Any chance of a vomit icon?
Samsung has set the date for its attempt to inspire a smartwatch market and will show off its Galaxy Gear watch and a super-sized smartphone just ahead of the IFA 2013 consumer electronics show in Berlin. "We will be introducing a new wearable concept device called Galaxy Gear at our own event in Berlin on September 4," Lee …
Any chance of a vomit icon?
These watches will go the way of 3D televisions, Betamax, and mini discs, no one really needs them, no one believes the hype anymore, gimmicky and lack of usefulness will eventually consign them to a bottom drawer.
"3D televisions" - Love mine, tho lack of decent content is a pain.
"mini discs" - I loved mine, it was a brilliant piece of kit.
No one really *needs* most of the artefacts of the 21st century. But many of us find many of them useful.
I've had my Pebble watch for six months now, and it has transformed the way I interact with my phone. I really wouldn't want to be without it.
Maybe. I do sometimes wear a watch, and it would be nice to be able to check phone dings and bloops thru it. But it *has* to be something that I only need to think about charging once or twice a week. I rather like the Pebble, if it had a higher DPI eInk screen so the watch faces looked better.
Although who am I kidding, I'm not going to buy one unless they're really cheap.
The real problem seems to be that it won't work outside of the range of bluetooth, you have to leave bluetooth on all the time (bluetooth does get some hacks now and then) and you will have to take the damn thing off for about and hour or two a week to charge it.
A watch with a touch screen, most likely LCD or OLED (people don't like e-ink all that much, it's too 'un-hip' and besides: monochrome? How can you tell a cerulean or teal marked link from a chartreuse one?) and Bluetooth (even low power BLE) that lasts a week when active?
Golf cart battery on the wrist, anyone?
OK, maybe with a built in camera, movement activated, that detects when you look and only then switches the screen on. But then, how can people see what a Dick (Tracy) you are, when your watch is off most of the time?
Decisions, decisions . . .
Bluetooth has a pretty decent range these days - I have bluetooth headphones that easily go 15m+ (not tested further) and a low power mode - so it's quite possible. Personally I take my watch off when sleeping (obviously not everyone does) - not really sure it would be that much hassle once a week.
It's like whinging about your car that you have to refuel it.
The manufacturers are trying to turn us into walking antenna towers! Cell phone: radio for cell network, radio for WiFi, radio for Bluetooth; headset: radio for Bluetooth; watch: radio for Bluetooth; smart glasses: radio for Bluetooth.
That's six radio transmitters on your person. Isn't that rather a lot?
Not if each one serves a useful purpose, no, it isn't. Of course, if some or all of them serve no useful purpose, then yes, it is.
There is no absolute number of radio transmitters that is too many.
I'll be happy with something that works as a running watch (like the Nike+ GPS one), but with a couple of extra features over the current ones - mainly wireless syncing (wifi ideally), bluetooth for a headset for music, and a screen so I can see progress of my running. Happy to charge overnight, but needs to last a full day even when logging GPS tracks and playingmusic.
Beyond that, can't see myselfmaking phone calls through it, and don't just want a mini screen for my phone that won't work without being in bluetooth range of the phone. If it's just that then I can pull the phone out of my pocket just as easily.
Will be interesting to see how each company approaches the watch idea anyway. Suspect there'll be quite a few duds!
You are asking a lot aren't you!
Asking a bit much - wifi and gps takes quite a bit of juice and logging typically requires gps to be running all the time and even an iPod Shuffle (probably about the same size as a watch) only manages up to 15 hours of music and has no screen, wireless, gps etc.
That's the problem with this whole concept. Anything you would want to do with it requires more power then you can put on your wrist. In the end, you still have to carry your phone to tether it to for anything useful, and it's not that much more convenient then just taking your phone out of your pocket.
" While he wouldn't be drawn on specs, the rumor-mill suggests it's a 5.7-inch display phone, possibly with the ability to show 4K video."
Anything with a 5.7 inch display is most certainly NOT a phone. Small portable TV yes.
"the industry has decided is the next big thing." - The consumer will decide.
"There have been rosy analysts' reports on the huge potential of the smartwatch market, but little indication that a significant number of people are very interested" - If Apple went first, the hyperbole would go into overdrive and it would have been the best thing since the iFolly, whilst normal people would see through the trash.
"....in reviving what had until recently been a dying piece of hardware" - I don't trrust those who don't wear a watch! No one is important enough not to keep time. Shows a lack of attention to detail.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017