26 thoughts on “Some thoughts on smartwatches (including Samsung GalaxyGear)”

  1. I think that Apple will take a decidedly different approach to the Smartwatch.

    Think of an Apple-designed device that can snap into a wide range of bezels and watch bands. Like Swatch meets Pandora bracelets. And didn’t they just hire a mucky-muck from YSL? Paul Deneve could help them to line up deals with other fashion companies. Apple wouldn’t just redefine the smartwatch, they’d redefine the watch. Right now, you can’t buy a Tissot, Swatch or even Rolex brand band for another watch body, but that might change.

    Recent Nanos included enough hardware for a device that tells time, and while also including an accelerometer and processor that enables tons of fitness apps.

    I was given a Pebble by a friend. I find it very useful to have something glance-able, but the hardware is very limited. An Apple watch would be infinitely configurable.

    If you removed the clip from the old “watch nano” and filled that space with battery, you could probably come up with a device that lasts a week on a charge — like the Pebble. And, I’d imagine an Apple watch would conserve battery by lighting up only when you hold it up to read the time. The Pebble has an accelerometer, but isn’t smart enough. It will light up when you shake, it though. Apple would be slicker.

      1. I guess you never saw how many cases they sell? Imagine screen bezels, screen protectors, and watch bands from all different designers.

  2. One of the big problems is that some think like you.
    Smartwatches don’t have to look like a watch , it’s not practical to have a small square screen. This has to be a new form factor and it is supremely dumb to limit yourself to mimic a watch.
    As for wrist based devices having to look good ,sure but not that many people actually wear a watch nowadays, that space is usually empty and there is nothing to displace.

    As for existing devices they are all terrible. Hardware and software. On the hardware side the focus is to mimic a watch and that is too far from ideal. On the software side the focus is on notification and fitness/wellness/healthcare but there are at the very least 2 other core features that such a device should have and nobody is exploiting those yet.
    The Samsung device is a very poor attempt. First and foremost it should cost 100$. At 300$ is ridiculous .Apple could get away with 125-150$ but only because it’s fanboys are used to pay too much and they usually are people with too much disposable income for their own good.. Then the Gear has short battery life and no wireless charging or capacitors instead of battery for quick charging. The camera is just wrong ,albeit mildly useful. It’s not all that comfortable to aim with it and is low res.
    It only takes one decent product for the category to take off , remains to be seen when someone has that.

  3. The problem will always be battery power. You cannot put all the power you want in a device small enough to fit on your wrist with out having to triple its size in battery space.

    Look at Google glass, at least you can hang the battery at the back of the ear, no luxury in a wrist watch.

    I think the efforts so far have been very commendable. I doubt you will get much better for a long time.

    1. I think that they have to make it last about a week. My friend recently gave me a pebble as a gift and it gets a week between charges. I find that pretty manageable but I am someone that doesn’t usually take off jewelry when I sleep, etc.

      The Apple watch could save power by only lighting up when it senses that you raise it up to your face to read the time. Also if you go off the clip nano from last year and remove the clip and fill that extra space with battery you might be able to reach a week.

      1. Jason

        You make solid points — it is battery and also the lightweight nature of these watches which will be in addition to what I said about the aesthetics.

        It won’t be that easy, but I am looking forward to the next killer design.

        1. I’ve had some exposure to this space, starting with Nike+ and graduating to the fuel band, etc.

          If Apple can recapture all of those fitness customers, grab the disparate “wearable” market (Jawbone Up, FitBit), wrap it with style, like Swatch, Coach (Coach already makes iPhone cases, anyway), they create an entire ecosytem again.

          1) Watch faces (I imagine you’d buy designer faces, or artist-based faces in iTunes), similar to the pebble
          2) Watch bands. A “made for iWatch” band that sells in the Apple stores with a licensing fee paid to Apple would be like cases all over again.
          3) Bezels/protectors? This seems the most iffy. But that might be one way to dress a watch up in diamonds, swarovski crystals, etc.

          Apple does a very good job of making stylish products. None of the current smart watches go after the traditional watch market, yet most traditional watches (especially feature watches) are genuinely difficult to use. I own a Citizen Eco-Drive, and I barely tap into the features. My wife recently spent $300 on a fashion chronograph, and there was a thick instruction booklet for time zones, stopwatch, timer, etc. Needless to say, it’s not used for much besides telling time. I doubt that the calendar is even set correctly.

          I think that Apple might very well come out with a core device that can then be dressed up in myriad bezels, bands and watchfaces. More like a Nano, but with a much more flexible OS and a bunch of features (in typical Apple mode, though, I’d expect some features to be held back for future iterations). The Nano line seemed to be losing steam anyway.

  4. “None of the companies have come up with a killer mass market product.”

    Did anyone really think Samsung would be the one to do it?

    If anything Samsung has proven that it can’t lead the market…

  5. I still feel the killer feature on a smartwatch—not addressed by any device so far—is identification and security. Proximity to an authenticated watch could be an alternative to phone-unlocking codes, passwords, keys, debit cards … all sorts of things.

    Notifications are obviously useful, but the screen is obviously too small to input any data and using voice commands is often impractical.

  6. Nissan has also unveiled its nismo smart watch that will allow the users to connect to their cars. However they are focusing more on connecting the users with their car rather than there smartphone. So there is a difference. It is a sub-niche and it would be interesting to see how this plays out in the future. Any thoughts?


    1. I like what I have seen from the Nismo watch (admittedly just a short video) and I like the car integration. I am a car guy and a watch wearer, but unless the thing on my wrist works as watch, I’m not wearing it. I think werables like fit bit and Nike fuel band are much better gadgets simply because they are not trying replicate every function of a phone.

    1. The (fill in the blank) has been replacing traditional watches for years. Watch sales, especially high end watches has been steady for years. There was a time when quartz watches were going to replace mechanical watches.

  7. Not to flog the horse, but I’d be curious to see if Jony Ives is inspired by iconic Dieter Rams designs again. Something like this: http://www.watchalyzer.com/magazine/braun-to-reissue-magnificent-watches-from-the-70s/

    With a touch screen, you might not need a winding crown, but it could be used to invoke things like Siri, and imagine if they sold different crowns in different colors and styles.

    Just putting a weird idea out there. Expand that screen to the whole face, and it looks very “Apple.”

  8. I hope the Apple watch will be very similar to the nest thermostat, albeit smaller. If they use sapphire for the crystal it would probably be pretty durable with a solid, machine milled bezel. I like the circular shape overall and nest does a fantastic job with it’s UI. Also, since iOS is going flat, that would be even better for a smaller, circular screen.

  9. Seriously GigaOm, you feel this was an article that was worthy of a post on this website ? Please do some filtering before posting such mindless drivel on a tech blog.

      1. Om, please keep your thoughts coming. I appreciate your well considered opinions. It’s refreshing to read something by somebody with your experience and logic. You nearly always give me a new way of looking at something.

  10. Om,

    I agree with you. Smartwatch makers (including MetaWatch – I’m CEO) have focused more on the ‘function’ part of the equation and less on ‘form’. This must change for smartwatches to become more mainstream.

    The reality is we purchase and wear traditional watches for a myriad of emotional reasons of which telling time is simply a pretext. It’s my belief that our motivation for buying and wearing smartwatches will follow along similar lines.


    1. Well said @billg. I think it is a great way to think about smart watches. I do think it is a market that will eventually evolve and find its place in the sun.

  11. If ‘smart watch’ is going to be a thing it won’t look like a watch. It won’t even be a watch. Telling time is becoming like spelling. We let our devices watch the clock now.

    Form follows function. The form of the watch-face – particularly its size – is strongly related to the simplicity of its function.

    Think smart ‘bracelet’ instead. Curved glass and an aspect ration that tends to wide-screen. There is more width real-estate up for grabs on the human forearm than there is height. And think ‘senses’ – the new chip architecture on the iPhone that sees the accelerometer processing moved out of the main CPU is interesting. Once you strap a device to the forearm the movement patterns are much more stable and predictable by the OS than a free-held pocket device.

    But even within the rubric of good design thinking, I share the skepticism. Where is the compelling utility? Where is the killer-app that proves there is a use case for this idea beyond duplicating what I already have, or creating a low-affordance cross-device dependency on my phone or bluetooth ear-dongles.

    I can only see niche – elderly folk who need a better health monitoring platform for example. When the iPod took off MP3 players were crap – they were limited and hard to use. When the iPhone took off phones – even smart ones and PDAs – were crap.

    I had no end of trouble with portable digital music, and mobile computing (as opposed to mobile communications) prior to Apple’s innovation.

    I really don’t have any serious issues doing anything a ‘smart watch’ has been supposed to do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.