Screen protectors - naysayers stay out

[orev]

right but it sounds like it's scuffing much easier than we're accustomed to with screen protectors as well as peeling which is a big no-no.

I mean only a few weeks in and people reporting multiple visible scuffs and peeling edges is not typical of today's screen protectors.

I think it's just a different mode of operation then we're used to on phones. A watch gets bumped around a lot more than a phone, not to mention the curve is a real pain to deal with something like this. It's still early days with this type of product, so maybe they will need to adjust their approach. Like most first-gen products, even the screen protectors need to have their bugs worked out.

----------

Mine stayed down at the edges from the best buy install. Took about 6 hours for all bubbles to clear and looks great..

Yeah, after it's been installed it should stay down, but if you're installing it yourself it takes a while.

 

[psylence2k]

I think it's just a different mode of operation then we're used to on phones. A watch gets bumped around a lot more than a phone, not to mention the curve is a real pain to deal with something like this. It's still early days with this type of product, so maybe they will need to adjust their approach. Like most first-gen products, even the screen protectors need to have their bugs worked out.

----------



Yeah, after it's been installed it should stay down, but if you're installing it yourself it takes a while.

You really think a watch gets bumped around more though ? I feel like phones go in and out of pockets at least 10 times a day and sits in there with everything from wallets, keys, extra change, and so forth clanging and rubbing against it. Then people take them out and lay them around everywhere. Then the fact that it's not attached to you allows it to be dropped constantly. Yeah I definitely have to give to phones by far.

 

[kovey]

You really think a watch gets bumped around more though ? I feel like phones go in and out of pockets at least 10 times a day and sits in there with everything from wallets, keys, extra change, and so forth clanging and rubbing against it. Then people take them out and lay them around everywhere. Then the fact that it's not attached to you allows it to be dropped constantly. Yeah I definitely have to give to phones by far.

It sounds like you're a first time watch wearer? I've been wearing a watch for years. Watches definitely get hit around a lot more frequently, unexpectedly, and a lot more forcefully than a phone.

 

[psylence2k]

It sounds like you're a first time watch wearer? I've been wearing a watch for years. Watches definitely get hit around a lot more frequently, unexpectedly, and a lot more forcefully than a phone.

No I actually have been wearing watches since I was like 9. I own like 8 different watches right now. So I feel I'm pretty qualified to say that.

Unless you're swinging your watch arm very wildly, widely, and vigorously everywhere you go in general most peoples' watches dont come into physical contact with hard objects as often as their phones do. Girls keep their phones in their purses, guys keep their phones in their pockets. That's daily contact with keys, change, wallets, and other things. Then since they're not attached to your body people take them out, lay them around, drop them all day long.

I see cracked, scratched, and scuffed phones at a MUCH higher rate than I do watches and yes I do check out the watches of friends and acquaintances. so therefore this isn't me just going off my own experience but observing the experience of others.

 

[enderg]

Stay away from this one!!!!

Someone was a brave early adopter and was NOT a happy camper!

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00WU6WYB0...UTF8&colid=38VL9DMDYG66J&coliid=IZWP05UVMLZAD

 

[kovey]

Someone was a brave early adopter and was NOT a happy camper!

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00WU6WYB0...UTF8&colid=38VL9DMDYG66J&coliid=IZWP05UVMLZAD

He got screwed, but that's kinda hilarious.

 

[kmichalec]

He got screwed, but that's kinda hilarious.

I wonder if he doesn't have a 42MM protector with a 38MM watch?

 

[Pez555]

Those in the UK looking for full screen coverage I have found one on eBay (and ordered). Should be here tomorrow.

Last resort for me. I've used a tempered glass and it looks like crap as it doesn't adhere at the edges.

Gonna try these wet install full screen ones. Only thing I'm concerned about is dust accumulating where the protector joins the glass/aluminium. If it does then I'm saying bye bye to any screen protector and going naked.

Here is the link to the eBay item:

http://m.ebay.co.uk/itm/171707885773?nav=SEARCH

Will report back tomorrow!

 

[orev]

No I actually have been wearing watches since I was like 9. I own like 8 different watches right now. So I feel I'm pretty qualified to say that.

Unless you're swinging your watch arm very wildly, widely, and vigorously everywhere you go in general most peoples' watches don't come into physical contact with hard objects as often as their phones do. Girls keep their phones in their purses, guys keep their phones in their pockets. That's daily contact with keys, change, wallets, and other things. Then since they're not attached to your body people take them out, lay them around, drop them all day long.

I see cracked, scratched, and scuffed phones at a MUCH higher rate than I do watches and yes I do check out the watches of friends and acquaintances. so therefore this isn't me just going off my own experience but observing the experience of others.

I really don't think most people keep their phone in their purse or pocket just jamming around with everything else. Purses have side pockets and most people use those for the phone. Pants have a pocket on each side, 1 for the phone and 1 for everything else. Also, keys, change, etc... as has been shown ad-nauseum have a lower hardness than the glass on phones, so they are never going to scratch it because of chemistry. Finally, any movement within a pocket or purse is relatively small and the energy is distributed among everything in there, reducing the energy on any one point. Cracked phone screens are 99% from people who drop them on a hard floor, not due to contact with something else in a pocket or purse.

A watch on the other hand, is completely exposed all the time. This alone puts the watch in much higher danger simply because of the amount of time its exposed. Also, many of the things you walk past of the same or higher hardness of the glass (concrete walls, stone, marble, etc...), and if any contact is made, all the energy is concentrated directly on the contact point. Watches are also attached to the most active part of your body which is moving around almost all the time doing something.

I really don't think the characterization that phones are in harm's way more often is correct. They spend most of their time either tucked away, sitting still on a table, or being held with 1 or 2 hands while they are the object of a person's attention. A watch does none of those things and is moving around on the end of an arm while a person's attention is focused on other things.

 

[psylence2k]

I really don't think most people keep their phone in their purse or pocket just jamming around with everything else. Purses have side pockets and most people use those for the phone. Pants have a pocket on each side, 1 for the phone and 1 for everything else. Also, keys, change, etc... as has been shown ad-nauseum have a lower hardness than the glass on phones, so they are never going to scratch it because of chemistry. Finally, any movement within a pocket or purse is relatively small and the energy is distributed among everything in there, reducing the energy on any one point. Cracked phone screens are 99% from people who drop them on a hard floor, not due to contact with something else in a pocket or purse.

A watch on the other hand, is completely exposed all the time. This alone puts the watch in much higher danger simply because of the amount of time its exposed. Also, many of the things you walk past of the same or higher hardness of the glass (concrete walls, stone, marble, etc...), and if any contact is made, all the energy is concentrated directly on the contact point. Watches are also attached to the most active part of your body which is moving around almost all the time doing something.

I really don't think the characterization that phones are in harm's way more often is correct. They spend most of their time either tucked away, sitting still on a table, or being held with 1 or 2 hands while they are the object of a person's attention. A watch does none of those things and is moving around on the end of an arm while a person's attention is focused on other things.

From experience, I've seen that most people do constantly put their phones in their purse or pocket with other items. I make sure to try to remember to never to do that since I'm more anal than most people and hate even the tiniest scratch but even I have made the mistake during busy hectic or just forgetful times to accidentally put my phone in my pocket with change or keys and yes those were the singled out times when I realized a scratch right after or soon after on both glass screen protectors and bare screens from experience over the past 7 Iphones I've owned. This has happened multiple times. So I'm not going by hypothetical speculation or secondary information but rather first hand experience.

If there's someone who's conscious enough to make sure their phones stays separate at all times from other objects than most likely that person is also conscious enough to not recklessly move their arm around because of them being conscious of the watch on their arm. The common person who isn't super mindful of either is still getting the phone scratched/damaged more than their watch from my experiences and observations like I stated before.

Like I've said, I've owned many watches for many years and even the ones that are non-sapphire dont really have any visible scratches (crosses fingers) after years of use. On the other hand, Ive experience scratches on about 4 of the Iphone screens or screen protectors I've owned from the first Iphone all the way up to the 6 Plus and it's almost always after I accidentally slide them in my pocket while forgetting change or keys are already in there.

Watches are constantly exposed but they're constantly exposed to air while staying strapped to your wrist. They're not constantly being rotated in and out of environments where they almost always are more likely to have contact with hard objects (pockets, desks, counters, dropped on ground, purses, etc).

Like I said, you can break down hypothetical speculations but I'm talking about first hand experience being a owner of multiple watches and Iphones as well as observing alot of my friends and acquaintances who own both as well.

 

[deathtotoasters]

No I actually have been wearing watches since I was like 9. I own like 8 different watches right now. So I feel I'm pretty qualified to say that.

Unless you're swinging your watch arm very wildly, widely, and vigorously everywhere you go in general most peoples' watches dont come into physical contact with hard objects as often as their phones do. Girls keep their phones in their purses, guys keep their phones in their pockets. That's daily contact with keys, change, wallets, and other things. Then since they're not attached to your body people take them out, lay them around, drop them all day long.

I see cracked, scratched, and scuffed phones at a MUCH higher rate than I do watches and yes I do check out the watches of friends and acquaintances. so therefore this isn't me just going off my own experience but observing the experience of others.

I really don't think most people keep their phone in their purse or pocket just jamming around with everything else. Purses have side pockets and most people use those for the phone. Pants have a pocket on each side, 1 for the phone and 1 for everything else. Also, keys, change, etc... as has been shown ad-nauseum have a lower hardness than the glass on phones, so they are never going to scratch it because of chemistry. Finally, any movement within a pocket or purse is relatively small and the energy is distributed among everything in there, reducing the energy on any one point. Cracked phone screens are 99% from people who drop them on a hard floor, not due to contact with something else in a pocket or purse.

A watch on the other hand, is completely exposed all the time. This alone puts the watch in much higher danger simply because of the amount of time its exposed. Also, many of the things you walk past of the same or higher hardness of the glass (concrete walls, stone, marble, etc...), and if any contact is made, all the energy is concentrated directly on the contact point. Watches are also attached to the most active part of your body which is moving around almost all the time doing something.

I really don't think the characterization that phones are in harm's way more often is correct. They spend most of their time either tucked away, sitting still on a table, or being held with 1 or 2 hands while they are the object of a person's attention. A watch does none of those things and is moving around on the end of an arm while a person's attention is focused on other things.

From experience, I've seen that most people do constantly put their phones in their purse or pocket with other items. I make sure to try to remember to never to do that since I'm more anal than most people and hate even the tiniest scratch but even I have made the mistake during busy hectic or just forgetful times to accidentally put my phone in my pocket with change or keys and yes those were the singled out times when I realized a scratch right after or soon after on both glass screen protectors and bare screens from experience over the past 7 Iphones I've owned. This has happened multiple times. So I'm not going by hypothetical speculation or secondary information but rather first hand experience.

If there's someone who's conscious enough to make sure their phones stays separate at all times from other objects than most likely that person is also conscious enough to not recklessly move their arm around because of them being conscious of the watch on their arm. The common person who isn't super mindful of either is still getting the phone scratched/damaged more than their watch from my experiences and observations like I stated before.

Like I've said, I've owned many watches for many years and even the ones that are non-sapphire dont really have any visible scratches (crosses fingers) after years of use. On the other hand, Ive experience scratches on about 4 of the Iphone screens or screen protectors I've owned from the first Iphone all the way up to the 6 Plus and it's almost always after I accidentally slide them in my pocket while forgetting change or keys are already in there.

Watches are constantly exposed but they're constantly exposed to air while staying strapped to your wrist. They're not constantly being rotated in and out of environments where they almost always are more likely to have contact with hard objects (pockets, desks, counters, dropped on ground, purses, etc).

Like I said, you can break down hypothetical speculations but I'm talking about first hand experience being a owner of multiple watches and Iphones as well as observing alot of my friends and acquaintances who own both as well.

Wow...you two seem to have everything all figured out and have so much experience that you can talk for everyone else. lol

 

[orev]

Wow...you two seem to have everything all figured out and have so much experience that you can talk for everyone else.

Finally someone who appreciates what I have to say.

 

[airfrancisco]

Anyone got experience with KlareKare? It got high reviews and looks similar to armorsuit

 

[roddenshaw]

From experience, I've seen that most people do constantly put their phones in their purse or pocket with other items. I make sure to try to remember to never to do that since I'm more anal than most people and hate even the tiniest scratch but even I have made the mistake during busy hectic or just forgetful times to accidentally put my phone in my pocket with change or keys and yes those were the singled out times when I realized a scratch right after or soon after on both glass screen protectors and bare screens from experience over the past 7 Iphones I've owned. This has happened multiple times. So I'm not going by hypothetical speculation or secondary information but rather first hand experience.

If there's someone who's conscious enough to make sure their phones stays separate at all times from other objects than most likely that person is also conscious enough to not recklessly move their arm around because of them being conscious of the watch on their arm. The common person who isn't super mindful of either is still getting the phone scratched/damaged more than their watch from my experiences and observations like I stated before.

Like I've said, I've owned many watches for many years and even the ones that are non-sapphire dont really have any visible scratches (crosses fingers) after years of use. On the other hand, Ive experience scratches on about 4 of the Iphone screens or screen protectors I've owned from the first Iphone all the way up to the 6 Plus and it's almost always after I accidentally slide them in my pocket while forgetting change or keys are already in there.

Watches are constantly exposed but they're constantly exposed to air while staying strapped to your wrist. They're not constantly being rotated in and out of environments where they almost always are more likely to have contact with hard objects (pockets, desks, counters, dropped on ground, purses, etc).

Like I said, you can break down hypothetical speculations but I'm talking about first hand experience being a owner of multiple watches and Iphones as well as observing alot of my friends and acquaintances who own both as well.

From personal experience I have cracked one smartphone screen, but in the same ownership period I have damaged multiple watch glasses. I wear watches while doing things like working on my car, crossfit, playing sports, etc. I do not use my phone during such activities, therefore my watches are much more exposed to danger. Also, the damage tends to be worse because it is usually the result of a sharp impact rather than rubbing against something.

I'm quite conscious of protecting my phone's screen, but to relate that to inhibiting the movement of one of my arms because I am aware of the watch I wear is very tenuous.

 

[psylence2k]

From personal experience I have cracked one smartphone screen, but in the same ownership period I have damaged multiple watch glasses. I wear watches while doing things like working on my car, crossfit, playing sports, etc. I do not use my phone during such activities, therefore my watches are much more exposed to danger. Also, the damage tends to be worse because it is usually the result of a sharp impact rather than rubbing against something.

I'm quite conscious of protecting my phone's screen, but to relate that to inhibiting the movement of one of my arms because I am aware of the watch I wear is very tenuous.

Yes I understand that there are some people whose lifestyles and jobs would make them an anomaly as is in almost every situation. People who work in heavy duty manual labor would also be one of those exceptions.

Alot of people with relatively nice watches I know as well as myself take watches off when they're doing such activities as playing ball, doing extensive manual labor, lifting heavy weights.

I assume the watches you wear during these activities likely aren't that expensive since you're okay with keeping them on knowing the heightened probability of damage. Most people with watches $100 or under will usually be okay with this. People with more expensive watches will usually be conscious of not only taking their watches off during these activities but just their arm movements in general.

Like I said, I'm a generally careful person, I've scratched only a couple watch faces probably over the 14 or so watches I've owned over my lifetime and I consider myself reasonably active with sports and manual labor at certain points in my life. Phone screens I've probably scratched 4-5 out of my 7 Iphones and usually when I go out and get a look at the watches and phones of acquaintances and friends I notice way more shattered, scratched, scuffed screens than I do watch glasses.

 

[roddenshaw]

Yes I understand that there are some people whose lifestyles and jobs would make them an anomaly as is in almost every situation. People who work in heavy duty manual labor would also be one of those exceptions.

Alot of people with relatively nice watches I know as well as myself take watches off when they're doing such activities as playing ball, doing extensive manual labor, lifting heavy weights.

I assume the watches you wear during these activities likely aren't that expensive since you're okay with keeping them on knowing the heightened probability of damage. Most people with watches $100 or under will usually be okay with this. People with more expensive watches will usually be conscious of not only taking their watches off during these activities but just their arm movements in general.

Like I said, I'm a generally careful person, I've scratched only a couple watch faces probably over the 14 or so watches I've owned over my lifetime and I consider myself reasonably active with sports and manual labor at certain points in my life. Phone screens I've probably scratched 4-5 out of my 7 Iphones and usually when I go out and get a look at the watches and phones of acquaintances and friends I notice way more shattered, scratched, scuffed screens than I do watch glasses.

Assuming that my experience is anomalous amongst potential Apple Watch users, based on your own experience, is silly. You reference a small, self selecting group of people as evidence, who are very unlikely to constitute a representative sample of AW users.

Your assumption about the watches I wear is incorrect, and illustrates the point; the mechanical watches I used to wear were all reasonably expensive because of the feature set I went for (radio controlled, solar powered, sapphire crystal, not hideous to look at). My Motoactv, Adidas Smart Run and Garmin Forerunner were all fairly expensive too.

I am also a careful person, for the most part, and I make accommodations for the frailties of certain objects if they are necessary or beneficial to me (e.g. my chinos all have special phone pockets to segregate my iPhone from other items I carry, and I wear impractical and relatively expensive suits because they are considered by many to be a fundamental requirement in my field). A watch, to me, is an almost purely functional item; so long as it is not too garish my only concern is that it should meet my functional needs, and impinge on my life as little as possible. That is the very reason that I have previously bought expensive but robust and functional timepieces, and smart watches; I did not have to be overly conscious of their presence or fragility.

My point is that extrapolating your personal experience is unlikely to lead to accurate generalisations.

 

[Benz63amg]

Screen protector?

Hey guys are u going to apply a screen protector to your watch? Mine was just delivered too but not sure if I should buy a screen protector, the sport model does appear to be prone to scratching from what the early Apple watch owners experiences so far so that makes me consider

 

[psylence2k]

Wow...you two seem to have everything all figured out and have so much experience that you can talk for everyone else. lol

I know ! it can seem pretty exhaustive (not really tho ) but verbalized recognition from acute observers such as yourself conveys an gratifying appreciation that is greatly appreciated. Thanks Man.

 

[SixtyK]

I work in a print shop/warehouse and my screen protector has already paid for itself a couple times. So glad I got it.

 

[caligurl]

there are a couple of HUGE threads in the apple watch accessory section with people talking about screen protectors and which one they like or don't like.

 

[psylence2k]

Assuming that my experience is anomalous amongst potential Apple Watch users, based on your own experience, is silly. You reference a small, self selecting group of people as evidence, who are very unlikely to constitute a representative sample of AW users.

Your assumption about the watches I wear is incorrect, and illustrates the point; the mechanical watches I used to wear were all reasonably expensive because of the feature set I went for (radio controlled, solar powered, sapphire crystal, not hideous to look at). My Motoactv, Adidas Smart Run and Garmin Forerunner were all fairly expensive too.

I am also a careful person, for the most part, and I make accommodations for the frailties of certain objects if they are necessary or beneficial to me (e.g. my chinos all have special phone pockets to segregate my iPhone from other items I carry, and I wear impractical and relatively expensive suits because they are considered by many to be a fundamental requirement in my field). A watch, to me, is an almost purely functional item; so long as it is not too garish my only concern is that it should meet my functional needs, and impinge on my life as little as possible. That is the very reason that I have previously bought expensive but robust and functional timepieces, and smart watches; I did not have to be overly conscious of their presence or fragility.

My point is that extrapolating your personal experience is unlikely to lead to accurate generalisations.

You think it's silly to assume most people aren't doing heavy manual labor or playing sports with expensive watches on ? You really think that's silly to assume that's not a common thing ?

Having an expensive watch amongst the general population in itself is not a common thing, that alone would make you an anomaly. Then amongst that group, I think it's safe to assume MOST (keyword NOT all) people with expensive watches aren't doing heavy and extensive manual labor or contact sports with them on. So Yes

Do you not realize that you having to explain , elaborate and specify your occupational behavior and lifestyle denotes that you probably aren't apart of the common,standard, or normal group of lifestyles and behavior (no that's not a bad thing) ? Which is why my assumption (which is why I stated it was an assumption) was incorrect because you're more of an anomaly than I gave you credit for. Would you argue that most people who wear watches during manual labor or contact sports are wearing these $200+ watches ? Do you think that's the norm ?

Like I've stated before , I never indicated that my generalizations applied to literally EVERYBODY, that's why it's called a generalization. I clearly stated with phrases such as " from my experience, I feel , most people I've seen, etc". I thought I made that clear.

So when I say things like " most people from my experience ." and then you respond with "well that's not me" then I can really only go back to my statement of "most people from my experience " and see if I worded something incorrectly only to realize I didn't. In other words, I never said my own empirical observation and SELF PROCLAIMED GENERALIZATION (i.e. "most people I've seen") was meant to apply to not only to you but everyone else in existence.

 

[roddenshaw]

You think it's silly to assume most people aren't doing heavy manual labor or playing sports with expensive watches on ? You really think that's silly to assume that's not a common thing ?

I was taking issue with assertions such as:

Unless you're swinging your watch arm very wildly, widely, and vigorously everywhere you go in general most peoples' watches dont come into physical contact with hard objects as often as their phones do.

and

If there's someone who's conscious enough to make sure their phones stays separate at all times from other objects than most likely that person is also conscious enough to not recklessly move their arm around because of them being conscious of the watch on their arm.

Which you supported by referring to your own experience.

Having an expensive watch amongst the general population in itself is not a common thing, that alone would make you an anomaly. Then amongst that group, I think it's safe to assume MOST (keyword NOT all) people with expensive watches aren't doing heavy and extensive manual labor or contact sports with them on. So Yes

I didn't argue that most people own expensive watches, or that most of those who do wear them while undertaking manual labour or participating in sports.

Do you not realize that you having to explain , elaborate and specify your occupational behavior and lifestyle denotes that you probably aren't apart of the common,standard, or normal group of lifestyles and behavior (no that's not a bad thing) ? Which is why my assumption (which is why I stated it was an assumption) was incorrect because you're more of an anomaly than I gave you credit for. Would you argue that most people who wear watches during manual labor or contact sports are wearing these $200+ watches ? Do you think that's the norm ?

I don't know whether that is the norm or not. To even consider that I would want to specify which geographical region and socioeconomic groups were being considered. My point was (and remains given the above) that you likely do not know what is the norm for potential AW users. Incidentally having to explain anything about myself to anybody does not denote whether I adhere to the 'norm' or not. You had to explain your own circumstances to make your points in this thread too. As you demonstrated this is a useful illustrative tool.

Like I've stated before , I never indicated that my generalizations applied to literally EVERYBODY, that's why it's called a generalization. I clearly stated with phrases such as " from my experience, I feel , most people I've seen, etc". I thought I made that clear.

So when I say things like " most people from my experience ." and then you respond with "well that's not me" then I can really only go back to my statement of "most people from my experience " and see if I worded something incorrectly only to realize I didn't. In other words, I never said my own empirical observation and SELF PROCLAIMED GENERALIZATION (i.e. "most people I've seen") was meant to apply to not only to you but everyone else in existence.

Had your comments been limited to "most people from my experience" I likely wouldn't have responded.

 

[MrXiro]

Just ordered this Skinomi Skin for my watch... anyone want to buy the screen protector off me? I just want the body protection from any scuffs and scratches since I apparently flail my arms around like one of those car dealership blow up things.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00NG09IT0/ref=od_aui_detailpages00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

 

[psylence2k]

I was taking issue with assertions such as:

and

Which you supported by referring to your own experience.

Right and in that quote I said " in general most people" and in the other quote I said "most likely" which denote that it is a generalization and not intended to apply to every single person which I later reinforced by saying that there were anomalies. Also at the very beginning of the post those two quotes came from I start off with the phrase "from experience".

I didn't argue that most people own expensive watches, or that most of those who do wear them while undertaking manual labour or participating in sports.

You indirectly did when you said it was silly to assume your experience was anomalous. What's your experience again ? Owning expensive watches that you self admittedly wear while doing manual labor and sports amongst other things. So if you were saying that wasn't anomalous which by definition means something that deviates from the standard, normal, expected, usual, or regular then I think it would be safe to assume from deductive reasoning you're saying that it is indeed those things. I mean what else could a person logically conclude from that ? What are the options ? Most/Least, Majority/Minority, Regularity/Anomaly ?

I don't know whether that is the norm or not. To even consider that I would want to specify which geographical region and socioeconomic groups were being considered. My point was (and remains given the above) that you likely do not know what is the norm for potential AW users. Incidentally having to explain anything about myself to anybody does not denote whether I adhere to the 'norm' or not. You had to explain your own circumstances to make your points in this thread too. As you demonstrated this is a useful illustrative tool.

Well I would assume unless otherwise specified we're talking about the general population since watch wearers, manual laborers, and sport participants exist throughout pretty much all major geographical regions and socioeconomic groups no ?

As far as knowing the norm for watch users. I clearly expressed my opinion was based on my own empirical observations which is the most either one of us can say. Like I said "From experience" was the first phrases in the first quote you responded to from me. So technically if I chose to stick to that same standpoint you really could only prove me wrong by proving that wasn't my actual experience.

and no simply explaining something does not always denote deviation from the norm but the way,purpose, and actual content of your explanation I would still argue shows that you're not the typical norm . Which would still support the original argument it was meant to support of your whole experience not being the norm or usual.

Had your comments been limited to "most people from my experience" I likely wouldn't have responded.

but that's how I prefaced the initial post you quoted from the beginning and was a notion I reiterated throughout that same post. You would've had to ignore all of that and carefully picked specific statements out of context to make it seem like I wasn't framing it that way. So I dont know why you responded then if this was true.

If you wanted someone who didn't indicate the limitation of their generalization to "most people from my experience" why didn't you pick the first post at the top of the page who was the guy who started this whole back and forth ? If that's what you're looking for then you seemed to miss him.

 

[Aelsi26]

I did buy a couple only because I'm accident prone. I got the Armorsuit on Amazon. It states that they cover the whole screen. I'm just waiting to get my watch.