Who knows the difference between an annual and perpetual calendar?

[Rollieo]

Without looking it up.

Not trying to bash the “Rolex” guys, as I love Rolex myself. But a bit surprised over in the general Rolex forum that two different people, one with 11k posts and the other with 6k posts, don’t know the difference between an annual calendar and perpetual calendar. I would think that after thousands of posts on TRF you’d at least know the difference between two of the most significant complications in the watch world.

I remember posting an article that talked about how the bi-color ceramic bezel is made on the GMT Master II and the technological reason why the blue/black color shade came out first compared to the Pepsi. Literally crickets, not a single reply.

Seems like most Rolex folks could care less about engineering, technology, and just horology as a whole? Never felt that way about those on the GS or Omega forum.

[Andad]

Seriously?.

Don’t you know?



I know and I also know lots of other things that you don’t know.

[swatty]

I know the difference, does that count ?

[Rollieo]

I feel like I’m being obnoxious.

Being fairly new to the watch game (got into watches over 10 years ago, but would say I didn’t really get into it until the last 2 years), I know there’s a lot I don’t know.

With that said, I also feel like someone who has thousands of posts on TRF and has been on this forum for years, should at least know what I’d considered fairly basic in the watchmaking world. There’s only a handful of complications out there.

[swatty]

Originally Posted by Rollieo

I feel like I’m being obnoxious.

Being fairly new to the watch game (got into watches over 10 years ago, but would say I didn’t really get into it until the last 2 years), I know there’s a lot I don’t know.

With that said, I also feel like someone who has thousands of posts on TRF and has been on this forum for years, should at least know what I’d considered fairly basic in the watchmaking world. There’s only a handful of complications out there.

With everyone having different behavioural styles we are all here for different reasons, some care about technical aspect, some don’t.
Oh it’s the same everywhere you go, not just TRF

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Rollieo

Without looking it up.

Not trying to bash the “Rolex” guys, as I love Rolex myself. But a bit surprised over in the general Rolex forum that two different people, one with 11k posts and the other with 6k posts, don’t know the difference between an annual calendar and perpetual calendar. I would think that after thousands of posts on TRF you’d at least know the difference between two of the most significant complications in the watch world.

I remember posting an article that talked about how the bi-color ceramic bezel is made on the GMT Master II and the technological reason why the blue/black color shade came out first compared to the Pepsi. Literally crickets, not a single reply.

Seems like most Rolex folks could care less about engineering, technology, and just horology as a whole? Never felt that way about those on the GS or Omega forum.

When a thread begins with:

“Not trying to bash the “Rolex” guys”.

It usually “bashes the Rolex guys”.

And it’s not “could care less” it’s “couldn’t care less”.

So now you know two things that I know.

[Brew]

One needs a battery, I think, but I can't recall which. Do I win anyways?

[swatty]

Originally Posted by Brew

One needs a battery, I think, but I can't recall which. Do I win anyways?

[Token74]

Not sure I’m surprised, or think it’s too much of an issue.

Some folk are watch geeks (I consider myself one, albeit still a relative rookie geek) who really cares about movements, history, etc.

Done like nice watches because the look good and they appreciate the quality feel of Rolex on the outside, but don’t care much for what’s going on inside.

Some folk see watches as jewellery, and they exist in their world simply to compliment an outfit.

And for some, it’s just an aspirational luxury product.

Plenty of room for everyone here, no one group is more worthy than another.

Worth remembering of course that Rolex is not haute horlogerie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Old Expat Beast]

Yep, I do.

But I wouldn't knock someone for not knowing. They probably know a thing or two that I don't, and that you don't. That's the strength of TRF....collective knowledge (and tolerance, good manners).

[1William]

So what. Different people have different interests and reason for being into watches. All good and one group is not better than another just different.

[ap1]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Yep, I do.

But I wouldn't knock someone for not knowing. They probably know a thing or two that I don't, and that you don't. That's the strength of TRF....collective knowledge (and tolerance, good manners).

If that’s a PC then maybe I don’t k ow either

[Chewbacca]

I have no shame in saying I had to look it up to confirm what I thought.

(Yes I was wrong haha.)

[Rollieo]

Originally Posted by Andad

When a thread begins with:

“Not trying to bash the “Rolex” guys”.

It usually “bashes the Rolex guys”.

And it’s not “could care less” it’s “couldn’t care less”.

So now you know two things that I know.

Technically you’re not sharing anything I don’t know.

1. I said I’m “not trying to”. Doesn’t mean I’m not going to.

2. Americans say could care less. You can say couldn’t care less, but doesn’t mean that’s the “correct” or “right” way to say it. So not sure that’s something you know that I don’t?

Stupidity aside...

Yea it’s probably obnoxious to start this topic, and maybe judgmental to. I have a prenotion that people that have been interested in watches for a long time should have certain knowledge about them, which probably speaks to an opinion that people should be interested in watches for the same reason I am. And if they aren’t interested in watches the way I am, then it’s the wrong way to be interested in watches. Obviously anyone can be interested in anything for any reason.

Still surprises me though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rollieo]

Originally Posted by Token74

Not sure I’m surprised, or think it’s too much of an issue.

Some folk are watch geeks (I consider myself one, albeit still a relative rookie geek) who really cares about movements, history, etc.

Done like nice watches because the look good and they appreciate the quality feel of Rolex on the outside, but don’t care much for what’s going on inside.

Some folk see watches as jewellery, and they exist in their world simply to compliment an outfit.

And for some, it’s just an aspirational luxury product.

Plenty of room for everyone here, no one group is more worthy than another.

Worth remembering of course that Rolex is not haute horlogerie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ah so true

[sgwatchguy]

I know more about watches than most people; but on TRF I’m in the company of giants.

[GMT-Explorer]

Well, if you consider non-user-intervention only until the year 2100 "perpetual", I suppose a Rolex is lacking!

Originally Posted by Rollieo

Without looking it up.

Not trying to bash the “Rolex” guys, as I love Rolex myself. But a bit surprised over in the general Rolex forum that two different people, one with 11k posts and the other with 6k posts, don’t know the difference between an annual calendar and perpetual calendar. I would think that after thousands of posts on TRF you’d at least know the difference between two of the most significant complications in the watch world.

I remember posting an article that talked about how the bi-color ceramic bezel is made on the GMT Master II and the technological reason why the blue/black color shade came out first compared to the Pepsi. Literally crickets, not a single reply.

Seems like most Rolex folks could care less about engineering, technology, and just horology as a whole? Never felt that way about those on the GS or Omega forum.

[GMT-Explorer]

edited

[Trog]

An "Annual" movement will keep accurate date keeping for a year.

A "Perpetual" has to go back to the manufacturer the moment you try to set it up.

[Locust]

Originally Posted by Trog

An "Annual" movement will keep accurate date keeping for a year.

A "Perpetual" has to go back to the manufacturer the moment you try to set it up.

Lol

[alllexandru]

Originally Posted by Trog

An "Annual" movement will keep accurate date keeping for a year.

A "Perpetual" has to go back to the manufacturer the moment you try to set it up.

Now we know

[Chute]

Can I hi jack this thread and ask:

WHY DOESN’T GRAND SEIKO MAKE AN ANNUAL OR PERPETUAL CALENDAR?

[Oyster Sauce]

Originally Posted by Chewbacca

I have no shame in saying I had to look it up to confirm what I thought.

(Yes I was wrong haha.)

+1 Thanks for your honesty Chewie...I'm in the same boat!

[Goin2drt]

I'm old I say "couldn't care less"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/word...0now%20defined.

Also I did not know and I have been here since 2014. HOWEVER if my life depended on it I would still be living as I guessed correctly before researching.
https://blog.crownandcaliber.com/wha...tual-calendar/

[Fleetlord]

What's all this about

[ejj]

I think the post really gets at different types of watch owners.

Some love the miniature machine aspect and love the technology and complications.
Some love owning cool/popular stuff.
Some love the hunt and the buy.
Some just have one nice watch.
Some care, and some don’t.

[horseShu]

Rolex is a "tool watch" brand. It's marketing schtick is having durable, accurate watches. When the brand's most popular model is a dive watch, you realize that complications is not its thing.

It has been trying, though very slowly. Starting with the annual calendar Skydweller.

If no one here can answer, just post it again in the Patek forums, lol.


Sent from my MI PAD 4 PLUS using Tapatalk

[Aplover5]

Originally Posted by Andad

When a thread begins with:

“Not trying to bash the “Rolex” guys”.

It usually “bashes the Rolex guys”.

And it’s not “could care less” it’s “couldn’t care less”.

So now you know two things that I know.

Love TRF!