Slashdot Mirror
Caller ID Watches
kbielefe writes "On Thursday, Sony Ericsson and Fossil Inc. announced a line of bluetooth watches that vibrate when a call comes in on your cell phone, display the number of the caller, and allow you to press a button to send the call to voicemail. No more digging around in your pocket or purse before deciding if the call is important enough to interrupt a meeting."
I wonder what the battery life is like and how many calls you get before your watch goes dead.
This sounds useful for the land line as well.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
http://www.fossil.com/shopping/product/detailmain. jsp?itemType=PRODUCT&RS=1&itemID=37060&keyword=blu etooth
There was a story about people (even perhaps the Commander in Chief) wiring something in their teeth for surreptitious voice communications. This is much more discrete than some doofy watch!
Is there really more money for intergrating than innovating?
That watch is butt ugly.
You'd think Fossil could come up with better looking packaging than that, especially given the launch of this new technology.
It's a great idea, obviously, but watches are also an important marker of self-identity for the buyer; I'd really want to see a few pictures of these in TFA.
O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon
Of course in the next year or so, when they come out with the whole Cellphone IN the watch, this product will be obsolete... :) --Ray
http://www.beanleafpress.com
Ok, cool. Now my watch will tell me what time it is and whos calling, but that still doesnt tell me where I put my damn phone. Now only if I could press a button and my headset picked the call up....then I wouldnt have to find that damn phone.
never mind...found it. the phone found its way under my nail again. Ah the good old days of a phone as big as a brick....they were never hard to find.
My phone won't attach to more than one bluetooth device at a time. Which means that if you use this watch, you can't use other BT doodads.
Bluetooth Sniffer ... Hey, pick up your phone ... your Mom is calling.
-- Brought to you by Carl's JR
I want one of those Dick Tracy phone watches. Ok not really. It would be a novelty but the sound quality would suck and I would hate having to bring my arm up to my mouth to talk.
a) How nice it would be to not have to reach into your pocket to see who's calling
b) How lazy I have become to think that this it would be nice to not have to reach into my pocket to see who's calling
DAMN YOU, TECHNOLOGY!
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
I'll be getting one of these when they have some compatibility for my phone. These rock!
[%] Cingular Ringtones
I've been in the market for a new geek watch for about 8 months now, but nothing really strikes me as something I want to wear.
The watches themselves look ok, and I like the idea of having caller ID on my wrist and not having to fuss with the phone... but only supporting Sony/Ericsson phones? I won't buy Sony shit, and I Ericsson phones are notorious pieces of shit.
It's BLUETOOTH for gods sake... it's an open standard. Why won't it support generic Bluetooth phones?
Screw that... I'll buy from another company that actually has support for some of the more common phones out there. I can't think of anyone with an Ericsson phone off the top of my head.
I don't wear a watch, you insensitive clod!
Sounds like you're also missing the sense not to read stories that don't interest you.
And those will be obsolete in two years, when they introduce the wrist-mounted video phone.
Just think -- we'll finally catch up with Dick Tracy!
My Grandfather was a watchmaker, a good one. When I was about 6 or 7 my father bought a digital watch, it was well over $800 a hefty sum in the early 70's but it was gold with a thin black (red) slit that when the button on the side was pushed the time lit up in the little red-dot LED displays similar to first gen digital calculators.
We sat down at the kitchen table and as my dad leaned over to show my grandfather the watch, he pushed the button and the time displayed. My grandfather never one to show much emotion shook his head and looked at my dad.
He said, "I dont understand, how can they call that progress when NOW it takes 2 hands to tell time ?" as he show a quick glance at his favorite self winding chronograph.
My dads bubble was visibly burst, I never saw him wear the watch again, it sits still in his jewelry box.....
I LOVE the Idea of the Caller ID Watch as I have refused to carry a cell until about 4 months ago , it drives me nuts and spends most of its time in the car, but I could live with something like this.....BUT PLEASE OMIT THe function requireing me to PRESS A GODDAM BUTTON !
According to reports I've heard about this damn thing is that it weighs MORE than an actual phone. Now tell me, why would I want some horrid piece of equipment strapped to my arm that actually weighs MORE than the actual thing? It makes no sense.
Sure, if it had just been like my regular watch I'd probably have loved it. But this? No thanks.
I enjoy large posteriors and I cannot prevaricate.
This sounds like a really neat gadget - unobtrusive, simple and potentially quite useful. I'd be willing to pay $100 to use it on my current bluetooth-enabled phone (a razr). I believe a lot of people would be. The problem is that, according to the article, this watch will cost $250, and work only with Sony Ericson phones. This is going to doom the nifty new Caller ID watches, I think.
I'm the stranger...posting to
Now all they need to do is add a built-in speaker/mic so you can answer and say "I'm on my way!"
How pissed is your boss going to be thinking you're so bored in his meeting that you have to keep checking your watch?
-- pupkick
I don't use a watch: my phone is my source of what time it is. To tell the time, I pull my phone out of my pocket... and can also check for messages while I do so. My watch broke years ago, and when I got a replacement, that broke too. My phone breaks less, so is a more reliable "watch".
and watch as I fumble through my backpack for replacement batteries or recharging cables, because of my fucking power-hog bluetooth watch and phone.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
Caller-id over bluetooth is just a gimmick. But since it's a watch which can communicate with the outside world, when are we going to get around to designing a watch which addresses the fundamentals - accuracy (+/- 0.1 second/day), self-adjusting (using NTP or WWV or another time source), correct calendars (leap years) and summer time zone support?
Most watches with calendars understand leap years. Except for the really expensive Tissot T-touch (the watch with a touch screen, which has inbuilt altimeter, compass and barometer, and which Angelina Jolie wore on Mr & Mrs Smith). The T-touch doesn't store the year and so requires manual adjustment on the 1st of March on the 3 out of every 4 years which are NOT leap years. How stupid is that?
Self-adjusting watches should be a doddle since we can build USB and/or bluetooth into the watch. Even a simple time signal receiver could mean that the watch could set itself (just configure the timezone yourself) and maintain accuracy for years.
Sounds like a really useful concept. I would love to buy one! Oh, except that they've fallen into the usual corporate trap of taking an open standard and locking it down so it's not useful with anything but the products of the companies they've partnered with, it's way way too expensive, and Oh Lord is it FUGLY!
"Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
I have been a fan of high tech watches for 5 years now. An Austrian company finally perfected the 2nd generation Mp3 watch a couple years back.
I saw some articles that Cell watches are possible in Japan, but not yet possible here, because the more efficient communications protocol in Japan allows a small enough device size in Japan. The US/Euro protocol forces devices just barely too large to make a sensible watch. Some incredible engineer might beat this flaw, but that was the State of the Times last I looked.
I happens to hate cell phones, as "a device to lose." I would jump all over a cell watch and grassroots promote the daylights out of it.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I have a bluetooth-enabled earbud.
I can tap the earbud and have it recognize "Call Home" and call home.
I can't have the earbud discretely tell me the caller id info of an incoming call, with the phone set to vibrate.
WHY THE FS*K NOT!?
For that matter, why does the phone not recognize the immensely useful, "say time" verbal command?
You could've hired me.
I'm not familiar with this 'watch' technology. Reading these posts, it sounds like some new apparatus which tells time. That doesn't sound like anything I need. My cellphone tells the time just perfectly.
Oh, now I get it. The thing is worn on the writst so I don't have to fumble in my pocket everytime I want to see what time it is. Now that's a breakthrough!
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
I don't know why I would want this.......my Sony Ericsson W810i has "voice commands", along with the ringtones I have assigned for various people, I know who's calling me by the voice command and/or the ringtone. 200.00 for a watch? With my job, I go through watches about once a year. I just pick up a cheap one...time is time......I don't need a pound (or kilogram) of metal hanging on my wrist just to impress someone.
Very soon we will have microchips implanted in your brain with peer-to-peer capabilities, to inform you of who is calling before they call and to whisper the text of SMS messages in your head so you don't have to read them.
To answer your phone, you merely have to imagine answering it, at which point your chip will open the line and forward your thoughts to the gentleman on the other end.
Jesus.
I like where this is going. If nothing else, it will eliminate 1 out of 1000 obnoxious ringtones i hear all day long. Maybe if you have a vibration alert strapped to your wrist, you won't have to crank your ringer up to max.
My Sony Ericsson W810i announces the caller on my BT headset (in my own voice) when I have voice dialing enabled for the number the person is calling from.
Cingular also has a feature called #121 which has voice recognition which will tell you the time.
The word you're looking for is timepiece.
What's that smell?
Oh it's bluetooth.
Because before, I never took my watch off... I have always been afraid of the watch gnomes. Those little bastards get everything I take off my body. Last time I took off my sunglasses... shit I had to buy another pair the next day. and WTF, they appear right after I buy a new pair. But this time, they were right on top of my head when I found them AFTER buying the new pair. Now don't even say it was the sales person's fault for not telling me, that they were there just so they could sell me another pair.
Joking aside... I personally, take everything off my body when I goto bed, shower, swim (well swim I sometimes keep the watch on, (timeing my breath holding skills)), mud wrestling, etc.
I think as the comments go on, Incentives are required for people to do what should be normally done. With my 'late' ipod, I used to charge it every night because I would place it in the docking cradle and it would play on my surround sound system. As for my phone(s), I charged them every other day, because sooner or later I'd get that one phone call that would kill the battery (thank gawd for travel/car chargers). Bluetooth devices are the same, PDAs, Cameras, lappytops, etc. We all have something that reminds us to take it off and recharge it. Whats another watch with bluetooth gonna need from us? take it off at night and charge it.
"Don't Forget to Salt the Fries"
Many young people do not wear watches, they use their cellphone as a watch.
So instead of looking at their watch to see who is on the phone, they look at their cellphone to see what time it is.
And Bluetooth is good on batteries, but no so good that I want a device with a tiny, non-rechargable battery to do Bluetooth. You'll be opening your watch weekly.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
So not only do I have to ask if I can REALLY use my phone for calling other people, I really have to ask now if my clock also show the time as well? This really does sound like the wave of future.. ;)
A decade ago, I stopped wearing watches, because I was carrying a phone and a pager and a PDA and a laptop and enough other things that should have known what time it was. Eventually phones became reliable enough to get rid of the pager, and I would usually occasionally wear watches, but these days the cellphone is smaller and gets the time loaded automatically by the network, and I'm usually sitting in front of a PC at home, so I'm usually not wearing watches these days. (And yeah, my cellphone doesn't do bluetooth either, though one of my watches does GPS :-)
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Does anyone else really see an odd paradox here in that all the watches have analog dials with digital displays for the caller ID and Bluetooth? Some of the most modern technology coupled with the most archaic. I don't know why, but it's very hard to find a decent watch that is digital only. (NOTE: My search automatically excludes anything made of plastic, anything non water-resistant or anything that has calculator buttons.) I don't think I'm odd (well, OVERLY odd...) but am I alone in thinking that it's peculiar that it's the 21st century and the majority of us are still reading watch dials that were invented 500 years ago? I understand the romanticism of wanting to know how it was done in the old days (similar to knowing how to shave with a straight razor, navigate by the stars or shoot a bow & arrow) but why is it that 98% of all non-plastic watches are still analog? Sure, I know how to read an analog watch, but why should I have to? It's extra work. I can glance at a digital watch, and I know instantly what time it is. No calculating, no trying to figure out which number the little hand is pointing at. No counting up by 5's. Just a 1/10 second glance tells me unambiguously what I'm looking for.
After an exhaustive search, I found this and so far I like it, but is it possible that it's the only decent watch that's all digital? I found a couple more (Ammon, Quiksilver and RipCurl come to mind) that were designed as surfer watches, but I really don't need to know when the tide is coming in here in Ohio. So I put this question to other time geeks out there. Are there other decent watches that are digital only? I don't like the analog/digital combo watches. Lots of wasted space that I don't care about. Just a reasonably plain, waterproof, easy to read watch that tells me the time and date at a glance, with a stainless steel case and a mineral quartz face. Am I wanting too much?
-Arthur
Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
Correct me if I'm wrong, but BlueTooth is only a hardware spec+protocol, right?
I.e. you could set up a LAN using BlueTooth if you were really bored, you can stream your phone's audio to a bluetooth headset if you want, you can use BlueTooth to let your carkit work without a wired hookup (Even if that's stupid)... but these are only things you -can- do, and aren't things that are specifically part of the BlueTooth standard?
I guess there might be something of a standard related to broadcasting incoming call details, so that e.g. your car stereo will show them - and it would be nice if this watch would adhere to that standard... but that isn't a BlueTooth thing per se; if your phone wouldn't support that standard anyway, even if it has BlueTooth, it doesn't matter whether the watch supports it or not?
I used to have all sorts of silly gizmos in my watch, be it a calculator, one of those silly phone books, and even a barometer back in high school. But now I have discovered the One True Watch Feature: WWVB reception. Since then I have been spoiled by having a watch that is accurate to, at worst, the nearest second (a timepiece that tells time, amazing!). I can tune into WWV and listen to the ticks synchronize exactly with my watch, I can turn on my GPS receiver and watch the time readout wander back and forth compared to the steady watch. My watch tells the time.
It seems that everybody is putting longwave receivers into timepieces nowadays, you'd think that the cool/hip/trendy/geek chic watches like this could afford to squeeze one in somewhere.
most importantly abstracts functionality - over form. Porting context over content changes the relationship between user and device from slave/master to client/server.
Bluetooth gets leggs!
when are we going to get around to designing a watch which addresses the fundamentals - accuracy (+/- 0.1 second/day), self-adjusting (using NTP or WWV or another time source), correct calendars (leap years) and summer time zone support?
Ah.....
Wouldn't it just be easier for the watch to get the time from the cell phone?
Phone gets it from the tower....
Which probably eventually gets it from NTP/WWV....
OTOH, my cheap bedside alarm clock automatically sets its data/time from the WWV broadcast.
It would make sense for a watch as this to be PROGRAMMABLE to receive the state of a remote process. Think of a watch with a simple Quarts timestamp on the front for local awareness, yet the face is covered with no less than 20 small buttons as would a calculator watch; a USB port is on the side, from where there is software that you can RSYNC configuration data so the internals will assign a ceratain button to a task that will query a process or /proc on a remote server. That process depends on the preference of whomever holds The Watch.
.mailbox, disk-usage via looking to /proc, server processing stress, network bandwidth usage, the percentile of completion for a database re-organization or massive file-system check, system environment temperature, or KITCO price for an asset. Better yet, just have a LCD Watch with a scroll wheel on the side that has a little Rolodex-style directory listing so I can use a standard button to choose the profile or character of data to syncronize onto and then the wheel to scroll through the data fields being updated.
:-)
Who needs to be killed just to get a watch that let me query the count of mail in the
BlueTooth? Why only BlueTooth? We're not Gillete! I expect 802.11G, with a hookup for an external antennae.
Besides all this, we're long over-due for a 386 PDA. I'm waiting-out for a VAX fab-shrunk down to a PDA. There is no excuse why technologists should boast on technology that tries to undermine the already-consistent capabilities of yester-years expensive UNIX equipment, and thereby ignore their prestige by inventing architecture after architecture that does nothing more than create structure and debris to clutter the intelect base that was meant to be pledged for useful information. There is more worldly matter of computer architecture implementation than there is on knowledge that was meant to be stored by said computer technology. That just isn't right!
without prejudice
When I used to wear a watch, I would take it off when I slept. I would also usually put it in one specific spot, so I could remember where it was the next morning. So all you nay sayers, say nay no more, splashpad is here: [splashpower.com]. And since you don't want to click on random links, the splashpad basically just charges anything that you put onto it, as long as you have a special adapter attached to the item, or perhaps if the item *cough*magicbluetoothwatch*cough* was built with said adapter integrated into it. No more whining about plugging your Dick Tracy watch in please, because if the makers of this thing had any decency they would integrate this tech. They also wouldn't have it anywhere near an Ericsson phone, but we can dream, right?
... caller ID watches You!
(sorry)
send + more == money?
So during our meetings all my coworkers will have watches flashing on and off the whole time and everyone will notice how no one ever calls me. No thanks!
I will not buy a bluetooth watch that only last few years, and only capable of showing caller ID. I still prefer a mechanical watch that lasts forever (with proper treatment/care). Better spend the $$ for an Omega or Panerai..
Guess now they've only partnered on this one its only half the price when its battery behaves like.no.other
The only use I see for this would be to ignore those frequent callers that call about nothing, and forwarding them to the mail.. but if you end up wanting to talk to the person.. You're going to have to end up squirming through your handbag etc anyway to find the phone, AND you've just wasted like 2 out of the 8 or 10 seconds that the phone would usually ring for. Another reason would be so that ladies with purses would get to know when their cellphone is ringing, if they left it on vibrate or whatever, but the watch doesn't look lady-like :/
Everyone relies on the NAME associated with a number to know who's calling. I don't think BT sends the name to a caller id device. It only sends a the number.
--- widget evolution: enhanced, plus, super, ultra, extreme, exxxtreme, ultra-extreme,
I had one in '93, and mine cost a goddamn mint and minutes were $0.45 a piece.
You must have had a bag phone or DynaTAC, right? It seemed like flip phones (the first handheld phones other than the DynaTAC) didn't become available until 1991.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
...unless you're a self-important asshole with no consideration for the other attendees. Better solutions are to keep your meetings really short, or schedule breaks.
Reduce, reuse, cycle
They have been around for a while. Just search the internet. Even Sony Ericsson has one (HBH 660). The new Cardo Scala 750 has a separate display *and* is (supposedly) compatible with any Bluetooth cellphone.
:-)
On a side note, the very first thing I do when I sit at my desk, is to take off my wristwatch
In the long run we are all dead. - John Maynard Keynes (1883 - 1946)
In recent years, sales of watches have been down because people carry other devices which tell the time anyway. I wonder if this will do anything to help the watch manufacturers recover.
Time will tell, I suppose. (No pun intended.)
Sent from my computer.
Now GET OFF MY LAWN!
...Caller ID watches *you*!
Chris Mattern
I am holding out for the infamous shoe-phone. I'd prefer to check my wingtips for caller ID before slipping my shoe off to take the call.
Even if it didn't offer full caller ID on a landline, being able to see if the call was domestic or international would be great. Because here in the UK, pretty much every international call you get is some stooge in India trying to flog you something. Add a button to cut the call off remotely and you'd have a great piece of kit.
Great concept but yes BUTT UGLY
Hopefully they wont perceive lack of sales as a negative and do it right with another design.
Cheers,
Dean
www.collins.net.pr/blog
It looks cool, and is a useful addition to my bluetooth phone. On the other hand, most phone companies lock most bluetooth modes out to force users to pass through their (for-pay) services.
Damn, I have just bought a Samsung A640 with bluetooth, and the only modes still avaliable are OPP and HSP. So there is just about zero chance this watch would work with my bluetooth-enabled phone.
It's frustating to think that I would have to hack my own hardware to access all of it's features.
You're not old until regret takes the place of your dreams.
I don't want to be annoying. I don't think the wood or metal were invented, but discovered.
Actually I find an anolog watch far easier to pick up the time with a causal glance than digital. It seems that with a digital you have little choice but to actually read the time. With an analog I can get a sense of what time it is by the position of the hands. Most of the time I find this "sense of time" or approximate time to be enough for my needs (ex: It's close to 11:30, I need to get ready for a meeting).
On the other hand I find that a strictly analog watch lacks many of the features that I have come to use and enjoy in a digital. Count down timers (preferably more than one) are a real bonus. Alarms seem to take to long to set (ok not really a lot of time but it seems that way), especially for quick reminders (ex: phone Bob back in 15 minutes). I have used countdown timers many times for short reminder times. Too often I will remember that I have something to do "in a little while" then get absorbed into some activity (coding!) and miss the time by several if not tens of minutes. Setting a countdown timer when I remember the upcoming event has saved me more often then I care to remember.
The ultimate watch is one that has both analog and digital displays. The analog for most general time tracking purposes and the digital for precise time tracking as well as extra information like dates and extra functionality like alarms, countdown timers, and (although rarely used) stop watch features.
Unfortunatly it seems incredibly difficult to find a watch that has both with a decent sized digital read out. I'm not talking about the ability to see it but instead for the functionality of providing enough useful information. I had a Timex watch several years ago that was perfect (so far as the display goes): analog hands, digital read out large enough to display the current time and date at the same time, 2 alarms, 2 24-hour countdown timers, a stopwatch, and finaly, the ability to disply digital time in 24-hour time. Also unfortunately I seem to be rather hard on watches (I must unconciously hate them or something and purposely bang them into things) so one of the two large buttons just below the face was ripped off within a month.
For the most part I have given up on wearing watches for the last 3 years. Mostly because I can't find another one with the features I want an secondly it has to be rugged enough to survive the abuse I seem to give watches. I'd even consider a pocket watch but I have never seen anything but an analog version of those.
This reminds me of a comedian I saw a dozen or so years ago. He said one day we'd have a TV watch, held up his hand to watch it, brought up his other hand and made clicking motions, and said, "Remote control..."
"The only legitimate use of a computer is to play games." - Eugene Jarvis
Yeah, this is one step closer to the brain implant, then the matrix. You see, it all started with the swiss army knife. Or maybe even the wheel or the club or the thrown rock. This is why technology is evil and ung[G?]odly.
Kidding of course. But this theme is very common in philosophy (not just in Sci-Fi!):
1. Who am I?
2. Am I my actions? No. Maybe. I don't know.
3. Am I my thoughts? Yes!
4. So my thoughts are more important than the physical world? Yes!
5. So I could theoretically eliminate the physical world and still be me? Probably.
6. What if I also eliminate some of my less relevant thoughts?
7. And what if my mental processes as observed by others could be duplicated perfectly by a computer program?
8. And what if they are duplicated perfectly not only as observed by others, but also in fact?
9. So who the hell am I?
My answer: I don't exist; I'm a figment of my own imagination. Consciousness is an illusionary contruct which has facilitated the perpetuation of human species. A series of complex, intricate, and interconnected cell membranes which serve as a duplicating medium for strands of DNA do not a soul comprise. But that doesn't stop us from rebelling against the truth with song, dance, or in my case, a couple of beers.
hate to reply to self, but.. nevermind; just read that latest story about Wibree and BlueTooth is a seriously f*cked up bunch of 'stacks' with different functionalities and whatnot. In other words - they didn't make a low-power short-range piece of communications hardware + small protocol, they made a monstrosity that should just have been avoided at all costs because now everybody seems to have problems with it. Sucks. Glad I don't own any bluetooth crap.
Flamebait? What-ever!
I wasn't being mean, I was just pointing out he's right. If the watch is heavier than your mobile phone it would make more sense to just strap your phone to your wrist. You can read the display, push the reject button to send the call to voicemail, and you could access the volume controls for the phone's ringer and use the phone in speakerphone mode too!