Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Isn't Giving Up On Smartwatches; Two Flagship Android Wear 2.0 Watches Launching Early Next Year (theverge.com)

Posted by msmash on from the new-smartwatches-incoming dept.

Google isn't giving up on its smartwatches. The company said today it will be launching two new flagship smartwatches in the first quarter of next year. These watches will run Android Wear 2.0 operating system and will be the first ones to launch with the new platform. From the report: Following the launch of the new devices, existing Android Wear watches will get the update to Android Wear 2.0. Not every existing Android Wear watch will be updated, but Google says most of the recent models will be. Certain features, such as Android Pay, require specific hardware, so not all models will support them. [...] Google will release the fifth and final developer preview of Android Wear 2.0 in January, and it is expected to include support for both Google Assistant and Android Pay (on supported devices) in it. It will also work with iOS devices, and Chang confirmed that while there will be differences between Wear 2.0 on Android and iOS, Android Pay will work on both platforms.

61 comments

  1. Too expensive by p51d007 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm "old" (if you consider 57 as being old). I've worn a watch, since the early 70's. Had an LED watch at one time too, so tech isn't something I shy away from. Heck, in 2010, when everyone was squinting at 3-4" smartphone screens, I bought a Dell Streak 5, with a (at the time) massive 5" screen. The stares, laughs and "what do you need a screen that big" was all I got. I didn't care. I wanted the larger screen. I've had two even larger, and now use a 6" screen. But, these "smart" watches, always seemed to me, to be an answer to a NON problem. People my age, wear a watch because that is what we are use to. The younger crowd, that has grown up with the phone in their hands, hasn't, since they have a "watch" with them all the time. I just never could wrap my head around a watch, with a tiny screen, tiny battery life, and a VERY high price, given you can pick up a watch for almost nothing, not to mention most people these days, really need 3 arms. The extra one for carrying their phone, since I see so many of them with it in their hands most of the time. Hey, if you want spend the money for one of these things, hey, it's YOUR money, but I just don't get it. But, I said the same thing a few years ago about services like Pandora/Spotify too, which I use DAILY now.

    1. Re:Too expensive by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Funny

      57? How are you able to type?

    2. Re:Too expensive by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2

      While I am in your age group, I can see the point of a "smart watch". Not that I'll ever get one, as I haven't actually worn a watch in probably 20 years or so. I haven't, mainly because I don't need a watch, since I started carrying my first PDA (Palm Pilot) and it had a built in clock. But ... I am digressing.

      The point of a Smart Watch is so you don't have to pull out your phone every time it rings, vibrates, buzzes, dings or whatever. You look down, and see what it is, and then decided. The fact that it is customizable screen is just a fashion plus. Who here hasn't purchased some vanity piece of jewelry, clothing, shoes, or sunglasses that were 20 times more expensive than functional equivalents?

      Again, I get it, without needing or wanting one.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    3. Re:Too expensive by sinij · · Score: 4, Funny

      He dictated it to his secretary in-between downing scotches, you insensitive clod.

    4. Re:Too expensive by chispito · · Score: 1

      The point of a Smart Watch is so you don't have to pull out your phone every time it rings, vibrates, buzzes, dings or whatever. You look down, and see what it is, and then decided. The fact that it is customizable screen is just a fashion plus. Who here hasn't purchased some vanity piece of jewelry, clothing, shoes, or sunglasses that were 20 times more expensive than functional equivalents?

      Again, I get it, without needing or wanting one.

      I think people get a smart watch because they believe it will make them efficient about alerts and messages, when what they really want is to turn their phone off.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    5. Re:Too expensive by Jhon · · Score: 1

      "I think people get a smart watch because they believe it will make them efficient about alerts and messages, when what they really want is to turn their phone off."

      You can think that. But I think the GP had it right. It's so I can see if a call or notification rises to the level of "pull my phone out of my pocket and deal with it right now".

    6. Re:Too expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm also 57, and have not worn a watch for almost 40 years. The impetus was always looking at the time (almost always when unnecessary). The solution was to stop wearing watches. Initially, I figured there was always someone to ask, or a clock visible; later, it became always the right time. I never missed an appointment or flight because I lacked a watch (airports are full of clocks). In recent years, I have had a cell phone or smart phone - which requires effort to look at for the time.

    7. Re:Too expensive by swell · · Score: 1

      "I'm "old" (if you consider 57 as being old)..."

      I'm a generation ahead of you, sonny. Not sure what you're going on about in that huge meandering paragraph, but you might be old enough to appreciate this story of pathos and depcronation:

      Fairly often I meet a fashionable young man (rarely a woman) wearing an Apple or other fancy watch. I always make a point to compliment them and inquire about the wonders of their watch. In every case, the wearer lights up with beaming pride and eagerly tells me about some incident where the watch actually turned out to be useful. Such enthusiasm; you would think it had saved his life!

      Well, for me this satisfies my question as to why they buy the darn things. It's all about ego, pride, and a hidden sense of worthlessness that makes them spend outrageous sums for watches, cars, fashion and the biggest screen television on the block.

      --
      ...omphaloskepsis often...
    8. Re:Too expensive by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I'm 56, and I've been wearing a (Series 1) Apple Watch for a few months now. Prior to that, I'd worn a Garmin Vivosmart for 16-17 months. Prior to that, I hadn't worn anything on my wrist for as long as I'd owned a cell phone.

      I'd gotten the Garmin device hoping it would help motivate me to walk more. It did that, but once that habit is in place (which takes a month or two) then the "fitness tracker" part of the equation became less important. What I discovered, though, was that - for me, anyway - it was useful to have notifications on my wrist (more for work, but after hours too). I also found its alarm feature to be useful (an alarm clock on my wrist works well, and is much less jarring). Eventually I came to the conclusion that the stuff I found most useful about the Garmin would work significantly better on a smart watch.

      But it's quite obvious that smart watches are not a good fit for a large chunk of the populace. And while I find it useful, it's not a necessity. For the price, if this thing doesn't last 3-4 years then I won't be replacing it.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    9. Re:Too expensive by OhSoLaMeow · · Score: 2

      And she wrote it down in shorthand.

      --
      They can take my LifeAlert pendant when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
    10. Re:Too expensive by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      I just never could wrap my head around a [smart] watch, with a tiny screen, tiny battery life, and a VERY high price, given you can pick up a watch for almost nothing

      Here they come. The slew of "But my Casio ..." posts that always pollute any thread about smart watches.

      Your problem is the inability to get past the word "watch" in the name. It's the size and form factor of a watch, but it's not a watch. It's a fairly powerful general purpose computer. My "watch" runs a 4-core SD 410 @1.6GHz, 512MB RAM, Android 6.0 OS, a 320x320 display, has bluetooth, wifi, accelerometer, heart rate monitor, barometer, GPS. The analogy is between a smart phone and an old flip phone. Is the flip phone a better "phone"? Sure it is. Why would you ever carry a smart phone then? They cost more, the battery sucks, bigger and heavier, less durable, and so on. The answer is obviously that a smart phone isn't a phone, it's a portable computer with a built in cellular modem.

      Does anyone *need* a smart watch? Nope. Does anyone need a *smart* phone? Nope either. If you like gadgets a smart watch is great. If nothing else it's a watch with programmable faces of infinite variety and function. Add in that it's a fitness tracker, it can run simple apps like note taking, flashlight, google authenticator, it has media controls, it can present simple bits of information like weather, messages, emails, etc. and even allow input / responding with voice.

      A word on battery life. Yes it's bad, but if you return home every night 99% of the time like everyone else it's really not an issue. You just plop it on the charger along with your laptop, phone, headphones, and whatever else needs daily charging. Smart watch battery life is more of a zombie apocalypse problem then a real, everyday problem.

      Re: cost. If you bought a non-smart watch that had GPS, barometer, altimeter, and a fitness tracker you'd be paying $250+,
      https://www.amazon.com/Suunto-...

      As much or more than a smart watch. Like just about any product, it's going to seem expensive if you don't use 90% of the features you are paying for. That doesn't make it a bad product, it makes it the wrong product for you.

    11. Re:Too expensive by kimvette · · Score: 1

      > Had an LED watch at one time too, so tech isn't something I shy away from.

      Ugh. My first digital watch was a Star Wars LED watch. I thought it was awesome at the time... but in my defense, I was only five years old.

      I have a smartwatch - a Gear S2. I bought it after I learned how much the Vivofit devices suck... Gear S2 + S Health is excellent for tracking my workouts - and I will be upgrading to the Gear S3 Frontier soon as it will be nice to be able to leave my phone behind -- no need to worry about damaging the phone when skating or hiking and climbing. :)

      I wouldn't be worried about the phone if Samsung and Apple weren't in a competition to make the sharpest, thinnest phone possible. I'd rather the phone be a bit thicker and resistant to damage, retain the headphone jack, a replaceable battery, and not dig into my hand when I am holding it.

      As an example of a rugged phone, I literally ran over my iPhone 4 on a stone driveway with my car. Damage was limited to a few of small chips out of the glass (so clearly a lot of pressure was on the phone if stones were able to dig chips out of the glass) - and the digitiser was completely unaffected and the phone did not bend and it still works to this day (I keep my old phones as spares).

      Meanwhile, the iPhone 6+ gets trashed just from people sitting with the phones in their pockets. Is it user error? Eh, not really, because one would expect a cellphone to be more stuff than a piece of cardboard. Samsung phones will be exactly the same way if they keep trying to make their phones thinner.

      But yeah... I use a smartwatch for fitness tracking, and One Of These Days When I Have Free Time(tm) I'll work on a couple of app ideas I've been kicking around for a while.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    12. Re:Too expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Binary equivalents.

    13. Re:Too expensive by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I guess you live somewhere warm or you never go out. The battery on my watch died a few weeks back, neatly coinciding with a cold spell (I reckon the bastard did it on purpose), and until I got round to fitting a new one it was a royal pain hitching up my greatcoat and fiddling about to get my phone out of my pocket.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    14. Re:Too expensive by A5un · · Score: 1

      Try the Miband 2 from Xiaomi. It was conceived as a "smart" activity tracker but has slowly morphed into a basic "smart" watch through several iterations. At around $25, I can't really complain about anything. It's water proof and has basic display for time, notification from the phone, steps, etc. One charge lasts around 3-4 weeks. Oh, it has heart rate sensor as well.

    15. Re:Too expensive by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Western Washington state isn't warm; but it's also not particularly cold. We just had a cold snap where it got down to around 20F at night at my place; although usually we're above freezing (cold, rainy Decembers are typical). I didn't notice that it had any impact on my watch, but it was only that cold for a few days.

      This time of year I'm outside mainly when I'm walking to or from the train on my way to work, and for 20-30 minutes for a lunchtime walk. Even though it's not freezing, given the rain it's not particularly enjoyable to be outside right now.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    16. Re:Too expensive by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      Indeed. My Pebble Time was actually quite useful, especially for driving. I could peek at the notification while stopped at a light, without having to dig the phone out. I also used it for two-factor authentication codes, being much more convenient than pulling out my phone and unlocking it.

      When I returned it*, I noticed how much more inconvenient it is trying to fumble around to get my huge phone with its large case out of my pocket, especially when most notifications aren't worth it.

      * I only owned it for about 2 weeks before Pebble tanked. I since returned it knowing that the warranty was gone and the community will probably dry up and move on soon. I'm still planning to find a replacement, and I might hold out for Android Wear 2.0.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
    17. Re:Too expensive by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I was referring to the claim that a phone serves instead of a watch. Essentially, a phone is like a pocket watch; those were replaced by wrist watches for a reason.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    18. Re:Too expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should have kept it. The community will keep it going for awhile, as there is really nothing with similar capabilities on the market right now, or possibly ever.

    19. Re: Too expensive by lokedhs · · Score: 1
      And therein lies the problem.

      Watches are generally jewellery with some secondary use case

      Apple watches sell because it allows Apple fans to show that they are part of the group, without holding their phone all the time. It's similar to people wearing t-shirts with their favourite heavy metal band on it. When they pass someone, they know they are part of the same social circle. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with this. People do it all the time.

      But this is where smart watches have a problem. They have to compete on their own merits, and frankly, it's very hard for a watch of any kind to do that. I use one for biking, but that's pretty much it.

      I'll buy one of the new Android Wear watches, but I doubt I'll be using it off the bike.

    20. Re:Too expensive by antdude · · Score: 1

      Ditto. People laugh at me (in my 40s) for still wearing an old school Casio Data Bank 150 calculator watch. I prefer that over smartphones for quickies of the times, alarms, phone numbers, calendars, etc. I care not! I wished current smartwatches were good as those! They're big, heavy, power hogs, etc. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    21. Re: Too expensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not entirely. We buy these things out of a sense of competition. Guys buy them because they're ugly and a $500 wristwatch helps them compete with the suave James Bond types that can get laid even if they're wearing a bin liner. We buy these things because we're insecure and need to compete with the guy next door.

      Eventually we grow older and stop chasing skirts, and thus stop buying pointless things. The industry responds by promoting divorce so we all have to repeat the cycle again.

      The industry thrives by making you believe you'll only be good if you have this . You too will have riches, girls and nights down the club because of . Later it'll be . The rate software is going all these shiny things will end up killing us in a giant botnet.

    22. Re:Too expensive by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      and a VERY high price, given you can

      My Pebble was about $100. You can get dumbwatches for $25 I suppose, but $100 for a watch that will tell me who's calling while I'm driving without having to risk everyone by trying to dig my phone out, and whose face look I can change on a whim to one of any thousands of options available is a pretty damn good deal.

      I'll agree that thousands of $ is ridiculous, but at $100 its frankly dumb to buy anything else.

  2. aaannd.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cue the bevy of posts from closed-minded nerds who think smartwatches are pointless because they themselves don't want one...
    SSDD...

    1. Re:aaannd.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cue the bevy of posts from closed-minded nerds who think smartwatches are pointless because they themselves don't want one... SSDD...

      Odd, you typed "closed-minded nerds" but I think you meant "public at large".

    2. Re:aaannd.. by admin7087 · · Score: 1

      Well, so far not many people have given a fuck about them, so the closed-minded nerds are not totally wrong. Smartwatches and VR glasses are the video telephone systems of the 80s.

    3. Re:aaannd.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not many overall, and the trend is negative. It's a fad. Like Google glasses, some technologies don't make it because of inherent flaws or because the market is not really there. Often they reoccur much later in a completely different setting, though, e.g. 80s video phone -> Skype or Apple Newton -> iPhone.

    4. Re:aaannd.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2.7 million units is plenty enough for companies to keep on investing in developing them...

  3. Google might not be giving up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But the public has.

    Correction, they didn't care to begin with.

    1. Re:Google might not be giving up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to the millions of people who own smartwatches.
      But, yeah, I'm sure you know more about it than all those dummies at Google, Apple, Samsung, Garmin, Pebble and Sony.

  4. At lest no more glassholes by sinij · · Score: 1

    At least they are not working on bringing back glassholes.

  5. I'd get a smartwatch... by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 1

    If it could do passwords and work with every device. Just act as a bluetooth keyboard or something, I have no real need for 2FA. Is there such an app? I haven't found one. Is it because bluetooth is too insecure?

    1. Re:I'd get a smartwatch... by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      If it could do passwords

      I host all my 2FA codes from the Google Authenticator app on my watch. You can also sign in to anything Google using your watch,
      https://support.google.com/acc...

    2. Re:I'd get a smartwatch... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      MY macbook and iMac unlock using my apple watch. it detects the watch and that it is on my arm and unlocked and then logs me into the computers. works great and feels oh so space agey.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:I'd get a smartwatch... by bondsbw · · Score: 1

      I used an authenticator app on my Pebble Time. Having it that convenient made me rethink how often I use 2FA.

      --
      All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
  6. Solution in search of a problem by stevez67 · · Score: 1

    Tech just hasn't advanced to the point that a smartwatch is, or will any time soon be, a crucial piece of technology for a large segment of the population.

    1. Re:Solution in search of a problem by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      Tech just hasn't advanced to the point that a smartwatch is, or will any time soon be, a crucial piece of technology for a large segment of the population.

      A lot like a product you might have heard of called the iPad. Certainly not crucial, but incredibly successful.

  7. And they shouldn't! by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    Smartwatches have a huge potential but there are significant issues that need to be addressed first.

    The first problem is the screen: it takes too much power, it's far too small, doesn't harvest energy from ambient light and can only flex two dimensions at once.
    The second problem is the CPU: it takes about 1000x more power than it should and isn't even stateful. QCA based CPUs would solve these issues.
    The third is the wristband: it doesn't keep the watch perfectly in place and it's quite the bother. Have the back of the watch exploit van der Waals forces and that should solve it.

    So yeah, the only thing Google really needs to do is improve display, electronics and manufacturing processes. If Google really presses their engineers then they could have a sweet prototype ready for CES 2047! ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:And they shouldn't! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pebble solved most of these problems, but due to bad management decisions, they are no more... Maybe someone else will figure out that a watch should be a mini phone, but a watch first and "smart" second.

  8. Most things are answer to non-problems by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    You can heat up toast in a pan, yet we have toasters.

    You can make coffee with a cup and a filter and a kettle. But we have coffee makers.

    You can walk or bike most places in cities, but we have cars.

    Most things in life are not really answers to a problem so much as they are about making life better. The Apple Watch doesn't really solve a "problem" for me exactly, but it does make life better...

    I have better tracking of workouts.
    I have a better and quicker understanding of who is calling to decide if I need to answer.
    I get (very select) notices right away even when I leave my phone somewhere in the house.
    I have better and more direct access to some small subset of features than I would just by opening an app on my phone.
    I have slightly easier ways to pay for things rather than dragging out my phone at a store.

    A smartwatch is nice not because of any one problem it selves, but because of all the little ways it just improves what you do through the day.

    By the way, before I got the Apple Watch I hadn't been wearing a watch for about a decades... because as you said I could just use my phone as a watch.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  9. Those mostly are not issues by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    The first problem is the screen: it takes too much power, it's far too small, doesn't harvest energy from ambient light and can only flex two dimensions at once.

    The screen may currently use too much energy, but I strongly disagree about it being too small. I bought the smaller Apple Watch because are screens on a wrist look absurd and take up too much space on your arm. A small screen can convey plenty of information.

    As for flexing "in two dimension at once" WTF? I don't need or want the screen to flex, at all. Why would I? Curved screens on a wrist are a terrible idea, you'd have to turn your arm to see the whole display.

    The second problem is the CPU: it takes about 1000x more power than it should and isn't even stateful. QCA based CPUs would solve these issues.

    How is the combination of CPU + SSD not stateful. I agree that it would be much better a watch could last, say, a year but that is not 1000x difference in power consumption... that is about a 300x difference.

    The third is the wristband: it doesn't keep the watch perfectly in place

    Speak for yourself there. My wristband keeps the watch in perfect position because it doesn't have discrete steps as most do - I use the Milanese Loop, which you can tighten to a perfect fit that does not move. I just wish there were some kind of sports version.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Those mostly are not issues by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Yep. I currently have the Apple watch with the milan loop band and it stays in place perfectly all day. plus it's comfortable as hell in 100 degree heat as air travels through the mesh band.

      But my Pebble time steel before it also stayed exactly where I put it. I am guessing the author is one of these notjobs that puts it on loose and then blames what gravity does on the device.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Those mostly are not issues by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      What I want is an arm mounted computer that is thin and flexible like a cloth yet stays in the perfect adhered to your arm and never runs out of power. What you want is a toy.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re:Those mostly are not issues by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      What I want is an arm mounted computer that is thin and flexible like a cloth yet stays in the perfect adhered to your arm

      Try wrapping a bandage on your arm for an entire day and then come back to tell me that is what you really want...

      What you want is a toy.

      What I *HAVE* is far more useful than a toy would be.

      Maybe someday we'll have what you want. But then I can use that too. Until then I can use the App Watch to do quite a lot of useful things.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  10. Hoping for less suck. by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The OS is not the problem. It's the hardware makers. I will accept a big chunky diving watch if the damn thing was waterproof and shockproof with a decent scratchproof crystal.

    Also for god's sake give us some real battery life! 2 days at a minimum please.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Hoping for less suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck yourself in the ass, dumpy. What the fuck you need 48 hours for? You take the fucking thing off every night. Get your head out of your Apple loving faggot asshole.

    2. Re:Hoping for less suck. by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      My Pebble can go about a week, and charges to full when I put it on the charger while I shower.

      Buy one now, while the box stores still have some in stock.

    3. Re:Hoping for less suck. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Your mom said you need to empty your bucket again it's stinking up the basement.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  11. Oh please by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    You'd have thought that by now the various manufacturers would have gotten the message that the vast majority of people simply do not want a smart watch.

    They just aren't that useful to most people and they also aren't that practical...otherwise everyone would be wearing and using them.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Oh please by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      They just aren't that useful to most people and they also aren't that practical...otherwise everyone would be wearing and using them.

      In the backwards, irrelevant landscape of silicon valley, many folks sport Apple Watches, and maybe 1/10 of that number use Android Wear. I wouldn't look to the technology capital of the world to get a feel for what's going to be successful in technology though.

    2. Re:Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ah look, another dork who thinks every product must be bought by the vast majority of people. The reality is that the vast majority of people don't want the vast majority of products that humans manufacture, otherwise the vast majority of people would each need blocks of warehouses to store all their possessions, and the vast majority of the surface of the planet would be warehouses. How many distinct possessions do you own? 100? 200? Do you know how many products there are in the world? It's in the millions. Look, we get it. You don't care about smartwatches, but like it or not the world does not revolve around you, and there exists an entire universe outside of your parents' basement and your tiny little worldview.

  12. Re:Google is still ruled by idiots! by farble1670 · · Score: 2

    Apple couldn't make it.

    Pretty sure they did make it. Not everything has to sell 100 million units to be successful. The fact that Apple built a version 2 says something. But hey they probably didn't do any research about potential and consumer demand or anything. Apple is known for just throwing garbage products over the fence.

  13. Re:Google is still ruled by idiots! by chispito · · Score: 1

    The fact that Apple built a version 2 says something. But hey they probably didn't do any research about potential and consumer demand or anything. Apple is known for just throwing garbage products over the fence.

    Look around you. Smart watches, and especially Apple Watches, are a niche product. They weren't the Next Big Thing.

    --
    The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
  14. Haven't wore a watch in years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The smart watch is so limited by design. It's small, can't hold a charge for anymore than a day. The screen is the big limiting factor on what it can do. Then you figure you buy a $700 smart phone that has a better screen, more functional, and many times you end up using it over the small screen on a watch. Even if you could cram a full smartphone into a watch it would be something not many could deal with. I get the ideal of it being a extension of your smartphone. But exactly how hard is it to pull out your smart phone? The smart phone is for those Dick Tracy wannabe's who fall in love with technology even before they know what to do with it.

    1. Re:Haven't wore a watch in years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry meant to say the smart watch is for Dick Tracy wannabe's.

  15. Yeah, they NEED to kill some things and FOCUS. by X86BSD · · Score: 1

    I just recently got google fiber + TV. Their onscreen guide and app is a tire fire. Its low resolution, its slow, buggy, lacks a ton of features the sat. providers and apple have, and support is a complete joke. Waiting 2+ years to drag fiber 50 feet to your house to get you hooked up? When service goes out taking 2, 3, 4+ weeks to restore service. Google, your rollout, support and commitment is OBSCENE.

  16. What's the point of Android Wear? by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

    Smartwatches are good as notifications device, it can act like the top bar of your Android phone.
    I have a Mi Band (like a Chinese FitBit), it is great because it has a very noticeable vibrator, much better than what you have on your phone because it is always in contact with your skin. Good enough to act as a silent alarm clock. It has sensors too and the new model has a tiny display giving you things like the time and unread message count.
    Do you really need more? For any interaction, the smartphone you already have with you is much better.

    Android Wear does too much, as a result, it need a really powerful CPU and a large and power hungry screen. First, it is expensive (>$100), but it also results in a ridiculously short battery life, usually around a day which mean you need to recharge it every day like a smartphone, typically overnight. Not only it is annoying but because you aren't wearing your watch at night, you don't get the silent wake-up alarms, which is a feature only wearables can provide. Same for sleep tracking if it has any value to you.
    To put it into perspective the Mi Band is around $15 and has a real month of battery life. Version 2 is around $30 and has a tiny screen which shows time and notifications and the battery life is just slightly lower.

  17. Re:Google is still ruled by idiots! by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    Look around you. Smart watches, and especially Apple Watches, are a niche product. They weren't the Next Big Thing.

    How many products last year were the next big thing? The year before? I count zero. Yet somehow the economy chunked along and consumers spent billions on products. Is the fog clearing yet?