OK. My view
Hi Chuck, Hi Georges, Hi anyone else bored enough to read this.
I don't want to go through each of the replies line by line, but here's my view.
Georges STATED , in a way that read as a fact, that the 3612 has NOT been tested under rough conditions.
I asked where the facts came from.
Basically Chuck & Georges have replied that the 33xx movements have had problems ( there is no doubting that !).
Maybe I'm missing the point here, but why does that mean that the 3612 movement will also have problems ?
A lot of water has passed under the bridge since the 33xx first came onto the market. Omega claim they have found & fixed the 33xx problems. They say new movements don't have these problems. Maybe they've checked the 3612's better before they left the factory ? Maybe they engineered them better from the begining ?
Omega have had "some egg on their face" because ofthe 33xx movements. I hope they have got their act together for the next range of movements.
Georges also mentioned meeting the head of the museum in 2004. With all respect, why should the head of a museum know all the ins & outs of the latest prototype testing ? & bear in mind this meeting was 2 years ago now. Again a lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. Just because he didn't answer a question, doesn't mean Omega has anything to hide.
I find it amazing that less than 24 hrs after a post anouncing the release of a watch, I read the line
The 3612 has not been tested under rough conditions.....
It doesn't read like a supposition, theory or guess to me.
I have no idea if the 3612 will be any good or not, but I'm sure not going to write it off before one has ever reached the public.
just my 2 cents.
S.
