Unless Oris actually state what SUC, Frischknecht, WTD 71 actually contributed, I will take it with a grain of salt. It's not just in the watch world that brands send their goods for testing at some prestigious facility (instead of the local approved test centre) so that they can bask in the implied association.
In terms of case construction: G-Shocks with pressed steel backs and thin mineral crystals have been tested to 3000m (search the internet)...I mean the whole 1000m thing is overkill, particularly on a non-ISO "diver". How many people on earth dive past 60m? That takes all manner of gas management skills and decompression stops. You have to be pretty dedicated....
Legibility: From the photos, the dial is cluttered. Witness your Panerai comparison photo. The information that should be immediately conveyed is the minute hand relative to the bezel dot. Why does a diver need a chronograph?
The diver's watch acts as a simple bottom timer, all that is needed is a simple black face with luminous marks at 12, 3, etc. and fat, clear, easily differntiated hour and minute hands.
I really like the Blancpain and Ploprof's luminous bezel markings (rather than just a dot).
It's hard to say which watches are optimised for diving, I'd have to nominate a Suunto or similar....If you mean analogue watches, in which case Aqualands (AL004) are hard to beat as back-ups. Same goes for the simple Seiko and Citizen Automatic divers (I actually use a 1979 Seiko)
In the end, if you aren't willing to smack it against your tank or have it whacked with a lead weight, regardless of what the watch is, it's not going to be much of a diver.
This message has been edited by BDLJ on 2009-07-30 16:46:42