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?
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
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.
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.
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.
They are just too tiny
I would have to carry a magnifier with me
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.
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
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.
I don't want yet another device to carry around.
Isn't the whole idea of a watch-like product the fact that you don't need to carry it? It's attached to your wrist, no need to carry it, or put it in a pocket.
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.
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.
Just to confirm...you're upset that they implemented exactly the feature you wanted?
And while I think your post was forward looking, I'm going to take a wild guess and say it wasn't the design document for the Apple Watch. And if it was, well, I'm glad they didn't take your suggestion of a lightning connector.
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!
Yeah but then your eyes couldn't follow the display fast enough.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
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
Golf would be my choice.
Show me how far I am from the next hole.
Show me how far I am from the nineteeth hole.
FTFY
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
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.
Holy moley, you could get an instafication when a compatible/willing partner is nearby. That would be hilariously awesome!
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.
In many social situations (perhaps you don't often find yourself in these sorts of situations) it is more acceptable to glance at your wrist than to pull out a phone and start fiddling with it. For example, a business meeting, a dinner party or the symphony.
In many sporting situations (perhaps you don't often find yourself in these sorts of situations) it is more convenient to glance at your wrist than to break rhythm to pull out a phone and start fiddling with it. For example, while running, playing tennis or rowing.
I see a few issues here for smart watch makers.
First, people who understand the above situations already have at least one watch. Getting those people to give up something they already know and have probably grown fond of over many years--perhaps decades--for something new, unproven and requiring a battery will be difficult. With the personalization that Apple is targeting they seem to understand and are attempting to address at least one major hurdle: style. How well, we will see.
Second, current watches are either purely mechanical or sip from a tiny battery that lasts years. We can ballpark from physical size and capabilities that an Apple Watch will require frequent charging. If Apple has made a breakthrough of some sort, they were conspicuously mum about it yesterday. People enjoying watches today will have to adjust their long-learned expectations, even if they do get more features from their new energy-hungry watches. How well, we will see.
That leaves us with the current watch-less people such as yourself. Today, they don't find any of my above situations relevant--or they would be wearing a watch. For them, digging out a phone from a pocket might be more compelling than buying a new device they're not accustomed to. Perhaps the new features such as biometrics will sway them to buy a new device. How well, we will see.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.