Changing a watchband is even harder than changing a watch battery -- and why is that?

What is it about watches that makes the simplest of repairs -- changing a band or a battery -- so hard that we have to seek out people to do it for us?

We all have had to replace watch batteries, which involves, first, trying to figure out how to pry the back of the watch off. Supposedly, there's a little arrow or mark, indented into the metal, to guide us, but often we can't find it. So we take out a knife or otherwise sharp instrument and begin the laborious process of trying to find that ideal spot that the manufacturer built into this particular watch back to show us where to being prying. We usually end up defacing the surface as we search for that sweet spot.

Let's assume we find it, as we often do. The metallic back pops open, and we see where the battery is located. Again using the knife, we pry up the battery and drop it onto the kitchen counter. The dead battery.

Here comes the daunting step #2: Identifying the battery.

The battery itself is tiny, smaller than a dime. In fact a whole lot smaller. More like an aspirin tablet. Even smaller. On its surface is etched a number, which our most powerful reading glasses can't decipher. (I have a magnifying glass I keep for just this purpose.) If and when we've figured out that this is, a 360 or a 380 or whatever -- and what do these numbers mean? -- we go to the nearest store that sells batteries and buy that one (maybe two) and come back home and try to re-pry it back into the tiny space allocated to it in the back of the watch, snap the back on again until it clicks . . . and hope it works.

In most cases, it does. This isn't rocket science. Your watch takes a certain battery and, once properly inserted, you're back on time. Voila!

But suppose it's not your battery but your watchband that breaks. Uh oh. Whole set of new problems. Now, let me make clear that I'm talking here about leather watchbands, the old ones that are still much in use. I have no idea about metallic watchbands. The way leather (or simulated leather) watchbands fit into the metal part of the watch is a study in intricacy and, at the same time, idiocy.

The tiny rod that holds the watchband into the metal part of the watch is impossibly small, about the width of a piece of twine, and is -- I still can't quite get this -- imbedded at both ends with springs that let it retract on one end so that you can fit it into the almost invisible indentation inside one arm of the metal part while trying to hold down the other retractable end that has to fit into an indentation on the other metal part -- these parts being less than an inch apart. (Note that none of this makes any sense unless you've tried to do this yourself.) In other words, you have to -- being a human with normal eyesight -- try to hold apart a tiny thread of metal, fixed on both ends with springs, into, simultaneously, two almost invisible indentations, first into one and then the other, without the whole thing springing out of your fingers and then onto the floor: good luck finding them.

Who designed this system? Granted it works for most of us, after a few (dozen) tries, but it seems to me like an invention ripe for re-inventing: A new way to install watchbands. I'm sure there are many other modern inventions more important than this that need some tweaking, but I'd start with this one. Not far behind would be making all watch batteries the same -- and easier to install.

I think that most innovatons come from customer complaint with an existing system or feature. I guess if most of us are okay not being able to replace our watch batteries and watchbands by ourselves, then I'm just a crank. But I have a drawer full of watches that need both replaced, just because I can't find a band or a battery -- usually a band -- and I welcome suggestions.

We landed a man or two on the moon, but we can't easily change a watchband? What's up with that? And I'm sure there's not an astronaut among us who can do better.