On the Sky-Dweller and Annual Calendars

[Seaswirl]

I don’t particularly like the Sky Dweller, but I do find the mechanics of this watch and Rolex’s clever use of the bezel to be fascinating. Isn’t this why many of us like mechanical watches?

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by Seaswirl

I don’t particularly like the Sky Dweller, but I do find the mechanics of this watch and Rolex’s clever use of the bezel to be fascinating. Isn’t this why many of us like mechanical watches?

Agreed on the use of the bezel. I think that is very innovative and cool.

I just wish they had done something other than an Annual Calendar.

A perpetual would have been great. Or, as I suggested above, something that lets the wearer know the date and/or day of the week in both reference time zones would be outstanding. Imagine traveling and knowing that it was 8am on Tuesday the 4th in Tokyo, but 7pm on the Monday the 3rd in New York. How fantastic would that be?

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by FrontHeadlock

But how often does one forget the MONTH? I'd guess almost never. And even at the end of a month into a new month, the date complication tells you all you need to know. Is today May 1? You aren't sure. A quick look at your watch will show "31" and the absurdity of April 31 will lead you to conclude quickly that it's May 1.

This indicates a total lack of comprehension of how an annual calendar works. Good job, OP. The month isn't there to tell the wearer the month but to allow the correct setting of the calendar which needs to be set correctly if it is to correctly adjust for the different lengths of the month (30 vs 31 days). The watch is best worn by those with a single watch who travel internationally and want minimal involvement in adjusting their watches. If worn continually it needs only be adjusted for time accuracy other than once a year or for the purpose of changing time zones. If an owner wants that then they either need an annual calendar with GMT or an Apple (or similar) watch.

BTW, there's been plenty of discussion of this on the forum in the past. A good search will reveal this.

[Roy7]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

This indicates a total lack of comprehension of how an annual calendar works. Good job, OP. The month isn't there to tell the wearer the month but to allow the correct setting of the calendar which needs to be set correctly if it is to correctly adjust for the different lengths of the month (30 vs 31 days).

To be fair I doubt most people knew that....

Of course I did... obviously.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

This indicates a total lack of comprehension of how an annual calendar works. Good job, OP. The month isn't there to tell the wearer the month but to allow the correct setting of the calendar which needs to be set correctly if it is to adjust for the different lengths of the month (30 vs 31 days).

I already addressed that in my OP. You're hanging your hat on the 1 date adjustment per year vs. 5 date adjustment per year benefit.

This is exactly where I think the complication represents a very marginal benefit over the date, but is substantially less interesting than a perpetual.

Prior to having an automatic date complication, suppose you had a date window on your watch that you had to update manually. That would require 365 (or 366) adjustments per year. Having an automatic date complication reduces that to FIVE per year. That is a fantastic complication.

The annual calendar only moves that down from 5 times per year to once. Four extra 1-day date adjustments is pretty minor. And as I said previously, it's never going to be the case that an adult will forget which months have 30 vs 31.

Contrast with the perpetual calendar, which for most wearers means they will NEVER ave to adjust the date. It's practically good for a lifetime.

From an engineering and benefit perspective, I've always viewed the upgrade to a calendar as perpetual or bust.

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by FrontHeadlock

I already addressed that in my OP. You're hanging your hat on the 1 date adjustment per year vs. 5 date adjustment per year benefit.

This is exactly where I think the complication represents a very marginal benefit over the date, but is substantially less interesting than a perpetual.

Prior to having an automatic date complication, suppose you had a date window on your watch that you had to update manually. That would require 365 (or 366) adjustments per year. Having an automatic date complication reduces that to FIVE per year. That is a fantastic complication.

The annual calendar only moves that down from 5 times per year to once. Four extra 1-day date adjustments is pretty minor.

Contrast with the perpetual calendar, which for most wearers means they will NEVER ave to adjust the date. It's practically good for a lifetime.

From an engineering and benefit perspective, I've always viewed the upgrade to a calendar as perpetual or bust.

Then what's the point of the "forget the month" comment. I call BS.

Originally Posted by Roy7

To be fair I doubt most people knew that....

Of course I did... obviously.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a watch forum; seems like most would want to understand what they're talking about. This has been hashed out in great detail in the past as well.

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Then what's the point of "forget the month" comment.

Because one could ALSO say that a benefit of an annual is to tell one the month, but it's functionally impossible to not know the month if one already knows the date.

Look, reasonable people can disagree. And I do think that, from an aesthetics perspective, having an annual can be nice, and perhaps that's the answer. But from a complication and engineering perspective, I find the annual to be kind of in no man's land -- not beneficial enough vs the date, but also way less cool than the perpetual.

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by FrontHeadlock

Because one could ALSO say that a benefit of an annual is to tell one the month, but it's functionally impossible to not know the month if one already knows the date.

Look, reasonable people can disagree. And I do think that, from an aesthetics perspective, having an annual can be nice, and perhaps that's the answer. But from a complication and engineering perspective, I find the annual to be kind of in no man's land -- not beneficial enough vs the date, but also way less cool than the perpetual.

At the price point this is a remarkable, amazing watch regardless of the opinions of those who don't care for it. Rolex put together a unique, innovative watch capable of showing off their true skills as craftsmen. Kudos to them.

Adding another nugget through edit; for a perpetual, the month needs to be shown as well as the year in cycle.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by FrontHeadlock

Because one could ALSO say that a benefit of an annual is to tell one the month, but it's functionally impossible to not know the month if one already knows the date.

Perhaps ... but you could also extend that argument to the Day Date complication. If one knows the date do they not know the day?

I get that it’s easier to remember the month but some of us are challenged with both.

Regardless, I think it’s a remarkable reference and Rolex put its own unique touch to the layout. Pretty cool and useful too

[Jostack]

Originally Posted by FrontHeadlock

The annual calendar only moves that down from 5 times per year to once. Four extra 1-day date adjustments is pretty minor. And as I said previously, it's never going to be the case that an adult will forget which months have 30 vs 31.

You make a gross assumption when you say an adult will never forget which months have how many days. I’ve never committed it to memory, so I guess maybe technically you are correct, and not knowing is not the same thing as forgetting. Assume for a minute that I don’t know which months have 30 vs 31 days. Those 4 extra days may a require a change, but if you don’t recall which are which to start, each end of month comes with some anxiety determining if you have to adjust your date or not. It would be pretty handy to only have to worry about February, which is unique and, for me at least, easier to remember. That said, Perpetual calendars are amazing. Annual calendars are still pretty cool.

[Caynuck]

Maybe people just like to say annual

[Amochosto]

I like the annual complication, when you look at a normal watch it tells you how much time has gone by in the day, with the annual complication, you can get a feeling for how much of the year is gone with a quick glance. It’s a cool feeling as far as I’m concerned. Then you consider the GMT wheel which is helpful for travel to different time zones, and really you have one of the most functional Rolex watches out there.

[vivicorsi]

Best bang for buck actually in the Rolex line up!

[vivicorsi]

[tjs00]

No one needs a watch at all these days...

[procrustes]

Thirty days hath September,
April, June and November;
All the rest have thirty-one,
Excepting February alone,
And that has twenty-eight days clear
And twenty nine in each leap year.

Probably the only 16th century poem most of us know by heart.

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by procrustes

Thirty days hath September,
April, June and November;
All the rest have thirty-one,
Excepting February alone,
And that has twenty-eight days clear
And twenty nine in each leap year.

Probably the only 16th century poem most of us know by heart.

Except for February alone,
Which has four and twenty four,
And every leap year one day more.

[MrCowboy99]

My thoughts-

With my phone, I call "time and temperature" since my watch doesn't have temp either. (try it if you don't believe me 817-844-6611). Maybe next year at Basel I can get the temperature and even a heart monitor (EKG) in a Rolex complication. We old geezers would love to be put on a list if that happened to get one but we might not last (hence the EKG need). Bottom line, enjoy what you have as they smile at you and appreciate them for what they are and not what they needed to be.

Now, where can I get one of these Blue SDs.!

[calatravato]

I would say that the least bang for your buck complication is the helium escape valve. Who goes down deep enough where this thing is actually useful? On second thought, who uses a Rolex for diving these days?

A close second is the moon phase. Who needs to know the moon phase, as a previous post said, unless you’re a werewolf? Even if you needed to know it-dude...look up.

I don’t even quite understand what a tourbillion really is, so I’ll say that’s #3.

Then, I guess, the annual calendar.

Having said that, i love all of these complications!

[timeisfathaoftruth]

It seems like a fun complication to me!

It's a great looking watch to me and I love to have one!