Are round smartwatches terribly impractical? Why the rectangular Apple Watch makes way more sense

When it comes to smartwatches and their design in particular, there are two diverging and contradicting paths that can be taken: one is the more traditional, circular design that's essentially most people's first association for a regular "watch", while the other train of thought encompasses all other possible watch designs, including rectangular and square ones.

Just a brief look at the smartwatch scene today shows that most smartwatches rely on the round form factor, whereas Apple is the sole major smartwatch maker to “stubbornly” set itself apart with its rectangular Apple Watch timepieces. Ironically, the Apple Watch is actually the most popular smartwatch in the world, so Apple is obviously doing something right.

What could that be? While most people’s first association with a watch is a more desirable and fashionable choice, mostly stemming from tradition, the classic form factor might not be the best suited one for smartwatches in particular.

Here goes a probably controversial opinion that rectangular smartwatches akin to the Apple Watch are much better suited for their intended purposes in comparison with the more traditional round smartwatches that we’ve grown accustomed to over time. There’s a key reason why Apple relies on the rectangular form factor and hasn’t come up with a classy dress smartwatch, and it has a lot to do with efficiency and the way we consume content on our wrists.

But before we take a look forward, we need to take a step back and explore why watches are the way they are.

Classical watch design: A brief history

Or why round stuck around

From the very get-go, pocket watches and wrist watches were conceived with a round form factor. While modern watches are round in order to pay homage to the traditional circular design, the very first compact timepieces were circular for a set of very mundane and practical reasons.

It was efficiency and practicality that made the first watches round, as all the dials, knobs and elements inside were also round, so it made sense for the watchmakers of olden times to use the most rational form factor.

What many consider to be the very first wristwatch, the Breguet No. 2639, was created by Abraham-Louis Breguet for Caroline Murat, the Queen of Naples, in 1812, was certainly a round one. Despite that it’s irreversibly lost to history, this timepiece can anecdotally be perceived as the "smartwatch" of the early 19th century, as it even had a thermometer on board (and the thermometers on the latest Samsung smartwatches are still non-functional as of late October 2022).

Less than a hundred years ago, in 1926, Rolex came out with the legendary Rolex Oyster, widely regarded as the first fully-tight, hermetically-sealed wristwatch that's both waterproof and dustproof. Yet, evidence exists about waterproof pocket watches from all the way back to 1851, when a W Pettit waterproof watch was displayed at the Great Exhibition in London. But we digress. Can you guess what form factor both the Oyster and the W Pettit watches had? Don't let your imagination run too wild, both were classic round smartwatches, but there's another reason for that, and it has everything to do with pressure.