People Still Aren't Buying Smartwatches -- and It's Only Going To Get Worse (businessinsider.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Wearable technology still isn't catching up. Despite a year full of exciting new smartwatches, tech-enabled clothing or jewelry, and fitness activity trackers galore, the growth of the wearables market is still on the decline, according to a new report from research firm eMarketer. In fact, the entire category is being overtaken by smart speakers, at least during the 2017 holiday season. "Other than early adopters, consumers have yet to find a reason to justify the cost of a smartwatch, which can sometimes cost as much as a smartphone," eMarketer forecasting analyst Cindy Liu wrote in the report. "Instead, for this holiday season, we expect smart speakers to be the gift of choice for many tech enthusiasts, because of their lower price points."

Comments

Maybe it's because...

[skam240]

Maybe it's because I don't want an accessory on my wrist that offers almost no advantages over the cell in my pocket, meanwhile costing the same as a nice watch but looking like an 80's calculator wrist watch.

Re:Maybe it's because...

[ZorinLynx]

If smart watches actually did look like 80s calculator wrist watches, I might actually get one!

Instead I just wear my 80s style Casio G-Shock. Because it's dorky-retro and I love that.

Re:Maybe it's because...

[houstonbofh]

Maybe it's because I don't want an accessory on my wrist that offers almost no advantages over the cell in my pocket, meanwhile costing the same as a nice watch but looking like an 80's calculator wrist watch.

And something that is only in style for about 6 months... I have a Tag from 2001. I have a Rolex from 1966. A 4 year old iWatch is trash... Not a good investment or accessory.

Re: Maybe it's because...

[sonamchauhan]

Ah, the build quality, of course. The low-capacity (and slightly-swollen) battery, PCB with tin whiskers, chipped bezel, unresponsive OS, temperamental Bluetooth, 'retired' cloud service, flaky sensors, compatibility issues with your hardware devices, tatty plastic band... All these add a degree of authenticity.

Re:Maybe it's because...

[_merlin]

A wristwatch is still more practical than pulling your phone out in a lot of situations. Diving, cycling, surfing, even running. It's a lot easier and safer to glance at your wrist than to pull a phone out, and in some cases the phone wouldn't survive the activity at all.

No thanks...

[erp_consultant]

I've got enough distractions without another one on my wrist. One that I have to charge up every day. One that doesn't do much without the phone that it is paired with. I like watches - real watches with automatic movements. Little mechanical works of art. Not some stupid little redundant blue tooth toy.

Re:Bring back the Pebble, damnit.

[arth1]

The Pebble hit it right - it did just enough, and the battery lasted a long time on a charge.

Most of us are used to watches that last years on a battery charge if they use batteries.
And you can tell the time with a glance, without touching it. That's why wrist watches won over pocket watches, and if you can't bring that level of convenience with a new product, it won't win either.

Once I get a clock that displays on the inside of my eyelid, I may consider getting rid of my wrist watches. But until then, that's what I'll use for the sheer convenience and dependability, neither of which Smartwatches have.

Nobody want some beanie babies?

[plopez]

Cabbage patch kids? Hulu hoops? Lava lamps? Tamagotchis? Smart watches? Anyone?

In other words, fads come and go.

I'm not interested in losing privacy & freedom

[jbn-o]

I'm not interested in a computer that runs on nonfree software, is network-capable, and running code I'm not allowed to fully understand, fix, alter, run only when I want, or share with others (in short, software freedom). I see no reason to trust the manufacturers, the proprietary software developers, or the distributors with my privacy and I see nothing in the ads for any of the devices to convince me otherwise (something I believe to be their job if they want me to buy their product).

I might find it convenient to have access to the information such a device can grant, but not at the cost of my privacy or my software freedom. I also don't have a problem with paying for respect for my privacy and my software freedom. But so long as that's not an option, there's simply nothing for me to consider. The high price and other technical shortcomings (small screen, hard-to-use touchscreen controls, etc.) are relatively minor details; issues that I can address myself with software freedom.

Smart Watches were Obsolete before they were inven

[LeftCoastThinker]

Two fundamental problems with smart watches:

My smart phone that is always in my pocket does far more and is less likely to get damaged.

My dumb digital watch with an electrolumenescent back-light still does what I expect a watch to do, it does it for $35 dollars, it's permanently water proof for showers and pool swimming, it lasts 6 years on a single battery and I can't figure out why I would want to replace it.

The screen of a smart watch is too small to do jack on and other than maybe buying a fitness tracker, I can't fathom screwing around with watch apps when my nice big phone is right in my pocket. The smart watch is a hangover from the Dick Tracey days of the radio watch fantasy, the problem is we already have better tech than was imagined in the Star Trek communicators, so we kind of leap frogged the whole Dick Tracey watch thing both functionally and practically. Now smart watches are relegated to to the nerd toy aisle unless and until they can be more practical than a real watch with some actually valuable, unique functions.