The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998. | ||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Feel free to discuss pricing and specific dealers. But 'for sale' postings, commercial solicitation and ads are not allowed. Full archive of all messages is accessible through options in the Search and Preferences features. Privacy, policies and administrivia are covered in the Terms of Use.
For the answer to the NUMBER #1 most frequently asked question here--for details or value of a specific older Omega watch you have--go to: Tell Me About My Omega. | Learn more about How To Include Photos and HTML In Your Postings. | To contact someone with a question not relevant to other readers of the forum, please click on their email address and contact them privately. |
: Why isn't a quartz watch viewed as an
: "electronic marvel"? Quartz
: watches work better and use newer, more
Quartz watches are common. Too common. They're mass-produced, cheap, and disposable. Those qualities make them great deals for someone looking for value. But to me, those same qualities make them almost lifeless, especially since mechanically they're all pretty much the same. In terms of aesthetics, I don't like the herky-jerky tick movement of quartz watches. The rareness of mechanical watches to me only adds to their appeal. When you buy a mechanical, you're buying a moment in time: a certain style and a certain movement caliber that are the products of a certain period.
Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. | CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE |