nice looking fakes
Ralph Gomez
famous and pricey watches, using a common run-of-the-mill quartz
movement. All the good looks, low price and decent time too.
I just don't know if these watches are what I'm thinking of.
http://www.qualitywatchworld.com/
anyone have any thougths?
nastyandy
First off you should realize that fakes cannot carry a legitimate warranty
and are illegal to begin with. If and when your fake has a problem and you
take it for repair, you run the risk of having it confiscated.
Now aside from the lack of integrity, fake watches are rarely of decent
quailty, usually consisting of cheap parts, hence the low prices. So
eventually you are guaranteed some kind of problem.
There are many inexpensive watch firms with styles and movements similar to
very high end watch companies. My advice is to buy a watch from one of these
companies, rather than wasting your cash on a fake.
You may want to consider Invicta, d.freemont, Tissot, Zeno, or Ollech &
Wajs. These companies all make reputable quality watches and great designs
that can be had for very low cost.
"Ralph Gomez" <rgo...@hobmail.com> wrote in message
news:rgomex-E9B4F2....@news.central.cox.net...
Norman M. Schwartz
look at something you like to see any time and all the time, on an on, the
analogies are endless. A genuine IWC strap itself cost several times more
than do some of these replica watches. The only problem I can see is that
there is no sapphire crystal available. Invicta makes some subs, copies of
the Rolex, almost all with mineral glass crystals. If it busts, throw it
out and get another replica. It's still cheaper than packing up the real
thing, insuring it, and sending it off. It also cuts down on the cost of
your homeowner's insurance. My insurance has risen several times the cost of
these replicas.I have both genuine and fake watches (as does an acquaintance
watchmaker) because I enjoy seeing a particular style, the art work of the
dial, etc. You don't have to ask anyone's permission to do what you want to
do, just be thankful that you can acquire fakes and/or the real thing
whenever you want. I don't wear watches to impress anyone at all, and the
only one I fool is myself. Perhaps some of the watchmakers here are unhappy
because you can simply throw away the fake and get another rather than
paying several times its cost to send it off to them to have it fixed when
it goes bust. I gave one of my sons a Rolex GST when he graduated law
school, 5 years ago. He recently had it serviced by Rolex (in Switzerland),
after it came back and wore it for a while, it died. Rolex acknowledged the
problem and offered a new movement or replacement with a new watch. I
suppose he became attached to the case, so he opted for the movement
replacement. Upon its return, it crapped out right in the Rolex Center, and
its going back to Switzerland yet another time. I'm hoping the same does not
happen to the Rolex Sub he recently gave me.
"nastyandy" <andy...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:vnSdnVRhnpM...@comcast.com...
Thore B. Karlsen
wrote:
Not only are they illegal, they are so poorly finished and so poorly
made that I don't understand how anyone could even want to wear one.
Almost none of them could be mistaken for the watches they are
attempting to copy.
Garbage.
--
Be seeing you.
nastyandy
only one I fool is myself."
I seriously doubt that, and I think the fact that you would wear a fake says
something about your own character. If I were ever doing business with
someone who I noticed was wearing a fake watch, I would think twice about
that person.
In my first two years of college, I wore a fake Tag/Heuer Link and a fake
Movado Esperanza. Of course, I liked how they looked, but chiefly I wore
them to impress others. I was vain and pretentious, but also 19-20 years old
at the time. They were garbage I picked up in NYC, and they both broke after
about 6 months.
After their demise I decided it was time for a decent watch, because I
appreciate fine craftsmanship and quality. As I began to reasearch watches
to make a wise purchase, I fell in love with the engineering of mechanical
watches, the beauty of a miniature machine that operates on a stored measure
of torque.
Now, at 25, I treasure my watches, and I wouldn't be caught dead wearing a
fake. I still have friends who would easily sport a fake Rolex, but they are
generally pretentious and have little appreciation for the hard work
involved in crafting a watch. They would also wear them because they want
the name to be seen by others, which I suspect you desire as well, and I
think if you insist otherwise, then yes, you are fooling yourself. If you
say you appreciate the art that goes into the dial, then get a Tmex, my
friend, they have some great face designs. Even Invicta, who does imitate
Rolex, is respectable because they do not market on the premise of another
brand's name equity, and they are quality watches.
Would you drive a 'fake' Mercedes-Benz? Maybe that's a rhetorical question
for you.
Now to compare a fake watch to a museum print is ridiculous. Prints and
lithographs of famous pieces of art are copies of a *unique* piece of art.
Van Gogh did not paint 1000 "Starry Nights" to sell. Without such prints, it
would be impossible for numerous art aficianados to ever glance at many
pieces of art. Moreover, these prints are licensed for reproduction by the
estate owner of the artwork. Fakes are cheap, counterfeit garbage, made by
rip-off artists. Sorry to hear you support such people.
Additionally, Magritte did not engineer a set of moving gears behind his "Le
Seducteur." Such art is appreciated strictly for its visual beauty, while a
fine watch has a work of art underneath the dial also.
I won't even get into the ethics associated with fake watches. There are
teleological and deontilogical dimensions to the whole cocept.
If you are wearing fakes, and especially at your indicated age (you
mentioned that your son graduated law school 5 years ago) you probably could
care less about ethics on a macro scale.
So that's "why not."
Good luck with your Sub, if it's real, you have youself a very nice classic
watch.
"Norman M. Schwartz" <nm...@att.net> wrote in message
news:6DRna.33678$cO3.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Jack Denver
boot) with that of watches that have styling similar to famous makes, but
which are sold under their own name and are completely legal (Invicta,
etc.). They are two completely different things. When a museum sells you a
reproduction, no one is meant to mistake it for the real thing. Replicas are
more like art forgeries, which are also illegal.
The Sandoz Explorer is a watch with Rolex-like styling that comes with a
sapphire crystal and Swiss ETA 2824 movement for under $150. A real bargain,
even moreso than Invicta (their sapphire/ETA watches go for around
$300...$100 gets you a Miyota with a mineral crystal). The only problem is
that Sandoz's distribution is in the Far East only and you have to mail
order them from there.
I agree with you that these low priced watches present a conundrum when it
comes time to clean and lube them.....how can you justify doing so when the
cost of the C&L (from most if not all watchmakers) is almost as much as what
a new watch costs? But why should you throw out a perfectly good watch just
because it needs a cleaning? At the very least, the manufacturers should
offer an inexpensive movement exchange service where for say 1/2 the cost of
a new watch they will replace your movement.
"Norman M. Schwartz" <nm...@att.net> wrote in message
news:6DRna.33678$cO3.2...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Norman M. Schwartz
> Good luck with your Sub, if it's real, you have youself a very nice
classic
> watch.
The Sub comes from Wempe, NYC as does my IWC Mark XV. I have an imitation of
the latter, that being a Speedbird II. I have a Fortis, 2 Breitlings:
Aerospace and Navitimer, an Omega Seamaster Professionl Chronograph (in
Titanium), 2 Tags, a Tiffany timepiece, and a couple of Ollech and Wajs. I
have a Waveceptor to sync the autos, and assorted Timexes and Casios and
Seikos. I have 2 Scatola del Tempo winders for my 6 automatics, non being
fake yet *I STILL HAVE SOME FAKES*. I don't wear watches to impress anyone,
but only for my personal pleasure and if you don't believe it, you most
probably know what I think you can and should do to yourself!
(signed nastynormy)
Norman M. Schwartz
I'm clear on the concepts of fakes and similar styles. I have a Mark XV
(which IWC replaced the "defective" one which ran slow, instead of fast- you
must remember our discourse back then, so far the replacement runs about 6
seconds fast per day, which is good with me because that's what IWC says it
could and should do) and a Speedbird II.
I still get a kick out of a fake, I'm tempted to buy a fake Sub even though
I have a real one. So go kill me .....
Norman
"Jack Denver" <nunu...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:7LWcnbGfSuC...@comcast.com...
nastyandy
> but only for my personal pleasure and if you don't believe it, you most
> probably know what I think you can and should do to yourself!
>
Hehe, I expected as much. Sounds like you have a nice collection (the geuine
articles,) Normy, probably worth more than my own collection so far.
But I think I made my point and I'm amazed that you would keep your fakes if
you really appreciate the art and science of horology. I'm no watchmaker,
but I think it's quite sanctimonious for any watch lover to keep a fake POS
in his collection.
I'm also disppointed to see this in a 'horology' newsgroup.
But to each his own. You can shove your fakes up your . .
Chag Samayach (Passover,) Happy Easter, and happy any other holiday this
weekend.
Norman M. Schwartz
> Hehe, I expected as much. Sounds like you have a nice collection (the
geuine
> articles,) Normy, probably worth more than my own collection so far.
If your expectations had any merit, they would include the fact that I
couldn't care less about the relative values of our collections. It turns
out that all but two of the costly watches I own were gifts to me from one
of my sons, which I either told him NOT to give to me, or were given to my
by surprise. However I did gave Rolexes (GMT 1- blue/red bezel) to each of
them. I gave my watch enthusiast son an Aerospace, as well, on the occassion
of one of his graduations.
>
> Chag Samayach (Passover,) Happy Easter, and happy any other holiday this
> weekend.
>
Likewise, the same to you and many happy returns of the day, any old day.
Norman M. Schwartz
Italian watch (name forgotten) that he said couldn't be distinguished from
the real thing. (I never saw the real thing.) However this particular fake
particular automatic, as those of many other make (one of which I own) is
battery powered! Looks like the real thing, obviously is not and thus is
not a forgery. Is it permissible to wear such a fake simply because *you*
like
the looks of it on your wrist?
Benzzoy
> I'm clear on the concepts of fakes and similar styles. I have a Mark XV
> [...] and a Speedbird II.
Clearly, from your statement about the IWC Mark XV and the Speedbird II,
your definition of "fake" is different from what most here would agree
to. Hint: The Speedbird is not a fake because it does not sport "IWC
Mark XV" on any part of it.
Cheers,
Benz
Norman M. Schwartz
between the Mark XV and the Speedbird to indicate to Jack Denver that I was
clear on the distinction between fakes and genuine watches of similar
styling. In addition this replica is neither forgery nor a fake.
Watch-Replica.net
" Franck Muller - Master Banker Automatic
FM-3
Top quality Swiss made stainless steel case with Japanese quartz movement.
Black face-Stainless steel band. Solid Back with all markings. Mineral
Crystal Glass Faces - resists scratches much better than regular glass.
Exact hour Markers and Hands. Accurate Markings all over the watch. Very
heavy and strong construction. Weight to exact original. Water resistant.
$ 159"
I own one, because I like its looks and not because I seek to impress anyone
being a snob. Snobs are more likely to be those who wish to limit owning
watches of certain appearance to those who can afford the price of
admission.
Hint: bone up on your reading comprehension.
Cheers to you as well.
benzzoy-118DD9...@news.supernews.com...
Chris Bicknell
news:lGjoa.69028$ja4.4...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
worn by the british RAF during the second world war. Simillar designs were
also produced by JLC and Omega. All designs were obviously based upon the
same military criteria.
From the impression that I get from this speedbird series, I am sure that
they are a very nostalgic item designed for those that want to wear a watch
that is similar to the old military classics and probably have a set of
original watches but prefer to wear the speedbird to prevent damage to the
more valuable stock.
I do not believe that the speedbird was a direct stab at the IWC MK XV. It
was just a watch on a military theme as was the MKxv.
I do have a different opinion on the Rolex/Invicta situation though.
How people can cry about fakes and then preach the good virtues of an
Invicta just makes me wonder.
ChrisB
Jack Denver
trademark) - identity theft if you will. Watches with similar styling but
sold under another name are not only perfectly legal but are a time honored
tradition in horology - imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If no
watchmaker was able to sell a watch that looked in any way similar to
another manufacturer's, this would eliminate about 90% of the watches on the
market. Invicta goes to great lengths to make sure that no one will mistake
its watches for Rolex, including engraving their name in large letters on
the edge of the case. Now I'll grant you that creating your own style rather
than copying someone else's is a higher art form, but this is a truth that
is honored in the breach...in clothes, cars, shoes, etc. the vast majority
of what we see contains major design elements that were "borrowed" from
others. Again, as long as you don't pawn your merchandise off as being
someone else's, this is perfectly permissible, even desirable. If you had to
start fresh every time you designed a shirt (or a watch) we'd all look like
extras on StarTrek or something.
In addition to Invicta, there are a number of very decent diver style
watches on the market with Rolexlike styling - Sandoz, MarcelloC, etc. -
Invicta is only the best known of them.
"Chris Bicknell" <ch...@tempest11.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b7skdd$pgb$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
Wing C Ng
Jack Denver <nunu...@netscape.net> wrote:
>Very simple - fakes are illegal and a form of stealing (of another's
>trademark) - identity theft if you will. Watches with similar styling but
Technically the shape of the watch can be copyrighted as a "3-dimensional
sculpture". However, this is more complicated law than trademark:
the copier can claim "independent creation", and it can also question
the copyrighter's own "independent creation". Certain elements may
also be in the "public domain", e.g. "round" shape of watches. Certain
elements may be "functional" and fall under patent law, e.g. the hands
indicating hour/min/sec, and patent law requires nonobviousness, etc.etc.,
much harder than copyright, which is harder than trademark.
A lot of fakes these days are quite nice watches. I have some that
are 10 years old and still function accurately. What they should do
is sell them under their own trademark, and maybe 30 years later, they
will become famous brands themselves.
Wing
Matt
"Norman M. Schwartz" <nm...@att.net> wrote in message
news:lGjoa.69028$ja4.4...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> *I NEVER WROTE THAT THE SPEEDBIRD WAS A FAKE*.
A quote from your reply to nastyandy - "....my IWC Mark XV. I have an
imitation of
the latter, that being a Speedbird II"
Imitation is the same as a fake. The words are interchangeable.
> Hint: bone up on your reading comprehension.
Hint: Bone up on your ability to word your posts correctly so that there is
no confusion as to what you mean.
Matt
Matt
"Norman M. Schwartz" <nm...@att.net> wrote in message
news:lGjoa.69028$ja4.4...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> *I NEVER WROTE THAT THE SPEEDBIRD WAS A FAKE*.
A quote from your reply to nastyandy - "....my IWC Mark XV. I have an
imitation of
the latter, that being a Speedbird II"
Imitation is the same as a fake. The words are interchangeable.
> Hint: bone up on your reading comprehension.
Norman M. Schwartz
"Chris Bicknell" <ch...@tempest11.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:b7skdd$pgb$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
were
> worn by the british RAF during the second world war. Simillar designs were
> also produced by JLC and Omega. All designs were obviously based upon the
> same military criteria.
> From the impression that I get from this speedbird series, I am sure that
> they are a very nostalgic item designed for those that want to wear a
watch
> that is similar to the old military classics and probably have a set of
> original watches but prefer to wear the speedbird to prevent damage to the
> more valuable stock.
> I do not believe that the speedbird was a direct stab at the IWC MK XV. It
> was just a watch on a military theme as was the MKxv.
Eddie Platts of Time Factors in the UK who produces the Speedbird, and from
whom I purchased it, indicated in an email to me that the similarity between
the Speedbird and the Mark XV is more than a coincidence. You can take it
from there.
Norman M. Schwartz
IMITATION, and then (I repeat myself, "bone up on your reading
comprehension") and place the word, "imitation" in context to which I
applied it.
"2 entries found for imitation.
To select an entry, click on it.
imitation[1,noun]imitation[2,adjective]
Main Entry: 1im搏暗a暗ion
Pronunciation: "i-m&-'tA-sh&n
Function: noun
Date: 14th century
1 : an act or instance of imitating
2 : something produced as a copy : COUNTERFEIT
3 : a literary work designed to reproduce the style of another author
4 : the repetition by one voice of a melody, phrase, or motive stated
earlier in the composition by a different voice
5 : the quality of an object in possessing some of the nature or attributes
of a transcendent idea
6 : the assumption of behavior observed in other individuals"
And also, again, Eddie Platts from whom I purchased the Speedbird, indicated
to me in an email that the similarities between the Mark XV and Speedbird
were not coincidental, IN OTHER WORDS, perhaps which you seem incapable of
comprehending, he in fact imitated the style of the of the Mark XV in the
Speedbird, DEFINITION 5, from Merriam-Webster above. In the context to which
I applied the word "imitation", responding to Jack Denver's accusation,
thereby demonstrating that I could and do distinguish between fakes and
copies, definition 2 is not applicable.
"Matt" <thom...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:02qoa.297644$Zo.59086@sccrnsc03...
Norman M. Schwartz
my neck of the woods would be driving with a cell phone in hand, nor would
there be any dog poop on the ground, Napster-like websites, CD burners,
"audio CD-Rs", etc., etc. Although I don't suspect Copyright laws apply to
the "Mona Lisa", if you enjoy seeing it, being reminded of its appearance,
and so forth, why shouldn't art museums make and sell copies which you can
hang on your wall, which in fact they do. If I enjoy seeing a Frank Muller
watch, why shouldn't I be able to enjoy seeing its appearance on my wrist?
I'm not depriving the manufacturers of the FM watch of any $$$ since I'm
never going to buy one, nor the Mona Lisa. Only Bill Gates can afford to buy
every watch that he might like to lok at. However, nearly everyone can
afford to buy $15 CDs, so why did Napster exist ?
"Wing C Ng" <wi...@lava.net> wrote in message
news:va404o2...@corp.supernews.com...
B R A V O ! !
> >
> >In addition to Invicta, there are a number of very decent diver style
> >watches on the market with Rolexlike styling - Sandoz, MarcelloC, etc. -
> >Invicta is only the best known of them.
> >
> >"Chris Bicknell" <ch...@tempest11.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:b7skdd$pgb$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >> I do have a different opinion on the Rolex/Invicta situation though.
> >> How people can cry about fakes and then preach the good virtues of an
> >> Invicta just makes me wonder.
Wonder about what?
"Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
Pronunciation: 'hi-p&-"krit
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Old French, from Late Latin
hypocrita, from Greek hypokritEs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
Date: 13th century
: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion"
Matt
FAKE. Since you are into watches, you should know this and you should
choose to use a different word. Homage, for example, would be a better
suited word to use.
Like I said, if you don't want to cause confusion, work on how you word your
posts. Being a smart ass about it when its your own fault sure isn't the
way to handle it.
Matt
"Norman M. Schwartz" <nm...@att.net> wrote in message
news:FNvoa.69797$ja4.4...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Wing C Ng
Norman M. Schwartz <nm...@att.net> wrote:
>Technically if everyone followed each and every word of the law, no-one in
>my neck of the woods would be driving with a cell phone in hand, nor would
>there be any dog poop on the ground, Napster-like websites, CD burners,
>"audio CD-Rs", etc., etc. Although I don't suspect Copyright laws apply to
>the "Mona Lisa", if you enjoy seeing it, being reminded of its appearance,
Copyright on that one expired couple hundred years ago.
>and so forth, why shouldn't art museums make and sell copies which you can
>hang on your wall, which in fact they do. If I enjoy seeing a Frank Muller
Actually I am surprised that the watch companies don't enforce
their design copyright. Maybe the law in Switzerland is different.
Norman M. Schwartz
nor will or should I ever. W.A. Mozart *IMITATED* J.C. Bach and Beethoven
composed works *IMITATING* W.A. Mozart, none of whose compositions are
considered fakes. Imitations need not be fakes, but (good) fakes need be
imitations.
You were and are a callous impolite SMART ASS, when you told me "hint",
blah blah". Hint at what ?, If you were confused OR, even perhaps more
importantly, if you thought I was either wrong or confused you should have
approached the matter in a very much more polite and civil fashion. That's
how I would have treated you if our roles were reversed, and that is how I
expect to be treated, PERIOD. . I don't require "hints" offered by an
impolite fool.
Perhaps unlike you I know that I'm not correct 100% and appreciate and am
grateful for receiving informative correction BUT not in the form of a
"hint".
The Speedbird IS an imitation of the IWC Mark XV!
The Speedbird IS not at fake, counterfeit or forgery, its says Speedbird on
the dial, and only a PUTZ like yourself lacking in any reading
comprehension skill could possibly conclude that anyone might think the
Speedbird is a fake Mark XV.
"Hint:" You lack both courtesy and reading comprehension skills
"Matt" <thom...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:N4Eoa.277583$OV.329167@rwcrnsc54...
Matt
> Well excuuuuuse me! Unlike you I don't *constantly* talk in terms of
watches
> nor will or should I ever. W.A. Mozart *IMITATED* J.C. Bach and Beethoven
> composed works *IMITATING* W.A. Mozart, none of whose compositions are
> considered fakes. Imitations need not be fakes, but (good) fakes need be
> imitations.
This isn't a classical music newsgroup, its a watch/clock newsgroup. When
talking about watches, imitation usually refers to a fake. And this being a
watch/clock newsgroup, you should have taken that knowledge into
consideration when making your post.
> You were and are a callous impolite SMART ASS, when you told me "hint",
> blah blah". Hint at what ?, If you were confused OR, even perhaps more
> importantly, if you thought I was either wrong or confused you should have
> approached the matter in a very much more polite and civil fashion. That's
> how I would have treated you if our roles were reversed, and that is how I
> expect to be treated, PERIOD. . I don't require "hints" offered by an
> impolite fool.
> Perhaps unlike you I know that I'm not correct 100% and appreciate and am
> grateful for receiving informative correction BUT not in the form of a
> "hint".
I was giving you a taste of your own medicine, thats how you replied to Jack
(or whoever, it was actually made as a reply to yourself). If you don't
like it, maybe YOU should change the way you respond to people. I am sure
you are aware of the saying: treat others as you want to be treated. Maybe
you aren't aware of it, though.
If you can't handle people making replies that echo your attitude and
writing style, maybe you should take steps to change how you present
yourself and how you reply to other peoples posts.
Could I have approached the subject without sinking to your level and
throwing it in your face? You bet, but based on similar instances in the
past, it works best to do just what I did - to give you a taste of your own
medicine. A civil reply usually doesn't get the point across.
> The Speedbird IS an imitation of the IWC Mark XV!
> The Speedbird IS not at fake, counterfeit or forgery, its says Speedbird
on
> the dial, and only a PUTZ like yourself lacking in any reading
> comprehension skill could possibly conclude that anyone might think the
> Speedbird is a fake Mark XV.
Whats with the name calling?
I'll repeat myself once again, when watches are being discussed the word
IMITATION is generally used to describe a fake. HOMAGE is used to describe
a watch with similar characterisitics to that of a more well known
brand/style. You used the wrong word and then got pissy when people
misunderstood you. I'll say it again, that is your fault, not mine. You
should be aware of what the word imitation means in the watch world.
> "Hint:" You lack both courtesy and reading comprehension skills
Didn't you just say replying like this makes one a callous and impolite
smart ass (nevermind the fact that you were the first to do it, it seems you
have forgotten what you had posted earlier)? Grow up.
Matt
Norman M. Schwartz
>
> "Norman M. Schwartz" <nm...@att.net> wrote in message
> news:tZFoa.70664$ja4.4...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > Well excuuuuuse me! Unlike you I don't *constantly* talk in terms of
> watches
> > nor will or should I ever. W.A. Mozart *IMITATED* J.C. Bach and
Beethoven
> > composed works *IMITATING* W.A. Mozart, none of whose compositions are
> > considered fakes. Imitations need not be fakes, but (good) fakes need be
> > imitations.
>
>
> This isn't a classical music newsgroup, its a watch/clock newsgroup. When
> talking about watches, imitation usually refers to a fake. And this being
a
> watch/clock newsgroup, you should have taken that knowledge into
> consideration when making your post.
>
familiar with "alt.horology newsgroup speak", as you could easily infer from
the number of times I've posted to it. I *randomly* drew a classical music
analogy to the above, but could just have well have done so with many tens
of thousands of others. Whether it be watch-talk or X-talk only a (?) such
as yourself, would have concluded that I wrote or meant to imply *either on
this ng, or anywhere else*, that a watch bearing the logo: "Speedbird II"
could possibly be a fake Mark XV (overlooking all its other differences,
date window location, hour and minute hand sizes and configurations,
etc.etc). I have granted you a lot of leeway here but still believe you lack
reading comprehension skills and are trying to save face rather than
admitting to your error and lack of civility.