There have been many outspoken critics regarding the Survivor. Many favorable and some less favorable. As with many things post in forums adopt a positive or negative tendency very much depending on the few first impressions. Surfing through several forums of different languages you can safely state that in each case above 90% of the people posting agree that the Survivor is either beautiful or horrible. Are people sheep? Not necessarily. I have neither the time or resources to start a debate in this mater but I would rather explain this phenomenon with the idea that people "generally" do not like confrontation. Most people like to agree, while those that don't agree with the initial tendency simply won't participate in the discussion. Such behavior generally makes the balance swing either way in the beginning. If the balance is heavily leaning towards one point of view than this could influence and sway the later undecided stands towards that opinion. It's a snowball effect.
At the first look the Survivor is not especially aesthetically pleasing to me. Mind you, the "End of Days" was neither and since it is one of my favorite Oaks. lately I have been going towards more balanced watches. Anything over 44 mm is just not for me anymore. Critiques have been harsh on the design of the crown and protectors emulating the nozzle of a semi-automatic assault rifle or the tip of a flame thrower. I tend to agree. Believe me, I am far from being a pacifist but a winding crown inspired in a flame suppressor of a machine gun is taking it just too far. Who would have thought?!?... that the most politically incorrect person in the world (me) would actually agree with some of these critiques! What is the world coming to..?
In spite of that the Survivor has some interesting graphical components that roundup in an interesting proposal. I would have liked a more discreet crown and protectors on a Kevlar strap like the EOD. What do you think?