Slashdot Mirror
A Third of Consumers Who Bought Wearable Devices Have Ditched Them
An anonymous reader writes "The Guardian reports on research (PDF) into the (alleged) wearable device trend: fully one third of customers who bought one stopped using it within six months. Activity trackers fared even worse: half of them are collecting dust. 'For comparison, you wouldn't find people from the early days of the smartphone saying that they'd abandoned their BlackBerry, Treo or Windows Mobile or Symbian phone. They were the early adopters, and they found utility in having email and (sometimes) web pages on the move. The idea of giving them up just wouldn't occur to them. ... So far, there aren't clear signs of quite what it is that smartwatches and fitness trackers are replacing, in the way that [early] music players did. Useful new technology has to replace or simplify some function, ideally; otherwise it has the challenge of persuading us that we need this entirely new thing. Smartphones are simpler ways to collect your email – and also make phone calls and surf the web (and so on). Fitness trackers... let you track your fitness. But given that 41% of people run with their smartphones, you might get by with a movement tracking app instead. The trouble with devices that claim to track your steps is they're so easily hoaxed by waving your arms around.'"
Same as my experience with Wii owners, or other fads, like slap bracelets.
Wearable devices will not be massively popular unless they will be as simple to use as headphones. Plug and it works and you don't need to think anymore about them.
There are many people I know who dislike bluetooth headphones just because after a while they get tired from sychronising them with the device, finding the proper frequency, there is noise and interference and whatever have you. Or they need something for a special purpose, such as to cheat at an exam hearing through a tiny invisible earplug deep in your ear what someone else at the next room is reading. But for normal people and normal life, either wearable devices will be as simple as switching on the TV, either the producers should really think targeting not "all the people there is" but selected target groups and usage specific audiences.
wearable devices are a hit compared to the rate of married couples who stay together. Does that mean marriage is a fad?
Pants have pockets. Phones fit in pockets. Problem solved. And I know that women tend to not use pockets - I cannot understand why - but they have purses and handbags that are specially designed to hold many things including a phone. Either way, the problem that a wearable smart gadget tries to solve is not a problem in the first place.
Also, I don't have to track my fitness, because I am usually there myself to observe my fitness with my own eyes.
Wearable devices will not be massively popular unless they will be as simple to use as headphones.
Maybe you are different but I don't carry headphones either and frankly I think headphones are a huge PITA. Headphones require all kinds of annoying cable wrangling or if wireless all kinds of unreliable setups that you are constantly dicking around with. Useful? Yes. Simple? Not so much.
I carry precisely 3 items 99% of the time - phone, wallet and keys - and I'd do away with any of them if I had a reasonable way to do so. I don't mind carrying a fitness tracker if I'm actually doing exercise but otherwise the phone should serve that purpose. I don't want to wear a special purpose device unless I'm doing something rather specific. I don't wear a watch except on rare occasions because they serve little purpose these days (clocks are everywhere) and are annoying to wear if you don't have to.
And I know that women tend to not use pockets - I cannot understand why
Because a lot of women's clothing tends not to have pockets. Can't use it if you can't buy it. Furthermore there are aesthetic reasons why they tend not to use pockets. Women have a different set of social pressures for appearance than men do.
They're wearing them in the wrong place.
In other news I stopped wearing a watch back in the eighties when my beeper stated telling the time. My iPhone 5s has a motion sensor so no need to wear anything for use with FitBit and fits nicely in my pocket. Plus I use an iPhone wallet case so often I don't even carry a purse when shopping. Last time I want is even more crap to carry.
I love a good watch. They are stylish and much more convenient to use rather than having to reach into my pocket to check the time. This is especially true when I am trying to be discreet during a meeting, date, or while listening to a coworker's inane babbling. There are times when I cannot wear a watch, though, and I am happy that I have my phone as a fallback.
Yeah, that's the thing. I could see wearing a fitness tracker...when I'm exercising. But not all day. It's just going to tell me that I sit at a desk.
Also, I do wear a watch, partly to tell time, but also as jewelry. It's the only jewelry a guy can really wear. I have a moderately expensive Ebel. It looks great, I get compliments on it, and I like looking at it and all shiny and everything. If I were to wear a smartwatch, it would have to look about as good as my Ebel, and I don't see that happening.
Glasses, on the other hand...I wear glasses, and as soon as a production, quality Google Glass-type product is available, I'll snatch one of those up. Motherfuckin cyborg, yo.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
The iWatch will be the precedent to decide if Apple is Apple without Steve Jobs. There are many factors to what Steve did which made their products something to be a part of a person's environment. Wearables have to provide a service that people really want. While the submitter and the article mentions about how 50% of the wearable market is sitting on the shelf, people should take note of every other market before Apple entered it.
Anyone remember the Tablet PC in 2003? That thing was a giant pile of steaming crap that people bought into, but barely used.
Smartphones were alright, but passable. I didn't see much of the advantage and waited until the technology matured. Microsoft nearly killed it, Blackberry saved it, and Apple allowed it to flourish.
Anyone remember the first MP3 players? I had one. They were terrible. I didn't see the point of having a 64MB device that was a nightmare to use. Apple introduced the iPod and everyone else followed suit.
People can trash wearable tech all they want, but I am not going to write it off until Apple fails at it. This will prove that the magic of Apple is truly gone, or ... there really is no point to wearable technology.
From what I see of the leaks though, Apple is doing what they do best so far. They are making the technology simple, small, unobtrusive to one's lifestyle. My iPhone to me is the same way. I don't have the device latched to me in such a way that it feels like an anchor. It's either there or not, but if it's around, I want to use it. Some of the wearable tech that I have seen so far appears to be large, clunky, has a terrible battery life and while might have a lot of functionality, requires too much effort to get anything useful out of.
Place something witty here
I avoided bluetooth for years becuase it was unreliable and awkward. The headsets were expensive and uncomfortable. Some didn't work in that they required pairing every time you turned it on. (Both the phone and the device completely forgot about each other.) Buying a corded headset was far cheaper, had far better quality, and was far more comfortable.
But times change, as do needs. Most bluetooth devices now have just enough non-volatile memory to remember what they were last paired with and most bluetooth hosts will quite happily keep a list of every device it's ever pair with. Other than the initial setup (which can still be awkward and annoying) it's quite simple to use now. Hold the button for a few seconds until the light blinks and/or the sound chimes. Now I have a whole host of bluetooth devices. A headset, a car, a smart watch, a pair of headphones and a keyboard.
Wearables are very much in that early adoption phase. Everyone who owns and actively uses one knows this, I should think.
"Why would I want to read a text message from my watch? I've got a perfectly good phone in my pocket."
"Why would I want to check my email from my phone? I've got a perfectly good laptop in my briefcase."
"Why would I want a laptop? I've got a perfectly good computer back at the office/at home."
The trouble with devices that claim to track your steps is they're so easily hoaxed by waving your arms around.
No kidding. My girlfriend is Italian. Every time she has a conversation, her FitBit records her running a marathon.
If we are in a tech bubble, I don't see it as bad as it was in the 1990's.
Today's bubble is focused mostly on Consumer Technology, the 1990's bubble was on Business and Consumer Technology.
For one: Todays tech workers are no treated like Gods like the 1990's. The idea of paying 6 figure salaries for someone to use front page to make a static website. And bringing the Techies to the C table. We have been knocked down a few pegs. As best we are considered Professional Services, at worst we are considered a barely necessary expense.
Second: We are sticking to more traditional business models. Unlike lets sell all of our products at a loss, and we will make it up by doing it in volume. Free services are backed up with Advertisements, which now are very targeted (Google). Other services are either charged via a Monthly Fee subscription (Netflix), or you have to buy individual content (Apple). The 1990's were give it away for free and some investor will give us a boat load of money.
Third: Consumer Tech has consolidated to a few companies (Google, Apple, Facebook) while if one these companies fail it doesn't bring down the whole economy. The other is more then willing to pickup where the other has left off. As well failure is based on a change in demand.
Finally: No Y2K. Y2K was the biggest influence in the bubble. Comapanies and people all rushed to upgrade their systems to be first Y2K complaint. If they have to upgrade, they might as well add the newer networks and other technology as well. You don't have to get an iPad or a Smart Phone, sure a lot of people likes them, but for most places it isn't a key component to the infrastructure.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.