WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,434 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
had displays like this, when just plain old legibility and a simple time display is all that's needed:
EFD-103w_1.jpg
Casio Edifice EFD-103
EFD-103ww_1.jpg
Closer view of the display
What do you guys think?:think:
Lee
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,512 Posts
Not precisely like that, but yes I do wish there was a G-Shock with a simple display.

More modern would be good too. I once had one of those Suunto animated 'walk through' demos on my computer screen and marvelled at the clarity of their designs compared to G-Shocks.

It's a curious thing with Casio - I think they (and possibly a good number of their customers) are reluctant to abandon their 1980s heritage (if heritage can be so recent) when it comes to G-Shocks. We're so used to G-Shock displays that we don't notice that they are a little old-fashioned. Casio experiments more with Baby Gs, but core G-Shocks change very little. They will have to one day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,003 Posts
I don't like the seconds under the hours and minutes, but otherwise it's nice. That's something I appreciate about my Ironman watches--very big and legible digits.

I do like the old-school display of the Gs, too. It just seems to fit the personality of the classics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
I really like the displays of most G-Shocks. I do admit though, watches like the some of the Timex Ironmans have great readable displays.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
262 Posts
Very good point!!!

I love the ruggedness of the G-Shock line, but I don't like the busy displays and smaller digits. I am now using the Casio pictured here
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,764 Posts
I suppose having a relatively smaller display is part of the G-Shock trademark, and the newer Gs are trying to address it with somewhat larger readouts.

But I think of it as an acceptable alternative to having an ultra-legible but ultimately fragile watch. And besides, it's proof that G-Shocks are being aimed at a younger demographic, because they require superb eyesight to read. :-d
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
Yes. This is my biggest annoyance with G-Shocks and probably the main reason why I don't own more, or those that I have/do own are not the most worn.

I cannot understand why Casio insist of using such small digits! My eyes are still ok and I can read them but whenever I wear my Ironman and see the excellent large numbers (still with lots of information on the screen) I don't want to go back to the tiny numbers of the G-Shock, even if it is a smarter and better quality watch! If you have the choice of a better screen but choose sub-optimal?

I think Casio are losing out here. However I do also think that many Casio owners do not know any better and assume "it is how it is". Casio pretty much always had a grip on the digital watch market so seeking alternatives is not commonly done. Casio often simply waste the space on the dial with useless circles and flashing objects which have no function at all and I don't think anyone actually appreciates them asthetically (I may be wrong, I certainly don't).

Ok some Gs have larger digits, but they are few and far between really. Certainly the most popular models don't have large digits. :-s
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,850 Posts
I think the 7800 fits the bill. You can even make the top line blank if you want. I have noticed using the thinner font for the top and bottom lines makes the time jump off the dial.

Really hard to photograph being completely black....

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29,512 Posts
Thinner font top and bottom is definitely the way to go with 7800s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
494 Posts
Not precisely like that, but yes I do wish there was a G-Shock with a simple display.

More modern would be good too. I once had one of those Suunto animated 'walk through' demos on my computer screen and marvelled at the clarity of their designs compared to G-Shocks.

It's a curious thing with Casio - I think they (and possibly a good number of their customers) are reluctant to abandon their 1980s heritage (if heritage can be so recent) when it comes to G-Shocks. We're so used to G-Shock displays that we don't notice that they are a little old-fashioned. Casio experiments more with Baby Gs, but core G-Shocks change very little. They will have to one day.
Very well said, Tribe! |> I couldn't agree more, and this is one reason I don't have many G-Shocks left (only 2). I think some of the Timex digital watch displays are very nice and easy to read, but I hate their Indiglo system - hard for me to read in the dark.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,360 Posts
Personnally I like the display on Gshocks as it is. But I think curiously Casio builds sometimes better modules on simpler and cheaper digi models, rather than on Gs. By the way , the display on this Casio Phys is huge and very legible, better than on the Ironman IMO :
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,522 Posts
bad example of small digits due to wasted space of more or less usefull gagdgets (that's why i particulary don't like the 6900 models):




good example of a clear, uncluttered display, still with lots of functions and almost as tough as a G:




regards, holger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,360 Posts
I agree that maybe the display will change and become less old fashion, although I think maybe not because I suppose they keep the display simple in order to maximise the battery lifetime.
On some G models definitely the display is too little, like on my DW9052.
But on those two I think it's good enough :
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,962 Posts
I really like my G's and how the current displays are. I still have great sight and like most of all the solid designs and look of toughness. Never really have cared much for large numerals on my digitals. Usually when you have larger numbers, you have more crystal area exposed, I like a very protected crystal, or higher bezel for protection. Can't stand the thought of one of my watches with a scratch through the middle of the crystal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,973 Posts
i'm torn on this point. who knows, i've probably myself written about casio wasting space on eyes and gizmos that could be otherwise used to improve legibility. but yet i've never had trouble reading the "small" (digit size relative to overall case size) digits on g-shocks, and actually would the tall and skinny digits of some other brands really be easier to read? and would tall and fat digits not look a little funny? plus most g designs arguably have less area for the display because of chunky protective bezels and solar panel surfaces. :think: however i agree, the digits on my paw1300 (a big watch!) were nice and clear. :-!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
Those digits are too big for my taste. I like the digit size of the gw5600j-1. It's not only the digit size that matters though. If you compare a gw5600j-1 with a gwm5600 then the display of the first is much clearer. Not sure whether that's due to the background or the glass but it does make a difference in readability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,453 Posts
Not precisely like that, but yes I do wish there was a G-Shock with a simple display.

More modern would be good too. I once had one of those Suunto animated 'walk through' demos on my computer screen and marvelled at the clarity of their designs compared to G-Shocks.
+1

I have some Suunto's and they do indeed put the Casio display to shame in terms if the crisp clarity they offer.

Cheers...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,434 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
This thread certainly threw up a number of interesting responses.
I thought I should show this pic again of a DW-1000 with the EFD-103 Edifice to show the 'traditional' GShock style look with a more 'modern' display:
casio_old_n_new_1.jpg
As for the more contemporary GSHocks, probably one of the more simple yet very legible displays must have been the DW-56RTs:
DW-56RT_1.jpg
The display space doesn't really get wasted on superfluous graphics or 'eyes' that could have been used for larger digits. There's also no need to increase the size of the display crystal which would make it more susceptible to damage.
Lee
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,980 Posts
Hi,
well on some Gs I think the digits are too small - not because I can't read them but because the factor case-size vs. digits gets out of proportion. Just looks stupid when you have a really big case and those tiny digits. I think Holger is right about the DW-6900 - the digits look a bit too small. But there are still plenty of Gs that have big digits:
g-3010 for example:


If you can't read the time on that ugly [expletive deleted] then you really got a problem with your eye-sight. I also like the G-8000 for its big digits:


And funny enough - one of the Gs with the biggest digits (not as big as the G-3010 but certainly bigger than the DW-6900) is also the smallest when it comes to the case:


I think that when the digits get too big however - like on some Timex models - then they get harder to read because you almost can't see them completely at one glance or they look so unusual that they get harder to read when you're used to the classic look. Besides I think easiest to read is an analogue watch - so the ana-digis or pure analogue Gs are maybe best when it comes to the aspect of legibility. The easiest to read of all times might be the GS-1200 I think :think:.

Greetings, Sedi :)
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top