IF Apple does announce a smartwatch, look for Android Wear to change direction very quickly to match everything Apple announces.
On a related note, something I have been wondering recently about is, what if things panned out in such a way that the iPhone was unveiled after Android was released?
People would have immediately noticed that Android was a Blackberry-based OS and nothing like the iPhone OS. That may have really changed the perceptions of people and the way the whole war unfolded.
What's the purpose of the round face? They say in the add that square is boring or something and they are bringing the circle back.
The circle serves a purpose for a 12 o'clock dial.
Square is fine.
My bet is Apple goes square for functionality. Everything the have made is square.
P
In all probability, with Ive as the designer, the chances of a round face seem more.
People talk about how iOS 7 is 'flat', but what about how it is 'rounded'? The numeric keypad now has circles, the call-related buttons are round, the contact photo is in a circle...
It all started off with the iPod Nano and its round icons...
It's an interesting point this article makes: has Google in fact stepped in and redefined the market with a clearer concept than everyone else? "Pulled an Apple"
The idea of augmented reality without the goggles. In which case even if they win they will kill Glass. Was Glass just a red herring, a cover under which to develop this product?
Would Steve have reached this concept sooner - he had a way of seeing the potential in products. We will not know until Apple releases their product, and we see if it is essentially the same as Wear or not. It does seem to be more fitness centric though, from the rumors so far.
I guess I'm just showing my age, but this whole "I look at my phone to tell the time" thing just floors me. Congratulations, you've reinvented the pocket watch, only this time without a fob, so you have to fish around in your pocket for it and drag it out. 110 years after Louis Cartier invented the wristwatch for Alberto Santos-Dumont specifically so he wouldn't have to do exactly that.
I have worn a smart watch for many years, mainly one or another version of the Casio DataBank (which, ironically, is virtually out of production except for some feeble models).
I use my Casio watch to: 1) see the time at a quick glance, 2) remind me of appointments, 3) keep phone numbers (in the days before cell phones), 4) as my alarm clock to wake me up, 5) math calculations (I don't have a head for that), 6) keeping track of time zones when traveling without having to reset my watch, 7) as a stop watch, and 8) as a timer. It doesn't depend on any other device to do these things and runs for well over a year using an inexpensive, user changeable battery.
I see a lot of nice ideas and wishful thinking but very few hard facts about implementation. As I've said before, showing off the concept is easy - think the Communicator in Star Trek (TOS); actually making it is hard.
Nah, the Star Trek Communicator was easy to design—all you had to do was drill a bunch of holes in the door of a Top cigarette roller. (Or was it Bugler?) Anyway, I think that's about the level of prototyping we're seeing in some of these "earth-shattering" products lately.
ETA: Show me something like the Star Trek TNG comm badge—then we'll talk.
They really look nice, except for a couple of daft things like the game on the watch and the emails.
If this does pan out, then Google/ Motorola does have a nice product on their (and hopefully, customers') hands.
I noticed, however, that none of the mockups seem to show any health-tracking stuff.
Wonder what Apple will come up with.
So far it doesn't seem like the Moto 360 will have health tracking capabilities. Android Wear though does have fitness capabilities and can integrate sensors for stuff like activity tracking and heart-rate monitoring if the hardware designers wish to add those sensors.
War? How can it be a war when Apple hasn't declared it yet? If anything, Apple is developing their thermonuclear iWatch and will swat these Google flies with one detonation when they're ready.
One thing the article missed out that I think is really important: all existing Android apps will work with Android Wear without any changes, provided they support Android 4.3 - the notification API used in 4.3+ provides the OS with enough information to generate contextual UIs on a second screen (including thumbnails and interfaces to interact with the notification). This is an incredibly powerful point in Wear's favour - unlike Samsung's Tizen watches, there is no need for developers to go out of their way to make their apps compatible.
As far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong - I haven't had access to an iOS 7 device recently), iOS notifications are non-interactive and also can't display contextual pictures (such as a profile picture for a tweet notification). If Apple were to launch an iWatch platform, developers would need to update their applications in some way to provide proper compatibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleaknik
Honest question here... What's the market's desire for an iWatch? I saw Google's announcement, but I have no desire to have one myself--be it Apple or Android.
Do you want a wearable? If so... why?
Personally, I see it as a zeroth-screen device: an instant-access platform for notifications and basic interactions, with my phone then used to deal with stuff that needs more detailed responses. I spend a lot of time getting my phone out just to dismiss an irrelevant email or an 'update available' notification - a smartwatch-style device eliminates that wasted time entirely. I don't actually have much interest in the healthcare side of things - I'm prepared to be proven wrong, but currently heartrate monitoring etc. just seems to be a bit of a gimmick to me.
Honest question here... What's the market's desire for an iWatch? I saw Google's announcement, but I have no desire to have one myself--be it Apple or Android.
Do you want a wearable? If so... why?
Analog face for a watch
Heart rate monitor
Blood glucose monitor
Step/motion tracking (either by itself or as an accessory to something like the MapMyFitness and EndoMondo type products
Reminder/appointment/text notifications (*only*; I have no desired to respond to anything on my wrist).
If someone could combine all of those desired features into something that looks like a classic wristwatch, in a variety of styles to fit moods and occasion, I'd at least consider buying it, as long as it wasn't stupid expensive.
Otherwise, I'm OK with taking my phone out of my pocket to see the time or notifications, buying a dedicated heart monitoring device, using the existing motion tracking functionality and apps, and using a dedicated blood monitor. I don't need an addon device.
Reminder/appointment/text notifications (*only*; I have no desired to respond to anything on my wrist).
I'd agree that responding to a text message or the like is kinda impractical, but I'd argue that basic interactivity should be present: dismiss / snooze an alarm, update an app, like or retweet a status, mark an email as read, etc. All the little tasks that just require tapping a button or two on your phone could be done via a smartwatch.
I'd like to see a car that will unlock when the BT of the watch gets close enough to initiate a secure handshake, but that also means it should be smart enough to disable this service if you remove the wrist-worn wearable. I can see some of the image's features being included but I think they go overboard with the features and therefore the complexity.
I don't see any particular reason to duplicate the function of the manufacturer provided key fob.
I am curious as to why we haven't seen a serious analysis on this topic yet. I am a hobby technology observer and enthusiast but I think based on the lessons learnt from the iPhone, Apple and wristwatch history, one can make a pretty valid assumption as to what the iWatch will look like. My analysis:
The current smarwatch
- Based on a centuries old paradigm: a mostly circular body designed with one app in mind (measuring time), attached to the wrist with flexible bands
- Legacy design harms experience - modern apps viewed on a small display severely limited, lack context
- Chunky design
- Belief fashion and social acceptance of a device never change
- Designed as an accessory device - merely a second screen to your mobile
A few centuries ago, the wristwatch was a lady product only. Men refused to wear it as they saw it as a woman's bracelet with added clock. War changed it as the man's pocket watch could not be used while riding the horse and holding the gun. A new paradigm was created and lasted a century. The current smartwatch makers now start with this historical design insisting the watch has always been this way. But squeezing modern apps into a centuries old watch design (made with just one app in mind) results in a limited display area, bulk size and overall poor experiece. Convenient viewing of limited mobile apps on your wrist offers low value and as a result lacks mass-market appeal.
Competitors' defence: People want the classic watch design (Motorola)
What's really happening: Making a faster horse instead of inventing the car.
Lessons from the iPhone
- Enable great software with great hardware
- Great software needs a large enough display to see context, simple UI, and connectivity
- Be bold enough to change the paradigm - if hardware cannot enable software, change the whole concept
Small displays on first smartphones and complicated fixed-button controls could not support more serious and context-sensitive sofware beyond calling, texting and simple games. By changing the paradigm of fixed-button controls, Apple allowed for great software with a large screen and revolutionary multitouch UI.
Competiros' defence at the time: Business users want buttons (Steve Ballmer)
What was really happening: Competitors unable to identify the problem in the smartphone product, unable and/or not bold enough to make a paradigm shift and change the product's concept.
Lessons from Apple
- Enter a new product category only if you can make a significant contribution and fix a problem which harms the product's experience
Finally, applying all these lessons to the smartwatch
- Apps need to sing through a large enough display
- To make a large display on a wrist-worn device, break the centuries-old paradigm. Replace the attachable bands with one all-band flexible display.
- Don't worry about people wanting the classic watch design. People want what they are used to and don't know what they want unless they have seen it and experienced it. Once it was easier wishing for a faster horse than imagining the car.
- Making a second screen to your mobile is not a significant contribution. Make use of the unique wearable concept - add health sensors, only possible on a wearable device.
Based on all of this, the iWatch should be similar to this concept from 3M which is exactly the type of the bold reinvention and market disruption Apple is famous for. This is how the watch for 21-century connected society should look like:
Apart from making apps really usable, this concept also makes for a great unisex device with endless possibilites for customised skins. Those in need for the classic watch design can download one from iWatch store, or turn to Google. Remember, it's 2014, we are a modern internet-connected society. A device designed centuries ago with one app in mind cannot possibly support 21-century apps.
Still, the most interesting question remains - is the technology needed for such device ready for mass production? The first flexible-display based mobile phones suggest so...
PS Those arguing this device can not replace Rolex - it surely can't. Because Rolex is not a watch. It is a status symbol. You don't spend thousands of dollars for it to tell you the time.
And being only a surrogate device for your phone doesn’t cut it. Half this stuff becomes useless without one.
Samsung will be selling a watch that includes a SIM. The problem I see is a smart-watch that can also serve as a phone will probably cost way more than a separate phone and separate smart-watch.
Comments
IF Apple does announce a smartwatch, look for Android Wear to change direction very quickly to match everything Apple announces.
On a related note, something I have been wondering recently about is, what if things panned out in such a way that the iPhone was unveiled after Android was released?
People would have immediately noticed that Android was a Blackberry-based OS and nothing like the iPhone OS. That may have really changed the perceptions of people and the way the whole war unfolded.
But mud isn't something that consumers want to buy.
... or see for that matter. I think it made about $21 Million at the box office.
What's the purpose of the round face? They say in the add that square is boring or something and they are bringing the circle back.
The circle serves a purpose for a 12 o'clock dial.
Square is fine.
My bet is Apple goes square for functionality. Everything the have made is square.
P
In all probability, with Ive as the designer, the chances of a round face seem more.
People talk about how iOS 7 is 'flat', but what about how it is 'rounded'? The numeric keypad now has circles, the call-related buttons are round, the contact photo is in a circle...
It all started off with the iPod Nano and its round icons...
Here are some people's thoughts:
They really look nice, except for a couple of daft things like the game on the watch and the emails.
If this does pan out, then Google/ Motorola does have a nice product on their (and hopefully, customers') hands.
I noticed, however, that none of the mockups seem to show any health-tracking stuff.
Wonder what Apple will come up with.
It's an interesting point this article makes: has Google in fact stepped in and redefined the market with a clearer concept than everyone else? "Pulled an Apple"
The idea of augmented reality without the goggles. In which case even if they win they will kill Glass. Was Glass just a red herring, a cover under which to develop this product?
Would Steve have reached this concept sooner - he had a way of seeing the potential in products. We will not know until Apple releases their product, and we see if it is essentially the same as Wear or not. It does seem to be more fitness centric though, from the rumors so far.
Do you want a wearable? If so... why?
I have worn a smart watch for many years, mainly one or another version of the Casio DataBank (which, ironically, is virtually out of production except for some feeble models).
I use my Casio watch to: 1) see the time at a quick glance, 2) remind me of appointments, 3) keep phone numbers (in the days before cell phones), 4) as my alarm clock to wake me up, 5) math calculations (I don't have a head for that), 6) keeping track of time zones when traveling without having to reset my watch, 7) as a stop watch, and 8) as a timer. It doesn't depend on any other device to do these things and runs for well over a year using an inexpensive, user changeable battery.
'Nuff said?
Moto 360 doesn't look so hot from the side. It isn't really wearable.
Cant wait when the fossils enter the game.
ETA: Show me something like the Star Trek TNG comm badge—then we'll talk.
They really look nice, except for a couple of daft things like the game on the watch and the emails.
If this does pan out, then Google/ Motorola does have a nice product on their (and hopefully, customers') hands.
I noticed, however, that none of the mockups seem to show any health-tracking stuff.
Wonder what Apple will come up with.
So far it doesn't seem like the Moto 360 will have health tracking capabilities. Android Wear though does have fitness capabilities and can integrate sensors for stuff like activity tracking and heart-rate monitoring if the hardware designers wish to add those sensors.
http://developer.android.com/wear/index.html?utm_medium=App.net&utm_source=PourOver
I guess my dirty mind is indeed a joy forever.
War? How can it be a war when Apple hasn't declared it yet? If anything, Apple is developing their thermonuclear iWatch and will swat these Google flies with one detonation when they're ready.
One thing the article missed out that I think is really important: all existing Android apps will work with Android Wear without any changes, provided they support Android 4.3 - the notification API used in 4.3+ provides the OS with enough information to generate contextual UIs on a second screen (including thumbnails and interfaces to interact with the notification). This is an incredibly powerful point in Wear's favour - unlike Samsung's Tizen watches, there is no need for developers to go out of their way to make their apps compatible.
As far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong - I haven't had access to an iOS 7 device recently), iOS notifications are non-interactive and also can't display contextual pictures (such as a profile picture for a tweet notification). If Apple were to launch an iWatch platform, developers would need to update their applications in some way to provide proper compatibility.
Quote:
Honest question here... What's the market's desire for an iWatch? I saw Google's announcement, but I have no desire to have one myself--be it Apple or Android.
Do you want a wearable? If so... why?
Personally, I see it as a zeroth-screen device: an instant-access platform for notifications and basic interactions, with my phone then used to deal with stuff that needs more detailed responses. I spend a lot of time getting my phone out just to dismiss an irrelevant email or an 'update available' notification - a smartwatch-style device eliminates that wasted time entirely. I don't actually have much interest in the healthcare side of things - I'm prepared to be proven wrong, but currently heartrate monitoring etc. just seems to be a bit of a gimmick to me.
Honest question here... What's the market's desire for an iWatch? I saw Google's announcement, but I have no desire to have one myself--be it Apple or Android.
Do you want a wearable? If so... why?
- Analog face for a watch
- Heart rate monitor
- Blood glucose monitor
- Step/motion tracking (either by itself or as an accessory to something like the MapMyFitness and EndoMondo type products
- Reminder/appointment/text notifications (*only*; I have no desired to respond to anything on my wrist).
If someone could combine all of those desired features into something that looks like a classic wristwatch, in a variety of styles to fit moods and occasion, I'd at least consider buying it, as long as it wasn't stupid expensive.Otherwise, I'm OK with taking my phone out of my pocket to see the time or notifications, buying a dedicated heart monitoring device, using the existing motion tracking functionality and apps, and using a dedicated blood monitor. I don't need an addon device.
I'd agree that responding to a text message or the like is kinda impractical, but I'd argue that basic interactivity should be present: dismiss / snooze an alarm, update an app, like or retweet a status, mark an email as read, etc. All the little tasks that just require tapping a button or two on your phone could be done via a smartwatch.
I don't see any particular reason to duplicate the function of the manufacturer provided key fob.
I don't see any particular reason to duplicate the function of the manufacturer provided key fob.
One less thing to carry around?
I am curious as to why we haven't seen a serious analysis on this topic yet. I am a hobby technology observer and enthusiast but I think based on the lessons learnt from the iPhone, Apple and wristwatch history, one can make a pretty valid assumption as to what the iWatch will look like. My analysis:
- Enable great software with great hardware
Competiros' defence at the time: Business users want buttons (Steve Ballmer)
- Enter a new product category only if you can make a significant contribution and fix a problem which harms the product's experience
Finally, applying all these lessons to the smartwatch
Apart from making apps really usable, this concept also makes for a great unisex device with endless possibilites for customised skins. Those in need for the classic watch design can download one from iWatch store, or turn to Google. Remember, it's 2014, we are a modern internet-connected society. A device designed centuries ago with one app in mind cannot possibly support 21-century apps.
Still, the most interesting question remains - is the technology needed for such device ready for mass production? The first flexible-display based mobile phones suggest so...
PS Those arguing this device can not replace Rolex - it surely can't. Because Rolex is not a watch. It is a status symbol. You don't spend thousands of dollars for it to tell you the time.
Samsung will be selling a watch that includes a SIM. The problem I see is a smart-watch that can also serve as a phone will probably cost way more than a separate phone and separate smart-watch.