[HN Gopher] Vacheron Constantin breaks the world record for most...
___________________________________________________________________
Vacheron Constantin breaks the world record for most complicated
wristwatch
Author : bookofjoe
Score : 309 points
Date : 2025-04-11 22:26 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.hodinkee.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.hodinkee.com)
| jsheard wrote:
| No price given. Needless to say, if you have to ask...
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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/
| devin wrote:
| They are indeed selling this one, and have indicated if there
| are buyers they will make them.
| brikym wrote:
| 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.
| bradfitz wrote:
| "most complicated" as if that's something's to be proud of! :)
| smugglerFlynn wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| It's not even word play. Complicated is just a term of art
| meaning having complications.
| pests wrote:
| I don't see how it isn't word play? If watch features
| weren't called complications then I'd agree with you.
| mahkeiro wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| So then isn't using "complicated" normally, in an
| attention-grabbing headline, referring to the watches
| complications, in a round-a-bout way?
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| 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.
| umanwizard wrote:
| 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.
| BalinKing wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| esafak wrote:
| We can play that game in the software world too, but
| strangely it does not sell :)
| stefs wrote:
| 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.
| internetter wrote:
| Did anyone else struggle to read this article? It felt very
| circulatory and... complicated
| defrost wrote:
| Wooden works for me: https://www.keepthetime.com/blog/valerii-
| danevych-wooden-wat...
| motohagiography wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Mechanical losses in cog and ratchet. At some point, friction
| won.
| pests wrote:
| Didn't mythbusters do 8 folds?
| gennarro wrote:
| Model name is "The Veblen"
| anigbrowl wrote:
| [expensive chuckling]
| walrus01 wrote:
| Seems like a Good name
| pixelpoet wrote:
| 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.
| m463 wrote:
| software does have tail recursion.
|
| This might be more like wrist recursion.
|
| EDIT: I wonder if a nixie wristwatch would be a middle ground?
| bookofjoe wrote:
| https://www.timesticking.com/steve-wozniaks-nixie-watch/
| slt2021 wrote:
| 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
| pixelpoet wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > _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 wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| > _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 wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| What else would you call a watch movement? That's just
| what it's called, there's no less fancy word for it.
| milesrout wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| Hamuko wrote:
| 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.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| At the very least, I think they could change some of the
| design elements to make more effective use of space
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| Where did I say that any of it was unnecessary?
| __loam wrote:
| 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.
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| 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.
| petesergeant wrote:
| > They serve the same function as a designer handbag
|
| Keeping EU trade imbalances from getting too far out of
| whack?
| __loam wrote:
| Switzerland is not part of the EU lol
| CydeWeys wrote:
| 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.
| mlyle wrote:
| 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.
| ehnto wrote:
| 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.
| euroderf wrote:
| What's "hobby" about it? Is the owner going to open the
| watch and make modifications as a weekend avocation?
| Y-bar wrote:
| 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?
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| 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.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| For a rolex, yeah.
|
| For virtually any other watch, not so much as to the normal
| person they are just a watch
| bookofjoe wrote:
| Casio F-91W: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43636954
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| 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.
| TimByte wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| There is its own beauty and craftsmanship in cramming
| billions of transistors on a 4nm die.
| pca006132 wrote:
| Sadly we don't consider things that are economically
| efficient as craftmanship :)
| GuB-42 wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| > sizecoding as an artform
|
| See you at Revision next week? :)
| GuB-42 wrote:
| Yes! I will be there in person.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > _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.
| milesrout wrote:
| You seem to have confused expense with arrogance and
| elitism. Honestly it just sounds like you are envious of
| people that can afford to spend their money on expensive
| luxuries.
| konart wrote:
| 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.
| tmnvix wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Imagine spending 8 years on a project where your entire user
| interface is literally tiny hands turning a crown the size of a
| lentil
| user3939382 wrote:
| 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.
| bslalwn wrote:
| Quartz can't either :)
| jsheard wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| jeffbee wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > 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.e
| du/exploringourfluidearth/physical/wor...
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| All electronic oscillator watches are ultimately limited in
| this competition by the fact that their batteries will run
| out.
| jsheard wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| The solar batteries have a max discharge cycle too
| though.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| 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.
| DennisP wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > _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
| umanwizard wrote:
| This is sort of like complaining that an expensive dress isn't
| very good at protecting the wearer from the elements.
| user3939382 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| As demonstrated, e.g., by Bianca Censori's outfit at the
| Grammys.
| guax wrote:
| 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.
| bslalwn wrote:
| That strap... way to ruin it
| w-ll wrote:
| I kinda agree here, many threads look lose. Even the attach
| arms look outta place.
| nextos wrote:
| 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.
| light_triad wrote:
| 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
| dang wrote:
| 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)
| perihelions wrote:
| There's also a neat one about the _process_ of making
| mechanical watches,
|
| https://watchesbysjx.com/2017/05/portrait-masahiro-kikuno-
| ja... ( _" Masahiro Kikuno, Japanese Independent
| Watchmaker"_)
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14610110 (108 comments)
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19011880 (98 comments)
| ecoffey wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Love this channel, perfect ASMR for nerds. Marshall is of
| course also one of the foremost Magic: the Gathering
| podcasters and commentators.
| ecoffey wrote:
| > perfect ASMR for nerds.
|
| Haha yeah I like to have this on it the background when I'm
| doing other things.
| LeafItAlone wrote:
| 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
| nradov wrote:
| 41 complications and no GPS? How am I supposed to upload my runs
| to Strava?
| layer8 wrote:
| It does allow you to determine your longitude. So just run East
| or West, I guess?
| DennisP wrote:
| Latitude is easier. Bring along a 5th-century astrolabe and
| you're all set.
| simpaticoder wrote:
| 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).
| dole wrote:
| 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.
| folkrav wrote:
| I'll be honest, to me, it looks like every other luxury brand
| logo that happens to use a sans-serif font.
| russelldjimmy wrote:
| Not just that, but it also appears to be stretched vertically!
| litoE wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| They probably just throw a MechEng PhD Professor in for a year
| as part of the deal.
| RobertDeNiro wrote:
| Are watches going to be tariffed?
| kjellsbells wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Probably seven figures, actually.
| rswail wrote:
| 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.
| charcircuit wrote:
| A smartwatch is going to be much more complicated than this.
| Millions and millions if lines of code is not simple.
| umanwizard wrote:
| Not what "complicated" means in this context (having
| complications).
| charcircuit wrote:
| Even with that definition apps can provide more complications
| than 63.
| pests wrote:
| But this is a wristwatch not an app.
| lvturner wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| A smartwatch isn't an app either. They are both platforms
| that support features to be built on top of them.
| pests wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| A smartwatch goes on your wrist.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| umanwizard wrote:
| 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.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| 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.
| atonse wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| noitpmeder wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Hopefully steep tariffs on Switzerland will bring
| watchmaking and watchmakers back to America.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| It's already back in America. Plus fr high end customers,
| there are many ways to avoid tariffs
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _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 wrote:
| You risk paying a tariff when you return to the US
| though.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _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 wrote:
| 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.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| 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 ..
| colechristensen wrote:
| >How expensive are the parts?
|
| They make the parts.
| manarth wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| 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.
| ZiiS wrote:
| Chinese ones are down to $100-$300
| dharmab wrote:
| Is that for an homage, or a superrep?
| KaiserPro wrote:
| Think of it like "art"
|
| You're paying for time. Seiko make great watches with cnc
| machines under the orient brand. They cost about PS150-300.
|
| 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 PS300, others not.
| lossolo wrote:
| 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.
| __loam wrote:
| 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.
| sbassi wrote:
| Richard Mille watches, priced at $500,000 or more per piece,
| are primarily used by wealthy individuals, elite athletes, and
| Hollywood stars.
| magicalhippo wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| 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.
| KaiserPro wrote:
| Richard mille watches are a brilliant way to work out who is
| a prick. Neer trust anyone who wears one.
| milesrout wrote:
| Because they have money? Do you know how envious you sound?
| I wouldn't be surprised if you were literally green with
| it.
| nottorp wrote:
| Do they have money? Or do they want to make you think
| they have money?
| KaiserPro wrote:
| 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.....
| dharmab wrote:
| 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.
| atonse wrote:
| 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.
| bitmasher9 wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| quickthrowman wrote:
| 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.
| nateburke wrote:
| No Easter complication?
| michaelssilver wrote:
| Patek Philippe held the precious record with the Grandmaster
| Chime: https://www.patek.com/en/company/about-time/the-
| grandmaster-...
| iFire wrote:
| Would an Apple iPhone 16 Pro be considered a very expensive
| wristwatch and would the number of transistors break a record?
| kijin wrote:
| Apple watch maybe. Most people don't wear full-size phones on
| their wrists...
| kyledehovitz wrote:
| So cool that Dan Flashes makes wristwatches now
| pmdev03 wrote:
| These watches are my EXACT style
| rpicard wrote:
| 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.
| paulsutter wrote:
| 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.
| mofunnyman wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| Right?? This is like mechanical watchmaking turned all the way
| up to 11, took a left turn into madness, and just kept going
| dyauspitr wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| curiousgal wrote:
| 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
| 7373737373 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| What I really want is a mechanical bluetooth implementation. It
| would open up so much other functionality...
| 7373737373 wrote:
| Maybe possible with a mechanical speaker and microphone, or a
| tense string between two watches ;)
| Mainan_Tagonist wrote:
| 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.
| TimByte wrote:
| My $40 Casio surviving everything from camping trips to getting
| dunked in a sink still feels like its own kind of masterpiece
| Mainan_Tagonist wrote:
| And in a way, it is...
| PeterStuer wrote:
| Used to have one of those. Survived daily swim practice and
| saunas for years.
| bookofjoe wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| A158 (Obama) for the upgrade to steel, A168 for EL
| backlight.
| ooterness wrote:
| Look at moneybags over here paying $30 for a watch. /s
| jxjnskkzxxhx wrote:
| One thing I like about Casio's, especially the cheap
| ones, is how unpretentious they are.
| helij wrote:
| 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.
| jxjnskkzxxhx wrote:
| I went thru a couple of F91W and the bracelet kept
| breaking. I since got a A158WA-1. Check it out.
| bookofjoe wrote:
| Done. Thank you!
| tokai wrote:
| All the F-91Ws I have gotten through Amazon have been
| fakes.
| LeafItAlone wrote:
| >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 wrote:
| 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.
| benhurmarcel wrote:
| The people who buy this kind of watches don't usually wear
| them much, they store them in a safe environment.
| ZiiS wrote:
| But I can buy an Apple Watch Ultra every year for the next 200
| years for less.
| Mainan_Tagonist wrote:
| So, 199 Apple watches Ultra in landfills 200 years from now.
| Congrats.
| ZiiS wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 499 actually. Can't let our unsold overproduction dilute
| the demand for the next model, so straight to the landfill
| it is.
| sorokod wrote:
| Apple watches are unlikely to exist then
|
| Apple is unlikely to exist then
|
| You... well you already know.
| threeseed wrote:
| 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.
| bookofjoe wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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....
| chuckadams wrote:
| 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.
| StopDisinfo910 wrote:
| > 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.
| milesrout wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| mplanchard wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| DennisP wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| Jewellery, masterpiece of craftsmanship, wealth signaling ...
| and least importantly a time keeping device!
|
| It is a nice looking watch!
| userbinator wrote:
| 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.)
| jasode wrote:
| _> 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 $4000 :
| https://www.geochron.com/clocks/boardroom/
|
| A lot of expensive offices had that and I thought I had to have
| it too. But then I bought cheap atomic clocks you never had to
| set and the web had dynamic maps I could explore. Even the new
| Geochron units don't automatically set to the radio signal from
| atomic clocks. New technology completely cured me of wanting to
| buy a Geochron. People used to want tall grandfather clocks in
| the house foyer as an elegant piece of accent furniture. Now
| you can't even give away those clocks for free on craigslist.
| Everybody has clocks on their smartphones so buying a
| grandfather clock for the house isn't a priority anymore. Even
| if we romanticize grandfather clocks with descriptions about
| "heirloom furniture craftsmanship, intricate wood carvings,
| etc", it still won't entice most people today to want one.
| konart wrote:
| I have somewhat different store.
|
| Moved to Garmin (for sports and outdoor activities) and Mido
| as an everyday watch from Apple Watch (had 3 and 7 versions).
| Can't really imagine going back.
|
| I guess I was sold the idea that I neeed notifications,
| weather and all this bullshit on my wrist all the time.
|
| At some point I realized I've disabled notifications
| completely and basically the only thing I was using my Apple
| watch was paranoidal heart rate monitoring.
|
| >Swiss mechanical movement yada yada yada...
|
| Most swiss mechanical movements cost 50-100$ though.
| jasode wrote:
| _> 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").
| mplanchard wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| _> 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+mod
| el&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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| _> 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 wrote:
| > 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
| theamk wrote:
| 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.
| jaybna wrote:
| 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...
| 42772827 wrote:
| I want one, but not with that terrible projection! I'd
| prefer one inverted at least.
| RHSeeger wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| RHSeeger wrote:
| 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.
| cjpearson wrote:
| 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)
| jasode wrote:
| _> , 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 wrote:
| 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.
| WillPostForFood wrote:
| _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.
| Mainan_Tagonist wrote:
| The fact that she had batteries in those Cartier and Omega
| says a lot, and explains why the Apple watch had such an
| appeal.
| umanwizard wrote:
| A watch with batteries that can die is by definition not a
| mechanical watch like this one.
| lm28469 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| > 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/VacheronConstanti
| n/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.
| davidivadavid wrote:
| The fact you think this is a $100k watch shows you may
| not really be looking at it with the right framework?
| RHSeeger wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| _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.
| wan23 wrote:
| 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.
| euroderf wrote:
| Wristwatches are fetishized but not buggy whips.
|
| To each his own I guess.
| Gud wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > _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 & Sohne. 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 wrote:
| 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.
| diego_moita wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| > 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
| coldtea wrote:
| > _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 wrote:
| Good luck finding a compatible battery for it after 200
| years.
| WXLCKNO wrote:
| I'll just ask the ruling AI to summon one into existence
| from the required atoms?
| coldtea wrote:
| 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.
| zx10rse wrote:
| 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.
| crazygringo wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| I wonder how many of these Casios and Apple watches will be
| in working order, and as functional as day one.
| crazygringo wrote:
| 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.
| wenc wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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.
| xvokcarts wrote:
| 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.
| TimByte wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| I think watchmakers have been pushing this for quite a while.
|
| If you want more recent examples, see Richard Mille.
| quickthrowman wrote:
| This is not new to watchmaking in the slightest. Highly
| complicated watches have been made for over 200 years.
|
| Henry Graves Supercomplication was made by Patel Philippe in
| 1933, which was 92 years ago;
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patek_Philippe_Henry_Graves_...
|
| An even older example is the Marie Antoinette watch by Abraham
| Breguet, which was started in 1783, 243 years ago:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Antoinette_(watch)
| mrweasel wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| I use the day-of-the-week indicator on my Casio watch an
| embarrassing amount!
| sombhadursubba wrote:
| Chick Heidi gogo chick guddu wishlist flair
| lofaszvanitt wrote:
| This looks nice.
| hiyer wrote:
| Amazing workmanship. And they managed to make the watch look
| beautiful as well.
| dogman1050 wrote:
| 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?
| PeterStuer wrote:
| 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.
| JacobiX wrote:
| 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 &
| Sohne 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 wrote:
| > people don't buy them for their utility
|
| That's called luxury goods and that's not limited to watches.
| rlupi wrote:
| Isn't this the closest thing to a portable antikitera?
| HarHarVeryFunny wrote:
| Plot twist : the antikitera mechanism was worn round the neck
| as a piece of bling (jk).
| microtherion wrote:
| By Ancient Greek rappers, presumably.
| gcanyon wrote:
| 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 190deg)
| danielktdoranie wrote:
| Sounds complicated
| offsky wrote:
| 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/
| netsharc wrote:
| The next step up from this would be to simulate all the
| internal mechanisms as 3D models that interact with each
| other...
| rpozarickij wrote:
| For those interested, the following article is a really cool
| explanation/visualization of the mechanical watch:
| https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-watch/
|
| (The website contains so much more than this)
| eddyg wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| 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 wrote:
| If maintenance is an issue and do not want subscription,
| why not try open source and patron ...
| primax wrote:
| 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.
| jxjnskkzxxhx wrote:
| Most complicated wristwatch, has all the things you never knew
| you didn't want.
|
| I'll keep my Casio thank you.
| staplung wrote:
| 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...
| philshem wrote:
| Another nice longform essay, from the NYer (2017)
|
| https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/20/confessions-of...
| CSSer wrote:
| It reminds me of the Theo Jansen's Strandbeests
| nayuki wrote:
| > 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 wrote:
| 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.
| nayuki wrote:
| > 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.
| theamk wrote:
| 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)
| amscanne wrote:
| 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".
| gweinberg wrote:
| It would be absurd to say an analog electronic computer was
| digital.
| emchammer wrote:
| 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.
| gweinberg wrote:
| 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.
| snovv_crash wrote:
| I have a feeling we'll feel the same looking back on combustion
| engine cars.
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| 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.
| gene-h wrote:
| 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
| DonDhump wrote:
| Well that's certainly an achievement but not water resistant
| though.
| azinman2 wrote:
| what about this is practical?!
| euroderf wrote:
| Where is my wristantikythera ?
| mrtransient wrote:
| Is there an open source Android app with all these complications?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-04-12 23:01 UTC)