More On The Linux Wrist Watch

Gareth writes "CNET has more information on IBM's wrist watch running Linux, including an interview with the vice president of research." A lot meatier than we had yesterday. It looks legit, but it's still looks pretty impractical (despite scoring many points on the old cool-o-meter).

Comments

You people should really read..

[Anonymous Coward]

Its clear in the article that IBM does not expect the Linux watch to become a product--but is a research prototype. Practical or not, I can think of many lessons learned from this effort. Just as a proof of concept, that Linux can be run in tiny devices--issues like power consumption, memory requirement, display readability--this can come a long way to proving to skeptics that Linux has vast untapped potential. So, broaden your minds and stop asking insipid questions like "is it practical"? Practically, in this case, is not the point.

Okay...

[dougman]

I'm sorry. I REALLY like Linux and all, but this seems to be akin to a small war to CNN coverage-wise here.

It's a FRIGGIN WRISTWATCH.

Jesus. I can only imagine the stop-the-presses-obsess-over-this coverage the day they get Linux running on The Clapper.

What the...?

[CWCarlson]

I checked out that link, and was surprised to see that the feature list included:

"Dairy alarm"

Now *that's* an odd thing for a watch to do. Does it let you know when your milk is going bad? When you're getting close to a lactating animal? I'm confused.

Of course, I'm also off-topic. Oh, well...

--- Chris

IBM Linux Commercial

[crumley]

Has anyone seen this a href="http://www-4.ibm.com/software/is/mp/linux/au dio/ibm_linux-02.avi" commercial on TV yet? If they put it on TV, it would really prove that IBM is going to try to push Linux, much more than this watch does.

Interaction is irrelevant

[FascDot Killed My Pr]

So because it would be difficult (impossible?) to interact with the computer, the computer is useless? Let's see what you think after I remove all microchips from your home, car and workplace.

How would Linux on a watch be useful?

Telemetry: A million uses summed up in one word. Spies gathering intelligence. Scientists/Doctors gathering data (from the environment and/or from the wearer). Security officers (including police). Tracking/homing.

Data access: Sure, you can't do much general computing--but every (digital) watch has buttons. How about a "what's my current location" button with some GPS software installed? How about a modified Timex DataLink that links DIRECTLY to my PC (wirelessly)?

Communication: We laugh about Dick Tracy, but cellphone small enough to wear on your wrist would be revolutionary.

I thought of all the above while I was writing it. Surely someone who is actually involved in the field will think of many many more immediate uses. Then there is the "new platform" effect: Once everyone has a watch running Linux, what else becomes possible? No one predicted the Internet would explode once everybody had a PC...
--

Gotta love the press

[Masker]

Linux is a clone of Unix whose programming instructions can be modified -- which is the reason IBM chose the operating system for the project

I know that IBM has been working for decades trying to modify the mystical "programming instructions" for AIX, and have been unsuccessful to date. Even multi-billion dollar companies have been unable to change their own operating systems. =)

Hmm...

[CrayDrygu]

The watches run on an ARM-based...processor...

Of course.

--

great

[cyberm]

The watch can tell time...

Hey that's real innovation!

Re:evolution

[bfree]

Before Linux, IBM's research group had lost its enthusiasm for operating system work, Goyal said. Linux, though, is ideal for research environments because its open-source nature encourages innovation that's not hobbled by licensing negotiations, he said.

I adored this quote also. It shows exactly why gnu/linux is able to go further than any other system.....and why it will. IBM produces good products, maybe not outstanding but not often awful. They are a huge company and you know their researchers are good, and you know that IBM are not going to have too many licensing problems on this world (imagine IBM and RMS asking M$ for windows source, who would have the problems :-). Despite their position however, their researchers want to work with linux (if this is to be believed, and personally I do) because of the lack of licensing issues, so they obviously don't see the GPLs viral nature as a problem. If this attitude is not being discouraged, then IBM are shifting to a GPL based development (in the long term) where their code will be the worlds code and again they might be restored to their monopoly/top billing position (SGI might be fighting them for it though). To a company like IBM the decision of whether to "gamble" on GPLing code must be far far easier than to all the other small players in the market who do not have the resources to sacrifice any income.
Maybe they are simply going to research on gnu/linux and then rewrite everything to their current operating system of choice.......they wouldn't, would they?

Re:So how do I use it?

[_xeno_]

This was mentioned in the previous article, but at All Linux Devices, they have a story that amoung other things explains how to use the watch. It's a combination of the touch-sensitive screen, and a little dial next to it. It also has an X server built in to the default install. The picture of the watch shows it running some shell (prob. just sh, but I can't tell - not enough shown), so it IS possible to enter data. It sounds like they really expect it to be used by typing data at your desktop and downloading it to the watch. Actually, the real use of this was just to show that you could run Linux on a watch, they aren't planning on anything else with it.

They may also have thought that the watch could have an overly simplified menu system, and display data as requested. Since it is just a prototype demonstrating that it's possible to run Linux on a wrist-watch, it makes sense that the user interface isn't well thought out yet. If they ever planned on marketting it, they'd probably need to add some more buttons. Plus the battery only lasts two to three days, making it not the most useful of watches.

Re:Limitations of current HCI models

[Penguin_99]

I agree with you 100%. However, the physical components we use to interact with a computer are not the only problem. True that the keyboards and mice are not the most intuitive of devices, but I think that more of the problem lies with the actual interfaces (ie: GUIs). Most GUIs fall short or delievering a natural way of navigating, controlling and interacting with a computer. We have to learn to look past the typical idea of a computer consisting of a 17" monitor, a large box to which all the paripherals connect to a machine that people can interact with and incorporate into their everyday lives without changing their habits. The goal (of software development and computer design) should not be to use the system but to create computers and software that are unabtrusive and fit into peoples everyday lives without the people having to change and mold around the computer.

Re:Any uses?

[streetlawyer]

Woman repellent?

Other OS Watches

[Corty]

Windows Watch: Hand moves anti-clockwise, only some numbers are shown and requires time setting every half hour.

Mac Watch: Straps to leg, made of transparent material and sphere rolls instead of hands to indicate global postion in relation to the Sun.

Sun Watch: Hands spin too damn fast too read.

So how do I use it?

[evanbd]

Having read the articles and looked at the pictures, how do I use the thing??? There's no keyboard, no stylus/grafiti thing, just an IR and radio comm thing. It syays it has a touch screen, but does it do handwriting recognition or something? no mention of this. So do I pull out my Palm and IR link to type in commands? Or do I need to bring my wireless keyboard with me? I will believe that there *might* be uses (I haven't found any) if I can use it somehow.

---

Limitations of current HCI models

[Dan Hayes]

This may have the "coolness" factor, but it has precious little else in the way of utility. Leaving aside the questions of what point is there running Linux on a wristwatch since this is a "proof of concept" (i.e. scientists being paid to muck around with stuff they like), the fact of the matter is that human computer interaction is woefully lacking at the moment.

Until we can offer some alternative to the anachronistic technologies we are using today to interact with computers (keyboards? mice? not exactly intuitive for Joe Sixpack are they?) extending the domain for computers is going to fail.

We desparately need a new paradigm in HCI, because the ones we have at the moment just aren't applicable to things like wearable computers.

P.S. And I don't mean voice control either.