Kids won't wear it, so it won't become the next tablet. Old people won't, so it won't become the next smartphone (and I get that it's not the goal, they're companion devices after all), so that leaves you with the usual suspects-consumers. I think it's great, but to dismiss the naysayers because the previous two were such a success, that's what I question. Anyway....fossil, aren't they like the walmart of luxury watches? I'm no Onkel, but I had a fossil watch when I was 13 and I always thought that demographic was more or less its market. Eh, anyway, carry on you watcholes you.Again, I think grannies are too far outside a demographic to judge mainstream appeal. ESPECIALLY when you're talking about technology.
I dont care for it no. especially loud people over the phone. I find it rude in a way. Should you really bother other people on the bus/train with your personal calls? no you should not its rude. They might want to relax or sleep, not hear you talk about what you did last night..
Can this operate without my phone, with its own simcard?
If no... the war has not began yet.
I really don't see what use can you give to it than can't already be done similarly with a smartphone. I don't want to go around in public speaking to my watch.
Motorola is killing it... Too bad Google was afraid of other manufacturers getting jelly of them being part of Google.
I was not referring to making phone calls. It's a collection of smartphone apps compressed down to very simple features. There will be a Facebook app for these devices.I feel like you didnt watch the video nor read any of the articles. This is exactly NOT a smartphone on your wrist.
What I see is glancable information, your weather 5 day forecast, navigation directions, transit directions, glanceable text messages, flight notifications, spot traffic updates, upcoming appointment updates, inbox email previews, sports scores, the time, and health information from sensors on the device.
This is ironically exactly what a smartwatch should be. Your post is describing that hulking Samsung monstrosity from last year that you are supposed to make phone calls on. This is doing it right; and you can bet your ass that Apple will roll out something extremely similar to this, just later on.
I was not referring to making phone calls. It's a collection of smartphone apps compressed down to very simple features. There will be a Facebook app for these devices.
Nobody is surprised at this product. People were surprised how shitty the Samsung watch was, but Google's take looks exactly what you expect for a well executed transfer of the smartphone to the wrist.
I'm hoping Apple will go in a different direction, something wearable that offers some other utility that is not offered better by the same apps I have on my phone. They might not. They might show us a well executed iOS watch that is not hard to imagine.
There is no product in these videos. This video is an announcement of Google's wearables development platform. The first wearable this platform will support is watches. This is a concept video as to how this might work.
Specifically, in this video, you see how Google Now can integrate into smart watches. Short of that, we don't know anything.
So I'm not sure what not-hard-to-imagine thing an iOS watch could do that this platform cannot support, but you seem like you already know what's what.
http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/0...fications-detailed-hands-on-with-gifs-galore/The home screen, which consists of the clock, the voice input button, and the topmost notification.
You can pull the top part of the screen down at any time to show the date and charge level.
The area occupying the very top 4-5% of the screen acts as a Home button and brings you back to the home screen.
If you're talking to me, you're preaching to the choir.Just so everyone is caught up, moto is no longer part of google.
Actually it's both. Preview for the SDK and preview for two watches one from Moto and one from LG
http://www.motorola.com/moto360
If you're defining it's success to the equivalent of tablets and smartphones, I agree. It's more niche than that. But I think there's a market in between "tech geek" and "perfect for every demographic" where you could still define it as successful, accepted, mainstream adoption. Plus, who knows. Down the line, I could see the tech getting cheap enough that they do have versions for kids. We already live in an age where people give their 10 year olds smartphones and tablets.Kids won't wear it, so it won't become the next tablet. Old people won't, so it won't become the next smartphone (and I get that it's not the goal, they're companion devices after all), so that leaves you with the usual suspects-consumers. I think it's great, but to dismiss the naysayers because the previous two were such a success, that's what I question. Anyway....fossil, aren't they like the walmart of luxury watches? I'm no Onkel, but I had a fossil watch when I was 13 and I always thought that demographic was more or less its market. Eh, anyway, carry on you watcholes you.
My wording is poor I see. The point was that an iOS watch would be similar to the concept watches shown in the video. I hope Apple tries to make a completely different wearable device instead of compressing the iOS platform (not referring to the guts of the operating system, which they would be using).There is no product in these videos. This video is an announcement of Google's wearables development platform. The first wearable this platform will support is watches. This is a concept video as to how this might work.
Specifically, in this video, you see how Google Now can integrate into smart watches. Short of that, we don't know anything.
So I'm not sure what not-hard-to-imagine thing an iOS watch could do that this platform cannot support, but you seem like you already know what's what.
Nah, they don't pretend to be luxury, just nice designs, acceptable build quality and accessible price. Think B, B- demographics. They are the watches you buy when you casually enjoy timepieces and peace with your bank account.Anyway....fossil, aren't they like the walmart of luxury watches? I'm no Onkel, but I had a fossil watch when I was 13 and I always thought that demographic was more or less its market. Eh, anyway, carry on you watcholes you.
They already make those (http://www.3gwatches.com/revolution.html). I've seen others too. I can't speak to the quality though.
Personally, I think that's a little too much. A watch form factor is too limited to completely replace your smartphone, so why bother? Better to play to it's strengths and let them enhance each other.
You're right. I do think there's a market for that. But I think that's a deeper niche than the current goal (ie as a phone enhancement). Assuming smart watches take off, I'm sure more development in to independent smart watches will follow.The whole point of a smartwatch is for it to be independent from mobiles, meaning you can do sports on it, surf, etc. Without depending on your phone. The whole point of those is so that you don't have to have a mobile in your pocket. After all they are a fitness device.
Mountain climbing, running, surfing swimming, etc. Thats why you want it be independent. Taking sudden photos, while being on the run, taking photos in the sea, listening to music etc. Without having your phone with you or having one bouncing around annoying in your pocket.
Of course after if you wish you can link it to your phone. They can enchance eachother, but allow them to act as standalone devices, because the requirement of having both devices is definitely not an enhancement while doing anything fitness related, its a downgrade.
I thought "smartwatches" were somewhat of a joke at first, but I happened to get a Pebble anyways a few months ago.
I absolutely love it. But I don't think it's necessary for everyone. If you can use your computer or phone at any time, a smartwatch suddenly seems much less useful.
Currently I'm teaching. It's both frowned upon and extremely impractical to try to use a smartphone/tablet/computer in the middle of class to refer to lesson plans, despite creating and organizing them all on Evernote. But having them available on my wrist is extremely useful and works seamlessly in the classroom.
Again, if you're working a job where you can access your phone or computer at any moment you choose, a smartwatch seems unnecessary. But for me, at least, it's quite helpful.
Oddly enough, I think the garage door demonstration at the end of the video is the most interesting application.
If they can make the battery life last longer than a week...This will be my next watch. I've been watchless for about 10 years now.
And plus I love Google Now, it works great for me on my phone. Having it easily accessible on my wrist would be great.
The whole point of a smartwatch is for it to be independent from mobiles, meaning you can do sports on it, surf, etc. Without depending on your phone. The whole point of those is so that you don't have to have a mobile in your pocket. After all they are a fitness device.
Mountain climbing, running, surfing swimming, etc. Thats why you want it be independent. Taking sudden photos, while being on the run, taking photos in the sea, listening to music etc. Without having your phone with you or having one bouncing around annoying in your pocket.
Of course after if you wish you can link it to your phone. They can enchance eachother, but allow them to act as standalone devices, because the requirement of having both devices is definitely not an enhancement while doing anything fitness related, its a downgrade.
Pretty cool. I'll wait till Apple makes a sexier UI and watch before jumping into one of these.
I dont even know if I need these but I like new tech so i dunno
The whole point of a smartwatch is for it to be independent from mobiles, meaning you can do sports on it, surf, etc. Without depending on your phone. The whole point of those is so that you don't have to have a mobile in your pocket. After all they are a fitness device.
Mountain climbing, running, surfing swimming, etc. Thats why you want it be independent. Taking sudden photos, while being on the run, taking photos in the sea, listening to music etc. Without having your phone with you or having one bouncing around annoying in your pocket.
Of course after if you wish you can link it to your phone. They can enchance eachother, but allow them to act as standalone devices, because the requirement of having both devices is definitely not an enhancement while doing anything fitness related, its a downgrade.
Its more a matter of what you have to accept given the current technology limitations.
For example, the battery on a Nexus 5 is 2300 mAh and is considered to be small. The batter on the posted watch is 500 mah. The Nexus 5 spends a lot of time with its screen off. You kinda expect to look at your watch face on demand which tends to suggest its on more, but it could be off most of the time as well. The battery drain of the GSM components is largely the same and it next to the screen is the biggest drainer of battery life. You can probably go with a substantially reduced CPU given the use case - but that's still going to have the watch and its battery life being measured in days if you're putting GSM in there.
So while its by no means a bad set of use cases you mention - I'm one of those engineering types who will be in the meeting constantly saying "yeah that's cool, but how are you going to power it" while the creative, UX, and business folks are posting videos of you using the thing to charge the car because you left the lights on or some other such foolishness. Not to mention, who the hell is going to want to get a data plan just for their watch. This is one of those crawl before you can walk scenarios. You can't always do everything in version 1.0 and make it affordable for people at the same time.
There's plenty of products "ahead of its time" and never took off because the technology cannot match the ideal. While you say version 1.0, I think it's more like version 0.1.
If you're selling it - its version 1.0.