Slashdot Mirror


Solar Powered Smartwatch Successfully Crowdfunded on Kickstarter (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader quotes the Verge: Battery life on smartwatches is, in a word, bad. And while most of today's watches can more or less make it through a day without dying, they're still a far cry from the months or even years that traditional watches can run for. What if you never had to charge your smartwatch? That's the promise of Lunar, a new Kickstarter project that claims to be the world's first solar-powered smartwatch... The company says that the watch can charge off both indoor and outdoor light, and can run off as little as one hour of exposure a day. (The company also includes a traditional inductive charger as a backup.)

As for the watch itself, it's a pretty standard hybrid smartwatch, solar power aside. It'll be able to do basic activity and sleep tracking, offer some limited notification support through a colored LED, and automatically set time zones through a connected smartphone app. Also, given the need for low power consumption for the solar charging to feasibly work, there's no screen on the Lunar. Instead, there's just a ring of LED lights located where hour markers would be.

The campaign reached its funding goal wIthin two days of launching -- and one week later had double that amount, raising a total of $101,987 from 564 backers.

It's not clear if Slashdot readers love or hate smartwatches. Does it make a difference if the watch is solar powered?

43 of 69 comments (clear)

  1. Does it make a difference if the watch by turkeydance · · Score: 3, Insightful

    is solar powered? no. next question.

    1. Re:Does it make a difference if the watch by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Hmm....just watched the kickstarter video, but couldn't make it very far....

      I thought the "man bun" had already had a quick and painful death.

      Apparently not for this watch company. ugh

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Does it make a difference if the watch by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I thought the "man bun" had already had a quick and painful death.

      Unfortunately not - with the start of the new academic year, I see them all the time at UW. of course I'm in reasonably close proximity to the CS department, so nerd chic Is displayed more prominently in this region of the campus.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Does it make a difference if the watch by Random+Internet+Guy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have a solar-powered analog watch. It's awesome, I never have to change the battery. And it tells me the time without having to look at my phone!

    4. Re:Does it make a difference if the watch by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      ambient indoor lighting may be enough to power a calculator, but it's only going to make minutes of difference to a watch that would otherwise last only a day.

      They say it takes an hour a day to charge in > 10k lux. Too bad if it's an overcast day. You'd need to spend over 5 hours in the "sun" then. Every day.

      And the notifications for a solar watch are LED's... which would be hard to read in direct sunlight...
      Seems like an LCD semi-smart watch like the Asus Vivo Watch is a better idea. Black & white graphical LCD, 7 days battery life. Sunlight readable. Pitty the app software is a bit shit.

    5. Re: Does it make a difference if the watch by enigma32 · · Score: 1

      You should look at the Garmin Fenix5.
      It's metal (with sapphire glass, if you desire), and the battery lasts about 3 weeks with normal use for me.
      The display is a reflective one, with a backlight as well. Some folks don't like this, but I love it. It's great in direct sunlight or the dark.
      Can you install any random app on it? no. But I never really saw the point of most watch apps anyway. I don't think the manufacturer is going away anytime soon.

      This is the only "smartwatch" I've seen that I was even remotely interested in.

    6. Re:Does it make a difference if the watch by q_e_t · · Score: 1

      It might be very important if you live in Trondheim or have just been sent to a research station in Antarctica.

  2. Interesting by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    I've been waiting for a smart watch with good battery life and just basic notification support. A little low power LCD would be handy, but this could potentially be a nice addition to a smart phone.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Interesting by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      This isn't really a smart watch, it's more of a solar-powered basic activity tracker like Fitbit, Garmin, and Jawbone have been making for years. The only difference seems to be they put a physical watchface with physical watch hands on one.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Interesting by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The other thing I really want from the watch is a proper heart rate monitor. The current ones are wildly inaccurate.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Interesting by narcc · · Score: 1

      The only ones I've found that work at all, for me at least, require a chest strap.

    4. Re:Interesting by carnivore302 · · Score: 1

      Have a look at Matrix, a watch that is powered by your body heat. It's on indiegogo (which should raise some red flags, but this seems genuinely okay - they gave updates every month or os and are almost ready to ship). They promise you can even swim with it!
      https://www.indiegogo.com/proj...

      --
      Please login to access my lawn
    5. Re:Interesting by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I'm highly sceptical that they can generate enough energy from body heat.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. Solar Powered by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Funny

    [very small print] If you live on Mercury. [/]

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  4. I don't get it. by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe I'm missing some sort of killer feature; but it looks like their power budget forced them to axe a pretty substantial percentage of the 'smart'; while still tying the watch to a phone(and the hope that it won't lose most of its utility if the company bleeds out and stops updating their little app) and keeping power draw high enough that you do at least sometimes have to worry about the battery, unlike non-smart watches which draw so little power that the solar ones usually run for the life of the device and the battery powered ones have battery lives in years rather than hours.

    I could see the notification LED maybe being useful if you already have your phone's constant demands for attention pared down enough that a simple "$APP$ is bothering you" indicator, without room for displaying 'from', 'subject', or anything of that sort would actually be helpful; but my experience has been that 'social' apps are relentless about their notification spam because user engagement metrics are the stuff of which inflated valuations are built; and email notifications are hard to make helpful without at least knowing you the message is from; or that it has passed a particular set of filter rules; because most mailboxes get a constant torrent of low value chatter.

    I, um, guess it's less silly looking than the rubbery-bracelet style activity trackers? And the advertising photos imply that it will make me a rugged outdoorsman enjoying an active lifestyle and adequate vitamin D? Plus, the advanced 'have your watch tell you if the sun has risen or set' feature!

    1. Re:I don't get it. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      I used to wear a Garmin Vivosmart. It seemingly did everything this device does. It also had a low res OLED display which could display notification text and symbols - which was significantly more useful than this - this is more along the lines of the low-end Jawbone or Fitbit devices of 3-5 years ago.

      My Garmin had 8-10 days battery life.

      The only advantage I can see to this is the physical watch hands are obviously "always on". And perhaps the solar powered bit means you won't have to keep to that brutal once-a-week charging schedule. :-)

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:I don't get it. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm missing some sort of killer feature; but it looks like their power budget forced them to axe a pretty substantial percentage of the 'smart';

      Yeah, pretty much any kind of active communication, interface or sensor will use orders of magnitude more power than running a clock. They say 1 hour/day at >10k lux, well that means an hour of daylight. On an overcast day it's >10 hours. Normal indoor lighting would barely register. I guess this watch is made for people that live in California...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:I don't get it. by Macman408 · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm missing some sort of killer feature; but it looks like their power budget forced them to axe a pretty substantial percentage of the 'smart'

      Yup. I don't feel like reproducing my math, but I calculated (given the Apple Watch's battery size and battery life) that in order for a device with that power budget to be solar powered, you'd have to have the entire face of the watch in direct, summer, noontime sunlight for something like 30 hours a day. Even the less astute among us should be able to detect a slight problem with that plan.

      My guess is that the display is probably the most power-hungry component, followed by the processor and radios. It's easy to save power in the CPU and radios by turning them off as quickly as possible - short bursts of high power followed by long periods of inactivity (and zero power draw) will consume minimal power from the battery. But for the screen, it's awfully hard to do that sort of thing, because you want to be looking at it! So, short of inventing some new display technology that uses very minimal power, the easiest thing to do is get rid of the display completely, and all the features that require it.

  5. solar powered watches by pz · · Score: 1

    I have a handful of solar powered watches. The normal kind, that just tell time. They have mechanical faces. They are just awesome, and, like the proposed semi-smart watches (without a display, they aren't smart, sorry), only need a modicum of sunlight, or somewhat more office light, every day to run just fine indefinitely. The only time I've had problems is when I inadvertently left one in a dark closet for a couple of months. Even then, bright sun for a few hours, and all was well again.

    Not having to replace batteries, ever, is AWESOME, doubly so because watch batteries are really tiny, by the constraints imposed by the size of the watches and so replacing them is a right royal pain in the patootie. Recharging, daily? No thank you. I'm the one who runs my life, not my watch. I need to be able to trust the reliability of the things I use, and if forgetting to do a daily charging cycle means the thing is no longer useful for the day, well, then it wasn't really useful to start with.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    1. Re:solar powered watches by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Not having to replace batteries, ever, is AWESOME, doubly so because watch batteries are really tiny

      I got my last wrist watch 17 years ago. The battery is still going. Most people will replace their dumbwatch long before the battery dies, so I can't see the point to a solar dumbwatch.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  6. I'm out by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    a) I haven't worn a watch for years.Carrying a phone just makes it totally unnecessary. I'm even afraid that having something on my wrist all day again would just feel wierd now.

    b) Watched the video on their website and am not about to buy anything that is advertised by and therefore associated with fashion-victim hipsters with ridiculous-looking man-buns.

    1. Re:I'm out by Known+Nutter · · Score: 1

      You lost me at 'a' but had me back at 'b' -- I love watches, personally, and a phone does not replace them. I'm not strapped with a Rolex, but rather a modest collect of Citizen and Seiko.

      That video, though, contained probably the largest man bun I've ever seen. Good lord...

      --
      Beware of the Leopard.
    2. Re:I'm out by antdude · · Score: 1

      For me, I hate taking out and in my stuff out of my pockets like my iPhone 4S, wallet, etc. With a watch, it is always on my thin wrist to easily see my old school Casio Data Bank DB150's time and other features.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  7. Vampire watch (sort of) by captbollocks · · Score: 1

    Finally I don't have to risk turning to dust when looking out the window to see if the sun has gone down yet.

  8. Fools and their money... by XSportSeeker · · Score: 1

    ...need I say more?

  9. Lack of compromise by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    In general we are inflected with a lack of companies.
    We want a device that is as small as possible with a ton of features and last a long time on a battery.
    When ever something is removed to add something out there is rage about it.
    Mobile devices that use to have months of battery life were also about 10 - 20 years behind modern technology on what they can do. We are not closer to 5 years now.
    So what the display can do, processing that needs to be done unwilling to have physical buttons to handle functions. All add up to kill battery life.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Lack of compromise by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I want fewer features and better battery life.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  10. Solar panel replaces LCD to let LEDs burn battery? by 4wdloop · · Score: 1

    That's an interesting compromise....do the analog hands auto synchronize to phone's time at least?

    --
    4wdloop
  11. Cutting-edge tech. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    TFA has photo of the watch with other, presumably, daily-carry items, including a Kodak Instamatic 100 camera from 1963 and cheap LED palm light. Cutting-edge tech all around I see.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  12. I'm missing something here...... by siamesevodka · · Score: 1

    So will there be an app on the smart watch to tell you when your getting to many harmful rays from the sun while your trying to charge your watch?

  13. Re: What does giveth the secret of time?! by TheOuterLinux · · Score: 1

    And for some reason, I accidentally AC'ed...

  14. Tomorrows headline by geoskd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Kickstarter funded startup for solar powered watch ends in disaster as startup discovers that watch size solar panels that are covered by sleeves don't produce enough power to run anything.

    Todays best solar panels produce about 15 watts per square foot under ideal conditions (south facing, unshaded direct sunlight). A watch is about 1 square inch (1/144th of a square). So you can start with 1/144th of 15 watts, and under ideal conditions the watch will generate 81 mW. Now you automatically have to divide that in half because you have about 50% nighttime, so the watch has to run on less than 40mW. Now because it still has to work at night, it needs some kind of energy storage, and charging and drawing from that storage will cost you about 15% of your efficiency round trip, so you can take that down to about 35mW. Next, you have to account for more northern climates where your solar load factor is lower because of the amount of atmosphere the light has to pass through, and you have to assume worst case that it will only provide 50% of the rated performance, so now you are down to 17mW. Now, a good microprocessor in sleep mode will draw about 1mA at 3.3V, or about 3.3mW, but during active function will draw around 10mA minimum (33mW). Although Bluetooth Low Energy itself will not use much power for low bandwidth usage, processing that information will require the CPU to be in the active state for a not-insignificant amount of the time. Assume that it will have to spend about 20% of its time actively handling status messages (remember the only way to get a processor that runs on so little power is that it is a 50MHz processor (about the same compute power as a 386 DX). So your average processor power draw should be about 7 mW under normal usage.

    All of that adds up to about a 2x power margin, but all of that has one fundamental assumption that kills the concept in the real world: The solar is only effective when pointed in the general direction of the sun. A watch (even without sleeves) will almost never be directly exposed to sunlight for any significant duration. (Note that light from indoor sources only produces about 1% of the energy as direct natural sunlight. That is why sitting in direct sunlight makes you warm, and indoor lighting doesn't).

    At the end of the day, a dumb watch would probably work just fine for this sort of thing, since a dumb watch only draws uAs. Once you add any kind of external communication protocol, even if it is BLE, you up the power draw to a level that simply can't be powered by energy harvesting of any kind (be it solar or motion, or anything else). I think they have a very nice design for a solar watch that can probably even work for non-smart usage, but if they think they are going to put anything in this thing that can talk to a smartphone, wifi, or any other wireless device, they are dreaming.

    --
    I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    1. Re:Tomorrows headline by geoskd · · Score: 1

      maybe they're combining solar + motion + heat + radiowaves harvesting and maybe they're just running a 386dx running vnc between the watch and a smartphone or maybe it's just a scam

      After a bit more digging, They say it requires at least an hour a day with > 10k lux. Here in New York, that would require about 1.5 hours of direct sunlight in the summer and almost 4 hours of direct sunlight in the winter. On a cloudy day, it would be about 3x that long. Note that both of those are with the panel surface perfectly perpendicular to the sun. If you move the surface 30 degree off angle, you double the time required. Indoor lighting, as stated, is worthless. So you either have to have an external charging system for the thing, or put it under a sunlamp for an hour a day... Neither of those are very appealing, since I can just get a watch that use QI charging, and achieve the same effect for far less money, and get one that can power a modern processor.

      As a kickstarter campaign, this seems to be quite successful, but keep in mind they only had to find 600 people willing to part with $150 each. As a viable company, I think they will discover that after the first dozen or so scathing reviews, their sales (if they ever achieve anything significant) will tank and that will be the end of them.

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
  15. Re:Not real news by crashumbc · · Score: 1

    This is the truth about so MANY kickstarters these days.

  16. Successfully Crowdfunded != Delivered by ChrisKnight · · Score: 2

    Meeting their funding goals isn't the hard part, delivering a product is. Let us know if they manage that. http://www.thegamer.com/failur...

    --
    -- This sig is only a test. If this were a real sig it would say something witty. --
  17. Where's the smart part? by Edis+Krad · · Score: 1

    - Notifications
    - Dual Time
    - Sunrise / Sunset

    That's it? I've seen wind up watches with more functionality that that. How about a calendar? Or a timer? Or a stopwatch? Or a heartbeat monitor? Or a pedometer? Or a GPS receiver?

    Connecting to your phone a smartwatch makes not, I'd say.

  18. A smart watch, on Kickstarter! Sign me up! by OnceWas · · Score: 1

    Truly groundbreaking. Anyone interested in buying my Pebble Kickstarter edition? It has several days of battery life, basic but somewhat useful smartwatch functions, and, oh yeah, it's been abandoned by its new IP owner, Fitbit.

    --
    Laugh while you can, monkey-boy.
    1. Re:A smart watch, on Kickstarter! Sign me up! by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      What's the price? I wouldn't mind picking up a used Pebble.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:A smart watch, on Kickstarter! Sign me up! by OnceWas · · Score: 1

      Name your price. It's just gathering dust.

      --
      Laugh while you can, monkey-boy.
  19. Let me know when by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    You can BUY it online from say a TRUSTED source, or, in a store. Nope, not backing kickstarter. If it were "that good" the venture capitalist or banks would back it.

  20. Good for batteries by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    To charge a small amount often is good for the battery. Charging from 95% to 100% goes slower because of a lower voltage difference. If the battery is nearly empty, current flows faster and creatures dendrites on the inside of the batteries' terminals. So recharging every time you step outside instead of once per day at night is quite beneficial.

  21. SCAM: A Smartwatch that has real hands! by gargalatas · · Score: 1

    Just look at the photos. You can see the hands are real! They are not like any other watch renders that the hands are drawn. Just look at one photo carefully and you will see even shade on hands! What a scam is this really! I can't believe there are so ignorant people to fund such SCAMMY campaigs.