Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: What Smartwatch Apps Could You See Yourself Using?
An anonymous reader writes: It's official: the smartwatch wars have begun. Apple's announcement of the Apple Watch added a contender to the race already shaping up between the Pebble watch, the Moto 360, and others. Personally, my doubts about wanting one were put to rest when I learned of the health-related features. Smartwatches will be able to track your movements and pulse rate, calculate how many calories you burn, and coach you continuously to improve your fitness.
If you have one or plan on buying one, what apps or functions do you see yourself getting the most use from? If you're still skeptical, what would it take? (If an app developer sees your requirements here on Slashdot, your wish might come true.)
If you have one or plan on buying one, what apps or functions do you see yourself getting the most use from? If you're still skeptical, what would it take? (If an app developer sees your requirements here on Slashdot, your wish might come true.)
I'm shocked!
I keep forgetting my place. Jesus is for losers. Why do I still play to the crowd?
Is there even an app for that?
Is the submitter of the article a developer looking for ideas?
Prof. Leoffler has a request: http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/09/10/1450208/using-wearable-tech-to-track-gun-use
It would have to have a sweet clock app. It would be so cool to run my clock app and be able to see the time on my smartwatch.
Can you really have a "war" when you no one shows up?
Don't get me wrong, some of these smart watches rate as "neat", but not for several hundred dollars. I could see dropping 100 bucks, maybe, on something that tracks health telemetry, but honestly? It'd probably have to be a gift before I got it.
This is kind of like saying 3D TV companies were in a war with each other. While that may have been true, consumers didn't notice because the tech just wasn't that interesting to them.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
The things that I can currently think of that I'd use a smartwatch for - 1) GPS / pedometer for running 2) music (without the need for a phone) while working out 3) discreetly checking notifications during meetings 4) navigation when riding a bike / motorcycle. I realize not everyone would value these and will say "JUST USE YOUR PHONE!", but for a $200 - $250 smart watch, I'd definitely drop down the money for these apps.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
An FPM meter. ;)
Wake me up when a smartwatch is a standalone device that does everything my Nexus 5 does now with decent battery life and an affordable pricetag. We're making progress, sure, but nowhere near primetime.
You will be reduced to a series of numbers.
You will find these numbers matter to you.
You will want to increase, decrease or maintain these numbers.
Keep your eyes on the numbers.
These numbers matter.
Nothing else matters.
Ahh I see you are using the new iNutjob app.
But... I suppose something like Life360 would kinda cool, or someway to track your kids if you're at a large park and want to keep tabs on where they are in case they get lost .. or worse.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
I've seen one in use. The only thing he did on it was try to take a phone call. It kinda worked, but it cut out. (We couldn't figure out if it was the watch or the phone that it was tethered to) Looking at texts and playing music, the basic things are probably the only things most people would use on one.
I can't see playing a game more complex than simon on it.
I have a pebble, and I don't really use any apps on it at all. But I love it. I pretty much never miss a call or text because my watch vibrates when that happens. Before the pebble, I would rarely notice if my phone was vibrating. Also, I find that glancing at my watch is less obtrusive than pulling out my phone, whether I'm checking who a text/call is from or just checking the time.
"Preceded by itself yields falsehood" preceded by itself yields falsehood.
You can swim (not scuba dive) with it, and the battery lasts more than 3 days. Various notification features are the most useful for me, and the ability to create my own watchface without much difficulty (I'm a programmer). I'd take Moto 360, LG G Watch R, and even Apple Watch more seriously if they could beat the battery life of Pebble, and get at least IP69 rating.
I hate wearing watches and certainly cannot imagine an app that would make me reconsider.
Golf would be my choice.
Show me how far I am from the next hole.
What's a watch and why would I want one? I mean, why do I need to wear something on my wrist when I have a perfectly good smartphone fully loaded with every application I want? I can browse the web, read books, do all sorts of things.
Not until the health/life insurance companies start offering incentives to wear and heed a smartwatch's fitness advice. Given the recent findings correlating sitting for extended periods with poor health outcomes (even for those that exercise and have an otherwise "fit" life) , a smartwatch that guided the user to the right level of daily activity could significantly reduce their risk of many chronic diseases later in life and thereby reduce the cost profile for insurers.
My watch is a Tissot PRC200 Automatic. Not a very expensive watch, but it would take some effort from a company to make me take it off my wrist.
To even consider a smart watch, it would need to have:
- a classy, attractive design (nothing convinced me so far, the LG G Watch R is the closest to something I'd use but still feels cheap; Apple watch looks too much like a gadget)
- a smaller size. I don't have a big wrist, my watch has 42mm diameter, anything larger looks bad on my wrist.
- much longer battery life. Current smart watches get 12-24 hours. I don't want a watch I must charge every night.
Get these right and then we can talk about software.
Currently I see no reason to have a smartwatch, it just seems like an expensive watch that relays notifications from my phone. I have no problem reaching into my pocket to grab my phone when needed. Everything these smartwatches can do, my phone can already do and usually better. This to me just seems like having a pager and a cell phone years ago, is it really necessary? I do see the potential for these devices, I just don't think they are there yet.
We already have this functionality, we just don't like to publicize it.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
They are just too tiny
I would have to carry a magnifier with me
Smart watches have tried and failed for 20 years. Hell, Seiko had a watch in the 80's that was a full blown data terminal. There were other models that you could click into a keyboard for data entry. And there have even been watches that ran BASIC programs. There was a watch-sized Palm PDA and there were a couple of Linux watches around 2000.
They all suffer the same problems. Here's what it will take:
A long battery life. Weeks not hours.
A low price. $20 not $300.
Waterproof to a reasonable depth, say 20 feet.
A good UI. This may actually be impossible given the form factor. (A watch is a passive device for the most part. A smart watch should be mostly passive as well. Everything is visible at a glance. The UI needs to encompass this.)
If I ever get one, first app will probably be some sort of adblock.
I don't want yet another device to carry around. I replaced my digital camera, PDA, mp3 player, etc. with ny smartphone. I don't want to go back to the days of having to carry around multiple tech products. Same goes for why I don't have a tablet. My smartphonw might not do everything as well as the individual specialized products, but it does things well enough ans really makes up for it in convenience. So until a smartwatch can make phone calls and do everything my smartphone can do, the answer is none.
My feelings are summed up by Joseph Volpe's article at Engadget, http://www.engadget.com/2014/0...,
As a category, it needs to replace -- needs to completely replace our need for a cellphone. Otherwise, it's just one more thing to remember to charge throughout our busy days. To date, there's nothing any of these thinly veiled, proof-of-concept, wrist-worn devices can do that the smartphone already in your hand can't.
In my own case, I would be most likely to use one while working ... but work involves dust, steam, liquids, and 70kg kegs. It's not a good environment for something on my wrist.
So I can tell the time, which I currently use my phone for. Oh, I still need a phone?
Gee, I wonder where Apple got the idea of being able to send Vibration messages. http://ask.slashdot.org/commen... :/
I bet they would sue the daylights out of Samsung if THEY tried to implement anything similar.
I guess I'll use that feature
Naturally, the health/fitness tracking is going to be awesome - I mean a fitbit is about $100 so condensing all the other features with similar into a single piece of wearable tech makes the price look a bit more reasonable. I definitely think this is the best way to enter wearable tech since it isn't so obtrusive as glass (and other head wearables).
In all, I think this can really be the way to start to assimilate wearable tech into society without it being rejected as due to being too extreme and different than the existing social norms.
the app that tell the date and time, i want my watch to remain stupid and not connected to the internet
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Since only the 'bosses' where I work haveApple phones, I propose that my idea for anon-linear clock be rolled out for 'smart' watch. Basically, just a watch/clock with the time prescaled so that during lunch hour time runs slower. The working hours compensate for this by running faster.
It needs to be installable by a remote exploit or have somesort of compelling 'sports' theme such that the boss-fuckoffs (who waste about 50% of every meetingbullshitting about 'sportsâ) would immediately need it.
I often need to look up conversions between metric and imperial, it would be useful to have that voice activated and on my wrist.
I don't wear a watch and don't want to. When I try to think of some application that would overcome my aversion to watch-wearing, I can't really think of any at all: everything I'd want to do with it would be equally (or more) convenient by using my phone directly.
That said, here's what a watch would have to be for me to even begin to consider it: small and lightweight, look "normal" (not like a smartwatch), and the ability to effectively interact with me without me having to raise my arm or look at it. It should rely on my phone/tablet/laptop for communications and storage (no direct connection to the internet at all).
or is there a hidden strategy of increasing the phone sizes of new iphones to deliberately make them unwieldy, and create a problem which can be "solved" with a smart-watch? ie, more crap to sell.
Any new posts?
Another use would be an IFTT app, where I would use IFTT to send event notifications to the watch.
Nog sade
Disclaimer: I am a terrorist.
I stopped buying watches when my phone was small enough to carry in a pocket at all times. Motorola StarTac I believe was the clincher.
Most of the things on a watch that someone would want can also be handled on a phone. Add to this that most of those things are things that require cell/data signal, so you are required to carry your phone. The inconvenience of sticking your hand into your pocket to look at a larger screen generally doesn't top the inconvenience of having to have a device strapped to your body that you have to take off to charge all the time and have to pay several hundred dollars for.
This is the same thing people have seen with bluetooth ear pieces. They are really nice for a small percentage of the time, but not enough to capitalize for the majority of the market.
The another problem with watches is size. You have to competing design constraints. People want small and light and durable on their wrist. Versus large screen size for reading what was sent.
Lastly many people don't want to be that connected. They want to be able to ignore the notifications every 5 seconds that someone posted a new tweet or your grandma sent you a hilarious forward. You eventually want to see them, when you can have the time to stick your hand into your pocket. But it can generally wait 2 seconds for that to happen.
Am I the only one who wants LESS electronics attached to my person?
It might be nice to be able to just look at my wrist to check the time, rather than always having to yank out my cell phone.
Personally, my doubts about wanting one were put to rest when I learned of the health-related features. Smartwatches will be able to track your movements and pulse rate, calculate how many calories you burn, and coach you continuously to improve your fitness.
You mean like fitbit, polaris, and other brands have been doing for years now? I guess it's news when Apple does it.
My wife has a polaris band she can combine with an accurate chest strap heart rate monitor, they sync together via bluetooth and her phone to track progress.... all without needing some big clunky, ugly "watch," or the premium cost for Apple products.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
I think smartwatches need a tiny joypad that can be clicked in as an extra button, kind of like old cell phones had. This would greatly expand the potential for video games, since you can't do much on a tiny touchscreen.
I could see dropping 100 bucks, maybe, on something that tracks health telemetry, but honestly? It'd probably have to be a gift before I got it.
One thing I haven't read thus far about the smartwatch situation is that Motorola, Apple, Samsung, etc. are new entrants to an area where Polar, Suunto, Garmin and a few others have already been building this sort of equipment for a long time. These guys have build watches with heart rate and other sensors with varying degrees of ruggedness, specifically for the purpose of surviving sports use. Spending ã100-ã300 for a device that needs daily charging, in a shell that can't go into the sauna, sea and mud just for the sake of having 1000 apps (at ã0.99 each) instead of 10 functions built-in is not that compelling until SPECTACULAR apps turn up.
This article comes at a great time, because heart rate and GPS as apps aren't that convincing IMHO. Maybe a fart-rate app is what the world needs.
I'll be happy when I can use it to detonate those remote mines that I set.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
If it could monitor blood sugar without stabbing you for blood, it'd be a great tool for diabetics (not a category I need it for)
If it can somehow monitor whether I've fallen asleep and beep/vibrate (and stab you for blood?), it'd be great while driving, or other dull work
Black hatting: Read every RFID/NFC object I pass my wrist near.
Design for Use, not Construction!
will it run emacs?
I'd use it to play a cricket's mating call whenever I show somebody my smartwatch and they ask me what I use it for.
an Apple rep looking to build more hype
Apple doesn't do that, they have no need. The tech press does that for them... you seriously think a post on Slashdot moves the needle either way on AppleWatch hype?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
...until we get a law passed that all health-related data collected from any source is granted the same protections as your medical records, and cannot be collected by anyone without your consent and/or knowledge. This data is a treasure trove of "unhealthy user" proof that the health insurance companies would use to jack your rates up. This is the same reason I refuse to use the Snapshot thing from Progressive - they don't use it to lower rates, they use it as proof to increase your rate.
Skydiving may be a niche sport, but it's also at times a sport that relies on many gadgets.
As a skydiver, I could see uses for the following:
A barometric altimeter, possibly GPS-aided. Pure GPS would probably be too slow or unreliable.
GPS or compass - maybe just a simple indicator pointing to the landing zone.
Remote control/remove viewfinder for helmet cameras (GoPro and Contour cameras can be controlled via smartphone apps through BT/WiFi).
Some way to visualize winds aloft, from prognosis or from measurements (the latter may not be straightforward to implement).
Data logger (vertical speed, horizontal speed, GPS positions, etc)
GPS-derived glide slope signals for tracking and wingsuiting, vertical speed signals for speed skydiving, possibly other functions where a vibrating signal tells you some current parameter of the jump.
"Dytter" functions, but with vibration signals rather than audible signals. A dytter is mounted in the helmet and beeps different sequences at different altitudes. I can see buzzing different patterns at different altitudes being helpful. They (the experts in stress management that lecture in many of our courses) say that hearing is one of the first things to go in a stressful situation. Could a vibrating warning increase situational awareness in those cases? I think it's worth finding out.
Some sort of proximity warning below a set altitute could be useful in certain situstions, but then everyone would need to carry an enabled watch or smartphone with them.
Wind+altitude+distance+canopy-derived warnings, telling you when you're about to leave the area you must be in for landing at the drop zone.
Exit separation calculator+counter (or just a stop watch)
GPS-based aircraft exit spot
For Apple and not for the consumer.
Basically the iPhone is like DSLRs these days. Once you have one there's really no reason to upgrade generationally because they're THAT good. So what can Apple do? Well, sell you something for your iPhone.
So, it solves a problem for Apple. What critical-path problem does it solve for consumers? Well, you don't have to fish your phone from your pocket to see who's calling. That's a bit of an issue for those of us who live where we have winter but it's not a really, really do-or-die feature. So, really it's following the delude-yourself-into-thinking-this-will-make-you-lose-weight item like 99 per cent of the sports equipment out there.
Look, you'll either go running or you won't. You'll either play sports or you won't. It's a bit like saying you'd take up drawing if you had the right pencil.
I've not doubt that Apple will sell a lot of them but really it's a solution in search of a problem for consumers.
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
nobody (including Apple) has made a smart-watch that I can see a compelling reason to buy. Primarily for two reasons:
1) You have to charge it every day
2) It needs a smartphone to pair with it in order to be functional.
A conventional watch will either have a battery that lasts for a year or more or an automatic mechanism that can be wound simply by spinning the rotor inside the watch movement. A good automatic watch will run for 24-48 hours without needing any attention. With a smart-watch we are once again looking for a charging station, just like we are for a phone or tablet or laptop. Not very convenient.
Pairing the smart-watch with a phone requires you to enable bluetooth on your phone, which is a significant drain on your phone battery. All so that the watch can give you notifications that you already get on your phone? No thanks.
At this point, the smart-watch is nothing more than a gimmick. A fashion accessory. And that alone might be reason enough for some people to buy it. More power to them. I'm not saying that the smart-watch can't be a viable stand alone gadget. It's just not there yet.
A successful smartwatch app would need to be one that was most usable in the same way you use a wristwatch - glancing at it occasionally, non-complicated UI interaction, etc.
Aside from the obvious fitness apps, there will be infinity variations on telling time - one that uses the number system from "Predator" would be neat - and calendar/agenda apps would be the most useful. If they support NFC, you could share schedules and contacts with a fist-bump and give new meaning to the phrase "synchronize your watches."
GPS navigation might be useful as a wrist-based app too, especially when on foot, bike, or when driving in jurisdictions that prohibit use of cell phones.
The key is they have to be apps that are better suited to a wristwatch form factor than a phone, although I'm sure there will be tons that aren't, just because devs will want to cash in on the latest new thing.
my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
I don't like having things on my wrist and I don't mind taking my phone out of my packet to check the time.
I'm certainly not going to pay $350+ for one that has to be charged at least once a day.
until smart watches battery life are measured in years, I wont buy one.
lose != loose
I'd use a smartwatch as a portable "me" token -- some low power NFC/RFID/IR setup for password/crypto/whatever exchange. Other than that I'd use it to tell time, get push updates from my phone, and finally, because people in the West are so backwards compared to Asia this app doesn't exist yet, I will probably end up coding an app I'll call Handshake: smartwatch-to-smartwatch NFC with accelerometer context. Shake hands with someone and get their business card / contact info. Touch wrists and get a file transfer, automated or otherwise. Raise your hand in the air and get keys to the local wireless mesh network for your smartphone.
Shh, don't steal my idea. ;)
With Apple announcements I'm used to them giving a date the gadget will be in the shops. Not just a year, but a month, and often a day even. And that date is usually in the quite near future.
A launch date of "early 2015" makes me wonder whether it's even ready for production, or that quite some development is still to be done before it can be released. No specific date, and it's like half a year out. That's almost a full generation when it comes to mobile phones!
First see, then believe. When it's released it's time to discuss the feature set of this device, the actual feature set that is. For now, it's vapourware. It seems Apple really lost its mojo since the demise of the late Steve Jobs...
Probably one of the better applications would be to allow both the phone and the watch to emit a loud sound when it goes beyond a certain range. That way if someone tries to walk away with your phone, you will know right away. I would have to pay someone to take my current phone, but I know several people who had their phones disappear in a matter of seconds.
I have to carry my phone. It's required for my job. That phone lets me read and write emails. It lets me surf the web and play games on a screen that's big enough for those tasks. A watch screen is not big enough for any of that. As a watch it's a device that requires regular charging and offers a lot of unnecessary complexity. Smartwatches: Sure they're bad phone replacements but at least they are lousy watches too!
... of course. Now the federales will even know what floor I'm on. Handy!
I believe I will need a armband to get functionality I really want with current technology. Currently a watch face is too small for me to get meaningful information. A 2.5 inch curved display that curves with my wrist/arm and fastened with a clasp or band. Integrated celluar bits to be free from my phone. One day battery life is good enough (match my current phone). This would let me replace my phone for almost all tasks. I could not only communicate (very possible with voice and current smart watches), but consume as well. The current crop of smart watches and Apple's "Watch" are not good for consuming anything complex like a longer email, webpage, book, YouTube, etc. Payment processing is interesting, but for something I do only a couple of times a day not a core feature I want. Same goes for things like boarding passes and hotel keys; I don't do those things enough for it to matter. I also don't go shopping enough to care about iBeacons and extra information popping on my watch. At this point I know for the most part what I want after having used: Casio calculator watch, Palm Pilot, Palm VII, an original iPAQ, BlackBerries from 2005 to 2009, Palm Treo, and since then Android devices. I'll probably pickup a smart watch of some kind in the next year once they get closer to what I want them to do. In a couple of years bezels, battery life, etc should have enough changes that they will do exactly what I want, but if not it will be an armband.
Who the fuck wears watches these days? Old geezers and fashion sluts?
I got out of the whole ring and watch thing many decades ago when my finger was almost ripped off when my ring got stuck. No artificial bands around any of my body parts, thanks.
I had a Sony Smartwatch for a while before it broke. Here are the apps I would like to see/write, besides the obvious notification apps:
Nextbus predictions
Remote control for mythtv
Monthly calender
Google maps with walking route
Weather
Display brief text, like shopping lists
Looks like a lot of these where covered in the Apple Watch presentation.
There lots of things people use their smartphones for that only require a quick glance. They are the kinds of things a smartwatch is suited for.
- scan for wifi .. though can't find any legal use yet .. maybe 'tell time' automatically for the correct timezone you are in?
- hack wifi
- collect data in wifis (passwords, etc.)
- scan for bluetooth
- hack bluetooth
- collect data via bluetooth
- scan for wireless creditcard
- autodebit foreign wireless creditcards to bitcoin
Anyone really thought of something else before this?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Rider_(1982_TV_series)
Holy moley, you could get an instafication when a compatible/willing partner is nearby. That would be hilariously awesome!
No, not Rule34, you insensitive clod ^W^W perv.
But for those who wanted their smartwatch to vibrate on incoming messages, why not an app to send you the message, translated into Morse code, via vibration pulses?
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
Currently, I have:
a Pebble -- I use it to see notifications about incoming e-mail, texts, phone calls, etc. That's sufficient, and in my opinion, worth the price.
a Garmin GPS watch -- I use it when running, to track my distance and pace, and sometimes also my heartrate and cadence (requires using extra sensors). I don't want the bulk of carrying a phone when I run.
If a single watch can combine those, I'll use it. If not, I'll wear my pebble most of the day, and my garmin for workouts.
If it contains electronic copies of my various cards, I would buy one in the bat of an eye. Replace my monthly transit pass, office entry card, credit card (already happen with the Apple Watch), various loyalty cards, etc. Also: add a bar code scanner to it so I can check out the price of anything at Walmart / Home Depot, etc
This is the phone that attracts naked women who crawl all over you and kiss you, right? That is the *only* feature I need in an ApplePhoney. My Android does everything else I need just fine, thank you.
My wife has a polaris band she can combine with an accurate chest strap heart rate monitor, they sync together via bluetooth and her phone to track progress.... all without needing some big clunky, ugly "watch," or the premium cost for Apple products.
I'd trade a little accuracy for the ability to monitor my heart rate without a strap. I've tried a variety of brands, and have yet to find one that doesn't chafe after 1+ hours of running.
Every time I hear about a new type of some tech "war" between one implementation or another, my mind goes to the dumb set of arguments of pro/cons Flash on mobile devices
About the same is going to happen now.
Which would include a function to "Send next part of rant to Apple Watch." This would serve as an unobtrusive teleprompter for being annoying at HOA meetings.
The smart watch would have to fit in with my smart shirt, smart pants, smart shoes, smart hat, smart glasses, smart necklace, smart gloves, smart earrings, smart nose rings, smart belly ring, and smart bracelet on my other wrist, as well as with my numerous, redundant, mobile devices.
It should serve to store all my hundreds of secure passwords and not be hackable. Its hackability is its greatest concern.
What any piece of jewelry has that no tech does is "last forever". Jewelry can justify a premium price (for those willing to shell out anything in the first place) because it does not go "obsolete". A premium pitched (i.e. apple) smart-watch will NEED the capability of swapping internal components (for a fee) to remain sellable. There is no "app" that could circumvent this issue, and really no app missing from the smart watch portfolio in the near future. If you want it, someone will make an app for it eventually... But not necessarily for your version of the hardware. Unless Apple promised to only release a newer version of this watch every 10 years, then that illusion of longevity disappears, and makes smart watches (in general) less desireable.
Just drop acid, already, and invent something better... or quit your whining.
When it drops to $199. An accessory for your phone shouldn't cost more than the phone. And yes I know there are kids running around with exhaust and rims worth more than the Civic they're bolted to.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Point taken... but I guess most people don't do cardio for that long a period of time, and the bands out now are TERRIBLE accuracy, not just "a little" off.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
When I got my smart phone years ago, I stopped wearing a watch and was pleased with that... There are clocks everywhere and when there isn't one, I just glance at my phone... I'm glad I don't have some barnacle on my wrist all day long.. Now I'm supposed to be convinced that I need one of these barnacles more than ever?
pshaw.
We don't need watches we need flexible screen bracelets that unflexes and detaches to have a full Flat screen phone when needed!!!!! Someone patent this and pay me for it! This could replace phones. Apple shouldhave reinvented the phone again. Well, now its just blackberrying us
The "smartwatch wars have begun" because Apple joined the fray? There was no war before then?
I will be rationalizing my Apple Watch purchase for any number of reasons. My guess is that the biggest use case for the watches of 2018 are some cool notification and some cool haptic use. But for now, being able to see some notifications - still easier to glance at wrist to see if it is noise or a message worth opening up. And TBH, I quit wearing my Rolex years ago and at times it would be nice to glance at a wrist and see the time. But shopping is the emotional appeal; no cash for legal purchases.
that I used to play all the time in school http://27.media.tumblr.com/tum...
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I would like to see a smart watch paired with other items for access control, specifically, a smart gun. The gun should not be able to shoot without the iBullet app verifying the user's identity and unlocking the gun's firing mechanism. The logistics around it would be a nightmare I'm sure, but I think the watch would be a good starting point for 2 factor(ish) authentication. Factor #1 something you have (the watch). Factor #2, something you are (biometrics)
In olden days it was referred to as FUD - Fear Uncertainty Doubt. Apple's announcement dramatically lowered Moto and especially pebble's Christmas sales. You can't do that with Watch 5.0 or Phone 5.0 but you can with 1.0
So I can tell what time it is.
I for one, am very uncomfortable with all this technology being suddenly rammed down our throats. I need to be eased into it, so I propose: the Apple Pocketwatch. For the 19th century styled gentleman. When you want to find out what time it is or read your messages, you pull out the Apple Pocketwatch, so you don't have to pull out the iPhone.
I suppose you could say I have one - actually I have three.
I started with a Garmin FR 405, got a FR60, and recently upgraded to an Garmin FR 220.
I am an avid runner, and they all track my workouts. The 405 and 220 are GPS watches. I have heart rate monitors (chest-strap, which I trust a thousand times more than a wrist-based solution at this point). The 405 was fairly large on my wrist, but the FR60 and 220 are actually reasonably sized.
They revolutionized my training when I started wearing them five years ago. I can get instantaneous feedback while I run, and I can track mileage and pace information over an entire season. I run faster now because of the Garmins, and my workouts are more intelligent.
Granted I only wear them while working out. I like not having to strap a phone to my body to get additional data, and I like that they are dedicated devices for the task. The FR60 goes months or years between battery changes, and the 220 can do a long weekend's worth of runs on a single charge. As just a watch the 220 can last weeks between charges.
The rest of them time I am content pulling my phone out of my pocket to check the time, see alerts, and so on. The Pebble is interesting (mainly because I see it as letting me know how important that last vibrate from my phone was), but I simply cannot justify it yet.
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
It's a bit ironic that nearly all smartphones are growing, including Apple's, but everyone is jumping on this smartwatch bandwagon which features a display too small to be truly useful.
With smartwatches why even bother with a mobile phone at all? Allow it to work with a desktop, laptop or tablet for more complex functionality. When untethered give it dumbphone functionality so that the watch can at least make calls and send texts, even if they have to be dictated. I think that's well within the realm of what's feasible with current technology and then you're giving the watch some level of true value.
The fitness tracking functionality is nice, but as data shows, adherence is abysmal for Fitbits and the rest. That functionality isn't going to make non-active individuals suddenly active, and fitness freaks don't necessarily need the info. If anything, these devices typically just create more work.
A clock app would be cool
... iwatch has an iphone app. Seriously, I would like a watch to replace all the mess I carry with me. Anything short of that means I have to carry additional piece of equipment for nothing.
The bit about the Apple Watch GPS being able to tap you differently for left or right is genius. I ride a motorcycle. I have enough to look out for without being glued to a GPS. Left/right haptic feedback to indicate direction on a watch will be awesome.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Sorry to all the Dick Tracy fans and everything.
But I have my phone. I don't need an additional device. Especially not something that lives in wristwatch land.
In my line of work I can't wear wristwatches or jewelry on my wrists. I'd have to constantly be taking it off to the point where I may as well not even bother wearing it in the first place.
Not to mention I have an uncanny history of killing digital/battery operated wristwatches just by wearing them. Not that I damage them like bouncing them off walls, furniture or anything like that. Just, usually in about 30-60 days of wearing one, I used to have digital wristwatches (even expensive ones) just up and die on me. Even battery replacement didn't help after the first time or two.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Perhaps an app that puts the current time on the face of the watch?
Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
- Waterproof to 30m
- Seven day battery life
- Ability to do basic functions when away from a phone (date/time, calendar, GPS tracking, pulse monitor), with an auto sync function as soon as you are back in range
- $100 price point
"Could be worse...could be raining." Igor
I started trying to think of situations where a person can have a wrist-worn PC but cannot have a handheld PC with them -- situations where people are constrained for some reason.
The obvious thing most people come up with, is where it's a natural or convenient constraint. You don't want to be holding something extra while you're swimming or swinging an axe or climbling a cliff. I think the related applications are already well-discussed.
What about when it's an artificial constraint? I initially drew a blank on how such a constraint would emerge, until I considered situations where the served parties by the two PCs are different, so that the handheld (if one is present) might serve the user (or manufacturer) but the wrist-worn serves someone else.
Once you start thinking of situations where the user is in an adversarial (or seemingly or potentially adversarial) relationship with the owner then it gets easier to see the applications.
Prisoners, parolees, etc. It's not so much that you let them wear the Pebble or iWatch, as you make them wear it. And your prisoner doesn't need to be surfing the web or otherwise doing things where the PC needs to communicate things to the user, so many of the disadvantages relative to handhelds, become totally irrelevant. The application, of course, is monitoring: being an open spy for the government.
Somewhat similarly: children. Mom wants to know where you are, but isn't really interested in giving you Yet Another porn terminal. Quit fapping and get back to your homework at the libra-- your friend's house?!? Get back to the library!
Marketing. Get 'em cheap enough, and these could replace your "frequent shopper" cards as your cookie. Wear our wrist PC as you walk around our store and check out, for a 2% discount. The application is spying, again. And I guess as long as it has a speaker, it can play location-triggered ads. "Whoa, you just walked right by our delicious canned spoo and instant flarn. Are you sure you don't want some?" The idea here is that you could perform the application with a handheld, but the existing handheld PC would be too pro-user so it might not really play the ads out loud and it might report false travel data. So you want the pro-store computer to be a physically different one. Then it becomes a wrist-worn simply because that's smaller and cheaper ($10 instead of $100).
Sweatshops. The Slurm factory employees are spending too much time on bathroom breaks, and texting their friends. Well, the employee wearable PC doesn't do texts, and it delivers a shock after 90 seconds in the bathroom. If a supervisor ever sees you without your wearable, you're fired.
Jealous spouses. Hubby's "Love Watch" chemical sensors are picking up interesting volatiles: perfume? My, he sure is breathing hard and the GPS has him in a residential neighborhood, not at the mid-town office. Oh, those are just fringe use cases: everyone knows the real purpose of the Love Watch is that it instantly relays every time you speak "I love you" into it. (OMG, that last part is so sickening that I bet a variant of this product already exists today.)
Think in terms of why you might want to "plant" (though not necessarily with subterfuge) your computer on someone else, to be your agent rather than the wearer's. Those may be the best applications for wrist-worn PCs.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
I predict a great increase in users' blood pressure due to constantly checking their heart rate.
I'll be using the same ones I've been using for the last 2 years when these "smart watches" and "wearables" were being pushed by other companies.
(Hint: None. I hope this manufactured market segment dies faster than the nettop and the digital photo frame.)
When I wear a watch of any sort, it aggravates the nerves in my wrist. As such, the entire smart-watch wars are something I simply have to "watch" by the wayside. I suspect more people have the same issue, but haven't put 2+2 together on what is triggering it.
I want a smart watch a smart pen and smart glasses and a smartphone and a smart earpiece and a smart pager and a smart mini fax machine that are all networked together. Arranged around my body like Classic Batman. In bright yellow so people can see from a distance how smart and trendy I am.
No, really, what I most want in a smart watch is to be able to leave my phone at home. I grew tired of carrying multiple devices long ago. Sadly, smart watches tend to be merely extensions to the phone you're already carrying. Ok for hipsters but no thanks.
Having the watch sync with the phone when in range would be fine. But having the watch only function as an extension of the phone? Fail.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
As in subject.
It's the UI, stupid.
First of all, the iOS UI is all garish colors and skinny outlines and an ugly font which are all unpleasant to look at.
Too many animations used are also distracting and serve little purpose.
I don't want to use a UI that is visually disturbing. Simple as that.
Since I can tell time on my phone, I want to make calls on my wristwatch.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
This sounds a lot like the argument for why no one needed a smart phone. Yet here we are.
Go for the classics.
... I was also skeptical until I saw the Apple watch's health monitoring features. In My case, that's enough to justify the price, especially given the ability to sync with the iPhone. Add the mobile payments feature and the value increases even more. I was at a major theme park recently where We had payment wrist bands tied to Our credit cards. It was sooooooo nice. I was not expecting the convenience to be as much as I expected but, WOW, I was so wrong!
There seems to be a design disconnect. We're making bigger phones but now a smaller interface for the watch... why does this make sense?
How about we need to scrap the phone concept. We need the combination of glass / watch / bluetooth ear buds / mic. Wearable technology that replaces all the crap we currently do with a phone. And once that's matured we just implant it under the skin.
The watch style devices should have solar charging and kinetic charging to hopefully avoid the wall brick charging completely.
It makes sense though that the nutjobs feel emboldened. As Snowden revealed, the government really is watching. And is Obama going to do anything about it? Hahahahaha. no. His perfectionist personality is currently disengaged from anything resembling a mess.
The real path to male liberation
Dang, missed again!
Sigh, I miss paperback books ...
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I am one of those anachronistic people who still wears a watch. A good Swiss watch starts at about the same price as a high-end smart watch. It's rugged, it keeps time for years or even decades without needing a battery (depending on whether it is quartz or automatic). You can dive much deeper with a good watch than you can hold your breath. The watch face is made of hard crystal and the case of thick metal to protect it from damage. People are still handing down to their great grandchildren their Rolex's and Omegas they got back during WWII. It also puts the most relevant information, which is they time, at your fingertips.
Smart watches are all incredibly flawed in some way. Apple's watch face looks rugged but the case is flimsy and the bezel is a huge point of failure and easily smashed by anyone who is active. Apple uses a backlit LCD, so the charge will not last very long. It certainly is not something meant for active people. You won't be able to take it with you into the field. Other watches use e-ink, so they have less of a problem with the battery, but they usually are not rugged devices.
And, to top things off, the only thing you really need to keep constant track of is the time. It's not that hard to stop and glance at your smartphone if you really need to check messages. The watch really adds very little.
Compare that to Google glasses. They actually have novel uses, such as working as a poor-man's heads up display so you can see navigation information while you drive, fly, bike, or walk. I see people staring at their cell phones all the time as they walk and drive, so at least the google glasses fits into that paradigm and makes the activity safer. I can see a future for Google glasses, because there are so many potential killer apps. The only killer app for watches is telling time, and many watches already do it better.
Make is a social network enabled app to enable sharing of results and aggregation of important statistics.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
No change could make me want to buy a smart watch.
I don't even have a smartphone nor am i able to stand in a room where people brought those.
This is all retarded and voluntary slavery.
Everyone will come to realize this, slowly, too late, the retards will perish, those who could forecast the shitstorm will prevail and evolve.
...and it should come bundled with a trenchcoat and fedora.
I'm just old enough to remember when we wore actual watches, but not quite old enough to get why Douglas Adams was obsessed with digital watches.
But what I remember is that there was always someone else who asked "What time is it?" and you showed them your watch. And, of course, people who said "nice watch, can I see it?"
So: What I'd want is an app that makes me money every time someone else makes use of my device. Either via a direct micro payment, or: the app could put the time display over an ad, so I could get an ad impression based on the time they spend staring at my clock.
Maybe it could be developed alongside a cell phone app that lets people with phones request someone with smart watch to come give them the time? Of course, established cell phone app developers would complain it was infringing on their market... But, ... progress...
Ooh - and maybe an tBackup app: if your watch isn't working properly (i.e. it doesn't know what time it is), it will direct you towards the nearest person with a working watch!
Lastly, I'd want an "icebreaker" app. You've gone to a party, and according to your watch you arrived on time. However, half an hour in, nobody is talking to you or coming over to look at your watch. So you tap the icebreaker app, which figures out who is nearby to you, finds a subject that would be of interest to everyone around you, and presents you with an ad you can use to break the ice, and get paid page impressions based on the number of people in the room!
-- A change is as good as a reboot.
From: Apple Monitoring Service
To: Apple Customer
Subject: Alert
We have detected unusual accelerometer activity in your iWatch. We believe you are left-handed and were visiting some porn sites.
Sincerely,
Evil Apple Overlords.
I received my GG2 as a gift, and otherwise would not have spent more than say, $100 on such a device.
It worked well for about 4 months, then my IP67 certified device got wet, and water got inside. After taking it apart and drying it out, the only thing that doesn't work now, is the touch-screen. So yeah: IP67 is bullshit. The degree of immersion was; momentary immersion under maybe 6" of water.
As for the other uses:
Battery life was good, about 3 days.
Charging was awkward, with a little clip-on connector that goes to USB. (Qi charging seems like a no-brainer for a device like this!)
Integration with my Samsung Galaxy S5 was JUST OKAY.
I liked having the time on my wrist (duh).
It was convenient to get my notifications, but I STILL had to dig my phone out of my pocket to send a reply text.
The bluetooth/phone conversation feature, I thought was kind of neat. I never could get used to conversing on a bluetooth earpiece, but being able to have the watch in front of me with a visual indicator that I was in an active phone conversation, really helped. It was kind of geeky, kind of neat, and worked pretty well in most situations, unless it was a private conversation you didn't want on-speaker, or there was too much ambient noise.
Samsung's TIZEN OS is very limiting, with regard to apps.
Contrary to the documentation, I was able to use Google Hangouts as my default messenger app on the phone, and still get notifications. (documentation really wanted me to use the Samsung messenger app - which sucks ass, by the way).
Of all the watch-face selections available, there was one that had the time AND weather on it - which I found very handy, but it was MADDENING that there was not a watch face that could devote a couple dozen square mm to "notifications".
The audio notification, and vibration, were weak enough that they were OFTEN missed in outdoors/noisy situations - (like driving with the windows down, or at outdoor events, etc). This is why you need to at least have some kind of on-screen notification indicator.
The thing has a camera, and video camera. Just plain unnecessary. Why no LED for handy flashlight? The camera was difficult to use due to it's positioning, and not really good enough to take worthwhile shots. Also, it had a very loud "shutter-click" sound, that could not be disabled. I found it annoying. But I guess that someone trying to take "creeper-shots" would probably not be able to get away with it because of that sound.
In my opinion it was stylish enough. Not oversized. So I wasn't embarrassed wearing it at all. (these companies designing "round" smartwatches, are just barking up the wrong tree, I think).
Fitness: Has all the nice GPS/Pedometer/heartrate sensors. They integrate okay with Samsung's SHealth. Not great, and not without problems. Unfortunately, heartrate data does not show up on the graph. You can get max rate, and avg rate; and there's even a line for it on the graph. But the data field is "--". Boggles my mind why Samsung won't integrate this on their own fucking device.
The use-case for this seems like a great idea, but not well-executed. I really look forward to the time where these wearable sensors can not only get your heart rate, but also detect arrythmias, and blood-oxygen levels. (theoretically - this sensor can do that. But Samsung's firmware isn't smart enough yet).
I thought it was also pretty stupid that the watch couldn't track a walk or hike unless the phone was in bluetooth range. So I had to carry the phone with me anyway. The ONLY advantage the watch gave, was continuous heartrate monitoring; and as I said: the continuous data gets discarded and you only get the avg and max. STUPID STUPID STUPID.
Sometimes, on runs or hikes, the watch would just freeze, and I'd lose all the data from that hike.
If I went in and "started" a run or hike on the watch, I would go into the phone and "start" that too. So I would have a backup of the data if the watch froze. SHealth would t
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
I'll already be very happy with a device that at a glance, tells me what time it is and when my next appointment is. I would strongly consider buying one just for this alone. In meetings, it comes over far ruder to grab your phone and start tapping away than to quietly glance at a watch.
The fitness tracking features will replace the device I currently use. Big win.
If I can control my podcast and audio book playback without getting my phone out of my pocket, then it will be a win when walking or biking.
I do enough travel that wrist-based navigation while walking through an unfamiliar city is attractive.
And basic home automation like adjusting my wemo lights or thermostat are a big win if it means I don't actually have to have my phone with me while shlepping around in the house.
A lot of people seem excited by notifications. I will likely turn most notifications off. I'm bombarded by enough distractions through the day already.
How about a windup app? So I can wind my watch instead of having to buy /recharge yet another battrie......no I am not buying an iwatch.
Jack of all trades,master of none
People are looking at this backwards. It is not a piece of tech to wear on your wrist. It is a watch that has tech features. If you do not currently own a watch, then you do not want one. Who own's watches? Guys who wear expensive suits and guys who are dressing up to impress women. They are quite willing to spend several hundred for a nice piece of bling. My wife has been asking me to get a watch for when I dress up, and I'm seriously considering getting one of these.
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
If the watch is broken, it will automatically get directions to the nearest watch repair shop.
Then it will display a large, friendly, compass arrow to point you on your way.
If the problem is a display failure, it'll speak out loud: "Hotter" or "Colder" until you reach your destination.
If the speakers are broken, it'll just run the phone hot or cold against your arm.
If the strap is broken, you're SOL.
-- A change is as good as a reboot.
I see a lot of "I can already do the same things on my phone" posts, but that doesn't close the book on smartwatches for me.
A phone can do everything a tablet can do. A laptop can do everything that a phone or tablet can do. A desktop can do everything a laptop can do. Go back to the start of microcomputers and there is the "the office mainframe can do everything a PC can do" argument.
All of the above platforms succeeded because they helped people do mostly the same things (or a subset of overlapping things) but added some advantage in portability, cost, ease of use, etc.
Google's official vision for Android Wear is interesting because it clearly explains where Google thinks the advantage for watches will be: timely notification of important information *without* interrupting what you are doing. If you're not understanding why you'd want to own a smartwatch, it is worth reading:
https://developer.android.com/...
I wouldn't say the current crop of hardware and software delivers this vision all that well, but if this is the goal then I will remain interested. Apple's strategy seem less focused and more of just "hey, it's yet another thing like an ipod or an iphone or an ipad, but tiny". Maybe that isn't accurate, I haven't spent as much time reading about their platform yet, just a first impression.
-Lod
This is I think the thing that so many people miss about the Apple Watch announcement. The problem with existing smart watches hasn't been that the features aren't useful, it's that the promised features simply don't work. I owned two different smart watches and had the same experience:
- Extremely limited app selection
- Very, very slow and oversimple apps that did exist
- With input that was just plain cumbersome and unreliable
- And bluetooth connectivity that had to be constantly restarted/reconnected (like, every time you tried to use it, bluetooth was down)
As I've said in previous posts, I'm one of those that does still wear a watch every single day, so I could be an obvious target for a smart watch, at least moreso than people that don't wear a watch at all and haven't done so in years, if ever.
But for a smart watch to make sense, it can't be a worse experience than pulling out the phone. Watches will always lose on the screen size front, so it's got to be compelling in other areas. The phone experience does have some problems (you have to pull it out, it's risky to pull out and manipulate in some contexts—walking in the city, for example, where a drop can kill it and jostles from pedestrians can come easily, it's bulky and conspicuous, you have to put it back, and so on), so it's not inconceivable that a smart watch could make sense.
But smart watches thus far have been lessons in user friction—you had to really, really, really want to do a given task *on your smart watch*. One that I tried for a few days (the Sony watch) only recognized about 10% of the taps that you made (Want to tap that button once? Then tap manically on the screen over the button 15 times in rapid succession and hope one of them takes.) and was so slow and oversimple (presumably due to lower processing power) that even aside from UI horribleness, it just plain didn't do anything very well in practical terms.
If the Apple Watch has:
- Processing power analagous to that of smartphones
- A high-resolution display
- Input surfaces and controls that are as reliable as those of smartphones
- Battery life long enough to get through a day with certainty
- Reasonable ruggedness
- Stable bluetooth connectivity without hassles
Then it could well be a winner, not because it claims to do anything new, but because it actually managed to do what smart watches claim to do. So far, my experience with smart watches was that they claim a lot, then do absolutely none of it in practice. It's not that the feature list sucks, it's that the features themselves haven't actually been implemented in such a way that you can use them without sitting down for ten minutes to have a "smart watch session" and eke out a tap or two.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Was Apple claiming to be the first to have a watch that watches heart rate? Does your wife's Polaris take voice commands, remind her of appointments, or have tactile GPS feedback depending on if she needs to turn left or right?
Simple answers for simple questions....
Here are some of my notes about small screen applications (glass/smartwatch) that I brainstormed a year and a half ago... Apple/Google/Samsung - please make this product.
Applications:
Time, Weather, Music, Games, Fitness, Universal Remote for Internet of things (car, thermostat, door locks, tv, game controller, camera, etc), Text Messaging, Payments/Digital Wallet, Flashlight, Voice Messaging/Notes, Voice Search, To Do List, Video Player, Hands Free Call, Facetime/Hangouts, Calculator, Calendar/Schedule, Translate, Alerts/Notifications integration, Dashboard/Tracker, Two factor Authentication, Data storage/exchange
Must Have features:
Microphone, BlueTooth, Accelerometer, Compass, Vibrate, iPhone compatibility, Android compatibility, iPhone notifications, Android notifications
Important features:
Camera, NFC, GPS, Touch Screen, Bright LED, I/R Led, Heart Rate,Water Resistance
Nice to have features:
Integrated Phone, Ambient temperature, Body Temperature, Blood Pressure, Video diplay driver/irda, Swappable Band, Swappable Case, Wireless Charging
Key functionality:
Shake gestures, Voice Recognition, Touch screen gestures, Swipe keyboard, Activity context, Use a desktop web app or tablet app to set up, Themes, Reflective display and Backlit Display
The Must Have Features are things that the device would need to support most of the applications' functionality.
The Important Features and Nice To Have features are things that I think would make the device a home run with broad acceptance
Key Functionality are things that many apps on the small screen device would share that would be an important part of the user experience.
Greed is the root of all evil.
Sends an alert when you're in too deep. Version 1 doesn't do anything due to a developer's misunderstanding of the requirements.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
These were all the rage back in the 1970's. A simple three touch-screen button interface and you're done. https://img1.etsystatic.com/01...
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
Yeah, that's what I will use - probably one of that geeky hour clock !!
Since they both (Apple and the other fitness bands) require the phone to work, the answer is really yes, for all intents and purposes (since she's got the phone anyway). My problem isn't that Apple is doing it - I'm sure they'll do a great job, but that the summary author claims that's the part that caught his attention, when it's all been available elsewhere - for android OR apple users - for quite some time.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
I aamm aldfresgy using the neww sppel Eatch, Iuse it mainly for massaging my friends
Full disclosure: I've been using Apple computers since 1986, so yeah, I'm an Apple fan.
When I first heard Apple was coming out with a phone, I was very skeptical. I mean, it's just a phone, right? I couldn't think of any reason why I'd want one. Then I saw the first iPhone commercials, and knew immediately that I needed an iPhone.
Now, I cannot think of a single reason why I'd want an Apple Watch. I wonder if I'll be swayed, once I see what it can do? Somehow, I think not. But, I've been wrong before. So, to answer the OP's question, I cannot think of a single thing.
-- sudon't
Air-ride Equipped
They already have one.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Me: Hey, what am I supposed to do now?
Apple Watch: Stand UP.
Me: Ok, thanks smart watch!
Me: Should I keep running into that dead end road?
Apple Watch: No, you should definitely turn right, now.
Me: Thanks, smart watch!
Me: How many calories did I shovel into my fat face today?
Apple Watch: You are a fat slob that ate 4,689 calories before lunch time!
Me: Thanks, smart watch, I love having you as my new friend!
I only use Bluetooth handsets/headsets with my phone, because I'm either driving, at home, at work when I answer the phone. I've got Bluetooth cordless phones at home and work, and Bluetooth in the car. I've got a computer and tablet at home, a computer at work, and don't do "computing" type things when driving. I really don't want to carry a cell phone. I want the watch to just do the cell phone functionality, and when I rarely want mobile data, then get data to the tablet through the watch. In fact, voice recognition and text to speech can answer almost all of my mobile data needs (without using much processing power on the watch) without a display at all. I really don't want a cell phone, much less a mega-phone. A watch would be a perfect phone for my (not that rare) use case.
What smartwatch apps could I see myself using? No.
Which is actually the closest answer I can give to this question -- I can't see myself owning a smartwatch.
That's called a ruler.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I have no use for a 16 passenger van. I don't complain at GM or Ford for making 16 passenger vans, I just don't buy one.
Wake me up when a smartphone has all the capabilities of a 32 core server with 256 gigabytes of RAM and a trio of 4k displays.
/rolls eyes
Only between same platforms are they contenders.
If you are an android user, you won't be getting an Apple Watch as you won't be able to do anything with it. Likewise the other way.
I already carry a tablet around. So if I need to have a watch AND a phone, then it is useless to me. I want it to replace my smartphone to keep only a watch and a tablet.
I want to be able to make a phone call with it. Not dick tracy style, but I could slide the watch to my hand and use it as a phone.
I want email/text message notification. (I don't care about composing if speech to text works fine.)
Appointment and todo list and reminders. (Once again modification using speech to text)
Time travel estimate to my next appointment (or home, work google now style)
Giving direction like a GPS.
Weather forecast.
ideally, battery life of more than 2 days. and something much smaller than what all smartwatch are. I don't want a half phone on my wrist. With modern screen resolution a quarter credit card is probably big enough.
Look again, the iPhone 6 (not plus) 4.7" model is quite a bit larger than the iPhone 5. It's just a bit wider, but quite a bit taller.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It doesn't cost more than the phone. It's perceived to cost more than the phone because they've hidden the cost of the phone from you. The base model iPhone 6 (16GB) costs $650.
But y'see, the reason I stopped wearing a watch is that I have to carry a phone (on-call) and the phone tells me the time. Why should I wear a watch again? Especially as whatever it does will necessarily be a subset of what the phone already does?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Hey KITT! Come get me! Turbo Boost!
Knowing my luck, KARR would show up instead.
Oh and I guess calling Dick Tracy could be fun too. :-P
Have gnu, will travel.
This is a necessary step in the evolution of this device and form factor, just as the original iPhone, even with its many limitations and flaws served as the basis for essentially the entire smartphone ecosystem that we take for granted a mere seven years later.
This is not a device for everyone. It has many flaws. It has an overly large form factor (relatively speaking compared to where it will go).
But for some (many) this will fill specific needs. Whether motorcyclists or bicyclists to have navigation on their wrist, someone looking for a fashion accessory that can connect with their phone, those wanting the health-specific features, this device will have a solid niche fulfilling those criteria.
The next Apple Watch will be thinner, have better battery life, etc., eventually, much of the functionality still relegated to the iPhone will make its way onto the watch.
But the next watch wouldn't happen if there wasn't a market for the early adopters and developers who will make use of what we have *today*.
By that line of reasoning, there's not much point in having a smartphone as you can get text messages on your vintage Nokia and check your email/facebook when you get home. If the smartwatch was a truly independent device, then we'd have all these complaints plus the extra cost and extra size for batteries and 4G support.
Off the top of my head, a smartwatch, over the Polaris would:
Let your wife check messages/notifications in the rain while leaving her phone safely in her purse or pocket.
Discretely check messages/notifications in a meeting without the rudeness of digging out her phone.
Receive silent signals to turn left or right on a jog or bike ride from tactile feedback.
My smartwatch does everything my smartphone does, plus I saved $199 - $299. Here's my swanky new smartwatch: https://matburyau.files.wordpr...
None, the whole concept is retarded and dumb
Some of the women I know complain that the clothes they buy don't have pockets, and so they are forced to carry some sort of bag wherever they go, if only to hold the phone.
I could imagine that a watch which had basic cell phone functionality would be great for such women. It would have to be a stylish and pretty-looking phone (apparently the problem with pockets in women's clothes is that they obscure the female figure - completely unacceptable!). I have no idea how to combine a large-ish LCD screen with the kind of style that is currently accepted for women's watches. But just like I am good at innovating technological solutions, somewhere out there is a designer who is good at innovating fashion solutions. Put two such people together, and you might end up with a device that would appeal to a very large market segment.
" 4) navigation when riding a bike / motorcycle. "
I'm assuming you don't wear gear on your motorcycle. I can't comfortably wear a watch under the sleeve+gauntlet of my suit+gloves. This is terrible for that situation - on the other hand, the RAM X-Grip I have mounted off my brake reservoir holds my phone just fine, and bluetooth to my helmet works great for receiving TBT navigation... and I can charge the phone while riding this way.
Quite a bit? Is a centimeter's difference going to amount to:
I don't really have an opinion about the original theory, but the difference is about 3/4 inch taller (for the SMALLER new iPhone from the iPhone 5). I'm just saying it's not accurate to say they are the same size when they are not that close.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Watch ...and that's it. Time and location. If it had the ability to hit a satellite, I would want an emergency button that I can push that sends my coordinates to an emergency center (that will send help). But its just a cell phone that this can connect to, and the range of a cell phone is at best about 10 miles. If you are away from the cell tower (like in the woods or on the ocean) then all the rest is useless. Of course it would be nice if you could tell the GPS "I'm here, and I want to be 22 miles from here at a direction of 212.555398" (bearing), and have it 'catch' the destination, then tell you how many steps north or east or west or south, how far to go, etc.
2. GPS.
The best use I can come up with [for me] is to have easy access to view text messages my wife sends me while I'm out on long cycling rides. It's annoying to have to stop frequently to check my phone, and it would be awesome to have this either on my wrist (or a bike mount) that would let me peek at texts while I'm riding. Pretty dubious reason for $350 though.
Well, Apple make me Uncertain about the actual existence of the product, Doubtful on when it's really going to be released (now they'll have to; they can't delay much or they'll really use their reputation), and anyway I Fear it has not much use anyway - not just because my phone happens to be not an iPhone.
So that'd be UDF. Not FUD. But that's just a minor detail.
"They want to be able to ignore the notifications every 5 seconds that someone posted a new tweet or your grandma sent you a hilarious forward. "
IMO it's better to cut down on the notifications in the first place. I only get audio notifications on my phone for a few classes of messages, and the rest are silent. I can imagine using a later generation of smartwatch to filter those even further so that the ones that are most important - let's say a text from someone I'm trying to meet at a crowded event, or an appointment reminder -- notify me in a way that's harder to miss than a beep in a noisy room or a buzz while I'm walking.
So, you mean... nobody all will be buying them?
Point made and doubled.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
By that line of reasoning, there's not much point in having a smartphone as you can get text messages on your vintage Nokia and check your email/facebook when you get home.
Uh... no... by my line of reasoning you already have to have your wristband and phone with you anyway, so it's not comparable at all.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Calling K.I.T. to come and save me ! :)
I can control the Philips Hue lights and Belkin Wemo switches in the house. The core of this is the Android app Tasker. I also use it for sleep tracking with the app Sleep As Android. I use it to control my music while I'm driving with Music Boss and I have the barcodes for three loyalty cards I frequently use (FlyBuys, Woolworths & Hoyts) in Wear Your Barcode.
How about an app to find my lost phone. Oh, wait...
Take a look at the Suunto Ambit 3. IMHO, this is the first usable application of a smart watch. Especially if you're active.
I'm currently got the previous version (Ambit 2) I use it while swimming (pool and open water), running, walking, etc, but also while I'm flying with some custom apps to track speed, pressure, etc. With the Ambit 3, there is some level of integration now with a phone (ios/android) for notifications, and syncing. And it talks to all those Bluetooth LE pods out there.
http://www.suunto.com/en-AU/sports-watch-collections/Suunto-Ambit3/
Though even in the smartphone area they are waning in popularity which was inevitable
Well, except for the fact the are waxing instead...
I wonder if releasing lager phones which have been popular, will increase or decrease iPhone sales? HMMMMMMM.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Fox News is often destructive and wrong. But nearly always coherent. Hrm... That gives me an app idea.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Gaydar!!!
"Is there something buzzing in your pocket, or are just happy to be near me"
I got rid of a watch ages ago and haven't looked back. My phone can tell the time, has a calculator and more.
Some killer feature for me comes out (which I can't see anything coming out for a watch that I couldn't have on a smart phone) then I wouldn't use a smart watch.
I walk for exercise. When I get tired or bored, my speed slows down.
I would like an app that plays music at the speed that I want. I don't know the term, but it's possible to speed up music without changing the key, by taking tiny slices out of the music. For example, to speed up music by 10%, remove 1/100 of a second of the music every tenth of a second. And to slow music down 10%, repeat 1/100 of a second of the music each tenth of a second.
I'd like to adjust the music's tempo to a good walking speed. Then I could walk to the music, one step per beat, and not slow down.
Poster is clearly Apple product placement. Apple is nearly two years behind others in the market and still has not got its iWatch into the shops. This post is to drum up enthusiasm for technology which is already there and the market is already filled. Amazed Slashdot editors did not spot it.
I hear there's an app for that.
Debt is Wealth... ...Cold is Warm.
So, I guess what you're looking for is the app that could shield you from the death rays that the black helicopters are beaming at you, and pop up a pre-folded tin-foil hat.
Got it.
Given that there is an accelerometer on the wrist, I could really use an app that tells me when I jerked off last time, and how much time is left before I need to jerk off again.
Notifications from my phone, with some level of reply options for text/e-mail; pedometer/exercise monitoring; weather; call screening (arguably already included in notifications); basic navigation with haptic feedback; calendar. These are all things that my Pebble does to a greater or lesser extent already, although I sometime chafe at its limitations (early adopter blues), except the replies to notifications. Lots of people seem to be saying they don't want another device and that people should just use their phones for all of these things. I, however, work in a professional setting and having access to certain types of information in a subtle, non-intrusive manner is very valuable to me. It a client meeting it is unspeakable rude and disrespectful to pull out my phone to see why it has been blowing up on my hip. Glancing at watch, not so much. In court (IAAL), pulling out a phone is absolutely verboten. Glancing at a watch? No problem. Outside of the professional setting, being able to get timely, informative information quickly an subtly without looking like a doofus, staring at my phone all the time, is great. I don't have to fumble with my phone or my fitbit or any other number of gadgets I may have in my pocket or my briefcase/messenger bag/murse/bag-o-tricks. Smart watches (or watches of any type) may not be for everyone, but I like non-smart watches, really like smart watches if they are done at least reasonably well (like the Pebble), and would love to have a smart watch truly "done right". I don't know if the Apple Watch will, in fact, be "done right", but it will be interesting to see what it's really like once it's in the wild.
If music be the food of love, play on...
is all anyone pays attention to. $349 is too much to walk out the door with for the average user who just dropped $199 to walk out the door with the phone. Your theory is correct. The practice at the retail desk may be quite another.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
I want features that have already appeared in watches: time display, stopwatch, alarm, tides for anywhere not dependent on downloading, barometer/altitude, compass, glow-in-the-dark, survivability from shock/EM fields/water/heat/cold, good styling (very few smart watches are much less than ugly), programmable remote control, good battery life, and durability, all in one. Add to that rudimentary navigation (only signals from GPS satellites necessary, and maybe not even that), Bluetooth, an accelerometer, and a great programming environment for those not wanting the hassle of a ridiculous tool chain.
A fatter version should have something like FindMeSpot functionality—SMS to satellites.
Oh yeah, and a friendly price.
Ability to find out the current time, date, alarms, countdown timer, stopwatch...
I'm a major Apple fanboy but I think they've dropped the ball on this one. I can't imagine buying it because I don't see the purpose, value or result that would justify the cost for me personally. Every other Apple fanboy I know and with whom I've talked to about Apple Watch is similarly at a loss to see the point. The thing is that it's the limitations (also shared by Samsung's Watch) that negate most of the value proposition. Being tethered (thanks to battery limits) is part of it. The other is: I haven't owned or worn a watch in 30 years - it's exactly the same to me as coming out with an Appel Fedora - WTF wears these things anymore?? Please show me someone.
I don't know any one but my wife who is a "fashion plate" and sees watches as a fashion accessory at best. Even for her, it makes no sense because any given watch she owns now will generally clash with her outfit. Ergo, she has dozens of watches with very different size, weight and form factors. A one-size-fits-all doesn't even play with a fashion maven (I don't know what Burberry Lady was thinking here).
I don't strictly fault Apple for coming out with it anyway. Even if it flops I see the R&D invested as "very likely useful for a future product" that isn't going to be a flop. It will be a leg-up for that future product, whatever it is. I can't see the Apple Watch as being useful in anyway for my life - and this is me, Apple Fanboy, who has or has had most every Apple product since 1995 and who lives comfortably in the Apple Ecosystem (I'm typing this on a fully loaded rMBP that cost $4K). Some day the tech created will probably fit into something useful but today there are too many gaps in the tech and in the market place for this IMO.
I'm seeing a lot of comparisons between Apple Watch and smartphones, PCs, and even other "smart watches". I think that's missing the point of what Apple's creating here.
With the iPod, they singlehandedly redefined the way we interact with music (and later video). With the iPhone, they surprised and delighted people with a device that does exactly what you want it to, and more -- it was like a dream come true for me. With the iPad, they opened up an entirely new market for, as some called it at the launch, "just a big iPhone with no phone". With each of these devices, people tried to understand it (and dismiss it) by comparing it to existing technology and usage models... which led some to dismiss the iPhone because it had no physical keyboard, for example. Some pointed to the Nokia big-touchscreen phone to say "see, they tried it and it doesn't work". Until they actually used the iPhone and realized that, no, this is nothing like anything they used before.
My most anticipated apps for Apple Watch are the ones that allow communication without words. The ability to draw shapes to someone, and they can see you drawing... or tap, and it taps your friend... record your heartbeat and they can feel it... THAT's the killer app that has been missing from other "smart watches".
The apps that will do best are the ones that capitalize on the unique capabilities of a watch device, not ones that try to shoehorn existing models into a tiny screen. Glances, gestures, simple swipes and taps, voice (sometimes)... and context awareness to remove the first layer of interaction ("what do you want to do") and jump directly to the end result. For example, if I'm walking along the street and I glance at my watch, it shows me the time/date (of course) but also a simple map of the area and maybe landmarks/businesses around me. If I've never been there before, it checks my schedule to see why I'm there, or maybe goes into "tourist mode". If it's mealtime, hey, there's some restaurants nearby with food I like. If my heartrate is up, it automatically assumes that exercise is occurring and pops up a shortcut to related apps/data. If I'm moving at greater than 15 MPH, it assumes I'm in a car and switches modes to minimize distraction by default -- easily overridden by, say, a quick shake of the wrist to "wake up" the watch. SIRI, of course, but focused on verbal and graphic interaction, voicing an answer or giving directions (via taps even) instead of providing a page of links you have to interact with.
A device that closely monitors you, your movement, heart-rate, sound input, light sources, knows time of day and your location and your schedule and keeps track of who you talk to the most, what apps you use the most, when you use them... something that's always there at a glance when you need it but knows when to shut up... this is a much more personal device, more closely tied to every moment. IF IT'S DONE RIGHT, with careful and intelligent design, this is a game changer.
When they released the iPod, iPhone, iPad, each time, Apple changed the industry, our assumptions about what's possible, and the way we live. (Even the most skeptical have to admit this -- who here doesn't have a smartphone?) I have no doubt that we're witnessing this happening again.
I'm So Meta, Even This Acronym
It would weight around 2-300g and contain
* battery cells, I imageine at least 10Ah. To be used to recharge the phone.
* a builtin antenna that could be used to extend the one in the phone if needed.
* headset and microphone
That would fix the three most common problem I got with my phone.
bitcoin payments
I think Google managed to cross some sort of threshold of usefulness with the Android Wear API, and Samsung has done a clean physical design. It functions as a good and possibly even stylish watch (albeit of the "digital watch" genre) as well as providing some extras.
The notification interface is very useful for fielding messages/emails that I receive on my phone: I can, at a glance, see whether it's worth taking out my phone to read a full message. When I'm driving, I can glance at my wrist much more safely than pulling out my phone. When I get an SMS with an access code I can again easily see it on my watch. You can also click to read more of the message on the watch, but eventually it gets silly on such a small screen.
The Google Now notifications are also a bit more useful as occasional popups on the watch than as cards on the phone's search screen; when I pull out my phone it's usually for some purpose that the Google Now cards just interfere with.
I still haven't seen special-purpose "wearable" apps that make much sense. The heart rate monitor doesn't work on this device unless I hold very still (useless when exercising). The screen is too small for navigation, although it might be useable for point-by-point directions in some cases. I have a compass app which might be convenient to have on my wrist if the magnetometer didn't need recalibration (via awkward figure 8 gyrations of my wrist) every time I think of using it. The security-related apps ("unlock my phone" when I'm holding it) are still too insecure. Several note-taking Apps have versions but I don't find them so useful without any method for input. There is of course also the voice input, but I find it pretty inaccurate so it's hard to do anything involving input on the watch.
I haven't had time to read up on the iWatch to see if they've managed to replicate the innovative "watch as a notification extension of the phone" which Google has developed.
I would say that the Electronic Leash now has itself strapped to us. I will never buy one. It is nice to freely let go of mine on a regular basis through the day.
The Time?
Ideally:
- coded in Java by a 14 year old.
- Uses over 80mb of memory to display 4 digits.
- 20% cpu usage when idle.
Wouldnt be a "true app" otherwise.
For us runners and trail-runners the needs are more such things as battery live, GPS, build in HRM (if possible) . The fact of being independent from phones / tablets is also a plus as this avoids extra encumbrance.
Regarding software there are three important things:
* The common chronograph/GPS functions (pace, distance, etc) plus HRM
* Mapping
* link to a PC/Mac/tablet (for uploading data after workout)
There actually are a few such devices already in the market: One is the Timex Ironman One (with built-in 3G support) and the Tom-Tom Multisport Cardio. Tehre was another startup that had an awesome flat screen with Google Maps but a very reduced battery life.
Anyway and as I see that people will go all wild about heart rate now: Most real sporters don't care about it. Despite being a very good training tool (!) but while it is good to know it from time to time we are more interested in times, paces. speeds, distances or volume than heart rate.
I measure mine maybe three or four times during the running season, one at the beginning and a few times after that, just to get my resting HR.
And here is another issue:
Most people have no idea what the heart rate means and nobody will care to calculate his/her own ones but happily accept pre-made formulas (forget it, not even Karvonnen works).
-- 29A the number of the Beast
I'd vaguely got the idea that these things were about health-Nazi-ism. Thanks for confirming that.
[Adverts for "smart watch, crumpled into ball, fly across room and ... bounce out of the rubbish bin.] Balls! I'll pick them up later.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"