New GMT face

No disrespect, but: Meh. Speaking for myself, I don’t believe Apple’s goal here was to turn a 21st century wrist computer into a lifelike simulation of a 60-plus-year-old Swiss analog GMT watch design. This is a new digital platform with a new kind of interface that allow — and require — new paradigms for reading and interaction.

My watches haven’t ever been expensive, but I’ve been wearing them regularly for about 40 years now. (How do you do, fellow kids?) The Apple Watch doesn’t work like any of them; as a result, it’s been more useful in every way.

That said, I’ll bet Apple wants feedback from users with specific use cases for wristwatches — but they’re less likely to find it here than in the place they provide for users like us to reach their developers directly. I’d be sure to send this to them at https://apple.com/feedback (if you haven’t already).

Look at the Rolex GMT II, (one of most prolific and standards of the Aviation world).

...as I mentioned, and as this poster mentions, make the “GMT” model like a “standard” GMT watch, or rename it to something else.

It’s deceptive - let alone being a battery powered watch which dies in less than 2 days without charging, it doesn’t replace the analog GMT.

There isn’t ANY paradigm being set for a watch which dies in less than 2 days on an aviators, (military and commercial) mariner (mainly commercial) and certainly an astronaut.

My point was it absolutely WILL NOT replace the aforementioned avocations requirement for a GMT timepiece which is essential for professional reasons.

The thing works great!! as a fitness or a wear around town watch, (not much if anything beats it as such) but when I’m on the road (I’m a professional aviator - airline pilot) I can’t have something which will die on an all day job. If I was still in the military flying missions, I don’t think this thing would cut it either. And of course this would absolutely not cut it in space.

I was disappointed after the excitement of seeing a “GMT” watch face coming only to discover it really is just another dual time zone watch.

There are lots of use cases for a GMT watch outside aviation. Smart people can disagree, so we’ll have to disagree on whether naming an Apple Watch face “GMT” is an attempt to deceive users into thinking it will give their Apple Watch all the function and features of a Rolex model that costs 30 times the price.

If your Apple Watch wasn’t suitable for your aviation use case before, a new watch face on it probably isn’t going to change that. This is a face that displays the time using a rotating ring that offers a readout similar (but no, not identical) to GMT watches (of which there are many styles and brands).

As it happens, Apple’s GMT face doesn’t suit my use case any better than it sounds like it suits yours. But this thread will become useless — if it hasn’t already — if it’s just filled with people pointing out that Henry Ford still hasn’t given them the faster horse they want.

Agreed on the battery life, not to mention the chance of a software glitch requiring a reboot and time reset, when needing to rely on it for aviation (really as a backup to the multitude of timers on your glass panel, iPad EFB, etc. these days). But just in terms of the GMT face being as advertised, it does appear to provide the information a real GMT watch does at a glance with the "GMT" hand, if you simply select UTC as the red hand/bezel time zone and leave it there. Apple should have said "this is a *GMT face. *if you select UTC as the second timezone for the bezel".

Keep in mind that Omega isn't the only game in space. Fortis has watches space-certified by the Russian and German space agencies. (Mind you, I own an Omega Speedmaster Professional and do not own a Fortis Official Cosmonauts AMADEE-18 but...)

https://www.watchbuys.com/store/pc/catalog/detail/FT-107.jpg

Thanks, this is a good suggestion. Though the “GMT” face does show GMT as a second time zone, I think it should have been renamed as a second time zone face and not as a “GMT” face. But, marketing is marketing.

I sent a suggestion to the link you posted. Hopefully they listen!

Thanks!

IMHO - in this case I want the horse to still alive when I’m using it for a professional purpose, I don’t want the horse to lay down and die!

At least the “old horse”, (automatic watch) keeps running, vs. the “latest steed” (the Apple Watch) which barely lasts on an all day international trip from (example) Newark to Sydney, or Chicago - Joberg, or working all day domestic flights without worrying about charging the darned thing.

And as one poster pointed out, now this is becoming a “gas bagging session”...

——-

yes, I still think my Apple Watch is nice, I’ll use it on ALL of my fitness sessions from 20-100 mile bike rides, (but just about any bicycle ride above about 8 hours, the Apple Watch “craps out” - along with Apple Phone, have to use a battery backup pack for the phone otherwise it dies too, at least the Apple phone has a way to use an external battery pack - if one is actively using a fitness app, GPS and maybe music, the watch will NOT last. Example: Seattle - Portland one day ride (206 miles) - used the iWatch 4 last year, the watch died from a full charge at 0445PDT and died within 12 hours later, luckily the ride was almost over when it died and I charged the watch from the external battery pack from my iPhone. The Heart strap feeding into my riding partners Garmin kept delivering data throughout and after, while my Apple Watch died.

Cool watch!

My cousin was in the NASA Astronaut Corps - Naval Aviator, (ring knocker) Test Pilot, didn’t get to go up before he retired, but still tests airplanes for a private company, wears an Omega GMT. I asked him last night after I got back from an international trip what he thought of using an Apple Watch if he were to go to space. You can guess what he said...

—-

It would be great if the Apple Watch would last a few days. I might consider changing to it here on earth because of the utility of the watch. :)

Yes, the iPad is a great tool along with the EFIS displays. My company (as I’m sure many others and military) still carry paper backup approach plates/paper Nav charts in case the tech fails. (It would be several steps of course before “absolute” failure happened and most pilots I know still have an E6-B in their flight bags - rather be safe than sorry...)

I've noticed most of these comments were written, as was the watch face released around the equinox. I am seeing the two colors' size of bezel change, as if it indicates length of day. That would be unique, as there is no adjustment for latitude other than the latitude of the selected tome zone city.

The red hand shows whatever you select by double-tapping on the watch face and then selecting a timezone, any timezone of your choosing; i.e. I live in the EST timezone but have relatives in Germany so I select BER (with the little outside bezel) after I double tap on the watch face. Once you select a timezone, you'll have to tap on the little check mark to save it. In my case, the the red hand shows that BER (Berlin) is 6 hours ahead of my local time. To make it easier to recognize, I changed my watch to 24-hours via the watch app on my phone. So, if it's 3 p.m. in my EST zone, the red hand is on 21 (9:00 p.m.) for BER.

Same here. It seems like Apple is trying to reinvent one of the most practical, easy to understand, and established watch faces. The more I use, the more I’ve become confused by it. It’s nothing more than a pretty watch face rather than being a practical tool.

I don’t use the Apple Watch for work.

1. The battery doesn’t last long enough for what I need it for (professional aviation) without charging it periodically, and

2. The “GMT” dial is not what a traditional “GMT” dial looks like. Granted, the change to a dual time zone look is nothing new, but IMHO (and many others on this blog) appear to have the same opinion.

I wish Apple would have left the “GMT” dial the way professional people who use it, alone.

Oh well....

Actually this thread brings up the need fir a suggestion. Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) is always expressed in 24-hr format. This is true in Han/shortwave radio, military, scientific and other disciplines. I would suggest to the UTC face author that if UTC is selected, it is always displayed in 24-hr format, regardless of the user’s preference. Thanks for reading!