I understand that you might want a modern, interesting-looking watch, but if it sacrifices your ability to read the time, i.e. the very purpose of wearing a watch in the first place, then it becomes pretentious. This means no dots or bars or binary or anything like that that you have to mentally calculate before you know what the time is. If it takes more than a glance to tell the time from your watch, you're a twat.

>>3957

I think you meant to say:

>If I can't read time with it, you're a twat.

Because there's no difference between a watch with hands and a binary watch.

>>3958
Lol I knew by including binary in that list I'd step on the toes of some ultranerd. What Linux distro do you use?

>>3959

Crunchbang. But that's not the point. All you have to do is learn how to use the watch and all of a sudden there is no special "mental calculation" that someone with a hands watch wouldn't be doing.

>>3951
I might like Braun watches. Yes, them made watches and some of them are digital.

I guess most of you guys are poor people jealous of wealthy people who can afford themselves good watches. You call people with nice watches "twats" and "cunts". Funny. I am here for the first time and I am surprised a little bit.

I've bought myself simple quartz Tissot watches for about 240$ because those will be not the last watches of mine and as I am going to buy better watches anyway (automatic n stuff) these watches are meant to be simple for everyday use.

>>4028
*you
**they

>>4028
You're not doing a lot to disprove the theory, yanklad.

>>4030
I am not a yank. One can tell it seeing how shitty my English is.

And I am not disproving any theories here.

I have a good Far-East pirate copy of a Tag Heuer Professional, a real version of which would set me back about £1000. I love wearing it, feels great on my wrist, the clasp design and the watchface and everything about it is perfect.

Am I a particularly foolish and pretentious cunt for liking a bootleg version of a posey watch?

>>4033

Perhaps it's just me, but I'd think of you as more of a wanker if you spent the £1000. Then again, I do wear a Timex with a nylon strap.

I guess I'm the cunt of the thread, because I wear a Cartier Roadster. I am under no illusions about it being materially worth the money, I just really like it and when I look at it, it makes me happy.

If it will make you £200 worth of happy, OP, it's worth £200.

Finally got it, and for only £140.
Is a bit bigger than I was expecting but I'm pleased as punch.
Got some ZULU/NATO straps ordered.

Best watch on the market, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

I would buy a watch if I could find one that is almost indestructible.

>>4078
Isn't that one of the key marketing points of g-shock watches?

>>4079
Yes but they splatter their logo all over the face of the watch. It is not stylish and discreet while being indestructible.

>>4080

Sounds like you just need a decent military watch. Most are hardwearing due to the nature of, er, the military.

>>4080
Take a look at the Timex expedition range. Cheap and solid. They sell them on bases in Afghan, or so i've heard.
Have a look at the Expedition Military Classic (Pic related) and the Expedition Military Chronograph.
Nite watches are good, their MX10 watch is issued to the SAS for use in the field. Has it's own NATO issue number.
There is also Traser, as someone further up the thread mentioned.
If you want digital there is the Suunto Core.

>>4082
Wow. That looks fantastic mate. I can't stand digital watches. I will check them out, I hope they aren't too dear.

I'm considering a Nite MX-10 very heavily. About tritium - once it runs out, is that it? Or can I sent it off somewhere to have new tubes installed? If its going to last even half a decade it's going to be worth it, really, but I'd like to know.

Perhaps in ten years they'll have figured out how to reionize my watch.

>>4082
Looks nice, but I gotta' have me a bezel.

My current watch is >>4077.
Amazingly I've got lots of compliments on it from people who don't realize it's been around forever and costs under a tenner.

OP Here.
Have had the Seiko on my wrist almost everyday since I received it, well over a year ago. It's been a dutiful servant. As an everyday/work watch I couldn't have asked for more. It's held up pretty well too, only a few minor scratches and blemishes on the pvd coating and the crystal is scratched up a bit, but this is only noticeable on close inspection, and entirely understandable given what a clumsy cunt I am.
That being said, for a while now I've been longing for something a bit more dandy for the weekends and evenings out so I've ordered the watch in the picture. Citizen BM8475-26E.
I think I now have full blown watch AIDS.
I only ordered it yesterday and I've already been eyeing up other watches tonight.

There's no difference between a £5 watch and a £5000 watch. 8.30 is 8.30. Time is a constant based on meridian. Unless you affect it with gravitational fields.

If you want an accurate watch then spend a pound or two on a digital quartz one. Any more and it's jewellery and novelty, especially mechanical ones. The sky is the limit if you want something that tickles your fancy as an accessory. Just know what you are getting and why, it's your money.

>>4591
Don't stop until you have a watch for every day of the week.

I don't like the first one you got; it looks like a novelty compass on a cheap canvas strap.

I'm inordinately fond of the Timex Weekender. It goes with anything from jeans and a t-shirt to a suit, looks really elegant but costs just £30. It takes NATO standard straps, so you can have a few different colours of strap for a couple of quid each.

>>4592
Time is an illusion, Arthur.

>>4035
It blows my mind to think that someone would pay £4.5k for this thing.

Aside from anything else, walking around with four and a half grand just hanging there on my wrist seems like an obviously bad idea.

>>4597
I think a lot of expensive watches are pretty wank to be honest. I've never seen a Rolex I like the look of, for instance.

>>4598
All watches are wank, especially expensive ones. They're anachronistic. Their time is over.

for the sort of money op is looking at spending I'd choose one of these beauties.

>>4598
I wasn't really making a point about that particular watch, it's more that spending that kind of money on a watch and then risking carrying it with you everywhere you go just strikes me as weird. I don't understand the appeal.

>Their time is over.
Baddum-tsh

>>4599

I disagree. To me a watch does have great practical value. I know many people just use their phone. It's hard to pinpoint exactly, but there's something much nicer in having something physical and single purpose rather than yet another digital screen. No rooting around in your pocket, no unlock mechanism, it's simply there and attached at all times.

It's not just about that, though, it's also about continuity, aesthetics and culture. You could argue many features of the modern business suit are anachronistic, but we still wear it because it communicates something to us visually.

>>4602
Suits are pretty ridiculous. Who the fuck thought up the idea of the tie? How did he convince all the other guys that it was a good idea? It baffles me.

>>4602
I'm forever running for my train home from work. First-world problem, since it's because of my flexi-time. I can't keep whipping my phone out of my pocket to check how close I'm cutting it. That checking my watch is as simple as looking down is a definite advantage over the phone. That, and you're unlikely to drop a wrist watch.

I say "running", being a fat cunt it's more like fast-waddling.

>>4604
Don't worry. Your phone will soon be attached to your face.

I really like the aesthetics of watches.

>>4603

Boring answer is that it is an evolution of styles and designs. A gradual thing. If you look through the history it makes more sense as you see the changes and have them explained and described.

>>4600
I think the Samsung watch is ridiculous. 10 hours battery life? What's the fucking point?

I think that of the recent "smart" watches announced, the Pebble has the most mileage. Same screen as the Kindle (i.e. very good in sunlight) and almost a week in battery life.

10 hours?

Almost a week?

That's really shitty battery life. Fuck that. I've had watches tick along happily for years on a battery. If I wanted one that I had to attend to like that all the time I'd get a wind up one.

>>4608
>10 hours battery life
What kind of R&D department honestly thinks this is an ok battery life for a watch? I would've assumed that was a joke, but a search tells me it isn't. Bizarre.

>>4610

Imagine the humiliation of mid-day or mid-meeting battery swaps and then asking everyone what the right time was when you had to reset it all. Wonderful.

>>4611

Well, it's a watch designed to be linked to your smartphone, so it will set itself from that. And I'm assuming the idea is you charge it each night just like a phone.

It's still extremely inconvenient, but if you want a watch that you can read your texts on you should probably expect to charge it up quite often.

Would a solar powered smartwatch work?

>>4613

Not unless you live in the Sahara and spend all day outdoors. There's just not enough available surface area.

>>4595

I bought myself one a few weeks ago. The design is great, but the mechanism is just too loud. I have to put it in a drawer if I don't want the incessant tick-tick-ticking keeping me awake at night.

This watch really tickles my fancy, you can find it for 40 quid on any high street jewler. Not bad.

>>4616

Tacky as fuck, it looks like it came out of one of those plastic egg vending machines.

>>4617

Scrooge.

I quite like it, m8. Rock on.