Sapphire version. Why ??

Wow that Apple watch is beat you have to wonder what that person's been up to ? Dragged it behind a car with a rope ? :confused:

Again, it seems you can have the best (and cheapest) of both worlds by getting the normal version and applying a nice $4 Brotect Airglass screen protector the minute you get it. These things are very scratch resistant and if it does eventually get scratched or cracked due to an impact (that could have shattered the glass of your sapphire version) just get a new one!

I would never, ever, never put a screen protector on a watch... To me they look tacky but again, this is a to each their own type thing..

I am sure a lab can find a difference in the display but my point is that I am outdoors daily in very, very, very bright desert sun and I've never thought the screen and it's readability was an issue.. If outdoor screen readability was an issue on the sapphire lens then trust me, I'd be the 1st to complain...

I guess my question is why would anyone NOT buy the sapphire? Even if you don't care for WiFi you get an extra band (that's a $50 value) you get higher resale and you get added protection along with piece of mind..

Like I said... You won't have a scratch until you do and once you do there is nothing that can be done to fix it..

Wow that Apple watch is beat you have to wonder what that person's been up to ? Dragged it behind a car with a rope ? :confused:

Yeah I know.. That thing look terrible.. I didn't read the thread but it's posted on MacRumors and was from yesterday I think..

I would never, ever, never put a screen protector on a watch... To me they look tacky but again, this is a to each their own type thing..

I take it you haven't seen the new generation of glass (not plastic) screen protectors ? They don't look tacky at all, actually you can't even see them if they've been applied properly.

I am sure a lab can find a difference in the display but my point is that I am outdoors daily in very, very, very bright desert sun and I've never thought the screen and it's readability was an issue.. If outdoor screen readability was an issue on the sapphire lens then trust me, I'd be the 1st to complain...

I guess my question is why would anyone NOT buy the sapphire? Even if you don't care for WiFi you get an extra band (that's a $50 value) you get higher resale and you get added protection along with piece of mind..

Other than the obvious cost difference, after all $100 on a $599 watch is almost 20% more (even if you can afford it why spend the money if you don't have to ?) sapphire shatters on impact! But all that's been written several times before...

I've seen the new screen protectors and yes they still look tacky to me... Plus knock the price of the screen protector(s) off the $100 sapphire increase..

Shatter? I've never seen anyone shatter a sapphire screen. Now I am sure some have but I'd be willing to bet that scratched non sapphire lenses far outnumber shattered sapphire displays..

A little math using the $100 difference:

Screen protectors (for a good one) are what $20?
The extra band that comes with the sapphire can probably be sold if you don't want it for $40 easily.

We are now at a $40 difference....

Add in resale and you'd easily get that $40 back when it's sold at a higher price than the non sapphire version..

I dunno people are going to justify their purchasing decision regardless of which route they go. To me the non sapphire is a dice roll on a $600 item.. If you scratch it, you will be lucky to get anything out of it on resale...

- Brotect AirGlass : $7 http://tinyurl.com/gl3794r -invisible when applied properly
- Shattered Sapphire glass : http://tinyurl.com/gtxge39

I am considering buying Fenix 5. How is that sapphire yes/no glass working for you guys after almost a year? How about the housing? Scratches or paint wearing off? If yes, sapphire does not seem to make much sense. Scratched housing with intact glass is not much better than scratched housing and glass, or is it?

My first Fenix 3 non-sapphire lasted for 5 months before it got replaced because of button malfunction. I don't remember if it got scratched.
My second Fenix 3 non-sapphire lasted for 5 months before it got replaced because of GPS malfunction. This one definitely got scratched.
My third Fenix 3 non-sapphire is now 4 months old. It got scratched too. But based on previous experience it will start malfunctioning in about 1 month from now anyway, so I live with the scratches until then.

I am considering buying Fenix 5. How is that sapphire yes/no glass working for you guys after almost a year? How about the housing? Scratches or paint wearing off? If yes, sapphire does not seem to make much sense. Scratched housing with intact glass is not much better than scratched housing and glass, or is it?

I have an F5 non-Sapphire slate grey for almost 9 months now.The housing has a very slight scratch that you can barely notice. They say the black version is even more prone to scratches. I have a glass screen protector for the screen...

I'd say the non-sapphire + screen protector is the way to go. Not only you save 100$ but lets also not forget that the sapphire glass is not as clear as the regular one, so you loose in screen visibility as well.

Sapphire screen on the left:

I had been fretting over this decision as well. Anecdotes of people NOT scratching regular glass are tempting. But then I remembered a) I am very clumsy, b) I have never liked screen protectors, c) I have a Vivoactive 3 that has a big scratch after 2 months - no idea how I did that.
My phone (Kyocera Duraforce Pro) has a Sapphire screen without a scratch in over a year. I am a major phone dropper, and bought this one because I was tired of delicate phones falling apart and looking like they went through a war zone. Yesterday it had the biggest test yet, fell out of my pocket on the bike and bounced and slid on the street for several yards/meters. Got a tiny ding on one corner, and screen is pristine. Another anecdote, because the screen possibly didn't contact the road. But I do feel this watch will be a huge investment to risk getting scratched and I plan to keep it a long time. (or resell it if it is inaccurate like the Vivoactive 3 has been.) A scratch on the screen would drive me crazy, but scratched bezel doesn't. And I like the idea of a classy domed screen.
What I would like to see is someone actually testing the two screens with some abrasive and stabby items and show the difference. My phone had a video of a guy stabbing it with a knife and throwing it onto rocks, which was reassuring to see. haha.

I am surprised to see the photo from gchris7. Are these at 100% brightness? Even with the difference, do you have trouble reading the screen outside? In other words, if we didn't have them side by side, would it be noticeable? (My phone has a very bright screen, and I never thought the Sapphire detracted at all.) I have my Vivoactive 3 screen brightness set at 10% (!!) because it is so bright and to save battery. I am going to assume this reduced transparency won't be a problem for me.