JPDev@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · edit-21 year agoFitbit Clock Faceprogramming.devimagemessage-square110fedilinkarrow-up11.28K
arrow-up11.26KimageFitbit Clock Faceprogramming.devJPDev@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · edit-21 year agomessage-square110fedilink
minus-squarePsythik@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up18arrow-down2·1 year agoWatches should be round IMO. I’m happy with my Samsung Watch 4 Classic.
minus-squareAceticon@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up31·1 year agoYeah, but square screens are way cheaper to procure and to program for, and every little helps in an open source project aiming for $30.
minus-squareSwedneck@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up12·1 year agohonestly just depends on what kind of watchface you want, square is cheaper and in some ways more convenient so if you don’t want an analog clockface there’s no reason to bother
minus-squareshea@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up6arrow-down10·1 year agoit’s ugly and sticks out too much when it’s square. round is classy
minus-squareipkpjersi@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up5·1 year agoTrue but it can also look sleek/modern, or at least rectangular can imo.
Watches should be round IMO. I’m happy with my Samsung Watch 4 Classic.
Yeah, but square screens are way cheaper to procure and to program for, and every little helps in an open source project aiming for $30.
honestly just depends on what kind of watchface you want, square is cheaper and in some ways more convenient so if you don’t want an analog clockface there’s no reason to bother
it’s ugly and sticks out too much when it’s square. round is classy
True but it can also look sleek/modern, or at least rectangular can imo.