apropos
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 4,461
- Reaction score
- 402
For me, the biggest component of the appeal of the O&J watches is their design. I've thought a bit about why their designs appeal to me, and my initial impulse was to chalk it up to them having some sort of je ne sais quoi with a "contemporary" or "modern" flavour. That they fit into "modern life" well, or something like that.
When I thought about it a little bit more, I realised this could not be true. We've seen examples of this sort of (industrial) design before, in the past most prominently from Dieter Rams, and nowadays from Jasper Morrison, Jonathan Ives, and Naoto Fusikawa. The common thread with their designs is simplicity, intuitiveness, usefulness - and as little design as possible.
FWIW, from a design philosophy POV, similar watches to the O&J lineup include the Ressence watch, and the MIH watch.
Compare this to many modern watches, which either 1. take cues from historical models from a different era where a more baroque aesthetic movement was en vogue and design elements were more designed (the vast majority of watches discussed on this thread), or 2. invent their own cues and look somewhat futuristic (some MB&F, de Bethune, etc).
It is interesting to see that some folk here have interpreted the simplicity and apparent lack of design to be "childish" - I would say that given the motivation of their design philosophy that this is evidence it has fulfilled its function perfectly. Perhaps what people are picking up on is the lack of overdesign. After all, if something with a functional purpose is intuitive enough to be used by a child, it has to be well designed, no?
Yeah, I thought the same thing. But the more I look at it, the more I see it as an anti-status symbol/branding watch.
For me, the biggest component of the appeal of the O&J watches is their design. I've thought a bit about why their designs appeal to me, and my initial impulse was to chalk it up to them having some sort of je ne sais quoi with a "contemporary" or "modern" flavour. That they fit into "modern life" well, or something like that.
When I thought about it a little bit more, I realised this could not be true. We've seen examples of this sort of (industrial) design before, in the past most prominently from Dieter Rams, and nowadays from Jasper Morrison, Jonathan Ives, and Naoto Fusikawa. The common thread with their designs is simplicity, intuitiveness, usefulness - and as little design as possible.
FWIW, from a design philosophy POV, similar watches to the O&J lineup include the Ressence watch, and the MIH watch.
Compare this to many modern watches, which either 1. take cues from historical models from a different era where a more baroque aesthetic movement was en vogue and design elements were more designed (the vast majority of watches discussed on this thread), or 2. invent their own cues and look somewhat futuristic (some MB&F, de Bethune, etc).
It is interesting to see that some folk here have interpreted the simplicity and apparent lack of design to be "childish" - I would say that given the motivation of their design philosophy that this is evidence it has fulfilled its function perfectly. Perhaps what people are picking up on is the lack of overdesign. After all, if something with a functional purpose is intuitive enough to be used by a child, it has to be well designed, no?
Last edited: