Slashdot Mirror
Slashdot Asks: Do You Want a Smart Watch?
Watches that do more than tell the time have been around for a long time. (And in fiction, James Bond, Dick Tracey, and Michael Knight all had notably high-tech watches.)
The new smart watches from Samsung and LG, without a phone connected via Bluetooth as backhaul, can still serve to show the time and to serve as alarms (and Samsung's can measure your pulse, too), but all the magic features (like searching by voice via the watch) do require a connection. They can't play MP3s or take pictures on their own, and they don't have built-in GPS. Even so, compared to the polarizing Google Glass, the new breed of smart watches are wearables that probably are an easier sell, even if this far the trend has been to replace watches with smart phones. (Android Wear has gotten a lot of attention, but Microsoft has their own upcoming, and Apple almost certainly does, too.) Are you interested in a smart watch, and if so, what uses do you want it for? If they have no appeal to you now, are there functions that would make you change your mind on that front?
No
A smart watch is a smart phone with less functionality that you have to wear around your wrist. I don't understand the appeal at all. Everything it does a smart phone does better, only a smart phone is not strapped to one of your body parts.
I don't.
I can't think of any use for a smart watch, to be quite frank. Can't dictate things to it without everyone around me hearing me, plus all the speech recognition - things I've tried handle Finnish poorly anyways. Too small a display to do anything useful with. Too small battery, would lead to endless frustration. Clock? I could just use a regular watch for that. I don't doubt that those can be totally awesome things for some people, but I just can't see myself belonging in that group.
I'd like a very *simple* smart watch...
* Simple caller-ID and memo display, programmable shortcut buttons, nothing else.
* Very long charge life comparatively (2 weeks would be okay) and/or very easy charging (put it on a charging pad).
If a smartwatch served as a secure Bitcoin wallet, I'd buy one!
I'm on my fourth watch and this one even has a date window. I cannot comprehend how a watch can get even smarter!
Full disclosure: I am the son of a jeweller / watchsmith.
Is that enough info, or do you need all the reasons?
Don't want it for the same reason I got rid of my cell phone. I was servicing it more than it was serving me, and it's redundant to my portable computer anyway.
All smart watches seem like to me is a cash grab by the big tech companies.
What can a smart watch do that my smart phone can't!
Hmmm.....well..it fits around my wrist? Does that count for anything?:)
A thousand times No.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
A "smart watch" is as much a watch as a "smart phone" is a phone. And many people have quit wearing a watch because ... they get the time from their smart phone.
The question should be, can a smart watch replace your smart phone?
Yet another thing to leave in the locker/desk before heading into the lab. No camera devices allowed..even without a camera, its nigh useless without my phone which it must be paired with and which has a camera.
Cool idea bro, call me when big brother takes over and has remote kill switches and 'silent zones' where you can remotely disable the ability to take pictures due to a mandatory built in kill signal. Then my employer can implement one and I can wear it in the lab and just have camera/video/sensors disabled. Which again would make it less useful but at least its still strapped on my body.
Also, 1-5 days of battery life? If I can't get 2 months out of my watch, its too much effort to deal with for too little return. Watches are the tablets in the 90s. Almost there. Give the battery and holographic display tech another decade, then sell me on it again.
I got the Omate Truesmart. I never use it except when skiing, when I use a sports tracking app with it. The battery life is poor and my phone does everything I need.
NO. How many more stories are going to ask this question?
Why would I wear an iWatch like every hipster at the Farmers' Market when I can wear a Submariner like Thor Heyerdahl, James Bond and Fidel Castro?
But, not until Apple makes one that's actually useful and stylish.
I had somewhat smart watches before (timex datalink), but I love my metawatch.
With a flexible OLED display that wraps around my entire forearm. Not sure where to put the battery, but I would not be surprised if that turns out to be a future tech.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
I want it if only to not miss calls (lots of these with AT&T.
I signed up for a Pebble on day 2 of the Kickstarted campaign. When I finally got it, I spend many hours loading watchfaces, apps and exploring all the features. Nothing really klicked for me. Kept it on my arm anyway for a week - just for show and tell - and now I'm totally hooked.
The killer app is the alerts. Not having to pull out the phone 500 times every day is what keeps this ugly thing on my wrist.
Forget all the music control, runkeeper, navigation and whatever they try. Camera - that's just stupid. That's all done better on the phone, but the *alerts* are golden! Several friends went through the same process. Initial disappointment turned to must-have. I never use the buttons - just a quick glance when the thing buzz. Android or iOS in the watch is nonsense. Pebble got the idea right, but could scale down on the features and focus on the looks.
So get me a "moderately clever" watch...
You get it. Any modern quartz-controlled watch that costs more than $10 is a status symbol and nothing more. Some watches may rise to a level of art, but still, a symbol of alphaness.
When James Bond wears a smart watch, then popularity will follow.
I would like a better fitness watch that tracked pulse rate without a chest band, respiration rate, blood pressure, blood sugar, and blood o2 levels, as well a movements such as swimming and riding, not just waking and running. I would like to to use the GPS in my phone and not have one built in.
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
I want a smartwatch, that looks and feels exactly like my current watch (Casio WVA-470 with Titanium bracelet), but has notification features over bluetooth etc.
Batterylife must be over 2 months with single charge and use solar and/or wrist movement for charging. Also the time needs to be synced automatically, through RF-waves atomclock or with the help of the mobilephone.
I think Martian is getting close to what I want.
When they make an actual smart watch, as opposed to a phone-accessory-worn-on-the-wrist, I may buy one. To me, a smart watch would be a computerized watch that does time things far better than a classic watch. I haven't seen one of those yet.
Only if it's as high tech as they've promised.
Beware of the Leopard.
No thanks. The watch is just another device on the long list of separate things that got consolidated into my phone (mp3 player, camera, calendar, ebook reader, flashlight, GPS, alarm clock, etc.). As with all those other things, the version on my phone is so far into the "good enough" range that having a separate device for the same functionality just doesn't offer much appeal.
Too many of the smart watches seem to try to move functionality back off the phone, which seems pretty pointless (until at such time as it could completely replace everything on my phone, which case I might be interested. You know, some sort of holographic magic screen that replaces the need for a large physical screen, or maybe interfaces with some futuristic contact lenses that project a HUD that only I can see).
Anyway, that seems to be the core problem - these watches just don't do anything worthwhile compared to what I'll already be carrying with me. I don't want a watch as a status symbol, I don't need a watch to just tell time, and I don't need/want a watch to do a bunch of stuff my phone already does.
An exception would be for highly niche purposes. I have a kid with type I diabetes. If he could have a watch that could monitor is blood sugar levels and dispense insulin, I'd buy it.
No.
1) Yet Another Device To Keep Track Of
2) Yet Another Device To Charge
3) Yet Another Device To Perform Monthly Patches On/Worry About Being Infected By Malware
4) It's simply not that hard to take my phone out of my pocket.
5) I've gotten very used to not wearing a watch, or cleaning it every month from all the skin/sweat stains they accumulate
6) The user interface is destined to be either disappointingly useless, or useful but too-big-to-be-practical.
I have exactly 0 interest in smart watches.
There would need to be three things that none of these smart watches have.
Durability. At the least, Timex or Casio G-Shock level. I want something I don't need to worry about getting wet, getting knocked, or getting dropped.
Duration. They can never get it to a watch's timeframe, but at the least, get it up past a week of use without a recharge.
Media use/bluetooth. Make it so it can take a micro-SD card, and play media to bluetooth headphones. Also, if you want that online experience, make it so you can act as a relay on your person between the phone and your bluetooth.
With tech today, I wouldn't want one. I think the time you can miniaturize it to give features such as call reception, streaming music, etc, will be the time it will be functional enough to sell. Otherwise, am I too lazy or distracted in my life to not hear/feel the phone, or to pull it out of my pocket? I have a phone for all that stuff, and a watch for time, both of which do that well. I don't need something that tries to help do both half-assed
and hell no.
Is that clear enough?
No FM Radio. Less storage than a Nomad. Lame.
http://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ipod
Some of the smart watches out there look OK; for instance the Martian Watches Passport SmartWatch looks like a reasonable timepiece, has a reported 1 week battery life, and does some simple Dick Tracy stuff while still managing to be a wristwatch.
If it had a separate power supply or some way to use the last bit of the main supply strictly as a watch with a 6 month reserve for essential functions I'd probably buy that.
But most of them are little phone gadgets for your wrist that will require charging daily, or nearly daily. Useless.
I thought about this for myself only,
This is what I would buy,
1) I need to tell at a glance time without hitting any buttons. Eg, a watch....
2) It would need it to be curved to fit the dimensions of my wirst
3) It should decide if I should buy or sell a stock.
That is all.
No, not really.
I'm inundated with tech. It's what I do for a living (not uncommon, on this site). If anything, I'd prefer easier ways to disconnect rather than add an additional stream of information.
Until they're ready to override my optic nerve or provide (nearly) seamless Augmented Reality, I am perfectly happy to live without. I still enjoy seeing the progression, but I just think I'm still happier not using most such things.
Changing the name from Ask Slashdot to Slashdot Asks seems a rather telling display of your character. You see yourselves as Slashdot, and the commenters as ... what, customers? the audience?
The next Beta Sucks is coming, it is only a matter of time. Until you realize that we, the commenters, are the site -- that we create the value you sell to the readers -- you will never be out from under that hanging sword.
Do me a favor; go to YouTube, Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, Ars, and half a dozen other sites, and read some comment streams. Do you see how vacuous they are? Do you see how much chaff you must wade through to find one or two poignant insights?
The moderation and metamoderation systems here have generated a unique community (well, not entirely unique, with SoylentNews cruising along in the wings). It is the community of commenters that you have the privilege of monetizing. But only so long as you don't piss it away with your narcissism.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
I would love a smart watch but it would be more like computer on your forearm. the problem is the requirements are has, a highres display that flexes in three dimensions, sticks to your arm using the van der waals force (like gecko feet), uses heat from your body for power, weighs less than a 10 grams and is 1mm thick. It's not impossible, my idea is just an expression of several "almost there" technologies.
that is the smartphone i really want.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
http://archer.wikia.com/wiki/Omicron_Spymaster_Watch
Wouldn't buy a smart watch, I would buy a fitness/health/stats watch, if it was more than a standard heart rate monitor. Don't need my watch to show time/sms/email/other-stuff, I can see that on my phone. But a non-stop health/fitness/stats censor... :-)
Well, not really. My current digital watch is several years old but has great features: strong (titanium) band, solar battery charging so NEVER needs to be connected to the charger and the battery lasts for many years before needing replacement, includes a range of sensors (temperature, barometer, compass) that are sometimes useful and the usual stopwatch, timer, alarm, etc. Most importantly, it keeps time accurately.
It would be very annoying to have a connect a watch to a charger every day. Having a smart phone in my pocket already doesn't leave a lot of "smart" tasks for another device.
When smart watches can claim a similar battery life, durability and unobtrusive use, only then will I buy a smart watch...
Much less an expensive one that requires recharging frequently and doesn't do anything my phone doesn't already do and in fact requires my phone to do much of anything at all.
My first smartwatch was a Seiko Data 2000, it was released in 1983 - and had a 4-line dot-matrix LCD display that lasted surprisingly long. It had an external keyboard with induction technology to transfer the data from the keyboard to the watch.
Since then, there has been numerous PIM watches released over the years, some with icons, some databanks etc. And 5 years ago - I bought a Chinese Watch-Phone with mp4 playback/recording, spy-camera, GSM-phone, Bluetooth (stereo) headset and a color touch screen with a mini stylus hidden in the wristband itself.
I used it the first 2 weeks to show off to my friends, I had to make numerous phone calls with it because no one at that time would believe that it actually worked as a phone, but yes - it most certainly did...and this was WAY before the well-known brands came with their limited "smart" watches, this thing could already do more than their stuff today.
I think I wrote...I used it for 2 weeks, gave it away to a watch-collector as a christmas present, because honestly...I'd never use it.
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
No. Ain't nobody got time for that.
Smart watches are misnomer, really. They can't do much on their own because of the form factor. Typing? No way. In reality, smart watches are dumber than dumb terminals.
What I do want is a nice looking, not too big, watch with a full color LCD matrix screen, maybe touch enabled, where I am able to customize the interface and make my own "themes". This, and being able to sync the time via NTP, would be the only reason for it to have WiFi or BlueTooth (unless a micro SD card could be squeezed in, then it could sync via WWVB or equivalent).
For context, I've owned several Casio DataBank watches, all digital/analog hybrids. My favorite of them was the one where the LCD displayed a fill month calendar. The Wave Ceptor was a neat gimmick, but watches don't generally need that much precision on a daily basis.
The Pebble comes close, except for the lack of color screen. It's been a while since I looked at what's out there. So far it seems the manufacturers are using smart watches as an excuse to tether users to their walled gardens (I'm looking at you Samsung).
No, I do not want a "smart watch" any more than I want any other "smart" jewelry. Purely functional timepieces are obsolete. If all you want is to know the time, your phone already solves that problem for you - hence the decrease in percentage of people wearing watches. A modern wristwatch is a piece of jewelry where its functionality (and the means of achieving it) are part of the beauty. "Smart watches" have enhanced functionality, but universally at the expense of beauty. The aesthetics are terrible, thus defeating the primary purpose of a watch these days.
I am a geek attorney, but not your geek attorney unless you've already retained me. This is not legal advice.
Sorry no, seems completely pointless and total waste of money.
Full-fledged computers can barely even keep track of time on their own without constantly pinging a network time server, there's no way in hell I would want my watch--of all things--to be absolute shit for timekeeping. Also, all I need my watch to do is show me the time and date, nothing else, and light up on the somewhat-frequent occasions that I need to see it in the dark. Not to mention, a cell phone can barely last a day running a modern "mobile" operating system... does anyone really think these "smart" watches will last a week without recharging? No thanks, I'll keep my current watch, which doesn't need a change of batteries for a couple *years*, and no need to plug into the wall every two days to charge. It's bad enough having to recharge my phone daily, hell will freeze over before I accept having to do the same thing with a watch.
No, I do not want a watch that is meant to sell my private information to third party, ass-holes like Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft etc. etc. etc.
I have zero interest in having a smart watch. I haven't worn a wrist watch regularly for at least a decade, and I don't miss them. If I ever change my mind about wearing a watch, it'll probably be something older than I am. Something may come along that makes me no longer want or need to carry a smartphone in my pocket, but at this time I don't foresee it being in wrist watch form factor.
I have cancer. Extensive surgery (20 hour operation and four followup operations), and ongoing chemotherapy are keeping me alive.
One issue I live with is occasionally fainting, and waking up on the floor in need of assistance to get anywhere. The medical staff in my case recommended I get a wearable medical alert. I looked into this, but the $20/week monitoring fee wasn't attractive, and calling out an ambulance for my frequent but minor problems seemed excessive.
So I bought a Samsung Gear watch. It's waterproof, so I can wear it in the shower. Now, when I find myself in need of assistance, I can call family/neighbours/friends/workmates, or even call for an ambulance if necessary. I have used it 3 times so far for this, and it's working well for me.
In all other respects I wouldn't recommend the "smart" watch. Everything else it can do, that I would use, is done better and more conveniently by the cellphone it connects through.
Will it increase the conspicuousness of my consumption?
I'd rather keep my mechanical / automatic watch. It's durable, looks nice, keeps excellent time, never needs charging and will still be nice 20 years from now. Show me a smart watch that can do that and I might be interested.
Facts have a liberal bias.
Is if it came with a red LED display and looked cheaply made. The people who wear watches anymore seem to be,"Hey look at how much money I have." so looking like you're going in the opposite direction would be art as fashion... if it didn't cost a lot of money. So maybe I'm thinking it is time to go invest in a 1$ LED watch off ebay to be a smart ass. Oh even better would be to leave it blinking 12:00 all day.
God spoke to me
I barely need my smart phone, why the hell would I want to spend hundreds of dollars on a second, feature-pared screen that has a terrible battery life?
I'm am older and need to wear reading glasses. I have trouble using my smart phone even with the letters quite large. It becomes bothersome to have to put on your glasses just to quickly glance at it. In addition, I stopped wearing watches about 5 years ago when I realized that my cell phone, cordless phone, pc, TV, VCR, DVD, stove, microwave, car, stereo, etc.. all have clocks running. When I did wear watches, I selected ones that were very thin as thick watches would catch on everything.
No
No++.
I have never found a need for a wearable watch. So, no.
I have not worn a watch in years. I do not see a need even if they are smarter. My smartphone does all I need.
As with the existing technological hassles in my life, I would use a smart watch only if it did something significantly new.
In the old days (1980s), my laptop would go weeks without a battery charge. Now, my laptop barely makes it through a day, if I'm not actually using it much during that day. But my new laptop is vastly more capable, with high-DPI IPS display and 802.11ac WiFi and the ability to run a C++ compiler many times in a single hour.
In the less old days, my phone would go a bit over a week without a battery charge. Now, my phone usually makes it through a day, but not if I'm using its GPS or its processor extensively; and it's much bigger. But my new phone has a camera that doesn't entirely suck and a lot of apps, some of them useful, and visual voicemail. Still, I wouldn't have bought it if it didn't have another compelling feature: Really cheap unlimited plans.
That's 2 devices that I have to plug in every day to keep using. A smart watch would be a third. So far, I haven't heard of any compelling features. The current crop has what? The ability to show notifications. Which my phone already does when I leave it on the table next to my mouse, and which I'm already consciously choosing to ignore when I want to maintain focus. And Samsung's watch has its trademark heart rate sensor, which works only if you're not exercising.
I can imagine some uses for a smart watch, in concept, if it could do stuff independently of the phone. A camera that you don't even have to dig out of your pocket (or purse, if you have a Samsung). A communications device that you can carry without pockets. A security/control device (if it doesn't come from Google, Apple, or Microsoft, and runs free software). The concept is interesting. It just needs good execution.
Have a nice time.
The smart watches, as they are being offered right now, do not interest me at all. They look ridiculous, the battery life is horrible and they are not good at being WATCHES.
A "smart watch" which would interest me would have some or all of these features:
- looks like a normal, elegant watch - i.e. leather or steel wristband (NO plastic!), round, not too heavy, elegant design (either like a standard chronograph or some "bauhaus"-y look). Basically nothing which screams "I am a geek". ...)
- long battery life. By that, I mean AT LEAST a week, better a month or more.
- maybe health monitoring features (pulse, steps,
- shows time without having to be "activated" (i.e. no having to touch the screen or hit a button to show something)
- best "display" option for battery life would be standard hour/minute dials plus a tiny little LCD screen for text (a line or two)
- possibility to link to a smartphone to show notifications (e-mail subject lines, sms), but nothing more, since tft/amoled screens plus touchscreen features plus voice recognition plus apps mean low battery life, so it's simply a no-no. Basically, I just want to have a look at the watch to see if it is worth taking out my smartphone to read the e-mail which just arrived or not. I do not want to actually read the e-mail or type a reply or make a phone call via the watch. Especially NOT make a phone call. Holding your watch up to your face and talking to it might look cool in some old James Bond movie, but in reality it is just stupid.
something which is kind of there, except for the little LCD display for notifications, is the Withings Activité:
http://www.withings.com/activi...
Looks like a standard, expensive watch. Has health monitoring which can send data to an app on your smartphone. Has a battery life of A YEAR with a standard CR2025 battery, despite low energy bluetooth connectivity to the smartphone.
Check out Pebble. I got it to last 2 weeks without bluetooth. If you turn bluetooth on, it's gonna last a solid week. And it's waterproof (I used it in a pool and daily in my shower).
Nope.
I don't need one nor do I want one.
1. I don't want to pay for a smart watch.
2. You have to hook it up with your phone, which I don't have.
Otherwise, it sounds great, but I am too cheap to buy and use all that stuff. If someone could show me how to make more than the investment in that stuff, I would go get one today. I got enough fun building horribly ugly HDTV antennas; I don't need to spend any more time on other stuff that might not be as interesting.
So I can use the BSOD as a flashlight.
Unless its something like they had on ARK-II back in the 70's, ( and that would not be too practical ) a smart watch will always be a gimmick, unless there is some sort of way to make the screen appear bigger than it is.
Not being a Luddite, or not 'thinking outside the box', its far to small to be really useful other than for telling time. Just from the proliferation of larger screen phones you can tell that going smaller is not the direction people want to go for usability or functionality.
Sure, you can have alarms, and scrolling banners.. but your phone can do that, and so much more, without the 'squint' limitation...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I want to be able to call my self-aware trans-am to save me from gunfire
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
I loved consolidating my watch, PDA, phone, and media player into a smartphone. Yo make me go the other way, a gizmo would have to provide very strong utility. Not alerts, not exercise data, not a duplicate of the remote that's already on my headset, not a teaser of stuff that I need to go to my phone to really use/act upon.
I've narrowed it down to either universal ID (for logins, PINs, locks...) or doing what my smartphone does, only hands-free. Not holding my breath...
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
I miss my Casio CFX-2000. Wish they still made them... I used to use the scientific calculator features an awful lot when I was still in school. Exponentials and Trig proved very useful many a time!
You don't need a watch, you need a life!
You've obviously made the trade off to give up your freedom to be connected 24x7, I am not judging you, its just not a choice that I would make for me.
500 alerts a day? That's over 30 alerts an hour assuming a 16 hour day. An alert every 2 minutes? Wow... Just wow.
How do you have time to have a life? I am serious about this. Are these alerts coming from work? From social media? Text Messages from friends?
So during a 2 hour dinner or a movie or anything else you might do, you don't mind being interrupted 60 times?
What do you do with these alerts? Ignore them? Respond to them? Does that mean you pull out the phone and respond?
My personal time is too precious to give it over to a little black box on my wrist. I'd want to control what notifications I get, how often and from whom.
I don't want a little black box to control my life.
Absolutely, I get that people in a support position might need to get alerts while on the job, but 500 a day that need your immediate attention can't be healthy,
for the organization or any person. I certainly hope they pay you really really well!!!
I want one. The specific thing I want my watch to do, besides be attractive manly jewelry and tell me the time faster than pulling the pod (cell phone) out of my pocket, is to vibrate or give alarms when certain things happen or to allow easier interaction with other of my nearby technology.
Oh, I forgot my pod in my car when I went into the shopping mall? I'll know because my watch will vibrate when I'm 50 feet away from the car instead of waiting an hour and wondering why my wife hasn't called me with the dinner plans like she promised.
Oh, I'm at a playground trying to manage multiple children safely? I'll know if one of my children starts to wander away, and the watch will point me in the direction they are wandering.
Oh, I'm listening to a podcast in earphones with my pod in my tight jeans pocket, and someone calls me? I can answer the call in one second by touching my watch, instead of trying to fish the pod out of my pocket and missing the call. I can also use the mic on my watch for better audio quality.
Oh, I want to take a 'selfie' from farther away than my arms reach? I can put the camera on a flat surface, go pose, look at my watch to see what the camera sees, get it framed up right, then touch my watch to start a three-second timer on the camera.
All you people saying NO have no imagination. You are the same people who would say "Why would I need my cell phone to have a big screen on it? All it has to do is show phone numbers and my flip phone already can do that." Have you guys paused to consider that there might be applications beyond your current imagination?
When I can talk to one, and it can talk back...
A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
The general idea is appealing: An especially easy to see/access interface to one's phone, one that takes the role traditionally held by a wristwatch and builds on it.
But, given the cost, and given the limitations of a postage-stamp-sized interface, I just don't see any "killer apps" for smart watches that justify that cost.
wants to be the first monkey to touch the monolith
You can get "too smart" and they become difficult to use physically & mentally.
I don't want it require a mobile phone. It needs to be light and small. It also needs a long battery's life, have a scheduler, a phone directory, a calculator, alarms, etc. I still wear and use 150 model and need to find a good replacement for it since Casio doesn't sell these types anymore. :(
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
A Dick Tracy speakerphone feature... massively important for those who charge their phone a lot and sadly missing from all but Samsung devices. An open API and ease of programmability is also nice. Pebble has really hit the moon on that one. Some of the apps people have come up with have been simply amazing. Unfortunately, It will be interesting to see how Android wear stacks up. It's a shame that only Pebble is going with the "minimalist" approach with an old fashioned, low power LCD screen. There's no need for high res on a watch, especially when it will be used outside in the sun a lot.
If it could replace the need to carry a phone around with me, or have one clipped to my belt, or have a bag to carry it in, etc. It's far nicer to have nothing extra to carry, than to carry around an item.
It would need a replaceable power source that holds a long enough charge so years from now when the battery doesn't have full capacity, it lasts all day and into the night.
It would be nice to have a scalable sized display, perhaps projected if not holographic (there goes that power).
Google Now functionality required, so connectivity, location awareness and microphone please.
Instead of being a watch, be the band, so whatever watch face could be used. Come in a size/style that suits womens watches.
It doesn't need to have a speaker, that could be a separate Bluetooth earring like IBM had 15 years ago, so the entire world doesn't hear/be disturbed, and I don't look like a borg.
One of those virtual keyboard systems that can tell what your fingers are typing in midair from your wrist movements. Acceptable to have a complementary bluetooth bracelet for the other wrist to make this work.
In the future, I'd like a private neural display, so I'd be a 'borg, with an amazing firewall so I don't get mental adverts. At this point we'd hopefully be able to eliminate the secondary bracelet for typing and just think "OK Google".
The point of smartwatch is not to make a smaller smartphone, the same way that a smartphone is not making a smaller laptop.
The point of the watch is to have a fluid interface based off your wrist. It's all about accessibility. If you can read muscle activity, acceleration, temperature, humidity, and have cameras in it then you have the basis for a fluid interface. Sure, put a little touch screen on it, but mainly, think of the wii without a paddle, or kinect without the sensor.
What use is it? Well, what use is a smartphone? It's whatever you want. I don't play games on my smartphone, but I do remote desktop from time to time. Most people do the exact opposite. The big point is: it doesn't matter. The phone is useful for whatever each person wants. Same for smartwatches.
Well, maybe I like to take pictures. What if a tap and a point and pause were to snap a photo of what I'm pointing at? Or it could vibrate to give me a signal if I'm going off a route that I planned. Or maybe I really am interesting in those fitness and health applications. Nah, maybe none of those, but there's this sort of ancient way to give a thumbs up or thumbs down ratings, or instead of reaching for a mouse or reaching for a touch screen, I could just make a small gesture and not reach at all.
The bottom line, however, is that the applications don't matter until there's a fluid interface. Once there's a fluid interface, the smartwatch can be whatever you want. Yes I'd want one. Actually, given that I don't have an amputation, I'd want two.
What would it take for me to buy a smart watch? Other than the fact I have not worn a watch in close to 15 years?
Basic Features:
- Waterproof to 60meters (Dive Watch)
- Actual watch/date/calendar/stopwatch/calculator functionality.
- No wifi or 'phone' capabilities. Bluetooth connectivity.
- SMALL - footprint of the old Casio calculator watch, at most twice as thick.
- 100% Open hardware and software.
- No spyware, no data-grab applications.
- vibrate and 'ringtone' alarm modes.
- Display not large enough/sophisticated enough to legibly support SMS, Tweets, or any other form of Social Media.
- Keyboard that is too small or too difficult to use in order to prevent "texting while driving" and similar stupid actions.
- MP3/OGG playback and record capability.
- MP4/OKV record capability. Playback is "thumbnailed" and choppy to prevent "Look at my wrist and watch this video" stupidity.
- AM/FM radio with record capability.
Sensors:
- 3-D multi-protocol GPS (GPS/Glasnoss/Gallelio) with physical on/off switch.
- Geiger counter.
- UV (sunburn) monitor.
- Accelerometer.
- 3-D magnetometer.
- Microphone
- two cameras, one left and one right, aligned with the plane of the wrist, both with LED flash, video/still/time lapse. UV/Visible/IR.
- Pulse Oximeter with contact thermometer.
- environmental temperature/humidity/barometric and hydrostatic pressure sensors.
Interfaces and Power:
- microUSB with OTG, Host and Client, and charge capabilities.
- Piezoelectric speaker incapable of reproducing human voice.
- Earbud/microphone jack.
- accessible micro-SD socket, waterproof to 60M (Dive Watch)
- Solar cell case.
- LiPo battery, 1 year of "normal watch" use.
In answer to Causby
I want one. ..... tell me the time faster than pulling the pod (cell phone) out of my pocket
I have a dumb watch for that.
Oh, I forgot my pod in my car when I went into the shopping mall? I'll know because my watch will vibrate
I don't forget my phone. Keep trying though.
at a playground trying to manage multiple children ...? I'll know if one ... starts to wander away
I don't manage multiple children.
listening to a podcast in earphones
I never listen to music.
use the mic on my watch for better audio quality.
Why would it be better than the phone?
take a 'selfie' ... go pose, look at my watch to see what the camera sees
Rarely do selfies, but never found a problem framing - just note some landmarks in the camera viewfinder first.
You are the same people who would say "Why would I need my cell phone to have a big screen on it?"
Yup, that's me.
Have you guys paused to consider that there might be applications beyond your current imagination?
Have you paused to consider that there might be other lifestyles than your own?
You can have a smart watch. I want a smart ass.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I have a Pebble -- until recently, a Kickstarter-edition one, though it malfunctioned and the company quite helpfully replaced it.
I originally got it as a geek toy, a whim, but it turned out to be hugely useful for me, given my constraints and work circumstances. Largely, this came down to three factors:
I manage people, and at least at my current company that means that the vast majority of my time is spent in meetings. Having a Pebble on which to see what messages I'm receiving (just for text messages, not FB or email) means I can know when someone's texted me (a rare, but potentially important, occasion) and be able to see what I got without having to reach for my phone in my pocket; it also means that because being able to see the message doesn't necessitate using the tool with which I respond, that I'm less likely to respond immediately, which makes the process less disruptive to the people I'm in meetings with;
I used to miss meetings often because I'd get in the middle of something (or another meeting) and forget to check where I next need to go. My phone quickly vibrating in my pocket was easy to miss. But my watch vibrating? For me, it's unmissable, and it makes me much more aware of where I need to go next.
The other factor that's made a huge difference is not work-related. Being able to control music on my phone via my watch is a trivial improvement when I work out, but it's made another issue basically go away: The "What the hell did I do with my phone?" problem. If I can't find my phone these days, calling it doesn't necessarily work -- it's typically in quiet mode -- but using my Pebble to get some music playing on it, and increasing the volume, is usually immediately helpful in figuring out where the phone is.
You could, of course, argue that these three factors are not, or should not, be relevant to the average geek -- maybe you don't have as many meetings, or are more disciplined about checking your calendar. And God knows we all found our phones before we could remotely start them playing music. But it's been very helpful to me.
Suuntu Ambit2 is a 100m water resistant GPS sport watch that you can run apps on to custom process the data. It doesn't do things that smart phones do but it does not require a smart phone to function and it operates in environments where smart phones can't. It is heavy, expensive, and there are Linux compatibility issues. That is why I don't own one yet. But it is the right direction.
It seems to me that current wearable products are a case of technology looking for a problem to solve. There's nothing they do that matters to me that my iPhone can't do better, and the idea that it's a burden to pull my watch out of my pocket seems laughable to me. The Android Wear products are vaguely interesting as technology demonstrations, but I see nothing that they DO that I need done —and I don't want to wear a device on my arm and charge yet another device, too. It's theoretically possible that someone will release a new product that does something that I'm not even conceiving on, in which case I'll re-evaluate my opinion. But right now I can't see anything interesting about them. If Apple releases anything even vaguely similar (in function or anything else) to what the Android companies have been releasing, I'll have zero interest in it. I need products that solve real problems that I have. Nothing about what I see so far even attempts to address anything that I consider a problem to be solved.
Then all I'll need is a smart car.
I'm waiting until there's a smart watch that functions as a feature-rich health monitor. Tell me about my white blood cell count, blood pressure, vitamin deficiencies, and so on.
There are plenty of multifunction watches (built in stopwatch, alarm, light, etc.) that have been around for 20-30 years, were relatively cheap (even in 1987-1991ish), and are waterproof. If the 2014 "smart watch" ain't waterproof, it ain't smart enough for me.
If statistics are to be believed (and mostly they're not) then 74% of people use their phone while on the toilet. And 25% of those drop it in the toilet. So I think there is a valid "need" for a (dumb) phone watch to help the multitudes that have dunny-dived for their phones in the past: if your phone is attached to your wrist it is less likely to wind up in the loo.
For me, personally, I don't need most of the crap that my smart phone can do. If I could *replace* my phone with a smart watch that could do all of this I'd be happy: tell the date and time; Contacts list; make and receive phone calls; make and receive SMS (not email, work doesn't need to exchange email with me 24/7 so why should anyone else?); bluetooth pairing (to my headset and/or car bluetooth, potentially a bluetooth keyboard for sending messages); GPS navigation for walking, cycling and driving (mainly from Contacts list, possibly supporting bluetooth keyboard for entering other addresses). That's it. Nothing else. No web browsing. No email. No games. It doesn't make sense to me to play games one-handed, etc., or any of the things that are better served by tablets, laptops or desktop computers. But... if you really need a bluetooth keyboard to make it usable then you're probably better of with a smart phone or phablet anyway.
Because knowing the time in our modern gadget infested world is so incredibly difficult that I believe this might be the solution to the problem.
I am interested in watches.
Whether or not a smart watch is worth it is an open question. If they can provide me something that I think I need with it, then sure. I've outlined a list in comments on previous stories, for quasi-trolls that were about to lash into me for being so general.
But I wear an automatic mechanical beater right now—specifically because it's virtually indestructible, represents only a minor investment (and thus financial risk), and requires no maintenance, attention, or battery-swapping. It's accurate to about 2 minutes per year, which means that about once a year I tune the time on it.
Most of the stuff that smartwatches are currently being said to do I either don't care about (fitness tracking, health monitoring) or currently use a smartphone for with far less hassle (bigger screen, more natural UI) so it'll be a stretch. But I'm open.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
No. Stop spamming Slashdot.
The "Moment Smartwatch," a Kickstarter project, is both decorative and practical. I may get one for my wife.
For myself, I have ordered a "Neptune Pine."
Basically I want a smartwatch that will free up my momentary pulling my phone out. So time, changing songs, checking messages, simple navigation, seeing who is calling/called, etc. I really don't want a whole lot more than that. So any attempt at fitness/appstores/games/etc that are best left on my phone then yuk. Any bloaty things that are best left on the phone MUST be left on the phone. Any slipshod half assed crap that don't work well will just waste menu space memory, capacity, and even the time that the company should be using to make the rest of the phone better.
The other key is that customization will be key. If I don't want messages, then I want messages clean off the phone.
But I have little hope that the first few rounds of smartwatches are even going to come close. They will load up the features which will result in abysmal battery lives. They will have complicated menus so that if you want to see a recent message you will have to scroll through 30 screens. But worst of all the MBA types will say, "Hey we have some valuable realestate on these fools' wrists that we can sell. So they will have all kinds of stupid things that sell sell sell such as music stores, app stores, and overlarge reminders that you have a Samsung product or some crap.
My prediction is that in the end there will be two winners. Eventually Apple will come out with something and unless it is total crap they will sell zillions for a huge profit. But some other Timex (maybe even timex) will come out with the simplest and dumbest smartwatch out there for a reasonable price. But it will be small, tough, cheap, and do exactly what it needs to do and not one transistor more.
In the super long term the watch will end up being so smart that it will replace the phone but not for a long while. For now it must be Robin to the Phone's Batman. "Batman the bat phone is ringing..."
You know, the type you see in movies set in the 19th century, I would be tempted. A wristwatch - not a chance.
My smartphone does everything already. Pulling it out of my pocket to look at it isn't such an ordeal. I already have a watch that tells the time and date, and it goes for years on a battery.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
it does something I find worthwhile, sure.
So far, I've not heard of any smart watch that actually does anything I find worth the cost. Maybe Apple will manage to make a smart watch a smart move. They did pretty well with MP3 players, tablets, and, arguably, smart phones.
An emphatic NO.
It's smart enough to know its limits. It tells time and leaves the other stuff to other gadgets.
Have gnu, will travel.
> Oh, I want to take a 'selfie' from farther away than my arms reach?
"Hey Google. Take photo in 3 seconds." Voice recognition technology is already there today, making wrist watch devices people actually want to buy isn't.
> Oh, I'm listening to a podcast in earphones with my pod in my tight jeans pocket, and someone calls me?
Boy, that one's contrived.
> Oh, I'm at a playground trying to manage multiple children safely?
They already sell Kiddie GPS systems. Stick the tag on the kid's clothes and you don't need a watch, you've already got your phone with a much bigger screen and better interface for interacting with maps.
> Oh, I forgot my pod in my car when I went into the shopping mall?
Might actually be one of the few valid use cases for a smart watch. And that's pathetic.
Here's the real problem with the smart watch - while you can keep coming up with contrived use cases, the fact remains that people want to use it like a watch. Smartphones just combined a PDA with a phone. And this was smart because, as it turns out, people don't really want to carry around the phone, they just need to be able to get into contact with one another quickly.
What does a smartwatch do? Well... it's a remote control for a PDA, which you're already carrying. I can't see anyone selling these devices well with that use case. We need *more.* The watch needs to be its own, standalone, "I would buy this even if I didn't own a smartphone" device. And considering my current watch gets more than 100 times the battery life and has all of the buzzing and alert features I could care to have on a watch, I just can't see me ever buying one.
This technology can be disruptive, I agree. But in its current iteration, it never will be.
If this smart watch can give me alerts, is waterproof to 10m and is more than just an expensive remote for my phone.
BT won't cut it, I want wifi at least so my phone can act as a base station and I can be hundreds of feet away.
It should also last more than a few hours. 5 days or so should be the minimum.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
The devices with seven days battery life are pretty viable furthermore, I don't want to have sound coming out of the watch... phone conversations need to be private... so you'd have to match this iwth a bluetooth headset or something.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
...replaced my watch Unless there is some new killer app that hasn't been announced yet I can't see why this is better than what we have today.
Scott
Sexy enough for an attractive 20 y/o to hop into the sack with my 56 y/o fat self.
// human female
/// I've posted this same comment in a dup thread a week or two back.
/ 20 y/o female
Fourteen years ago I carried a phone and a PDA. The PDA had wifi, office apps, games, etc., and when needed I could use the phone as a data modem. I eventually migrated to a single device with both phone and PDA functionality, and I've gotten used to the convenience of a single device with the same functionality. I would not want to go backwards in time to once again carrying two devices for the same functionality.
I consider bio-sensors to be gimicky. I imagine most of the people who would find those sensors to be a positive have already bought existing sensor devices.
Using a watch as a convenient but significantly crippled interface to a phone seems like a huge step backwards. I would only accept that huge loss of interface functionality if I could leave the phone behind, i.e., if the phone migrated to the watch. Now, that is something that I would buy in an instant. Anything else is just Pebble++, even if it happens to have a fruit logo on it.
Heck, I don't even wear a dumb watch, and I haven't for years. My phone has a huge time display right on it. And I sit in front of a computer all work day. What do I want a watch for?
When I read (errr, skimmed) a recent article on smart watches, and it described the units with exceptionally long battery life as about 3 days, I thought, WTF?
I have a watch that lasts years on a single charge.
watch+fitbit+alarms+callerid+SMS
No, because I don't want to wear a watch type accessory.
When technology gets to the point where I can have it safely embedded under my skin, use it to make calls, and runs off body energy, that's when I'll consider getting one.
I have a Rolex you insensitve clod!
That's because those devices will, like "smart"-phones, cater to the lowest denominator. In the end you'll end up with a device that's hard to program, preventing "casual programming", while allowing malware via some store.
So far the closest thing I've seen to a smart watch was the HP-01.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Who wears a watch in 2014?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It's the same answer to the question, "Do I want slashdot beta?"
Lasts three days or more on a charge, perfectly readable in any light. It's incredibly valuable since my phone is on my belt in a pouch at work, and I sometimes don't feel the vibrate but I can't have the ringer on all the time. Apps let me respond to text messages with short choices, and control my music. All I want is the price on a Steel to drop a little and I'm there.
I wish there was a choice that said "Factually Wrong -1" when I mod.
I haven't owned any of the current generation of cellphone-accessory smartwatches. The ones I have owned:
-- Casio GPS watch - It was a gift from my wife, back before GPSs had taken over the world. It was big and clunky, got me all kinds of geek cred at work, didn't work very well as a GPS but the fact that it worked at all was amazing. -- TI EZ430-Chronos watch - programmable, using their MSP430 microprocessor set, had a reasonably flexible display. It didn't have a lot of sensors, and I didn't end up hacking it very much, but it was a lot of fun. It had a low-power radio link that let it connect to a heartbeat monitor band, so you could use it for things like watching your heart rate while jogging. -- Watches with various other functions built in, like moon phase, tides tables for surfing, that kind of thing. One of them had a screen saver for entirely no good reason, just because it could.In practice, I find that almost all of the time I'm either in front of a computer screen with a clock display in the corner, or in an environment with clocks around, or carrying a cellphone with a clock display on the main screen, or in an environment that's not very friendly to watches, or in a social environment where I don't really care what time the clock says it is, so I've stopped wearing watches most of the time.
When smart-watches get smart enough to be the phone instead of being a peripheral display for the phone, maybe. But is a smart-watch phone that needs a Bluetooth headset and needs reading glasses to use more convenient than a cellphone with big text that can use a wired headset? For me, it's really not.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Besides basic watch functions, a GPS would be good, an 'Emergency' button that when pressed would (somehow) send a signal to a satellite that the user needs emergency aid (along with the GPS location), and if it could sync itself to WWV so that it is always within +- 1 second, that would be good too. Its too small to send text or be used as a calculator, unless you could use it to project an interactive touchscreen image onto an available surface (table/book/whatever), in which case I want all the functionality of a smartphone.
Slashdot: News for nerds, terrible at predicting anything that matters.
just it's form factor, no screen.
You know, internally, the iPod Nano had all the active functions of a Smart Watch without a screen. Why not put a iPod Nano on a leather wristband and give it a Bluetooth link for your Bluetooth Headphones for audible time recital like a classy bulky 70's dictaphone? Who is willing to hack one to do such, and with a clever Jupiter Jack we can get it to our FM Headphones.
If it is actually "smart" in any appreciable sense, I'm interested.
Right now, I see nothing on the market that even approaches anything that would justify using that term. The best that these watches have to offer at this moment is that they're about 3 seconds faster to look at than the smartphone in your pocket. Maybe if you're a lady and keep your smartphone dug in deep in your bag of holding and it takes you a minute of searching to find it that's interesting, but for most people I don't see any actual practical value (not that that would stop a million or so customers from buying it simply because it's new and flashy and advertisement budgets have convinced them it's the second coming).
I can't say what a watch would need to be interesting. If I could, I wouldn't post it here, I would sell it very expensively to Apple. So I'm looking for what everyone announces, maybe someone is smarter than me and I'll say "I didn't think of that, it's really cool". But so far, that hasn't happened.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
...that the reasons why I and the public in general might have a use for a smart watch are not, as yet, obvious to me. It seems to me that a smart watch inherently cannot do more than my smart phone is already capable of; just redestribute precisely how it's done. So - which are the apps that would work better sitting on a tiny screen on my wrist than on my phone? I have to say I can't (offhand, as it were), think of one. Niche applications, maybe - but niche isn't going to turn smart watches into the next big technological "thing". Oh - and a personal foible. I don't actually wear a watch at all right now, except on those few, special occasions when I know I'm really going to need it. I'd been wearing one for so long that I'd forgotten just how much more comfortable it is not to have one on. I wouldn't easily go back for the sake of a little electronic bling. I have a perfectly serviceable, cheap digital casio in my pocket that I can put on when I need to, and I have my phone. So to get onto *my* wrist, whatever that smart watch is going to do, better not only be something useful, but something I need sufficiently often for it to justify the annoyance of wearing a watch again. Frankly, it seems unlikely to me that that's going to happen.
Well, we'll see. People here have long lists of requirements that "would make them buy a smartwatch", and the lists even include things that are far away from reach of current technology.
In reality, all it requires is some marketing.
Add a Bitcoin app and show a short video clip Linus Torvalds says that "yeah, smartwatches are quite interesting area where Linux is used". Make it so that you can unlock the watch and SSH to it and do stuff. The nerds will arrive.
Absolutely not.
And i wont consider buying one until the battery run time is in the region of months, not hours.
I wear an mechanical Hamilton watch, I love the idea of having a coil spring and that level of mechanical complexity around my wrist in a digital age working with digital equipment all the time.
It's the same reason I love the partial mechanical tape robots I work with, I don't want another digital thing on my body thank you very much.
Even a watch with a sticker on it saying "You have unread emails and new tweets" is right several times a day.
The readership clearly is to be product that is to learn to take to the slop and fscking like it.
I'd love to be connected without having to carry anything in a pocket. I hate the feeling of phone/wallet/keys slapping around my thigh while running. A wristwatch is tolerable. But it would need to be shock- and waterproof and have a touch interface on the palm side so I can operate it with the fingers of the same hand without looking. Alternatively, a smart earbud.
I do but I can't afford one
I want one that's not going to be tracking me, connected to a smart phone that's not going to be tracking me either. Would be awesome.
Flavor Flaw with a new smart watch!
... only if it's smart enough to do my job while I stay home and drink beer.
All of people's creative reasons for wanting one really seem to be just using it as a remote control for their phone.
For that it does have one advantage: convenient access because it's strapped to your wrist. The down side is that almost all apps will need to use voice command. Even the simplest touch interface will be more bother than pulling out the phone; plus, people over the age of 45 will need to put on reading glasses to see all but the biggest block letters.
Nope not for me thanks.
Noticed these all need to be tethered to be useful? Anything which sells more huge-margin smartphones is just gonna be rammed down consumers throats, so expect tons of "buy this handset and get this hugely discounted smartwatch" type bundles any time now.
so if the smartwatch can be as pretty as my omega, I'd use it
all the rest I got on my smartphone
http://watchshock.com/archive/... -- this one. How much smarter a watch do you really need? #getoffmylawn #forreal
Not in a million years.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Smartwatch wishlist: :-) ) :-) ) ...
Shockproof
Waterproof (200 m)
Solar Powered
Flat but Sturdy - Think a combination of Casio G-Shock and Skagen
Pressure Sensor / Height Meter / Variometer
Temperature Sensor
Environment Sensor
Complete Biosensor Package
FOSS OS with every aspect configurable, especially blocking of corporate tracking (Google, Facebook, etc.)
Speed-charging mode
Assistance AI ('please' of course being optional
--> Watch, when does the milonga in collogne start today?
--> Watch, are the regional trains to collogne on schedule?
--> Watch, please warn me if I cross the speed limit.
--> Watch, please navigate me along the fastest route to school.
--> Watch, I hear cheering from all the windows around me - who just scored a goal?
--> Watch, guide me to the nearest DM that stocks dental care. (Watch knows that I'm on foot and guides me to the nearest Tramstation if required.)
--> Watch, has the bike shop gotten back to us yet? (Watch checks voicebox and all message channels including mail)
--> Watch, please tell me if todays schedule is still valid or if there are any unforseen changes.
--> Watch, what was her name again? Just show, don't say.
--> Watch, please record a tracklist of everything the DJ is playing tonight. Use any analytical software available, not just shazam. And establish what it would cost to buy that tracklist on the music platforms that we're registred on.
--> Watch, please silence youself and all my devices in proximity until tomorrow 7:30 in the morning. Silence all priority notifications except the "Company Server Down" Alert. And go into "Push to show" mode for your clockface and turn of all screensavers and backlights. (Thinks to himself: I want to enjoy this evening/night with this tango-cutie here without any further disturbance.
you get the picture.
Furhtermore: ... ...Allthoug I couldn't say if such a watch would be good for me. With that type of AI my brain would probably start to rott from under-usage quite soon :-) .
Standardised wrist strap connections
Cheap and available spare wriststraps in variing colors and materials
Cheap and available spare and extra bumber cases in variing colors and materials
1st hand 3D printing files of wriststraps and variant bumper cases
Quick change from wriststrap to pocket'watch' / pocketdevice mode
And probably some other things I haven't thought of yet.
My 2 cents.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
I want a 'smart' fleshlight which obeys my every command.
with tentacles.
with an active AI.
"go ahead, ask the Internet."
It's never gonna work. Phones are popular because they are designed to steal the entirety of one's focus and attention. It's a little blingy crying baby designed to make you think you can't live without it buzzing away in your pocket, tweeting Britney Spears' most profound thoughts. A watch seeks to be unobtrusive, and even the most ridiculous Rolex sits on an off hand, under a sleeve, most of the time.
So people aren't going to go crazy over a watch because it's already designed to be safe and easily ignored, which is exactly what The Man wants to prevent your monetized ass from doing--ignoring His product.
No.
A smart watch should be a compact portable sensor package with a minimal display. Think a fitbit but MUCH more capable. Data logging versions of accelerometer, thermometer, barometer, chronometer, lightmeter, altimeter, hygrometer, GPS, voice logging, etc. Basically anything that ends in the word *meter. Should be able to interact with a smartphone or PC but not be dependent on it. Should have an API to allow applications and other devices to do interesting and custom things with it. Should be waterproof and have a waterproof data cabling (or wireless) system to allow other devices to interact with it. Battery life needs to be substantial. >72 hours at absolute minimum but really more like a week. Some storage and the ability to play music similar to an ipod. Any display should be minimal and energy efficient but more user friendly than your typical wristwatch. Think something like an ipod nano most likely.
Use cases? Anywhere you would want to record such data but don't need/want the bulk and energy drain of a smartphone screen. Exercise, hiking, research, boating, diving, etc. I don't wear a watch but I could see tons of uses for a compact wearable sensor package. Such a device could both be worn and mounted to various objects to useful purposes.
...but I'm horrified that I would scratch the face of my new $300 watch in about 2 hours. This is probably the primary reason why I would really love to have the upcoming Motorola watch, but probably won't get one.
The Omate Truesmart is pretty cool, even if it is a little bulky.
It runs full Android with a few add-ins from Omate. It has 3G, Bluetooth, and a camera.
It doesn't have the Google Play store (a Facebook and YouTube app is built in and updateable through an Omate-provided application), and the radio is 3G only. Also, it has a pop up keyboard, but it's not practical at all. You can sync a Bluetooth keyboard to it, as you can any Android device with a Bluetooth radio.
It works surprisingly well, but it's just too small to use unless it's the only thing you have.
My first thought when seeing this is that it would be easy to sneak into court.
The one that doesnt suck.
Pebble.
All the others from Samsung and the rest have two major SUCK failure points...
1 - Have to charge it daily : FAIL.
2 - cant read it in direct sunlight : FAIL.
The pebble does both perfectly and for Under $150 if you buy the normal one.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Just sayin'.
I wear a self-winding mechanical watch precisely BECAUSE it's not "smart". It tells the time (in 3 time zones, on a 24-hour basis) and displays the date. The date function isn't even "smart" in that I have to manually advance the date at the end of months that have less than 31 days.
The best part is that I LIKE IT that way.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There are real industrial design reasons to have a round watch on your arm. The ease of drawing to a rectangular display buffer do not outweigh them.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
I do wear a watch, and can see uses for a smart watch - but almost all the stuff listed in the summary would be excluded! Music? Requires headphones or speakers, better to leave it on the phone. Pictures? Um ... how? Are you planning to use the screen as the viewer and thus have the lens wear the clasp would be? Sensor has to go with the lens ... seems it would be too prone to damage. GPS could work - already seen watches with a built-in compass, but navigation is probably a bad idea (small screen, and sound/voice would be better with headphones again). What watches are mostly for is telling time, so how about a watch that can sync with your schedule to remind you of appointments? A watch could reasonably display small amounts of text (like addresses or tweets) but input is rather limited - currently. Hmm ... install enough motion sensors that the watch could track your hand on a virtual keyboard or virtual mouse? But that's only one hand - and not even individual fingers - so would require some training to get it to work right. Looks like we'd better just stick to time and leave most of the "smart" stuff for the phones.
Yes, I absolutely need a smart watch, right now. Maybe, I'll be able to wait until November when the iWatch will definitely be available to buy, or in manufacturing, or announced at a crazy event, or not. But, what do smart watches do?
Yeah I want one, and I bought it. My Navitimer has a sliderule built into it. It's an amazing computer. It does multiplication tables and MPG calculations.
All I need a watch to do is tell me the time of day, and my $30 Timex does that job just fine!
"A Bird In The Hand Will Poop On Your Wrist"-Benny Hill,1982
You wouldnt create content on a smart watch. But most of the time I look on the computer to read mail/texts, news and weather. I dont need to sit a desk or pull a lump out of pocket to do this.
Its interesting how much technology they pack into a small device - 1 GHz CPU and 4GB flash, camera, gyro. The screen is 320 x 320 or about 6x20 characters. Google glass is same height, but twice the width. mini-Linux, Android and Java.
Overall I see good potential as a basic messaging receiving device. I am dubious about the camera, because it is hard to aim unlike a smartphone or glass.
The basic user interface follows smartphone conventions- touch activated and scrolling cardlets. The positive is that you can write a similar applet for both a phone and watch. I personally dont think the long term future of a smart watch is as a small smartphone. Other user interfaces such as voice and wrist guestures will be more efficient.
The first two generations tether with smartphone for internet access. Ditto google glass. Battery life is about 3 days if you dont use the camera or video.
Samsumgs million dollar smart watch app contest (top prize 100K) ends this week.
using that "curved smartphone" technology to make a phone that bends over your wrist, and pair it with some straps and an always-landscape gui for a wrist computer?
So, you want Pebble.
Go for it - you'll like it.
A very similar question was just asked on Slashdot less than a month ago. ask.slashdot.org/story/14/06/25/2129237/ask-slashdot-what-would-it-take-for-you-to-buy-a-smartwatch
I'll give the same answer I gave then, I already carry one device (smart phone) designed from the ground up to spy on me. I don't need another.
I have a Seiko watch that runs on solar power. It features day of the week, date, a stopwatch, an alarm, and a second time zone. Oh, and yes, I almost forgot: it looks good, too. So - thanks, but no, thanks.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
1. The battery has to last 5 years, minimum.
2. It has to be waterproof to 30 atmospheres.
3. It has to be shock proof.
4. It has to use mechanical controls. Capacitive/resistive screens don't work that well on very small screens.Hell, they don't even work well for me on phone size screens.
5. It has to measure my dive time and calculate my decompression (my current watch does that)
6. It has to look good. Either stainless steel or titanium case.
7. It would have to have a GPS and no tracking of any type- that would be the function that sells me. I can already buy a wrist mount GPS, but it doesn't comply with #1-6.
8. It would have to function off of satellite- not cell towers. (I already have a satellite device that connects my smart phone for texting)
In reality dumb watches are higher technology already. Someday they will realize that and the analog watch manufacturers will build better watches than the digital companies.
Mobil medical device, sensors, health/activity tracker ... YES! ... Just another watch, phone, tablet... NO! Make US/EU better open platform TechApps.
Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
Have you noticed how clunky the medical profession is? You sit down at the dr. office and they put a cuff on your arm to read your blood pressure and pulse, which is about the most worthless science I can think of. If they wanted to see your BP spikes they would use a sensor that is a whole lot more unobtrusive than a sphigmometer! But the medical establishment is truly in the dark ages and this is a situation where some decent sensor engineering could make a big deal. Your dr. puts you on BP meds and he wants to know if they are working. An acclerometer could give enough info so that the variance of BP is measurable from a wearable monitor, in a watch. I am quite surprised that somebody isn't pushing the problem of calibrating a small sensor to solve this problem. If if takes a couple of sphigmometer measurements to calibrate a sensor, then fine, but it seems to me that it would be worth that.
How much useful data could be gotten about blood by using a colorimeter measurement to link the spectral response, even just extinction of light transmitted or reflected from in situ blood to indicate blood chemistry, such things as Fe, sugar, chlorestrol? I haven't heard that any doctor or engineer has tried to get such data under a control. Has Anyone? A wrist watch that can do monitoring of such things is something I would buy. I don't think of the possibility as just another mobile device, in fact because of the privacy issues I would't want the device to have more than a mini USB connection, so that I can download the data for my doctor's use alone, no buetooth, no wireless, unless I can turn it on and off. The ability to do continuous monitoring would be worth the ability to have the device. This would be more valuable to a segment of the population than any smartphone conveniences, and it would undercut the medical profession's staidness.
...isn't just an expensive add-on to the Smart Phone. They really need to think what they are doing.
Will it make me a Power Ranger?
I've had garmin watch for 5 years. GPS, run and bike history, heart rate monitor. No radio though.
I've got plenty of watches that tell time, but so does my phone. What I want is one that offers Time Travel. I would stand in line to buy that!
What I want in a smartwatch is to be able to stream video of the cops whenever they are harrassing me or anyone else for that matter. Stream to a secure server in the cloud via my phone if necessary. It would be nice to have a video camers (a useful video camera) sitting on my wrist all the time... OBTW: If any of you thieving manufacturers decide to steal my idea (like that never happens on the internet), then please send me a dozen of your top of the line units for my trouble.
Dear Microlimp: I give you 2 valid product keys for win7 and you reject both of them. Piss off you wankers!!!
... but if I were to start wearing watches again, yes I would get a smartwatch!
it will make lockscreen widgets useful again
When enjoying the great outdoors on the water I have a Bad Elf GPS on a lanyard, a lightening alert clipped to my belt, an iPhone with a backup chart plotter/navigation app, timer (for DR plot), a VHF handheld (with DSC), and a PLB. I feel like a cop on the beat with all that crap attached to me!
Put the GPS, the PLB, the and the lightening alert in a watch and I'm in.
The current offerings - that I have played with in the store - are cute, and show promise, but are a long ways from being usable.
Murphy was an optimist
I'd love a smarter watch. I like the *concept* of wearable electronics. I would not, however, be willing to sacrifice any of the features of my "dumb" watch - I would buy a smart watch if and only if I never have to change its battery, I could take it with me in the shower or into a swimming pool, and regardless of whatever other fancy stuff it might do, it never failed to continue to tell me the correct time.
...I'll take a Pip Boy 3000
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Pip-Boy
I run long distance races. I'd like to see a smart health band that can do the basics right.
1) Store and play music via bluetooth. This way I don't need to run with my phone and can use a bluetooth earplugs to play my music. Heck this way I can listen to music even when I swim. One of the samsung watches does this, but horribly ugly and extremely inaccurate
2) Measures my activities like a FuelBand/Garmin watch.
3) Is light weight and has great battery life, again like a fuelband.
Don't care about fancy high res tiny screens/cameras.
I would if they put built-in GPS in a smart watch. What's the point of a smart watch for fitness if you have to carry your phone with you anyway... If they would make one I can play music to a bluetooth headset that had built in GPS, I would probably consider it.
It always amazes me at the gap between smart watches that make it to market, and what a watch-wearer looks for in a watch. (tells time, isn't huge, battery lasts for years, isn't gaudy to the point you are surprised if someone DOESN'T notice it)
Until the day my smart watch can be mistaken for a 'dumb watch' I'll keep watching.
Speaking of watching, I have kept an eye on the Moto360. Apparently it doesn't keep time, since summer 2014 is here. Any Moto360 developers on slashdot care to comment?