibres” that you could flip over and show in day or night mode. Sadly the dev has removed the apps from the App Store, but it still runs (for now.) It’s a fun use for an older iPad on a stand.

Wanted to mention it in case it gives you some inspiration. :)

⁽¹⁾https://emeraldsequoia.com/h/

mwexler

10 months ago

Emerald Time (https://emeraldsequoia.com/et/index.html) was my favorite clock-setting app. Always fun to see the variation among sources. I was sad to see the company shut down.

ttepasse

10 months ago

Back on New Years Eve 2016 I wanted to see once in my life one of these leap second which got inserted every few years. Emerald Time was the only clock app I found which displayed the deciseconds: https://imgur.com/a/r1d6OkW

(00:59, because of UTC+1)

ngcc_hk

10 months ago

If maintenance is an issue and do not want subscription, why not try open source and patron …

netsharc

10 months ago

The next step up from this would be to simulate all the internal mechanisms as 3D models that interact with each other...

primax

10 months ago

There is a giant world of high end replica watches that are so close to the original that they take expert mechanics to tell apart. I've got a few $500 watches that are identical to $10-40k watches.

Worth checking out reptime to scratch that itch without selling a kidney.

pixelpoet

10 months ago

If only my software were valued by number of complications...

Everything about the high end "movement" scene rubs me the wrong way (I had a friend into it), but most of all, the pompous terminology.

JumpCrisscross

10 months ago

> Everything about the high end "movement" scene rubs me the wrong way (I had a friend into it)

Why? I’m not a watch guy. But I think the engineering is beautiful. It’s also super niche, so there isn’t a financing model outside this to fund it.

guax

10 months ago

The engineering and craft is beyond reproach, beautiful, involved, unique.

The market in which it needs to exist is exclusive, arrogant and elitist. So there is a bittersweet response to it. Makes me think of Royal arts of the past, made to adorn the palaces and display wealth. beautiful, but they're better now at museums. I believe this watch shall too.

JumpCrisscross

10 months ago

> beautiful, but they're better now at museums

Strongly disagree. Pilfered artefacts are usually safer in a Western museum. But they’re more beautiful when left in their natural environment. In any case, if there is one thing sillier than someone with no respect for fine watches treating them as a status symbol, it’s getting upset about it as a bystander.

__loam

10 months ago

You can get a watch that's more accurate and more complex than one of these for under $1000 in an Apple watch or a Casio.

For me, this feels like one of the less harmful things rich people do. Ultimately you're paying a bunch of skilled labor in a developed state to maintain an artistic craft that uses very little energy and material, for a device that has worse functionality than one under $100. The only issue is where you got your money I suppose, and whether that money would have been better spent elsewhere.

matheusmoreira

10 months ago

You can get a Casio F-91W and replace the movement with a Sensor Watch board. The watch then becomes a water resistant temperature compensated quartz wristwatch. It's a literally world class time piece. I calibrated mine and now it deviates a few seconds per year. It's insane how good this thing is. Low power, battery lasts over a year.

It's a fully programmable ARM microcontroller. You can write "watch faces" for it. There's a 2nd factor codes face that lets you log in like you're James Bond on the Nintendo 64. One of the coolest projects I've ever worked on. I made it possible to calibrate the pulsometer, a feature I use frequently at work.

https://www.sensorwatch.net/

They even developed a custom LCD that's even more awesome than the original.

TheOtherHobbes

10 months ago

The point of these is to signal you have money and are enough of an insider to know the high-status brands - or at least high-status enough for that particular social group, who use them to reassure each other they're not in the vulgar Rolex set.

They serve the same function as a designer handbag - although you can at least put things inside a handbag and carry them around.

CydeWeys

10 months ago

This is overly cynical. The target demographic for a really complicated Vacheron Constantin is a rich person who is a HUGE nerd about watches. Think about people who get into really high levels of nerd hobbies and acquire super expensive gear. It's not primarily about showing off.

ehnto

10 months ago

Not that I am wealthy enough to participate, but you see the same thing in cars and the same issue too. Sometimes status signalling and taste end up in the same product, and people who don't care about cars end up with the finest of the cars, almost coincidentally.

TheOtherHobbes

10 months ago

If it was about the nerdery the watches wouldn't be sold with huge margins through a rarefied dealer network located in exclusive shopping locations.

This is an item of jewellery, not a high-end custom PC.

mlyle

10 months ago

I'm not sure buying the super fancy handbag is primarily about showing off, either, and I think people who consume a lot of these goods have a lot of brand knowledge.

I mean, I think you're right in that watch nerds usually have more domain knowledge, but I don't think it's inherently dissimilar.

euroderf

10 months ago

What's "hobby" about it? Is the owner going to open the watch and make modifications as a weekend avocation?

Y-bar

10 months ago

Just like those collecting stamps, figurines, comic magazines, paintings and so on the watch hobbyist pretty much _never_ makes modifications to their items. Why do you consider it a requirement for it to be a hobby?

KaiserPro

10 months ago

For a rolex, yeah.

For virtually any other watch, not so much as to the normal person they are just a watch

petesergeant

10 months ago

> They serve the same function as a designer handbag

Keeping EU trade imbalances from getting too far out of whack?

__loam

10 months ago

Switzerland is not part of the EU lol

TimByte

10 months ago

Like yeah, purely from a utility standpoint, a $50 Casio destroys a mechanical watch in accuracy and durability. But not everything people value is about utility - sometimes it's about beauty, craftsmanship, or just the joy of making something wildly unnecessary really well

microtherion

10 months ago

There is its own beauty and craftsmanship in cramming billions of transistors on a 4nm die.

pca006132

10 months ago

Sadly we don't consider things that are economically efficient as craftmanship :)

GuB-42

10 months ago

> If only my software were valued by number of complications...

If it fits within a size and power budget, then you essentially described sizecoding. In its extreme form, it is not practical, but it is an art form.

pixelpoet

10 months ago

> sizecoding as an artform

See you at Revision next week? :)

GuB-42

10 months ago

Yes! I will be there in person.

slt2021

10 months ago

in the B2B SAAS world these are called "features" or "integrations".

Software with the most integrations and features is usually ends up being the most preferred solution

Hamuko

10 months ago

Yeah, I was just thinking that our B2B SaaS has been trying to churn out as many features and integrations as possible, with customers constantly wanting more and more.

pixelpoet

10 months ago

If you asked someone what a "feature" is, in almost any context, they will probably give you the answer we all expect.

If you ask someone what a "movement" is, they might well refer to the poop they had that morning, or Eurythmy (which I had as a subject at school!), or almost anything.

That's not a statement about how basic language has become, but rather intentionally lofty vagueness (like "bespoke" instead of custom) people invent for things perfectly well described by expressions anyone can use like "high precision timekeeping", but not-so-subtly signaling a higher price.

mlyle

10 months ago

The word "movement" for a watch movement is old. Ditto for "complication". Or "calibre". They come from the late 1700s and early 1800s.

They were the normal words for the items described. They only sound fancy now that they have fallen into disuse.

Actually, ditto for bespoke, now that you mention it.

pixelpoet

10 months ago

Real perspective shift from your comment, thanks! Reading more about usage of those terms now, but I still can't help but feel there's a deliberate "fancypants nonstandard language" signalling going on in the marketing of these "timepieces".

There's an easy parallel to make with the audiophile industry, which uses all kinds of colourful but ultimately vacuous language.

JumpCrisscross

10 months ago

> can't help but feel there's a deliberate "fancypants nonstandard language" signalling going on in the marketing of these "timepieces"

You’re reverting to your priors despite evidence to the contrary.

mlyle

10 months ago

> You’re reverting to your priors despite evidence to the contrary.

Eh, I don't think what he's saying now is unreasonable.

Certainly no one feels a pressure to use a modern term that might have less perceived value-- to say "functions" or "features" instead of "complications."

A big part of the product of a fancy watch, or a bespoke suit, is the traditions. When tradition or sounding fancy is opposed to accessibility, the former will win.

JumpCrisscross

10 months ago

> no one feels a pressure to use a modern term that might have less perceived value-- to say "functions" or "features" instead of "complications

Methods in OOP. Every term in functional programming. Rolex does a little bit of the Apple game, renaming jargon. But the watch industry mostly uses the term the first person to use it deployed. (“Complications” makes more sense than “features” when working multilingual across French, German and Italian.)

I’d also argue that “features” is a bit misleading. Complications aren’t about utility. They’re about art. It’s intentionally overcomplicating something.

mlyle

10 months ago

> Complications aren’t about utility. They’re about art. It’s intentionally overcomplicating something.

This is not the original usage; "complication" does not imply "grande complication."

> ..."features"...

None of your criticism applies to "functions" which is the first term used.

> Methods in OOP. Every term in functional programming.

Yes... I'm saying in a niche, luxury industry based upon exclusivity and tradition, the marketing pushes towards old, foreign, and exotic language. All these things in commodity digital watches are "modules" and "functions" instead of "calibre" and "complications." (With Apple, on the high end, choosing "complication" for some reason ;).

umanwizard

10 months ago

What else would you call a watch movement? That’s just what it’s called, there’s no less fancy word for it.

milesrout

10 months ago

This is a baffling criticism. Why would you expect a niche not to have its own jargon? Not that "bespoke" is (it is an older usage than "custom" and is used widely).

>people invent for things perfectly well described by expressions anyone can use like "high precision timekeeping"

What is "high precision"? Why are you using engineering jargon when you could say something simple like "accurate"? Why are you using such lofty elitist language?

microtherion

10 months ago

It's true that niches have their jargon, but I tend to be suspicious when the jargon makes its way into marketing pitches.

It's one thing if your software vendor writes the software in Haskell, but if their pitch to you is that the software has 40 patent protected monads and is entirely dotless and lambda lifted, you're probably being taken for a ride.

konart

10 months ago

I (surely I'm not alone here) know many people who would say the same thing about software development "scene".

Hell, even _inside_ the software development "scene" you can easily find similar cases. Like when web developer who builds (relatevily) simple web apps on top of Rails earns notably more then someone who works with a complex hardware.

LeoPanthera

10 months ago

> If only my software were valued by number of complications...

Amateur radio software would win:

https://sv1cal.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/image.png

avidiax

10 months ago

Which part of that interface is unnecessary?

I agree, you could have an Apple-like interface that lets you tune a single frequency with a particular modulation, but nothing there seems like it's a constellation viewer that has almost no practical use.

internetter

10 months ago

At the very least, I think they could change some of the design elements to make more effective use of space

LeoPanthera

10 months ago

Where did I say that any of it was unnecessary?

tdeck

10 months ago

I thought this was going to be xnec2c, which has one of the most unintuitive UIs I've ever experienced.

https://www.xnec2c.org/#Nec2Treeview

But after a while I realized that's because it's essentially a graphical wrapper around a punched card program.

7373737373

10 months ago

I do hope watchmakers start to integrate "computational" (instead of temporal) complications into their watches, like a mechanical turing machine or other tiny mechanical computers or calculators which I believe have never been constructed this small.

Inspiration:

Wooden Turing Machine: https://youtube.com/watch?v=vo8izCKHiF0

Curta Calculator: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZDn_DDsBWws

Zuse Z1 Computer: https://youtu.be/R5XnuT6ZLKg?t=283

Maybe also analog ones!: https://youtube.com/watch?v=s1i-dnAH9Y4

appplemac

10 months ago

It feels like a lot of complications the watchmakers are building now are stuck in the early 20th century. Sure, perpetual calendars will always be useful, but what about:

* pomodoro focus timers * multiple TZ support - like GMT watches but more than one additional TZ shown at once * timers * alarms

kingkongjaffa

10 months ago

All of those already exist.

World timers show every timezone

Alarms and timers are available.

Pomodoro can be done with something as simple as a rotating divers bezel.

I agree it would be cool to have them more available in cheaper watches, most complications increase the cost and the more niche you get

microtherion

10 months ago

What I really want is a mechanical bluetooth implementation. It would open up so much other functionality…

7373737373

10 months ago

Maybe possible with a mechanical speaker and microphone, or a tense string between two watches ;)

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

rpicard

10 months ago

The recent Acquired episode on Rolex is a great peak into the world of luxury Swiss watches: https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/rolex

What I love about it all is that whatever arguments are made for or against these sorts of things, I think people are just into it because it’s fun.

JacobiX

10 months ago

What I like about mechanical watches is that, having survived a near-death experience when quartz watches were introduced, they’ve evolved into a completely different kind of product. It’s fascinating that, unlike most other businesses and products, people don’t buy them for their utility, and the less automated their production process, the better. Brands like A. Lange & Söhne even pride themselves on assembling their movements twice.

When inefficiency and craftsmanship are considered features rather than flaws, you have an industry that won’t easily be replaced by AI or robots.

wiether

10 months ago

> people don’t buy them for their utility

That's called luxury goods and that's not limited to watches.

s0rce

10 months ago

Exactly, a painting, for example, has zero utility.

nevertoolate

10 months ago

What item on a wall would have more utility I wonder.

s0rce

10 months ago

A tapestry can reduce echo/reduce sound and provide some thermal insulation, was more relevant in the past.

gcanyon

10 months ago

Time Measurement (6 Total):

    1. Day and night indication for reference city 
    2. Second time zone hours and minutes (on 24-hour display) 
    3. World time indication for 24 cities 
    4. Second time zone day and night indication 
    5. 3Hz tourbillon with silicon balance wheel (with high Q factor) 
    6. Civil time display module coupled to the base movement
Gregorian Perpetual Calendar (8 Total):

    7. Perpetual calendar 
    8. Days of the week 
    9. Date 
    10. Months 
    11. Year indication 
    12. Leap-year indication 
    13. Indication for the number of the week within the year (ISO 8601 calendar) 
    14. Number of the day of the week (ISO 8601 calendar).
Vacheron Constantin Les Cabinotiers ‘Solaria Ultra Grand Complication’ Lunar Indication (3 Total):

    15. Astronomical Moon phase and age of the Moon 
    16. Tide level indicator 
    17. Spring and neap tides indication.
Astronomical Indications (14 Total):

    18. Indications of seasons, equinoxes, solstices & astronomical zodiac signs 
    19. Position of the Sun 
    20. Sunrise time (according to the city of reference) 
    21. Sunset time (according to the city of reference) 
    22. Duration of the day (according to the city of reference) 
    23. Equation of time on tropical gear 
    24. Culmination time of the Sun (according to the city of reference) 
    25. Height of the Sun above the horizon (according to the city of reference) 
    26. Declination of the Sun, 3-dimensional Earth showing the latitude of the Sun in the North/South hemisphere 
    27. Sidereal hours 
    28. Sidereal minutes 
    29. Astronomical zodiac signs 
    30. Sky chart (according to the city of reference) 
    31. Temporal tracking of celestial objects.
Vacheron Constantin Les Cabinotiers ‘Solaria Ultra Grand Complication’ Chiming Complications (5 Total):

    32. Minute repeater 
    33. Westminster carillon chime (4 hammers & 4 gongs) 
    34. Choice of hour-only or full chime 
    35. Crown locking system during the chiming 
    36. Double-stop hammer system to limit rebound and optimize transmission of the hammers' kinetic energy
Chronograph (4 Total):

    37. Chronograph (1 column wheel) 
    38. 60-minute counter 
    39. Split-seconds chronograph (1 column wheel) 
    40. Isolator system for the split-seconds chronograph
Additional Feature:

    41. Power-reserve indication (outer disc at 190°)

mofunnyman

10 months ago

For those of you that don't know a lot about Swiss mechanical movements, this watch isn't just nuts, it's fuckin nuts.

TimByte

10 months ago

Right?? This is like mechanical watchmaking turned all the way up to 11, took a left turn into madness, and just kept going

atonse

10 months ago

I’ve never heard of this company but according to the video below, they’re large enough to have a huge building.

How do these economics work? I’m guessing they’re a maker of very expensive low volume products. But are there that many buyers?

https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/video-vacheron-constantin-...

Same with Richard Mille. Never heard of them but they’re rich enough to sponsor the Ferrari F1 team.

umanwizard

10 months ago

They are both extremely well-known luxury watch manufacturers. The fact that you haven’t heard of them has nothing to do with them, it just means you’re not into luxury watches.

atonse

10 months ago

Indeed. In case I didn't explicitly state it, I was expressing more of a fascination that there are these companies that seem to make high priced luxury items (so they have to be low volume, and likely handmade) but are still large enough in scale to afford these massive fancy buildings, as opposed to be boutique watchmakers, which is how I would intuitively think of this class of craftsmanship.

dharmab

10 months ago

To give you an idea of margins:

- A real Rolex dive watch costs $5k-15k.

- A similar Swiss-made dive watch from a less famous brand costs $2k-4k.

- A similar Japanese-made dive watch from a famous brand costs $500-1000.

- A Chinese-made replica/fake Rolex, mechanically identical to a real one, and only distinguishable by an expert under high magnification, costs about $400-800.

- There are some low-volume watches that are sold for 4-6 figure sums to repeat buyers. Richard Mille in particular has done one-offs for celebrities in the range of 7-8 figures.

As you can imagine you don't need a high volume with margins that large.

manarth

10 months ago

    > A real Rolex dive watch
The "dive" part is a red herring these days, as the use of watches to manage decompression strategies has declined since the 90s, and by early 2000s dive computers became the default tool. Use of a dive-watch for diving is almost non-existent these days.

Some example dive computers, for those interested:

- Suunto Zoop [1] - Shearwater Perdix [2] - Garmin Descent [3]

[1] https://www.suunto.com/en-gb/Products/dive-computers-and-ins...

[2] https://shearwater.com/products/perdix-2

[3] https://www.garmin.com/en-GB/p/632320

cjpearson

10 months ago

It's simply a description of the style of the watch. Just as most people wearing a bomber jacket aren't flying B-52s, and most trench coat wearers aren't fighting in trenches, most dive watch wearers aren't diving. They are still useful terms, despite their relative professions moving on to newer tech.

KaiserPro

10 months ago

Think of it like “art”

You’re paying for time. Seiko make great watches with cnc machines under the orient brand. They cost about £150-300.

In terms of watch, it’s the same type of parts and accuracy as a base Rolex.

Rolex you are paying for the name. Yes, they are better quality than an orient, but not much. There is better QC, and more people looking at the watch before it’s sent out, but in terms of precision of manufacturing, or amount of cnc machine used, it’s mostly the same.

There is a thriving scene in small watch producers, spinnaker, holthinrich, de ryke and co, vortic, Weiss, lorier to name a few. Some are sub £300, others not.

dharmab

10 months ago

I will say there is a easily noticeable jump in build quality from a $300 Orient or Seiko to something like a Tudor Black Bay, or even some of the microbrands in the 2-4k range. You can especially feel it by rotating the bezel and feeling the play in either direction.

But after that tier the quality increase to price ratio pretty much drops to zero.

yjftsjthsd-h

10 months ago

That's the price, but as someone ignorant of this area, I don't know enough to even guess margins from that. How expensive are the parts? I would assume that grade of mechanical components aren't cheap. And we should probably price in the labor.

nextos

10 months ago

Panerai is a good example to estimate margins. When they were unknown, watches costed $1-2k. This was in the mid 90s. Same models now, distributed by a big luxury conglomerate, cost 5-10x more. Quality and components on comparable models are virtually the same.

Likewise, long ago, Rolex was a toolwatch brand and their products were relatively affordable. They are still great, but prices are insane. Vacheron Constantin is on a different class, though, as they sell lots of watches in the high horology category. Insanely complex and difficult to produce. Some similar brands have had financial issues or gone bankrupt.

wincy

10 months ago

I’d imagine a single one of your watch makers dying/quitting would be catastrophic to your business with something that requires this level of skill.

ehnto

10 months ago

I was unsure how to word it, but I think there is a pricesless aspect to the talent that this took. Even though they were probably paid a wage, sometimes outputs by individuals at a company a literally irreplaceable.

CydeWeys

10 months ago

These are luxury products. That's not the point. They use precious metals when steel would work just as well, and the really high end ones take hundreds of hours of hand labor to very finely decorated the dials and movements. Why? Because it's luxury. It's art.

And let's not even get into how much money they spend on marketing and sponsorships ..

noitpmeder

10 months ago

The labor and design are probably the most expensive parts. Think hundreds if not thousands of hours of many ultra specialized people's time.

The actual raw material has to be a fraction of the worth.

adriand

10 months ago

Hopefully steep tariffs on Switzerland will bring watchmaking and watchmakers back to America.

JumpCrisscross

10 months ago

> Hopefully steep tariffs on Switzerland will bring watchmaking and watchmakers back to America

It’s actually a good case study. It no longer makes sense to buy a fine watch from an American retailer. The tariffs incentivise a trip abroad. (I’m seeing something similar happen with skis.)

secondcoming

10 months ago

You risk paying a tariff when you return to the US though.

JumpCrisscross

10 months ago

> You risk paying a tariff when you return to the US though

Not really. I’m bringing back a few thousand dollars of mounted, probably lightly-used, skis. Nobody expects to declare random purchases made abroad. Much less an article of jewellery on their wrist.

dharmab

10 months ago

I've bought watches overseas.

Hypothetically, one could simply wear the watch on their wrist on the flight home. Personal jewelry is not subject to duties.

KaiserPro

10 months ago

It’s already back in America. Plus fr high end customers, there are many ways to avoid tariffs

colechristensen

10 months ago

>How expensive are the parts?

They make the parts.

ZiiS

10 months ago

Chinese ones are down to $100-$300

dharmab

10 months ago

Is that for an homage, or a superrep?

__loam

10 months ago

Vacheron Constantin is one of the big 3 Swiss watch brands that also include Patek Phillipe and Audemars Piguet. These are a tier above Rolex and Omega and they specifically trade on scarceness and exclusivity. You haven't heard of them because they advertise in very specific places to watch nerds and the very wealthy. Each watch can be like $30,000 to $50,000, or even $120,000 for small run products with unique complications.

There's more interesting brands like Moritz Grossman and Bovet that make even rarer pieces but fewer people have heard of them.

bitmasher9

10 months ago

> economics

* Margin. A relatively low prestige Swiss brand (Tag) has stated they charge 3x bill of materials for their watches. The more exclusive the brand, the higher this number goes.

* Volume might be higher than you think. Popular Swiss models sell in the tens of thousands of units a year. Not bad if you’re charging four or five figures per unit.

* Consolidation. There’s a handful of actual parent companies for watch making that are responsible for most sells. Swatch, Citizen, Rolex. They share resources between each other.

* Common suppliers. Some movements are used in multiple brands, even across multiple parent companies. Sometimes a company will buy a movement, modify the movement, and completely rebrand it. This allows better economics of volume for the most complicated aspects of watches.

* Marketing works. There’s no practical reason to buy a $10k (or $40k) Rolex compared to a $25 Casio. There’s a reason James Bond wears expensive watches and that reason is product placement. Some watch conglomerates are publicly traded, so you can look at how much they spend on marketing.

* The fact that you haven’t heard of the brand is part of the point. If you’re wearing >$100k on your wrist you probably don’t want everyone to know. Even at this price point, it’s a highly liquid asset in some cities.

jsheard

10 months ago

> There’s a reason James Bond wears expensive watches and that reason is product placement.

Only since Goldeneye when Omega started paying for product placement. Bond had worn Rolex since the original novels, which were written before their big pivot to luxury, so him wearing expensive Rolexes in later films was more of a historical accident. Rolex never actually paid a cent to appear on screen.

microtherion

10 months ago

The novels always had a lot of wealth signaling from Bond. E.g. in 1953, he ate an avocado, which to British consumers at the time was virtually unknown.

dharmab

10 months ago

Originally Bond wore a Submariner, which wasn't a wealth signal at a time- it wasn't a _cheap_ watch, but also not the choice of a wealthy person. The Submariner was originally a tool watch, used by naval infantry. The modern equivalent would be wearing a G-Shock DW5600 with a tuxedo. It hints that Bond is a military vet.

lossolo

10 months ago

Richard Mille is well known to anyone interested in watches, especially very rich people. You probably haven’t heard of Jacob & Co? Or maybe you’ve heard of Hublot? It’s the same story with Loro Piana when it comes to clothing, and Koenigsegg or Pagani when it comes to cars.

In certain circles, all of these brands are as common as Nike or Mercedes are to the general public.

sbassi

10 months ago

Richard Mille watches, priced at $500,000 or more per piece, are primarily used by wealthy individuals, elite athletes, and Hollywood stars.

KaiserPro

10 months ago

Richard mille watches are a brilliant way to work out who is a prick. Neer trust anyone who wears one.

milesrout

10 months ago

[flagged]

dharmab

10 months ago

I collect watches and also agree with the parent. Anyone who wears a Richard Mille, and isn't being paid to do so, cannot be trusted.

nottorp

10 months ago

Do they have money? Or do they want to make you think they have money?

KaiserPro

10 months ago

I work for a FAANG, I’m in a team that was part of a buyout, I’m surrounded by millionaires. One is wearing a patek phillipe right now. I’ve never seen them be rude to a waitress.

However, richard mille owners on the hand…..

magicalhippo

10 months ago

> primarily used by wealthy individuals, elite athletes, and Hollywood stars

I'm assuming the two latter categories are sponsored to get the first category to buy?

I just know these brands from F1 where the drivers are sponsored, which is very obvious from the way they wear them.

bookofjoe

10 months ago

You will notice at Grand Slam tennis matches the first thing the winner does — even before walking out for the interview — is put on the watch made by their sponsor.

atonse

10 months ago

Right, again my point is, if you're charging 500k for a watch, isn't the market for that watch relatively small (people who have the money + people who care about the watch?) Or are they actually selling, say, a thousand of them?

As I'm saying this, I realize selling a thousand of them probably isn't a crazy volume.

quickthrowman

10 months ago

Vacheron is part of Richemont, a watchmaking conglomerate/holding company.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richemont

It works like any other luxury company, charge an arm and a leg, control the supply so you don’t overproduce, spend a ton on marketing.

Almost all Swiss watch brands (by volume) are owned by either Richemont, Swatch Group, or LVMH. Rolex, Patek, Audemars Piguet, Breitling, and Chopard are the last of the big Swiss independents, but there are smaller ones like Czapek and Cie, H Moser & Cie, Gruebel Forsey, Richard Mille.

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

bradfitz

10 months ago

"most complicated" as if that's something's to be proud of! :)

smugglerFlynn

10 months ago

This is a word play - in the watch world “complication” means “feature”, and this watch has 41 features, which requires tricky design decisions and high precision to house everything in a case that is still wearable.

Something to be proud of, for sure.

umanwizard

10 months ago

It’s not even word play. Complicated is just a term of art meaning having complications.

pests

10 months ago

I don’t see how it isn’t word play? If watch features weren’t called complications then I’d agree with you.

BalinKing

10 months ago

I think would depend on whether the author of the article title was intentionally going for the more common meaning or not. But given that this seems to be a watch news site, I feel like there’s a decent chance the headline is only referring to the term of art (but I don’t know anything about watches, so this is pure speculation).

umanwizard

10 months ago

The author is definitely not going for the more common meaning. It wouldn’t even occur to someone who reads watch publications that this could have been some kind of double entendre or word play.

mahkeiro

10 months ago

It‘s not a word of play as it literally means complicated things added to the normal watch function. The word with that watch making meaning is coming directly from French (most famous watch makers are coming from the speaking part of Switzerland).

pests

10 months ago

So then isn't using "complicated" normally, in an attention-grabbing headline, referring to the watches complications, in a round-a-bout way?

umanwizard

10 months ago

But they’re not using it with its normal meaning in the headline. They’re using it only with the “term of art” meaning. You’re insisting on seeing a double entendre that just isn’t there.

JumpCrisscross

10 months ago

No, it’s a term of art. This discussion is sort of like someone complaining about the term computer being used to refer to both the electronic device and mid-century math whizzes.

esafak

10 months ago

We can play that game in the software world too, but strangely it does not sell :)

stefs

10 months ago

Features in the software world do sell, and they're cheap up to a point. But then complexity and technical debt lead to the hockey stick explosion of cost.

dole

10 months ago

I can nowhere near afford them, but I love most everything about Vacheron Constantin except for that godawful, cheap, brash font they use for their logo. The font on this piece is fine, their overall design and language is great, I'm glad a company like VC pushes the technological limits and industry forward, but that Helvetica-lookin font is visual fingernails-on-a-chalkboard.

russelldjimmy

10 months ago

Not just that, but it also appears to be stretched vertically!

folkrav

10 months ago

I'll be honest, to me, it looks like every other luxury brand logo that happens to use a sans-serif font.

motohagiography

10 months ago

do timepiece complications have theoretical limits that might originate from the "7-fold limit" in origami, or huffman's work on folding curves in origami?

I realize watch complications are stacked disc segments and not folds, but intuitively if you are dealing with a material in a fixed space you either run up against limits in the stiffness of parts down to sheets of atoms, or some theoretical folding limit relative to the thickness of the case. a watch that expressed the proof might be worth the indulgence.

ggm

10 months ago

Mechanical losses in cog and ratchet. At some point, friction won.

pests

10 months ago

Didn’t mythbusters do 8 folds?

gennarro

10 months ago

Model name is “The Veblen”

walrus01

10 months ago

Seems like a Good name

rsynnott

10 months ago

I mean, you could say that of the product category as a whole, really. Mechanical watches have been entirely impractical for some time now.

jsheard

10 months ago

No price given. Needless to say, if you have to ask...

boomboomsubban

10 months ago

A quick look at their website suggests it's probably several hundred thousand dollars.

edit a look at their Wikipedia article, tens of millions seems more likely, if they even sell one.

TheOtherHobbes

10 months ago

The millions are for vintage/antique watches with an interesting provenance/history.

I'd guess this model is somewhere in the $250k to $500k range.

devin

10 months ago

You are quite incorrect. This is a wearable 1/1 and took 8 years to develop and build. The rumor from the Hodinkee folks is around 4 million.

rpozarickij

10 months ago

I haven't heard about Hodinkee before, but their website [0] has a tasteful little detail in the top-left corner. It shows the current date and more details are brought up after clicking on the icon/image next to it.

[0] https://www.hodinkee.com/

boomboomsubban

10 months ago

Their 260th anniversary watch never had the price officially revealed, and they supposedly only sold one, but that is estimated to have gone for over $10 million. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_57260

That one was a pocket watch, but I doubt their wristwatch would be that much cheaper. Maybe I'm wrong.

edit the 250th anniversary watch was a wristwatch and went for a million at the time.

devin

10 months ago

They are indeed selling this one, and have indicated if there are buyers they will make them.

brikym

10 months ago

I don't think it looks very nice. But the whole point of it is for someone to show they have so much excess wealth they can thoughtlessly spend it on something useless and ugly.

gene-h

10 months ago

At some point, making mechanical watches more complicated will require going digital. It is possible to make very small gears with semiconductor processes, however, very small gears wear out fast due to stiction.

In order for gears to work they must have sliding contact and that means wear. Mechanisms based on flexures don't have this problem, but this requires building the clock very differently. It might be possible to implement many of these complications using flexure based logic[0].

[0]https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-08678-0

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

TimByte

10 months ago

I love that we've apparently reached the "absurd flex" stage of watchmaking where it's less about telling time and more about seeing just how much ridiculous wizardry you can cram into a tiny mechanical space

Hauthorn

10 months ago

I think watchmakers have been pushing this for quite a while.

If you want more recent examples, see Richard Mille.

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

nradov

10 months ago

41 complications and no GPS? How am I supposed to upload my runs to Strava?

simpaticoder

10 months ago

I wonder if a mechanical watch could communicate something via radio with some clever placement of magnets and copper on the movement via Faraday induction. Imagine movement that encodes a simple BT handshake. On the more science fiction side, a very tiny Difference Engine that fits on your wrist (I am reminded of a Young Ladies Primer from The Diamond Age, where the compute was nano-mechanical).

layer8

10 months ago

It does allow you to determine your longitude. So just run East or West, I guess?

DennisP

10 months ago

Latitude is easier. Bring along a 5th-century astrolabe and you're all set.

tmnvix

10 months ago

Impressive. Here I am struggling to design a decent UI for a screen of at least 13 inches. I shudder to think how much harder it would be if the only means of interaction were a scroll wheel.

TimByte

10 months ago

Imagine spending 8 years on a project where your entire user interface is literally tiny hands turning a crown the size of a lentil

curiousgal

10 months ago

Yeah I would never give a cent to some Swiss watch company. The only luxury watches I see actually worth their price tag are those made by independent watchmakers like Masahiro Kikuno.

I watched a documentary[0] back in the day that goes over his process of designing and making a watch and it's nothing short of amazing. There's something about swiss watches being so commoditized (even the most expensive ones) that makes their clientele seem outright stupid in my opinion.

0. In Tune with Time: Watchmaker Masahiro Kikuno

user3939382

10 months ago

Still can’t tell time accurately over a long period. The ultimate irony of these collectible expensive watches. I like them anyway out of respect for the engineering but still.

umanwizard

10 months ago

This is sort of like complaining that an expensive dress isn’t very good at protecting the wearer from the elements.

user3939382

10 months ago

I see your point but this still strikes me as a weak analogy. The purpose of any watch is to accurately tell time more than the purpose of any dress is to protect from the elements.

umanwizard

10 months ago

The purpose of cheap clothing is to protect from the elements (and to prevent other people from seeing your naked body). The purpose of a cheap wristwatch is to tell time.

The purpose of expensive versions of both of those is divorced from their original meaning.

microtherion

10 months ago

As demonstrated, e.g., by Bianca Censori's outfit at the Grammys.

rsynnott

10 months ago

These are jewellery, and have been for a long time, really since quartz watches became practical.

DennisP

10 months ago

Achieving the accuracy they do, with just mechanical parts powered by a spring, seems reasonably impressive to me.

It's basically the same technology that John Harrison used to win the Longitude Prize in the 1700s, revolutionizing navigation on the high seas.

jsheard

10 months ago

That said, John Harrison didn't have access to Solidworks and 6-axis CNC machines like today's high horology brands do. The final product may still be fully mechanical but the process of getting there has advanced a bit.

throw0101d

10 months ago

> That said, John Harrison didn't have access to Solidworks and 6-axis CNC machines like today's high horology brands do.

When you get into some of these luxury brands they pride themselves on not using CNC machines. See for example "Machining a 0.6 mm Screw":

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKVqLTzh_z4

DennisP

10 months ago

They also didn't have the materials we use for springs, or some of the mechanisms we use. The fact that these devices are the same basic tech from the 1700s, while at the same time being much more advanced, is actually part of the appeal for me.

guax

10 months ago

This one I believe is not the collectible one. I think is the marketing one. Is the concept car of watch world. The LaFerrari that makes people buy the expensive but cheaper Purosangue.

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

bslalwn

10 months ago

Quartz can’t either :)

jsheard

10 months ago

I guess it depends on your definition of "long period" but high end Quartz movements can achieve ±1 second per year by using a high frequency, thermally compensated oscillator. Movements with atomic radio control can do even better than that of course, though that's arguably cheating since the heavy lifting happens in a standards lab somewhere rather than on your wrist.

defrost

10 months ago

Is that a year of ideal conditions with little to no movement or acceration in standard temp. and pressure conditions, or a year at sea in a barometric rollercoaster with 60 degrees celsius cycling heating and cooling with 2G+ surges of roll, pitch, and yaw?

The mechanical marine chronometer challenge is a tough one.

dghlsakjg

10 months ago

It depends on the maker, not all quartz watches are equal. However, quartz is typically very stable as an oscillator over the conditions that humans can survive in. That’s why we use it in watches after all.

That said, I have used a quartz watch (mid level Citizen) for actual celestial navigation at sea. It is, for all intents and purposes always going to be more accurate than mechanical (mine typically is good for ~1 second per month, and always in the same direction) Certified mechanical watches typically vary more than that in a day, I believe the standard is 2 seconds per day. I don’t know what a proper marine chronometer is certified to, but it is worth pointing out that a marine chronometer is typically not exposed to the conditions you describe at sea. The official ships chronometer is always kept down below, protected in what is effectively a gimballed humidor. For the purposes of navigational measurements, you use your wrist watch at the time of sighting on deck and add or subtract the difference between your watch and the chronometer. To add on to all that, if a ship is rolling and pitching like you describe your chances of an accurate sight are very low. Even in perfect conditions, it is hard to call the exact moment of alignment to within a second.

If I placed my quartz watch in the box with the official chronometer, I am perfectly willing to argue that if there is a discrepancy in the times shown, the quartz watch should be trusted.

defrost

10 months ago

> To add on to all that, if a ship is rolling and pitching like you describe your chances of an accurate sight are very low

You as a human wouldn't shoot a line in those conditions, no.

The point is that mechanical clock mechanisms endure those conditions .. the rise and fall of tempreture, the rise and fall of air pressure, the shock of acceleration (even when sharply reduced by a gimbal mount).

The error bar over months at sea is the tension betwen the drift effect of all those conditions and normalising complications - gimbal mounts, the use of bimetallic strips to counter tempreture change expansions, etc.

In dead calm conditions a mechanical clock at sea carries the accumulated drift baggage of past storms and heatwaves.

Circling back to quartz oscillators, my question above goes to prompting others to ask themselves if an electronic oscillator regulated by a quartz crystal shows any performance differences over a year when harsh real world physical usage conditions are compared to ideal controlled test conditions.

Does temperature affect the oscillator, does humidty, air pressure, accumulated shock forces, etc.

Addendum:

   I cant imagine why an instrument that is ~40x less precise would offer more precise timekeeping
~ @dghlsakjg

  I'm having some difficulty understanding how [..] will have less of an effect on a fragile mechanical system than a tuned electronic one.
~ @TheOtherHobbes

I've reread both my comments above and I'm having some difficulty seeing they can be read to take away a claim that a mechanical marine clock is more accurate than a quartz timekeeping mechanism. Both comments address accuracy in harsh variable conditions versus stable STP lab conditions.

See also: Precision vs. Accuracy - https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/physical/wor...

dghlsakjg

10 months ago

To answer your question directly.

A mechanical timepiece that calls itself a marine chronometer has to be accurate to +-0.5 seconds per day.

The most accurate quartz wristwatch is certified accurate to +-5 seconds per year.

My experience, in the exact harsh real world conditions that you are talking about, is that is a realistic expectation for quartz watch to accomplish. I cant imagine why an instrument that is ~40x less precise would offer more precise timekeeping

jeffbee

10 months ago

A bit LARPy, I would think. The need for ludicrously accurate marine chronometers is doubly obsolete because of the somewhat lessened need for celestial navigation and the fact that the GNSS systems also disseminate the time (in fact, this is the only thing they can do). Even for those obligated to practice celestial navigation, pretty much any old quartz watch will do the job and you can check/set them by WWVB.

defrost

10 months ago

It's a genuine question about the conditions under which error bar performance was claimed (by whomever you quoted).

> A bit LARPy, I would think.

That's all relative - I worked global exploration geophysics for a decade, worked with folk that developed sapphire oscillators for use in gravitational wave detection, dabble with SKA data, etc.

What's role play to some is just a job to others.

TheOtherHobbes

10 months ago

Even the cheapest quartz watches (0.5s/day) are significantly more accurate than a typical Rolex (2s/day) in normal use.

I'm having some difficulty understanding how g shocks, temperature variations, and barometric changes will have less of an effect on a fragile mechanical system than a tuned electronic one.

KaiserPro

10 months ago

Only citizen can achieve that. There are some watches that use external time references to achieve that level of accuracy.

Most are +-5 or 10 seconds a year.

The problem for me is the citizen isn’t that pretty to my eyes.

jeffbee

10 months ago

All electronic oscillator watches are ultimately limited in this competition by the fact that their batteries will run out.

jsheard

10 months ago

Unless it's a Citizen Cal.0100, which is good to ±1 second per year and solar powered. Just don't leave it in a dark drawer for too long :)

user3939382

10 months ago

The solar batteries have a max discharge cycle too though.

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

paulsutter

10 months ago

At first you think, great, im going to buy a fancy watch and I'll wear a platinum Patek that only a banker will recognize. That's how assholes recognize each other, its all in the watch.

But in the end everyone ends up wearing an Apple watch. Nobody knows how to use an Apple watch. Amazing hardware with the worst software ever developed. But it says that you dont care and at least the watch will tell you the temperature outside.

hiyer

10 months ago

Amazing workmanship. And they managed to make the watch look beautiful as well.

mrweasel

10 months ago

Is anyone actually going to use those complications? That's really my question for most high-end watches. I can see a diver using the features on their watch, but how many are actually using a Rolex or an Omega as their regular dive watch?

Chronographs, while cool, isn't exactly a useful why of measuring speed these days, and how often do you really need to do that anyway.

On a mechanical watch having the date might be useful, I know I keep forgetting the exact date, but do I really need a watch to remind me that it's Saturday?

I really love mechanical wristwatches, the mechanics of it is amazing and they are beautiful pieces or engineering and works great as an accessory/jewellery, but I don't understand the need for many of the complications.

ZiiS

10 months ago

The watch with the most complications is any $200 WearOS. You will need to have spent over $1,000,000 on their other watches before they will talk to you about a price for this one; practicality is not a factor to consider.

mrweasel

10 months ago

I realise that, but it's just weird. Technically the majority of the complications wouldn't even need to work, because... Who'd notice?

Seems a bit soul crushing to be working on a complication that no one would ever use.

guax

10 months ago

Everyone will see and praise how good you are. The elite swordmakers of royalty did not think their elaborate swords would see battle, they knew it was a show piece. The point was not the use, was the position and recognition it brought you.

More than half of the watch world does not appreciate the engineering. They appreciate the exclusivity.

mytailorisrich

10 months ago

These are special, collectors items and pieces of art. Of course there is no "need" for all these complications, but it isn't the point.

barbs

10 months ago

I use the day-of-the-week indicator on my Casio watch an embarrassing amount!

litoE

10 months ago

I'm impressed, but with my declining eyesight I don't think I could read most of the dials, even with glasses - I can't even read the date on my Timex. I would love to see a copy of the User's Guide for this watch though.

boznz

10 months ago

They probably just throw a MechEng PhD Professor in for a year as part of the deal.

standardUser

10 months ago

Is there something I don't know about mechanical watch culture/industry that would explain their terrible choice of watch band in those photos?

dogman1050

10 months ago

Incredible. This thing started as metal ore and minerals, and look at what was crafted. Is there even a single phone app that does everything this watch can do?

rlupi

10 months ago

Isn't this the closest thing to a portable antikitera?

HarHarVeryFunny

10 months ago

Plot twist : the antikitera mechanism was worn round the neck as a piece of bling (jk).

microtherion

10 months ago

By Ancient Greek rappers, presumably.

iFire

10 months ago

Would an Apple iPhone 16 Pro be considered a very expensive wristwatch and would the number of transistors break a record?

kijin

10 months ago

Apple watch maybe. Most people don't wear full-size phones on their wrists...

SergeAx

10 months ago

To me, people wearing mechanical watches are like people travelling in steam automobiles or using black-cloth-covered daguerreotype cameras.

jxjnskkzxxhx

10 months ago

Most complicated wristwatch, has all the things you never knew you didn't want.

I'll keep my Casio thank you.

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

dyauspitr

10 months ago

I’m always impressed by the Swiss. They manage to charge an arm and leg for regular things that a lot of the world makes nearly as well on purely mystique and vibes. Watches, chocolates, diamonds, banking etc.

eqvinox

10 months ago

I don't think "a lot of the world" makes a clock like this.

Also that "mystique and vibes" is essentially "a reputation of quality", which has to be earned, and I'd say they did that. Whether it still holds is another question.

kyledehovitz

10 months ago

So cool that Dan Flashes makes wristwatches now

pmdev03

10 months ago

These watches are my EXACT style

mrtransient

10 months ago

Is there an open source Android app with all these complications?

nateburke

10 months ago

No Easter complication?

euroderf

10 months ago

Where is my wristantikythera ?

bslalwn

10 months ago

That strap… way to ruin it

nextos

10 months ago

Given the price tag, it's surely a custom order and I imagine you can tweak lots of details. That's the case for much cheaper Dornbluth & Sohn and other small boutique watchmakers.

w-ll

10 months ago

I kinda agree here, many threads look lose. Even the attach arms look outta place.

user

10 months ago

[deleted]

tomcam

10 months ago

I like my watches the same way I like my women. Quiet, and with fewer complications.

Joke! It’s a joke! Aw, downvote away ye bastards.

DonDhump

10 months ago

Well that's certainly an achievement but not water resistant though.

azinman2

10 months ago

what about this is practical?!

PeterStuer

10 months ago

Hold my beer. I'm sure i can cram some 2FA, biometric authentication, opt out except for 'legitimate interests' activity tracking, cloud services and AI assistants in there.

sombhadursubba

10 months ago

Chick Heidi gogo chick guddu wishlist flair

RobertDeNiro

10 months ago

Are watches going to be tariffed?

kjellsbells

10 months ago

Yes. 31%, at least for now. The administration is...mercurial.

Although one might argue that an additional 31% on a watch that retails for six figures is not going to make a difference to the kind of buyer that spends six figures on a watch. Even if a US watchmaker existed, this kind of buyer seems unlikely to substitute a Vacherin or a Patek for something made in Cleveland.

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/workplace-switzerland/adding-up...

umanwizard

10 months ago

Probably seven figures, actually.

rswail

10 months ago

Not if you wear it on your wrist as you arrive by your private jet to get the personalized immigration and customs service that whisks you through the private areas of the airport to your waiting limo.

gafferongames

10 months ago

[flagged]

LinuxAmbulance

10 months ago

Some people are willing to pay for the engineering.

pixelpoet

10 months ago

Eyyy it's Mr OpenPTC :) Hope you're well mate

gafferongames

10 months ago

Jesus Christ that was a long time ago. Thank you sir!

charcircuit

10 months ago

A smartwatch is going to be much more complicated than this. Millions and millions if lines of code is not simple.

umanwizard

10 months ago

Not what “complicated” means in this context (having complications).

charcircuit

10 months ago

Even with that definition apps can provide more complications than 63.

KaiserPro

10 months ago

A modern synth can make almost any sound, that’s old hat now.

A beatboxer can’t really do two “voices” at once. When they do, it’s impressive because it’s hard.

That’s the point, making stuff purely mechanical is hard.

charcircuit

10 months ago

Are you trying to suggest a smartwatch is easier to build? I think making a smartwatch is much harder to make than a mechanical one.

KaiserPro

10 months ago

A smartwatch in a 45mm case is now pretty easy to build. it won’t be fancy, but an esp32 plus screen in a 3d printed case is something I could make.

A basic mechanical watch movement is something I can’t make. (I have made a case and dial out of aluminium/brass though.)

But, the point I was trying to make is that adding a complication to a smart watch is trivial, something that can be done in a few hours and shipped to everywhere. Adding a complication to a mechanical movement is a lot harder, especially as the iteration time is long.

umanwizard

10 months ago

It’s harder to build one smartwatch from scratch - it took decades and trillions of dollars. However, having already built N of the same smartwatch model, it is much easier to build the N+1st than to build a mechanical watch.

pests

10 months ago

But this is a wristwatch not an app.

lvturner

10 months ago

And while the Apple Watch is objectively better value, it's destined to be e-waste after a couple of years. Mechanical watches last far, far longer.

charcircuit

10 months ago

A smartwatch isn't an app either. They are both platforms that support features to be built on top of them.

pests

10 months ago

Yes but again we are taking about wristwatches, not smartwatches or apps. The features/complications on smartwatches and in apps are different than the complications on wristwatches.

charcircuit

10 months ago

A smartwatch goes on your wrist.

user

10 months ago

[deleted]