I am in awe of OMEGA. Compared with Rolex's steady progress, I also appreciate OMEGA's innovative spirit and parent company SWATCH's persistence in protecting high-end Swiss timepieces; I think the global Tool watch is indispensable. If you read my article "carefully enough", you will also You will find that in many aspects, I am speaking for OMEGA. It is undeniable that everyone has likes and dislikes, and it is reasonable to have a "relative reaction" to negative reviews of something you like; but fans and fans are asked to rationally put forward their own opinions that they agree or deny, and let interested watch fans discuss rationally. , isn’t this the true meaning of the Zhihu platform? **
--Text--
Not in order, start with simple answers...
1. Travel time accuracy:
There is no doubt that this must be a Rolex. Of course, I can also say it ironically... But Omega also has a more accurate "quartz watch"! Even an "electronic watch" (X33). Of course, I think the person who will ask this question should You won’t be stupid enough to argue at this level...
Basically, Omega’s commitment to mechanical watches is the Swiss Chronometer Certification (COSC) Chronometer, which is the daily -4/6 error of the mechanical watch “movement” level (this requires "every" movement to be sent to COSC for testing); and Rolex promises its own Superlative Chronometer, which is an error level of 2/-2 per day "after sealing" (although it has been used in recent years It has been verified by its own company, but Rolex continues to send the movement to COSC for testing).
These two realms are not just limited to the second difference. Rolex dares to claim that "after sealing", which is simply fatal for mechanical watches that are more "fragile" than electronic components; but it relies on profound skills. With the improved design philosophy (which will be mentioned later), basically if Rolex says that it is the second most accurate mechanical watch, no one would dare to compete for the first place.
After Omega worked hard on the Co-Axial Escapement, and at the same time improved the problem of the 2500 series' sudden stop (stopping and then resuming halfway) in the early years, it finally came up with the idea in 2007. Daozhao launches the “Manufacture Caliber” coaxial escapement axis movement 8500. This is Omega’s trick to regain its glory and challenge the “magic core” of Rolex 3135 (even some convenient and maintainable designs refer to 3135).
Forums at home and abroad pointed out that the O-note 8 series and the extended chronograph 9 series are as accurate as the Rolex 3135 under normal use; many masters also praised some of the design philosophies of this movement. Yes; however, Omega’s product line is too complex. If we put aside electronic or quartz watches (because Rolex no longer makes Oysterquartz), the overall accuracy level is still not as good as it is (but the flagship product does have the confidence to be positive)... After all, they are there as a benchmark, and even Lao Hei has to admit this.
**However, Omega is not to be outdone. With the launch of the Globe Master Chronometer in 2015, which is a replica of the "Constellation Global Master Series", it also launched a Master Chronometer that is certified to the Rolex Superlative Chronometer; Omega emphasized This certification is after the movement has been certified by the Observatory, and then undergoes a series of "post-sealing" accuracy certifications (including different wearing angles, winding conditions, and harsh use environments) by the Swiss Federal Institute of Weights and Measures (METAS). However, Omega particularly emphasizes a "harsh environment test", which is the antimagnetic performance test they have added to mainstream watches in recent years. Interested parties can go to Omega's official website for details; however, the basic accuracy is still based on the Observatory's daily -4/ 6 are the main ones; currently, the passers are mainly several models without complex functions, three-hand watches, and models using the mainstream 85 and 89 coaxial escapement series self-made movements, and have not achieved the full series**
2 .Reliability
Why should we continue to talk about accuracy... Because reliability and accuracy are two things that go hand in hand. Under normal use conditions, an inaccurate mechanical watch actually means unreliability; in addition, reliability is related to Institutional design is also related to product philosophy. In this regard, OMEGA, which was saved by SWATCH Group's marketing tactics, is naturally no match for Rolex, because Rolex's entire company's product development philosophy revolves around "accuracy and reliability"; this is why many people say that Rolex sticks to rules and is old-fashioned. , cheating money... Behind the scolding, only Lao knows best how to establish the most complete product life cycle.
However, I am not here to criticize Omega. Many fans in Taiwan use this to criticize Omega, saying that it is so expensive and so bad... Frankly speaking, when there is a clear consumer usage situation Before the report, the reliable information we could learn came from watchmakers on issues of accuracy and maintainability (so we will not discuss excessive shocks or magnetism caused by novice users). I have reiterated the word maintainability many times. In fact, whether a mechanical watch is accurate does not depend on the product design and assembly itself, but also depends on whether it is convenient for people to adjust (because the movement is not fine once it is installed). , it is necessary to adjust the hairspring through manual labor and electronic instruments); this is why the Rolex brand maintains its value, because in addition to its own RSC (Rolex Service Center) strong logistics system, Rolex also has the most friendly requirements for watchmakers (even including The chronograph movement 4130 used in Daytona can replace the mainspring without disassembling the entire core), because it was designed from the perspective of ease of maintenance. However, the coaxial escapement axis chosen by O Ji may be a nightmare for many novice watch repairers; in addition, SWATCH's multi-brand strategy has also led to the problem of uneven service levels. The manpower is already insufficient, and it needs to deal with the huge gap. Movement design.
In fact, the colorfulness and vitality of Omega should also be encouraged, otherwise it would be boring if there is only one company left in the market; however, SWATCH Group seems to be missing an important element in the revival of the Omega brand... Satisfactory logistics system; sadly, failure to do this will greatly affect the value preservation of the watch!
3. The overall movement (including polishing, technology, and complex functions)
Let’s talk about the complex functions first. Fortunately, Rolex launched the Skywalker Sky Dweller in 2012 to allow both complex functions. Standing on the same level (of course, Omega's De Ville series has always been in limited production of the mid-mounted tourbillon watch DE VILLE CENTRAL
TOURBILLON; this is really high-end... However, this watch is limited edition. Limited production in China, and anyone who understands the structure of mechanical watches should know that the tourbillon can only help the actual accuracy...); the limit of complex functions of the two companies is the annual calendar (you only need to adjust the February date every year ) so far (just save the minute repeater, rattrapante, perpetual calendar, etc.), because both companies mainly focus on tool watches (which are meant to be worn on the body for serious reading of time), so there is no interest in taking care of them. That kind of high-end, super complicated style. Rolex considers it because the more complex the functions, the greater the damage to reliability, which deviates from the purpose of the company; Oji is mainly subject to a bunch of super top brands in the SWATCH Group that "focus on X", so just deal with Rolex by yourself. It is necessary to lie in that muddy water...
Omega took advantage of the resources of SWATCH Group to first realize the self-made coaxial escapement shaft. Of course, many O Hei are saying that the pattern designed by ETA is not a self-made movement. I heard I'm also drunk by this... Do you care about whether the watch is good or who designed it? O's biggest breakthrough in the past few years is the technology that makes the entire watch antimagnetic, which dwarfs the Milgauss's ('literally' about 15 times the antimagnetic capability of Milgauss). This is indeed worthy of praise, because mechanical watches The most feared thing is magnetism. Although magnetization can be solved by demagnetizing it, there are so many electronic products in our daily life that ordinary users cannot pay much attention to the usage environment. Basically, the more the better in anti-magnetic technology, no one thinks too little. of.
However, the foundation of Rolex is shown in the declaration of 2/-2 on the back of the case, and it is the same even for the flagship model Skywalker with complex functions. In addition to the raw materials and design, Rolex has a tight grasp; There is also a huge laboratory that is responsible for everything from materials science to applied mechanics. Simply put, Rolex is a small scientific research unit, and the research object is its own mechanical watches; and many of Rolex’s movement designs are based on institutions accumulated over the years. To fine-tune; it can be said that every design has been tested by time and users. Many Rolex fans will use this to criticize other brands, but I think it is really unnecessary. After all, Rolex is a special existence in an industry. I think we should appreciate the various beauties in the watch industry, rather than taking advantage of rare examples that are beyond the reach of ordinary people. for one's own sense of superiority.
There is no doubt about the practicality (related to accuracy) of the polished and rhodium-plated details of Rolex and Omega’s self-made movements. This is also a required course for all high-end watches. However, Rolex does not have a back-through, so it is not Like Omega's 8 series and 9 series, the exterior of the movement is polished with fish scales and radial patterns.
Because I think watches are all about looking at the front, I don’t care much about decorative polishing; if you really care about it, you can indeed buy Omega’s PO series, but some people will doubt...a tool watch that can dive to a depth of 600 meters uses a back see-through ...is it reliable? (I really have no idea about this)
lt;img src="/50/9a45edad6eed85fcfae5cb1cbb86eae7_hd.jpg" data-caption="" data-size="normal" class="content_image"gt;
4. Appearance design
Appearance design is very subjective, but the watches of these two companies can be said to be the backbone of the entire industry. How can I put it... In Panerai Before the sea was popularized by all kinds of styles to the height it is today, R and O were probably the most imitated products in the world, especially their diving watch series (Lao: Submariner; European: 007 Seamaster, Planet Ocean Seamaster, AquaTerra Seamaster), and even some elements have been borrowed by well-known brands; for example, Longines Hydroconquest has added Submariner elements, and Tag Heuer Aquaracer has the outer ring style of 007 Seamaster.
I can only say that the designs of these two companies are classics, especially the chronographs (Daytona and Speedmaster) and diving watches; of course, Rolex’s formal watch series (Day-date, Datejust) have been imitated. It's beyond words. Of course, based on SWATCH Group's attitude of attaching great importance to the USP (unique selling point) of its products, OMEGA's watch models have changed more, while Rolex's changes have always been very small. This is also a reflection of the brand's characteristics. I don't think there is any need to comment; especially for some friends who only strongly dislike metal watch chains, OMEGA can be said to have found a new way outside of work.
The only thing worthy of further investigation is Omega’s attempt to take an elegant route on the Haima AT model, which can be regarded as a good formal route that goes beyond the tool watch style... After all, the De Ville series is too old-fashioned... The latest model of the Constellation series Tai Niang (however, the old model of the Constellation series is a favorite watch of politicians from all over the world, except for the Rolex presidential model), AT Seamaster has carried the line of Omega formal wear very well. Although there is still a big gap in popularity compared to the Rolex "Oyster" formal model, don't forget that the one who really defeats the sales of the Oyster...is often the Oyster itself...consumers will sentence it to death with just "old-fashioned"!
5. Marketing
Many people think that Rolex pursues mysticism. In fact, this statement is simply boring and nonsense. The reason why Rolex makes people feel mysterious is because Rolex is not a listed company, and what’s more, its parent company is called the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation (a foundation named after the founder: Hans Wilsdorf... No Wrong...the foundation! It's a charity!); that is to say, it has no obligation or responsibility to announce any operating conditions (it seems that there is no intention according to its years of operation, and Rolex does not even have an official museum) , so Rolex's sales figures will always be a mystery, or they can only be compiled through second-hand and third-hand data (channels). As for revenue...maybe you won't be able to wait in the next life; while OMEGA's parent company SWATCH GROUP is A company listed on the Zurich Stock Exchange (also a component of its index)...do you think it can not publish financial reports?
Back to marketing, both companies are pure businessmen, but they each have their own strengths... Let me talk about the similarities first. For specific groups of people with high qualifications, such as first-class athletes or performers, major sports events, and scientific research, these two companies will not let them go. In fact, these items can be seen on the official website in places other than watch selection and company history. I believe I don’t need to say more.
Now let’s talk about the differences in the marketing strategies of the two companies. Rolex pays more attention to offline channel operations, which is why high-quality authorized dealers (although they sell more than just Rolex brands) are willing to There are big ROLEX and TUDOR (Tudor, Rolex sub-brand) logos on it... Because I have money, take it... Big brother! In fact, most Swiss watches were done this way in the early years. However, after the marketing channels were diversified, people no longer regarded this as their final destination. To a certain extent, it also reflected that the cash flow of other players really couldn't beat Rolex. Only he can always do it. However, any evaluation of Rolex’s operations is purely conjecture, which at least proves Rolex’s determination to work offline.
lt;img src="/50/e1c98ef900719281fdfd9ef98424327e_hd.jpg" data-caption="" data-size="normal" class="content_image"gt;
Omega will dry One thing Rolex doesn’t like to do: Product Placement. The most outrageous one is the soft advertising placement in 007 movies. In fact, this is quite controversial. In addition to saying that Ian Fleming, the original author of James Bond, is a huge fan, he also pointed out when writing Casino Royale: Bond cannot wear a watch casually, he has to wear a Rolex... However, since 1995 GoldenEye Bond has always worn Omega watches, and even Pierce Brosnan, who played Bond at the time, became the spokesperson of Omega (current Bond actor Daniel Craig only wears Omega watches when he appears as Bond. He was photographed many times wearing a Rolex when wearing a corset ("German image"). According to Jake's Rolex World, a well-known American labor fan blog, Omega even "tampered a little" with NASA officials to make the Speedmaster the "first moon landing watch" (I personally think this news has low credibility, because after searching There is no evidence of similar behavior in various overseas information, but there are only three watch brands left that have made it to the final stage after NASA auditions: Rolex, Longines, and Omega).
Although Rolex also hires spokespersons, sponsors great sports events, and witnesses human innovations... Rolex prefers to prove itself rather than others. I think soft advertising implantation and business channels are not a dispute over ideological lines, but simply a matter of choice. But before Pierce Brosnan, except for twice wearing his watch, Bond wore the classic Rolex Blackwater Ghost in the rest of the series...and Rolex didn't pay a dime (of course, during the filming of Bond's movie in the early years, Ian Fleming is still alive, so I believe MGM would not dare to make a mistake). At this time, no matter how neutral you are, it is difficult not to show the superiority of the two brands...