Google Is Building a Pixel-Branded Smartwatch, Says Report (venturebeat.com)

Prolific technology leaker Evan Blass received a tip yesterday that Google could unveil a Pixel watch at its annual hardware event later this year. Wear OS didn't get any serious stage time at Google I/O this week, so it's likely to be covered in more detail at the next event. Furthermore, Qualcomm revealed on Tuesday that they are launching a new smartwatch system on a chip (SoC) this fall too. VentureBeat reports: WinFuture concurs that a Google smartwatch is coming, and adds that it will be available in three models, codenamed Ling, Triton, and Sardine. The German publication does not know how the three Pixel watches might differ (presumably either size, connectivity, or finish -- and of course, price).

This is not the first time we've heard about a potential "Pixel-branded watch." Still, this time around is hard to ignore when it comes from Blass, and just two days after Pankaj Kedia, Qualcomm's senior director of wearables, told Wareable that Wear OS smartwatches from several partners would arrive by the holidays, preceded by new chips announced this fall "alongside a lead smartwatch." It all lines up.

Comments

Brilliant idea

[Shemmie]

Under-performing brand tries to sell (seemingly) unwanted gadget.

I miss you, Nexus.

Re:Brilliant idea

[drinkypoo]

I miss you, Nexus.

you can have my Nexus 4 whose digitizer failed. It costs a mint to repair. I'd still be using that phone if not for that.

Re:Brilliant idea

[Shemmie]

My 6P's still trundling on. I didn't bother upgrading last cycle, and I don't honestly know wtf I'd want, this cycle. If I can just keep the battery ticking over (or replace - bit fiddly, but seemingly do-able), I'll keep it.

No new features, on any new phones, seems like a worthwhile update.

Re:Brilliant idea

[Shemmie]

Actually, saying that - I just picked up a Nokia 220 as a burner second phone, and I'm happy. Maybe it's just me getting old. *shrugs*

Booooring

[diginess]

Next?

Still don't see the use case

[cascadingstylesheet]

A smart phone is about the smallest size to show you useful stuff.

Sure, a wristwatch can show you the time without you having to take it out of your pocket, but it doesn't have to be smart for that ;)

Re:Still don't see the use case

[kwalker]

You sound like me before I bought a Pebble. However smartwatches are useful for a number of things. Off the top of my head, I used mine for:

* Notifications (Including actions) without digging the phone out of my pocket (And filtering out notifications based on my tastes)
* Call handling (Primarily with a headset, but rejecting calls without one)
* Music handling (with headphones or speaker)
* Useful apps (Timer, stopwatch, alarms, dialer, GPS bookmarks, weather, sending texts with voice-to-text)
* Activity tracking

I handled dozens of notifications per day without touching my phone. Texts back and forth, glancing at e-mails, notices from important apps, etc. My screen-time on my Android phone stayed under 45 minutes per day while I used the watch. I only had to charge my phone about every other day, and the watch about every 4-10 days. And that was without doing anything crazy like using a voice assistant.

So many people seem to think a smartwatch is supposed to replace a smartphone, but I've never found that idea useful at all. For me the watch was an extension of the phone so the phone could stay safely tucked away and not distract me constantly.

Re: Of course they did

[Reverend Green]

Innovation has been declared un-Googley.

Most smart watches are not robust

[bdwoolman]

Would perhaps consider a Smartwatch I could wear into the shower routinely or with which I could dive into a pool. Not SCUBA diving, mind you, just the pool. Water resistant is not good enough. Most of the smartwatches I have seen to date are only water resistant. There is a formal definition:

A watch stamped with "Water Resistant" means that it is humidity-protected. It can endure a bit of water splashes from washing your hands or being caught in the rain. However, water resistance does not mean you should swim or shower with your watch on.

Source

Want waterproof. For a wristwatch it is really a must for me. Not so sold on the idea of a smartwatch anyway as my phone is already a big distractor that I try to keep at bay.

Re:Most smart watches are not robust

[kwalker]

There are multiple levels of 'water resistance', so check the fine print. If it's rated to a certain number of meters or has an IP68 rating, it's proof enough for what you mentioned. If it doesn't have that rating, I would be more leery.

I still miss Pebble. Their Time series was water resistant to 30m (Except the Round), and I believe their original design was as well. I kickstarted when the Time came out and used that for two years. I had it in pools, the ocean, I used it to change music tracks while showering. Not worrying about getting the watch wet was a major requirement for me, as was as long of a battery life as possible, and daylight readability. I kickstarted the Time2, which was just about everything I ever wanted, but then they company folded and sold off most of the carcass to Fitbit and that was the end of that. I still have my Time and I still charge it occasionally, but with the last of their services closing down in June, and with nothing comparable on the market, I guess I'll have to go back to a regular digital watch.

Wow, Qualcomm got off its ass

[cerberusss]

Quite surprising, I had not expected new SoCs from Qualcomm for smartwatches. In February, Ars posted about "Android Wear is getting killed, and it’s all Qualcomm’s fault, where they mention that it's two years since Qualcomm's last smartwatch chip was announced.

Since by all accounts, Qualcomm was being such a dick in the marketplace, I kinda hoped that the smaller SoC makers would've stood up. But it doesn't appear to be the case. Oh well.

Re:Wow, Qualcomm got off its ass

[cerberusss]

Shit penis bags, forgot to include the link:
https://arstechnica.com/gadget...

No Must-Have Features

[Anonymous Coward]

As someone who doesn't wear a watch of any kind, I'm still waiting for a smartwatch to come up with something that I can't do better with the smartphone that's perennially in my pocket. I don't have enough money to just toss it at things that seem neat at first glance but actually don't do anything useful or fun that I'll use them for regularly.

I think that's the real reason smartwatch sales are laggy. Once you get past "Oh neat, a computer on my wrist", it's hard to figure out what to actually do with the things.

The best use cases I can come up with (And none of these apply to me, or to most people) are:

- People who wear pants or other attire without pockets and can't bring a smartphone around with them (Of course, they could just buy pants with pockets instead, that might be the better solution there). This might apply to women wearing dresses or skirts who don't also carry purses as well. But it seems very niche, and they'd have to get a watch with cellular connectivity independent of a phone.

- People who like to wear a watch to check the time quickly while running or something and have enough disposable income to go "I'll buy the one that I can add some sort of wallpaper too instead of a traditional watch with a normal background". I guess some smartwatches might also have unusual faces as options that are hard to find in regular watches these days.

- Avid fitness enthusiasts who want real time tracking of their miles or kilometers walked, pulse, etc.. Of course, there are cheaper devices with which to do that. I think some cell phones can even do that.

Here is my thought on a good feature they could add that would make it more useful if it's technologically possible:

- Make smartwatches that measure not just pulse, but blood pressure. People with high blood pressure could wear them all the time and they'd beep for you to get medical attention if you are about to have a heart attack (There is a much higher chance of a relatively successful outcome if you can get a heart attack treated immediately versus a delay of any kind- it can be the difference between having to eat more vegetables and exercise a bit more after a couple days in the hospital versus not being able to talk or walk properly afterwards or even dying).

Actually, even without the heart attack prevention angle a real-time blood pressure reading could help people with high blood pressure who are trying to exercise. Exercise is recommended to lower blood pressure *over the long haul*, but blood pressure can spike dangerously in real time during exercise and bring on the event people are trying to avoid. So, the watch could monitor your BP and do a chime and an on-screen thing that says "Blood pressure evaluated too high, please take a break or slow it down.", so that people could get all the exercise they can handle without straying into dangerous territory.

So far, I see pulse rate detectors in watches, but not watches that deliver traditional blood pressure readings (i.e. 120/80 type format).

Re:No Must-Have Features

[igot4eyes]

Definitely agree about potential healthcare benefits of wearables for people that need constant monitoring like diabetics, too. I have a fitbit watch for running - i thought i'd get bored of it really quickly and expected to return it, but its actually surprisingly useful. The inbuilt gps tracks my runs so I can leave my phone at home (I used to run with my phone on a belt which was annoying and bulky). It also tracks heartrate constantly which gives a more accurate estimation of calories burnt etc. That said it was quite expensive!

Leaks and more leaks

[kwalker]

I dunno about Evan Blass anymore. He swore up and down that we would get a new Nexus/Pixel 7 a year or so ago and it never materialized. I'm still limping along on my old Nexus 7 with no hope for a decent replacement in sight (Samsung is not decent).

Thanks for the new info, guys.

[bdwoolman]

This is great information, guys. Every now and then one learns something on Slashdot. The devices I have looked at all had no meter-depth rating and just said water resistant not waterproof. Apparently that standard has changed and the word "waterproof" is not used anymore. I'll keep looking for a device that can stand up to my abuse. d:-b