SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Five years ago, a collective mania overtook the industry. Nobody could think of a clear reason why consumers needed an expensive "smart" watch when they already had a smartphone in their hand, pocket or bag. What value could it deliver? Even Google didn't seem sure: in its now notorious launch video, a punter used a watch simply to replicate features on their phone. But the industry convinced itself that wearables were another platform, and nobody wanted to be a sad second in this race. So the giants entered the market. Not because they wanted to, but as a hedge. Someone else might take a lead.
As we predicted in 2014, this was a solution looking for a problem. And an expensive one, at that.
Are wearable devices whose OS wakes up only when needed for smart features the answer?
(Score: 2) by boltronics on Thursday July 19 2018, @03:24AM (2 children)
I purchased the Garmin Forerunner 935 [garmin.com] earlier this year. It's a sports watch with smartwatch features, but they didn't put the focus on apps or having lots of colours, etc that other smart watches have (such as the Samsung Gear).
But it doesn't make the mistake of trying to compete with a phone, and I'm not even sure it's possible to browse the web on it. I'm pretty sure it can't play audio (other than the most basic beeps you would expect from an old x86 PC speaker). So why would anyone want one?
When riding my bike I can throw my phone in my pannier and still record my ride to upload to Strava.
For running I used to use my phone with an armband. Try that with an Sony Xperia Z Ultra... the thing is huge! I later upgraded to a Samsung S8+ which is a bit smaller but still quite reasonable in size. Anyway, running with a phone on your arm is really annoying to access. You basically can't access it properly on a run unless you're stuck at traffic lights or some such, so if you want to know your speed and other stats you'll need to have it announce those details over your phone speaker. Alternatively you can wear headphones, but I prefer not to use them and just focus on my running.
So imagine you're doing a Saturday morning ParkRun [parkrun.com] and trying to compete, you probably don't want everyone else to hear "best kilometre" or whatever and give away how you're performing. Besides, it's really annoying to miss what was said, and also annoying that you need to wait until a set interval or something to trigger an announcement.
Contrast this to my smartwatch - I get to look at it whenever I want while running which makes it much easier to pace myself correctly to achieve my best times, or to know I'm 500m from the finish so it's time to kick things up a couple of notches. I also get other stats such as heart rate and relative effort to see how I'm going during the event. Sure I could get a bluetooth heart rate chest strap and connect my phone to that, but then you'll only be able to look at that information afterwards. Every stat I care about fits onto my Garmin watch screen (I installed a custom face for running) so I don't need to touch a thing (although I might occasionally press the button to activate the backlight if running at night).
Having a smartwatch means I can also easily press stop and start when I want to get the most accurate time. That may sound silly since phones have GPS too, but GPS usually takes at least a couple of seconds to kick in and notice you got stuck at an intersection or something - and you slow down a couple of seconds before that. It all adds up and can mess with your average times (although arguably cutting out unintentional stops are still messing with the average time, but it's up to the individual as to how they want to track such things).
I've injured my leg and am taking some time off running for a couple of weeks, but I might hit the pool this weekend. My watch can track my performance in the pool too, such as laps and pace - even without GPS availability. Try that with a phone!
Sleeping is better with the watch - once you get used to it. I now get detailed stats about how I slept, and was surprised how poorly I actually sleep in general and how much of an effect keeping my sleep patterns in check can make. I'm also on call 24x7 for work, and now I can have my phone on silent to not wake my spouse - my watch vibrating on my arm can wake me instead.
For people who want to browse websites and the like on your watch - nope, I can't see that happening. A phone is a better and more practical solution there. But everyone should do sports so everyone should have a smartwatch!
It's GNU/Linux dammit!
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Thursday July 19 2018, @09:45AM (1 child)
That's exactly my use case for a smartwatch, but when I read reviews they all said "needs to recharge every 2 days". Urg! So I have a stopwatch on my cheap casio job which is "good enough".
(Score: 2) by boltronics on Thursday July 19 2018, @12:34PM
Yeah that sounds crazy. It might make sense if GPS+GLONASS is on all the time, or the backlight is permanently on a higher setting.
My watch claims to work for 2 weeks in normal watch mode, but I've never been more than 2 days without switching to GPS tracking for a run or ride so I get a bit over a week on a charge. I just charge it each Friday night since I'll usually do longer runs over the weekend.
It's GNU/Linux dammit!