Slashdot Mirror
Moto 360 Reviews Arrive
An anonymous reader writes: Reviews for the Moto 360 smartwatch have started to roll in. David Pierce at The Verge praises the design: the circular display is framed by an unadorned, stainless steel shell, and fastened to your wrist with a simple leather strap. At the same time, he criticized the battery life, saying the device averaged around 12 hours of use before it needed to be charged. Pierce adds, "The Moto 360's most impressive feature is that I stopped noticing it almost immediately. Whenever I wear the LG G Watch or the Samsung Gear Live, I'm constantly compelled to fidget with it; there's this unexplainable feeling of having something alien on my wrist that is there because I need to use it. The 360, on the other hand, just vanished into the spot left on my wrist by the Seiko watch that conveniently died this week." AnandTech takes a deeper dive into the device's hardware, noting that the TI OMAP 3 processor is built on a somewhat old 45nm process, which necessitates higher power consumption than newer, smaller processes. The Wall Street Journal says it's easy to get used to speaking into your watch for basic functions, but the software — and thus, the Moto 360 as a whole — still isn't quite ready for prime time. However, almost all the reviews agree that the smartwatch's time is coming.
Because it's only going to be a few days until Apple's announcement.
i saw what you did there
45nm = 15 / 8388608 of an inch.
Is the moto 360 a google product? If so I won't wear it.
Why don't you use Bing to find the answer?
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
You say the software isn't ready? I say the hardware isn't ready. How in the world is a watch with a battery life of 12 hours even close to usable?
Ooh, nice watch you have there? What time is it?
I don't know, the battery died around dinner time.
That sounds annoying. Does it happen often?
Yes, every frickin day!
.
Smart rings?
Is it just me or are these things redundant? Why would I want my wrist encumbered with anything, let alone a watch? Wherefore art thou oh smart ring?
http://www.acetonestudio.com
I've seen a lot of people on this site bash smartwatches if they have less than a week of battery life, and that always seemed like overkill to me. I suspect a lot of people (most?) are like me and take off their watches at night anyways. As such, placing it on a wireless charger dock at night doesn't seem like a problem - as long as the watch has enough battery life to get through the day until I take it off at night. Which is doesn't, according to these reviews. I don't know if I like the look of one enough to buy one anyways, but that would keep me from buying one even if it was better looking.
Having a round LCD screen is stupid. There is just no reason for it. The image is displayed anyway as rows and columns, which is inherently rectangular. It's just a holdover from mechanical watches that rotate on a central axis. The circular LCD will never hold as much information as a same resolution rectangular LCD, plus the engineering to get it to work is a lot more complicated. I see round LCDs as a waste of perfectly good screen real estate, and technology. That engineering could be put to much better use than (almost literally) to cram a square peg into a round hole.
Let's see, we've had smart phones for a while. Now we seem to be entering the fad of smart watches. When the smart watch fad dies down, what will replace it?
.
Smart rings?
Smart People?
like most of the idiot phone/tablet manufacturers it can't be seen or used in sunlight, so now you have a watch and a phone that you cant use outside, yeah innovation, get some.
Bing!
Norway.
If battery life is that weak why not put batteries in the band? Or solar charging?
I use duck duck go. you know the name of the duck? dax.
might as well just velcro your phone to your wrist.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
The addressing of LCDs is inherently cartesian, but I don't see why it means the display itself must be as well. The space not on the display is not wasted, there are not physical pixels being hidden here. Instead, the device provides the user with more free physical space compared to one with square screen, not to mention nicer look.
No one cares about your personal issues.
Everyone keeps saying how this doesn't have the latest most powersaving CPU but how much CPU does this device even need? Once a second to update the hand? Or could even be a few times a minute for a smooth minute hand.
I would be surprised if the overwhelming majority of the amperage doesn't go to the display and the BLE radio (in that order), the CPU coming last.
This is the first smart watch I've seen that doesn't look terrible. For me, a watch is primarily a piece of jewelry. I'll stick with my Ebel, thank you.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
1) Interfacing: Since they are so small, a keyboard is out of the question, and you won't probably have too many icons on the screen at the same time. Voice input is probably not up to it yet and, quite frankly, talking to your wristwatch a la Dick Tracy makes you look like a dork.
2) Phone usage: Leaving the dork factor mentioned above aside, a conversation that you hold on such device will probably be audible by everyone. Unless you hold it to your ear, but that would make you look even more dorky. Or you can have one of those Bluetooth ear pieces that make you look like a Borg. Those are not so prevalent these days though.
Do these new watches solve such issues?
Are smartwatches anything more than just a watch and a remote for a smartphone?
Since my watch (if I had one) would always be on my wrist (hopefully), 'd like it do some useful stuff like remind me when my smartphone battery is getting low, remind me when I'm leaving the house without my house keys, let me turn the thermostat up or down, let me know if I left the garage door open when I'm going to bed, etc. The reason for putting these functions on the watch is that I'd always be wearing the watch, unlike a cell phone.
the 360 is 270, if you look at where the LCD actually goes...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Taking bets on when Motorola discontinues this and therefore stops supporting it. I fell for their previous version of this, the Motoactv, which is meant to be a sports device. But oops I made the mistake of sweating on it, so they won't honor their warranty.
I do, for one. So do millions of other people.
How difficult is it to take out phone and check time anyway. Other use cases like checking for the caller while driving can be handled by voice apps..or phone holders etc.. Unless however, they are completely eliminating the need to carry a cell phone. And that will require a lot more thought than just . May be pair the watch with Google Glass say. A fundamental shift is required. Something tells me I need another pot...
I come to Slashdot only to read sigs. One you are reading is mine.
Ned? Ned Ryerson?
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
I don't think you understand how CPU's work.
However, almost all the reviews agree that the smartwatch's time is coming.
The people posting these reviews have had the watch for a few days, but I wonder how much education they got on it from Motorola, or if they were going in blind?
The reason I ask is that it has been well advertised today that the battery life of the watch will be HEAVILY INFLUENCED by it's distance from your phone. If the watch is seperated by the phone often, then it will constantly be using more power to communicate with it and/or be probing for the phone. This will significantly impact it's battery life, according to Motorola - and it makes sense. I know that for myself, the watch wold always be close to the phone so this would never be an issue.
Why encumber your wrists? What we really need is a device that you keep in your pocket and you can pull out when you need to check the time.
It can be called the iPocket Watch.
Millions of people care about your personal boycott?