The SalonQP session that almost was, part IV: Technology
By The Prodigal Fool, published on 13 January 2011
We’re re-writing history this week, folks. If you’re new to the series, you should read our introduction.
James Gurney, editor of QP Magazine:
What are the most interesting new technologies being developed for or applied to watchmaking?
The Prodigal Fool:
I must admit, we’re reaching the limits of my knowledge here because, as I’ve said, I’m more concerned with how watches look than what’s under the hood.
I guess for that reason, I’m a big fan of Omega’s Liquidmetal technology if for no other reason that it makes the bezel of the latest PlanetOcean look sensational and promises to keep it looking like that for years to come.
The fact that Apple have recently licensed it tells you that this is an interesting and potentially wide-reaching new technology.
James Gurney:
Are there limits to the application of new materials, manufacturing processes, or designs?
The Prodigal Fool:
In short, no.
Listen, in the 1870s, most people would have told you that it was totally impossible for two people to talk across copper wires from one side of the country to the other, let alone that one day you’d be able to send information and data across those same wires. Luckily, Alexander Bell thought differently.
In the early 1900s, most people would have told you that the idea of wrapping people in a steel tube, bolting heavy engines on to it and then using it to fly around the world was insane. Luckily, the Wright brothers thought differently.
I guess all I’m saying is that I don’t think there are – or should be – any limits on the inventiveness of engineers and scientists. And the engineers working in horology have demonstrated again and again that they can still push the boundaries.
Peter Roberts, veteran watchmaker and Technical Director at Bremont:
I agree with The Fool. He’s demonstrating a very thorough understanding of the technical aspects of watch making that frankly dwarfs my own.
James Gurney:
Alright, so tell us, what possibilities do these innovations open up?
The Prodigal Fool:
I’m going to go a little far out here but I’d like to see my smartphone merged with my Rolex.
I know, I know, you’re all wincing at the very thought. But think about it: your watch is the only object that you always have with you, that you carry around without fail. So, wouldn’t it be great if it could also deliver all of your vital information and communication channels to whatever device you’re near at the time?
So, just to clarify, what I’m suggesting is not that we see touchscreen dials rolling out of Switzerland but rather that in the future, my watch would be able to interact with appropriate devices around me to display information. For example, it would send my emails to whichever tablet or Microsoft Surface table top I was sitting at while it created a hologram from my incoming video calls.
And, just to be clear, I’d want all of this in a device that lost none of its traditional manufacturing appeal, heritage or design.
Have I lost the plot? Perhaps.
Elizabeth Doerr, one of the world’s foremost writers on horology:
I don’t think The Fool has lost the plot at all. On the contrary, I think that he’s demonstrating that – in addition to being charming and handsome – he’s a true visionary, perhaps without equal in the watch industry.
James Gurney
Eh, alright then, let’s go with this. So, what are the pitfalls?
The Prodigal Fool:
The pitfall when it comes to implementing new technologies is that you appear to be abandoning your roots. We talked earlier about the important of heritage and brand values; well, it’s clear that inappropriate use of technology can destroy those in a flash.
Witness those watchmakers that piled into Quartz in the 70s. No one came out the other side looking good.
The use of new technologies or new materials – innovation in short – needs to be an extension of your core values as a brand. MB&F is of course the brand that most easily pulls this off because it was created precisely to push technological limits. Names like Jacob&Co and URWERK also spring to mind of course.
Ken Kessler, world renowned watch journalist and audiophile:
Damn, I thought I had something there for a second but The Fool beat me to it.
James Gurney
Great! Well, having discussed what the future might hold, next I’d like us to turn our attention to what people should be collecting and how.
Tune in tomorrow folks for the final instalment of ‘The SalonQP session that almost was’. In the meantime, why not join our fictional panel and let us know your thoughts on this topic by leaving a comment below? How would you like to see technology applied to watches in the future?
The SalonQP session that almost was, part IV: Technology
We’re re-writing history this week, folks. If you’re new to the series, you should read our introduction. James Gurney, editor of QP Magazine: What are the most interesting new technologies being developed for or applied to watchmaking? The Prodigal Fool: I must admit, we’re reaching the limits of my knowledge here because, as I’ve said, [...]
This section is supported by the patronage of:
4 Responses to “The SalonQP session that almost was, part IV: Technology”
-
The SalonQP session that almost was « The Prodigal Guide
14 January 2011
[...] Thursday: Part IV – Technology and the future [...]
-
Ian
16 January 2011
“In the early 1900s, most people would have told you that the idea of wrapping people in a steel tube, bolting heavy engines on to it and then using it to fly around the world was insane. Luckily, the Wright brothers thought differently.”
Have you ever seen the Wright brothers’ plane? Thankfully, they were not insane enough to start with a steel tube, and then bolt heavy engines on to it.
-
Ivan Y
17 January 2011
“HB&F is of course…” – did you mean MB&F?
Anyway, I’m a little disappointed this article doesn’t have as many comments as the other ones in SalonQP series. While MB&F, URWERK, etc. are all cool, I think, mainstream companies need to focus more on practical technology. Sure, Rolex and Omega are doing ceramic/liquidmetal bezels but they are progressing at a glacial pace. Let’s take Omega, for example — only one current model with LM and exactly zero current models with titanium case.
A watch’s worth is not measured in pounds or kilograms, there’s no reason we can’t have awesome mechanical watches that are slimmer and weigh less, but constructed out modern high-tech materials that make steel seem like cast iron!
Yes, there are companies that are doing interesting work with alloys, ceramics, slim movements, etc., but they are generally very high-end brands in the first place and models cost even more than regular ones. As a techie, slow progress is rather disheartening.
Chris I
13 January 2011
Ugh, I am so old fashioned. None of these pushing the envelop watches appeal to me. I like to look at them here, but I doubt I would ever wear one or even seek out one to try on.
I think I like watch that looks like a watch.