Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> The digital crown looks like one such mistake. Swipe-to-scroll is so natural, particularly at this point, that moving back to an indirect method of scrolling seems just wrong.

That's not the point of the digital crown. It's to free your "swipe to scroll" gesture which blocks a screen of that size, to a physical input. Apple has been very clear on it's existence, and it's taking a classic component of a watch and propelling it into the modern era.

Might want to rethink that first.




> it's taking a classic component of a watch and propelling it into the modern era.

That's a spectacularly marketing-y phrase. It's a scroll wheel. There's nothing wrong with that, but we don't need to dress it up as anything else.


Why does it even need to be a dial? Why not a touch-strip along the side that you slide your finger along for scrolling?

The whole idea of a dial seems backwards. I've always hated dials on watches. They catch on everything.


With the touch strip you'd be limited by the length of it and 1:1 mapping for scrolling.


Why does it have to map 1:1?


> It would have been better to simply detect swipe-to-scroll along the right edge of the bezel (if not along the right side of the frame itself) to effect "scrolling without obscuring".


That's how it basically seems to work, judging by videos. The video reviews I've seen have shown the user using one finger to operate the crown, rather than pinching it between two.


I'm unconvinced this is a better solution than sliding a finger along the side of the bezel - or possibly around the entire rim, for different functions.

Considering the technology in the crown, it's possible this would have been cheaper and more reliable as well as a better fit for the haptic features in the rest of the design.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: