Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Swatch Takes on Google, Apple With Watch Operating System (bloomberg.com)

Posted by msmash on from the carving-their-own-way dept.

Corinne Gretler, reporting for Bloomberg: Swatch said it's developing an alternative to the iOS and Android operating systems for smartwatches as Switzerland's largest maker of timepieces vies with Silicon Valley for control of consumers' wrists. The company's Tissot brand will introduce a model around the end of 2018 that uses the Swiss-made system, which will also be able to connect small objects and wearables, Swatch Chief Executive Officer Nick Hayek said in an interview Thursday. The technology will need less battery power and it will protect data better, he said later at a press conference. Switzerland's four-century-old watch industry has been adjusting to new competition since Apple entered its territory with the Apple Watch in 2015. Hayek faces the uphill challenge of trying to outsmart Google and Apple, which have fended off would-be rivals to their operation systems in smartphones and watches.

65 comments

  1. They could call it Minux by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    ...but that's kind of taken.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:They could call it Minux by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Is it a Linux based OS, or based on something else, like QNX or L4 or Minix?

    2. Re:They could call it Minux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Timeux or Timeix.

  2. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple has already perfected the watch OS market.

    1. Re:Why? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Not if you have to charge it almost every day.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re: Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Under Tim Cock the only thing apple perfected was dirty anal sex.

    3. Re:Why? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 1

      Why charge it everyday when you can charge it every hour? In fact, that's how you use it to tell time. Every time you have to charge it, you add an hour to the day. Much like the hour glass except now with computers.

      An interesting historical coincidence: they both have sand inside

    4. Re: Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that was done by the guy doing yr wf

    5. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep not making sense in the name of the great apple.

    6. Re:Why? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      I never understood why this is a problem. Do you sleep with your watch on? I have to charge my phone every night, too. So I take it out of my pocket and place it on a dock to charge.

    7. Re: Why? by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

      Those people will bitch about anything to try to prove to everyone that their lives aren't devoid of any real meaning or importance.

  3. Better have security in there somewhere... by ctilsie242 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Every time I read about a new OS for IoT devices, it likely is about some new feature, but because of the mentality that security has no ROI, it means the new device is now an IoT toy for the blackhats.

    If Swatch wanted to do things "right", the OS in question would be something lightweight like QNX, heavily compartmentalized (think SELinux), and done "right" from the ground up, so OS updates are as infrequent as possible, and when they come, they are ideally features, not fixing some obvious bug that should have been caught well earlier in the dev cycle.

    I hope they think it through, make a lightweight, secure OS, designed to run on hardware that runs days to weeks between charges. A watch doesn't need tons of apps slurping up CPU. Instead, they should design with a philosophy similar to the original PalmOS. Black/white, do something simple, do it well.

    1. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

      The problem is ease of development - use something developers are already familiar with and suddenly there's a massive pool of people making 'apps' for your new device, which helps it appeal to the consumer since you're probably not going to build an app library of your own out of the gate.

      People don't want a watch anymore - they want a wrist computer that primarily tells time but tracks a bunch of other stuff and brings some of it to your attention as necessary. No matter what OS you write, it's going to have to have Bluetooth and connect to an Android device for I/O, and to compete it's probably going to need environmental sensors, an accelerometer, maybe a light and sensor for guesstimating your pulse rate, etc. Oh, and it should probably be able to clone an RFID tag so you can use it as an access key. And play music (and video). And have a camera. Maybe also GPS and basic cell phone capability so it can solo without a phone.

      Now we're right back to sucking up battery and doing a poor job attempting to be all things to all people.

    2. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People don't want a watch anymore - they want a wrist computer

      From what I can tell from about 99% of the people I know who wear watches, no, they want jewelry.

    3. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just hope I can check my thermostat and fire alarm with it when I'm out of the house.

      Oh look, my house is on fire. Better turn up the A/C. Thank you SmartWATCH!

    4. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Is it even an IoT device? Most smart watches are not connected directly to the internet, only to a phone via Bluetooth.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Vairon · · Score: 1

      In my opinion a device utilizing IEEE 802.15 (Bluetooth) to connect to a device utilizing IEEE 802.11 (Wireless LAN) to connect to a device utilizing IEEE 802.3 (Ethernet) to connect to other devices utilizing IEEE 802 standards across the network of networks that we call the Internet makes it an IoT (Internet of Things) device.

      Do you feel like in order to be a IoT device it must have an IP address?

    6. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by chispito · · Score: 1

      A watch doesn't need tons of apps slurping up CPU. Instead, they should design with a philosophy similar to the original PalmOS. Black/white, do something simple, do it well.

      You just described every non-smart watch.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    7. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an outlier, I want a micro-buckler with a clock in it.

    8. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by ctilsie242 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Do we need watches to be "smart" being yet another screen with bloated apps and coded by the cheapest people hirable? Not really. Having apps designed for low power, low CPU, low RAM, and low storage will bring a better benefit than trying to compete with WatchOS and Android head to head.

    9. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      By that standard Bluetooth headphones are an IoT device. A monitor is an IoT device, after all it displays data downloaded from the net... I think you need more specific criteria.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Vairon · · Score: 1

      In my opinion, Bluetooth headphones are IoT devices. They are a network device utilizing an IEEE 802.15 protocol to connect to other devices within their network. Those devices in turn may be connected to other network devices using the same or other IEEE 802 protocols. The name we give the network made up of all these smaller networks is the Internet.

      I would not consider a monitor an IoT device. It is not utilizing an IEEE 802 protocol to communicate with other devices on its network. If it's not in a network then it's not a part of the Internet. This could change in the future if someone made a network connected monitor. It's certainly possible since HDMI and Display Port have the ability to pass Ethernet between devices. At the point a monitor gets a MAC address or some other layer 1 identifier that allows it to communicate with other devices on a network then I would consider that monitor an IoT device.

    11. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by adolf · · Score: 1

      IoT. Internet of Things.

      First word: Internet. We know what this means, right?

      Second word: Of. Do we need remedial English here, too?

      Third word: Things. Not specified is if they are large things, small things, proxied things, firewalled things, publicly-routable things, or other things. They're just things, ultimately connected to the Internet.

      It's a very inclusive term.

      --
      Kid-proof tablet..
    12. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I haven't worn a watch in nearly 12 years. My last watch battery died, and the batter cost more than the watch did originally. I thought I'll see if I miss it.

      A few days later, my tan came back.

      A month later, I stopped "missing" it on my wrist.

      A year later passed and ... I didn't even care.

      Twelve years later, I still have clocks all around me telling me what time it is. Often atomically accurate to within milliseconds. And I don't miss a wrist clock at all.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    13. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The girl I live with saw me winding my watch and looking at me incredulously asked, "You have to wind that every day?"

    14. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by jon3k · · Score: 1

      I appreciate your anecdotal experience, but truth be told, a lot of people really do like wrist computers.

    15. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      I can't afford Jewelry that tells time, and functionality isn't needed. And yes, winding watches ... I haven't seen one in forever. Except for the nice antique pocketwatch I have.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    16. Re: Better have security in there somewhere... by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

      There are 4G smartwatches that connect directly to a mobile network.

    17. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Misagon · · Score: 1

      Bluetooth headphones are single-use devices, not designed to run arbitrary code. They may have a processor in them, in form of a DSP or a small microcontroller - but which has its firmware locked.

      Smartwatches are supposed to run arbitrary code, and to get software updates over Bluetooth - That is what makes them smartwatches.

      --
      "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
    18. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by msk · · Score: 1

      I used to go through watches like I used to go through chocolate.

      I bought my last watch in 2009. I wear it a few times per week. Light charges it. It's on the original battery. I never have to set it, because it listens to WWV.

      Casio FTW.

    19. Re:Better have security in there somewhere... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, I have some Bluetooth headphones on right now. (Bose). From time to time they receive over-the-air firmware updates when connected to a computer.

      The latest updates appear to have broken some of their core functionality - they are working less well then before. Among other things, this indicates their engineers haven't yet got the hang of great quality control, and leaves me doubting if their firmware update system security is all that solid, when core functionality is not.

      I know a bit about the Bluetooth software stacks in these sorts of devices and, if someone wanted to take advantage, especially as they pick up automatic updates, they are certainly capable of being used as security attack vectors. With a firmware update they are capable of pretending to be almost any kind of Bluetooth device, including a keyboard, offering a (fake) internet connection, etc.

      Yes, headphones now have the same problems as other IoT devices. You can split hairs over the terminology but it doesn't change that the problems are there.

  4. Synchronization better be super good by aicrules · · Score: 2

    Otherwise Parker Lewis will stick with iWatch.

  5. Meh by Philotomy · · Score: 1

    I wear a Roamer mechanical watch (Swiss made, 1955, 17 jewel MST movement) and don't see the appeal of a watch with an operating system. Even if I were part of the target market for smart watches, I'd want tight integration with my cell phone and its apps, and I'd expect Apple or Google to be able to implement that better than a third-party OS. Guess we'll see, but I'm not expecting great things from this.

    1. Re:Meh by hey! · · Score: 1

      Excellent taste in watches, by the way. You can't beat the elegance of a simple analog watch, especially from the era before it became stylish to be large and vulgar.

      I'm a collector vintage Indian watches, which while not quite of the same quality embody much the same aesthetic and can be had for about $15, including shipping from India.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Meh by Philotomy · · Score: 1

      Thanks! It's my favorite watch, and I definitely agree about modern watches usually being overly large and (IMO) ugly. I'll have to check out the vintage Indians you mention.

    3. Re:Meh by Camembert · · Score: 1

      Oh yes I also have an HMT Janata and a black and a white pilot HMT. Lovely!

  6. Sounds like vaporware by John.Banister · · Score: 1

    Two years ago, Tissot said they'd have a smart watch available now. Now, they say the end of next year. I think I'll be hearing announcements about this for a while.

    1. Re:Sounds like vaporware by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      Do you realize how complicated a mechanical kernel is? Even 1MHz is hard to get out of an escarpment.

      I don't understand why the Swiss think they have any sort of lead on this tech? They build jewelry that keeps decent time.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    2. Re:Sounds like vaporware by John.Banister · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a good reason not to be making promises they don't keep.

    3. Re:Sounds like vaporware by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Even 1MHz is hard to get out of an escarpment.

      It's been dune before.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  7. Smart watch? by wjcofkc · · Score: 2

    Here's your smart watch:

    https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AJ2YDZC/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1

    I have one and it is substantially larger than it looks in the picture.

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    1. Re:Smart watch? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      That's the dumbest smart watch I have ever seen! Three of the dials don't even function (on purpose!).

    2. Re:Smart watch? by wjcofkc · · Score: 1

      I have it sitting here next to me. All the dials work except the temp sensor.

      --
      Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    3. Re:Smart watch? by Maxwell · · Score: 1

      I too would be proud to own a mostly non-functional $14 watch. Congrats. Now where were we?

  8. Battery Is not OS by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Not if you have to charge it almost every day.

    The original statement was "Apple has already perfected the Watch OS".

    Now I'd e the first to say, there's always room for something more perfect. The new Swatch OS may be really good, and I'll certainly be looking at development details just as I did for the Pebble.

    That said, your statement makes no sense. The original Apple Watch you had to charge almost once a day. The Series two seems better, say almost once every other day?

    But that's all beside the point, which is that the OS is independent of hardware - including battery. You could have an Apple WatchOS on a device that lasted a week, t would just be a bulky watch (or maybe one that used eInk).

    What Apple HAS done is developed a really good OS for watches at this point, that is secure, and takes into account the balance between watch apps needing data refreshes and power use.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Battery Is not OS by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      the OS is independent of hardware

      Not really. An OS can be a resource hog and/or manage resources poorly, and thus eat up power. They are dependent. That's one of the areas this Swatch project wants to improve upon.

      I should point out that there are probably trade-offs and there may be a decent market and/or niche for power-friendly watches that have fewer app choices/features as a sacrifice. Different consumers want different things.

      Apple's and Android-based watches may depend on abstraction layers for cross-product uniformity that a purpose-built OS can probably toss or simplify. Apple and Google could take the same route, but they'd essentially be largely starting over, and thus doing what this Swatch team is doing.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:Battery Is not OS by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

      An OS can be a resource hog and/or manage resources poorly, and thus eat up power

      But that is not true at all of the Apple WatchOS, in fact it is highly optimized in that regard.

      Apple's and Android-based watches may depend on abstraction layers for cross-product uniformity

      Not true of either platform. They are both purpose-built OS's.

      There is no magic bullet here, just incremental hardware and software improvements from where we are that slowly increase battery life. The closest thing to a real leap in battery life was the Pebble, but it turns out that eInk is just not a viable display for a watch.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    3. Re:Battery Is not OS by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I get different info on that in that both OS's are based their smart-phone counterparts to a large extent. They may have made several watch-related adjustments, but they are not from-scratch. Anyhow, hopefully we'll see if Swatch can pull it off from a battery/power standpoint.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  9. Too late by trevc · · Score: 1

    I think they are already too late. Apple has set the bar very high (battery life aside) and I doubt Apple will help Swatch interface with ios.

    1. Re:Too late by seoras · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Swatch are a watch maker, not a software company.
      I see a parallel in that between Nokia and Apple. Nokia were a mobile phone manufacturer, not a software company.
      This announcement to me smacks of management going through the motions so that they don't look as bad as Nokia did when their market share diminishes.

      I recently stuck a toe in the smart watch waters by buying a 2nd hand Apple Watch S1.
      Got a stainless steel model for 1/4 of it's price new a year ago.
      I was not convinced of the need for a smart watch, which seemed like a gimmick, and it was bought out of curiosity more than anything.
      3 Weeks into wearing it and I can't remember were I put my beautiful $3,000 Swiss automatic. It's in a drawer somewhere.
      I'm hooked, totally and utterly.
      Even 2nd hand it looks as good as new and it's battery life is superb.
      I expect the healthy 2nd hand Apple Watch market will do a fair bit of damage to the Swiss economy.

    2. Re:Too late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are confused about what swiss watches are for.

      Hint: If a girl can't tell your knockoff from a real Rolex in a dark bar, it's serving its purpose. Apple watches don't address this. Get one that knocks off a better watch. ($3000? Who is that supposed to impress?).

    3. Re:Too late by seoras · · Score: 1

      You are confused about what swiss watches are for.

      Hint: If a girl can't tell your knockoff from a real Rolex in a dark bar, it's serving its purpose. Apple watches don't address this. Get one that knocks off a better watch. ($3000? Who is that supposed to impress?).

      You're hanging with the wrong sort of women my anonymous friend.
      Can you tell a real girl from a fake in a dark bar I now wonder? ;)

  10. Your first part was right by s.petry · · Score: 1

    Very few people want a watch that is "Smart", just like very few people want "Smart" Refrigerators, "Smart" Thermostats, and just about everything else being pushed as IoT. Watches are probably the worst, because it has become a redundant piece of Jewelry when every single phone built today has a functional clock.

    People don't want to waste time tracking their heartbeat online, or looking at their home thermostat at work. Your "Meh" expresses the opinion of all but 1 person I work with regularly when talking about "Smart" watches. That 1 guy used to have a FitBit and traded that in for the Apple watch. For working in high tech (security) you would think the number of people would be higher than about 1%, but it really isn't.

    "Smart" watches are already a niche market. Not much for Swatch to pursue. Good name recognition is not enough to make a dent in a saturated market.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Your first part was right by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Watches are probably the worst, because it has become a redundant piece of Jewelry when every single phone built today has a functional clock.

      Unless you are a teenager/hipster and walk around with your phone permanently in your hand, it is still quicker to use a wrist watch to tell the time than take your phone out of your pocket and unlock it.

      A phone is more like a pocket watch, and there is a good reason why they lost out to wrist watches.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:Your first part was right by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Completely false analogy. Pocket watches were around at a time where we didn't have monitors all over the place showing the time, and we didn't work on computers which showed the time. Not getting "time" is trivial since it's literally surrounding you. When did people normally check the time? Looking for a ride/coach/train, and today we have software on our devices handling the ticketing so need the phone out anyway.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  11. No chance by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    vies with Silicon Valley for control of consumers' wrists.

    Not mine. It will take something pretty special to displace Lucy Lawless.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  12. Re: Swatch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Swatch Group is a portfolio of brands -- from the playful watches you mention to Omega and Breguet.

    They're releasing the smartwatch under their Tissot brand which is affordable but refined.

    I prefer for my three year old to run with Swatch Group's Blancpain Fifty Fathoms Bathyscaphe though.

  13. In distress by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    Well, like Apple, Swatch seem make product names by sticking a letter in front so surely this will make it sOS?

  14. Promises by hattable · · Score: 1

    The only thing that doesn't immediately make me believe this to be complete nonsense is the far-off timeline. If someone popped up tomorrow (even an established brand in either operating systems or watches), stating they would be releasing a competing product next month...I'd call B.S.immediately.

    Not that I think they have a chance at all, but I certainly hope we see a viable product hit the market. At the very least, Apple can incorporate (or steal depending on your '*-boi' status), bettering whichever product we do use.

    --
    OMG facts!
  15. New product delivery promises. by livinginthefutr4457 · · Score: 1

    I'm sure it will be ready around the same time as my Waytools Textblade finally ships.

  16. Our survey said "Ughhh Errrrr". by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    Switzerland's four-century-old watch industry has been adjusting to new competition since Apple Inc. entered its territory with the Apple Watch in 2015.

    Wrong. It was already doing that when digital watches appeared in the 1970s.

    P.S. I spotted & corrected the a-hat-TM in the copied section. Ain't preview marvellous, manish?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  17. An AI watch takes over world: The Jennifer Project by Paul+Fernhout · · Score: 1

    by Larry Enright: https://sites.google.com/site/...
    https://www.amazon.com/Jennife...
    "In 2096, Deever MacClendon creates Jennifer, the first proto-conscious cybernetic processor. It is hyper-intelligent, aware, and evolving. Deever wants to use his creation for the good of all, to help fix a broken world, but knowing what a powerful weapon it could be in the wrong hands, he hides it. When his secret is uncovered, he is forced to plunge into a high-tech morass of deception and treachery to avoid catastrophe and save a world where humans are no longer the most intelligent species."

    A fun read!

    --
    A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.