Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Unveils Galaxy Gear Smartwatch
MojoKid writes "The smartwatch race heated up today, as Samsung showed its Galaxy Gear smartwatch at the Samsung Unpacked event in Berlin. Samsung's take on such a device has been eagerly anticipated. Samsung announced the Galaxy Gear as a companion to the new Galaxy Note 3 (or any Galaxy device). The Gear lets users make and receive calls hands-free with the built-in speaker, and it notifies you of any incoming texts, emails, and alerts and gives you a preview of whatever is coming through. A Smart Relay feature will display the full content on your Galaxy device. The Galaxy Gear sports an 800MHz processor and 1.63-inch display (320x320) AMOLED display with 512MB of RAM, 4GB of internal storage, a speaker, and two microphones with noise cancellation. There's a 1.9MP camera with a BSI sensor and autofocus, and it connects via Bluetooth 4.0 + BLE. Sensors include an accelerometer and a gyroscope. Samsung plans to launch the smartwatch in October for $300."
Smart or not 300$ is expensive. Considering that Google is selling Nexus 4 phone for 200$ I'm not gonna buy this thing. Yeah, the battery life is like 10hrs or so. Bluetooth drains the battery fairly quickly so you'll end up charging this thing fairly often. No thanks.
So who else remembers the uber cool Casio smart watches of the 80s? (Contacts in your Watch! Cool!) And how long they were actually cool for...
really don't see why anyone would get this.
Expensive for needing a main device as a companion - making hands free calls is not a good enough reason for a $300 device, and the other items "alerts you of incoming texts/emails/etc" is a bit so what - if you have to pair this to a phone, having it near enough will mean that you'd get notified of this anyway.
I think it needed either a cool factor (flexible/wearable), or to be very useful (standalone device that could replace a phone).
let all now sing "Let do the time warp"...
So what's the actual point of this? I guess I just don't get it. Do people really want these?
Samsung should have contemplated this longer before shoving it out the door. Deliver useful things a smartphone can't and nothing more then you'll have better battery life and something stylish instead of that bulky thing.
I'll take this over Google Glasses any day.
No 4G. Less space than an iPhone 5. Lame
Hell yeah, Escape from New York all the way! While a bit pricey I would not mind 1. Where I work we have to keep our phones in our desk or in our pockets, and it would be a great boon to me to see messages and who had called with a look at my wrist. Plus, I dont have to fish my phone out my pocket to see who calls. Or leave it on the bar in front of me. But the best use for me is that when I am in South America and my cell rings, I can see who it is, without alerting local crooks I have a smartphone.
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
Cant wait until this thing tanks and I can pick one up for cheap. This thing was made as a hedge in case anyone else came out with a watch, at least Samsung would be poised to compete. I believe wearable computers are in our future, just not in this very obvious form. Give me something that looks like a real watch, with DAYS of battery, and useful functions that dont require a larger device to run it all the time.
Good-bye
Its quite ugly not to mention far too bulky.
I'm not sure what benefit having this could provide anyway.
Can anyone provide a credible use-case?
on my new 1.63-inch screen! This is almost as exciting as my first Casio calculator watch.
...The Gear lets users make and receive calls hands-free...
I thought it was meant to be tied to our hands !
until they were tablet sized and inconvenient. Then they decided to maximize profits by trying to sell expensive "add on" devices that do nothing more than alert me that the over-sized phone in my backpack is ringing or I have a txt? The folks at these tech companies need to get out more so they get a feel for what "real" people need in a device.
WTF?
A few decades ago an LCD watch had a battery that would last at least a year.
Progress, what progress?
I've already replaced the glass on my G S4 and was astounded to see how it is half (or less) the thickness of the glass for the iPhone 4S. My Swiss watch, which I seldom wear now was always making contact with things, hard and scratchy things, which left the crystal scarred and no small amount of damage to the bezel. Which is why I don't wear it much anymore. Hope that thing is at least as thick as the watch and much thicker than the G S4 glass.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
You don't need to be an Apple fan to say that when Apple comes out with theirs, it'll look a heck of a lot nicer.
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
I'm not sure why the round of negativity regarding this watch. I'm wearing a $300 watch on my wrist right now because it's business appropriate -- and we're not talking about something made with precious metals. My watch has quite a few "complications", but its overall function is to make me look good. I would have jumped at the opportunity to spend the same amount of money on a watch that can actually do something (virtually infinite "complications") AND be business appropriate.
Honestly, the price seems rather attractive. The only real down side is the battery life -- unfortunately, given how its power requirements to size ratio is similar to cell phones, it's likely future versions will have a week-long battery when cell phones do -- in other words, not soon since the trend is to pack more features in at the cost of more power rather than have a phone with a week long battery.
Somebody needs to make a $30 wrist-band case for iPhone, if they aren't already doing that.
A Dick Tracy / Michael Knight comm-watch, or a Star Trek comm-badge, plays well on screen. In real life speakerphones in public means zero privacy, sound quality and loudness are such that you can't hear it well in public unless it's right up to your ear, or it's so loud and clear it disturbs everyone within arm's length.
And of course, a lot of people text more than they talk now--also something this watch can't do.
Sure you could whip out the parent device in public to work around this, but that undercuts a big reason for having this watch in the first place.
Uh, an iPhone with a browser ISN'T an iFap?
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
And why do you need all the bloated stuff to read the time? Besides ...300...hahahahahhahahahaha!!!!!!!
This is just round one. Samsung also has a flexible display technology, and a patent application for a phone with a flexible display that wraps around the wearer's wrist. That has a lot more promise.
A wristband phone can offer much more vertical space. than a watch-like clunker. Wristbands can be wide or narrow, and can be made to look like jewelry. Twisting your wrist can control scrolling. Much more convenient than carrying a brick in your hand, and doesn't look so dweebish.
This could be the beginning of the end for round-cornered brick smartphones.
I wonder what kind of battery and charging frequency is needed for this kind of device.
I know the space they have to jam the electronics into is really tight but I really don't want a zippo lighter strapped to my wrist. I'm sure these things will slim down over time.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
I doubt it's as water resistant as people have come to expect even from jewellery-type watches. Same goes for impact and scratch resistance. Watches get abused a bit more than a phone as they are out in the open all the time. If you spend $300 on a watch you usually get a sapphire crystal so you don't ever get any scratches. All of this will add up to people complaining about quality and durability.
Nope, you need a wrist mounted accelerometer to keep track of speed, indurance and frequency as well as post your new high score to facebook.
Too bad nothing from Samsung (including this disgusting watch) will get anyone laid, except from low-rent Warcraft moms.
Did they not get the memo that watches are actually supposed to be fine jewelry?
I'd never wear one, not because I don't like samsung devices.. But because I can't stand having things on my wrist. They get itchy, scrape on things, etc. This all became moot when I started carrying a phone anyway. They all keep great time and you never have to set them.
Google glass, however, I'm excited for. I don't have any trouble with glasses.
You can have my Casio when you pull it from my cold, dead wrist, possibly from a pile of rubble.
Or from the bowl an the TSA station while I'm busy getting my extra through pat down at the airport.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Reminds me of the Babylon 5 communicators that adhered to the back of the hand.
You all seem to ignore the fact that first-generation products are almost always suboptimal.
Count on a fast cycle time to refine and supplement these features several times a year.
Competitors may laugh now, but at their own peril.
For something that could be attached to my wrist most of the time i would expect that it would check me (i.e. pulse, blood pressure, temperature, etc). And of course, have longer battery life. Qualcomm's Toq smartwatch have at least better battery life and can be read at sunlight, or something with more sensors like Whithing's Pulse (that is not a smartwatch, yet).
Anyway, it could be a hint for things to come, more devices that uses the computer power of our phones (or at least, devices that we carry with us but hidden, or in a pocket, or whatever) and via bluetooth or similar have satellite devices around us.
Somehow getting overloaded with gadgets?
Glasses, watches, wearables, I-somethings, A-somethings, G-somethings, N's, S's etc...
Could there be something else, a more simpler reality perhaps?
http://burgcanada.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Dick-Tracy.jpg
I love that my watch can tell me that it's sunny outside! Yay for technology!
Beware of the Leopard.
If you ask me Apple has quietly let slip that is was developing a watch only to make everyone else go OH CRAP, and divert shed loads of resources to it. It's a shit idea with 21st century battery life. I have a £3K watch I hardly ever use because of my phone, and that lasts forever, why would I want to buy a watch that lasts ten hours when I have a phone that lasts longer. Apple 1, competitors 0
Find a job you love, and never work a day in your life.
...that they still think digital watches are a pretty neat idea.
You must realize that these wrist computers are non-starters in every category that distinguishes a watch as worth a premium price to watch enthusiasts.
These are indeed cheap compared to a "nice" watch, but these are not likely to be attractive to the type of person who thinks that $300 is cheap for a watch.
At the same time, they are likely to be perceived as expensive to the average gadget nerd.
And as a fashion accessory, even though I think this version is much more attractive than the Pebble, there is a reason why there are a zillion fashion watches on the market -- tastes differ widely.
screw Google Glass, I want one of these bitches, so I can be COOL.
well, nerd-cool at least...
Actually, Lobot didn't go far enough, you could just have a solid ring of electronics around your head, kinda Cyclops + Lobot, YEEEEEAAAAHHHHHHH...
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I almost got a pebble, but I wanted an android based watch, and then I saw the Omate, but decided to wait and see what a big company like Samsung could do. I was actually really excited to get the Samsung watch, but now having seen it, at that price, I'd rather just get the Omate for $100 cheaper by backing their kickstarter. I know, kickstarters hardly ever live up to their promises, but the demo videos of the Omate look like exactly what I'm looking for.
Everyone seems to be bashing this product because they don't see any usefulness. That used to be the old paradigm. Now you just do stuff with a lot of features and possibilities and leave it up to the app creators to come up with something useful. My iPhone today does stuff I would never have imagined in my wildest dreams (fart apps included). Only time will tell what this will do for you.
First relative to the iWatch. If Apple brings it out.
That would still be the Pebble, which is a lot closer to what an iWatch would be than the thing Samsung made.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
How well does this thing handle getting hit or fell on as it will happen a LOT if it is worn on the wrist.
They fix the battery life and let it take a beating, then got something here, but not buying it to look like a spider crack in 2 weeks due to something hitting the face while moving something.
And the battery life needs to last at least a few days under normal use (IE, not gaming and a few hours a call time per day) and allow it to charge wirelessly or even sap some power from the heat generated by the user. I don't charge my phone but once ever few days and if I had to do it daily, I would probably end up leaving it at home as I don't have the time for that many times.
I've been waiting for this because I wanted a phone that was easy to carry (like a watch, duh). I have been following the Omate TrueSmart on Kickstarter:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/omate/omate-truesmart-water-resistant-standalone-smartwa
Now that Samsung has released more information, I'm very disappointed. It's not a stand alone phone, it requires the latest Samsung phone to be paired all of the time. It's crippled Android. (Not very attractive, either, compared to the Omate). The Omate is waterproof and is a fully functioning phone with better specs... and it's only $200.
I guess Samsung was just looking to create a fancy "accessory" for their phone without much functionality.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
which makes you look like a bigger tool: holding your over-sized phone up to your ear, or holding your watch up to your ear?
(I'll stick with my 3.3"-screen smartphone, thank you.)
www.gaiageek.com
Same shit, different form factor.
There most certainly is a simpler reality. However, it is free to enjoy and requires no gear, so nobody is promoting it as "news".
I'm still laughing at the very real possibility that Apple says smart watches are very stupid next week.
I kind of agree, I always though an iWatch was an odd idea with a limited market, and like you say there's a pretty good chance Apple floated the rumor just to disrupt competitors!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Look, I'm as much of a tech nerd as anyone else, but the summary is written by someone who just doesn't "get it". Whether this product is successful will have almost nothing directly to do with the type of screen, amount of ram, or mHz of the processor. Users Care about what they can do with the watch and how it will improve their lives. Apple doesn't usually push the tech specs of their phone because nobody cares. People Care about the speed of losing their web page, the user friendliness on the email application, the quality of Photos taken with the camera, etc. The amount of ram is just an implementation detail. In fact, this is all doubly true in the case of specialized devices like this because: 1. They can tune the os and software to adjust the specs needed for decent performance. 2. They don't have to deal with running all sorts of legacy 3rd party apps. Now, what can this watch actually do? It can make calls, great, that means it's a fancy Bluetooth headset. It can take Photos? Ok, but so can the phone itself - what else?
So who else remembers the uber cool Casio smart watches of the 80s? (Contacts in your Watch! Cool!) And how long they were actually cool for...
In the early 90s some good friends purchased a $75 Casio in a duty free shop they were passing through and gave it to me as a birthday present. It had a pressure sensor so it could estimate altitude or depth under water. I used it while scuba diving for years, it was generally within 3-5 feet of my analog depth gauge. Pretty impressive for a $75 watch IMHO.
...the days when you used to make things useful, that can do many things in a simple machine...not to make machines for every single scheize you want to sell.
What sort of watch only runs for 10 hours and when you glance at it doesn't show the time till you activate it?
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I bought a Sony smartwatch just to have the experience and on the off chance that it would be fabulous.
It was anything but.
You're absolutely right: the "smart watch" is a dead end.
Smart —fine.
Wearable — excellent.
Watch —stupid.
Packing a third of a smartphone (it can't do most of what a smartphone can do, at least not directly and independently) into a device with a crazy-small display size and a battery that might last you a day before needing to be charged (and remember, when you think about charging, that a "watch" is something strapped to your wrist that you rarely want to think about in logistical terms in your everyday life) just plain doesn't make anything about life better.
Wearable tech sounds great, but it'll be something other than "bluetooth device running your phone's OS that you need to charge all the time and that does less than your phone."
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
... Also light and thin like Casio Data Bank calculator watches.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
I remember I owned some Timex watch in the 1990s. It had the same processor as Commodore 64. It used blinking lights to sync with the watch and you could transfer some data there (calendar, perhaps).
Answer: the new super-duper mega-improved superwatch. I mean, who wants to have a watch that constantly displays the time? What a waste of bits...
This new wave of gimmicks Is sort of ridiculous, really. I even have a password protected kitchen timer on my phone!
Early electronic watch with LED display.
LEDs used too much power to be lighted up all time, so you had to press a button to check time. Everyone simply got used to it, as at the time these watches were not only a novelty but also forefront of technology.
Later on LCD allowed for continuous display on electronic watch.
Samsung "watch" is in a way on the forefront of technology, so it will take time to make it better. Meanwhile people are fairly spoiled and expect 100 year batter life with built-in projector showing time on the ceiling.
One good thing that Samsung did here is calling this an accessory, not a watch. This is very smart in multiple ways.
What sort of watch only runs for 10 hours and when you glance at it doesn't show the time till you activate it?
Samsung copied the iPod Nano from 2 years ago... though I heard the life on that was a bit more than 10 hrs.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
They're trying to get their foot in the door before Apple does, if I had to guess.
Because everyone here seems to be running with the "10 hour" number, which from what I can tell, is just speculation.
If it's indeed 10 hours, then that's pretty weak, but I suspect it's more. Also, I don't think this watch is designed to be used for lots of long phone conversations, for that, people will use their phone. It's more suitable for quick incoming calls.
This device makes it possible to see who is calling with a quick glance, and take brief incoming calls ("What time will you be here?", or "Don't forget to pick up Kylee" sort of stuff). That seems much safer than fishing your phone out of your pocket or purse, and holding a device in your hand.
Also, I'm not clear on something.. can you invoke the voice system on this device? In other words, can I speak into this device, "Text Caroline we skipped out of the show comma see you at ten oclock period"? If so, even better.
A smartphone?
I'm not impressed! I'll wait for the smart-shoe, the ultimate in smart devices. I must admit that I'd go for the smart-pants as well. But a smart-watch ... you've got to do more than that buddy!
So how is this watch, that reportedly only connects to other Samsung smart devices, any better than the one Sony has had out for months that connects to just about anything running Android?
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
who wants a bulky ol' think strapped to their wrist? I'm thankful we've evolved beyond the need for that kind of jewelry with our smart pocketwatch/phones.
Leela: " Hm. This thing I wear on my wrist says they're not poisonous"