On the Sky-Dweller and Annual Calendars

[FrontHeadlock]

The Annual Calendar has always struck me as one of the "least bang for your buck" complications available, and it that vein I think it makes the Sky-Dweller a bit overrated from a complications perspective.

First, consider the lack of importance of an annual calendar. While one might wish to time something on a chronograph, or have a reference timezone on a GMT, the annual calendar is surprisingly useless. When it comes to the calendar, having a date complication is useful, because especially if one is not near an electronic device, remembering the exact date can sometimes be a pain. It's quite common for people to forget the date, and so having the date on one's watch can solve that problem. Similarly, one can also easily forget the day of the week, and so even the Rolex Day-Date is a complication of some use.

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.

Some might say that an annual calendar is a benefit because you only have to change the date once a year, but that is overstated. Because most months have 31 days, you only have to change the date on a watch with a date complication 5 times per year compared to once for an annual calendar. And on any watch with a quick date set, it's as simple as advancing the date by a single day 4 times per year. Not too big a deal. On the other hand, a perpetual calendar is actually quite impressive not only for its feat of engineering, but also because an owner quite possibly will not have to change the date for his entire life, or only once at the absolute most.

Once a watch has a date complication, pretty much ANY other complication is more useful to me than an annual calendar, and if I want a calendar complication, the perpetual is vastly superior.

For those reasons, the annual calendar complication on the Sky-Dweller is fairly overrated. In fact, given that the watch is marketed as the ultimate watch for frequent travelers, I actually think the day of the week combined with the GMT and the date would have been more useful, or even a complication that would give the wearer the day of the week (or the date) for both the current time zone as well as the 2nd time zone, since someone who travels long distances might forget that the other time zone is a different date or day of the week.

Any arguments to the contrary?

[rw2008]

It's 2019.

Debating the relative "usefulness" of mechanical wristwatch complications is like debating which zeppelin we should use to cross the Atlantic.

Complications, while some may still be quite useful everyday (GMT), are just part of the charm now.

[Hutrmila]

How often there is no charge and no one around you ... telling you time / day/date etc. How many people really time things by watch rather than smartphones ... appreciation and acknowledgment is I believe the thing ... there might be robots completing even mechanical watch in future but the scarcity of the human touch (sometimes those few humans) and velocity of those little turbines / engines ... even that little red dot (me not having SKyDw in collection yet - if ever as I kinda don’t support over 40 sizing) is what we aficionados admire ... or don’t we ... then what ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[subprimero]

The annual calendar was conceived as value piece by Patek. The 5035 is approximately half the price of the 3940 perpetual even though it has more components. A 5035 can be had for the price of a simple Calatrava. The Sky Dweller, at current market prices, is not any more expensive than a BLNR. Why not have a complicated watch if it doesn't cost any more than a simple watch?

[marc12]

The same can be argued for a simple time and date only 5711 going for $65k :)

[wiswrist]

You know the SkyD has a GMT complication as well, right?

[KBM]

Originally Posted by rw2008

It's 2019.

Debating the relative "usefulness" of mechanical wristwatch complications is like debating which zeppelin we should use to cross the Atlantic.

Complications, while some may still be quite useful everyday (GMT), are just part of the charm now.

It's not often that the first reply is enough to close the debate. Kudos to you!



In a nutshell, every single complication these days is about the marvel of little machines (ideally man made) doing god knows what on your wrist. Cell phones and digital watches take care of the need for "useful" stuff.

[fsprow]

I thought the Sky Dweller did in fact do the 30 vs. 31 days in month accounting, just not the 28 day February or leap years.

As has been said, complications just add luster to the mechanical wonder of a watch. Certainly complications like the "moon phase" on my Patek are of little value, except perhaps to vampires.

[jason10mm]

Rolex is missing the functionality of many other watch brands, or they put a significant premium on what other brands stick in a sub-$200 watch (DD versus any old seiko with day date for example). Their touted milguass has less mag resistance than a modern Omega dress watch! They clearly are not making professional use watches anymore, it is all just wrist jewelry that reflects the past. All they are missing now are display backs and their transformation will be complete

[enjoythemusic]

Know thyself.

Love annual calendars personally and have had Pateks first AC 5035 and have a SS SkyD blue now. Also had a Patek perpetual, bit of a PIA to deal with those old-school pushers. The SkyD is sooooo much better imho.

And yes, some of us do forget month, day of week, and of course date. Working the Internet means every day 'looks the same' to me :)

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by fsprow

I thought the Sky Dweller did in fact do the 30 vs. 31 days in month accounting, just not the 28 day February or leap years.

As has been said, complications just add luster to the mechanical wonder of a watch. Certainly complications like the "moon phase" on my Patek are of little value, except perhaps to vampires.

It does.

Your second sentence was sorta my point. The perpetual calendar is the one with the wonder, as is the moon phase. The annual calendar to me, as someone said above, is really just a cost-saver vs the perpetual.

I'm submitting that the annual calendar both never has any use (even if other complications are used infrequently, they ARE used) and also has no wonder.

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by rac10000

You know the SkyD has a GMT complication as well, right?

Of course. The annual calendar adds nothing to the watch.

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by rw2008

It's 2019.

Debating the relative "usefulness" of mechanical wristwatch complications is like debating which zeppelin we should use to cross the Atlantic.

Complications, while some may still be quite useful everyday (GMT), are just part of the charm now.

In case you missed it, I've specifically said that the Annual calendar provides little to no charm, which is part of the problem.

If you want charm go perpetual. Annual adds neither charm nor use.

[George Ab]

For me, the beauty of an annual complications is the art of the complication implementation in the movement. I have attended a leap year party of collectors who specifically collected perpetuals... pretty cool https://www.rolexforums.com/showpost...4&postcount=25. For personal use, no I do not need an annual. One of my favorite watches a Glashutte Original Senator does not have a date and is super easy to read.

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by George Ab

For me, the beauty of an annual complications is the art of the complication implementation in the movement. I have attended a leap year party of collectors who specifically collected perpetuals... pretty cool https://www.rolexforums.com/showpost...4&postcount=25. For personal use, no I do not need an annual. One of my favorite watches a Glashutte Original Senator does not have a date and is super easy to read.

Yes, I get that and I think that is a reasonable counterargument. From an aesthetics standpoint, you like to see how they are incorporated.

The perpetual party I think further proves my point that the wonder of the complication is really at the perpetual level. Dood link.

I think part of it is that I find the Sky-Dweller to be a disaster aesthetically.

[rw2008]

Originally Posted by FrontHeadlock

In case you missed it, I've specifically said that the Annual calendar provides little to no charm, which is part of the problem.

If you want charm go perpetual. Annual adds neither charm nor use.

The level of "charm" is completely subjective

[rw2008]

Originally Posted by kauebm

It's not often that the first reply is enough to close the debate. Kudos to you!



In a nutshell, every single complication these days is about the marvel of little machines (ideally man made) doing god knows what on your wrist. Cell phones and digital watches take care of the need for "useful" stuff.

[challer]

So don’t buy one. I sign many documents every day. The date matters. The day never. The GMT is good as I travel every week. The calendar is nice as I don’t know which months are 30 vs 31. But we all know about Feb.

[t65tampa]

It is impossible to rationalize "bang for your buck" complications or functions of a luxury timepiece. A $20 Casio calculator wristwatch is going to blow away any Rolex in that regard.

[joli160]

Pretty useless watch but I like it

[Hutrmila]

Originally Posted by joli160

Pretty useless watch but I like it

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TimeOnHand]

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by challer

So don’t buy one. I sign many documents every day. The date matters. The day never. The GMT is good as I travel every week. The calendar is nice as I don’t know which months are 30 vs 31. But we all know about Feb.

100% agree about the date. It's easy to forget the exact date. Also agree about the GMT.

But again, how could you not know which months are 30 vs 31? You would really look at a Sub and say "oh wow, it's November 31 already!"

[brandrea]

I don’t agree with your premise ... probably one of the most useful.

[FrontHeadlock]

Originally Posted by brandrea

I don’t agree with your premise ... probably one of the most useful.

I've made my arguments above. Make your arguments as to why an annual calendar is one of the most useful of all complications. I'm open to hearing them.

The aesthetics argument above was a good one, and probably the best so far.

[MR. STEEL]

LMAO why are you even on this forum? Just look at your phone to know the time and zip it

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by FrontHeadlock

I've made my arguments above. Make your arguments as to why an annual calendar is one of the most useful of all complications. I'm open to hearing them.

The aesthetics argument above was a good one, and probably the best so far.

Well I suppose as above, it could be argued that all mechanical watches are becoming redundant and thereby less “useful” however since everyone here on the forum appreciates mechanical timepieces (why else would you be here ) then I think it would be obvious

A watch with a complication that functions to perform hour, day, date and month is pretty darn impressive and useful as a complication IMO. It’s also quite a feat in terms of mechanical watchmaking.

We are talking about time keeping after all.

[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.