Apple has a decade-long lead in wearables(aboveavalon.com)
aboveavalon.com
Apple has a decade-long lead in wearables
https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2021/5/27/apple-has-a-decade-long-lead-in-wearables
236 comments
I'm have to sort of disagree, not a decade but easily half a decade lead. Source: I worked in this space years ago with what was, at the time, the leader in the space, and remember how many of my coworkers laughed at the Apple Watch unveil. Now Apple is the one laughing with a girthy, multibillion dollar schadenfreude.
Apple has leads in silicon and cross-platform integration which is inarguably led to a better user experience, extended battery life, and smaller form factor. Try piecing together an Airpods Pro grade product with 'off-the-shelf' parts and half the firmware engineers.
Apple has orders of magnitude greater scale through their supply chain, and a real clincher: technological mastery of material science; from CNC milled aluminum to tooling for high grade plastic resin, and can shoulder out competitors from even touching the raw material once they've even realized they need it.
Apple has solid brand cachet, which drives loyalty which drives revenue.
Apple has (last I checked) the highest revenue/sq. foot retail space in the world. Yes, the rest of retail is dying, but Apple controls the image, experience, support, and purchasing of all it's own products. Check out an Apple store on a Friday night in the Bay Area, it's incredible how packed they are.
Arguably the most difficult thing for competitors to copy is the culture of industrial design and UX prioritization backed by engineering. Every other major competitor in their spaces shamelessly copies the externals without the same cohesion and mastery of internals -- it's embarrassing frankly (checkout the Oppo 'Enco X' earbud site, it's a poorly made rip off of the Airpods site).
I don't own any Apple products, and I don't endorse their labor practices, but I respect their brand, products, and patience in releasing GOOD things at the right time. Consumers do too, judging by revenue.
Apple's weakness is now their precarious position in bed with China, which will take decades to undo.
Apple has leads in silicon and cross-platform integration which is inarguably led to a better user experience, extended battery life, and smaller form factor. Try piecing together an Airpods Pro grade product with 'off-the-shelf' parts and half the firmware engineers.
Apple has orders of magnitude greater scale through their supply chain, and a real clincher: technological mastery of material science; from CNC milled aluminum to tooling for high grade plastic resin, and can shoulder out competitors from even touching the raw material once they've even realized they need it.
Apple has solid brand cachet, which drives loyalty which drives revenue.
Apple has (last I checked) the highest revenue/sq. foot retail space in the world. Yes, the rest of retail is dying, but Apple controls the image, experience, support, and purchasing of all it's own products. Check out an Apple store on a Friday night in the Bay Area, it's incredible how packed they are.
Arguably the most difficult thing for competitors to copy is the culture of industrial design and UX prioritization backed by engineering. Every other major competitor in their spaces shamelessly copies the externals without the same cohesion and mastery of internals -- it's embarrassing frankly (checkout the Oppo 'Enco X' earbud site, it's a poorly made rip off of the Airpods site).
I don't own any Apple products, and I don't endorse their labor practices, but I respect their brand, products, and patience in releasing GOOD things at the right time. Consumers do too, judging by revenue.
Apple's weakness is now their precarious position in bed with China, which will take decades to undo.
> Apple's weakness is now their precarious position in bed with China, which will take decades to undo.
But this holds for the entire world economy.
But this holds for the entire world economy.
Kind of, but among the largest tech companies, Apple uniquely runs most of its revenue through the hardware category, and gets a lot of revenue from China.
Google (Alphabet), Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook all use hardware from China, but most of their revenue comes through software interactions. Google does not officially even operate in China. Amazon has a limited corporate footprint in China.
I think it’s reasonable to say that Apple has higher risk related to China than many of its competitors.
Google (Alphabet), Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook all use hardware from China, but most of their revenue comes through software interactions. Google does not officially even operate in China. Amazon has a limited corporate footprint in China.
I think it’s reasonable to say that Apple has higher risk related to China than many of its competitors.
> Google does not officially even operate in China
Google lists three offices in mainland China:
https://about.google/intl/ALL_us/locations/?region=asia-paci...
Google lists three offices in mainland China:
https://about.google/intl/ALL_us/locations/?region=asia-paci...
What happens to their services if they can’t procure hardware?
Services could be sold to existing customer with existing hardware at a moment.
Because hardware never fails and needs to be replaced…
You do remember the disruption when the earthquake in Japan caused hard drive failures? Can you imagine what would happen if the entire supply chain gets disrupted?
You do remember the disruption when the earthquake in Japan caused hard drive failures? Can you imagine what would happen if the entire supply chain gets disrupted?
Of course finally service companies (or all companies) need hardware but the situation isn't too bad compared to company profited by selling hardware. BTW the HDD disaster was flooding in Thailand
As Werner Vogels says “everything fails all the time.” How long can Amazon Retail/AWS, Google/GCP/YouTube, or Microsoft survive without continuously replacing hardware? How much degradation of their service can they withstand as they are unable to replace hardware?
If hard drives fail at YouTube and they can’t replace them and keep up with demand, does YouTube start deleting old videos to make room for new ones? Does AWS stop promising 6 way redundancy across three data centers? When a server goes south in us-east-1 and they don’t have a replacement, then what?
If hard drives fail at YouTube and they can’t replace them and keep up with demand, does YouTube start deleting old videos to make room for new ones? Does AWS stop promising 6 way redundancy across three data centers? When a server goes south in us-east-1 and they don’t have a replacement, then what?
In emergency situation, I can come up with mitigation something like: YouTube could reduce available video quality options only for 144p/480p/1080p/2160p for some rarely watched videos and remove other quality converted videos (but keep original file internally). Such mitigation will work for consumer oriented services, but not work for AWS/GCP. Possibly they can also stop internal analysis/research project that consumes a lot of resources.
They can also delay replacing hardware by accepting higher power usage and failure rate.
Yes it's serious problem but not critical as much as hardware company for immediately.
They can also delay replacing hardware by accepting higher power usage and failure rate.
Yes it's serious problem but not critical as much as hardware company for immediately.
Both Google and Facebook have substantial proportions of their revenue from CN based advertisers.
It's also in bed with the US, a huge flaw for us in China.
I mean, there are dark forces at the top here, which probably will misuse any kind of dominant position, but it's not like the US has our best interests at heart either.
As for Apple, now they have to play nice with a 300+ M people direct market in the US + all the allies they can sort of bully into segregation against us, vs a 1.3bn (and trending down) direct market in China + very few allies who'd be rich enough to afford Apple products.
I wouldn't blame Apple for cutting itself in half to work with both side of this artificial competition both our rulers decided they should have to defend our respective precious "national security" (which I'd rather call national distraction but heh).
I mean, there are dark forces at the top here, which probably will misuse any kind of dominant position, but it's not like the US has our best interests at heart either.
As for Apple, now they have to play nice with a 300+ M people direct market in the US + all the allies they can sort of bully into segregation against us, vs a 1.3bn (and trending down) direct market in China + very few allies who'd be rich enough to afford Apple products.
I wouldn't blame Apple for cutting itself in half to work with both side of this artificial competition both our rulers decided they should have to defend our respective precious "national security" (which I'd rather call national distraction but heh).
I’m glad you highlighted the materials/manufacturing component, which I think is frequently overlooked by tech people (who mostly focus on the chips and software). Apple’s ability to build millions of devices with such precision and tight tolerances is really a huge accomplishment.
Just to clarify, Apple doesn't actually build any devices. They are built by Foxconn, mainly. It's still very impressing, of course.
To be clear. Apple provides the designs, the build procedures, fixtures, and test stations. Foxconn provides the facilities and workers.
And Apple spends billions a year to design and create the manufacturing equipment that Foxconn uses.
> Apple has (last I checked) the highest revenue/sq. foot retail space in the world
Does this also correctly count the area of all Apple partner stores? In some countries they sell Apple devices but don't operate a single store themselves.
Does this also correctly count the area of all Apple partner stores? In some countries they sell Apple devices but don't operate a single store themselves.
The revenue/sq foot ratio is based on the sales from those square feet, not the total revenue. They measure sales at each individual location for location revenues/sq foot and all locations for overall. Revenue from partner sales, internet orders, etc. are not counted in that (although they might include deliver to store website orders, I don't know). It doesn't hurt that they're selling products with a high price-volume ratio.
> I don't own any Apple products, and I don't endorse their labor practices,
So which labor practices does Apple engage in that every other phone manufacturer doesn’t - using the same factories and supply chain?
So which labor practices does Apple engage in that every other phone manufacturer doesn’t - using the same factories and supply chain?
> Apple has leads in silicon and cross-platform integration
I stopped reading after this part.
I stopped reading after this part.
Both are simple, factual and true statements? Why does that make you stop reading?
Bias
Towards truth, or?
Bias "against X" (here: Apple).
Whether the fact is true or false makes no difference. The person with the bias will cherish both true and false statements if they are against X, and reject them if they are in favor of X.
Whether the fact is true or false makes no difference. The person with the bias will cherish both true and false statements if they are against X, and reject them if they are in favor of X.
If you read the post from the bottom you would start with:
> I don't own any Apple products, and I don't endorse their labor practices,
would you have stopped reading it because of anti-Apple bias?
> I don't own any Apple products, and I don't endorse their labor practices,
would you have stopped reading it because of anti-Apple bias?
> silicon tech being years ahead of the competition is one that is hardly a factor for the smart watch category.
What? This doesn't even make sense. This is by far the most important lead Apple has.
Their ability to put performant and efficient chips into tiny devices is why they have such a software edge. Other Android wearables suck because the underlying hardware is not able to power the experience without significant compromises.
It's not an accident that WatchOS is vastly better than competing Android offerings. It's hardware driving software possibilities.
What? This doesn't even make sense. This is by far the most important lead Apple has.
Their ability to put performant and efficient chips into tiny devices is why they have such a software edge. Other Android wearables suck because the underlying hardware is not able to power the experience without significant compromises.
It's not an accident that WatchOS is vastly better than competing Android offerings. It's hardware driving software possibilities.
"People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware"
what folks don't seem to grasp is that hardware is (conceptually) software, except it much harder to change...
And it works the other way, too, c.f. Lisp Machine.
And then there were mainframes B6700 had loadable microcode that 'swapped in' different instructions depending on the higher-level language being run: http://www.retrocomputingtasmania.com/home/projects/burrough...
And it works the other way, too, c.f. Lisp Machine.
And then there were mainframes B6700 had loadable microcode that 'swapped in' different instructions depending on the higher-level language being run: http://www.retrocomputingtasmania.com/home/projects/burrough...
I don't really agree. I've owned a Fossil Carlyle 5 smartwatch with WearOS and an Apple Watch 3, and Apple's lead is definitely on the software side of things. I actually really dislike the material build of the Apple watch. The screen is designed to expose as much of the surface area as possible to scuffs and scratches, while the body of the watch feels larger than any other smartwatch I've used. The Apple Watch got hotter than the Fossil, somehow, and the sensor bump is also much more pronounced.
Anyways, it's not like this is up for debate anyhow. Ask any analyst who's watched the industry for the last decade, they'll still tell you that Apple's advantage is in the software world. If iMessage and MacOS were available on other hardware, Apple would be selling two crazy handfuls of nothing to customers. The average consumer doesn't care if their laptop has faulty graphics, a keyboard failing en-masse or soldered storage. They just want the little blue bubble to pop up when they send a message from their computer. Recognizing that, Apple arguably makes more compromises than anyone else in the industry. Their concept of "iteration" really only involves bringing their product to the next most common denominator.
Anyways, it's not like this is up for debate anyhow. Ask any analyst who's watched the industry for the last decade, they'll still tell you that Apple's advantage is in the software world. If iMessage and MacOS were available on other hardware, Apple would be selling two crazy handfuls of nothing to customers. The average consumer doesn't care if their laptop has faulty graphics, a keyboard failing en-masse or soldered storage. They just want the little blue bubble to pop up when they send a message from their computer. Recognizing that, Apple arguably makes more compromises than anyone else in the industry. Their concept of "iteration" really only involves bringing their product to the next most common denominator.
> I don't really agree. I've owned a Fossil Carlyle 5 smartwatch with WearOS and an Apple Watch 3, and Apple's lead is definitely on the software side of things.
I don't disagree that the lead is in software. I'm saying it's also in Hardware too. You're making comparisons to the Apple Watch 3--that came out more than three and a half years ago. It's not helping your point that you feel the hardware for your android watch is in the same ballpark as Apple's oldest supported piece.
> Ask any analyst who's watched the industry for the last decade, they'll still tell you that Apple's advantage is in the software world
Please don't willfully miss my point. I'm agreeing with you that Apple has a software advantage. I'm telling you the software advantage exists in no small part due to the hardware advantage. Apple's SoC prowess is a massive advantage.
>If iMessage and MacOS were available on other hardware, Apple would be selling two crazy handfuls of nothing to customers.
Are we talking about the watch or not?
>They just want the little blue bubble to pop up when they send a message from their computer.
Damnit. If you had started with this line I would have known to not bother reading more of your post.
I don't disagree that the lead is in software. I'm saying it's also in Hardware too. You're making comparisons to the Apple Watch 3--that came out more than three and a half years ago. It's not helping your point that you feel the hardware for your android watch is in the same ballpark as Apple's oldest supported piece.
> Ask any analyst who's watched the industry for the last decade, they'll still tell you that Apple's advantage is in the software world
Please don't willfully miss my point. I'm agreeing with you that Apple has a software advantage. I'm telling you the software advantage exists in no small part due to the hardware advantage. Apple's SoC prowess is a massive advantage.
>If iMessage and MacOS were available on other hardware, Apple would be selling two crazy handfuls of nothing to customers.
Are we talking about the watch or not?
>They just want the little blue bubble to pop up when they send a message from their computer.
Damnit. If you had started with this line I would have known to not bother reading more of your post.
Note that iMessage only became a thing in the US ‘pay to receive SMS’ market. It’s mostly irrelevant in the rest of the world. Yet they have that same lead outside the US.
I mean, I did voice my gripes about the hardware of the Apple Watch in my comment. You can't expect me to be surprised/offended/owned when you've willfully ignored my argument too.
>The screen is designed to expose as much of the surface area as possible to scuffs and scratches, while the body of the watch feels larger than any other smartwatch I've used. The Apple Watch got hotter than the Fossil, somehow, and the sensor bump is also much more pronounced.
None of those are about the build quality and even less about the hardware capabilities.
To me it sounds more about a "pea under the mattress" list of complains.
None of those are about the build quality and even less about the hardware capabilities.
To me it sounds more about a "pea under the mattress" list of complains.
> Apple's lead is definitely on the software side of things.
It’s their lead in hardware that makes that software possible.
It’s their lead in hardware that makes that software possible.
I mean, that's never been true. Hell, MacOS runs fine on pretty much any computer, as evidenced by the cakewalk that is the modern Hackintosh. In the Intel era, Macs consistently lost outright price-to-performance battles with equivalent PCs, and the same goes for the PowerPC era.
Instead of arguing with you though, I'll propose an amendment to your phrase: "Apple's lead in software makes their hardware profitable."
Does that contextualize things for you?
Instead of arguing with you though, I'll propose an amendment to your phrase: "Apple's lead in software makes their hardware profitable."
Does that contextualize things for you?
Why do you keep talking about macOS in an Apple Watch thread?
Because you expanded the scope to "Apple's software", which includes MacOS. You could have said "Apple Watch hardware drives WatchOS" if you wanted to talk about the Apple Watch, but it sounded to me like you were addressing Apple, not their watch.
You're grasping. I've been very clearly talking about the Apple Watch this entire time. Read my posts. You're the one going down blue bubble rabbit holes.
Though since you're adamant on expanding the scope here, I do believe Apple Silicon has long been driving their software advantage in not just the Watch, but all their mobile offerings. And now going forward, with the arrival of the M1, we're starting to see similar performance and battery life advantages for the Mac.
Seems to me like you're just looking for opportunities to rail about Apple in general. Everyone needs a way to blow off steam, you do you brother.
Though since you're adamant on expanding the scope here, I do believe Apple Silicon has long been driving their software advantage in not just the Watch, but all their mobile offerings. And now going forward, with the arrival of the M1, we're starting to see similar performance and battery life advantages for the Mac.
Seems to me like you're just looking for opportunities to rail about Apple in general. Everyone needs a way to blow off steam, you do you brother.
I don't think he is grasping... You quite clearly indicated the entirety of Apple in the comment. If you did not mean to do this you should have written the Apple watch specifically. It's not like the comment would have been any longer.
What I'm not satisfied is why Apple won't make their Watch to make battery life longer. It still just enough for a day even though they have most advanced technologies.
The high-resolution always-on OLED display is a major power drain. In order to get significantly longer battery life Apple would have to downgrade the display, or make the device thicker to fit a larger battery.
Agree on all counts. It's very hard to put time horizons on anything. But I started wearing a Series 3 watch (3 generations old now) when I started a project my client in 2019 insisted I wear it as I was writing code that utilized HealthKit data from the Apple Watch. Check my past posts I'm NOT an Apple fan boi at all. But compared to the competition, there's nothing coming close to the integration and the UX out there. My partner has a Rage 4 and it's just garbage in comparison. It misses and drops, the display is like from the dollar store. HealthKit is absolutely bulletproof. Every single decision in that API is gold. Every time I think something might be poorly done it's my misunderstanding or they made the best choice you can make. Deep respect.
Apple Watch might be the best smartwatches but for me the concept or smartwatch is still novel and I'm not sure if I want to switch. I wear ordinary watches and they're good enough for me. The only killer feature that I need is waking me up in a smart way (monitoring sleep phases and boozing on my hand between 08:00 - 09:00, for example) but Apple Watch does not have that feature. Other features are just not interesting for me. And, honestly, for most other people around me. May be I'm in a bubble, but so far I saw Apple Watch only once in my life.
The reasons for a cellular Apple Watch.
For myself:
- Running without my phone. I can still track my speed, make phone calls and listen to streaming music and podcasts. I can even leave my wallet at home and stop by a convenience store that accepts Apple Pay.
- During the Before Times when I went to the gym (I have a home gym now), I hated carrying my phone around. With my watch, I didn’t have too.
- Even now when I am working out at home, I keep my phone in another room and just have my watch on to measure my heart rate while I’m working out and even control my AppleTV. If I do get a call, I can answer it.
- I was horrible controlling my “screen time” and would pull my phone out when I was with other people. Now, anytime I am suppose to be socializing, I leave my phone in the car. I can still be contacted. I ignore all phone calls though except from my wife, kids, or parents.
My wife:
- women often wear clothes without pockets or shallow pockets. She will often leave her phone in the car and just walk around with her watch and her AirPods on a key chain.
- she has a working hobby as a fitness instructor. It’s online and outside these days. She has her iPhone connected to her sound system and uses her watch to control the music.
For myself:
- Running without my phone. I can still track my speed, make phone calls and listen to streaming music and podcasts. I can even leave my wallet at home and stop by a convenience store that accepts Apple Pay.
- During the Before Times when I went to the gym (I have a home gym now), I hated carrying my phone around. With my watch, I didn’t have too.
- Even now when I am working out at home, I keep my phone in another room and just have my watch on to measure my heart rate while I’m working out and even control my AppleTV. If I do get a call, I can answer it.
- I was horrible controlling my “screen time” and would pull my phone out when I was with other people. Now, anytime I am suppose to be socializing, I leave my phone in the car. I can still be contacted. I ignore all phone calls though except from my wife, kids, or parents.
My wife:
- women often wear clothes without pockets or shallow pockets. She will often leave her phone in the car and just walk around with her watch and her AirPods on a key chain.
- she has a working hobby as a fitness instructor. It’s online and outside these days. She has her iPhone connected to her sound system and uses her watch to control the music.
While I agree that the wake-up feature you described is not available from Apple directly, I bet there's a 3rd party app out there that does what you're asking.
I use the Apple alarm now and when if I go to sleep with my watch on, it will gently buzz on my wrist and get more forceful until I turn it off. The sensors to track sleep are all on the device, but Apple doesn't seem to have any interest in building a "sleep cycle" tracker at this time for whatever reason.
A cursory search turns up the "Sleep Cycle" app[0] with a ton of reviews and even an "Editors Choice" award. Maybe Apple is holding their horses until they 100% nail the implementation, but if you can live with 90% in the meantime, it would probably be worth it to you if this is a thing you're really wanting in your morning routine.
[0] - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/sleep-cycle-sleep-tracker/id32...
I use the Apple alarm now and when if I go to sleep with my watch on, it will gently buzz on my wrist and get more forceful until I turn it off. The sensors to track sleep are all on the device, but Apple doesn't seem to have any interest in building a "sleep cycle" tracker at this time for whatever reason.
A cursory search turns up the "Sleep Cycle" app[0] with a ton of reviews and even an "Editors Choice" award. Maybe Apple is holding their horses until they 100% nail the implementation, but if you can live with 90% in the meantime, it would probably be worth it to you if this is a thing you're really wanting in your morning routine.
[0] - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/sleep-cycle-sleep-tracker/id32...
The only real complaint I have is 8GB is not enough storage to update watch os. But there is praise in the complaint: you can update it at all.
That is horrible. I am glad I bought the 16GB cellular version. I would have bought it just for the extra storage even without cellular.
> On a tangential note, I'd like to take a moment to recognize the amount of work that Apple has put into its accessibility features. Assistive Touch on the apple watch will probably serve a remarkably small portion of the user base
On a similar note I’d like to point out that accessibility affects everyone. You don’t need to be disabled to enjoy accessibility. My eyes are fine, (I think), but I find the iPhone X’s lowest screen brightness too bright iOS’s blue filter to be barely effective, so I use a custom color filter (almost full red) and “Reduce white point” and am super happy it’s an option. People used and probably use assistive touch for things that don’t compensate a disability, but just add useful features. The back tap shortcuts are just a nice feature. The zoom is nice if you want to show something to someone a bit further away. I could go on.
As someone with perfectly fine hands I love this feature because one thing I hate about modern smart watches (RIP Pebble) is that you have to touch and inevitably smudge up the screen. Bam, problem single-handedly (what pun are you talking about?) solved. Massive kudos. The other, more obvious advantage is that your other hand stays free, of course.
> and perhaps costs more to develop than the return they'll ever see on it.
As you see, the user base for such features is bigger than you may think. Besides collecting some easy sympathy points for helping disadvantaged people, Apple also seems to be huge in the business of servicing small, but under-served and vocal minorities (where can someone who wants a modern, small phone go?), which will turn into strong advocates for their brand.
On a similar note I’d like to point out that accessibility affects everyone. You don’t need to be disabled to enjoy accessibility. My eyes are fine, (I think), but I find the iPhone X’s lowest screen brightness too bright iOS’s blue filter to be barely effective, so I use a custom color filter (almost full red) and “Reduce white point” and am super happy it’s an option. People used and probably use assistive touch for things that don’t compensate a disability, but just add useful features. The back tap shortcuts are just a nice feature. The zoom is nice if you want to show something to someone a bit further away. I could go on.
As someone with perfectly fine hands I love this feature because one thing I hate about modern smart watches (RIP Pebble) is that you have to touch and inevitably smudge up the screen. Bam, problem single-handedly (what pun are you talking about?) solved. Massive kudos. The other, more obvious advantage is that your other hand stays free, of course.
> and perhaps costs more to develop than the return they'll ever see on it.
As you see, the user base for such features is bigger than you may think. Besides collecting some easy sympathy points for helping disadvantaged people, Apple also seems to be huge in the business of servicing small, but under-served and vocal minorities (where can someone who wants a modern, small phone go?), which will turn into strong advocates for their brand.
When I showed the designers at a company I worked at a few years ago how to enable screen zoom, they found it an imminently useful tool. Once enabled, ctrl-scroll zooms in/out on the display which is very useful for being able to check pixel-level details on, say, an HTML render.
Apple has a significant lead in manufacturing, at the very least. I haven't been in the CE industry in several years, but when I was, they frequently bought out entire lines of new tooling equipment with exclusive multi-year contracts. They literally have some of the most advanced, bleeding-edge tooling in existence. It's very, very difficult to compete with their fabrication abilities.
Combined with their market position, huge margins, decent but good looking software and UX, it's incredibly hard to catch up to them.
Apple has a decade-long lead in wearables because there is no competition at their luxury price point in a luxury device ecosystem like the iPhone. To catch up, first you'd have to defeat the iPhone, meanwhile develop and then unleash a wearable all of your customers also want, and somehow make money doing so. It's a tall task.
Combined with their market position, huge margins, decent but good looking software and UX, it's incredibly hard to catch up to them.
Apple has a decade-long lead in wearables because there is no competition at their luxury price point in a luxury device ecosystem like the iPhone. To catch up, first you'd have to defeat the iPhone, meanwhile develop and then unleash a wearable all of your customers also want, and somehow make money doing so. It's a tall task.
I've got a Samsung watch and the the heart rate monitor has serious reliability issues. Apples is not only suppose the be better but you got blood pressure and o2 monitoring. I'm definitely going to switch over in the future
It gets weird as you age.
When I was younger, I wanted my vitals. I bought numerous BP machines. I even bought glucose meters. I wanted to know what my body was doing.
I wanted to know because I was young, and those numbers were always fine.
Now--I just don't want to know. You can call it denial, or life is too short to measure health stats all the time, especially on my wrist.
I'm also a Certified Hypochondriac. I've been one for ever. I don't anything on my wrist reminding me of my eventual death of cancer, or a heart attack.
Now--I get a physical every three to four years.
I don't want to know what my aging body is doing daily.
If I had diabetes though, the upcoming glucose monitor would be a no brainer. This will be huge.
I'm a Watchmaker, so my tastes might not be Apple's demographics? My perfect watch is something I can repair, and just tells time, and looks good on my wrist.
I will admit Apple square watches have grown on me. I didn't like them when introduced, but now they look fine.
Would I trade my '62 IWC with the 362 movement for any Apple watch; hell no.
When I was younger, I wanted my vitals. I bought numerous BP machines. I even bought glucose meters. I wanted to know what my body was doing.
I wanted to know because I was young, and those numbers were always fine.
Now--I just don't want to know. You can call it denial, or life is too short to measure health stats all the time, especially on my wrist.
I'm also a Certified Hypochondriac. I've been one for ever. I don't anything on my wrist reminding me of my eventual death of cancer, or a heart attack.
Now--I get a physical every three to four years.
I don't want to know what my aging body is doing daily.
If I had diabetes though, the upcoming glucose monitor would be a no brainer. This will be huge.
I'm a Watchmaker, so my tastes might not be Apple's demographics? My perfect watch is something I can repair, and just tells time, and looks good on my wrist.
I will admit Apple square watches have grown on me. I didn't like them when introduced, but now they look fine.
Would I trade my '62 IWC with the 362 movement for any Apple watch; hell no.
There have been some wearables coming on the market claiming to measure blood pressure. Family member got one. Unfortunately it turns out to be so inaccurate that it created more stress for them out of frequently seeing alarming numbers.
I wonder if blood pressure readout is one of those things like Theranos' assays from one drop of blood - not possible due to physics. It certainly is less obviously so.
I wonder if blood pressure readout is one of those things like Theranos' assays from one drop of blood - not possible due to physics. It certainly is less obviously so.
Most of the Apple Watch health features are blocked in Australia because they were literally too lazy to submit the paperwork to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)!
All a competitor has to do is submit their paperwork and they won't get any competition from Apple. Easy!
All a competitor has to do is submit their paperwork and they won't get any competition from Apple. Easy!
Who's the mug in this situation? Apple, or the Australian people?
ECG has been available in Australia for the last month.
Only health feature that isn't approved is O2 levels.
Only health feature that isn't approved is O2 levels.
o2 levels have been available in Aus since it was first in the phone.
> Most of the Apple Watch health features are blocked in Australia because they were literally too lazy to submit the paperwork to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)!
Why duplicate all the work done by the FDA? Just use their certificate. Save the taxpayer some money.
Why duplicate all the work done by the FDA? Just use their certificate. Save the taxpayer some money.
Because the FDA only certifies that a device meets American laws?
Because the FDA doesn't really do any work in the first place.
If you believe unthinkingly following American regulatory authorities is a good thing, I have a few hundred 737 Max planes to sell you.
I have been using the samsung line of watches since before apple watch was ever a thing, despite some heart rate variance the leadership in payments samsung commanded was and still is unparalleled.
people with apple pay carry a backup card, a samsung watch allows paying with magstripe emulation in case of legacy terminals. pre 2020 pandemic this was indespensible and there are still often inoperable nfc terminals and MST is a great backup.
I hate the elitism around the apple watch and its minor changes to standard health tracking wearable tech that has had normal LTE and other full phone functions from the get go... not to mention the ridiculous requirment that an iPad isnt enough to set up a watch, you need to buy into their phones.
people with apple pay carry a backup card, a samsung watch allows paying with magstripe emulation in case of legacy terminals. pre 2020 pandemic this was indespensible and there are still often inoperable nfc terminals and MST is a great backup.
I hate the elitism around the apple watch and its minor changes to standard health tracking wearable tech that has had normal LTE and other full phone functions from the get go... not to mention the ridiculous requirment that an iPad isnt enough to set up a watch, you need to buy into their phones.
When I first saw that feature of the Samsung watch I thought it was really awesome. I still do. But I also remember it being excluded from some of their watches? Is that not the case anymore?
In other news, Apple devices are not compatible with obsolete standards. Magstripe is insecure and obsolete and in no way a backup for nfc payments. Skimming is a thing.
what? skimming is a thing and MST is not an insecure solution on top of magstripe, since it generates temporary cards per every few transactions. It is a backup for a traditional card, not something meant to be similar to NFC since its just a legacy method of payment that is still accepted more places than nfc.
you could try to use one of those temporary numbers but whats the likelyhood it expires before malicious reuse?
you could try to use one of those temporary numbers but whats the likelyhood it expires before malicious reuse?
The software side, they’re so far ahead it’s ridiculous. Google couldn’t put out a watch to match the generation 3 Apple Watch today. They probably couldn’t even do that in 2-3 years. Same goes for Microsoft’s and Amazon.
Your last p contradicts the first. Part of what makes apple products so good is the software, the depth and complexity of things like Assistive Touch doesn’t happen in a few sprints.
Their software isn’t perfect, but it’s so thorough that it allows them to do levels of polish that competitors have a hard time catching up to.
Their software isn’t perfect, but it’s so thorough that it allows them to do levels of polish that competitors have a hard time catching up to.
Once a feature is shown off in the real world it usually doesn't take long to replicate its functionality to an acceptable level. This give Apple a lead in that respect, but not years of a lead.
The whole article is viewing things through some heavily tinted glasses.
1. Apple was early - Nope, Apple came late to the party, years after first movers were there.
2. Voice computing distraction - Again, nope. Amazon Echo devices and Google Home devices are HUGE. Headphones and earbugs come with Alexa and google Assistant integration. Apple tries with Siri but it's consistently far behind Amazon and Google there.
3. Wearables require design expertise. It’s not enough to just throw together some leftover smartphone components and ship wearables. -- Yet, that's what Apple did with the first gen of Apple watch. Gen 1 was also dead in three years. Gen 1 was a pilot project.
4. Ecosystem and technology advantage. - These are Apple advantages, but not ten year leads.
5. No price and feature umbrellas under Apple. - Well, there are a lot of people still wondering what utility they have aside from a few "health" measures. I personally don't care about my heartrate all day, nor my steps, or a bad idea of calories burned. I don't need to monitor my O2 levels, nor get instant EKGs. I personally stuggle to see the point of smart watches. Notifications? I can see them on the phone screen, it's just as easy for me to look at it. Music controls? If I'm in the car the controls are on my steering wheel. At home I just say "Alexa, stop" or whatever. When I have headphones/earbugs in? I can tap the button on my headphones just as easily as I can tap my watch. What else would I use it for?
There certain is a price umbrella, too, because you have to have an iPhone and be bought into that ecosystem.
1. Apple was early - Nope, Apple came late to the party, years after first movers were there.
2. Voice computing distraction - Again, nope. Amazon Echo devices and Google Home devices are HUGE. Headphones and earbugs come with Alexa and google Assistant integration. Apple tries with Siri but it's consistently far behind Amazon and Google there.
3. Wearables require design expertise. It’s not enough to just throw together some leftover smartphone components and ship wearables. -- Yet, that's what Apple did with the first gen of Apple watch. Gen 1 was also dead in three years. Gen 1 was a pilot project.
4. Ecosystem and technology advantage. - These are Apple advantages, but not ten year leads.
5. No price and feature umbrellas under Apple. - Well, there are a lot of people still wondering what utility they have aside from a few "health" measures. I personally don't care about my heartrate all day, nor my steps, or a bad idea of calories burned. I don't need to monitor my O2 levels, nor get instant EKGs. I personally stuggle to see the point of smart watches. Notifications? I can see them on the phone screen, it's just as easy for me to look at it. Music controls? If I'm in the car the controls are on my steering wheel. At home I just say "Alexa, stop" or whatever. When I have headphones/earbugs in? I can tap the button on my headphones just as easily as I can tap my watch. What else would I use it for?
There certain is a price umbrella, too, because you have to have an iPhone and be bought into that ecosystem.
I was with you until #5.
The Apple Watch is very useful. That’s why people keep buying it.
It’s nice to get notifications on your wrist if you don’t have your phone out 100% of the time. The alarms are silent and dead simple to set, and it can function as your wake up alarm in the morning, and sync with your phone as a backup alarm. It lets you unlock your phone while wearing a mask. It lets you pay for things instantly without taking your phone or wallet out.
If you are someone who exercises, the utility goes up even more. It’s great to control your podcast or music while out walking or running without digging around in your phone. It’s perfect for tracking your workouts, because it’s always on your arm and it tracks your heart rate.
I agree that the EKG & O2 level features are pretty much a gimmick. But the watch generally is an exceptional piece of technology.
The Apple Watch is very useful. That’s why people keep buying it.
It’s nice to get notifications on your wrist if you don’t have your phone out 100% of the time. The alarms are silent and dead simple to set, and it can function as your wake up alarm in the morning, and sync with your phone as a backup alarm. It lets you unlock your phone while wearing a mask. It lets you pay for things instantly without taking your phone or wallet out.
If you are someone who exercises, the utility goes up even more. It’s great to control your podcast or music while out walking or running without digging around in your phone. It’s perfect for tracking your workouts, because it’s always on your arm and it tracks your heart rate.
I agree that the EKG & O2 level features are pretty much a gimmick. But the watch generally is an exceptional piece of technology.
> I agree that the EKG & O2 level features are pretty much a gimmick. But the watch generally is an exceptional piece of technology.
They are until they aren't, you know? https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-watch-lifesaving-health-feat...
They are until they aren't, you know? https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-watch-lifesaving-health-feat...
None of those people were saved by the EKG or O2 features (other than that one person noticed a slow heartbeat while playing with the EKG feature). They are talking about the "fall detection feature, heart rate notifications, exercise tracking and even the ability to make a call from your wrist."
You didn't read far enough.
The article includes a story on the watch detecting Atrial fibrillation. Presumably this used the EKG feature, since an EKG is the standard clinical tool for diagnosis of AFib.
The article includes a story on the watch detecting Atrial fibrillation. Presumably this used the EKG feature, since an EKG is the standard clinical tool for diagnosis of AFib.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying they have no use, I'm saying I can't find a use for them. I just want to be very clear I'm saying me personally and not others.
Wrist notifications are kinda nice, yes, but I almost never don't have my phone. I've also had one broken screen in 11 years of carrying Android phones, so I'm not the typical user. Always having it with me kills most of the utility of the watch for me, I think.
I also use finger unlock, because I'm Android. I don't use face unlock even though it's available because I think finger is far superior, to the point I won't buy a phone that doesn't have it. I skipped th ePixel 4 totally because of the lack of fingerprint. If the Pixel 6 has no fingerprint, then I'll skip that too.
Wrist notifications are kinda nice, yes, but I almost never don't have my phone. I've also had one broken screen in 11 years of carrying Android phones, so I'm not the typical user. Always having it with me kills most of the utility of the watch for me, I think.
I also use finger unlock, because I'm Android. I don't use face unlock even though it's available because I think finger is far superior, to the point I won't buy a phone that doesn't have it. I skipped th ePixel 4 totally because of the lack of fingerprint. If the Pixel 6 has no fingerprint, then I'll skip that too.
> It lets you unlock your phone while wearing a mask.
I'm really glad I passed on the Pixel 4, mainly because I hated the concept of face unlock on a phone (slower and less reliable? sounds great!). And this was before the age of masks. I love having a fingerprint reader on the back. The phone is unlocked as it's coming out of my pocket. Google switched back with the 4a and 5 so I picked up a 4a 5G. It's a shame Apple won't stick a fingerprint reader on the back, too.
I'm really glad I passed on the Pixel 4, mainly because I hated the concept of face unlock on a phone (slower and less reliable? sounds great!). And this was before the age of masks. I love having a fingerprint reader on the back. The phone is unlocked as it's coming out of my pocket. Google switched back with the 4a and 5 so I picked up a 4a 5G. It's a shame Apple won't stick a fingerprint reader on the back, too.
But aren't those features (notifications, alarms, exercise tools, music controls) in a bunch of other smart watches?
> But aren't those features (notifications, alarms, exercise tools, music controls) in a bunch of other smart watches?
Yes, definitely. I was replying to:
> I personally stuggle to see the point of smart watches.
I do think the Apple execution and hardware is generally better, but really I was just comparing the benefits of wearing a smart watch vs. not wearing one.
Yes, definitely. I was replying to:
> I personally stuggle to see the point of smart watches.
I do think the Apple execution and hardware is generally better, but really I was just comparing the benefits of wearing a smart watch vs. not wearing one.
The hard part about copying Apple in wearables isn’t the software. It’s the hardware. Yes another company theoretically could make hardware that has the same performance/power efficiency as the S1 series in the Apple Watch. But, no other company is going to spend the money since they don’t think they will recoup it.
Just as most people who are willing to spend money on high end phones buy iPhones, the same is true for other wearables. Apple knows that it can recoup the up front costs of any research and development.
Just as most people who are willing to spend money on high end phones buy iPhones, the same is true for other wearables. Apple knows that it can recoup the up front costs of any research and development.
I had an Android smartwatch years before Apple even came out with one. Typical Apple reality distortion field in effect.
I’ve had multiple wearOS watches and switched to the iOS platform in the last year. It’s frankly night and day, for the extra bulk in the wearOS watches you get worse battery life and dismal performance. A lot of the blame can be placed on Qualcomm’s back for not keeping pace with wearable processors. I’m wondering if Google’s Whitechapel and their cooperation with Samsung can improve this at all, but it’s currently a sad state of affairs. Dieter of The Verge and Linus of Linus Tech Tips have made all the same points scattered throughout this thread.
Downvoted by the Apple cult, of course!
Pebble IMO was and still is the best wearable watch. I don’t think anything worked better largely due to the long battery life and generally the e-ink design. Had they added different wrist bands with smart tech in it, it would have gone even further.
I don’t really think apple has a decade lead, what they do have is minimal innovation they’re competing with. AND more importantly, a brand and ecosystem. That being said if Samsung came out with a decent watch similar to pebble and bundled it with their phones I think they’d be outselling Apple.
I don’t really think apple has a decade lead, what they do have is minimal innovation they’re competing with. AND more importantly, a brand and ecosystem. That being said if Samsung came out with a decent watch similar to pebble and bundled it with their phones I think they’d be outselling Apple.
I had several pebbles (2 b/w and the colored one) and now have an apple watch. You don’t know what you’re talking about, the tech in the apple watch is years ahead. There’s much to criticize about the apple watch but it does the important things just so much better than the competition. I also never understood the focus on battery life. I put my watch on the charger whenever I go to sleep. If I forget it either still has more than 50% charge or I can charge it quickly. I don’t care for edge cases (camping etc.)
I mean, sure the Apple Watch is "years ahead". It not only came out two years later, but is developed by one of the most wealthy consumer tech/software companies in the world. Pebble was acquired by FitBit right around the time the second iteration of the Apple Watch was out, so there's really not much point in comparing the two in terms of technology.
Despite Apple Watch's merits over the Pebble, I still miss my Pebble watches. The thing I actually miss the most is the physical buttons, so I can switch the currently-playing song with my watch without having to look at it. Having nearly all interaction with the Apple Watch being a touch screen is one big downside IMO -- still something it hasn't really "beaten" vs. Pebble Watch :)
Despite Apple Watch's merits over the Pebble, I still miss my Pebble watches. The thing I actually miss the most is the physical buttons, so I can switch the currently-playing song with my watch without having to look at it. Having nearly all interaction with the Apple Watch being a touch screen is one big downside IMO -- still something it hasn't really "beaten" vs. Pebble Watch :)
I feel the same way with regards to the physical buttons, so easy to control by feel. I'd pay decent money for a phone case with external buttons for pausing/playing and other quick access functions.
The actual buttons on the pebble were terrible though but I do agree, it really sucks that this isn’t possible. I remember having a jailbreak tweak that allowed to use long presses on volume up/down to skip songs. Something like this could be done with the crown on the watch but we’re talking about apple, so don’t even think about using the physical inputs for something useful.
> can switch the currently-playing song with my watch without having to look at it
Why would you need to look at your watch? If you are listening to music on your Apple Watch - you are probably using headphones, all of which have next/prev buttons or gestures.
Why would you need to look at your watch? If you are listening to music on your Apple Watch - you are probably using headphones, all of which have next/prev buttons or gestures.
driving in my car and listening to music playing from my phone via bluetooth :)
Can you not use the button on your steering wheel in that scenario?
No, my car is kinda old - I use a Bluetooth FM Transmitter to broadcast the music to my car stereo! hahah :)
[deleted]
> I put my watch on the charger whenever I go to sleep.
One of the things that always confused me about the Apple Watch (and other smartwatches) is that they market them as sleep tracking devices, but if you do use it for that purpose then I'm not sure when you're supposed to charge it. I guess you could charge it during a morning (or evening) shower but is ~30 minutes a day of charging enough?
One of the things that always confused me about the Apple Watch (and other smartwatches) is that they market them as sleep tracking devices, but if you do use it for that purpose then I'm not sure when you're supposed to charge it. I guess you could charge it during a morning (or evening) shower but is ~30 minutes a day of charging enough?
> I guess you could charge it during a morning (or evening) shower but is ~30 minutes a day of charging enough?
As someone who does this, yes. (It's more like twice a day, roughly ~30 minutes each.)
If it helps, I also usually turn on cinema mode on my Series 5 before I go to sleep.
As someone who does this, yes. (It's more like twice a day, roughly ~30 minutes each.)
If it helps, I also usually turn on cinema mode on my Series 5 before I go to sleep.
You can set up sleep timings in the watch app on iPhone and the watch will automatically enter sleep mode in that range. It’ll mute notifications etc. as well, and give you a sweet notification on your iPhone when it’s done charging.
I charge it for 30 minutes while I get ready for bed and for 15 minutes in the morning while I dress and brush my teeth. For the other 23 hours and 15 minutes I wear it. I’ve yet to see it dip below 30% (except for days when I do all day hikes and have my outdoors map + gps tracking on the watch).
So I could probably make do with just the 30 minute charge in the evening.
Before Apple Watch I used (in order) a Jawbone Up, a Fitbit don’t know the name and a Garmin Vivofit. All three are by far way crummier than an Apple Watch. Both in comfort, build quality and functionality.
So I could probably make do with just the 30 minute charge in the evening.
Before Apple Watch I used (in order) a Jawbone Up, a Fitbit don’t know the name and a Garmin Vivofit. All three are by far way crummier than an Apple Watch. Both in comfort, build quality and functionality.
One of the few things I used my smart-ish watch for is tracking my sleep.
Without a large screen and turning off all notifications, I get about 3-4 weeks of battery with my current watch. Personally I rarely take it off.
I’d like at least a week of battery if I were to adopt any other smart watch. For me personally, I enjoy thinking less about the battery of a device that I mostly use for passive personal data collection and telling the time.
Without a large screen and turning off all notifications, I get about 3-4 weeks of battery with my current watch. Personally I rarely take it off.
I’d like at least a week of battery if I were to adopt any other smart watch. For me personally, I enjoy thinking less about the battery of a device that I mostly use for passive personal data collection and telling the time.
What is years ahead? It has a better SoC than competing watches for sure but what's the point? I wouldn't be surprised if the first Apple Watch has a faster SoC than my Fenix 5 Plus but other than the time it takes for it to make up a random running route I don't really care because the device feels snappy. My Pebble felt snappy too. I think other than EKG (don't care about that) my Fenix has all the same sensors, GPS, NFC for payments, HR monitor, accelerometer, altimeter, WiFi, bluetooth etc. I do wish it was a little more open like Pebble to get some of those weird little apps back though.
To me, a power hungry OLED touch screen seems like doing the important things wrong. It's harder to see in the sun, doesn't work with gloves or when it's cold, you need to actually LOOK at it to do something like pause music or change the album.
To me, a power hungry OLED touch screen seems like doing the important things wrong. It's harder to see in the sun, doesn't work with gloves or when it's cold, you need to actually LOOK at it to do something like pause music or change the album.
The functionality. I can use it as a flashlight, call, dictate messages, listen to music without phone, control my phone camera, use it for 2FA, map navigation, notifications with images and control smart home stuff. And yes, much of this convenience is due to the walled garden. I never had issues reading the screen, which I did have with my color screen pebble.
I can do most of that on my Garmin. Really only stuff that requires mic is not doable because it doesn't have a mic. And I guess notifications "with images". Heck some of it like 2FA I did on my Pebble!
I can’t compare with the Garmin, but the Pebble experience was subpar. I stopped wearing mine after a few weeks and gifted them to my mother after a while (she loved the pebbles but had constant issues with connectivity on Android). On the other hand, I expected to return my Apple Watch (it was an impulse buy due to a discount). But it really grew on me. It’s actually a “it just works” product (which I can’t say of a lot of Apple products these days). A friend of mine has a Garmin, but afaik he can’t do much with notifications. On the other hand I have quick replies, voice to text or depending on the app quick actions. That’s just not in the same ballpark. Do I need it? No. But it’s really convenient once you got used to it. I don’t know how many times I set the timer with Siri because my hands were full or dirty. If a second SIM card wasn’t so pricey in Germany I would probably get one and leave my mobile at home most of the time.
> If a second SIM card wasn’t so pricey in Germany I would probably get one and leave my mobile at home most of the time.
This reminds me: it's silly that the Apple Watch eSIM has to be from the same provider as one's iPhone, and some providers which offer a phone eSIM don't support provisioning it for the Apple Watch, and vice versa.
This reminds me: it's silly that the Apple Watch eSIM has to be from the same provider as one's iPhone, and some providers which offer a phone eSIM don't support provisioning it for the Apple Watch, and vice versa.
Yeah, quick replies only work if you have Android with Garmin and other smart watches because Apple doesn't let them.
The only thing I really hate about the Garmin is that they kneecap CJK support by region locking it.
The only thing I really hate about the Garmin is that they kneecap CJK support by region locking it.
A better SoC usually means better power efficiency, where the speed means it can get through tasks faster under the same wattage, so it helps battery life.
Which is then completely blown by the screen anyways? It's not like you're tearing up complicated calculations on your watch. This makes sense on other devices but not so much on a watch. My Garmin lasts a week with the screen always on, several hours of GPS on and music playing during workouts. The most draining thing is music.
Yes but those screen features are what some people ask for (and always on can be disabled).
The watch also does do quite a bit of processing on device, especially cellular ones. It's quite a different beast than the Garmin, even though they have crossover
The watch also does do quite a bit of processing on device, especially cellular ones. It's quite a different beast than the Garmin, even though they have crossover
I know you said you don't care about camping, but I have to point out it's simply not as big a problem as people like to imagine either. I take a battery to charge my phone for maps anyway. The big difference between charging my watch camping, and charging my watch at home, is when I'm camping, I put it on the charger and take it off when it hits 80%. I don't just leave it there while I sleep.
5-8 days on 1 or 2 powerbanks is normal. Most people hiking more than that are going to find somewhere to stop and charge (and restock food) at least that often anyway. Truly hitting wilderness for 2+ weeks is the actual edge case where I'd want to leave my watch at home.
5-8 days on 1 or 2 powerbanks is normal. Most people hiking more than that are going to find somewhere to stop and charge (and restock food) at least that often anyway. Truly hitting wilderness for 2+ weeks is the actual edge case where I'd want to leave my watch at home.
You must not care about sleep tracking? That's why I find battery life annoying on the apple watch, it always runs out by the end of the day. Luckily, it does charge really fast so 30 min before falling asleep and its back on.
I love my Apple Watch but the battery life thing is annoying because I do want to wear it to bed so the alarm can fire without waking a sleeping companion.
The sleep monitor is amazing this doesn't work for me.
Pebble was a lot of fun for tech people who wanted a minimalistic watch, but the Apple Watch is in a different league altogether. The two aren't really comparable.
There may be a niche market for low power, hackable, e-ink watches with minimal functionality, but the size of that market is orders of magnitudes small than what companies like Apple are addressing.
Pebble ultimately fizzled out because the demand just wasn't there. It might be possible for an indie company to make something similar if they focus on staying lean and small, but it's difficult to cater to niche audiences with small TAMs where the barrier to entry gets lower every year.
There may be a niche market for low power, hackable, e-ink watches with minimal functionality, but the size of that market is orders of magnitudes small than what companies like Apple are addressing.
Pebble ultimately fizzled out because the demand just wasn't there. It might be possible for an indie company to make something similar if they focus on staying lean and small, but it's difficult to cater to niche audiences with small TAMs where the barrier to entry gets lower every year.
I had both the original Pebble and the Pebble Time. The battery life, always-on screen, and readability in the sun made for an incredibly useful experience. After my Pebble Time broke, rather than switching to another smart watch I got a simple "dumb" watch.
Frankly I don't think I'll wear another smart watch that isn't a Pebble, which means I don't think I'll get another smart watch.
Frankly I don't think I'll wear another smart watch that isn't a Pebble, which means I don't think I'll get another smart watch.
You should look at Garmin. They have models with battery life measured in weeks, not hours like the Apple watch. My 3+ year old 645 still gets 6 days of battery life.
I bought an Instinct about a month ago and love it. I like the G-Shock aesthetic which I know isn't for everyone but it's everything I want in a watch. The battery life is amazing as you said. I charge it once a week and even regularly using GPS for fitness tracking it's usually at around 40% (it can be extended further by using a GPS mode that polls less frequently). The interface is responsive and straightforward (and button based instead of touch which I personally prefer). Like a G-Shock it's waterproof and appears to be near indestructible. I can't see myself wanting to replace it any time soon.
I'm another Instinct fan, absolutely love this watch. Its just the right balance of smart watch features while not compromising on being an actual watch. I think the only real weakness is the Garmin software itself but its still decent.
Sadly most smart watches seem to be heading the direction of just being a tiny phones with apps and crap that I'll never need and the segment of people who are just looking for a few concise features in something durable and stable will eventually have no options
Sadly most smart watches seem to be heading the direction of just being a tiny phones with apps and crap that I'll never need and the segment of people who are just looking for a few concise features in something durable and stable will eventually have no options
I use a Garmin Tactix Bravo in tactical situations and it's brilliant! I think the battery lasts about two weeks.
Still loving my Pebble, but sad as I've watched the battery life dwindle to ~4 days. I even put my phone in airplane mode overnight, which has extended it a bit. Does anyone else have any tips on how to make a Time Steel last?
(I considered putting the Pebble into airplane mode, but it seems to be less reliable reconnecting to the phone if I do this.)
What do Pebble-lovers get if they don't want an Apple Watch? I was hopeful about the Fossil hybrid smartwatches, but the UI just wasn't there (two clicks to see more of a message?). Garmin is on my list, but they have so many models I can't tell which ones are best, or where they are in their upgrade cycles.
(I considered putting the Pebble into airplane mode, but it seems to be less reliable reconnecting to the phone if I do this.)
What do Pebble-lovers get if they don't want an Apple Watch? I was hopeful about the Fossil hybrid smartwatches, but the UI just wasn't there (two clicks to see more of a message?). Garmin is on my list, but they have so many models I can't tell which ones are best, or where they are in their upgrade cycles.
I recently replaced the battery in my Pebble Time Round. Replacements are on iFixIt. It's not easy, but not impossible either. For me, it's well worth another 5+ years of use while I wait for someone, anyone, to make a decent competitor.
Awesome. How does it affect water resistance?
I re-sealed mine with Sugru. It is as waterproof as it was before, as far as I can tell. Unfortunately I used too much and some of it got squashed under the glass so it's slightly visible. It's really hard to use the correct (very small) amount. There are other adhesive options that I haven't tried.
I'm going to miss my Pebble when it finally dies. Still wearing my Kickstarter Pebble Time. One thing it did well was be a watch first, as opposed to a small phone on your wrist. Depending on your needs/expectations those are very different wearable experiences. Sure the nice OLED is great, but clearly that comes at the cost of battery life. This is especially notable if you use to wear dumb watches.
And BlackBerry was always the best for communications.
I think we're confusing 1) tech 2) product 3) marketing/positioning and 4) brand.
All of that together, Apple has a very powerful entrenched lead.
They can launch almost anything and own the category, the are firing on all pieces.
Google doesn't have either the supply chain, distribution or hardware-product discipline.
And who else is going take on Apple's machine?
So from a tech perspective, it's doubtful they are '10 years ahead' but from an operational perspective, it sure feels that way.
I think we're confusing 1) tech 2) product 3) marketing/positioning and 4) brand.
All of that together, Apple has a very powerful entrenched lead.
They can launch almost anything and own the category, the are firing on all pieces.
Google doesn't have either the supply chain, distribution or hardware-product discipline.
And who else is going take on Apple's machine?
So from a tech perspective, it's doubtful they are '10 years ahead' but from an operational perspective, it sure feels that way.
A refreshed version with a thin display bezel and NFC to pay with NFC and I'd be sold.
The timeline UI makes such much sense.
The timeline UI makes such much sense.
I don’t get why battery life is important beyond 24h. I just put the watch on its charger at night. Only downside is during traveling, one more thing to carry and possibly the watch won’t make it through excruciating international travel.
So it won’t matter to me if the watch lasts a day or a week, it’s off my wrist when I sleep and goes on it’s charger.
So it won’t matter to me if the watch lasts a day or a week, it’s off my wrist when I sleep and goes on it’s charger.
I’m T1 diabetic and use my watch for monitoring my glucose levels. I wear it 100% of the time, aside from showering when it charges. Charging quickly and having a minimum of 24hrs of charge is really important to me. Apple Watch hits both of those.
Do you have a separate accessory for monitoring glucose? I'm really looking forward to the Series 7 which is rumoured to have blood glucose monitoring.
Yes, I use a Dexcom G6. If the rumors of the Series 7 having a glucose monitor and a blood pressure monitor on it are true, that would be incredible. They’re surely working on core body temperature monitoring too!
Several years ago I did some research (published paper here: http://kentlyons.net/pubs/dumbwatch-iswc15.pdf) and one of the findings I thought was interesting was there were 3 groups of people that implied different battery needs. One seemed similar to what you describe: people that took their watch off at night (so could charge it then). Another group wore their watch 24/7. And the final group which I wasn't expecting, but made sense in retrospect, was people that only wore their watch when out of the house. When they got home they'd take it off like setting down their keys.
If you want to track your sleep that doesn't work so well
Everyone says this without trying it. I wear my Apple Watch to sleep. In the morning I shower and charge it. It is fully charged and lasts till next morning.
No problems here either. Lately I just wear it in the shower and charge it for a while when I sit down at my desk to work. It charges fast enough and I don't miss out on any activity tracking while I'm typing away at my desk.
I plug my phone in to charge at the same time. It's really not a big deal.
The only time it might matter is if I was doing a weekend camping trip or something, at which point the connected features of the Apple watch are less useful and a minimalistic Garmin would make more sense.
I plug my phone in to charge at the same time. It's really not a big deal.
The only time it might matter is if I was doing a weekend camping trip or something, at which point the connected features of the Apple watch are less useful and a minimalistic Garmin would make more sense.
You missed their meaning. They meant that taking your watch off overnight to charge it gets in the way of sleep tracking.
Edit: People aren't reading carefully. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27321770 clearly means what I've stated and then the parent says that they must not have tried charging their watch at some other time.
Edit: People aren't reading carefully. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27321770 clearly means what I've stated and then the parent says that they must not have tried charging their watch at some other time.
I never understood the point of tracking your sleep or even steps. It’s not like knowing that I had N hours of deep sleep will somehow change my sleep the following night. Same with steps, it’s pretty easy to understand without a tracker when you were active and when you weren’t.
I think people use them to: 1) figure out what's affecting their sleep quality, not necessarily just duration, and 2) trigger alarms within a window, rather than at a specific time, when the device registers that they're between REM sleep cycles so waking up to the alarm is less shocking and unpleasant, and 3) have an alarm or pager-duty-type alert that doesn't bother anyone in the bed with them.
What gets measured gets managed. Both my fitness and sleep improved after tracking.
At the start I was able to use the sleep tracking to troubleshoot sleep issues and improve. After that, it’s mostly a warning system for when I may need to nap later (and thus plan for it) or make sure to get to bed early.
The steps are also a fun social thing. My dad and I talk about them and have streaks of 10,000. If we handle our days well, that’s what we’d get anyway. But somedays, you slack. Being accountable to each other is a fun game and we walk more and are happier for it.
The key to this kind of tracking is you mostly don’t think of it. It happens automatically in the background.
At the start I was able to use the sleep tracking to troubleshoot sleep issues and improve. After that, it’s mostly a warning system for when I may need to nap later (and thus plan for it) or make sure to get to bed early.
The steps are also a fun social thing. My dad and I talk about them and have streaks of 10,000. If we handle our days well, that’s what we’d get anyway. But somedays, you slack. Being accountable to each other is a fun game and we walk more and are happier for it.
The key to this kind of tracking is you mostly don’t think of it. It happens automatically in the background.
For me, it's the nags (e.g. Garmin's 'time to be active') that make it worthwhile to get me out of my groove. Also, the sleep tracking includes things such as SpO2 measurement, which can help one see if changing sleep positions makes a difference. I feel somewhat confident in saying that my Garmins have likely extended my life by a few years.
To me, smartwatches are about making my life more convenient (not taking my phone out of my pocket). So any inconvenience is going to be a big deal.
Having gone from a Wear OS watch with ~1d battery life to a hybrid e-ink watch with ~2w battery life I don't think I'll ever go back, even though I'm giving up features. You already mentioned travel, but an even bigger issue for me was that if my watch didn't get charged overnight for whatever reason (watch wasn't sitting correctly on the charger, fell asleep with my watch on, etc.), I'd basically have a paperweight on my wrist the next day. And having to disable features (always-on display) to get my watch to last through the day always felt silly.
Overall, it's just one less thing to worry about on a daily basis. If I ever see a low battery warning on my watch, I know that it'll still last for more than a day.
Having gone from a Wear OS watch with ~1d battery life to a hybrid e-ink watch with ~2w battery life I don't think I'll ever go back, even though I'm giving up features. You already mentioned travel, but an even bigger issue for me was that if my watch didn't get charged overnight for whatever reason (watch wasn't sitting correctly on the charger, fell asleep with my watch on, etc.), I'd basically have a paperweight on my wrist the next day. And having to disable features (always-on display) to get my watch to last through the day always felt silly.
Overall, it's just one less thing to worry about on a daily basis. If I ever see a low battery warning on my watch, I know that it'll still last for more than a day.
This. A smartwatch must be a watch first. A watch is small, always-on, and recharged rarely. Most smartwatches aren't - short batteries, screens that you have to shake to wake, and large.
A smartphone must be a phone first. A phone is large with a comfortable earpiece, has large easy-to-press physical numbers, and is plugged into the wall so it doesn't require recharging.
Don't understand why this is upvoted. The math used to get to 10+ years assumes competitors address each element of the lead one-by-one:
> Custom silicon / technology / sensors (a four to five-year lead over the competition, and that is being generous to the competition)
> Design-led product development processes that emphasizes the user experience (adds three years to Apple’s lead)
> A broader ecosystem build-out in terms of a suite of wearables and services (adds two years to Apple’s lead)
Why would competitors wait to start on emphasizing user experience and broader suite of wearables until after they create "custom silicon" (whatever that means)? And the claim that user experience is superior for an Apple itself is unsubstantiated. As an Android/Windows person, I would most likely have a better experience with an Android-based wearable than an Apple-based wearable because of the integration. If the claim is that Apple has a lead against competitors for owners of Apple products, why is that interesting enough to write a blog post? I bet Apple has a lead in Lightning to 3.5mm headphone dongles too.
> Custom silicon / technology / sensors (a four to five-year lead over the competition, and that is being generous to the competition)
> Design-led product development processes that emphasizes the user experience (adds three years to Apple’s lead)
> A broader ecosystem build-out in terms of a suite of wearables and services (adds two years to Apple’s lead)
Why would competitors wait to start on emphasizing user experience and broader suite of wearables until after they create "custom silicon" (whatever that means)? And the claim that user experience is superior for an Apple itself is unsubstantiated. As an Android/Windows person, I would most likely have a better experience with an Android-based wearable than an Apple-based wearable because of the integration. If the claim is that Apple has a lead against competitors for owners of Apple products, why is that interesting enough to write a blog post? I bet Apple has a lead in Lightning to 3.5mm headphone dongles too.
Basically, I upvote anything Apple.
The article seems to be saying that Apple has a decade-long lead in wearables over a list of companies that don't even make wearables. That is a clever trick for giving the article a bold title, but the result is a fairly uninteresting and uninformative Apple jerk-off piece. It is akin to saying "Quaker Oats has a 150-year lead in edibles" where Apple doesn't even make food.
So who are the most capable competitors to Apple in wearables?
Among my friends and colleagues, those who don’t buy Apple Watch often buy Garmin watches instead. In the area of fitness tracking watches, Garmin seems to be serious competition. It’s missing the full app ecosystem of Apple Watch but I think you can send messages and email to some Garmin watches over 4G, for example.
Among my friends and colleagues, those who don’t buy Apple Watch often buy Garmin watches instead. In the area of fitness tracking watches, Garmin seems to be serious competition. It’s missing the full app ecosystem of Apple Watch but I think you can send messages and email to some Garmin watches over 4G, for example.
Around here (Austria/Switzerland, Country Side) people only wear smart watches for fitness purposes. Meaning most folks buy Garmin or Suunto devices. Another reason might be that the market share of Apple is lower in general compared to the US/UK.
Personally I love my Garmin Fenix watch. It lasts a week with light usage or up to 18 hours when using GPS. It also offers NFC payment. Notifications might be supported but I honestly don't need yet another device to bother me with messages and such... Meaning I disabled all of them ;).
On another note: Apple might simply be successful because of consistency. They've been iterating and improving on there smartwatch platform for years whiles others change their whole product every few years (samsung) or simply neglect it (google).
Personally I love my Garmin Fenix watch. It lasts a week with light usage or up to 18 hours when using GPS. It also offers NFC payment. Notifications might be supported but I honestly don't need yet another device to bother me with messages and such... Meaning I disabled all of them ;).
On another note: Apple might simply be successful because of consistency. They've been iterating and improving on there smartwatch platform for years whiles others change their whole product every few years (samsung) or simply neglect it (google).
Garmin is now #2 in smartwatch market share. Fitness tracking features are generally superior to Apple but there are few useful 3rd-party apps. Currently only one Garmin watch has some limited LTE support so they generally need a smartphone Bluetooth connection for messages. Rumors say they'll be launching additional LTE models soon.
> Garmin … Fitness tracking features are generally superior to Apple
Superior how exactly?
Superior how exactly?
More physical buttons. Longer battery life. Displays that are clear in direct sunlight. ANT+ sensor connectivity. Data syncing and extended display with bike computers. More different sports, including multisport activities with transitions. Complex structured workouts. Multiple types of configurable alerts. Pacing targets based on a course elevation profile. Daily suggested workouts. Detailed online analytics. The list goes on and on.
If you count the fitness trackers worn by the top finishers in any sort of endurance sports race you won't see many Apple watches. There's a reason for that.
If you count the fitness trackers worn by the top finishers in any sort of endurance sports race you won't see many Apple watches. There's a reason for that.
As a current Apple watch owner I was tempted to get a Garmin, just for the battery life. It is super annoying to remember to charge the Apple watch every 20 hours or so. I wish Apple got around to offering better battery life than adding features.
I finally caved and bought an automatic. I just want a watch to show me the time accurately, last long and offer good water resistance as I wear the watch all the time.
I finally caved and bought an automatic. I just want a watch to show me the time accurately, last long and offer good water resistance as I wear the watch all the time.
Personally, the watch I grab most these days is a good ol’ Timex Ironman. I pretty much only wear a watch when exercising and pretty much only care about the time while doing so.
Why do you want a watch to tell you the time? The time is literally everywhere you look - from you laptop to your phone to your oven and even microwave.
I have been using the Samsung Gear Active 2 for few months and it is pretty good. Battery lasts couple days. it does everything I need and the UI is pretty good and simple.
Fossil is a pretty significant player in the industry, I own their Carlyle 5 model.
In 10 years or so, everybody will have to have a wearables story -- because of the market for them Apple created.
Yeah, the Apple Watch isn't even 10 years old...
I know it's not quite the same and is a lot more complicated, but...
What was Microsoft (PocketPC) and Palm's lead in hand held computing back in the days, right before Apple shit over everything they did in one announcement?
Wearable as currently imagined kind of suck. Making them better while keeping the same concept is just gonna make something that sucks faster/lighter. Someone needs to come in and take the world by storm with something we didn't think of yet. Maybe that will STILL be Apple, but it could be someone else.
What was Microsoft (PocketPC) and Palm's lead in hand held computing back in the days, right before Apple shit over everything they did in one announcement?
Wearable as currently imagined kind of suck. Making them better while keeping the same concept is just gonna make something that sucks faster/lighter. Someone needs to come in and take the world by storm with something we didn't think of yet. Maybe that will STILL be Apple, but it could be someone else.
In what concerns Microsoft, if they had doubled down on WP7 model (Silverlight + XNA) and just opened the C and C++ toolchain to app developers (NDK style), instead of rebooting the ecosystem multiple times, their stuff would probably still be around.
Thank you. I was wondering about this too. Breaking app compatibility between WP7 and WP8 was IMHO the death sentence for the platform...
Except that doing it once wasn't enough.
8.0 had separate models for phone, tablet and desktop.
Then 8.1 unified tablet and desktop, while keeping phone apart for view code, so UAP was born.
With Win10 everything got merged together as UWP and the whole One Core marketing happened.
Then since the WinDev team had some score to settle, C++/CX was deprecated and replaced by C++/WinRT, which to this day after 4 years in development, still expects developers to manually edit IDL files and the generated code without any kind of Visual Studio tooling support.
Now they have WinUI 3.0 with 1700+ issues on Github, with Project Reunion just hitting 0.8, with the very long term roadmap of unifying everything, assuming it doesn't get canned as well.
So most of us that believed on the ideas behind WinRT just gave up, and went back to classical Forms/WPF/Win32.
8.0 had separate models for phone, tablet and desktop.
Then 8.1 unified tablet and desktop, while keeping phone apart for view code, so UAP was born.
With Win10 everything got merged together as UWP and the whole One Core marketing happened.
Then since the WinDev team had some score to settle, C++/CX was deprecated and replaced by C++/WinRT, which to this day after 4 years in development, still expects developers to manually edit IDL files and the generated code without any kind of Visual Studio tooling support.
Now they have WinUI 3.0 with 1700+ issues on Github, with Project Reunion just hitting 0.8, with the very long term roadmap of unifying everything, assuming it doesn't get canned as well.
So most of us that believed on the ideas behind WinRT just gave up, and went back to classical Forms/WPF/Win32.
I think people underestimate how big of a factor weight is going to be when it comes to face wearables. Apple’s lead in terms of performance/watt is so massive at this point, they’re going to have a few years where no other AR solution can even compete.
I work in the AR space and it is incredible how much Apple is preparing their entire platform for a massive push into AR. For years they have been laying a very robust groundwork with their APIs (ARKit, RealityKit, SceneKit), the inclusion of LIDAR on their iPhone 12 Pro / iPad Pro, and likely the entire iPhone 13 line. These are all things that are effectively gimmicky and seem like failures with little uptake, but all of it is just prepping for the inevitable headset in the very near future.
They are going to absolutely dominate the market so completely.
They are going to absolutely dominate the market so completely.
That baffles me sometimes. A lot of people see some features that they think of as gimmicky on their own. But then all of the sudden Apple releases something new that utilizes all those little features and combines them to something groundbreaking.
The addition of UWB to phones was another prime example of this. It makes airdrop moderately easier now, big deal, but locating objects accurately in space with high resolution is a huge problem for AR, and with airtags Apple will have way more experience with this technology in real world situations than anyone.
You make an extremely good point. One could guess that a first version of AR glasses would be not unlike the functionality of the watch - a few Complications, some Notifications, simple apps for stuff like navigation/music.
They have all of that, powered by a tiny system-in-package and a little battery.
They have all of that, powered by a tiny system-in-package and a little battery.
They can't even make a pair of headphones under 300 grams.
AirPods must outsell AirPod Pros by what, 100 to 1?
Each AirPod weighs only 4g.
Each AirPod weighs only 4g.
Fair enough but they would have to change out the Apple design language. I find it odd that we seem to assume Apple would do this for a headset and not headphones though.
Apple’s lead seems to be more in tangential things that are very hard to replicate: Apple Pay, supporting the highly popular iMessage, etc. These can never work with any other device.
There are definite flaws in the device. I find buttons unnecessarily hard to tap for instance (they should offer more vertical space), and the face is so sensitive that it routinely triggers unwanted actions. It is really annoying to start something I want (like a timer) and notice some time later that I somehow accidentally stopped the timer by hitting my watch on something.
As far as 3rd parties, I have seen a general trend of apps gradually withdrawing their support for watchOS. There just aren’t that many useful things to do on a small surface. For apps suited to this (timers, reminders, etc.) it is fine.
There are definite flaws in the device. I find buttons unnecessarily hard to tap for instance (they should offer more vertical space), and the face is so sensitive that it routinely triggers unwanted actions. It is really annoying to start something I want (like a timer) and notice some time later that I somehow accidentally stopped the timer by hitting my watch on something.
As far as 3rd parties, I have seen a general trend of apps gradually withdrawing their support for watchOS. There just aren’t that many useful things to do on a small surface. For apps suited to this (timers, reminders, etc.) it is fine.
To start a timer, raise your watch to your mouth and simply say “start 1 hour timer”.
You don’t even need to say “hey Siri”. It starts listening on the gesture of raising it to your mouth. Genius.
Raise watch to mouth and try things…
“Text Danielle ____” “Open Pandora” “Open wallet”
There are also settings to disable active watch face unless it’s raised. I have that enabled and never have issues accidentally hitting it. Check your settings and let me know if that helps.
You don’t even need to say “hey Siri”. It starts listening on the gesture of raising it to your mouth. Genius.
Raise watch to mouth and try things…
“Text Danielle ____” “Open Pandora” “Open wallet”
There are also settings to disable active watch face unless it’s raised. I have that enabled and never have issues accidentally hitting it. Check your settings and let me know if that helps.
The raise-and-speak feature is extremely unreliable. It seems to refuse to trigger if you’ve interacted with the watch in the last few seconds, so if you try to speak to it and it doesn’t trigger, it certainly won’t trigger when you immediately try again.
It also triggers all the time accidentally when my watch was nowhere near my mouth. I frequently look at the watch and see a message like “I don’t understand that” with a transcription of something it thinks I said.
“Hey Siri” is also unreliable, mostly because if you hesitate for a few too many milliseconds it thinks you’ve finished your query. I almost exclusively use Siri by holding the power button on my iPhone or Apple Watch.
It also triggers all the time accidentally when my watch was nowhere near my mouth. I frequently look at the watch and see a message like “I don’t understand that” with a transcription of something it thinks I said.
“Hey Siri” is also unreliable, mostly because if you hesitate for a few too many milliseconds it thinks you’ve finished your query. I almost exclusively use Siri by holding the power button on my iPhone or Apple Watch.
Very interesting. Personally, I don't have any of the issues you've mentioned.
I wonder if we're somehow using it differently? Different model? Not sure what could explain the delta in our experiences.
I never use "Hey Siri" because I've always found my phone just easier to unlock and manually operate. The watch however seems to be a really great application of voice control.
I wonder if we're somehow using it differently? Different model? Not sure what could explain the delta in our experiences.
I never use "Hey Siri" because I've always found my phone just easier to unlock and manually operate. The watch however seems to be a really great application of voice control.
Do they collect this information somehow? I mean by wearing this device and using e.g. a timer, do Apple employees can find out for example how often did particular person use the timer and for how long?
Apple Pay isn't much of an advantage. Samsung and Garmin have the same thing.
They have competing products, they don’t have competitive products. There’s an important difference.
When Samsung had mst they had a pretty big lead on the competition, but seems like they dropped it.
Can't use Garmin pay to pay for train / bus fare, or at least not as widely as Apple Pay.
Can't speak for U.S. banks, but in Europe more banks seem to support Apple Pay than Garmin.
Yep. Apple's game has always been marking up marginal utility, and that's ultimately what you pay for here.
I didn't think I would like the Apple Watch as much as I do. I swear, add a camera, and I'll leave my phone at home.
I know, it's not a mobile browser, not really much as a mobile messaging device — but that's fine. One one hand, I'm not your stereotypical phone user that is always engrossed in the black mirror but furthermore, the Apple Watch means I am even less inclined.
I know, it's not a mobile browser, not really much as a mobile messaging device — but that's fine. One one hand, I'm not your stereotypical phone user that is always engrossed in the black mirror but furthermore, the Apple Watch means I am even less inclined.
I'm in the same boat. I got the LTE connected Apple watch and I absolutely LOVE it. I leave my phone AND my wallet at home pretty much everywhere I go now. If I get a phone call, or a text, I answer it with my watch.
I have phone, text, apple pay, music (spotify, pandora), maps, and so much more. Probably the only thing I miss is a browser to google something. But that's pretty rare that I need that.
The best part is that all of these apps work natively, without the phone nearby, entirely over LTE or WiFi.
Seriously if you hate carrying around a big phone, get an LTE connected Apple watch. It's a game changer.
I have phone, text, apple pay, music (spotify, pandora), maps, and so much more. Probably the only thing I miss is a browser to google something. But that's pretty rare that I need that.
The best part is that all of these apps work natively, without the phone nearby, entirely over LTE or WiFi.
Seriously if you hate carrying around a big phone, get an LTE connected Apple watch. It's a game changer.
I liked my Apple Watch for a while. Then… I forgot to wear it sometimes. Then everyday.
I’d love to buy one again if it could hold a charge for several days. But the value proposition isn’t high enough for the pain of daily charging.
I’d love to buy one again if it could hold a charge for several days. But the value proposition isn’t high enough for the pain of daily charging.
I tend to charge mine in the shower or when I’m sitting at my computer at work. It handles a day just fine with a couple 30-or-hour long charges
Feel like I'm on the opposite side of the spectrum. I hate wearing it and don't like wearing anything any kind of jewellery either. Only really wearing it for sleep tracking and I don't even do anything with the data. I don't really use it for time and I honestly can't think of any reason to use it for anything. The health stuff doesn't tell me anything is wrong with me and the notifications drive me insane vibrating on my wrist so I just turned it off and they've been off since.
Agreed on the haptics, a literal nightmare device with them enabled. But without I find it keeps me less tethered to the phone, and able to check on calls and messages during a conversation without breaking the flow
Turn off all the notifications. It’s way, way better without them.
I leave the call notification on, since I feel like calls are time sensitive.
Around 10 years ago I wrote a Linux driver for the OCZ Nia, a super cheap EMG device. The Nia was actually a $10k medical device for paralyzed people to control computers with their face and tongue repurposed as a gaming input and sold for $120.
While I'm certain the technology has advanced, what surprises me most is how basic these finger reading devices seem. They're basically some electrodes on your skin near major nerve centers and a little bit of signal processing, like barely any signal processing.
It's about time this technology entered the mainstream. I was waiting for VR with occular/vagus nerve sensing for depth of field emulation but I guess hand sensors are the next best thing.
While I'm certain the technology has advanced, what surprises me most is how basic these finger reading devices seem. They're basically some electrodes on your skin near major nerve centers and a little bit of signal processing, like barely any signal processing.
It's about time this technology entered the mainstream. I was waiting for VR with occular/vagus nerve sensing for depth of field emulation but I guess hand sensors are the next best thing.
The implementation shown in the video strikes me very much as an accessibility feature (which is a fine thing). By comparison, pressing the stateful stop button on my exercise watch is quick and straightforward.
There was also the Myo armband by Thalmic Labs, later North, later a division of Google. Apparently it didn't work very well though.
I strongly disagree.
Apple is selling a ton of watches because the brand is currently so strong that it's a no brainer for most people.
Also, the product is actually not bad.
But, I don't find it attractive, I think the rectangular design was an early mistake that will hinder their design for a long time.
The software look good mostly because Google did a really poor job when porting Android to this form factor.
This is not the end of the story, and it won't need 10 years for competitors to catch up.
Apple is selling a ton of watches because the brand is currently so strong that it's a no brainer for most people.
Also, the product is actually not bad.
But, I don't find it attractive, I think the rectangular design was an early mistake that will hinder their design for a long time.
The software look good mostly because Google did a really poor job when porting Android to this form factor.
This is not the end of the story, and it won't need 10 years for competitors to catch up.
I disagree with your disagreement.
Though I also disagree with the article itself, but for one particular reason: I don't think it'll be nearly 10 years to catch up.
I was skittish on the idea of a watch I have to charge (nearly) every day, but it really has improved my life, in fact it's _nearly_ to the point where I don't need a phone.. since I can pay, take calls, respond to messages, play music (though, not browse the web or take photos) without having my phone anywhere near me.. I've trialled entire days with no phone and it's worked pretty well honestly.
There's nothing coming close to this anywhere else.
But, I think people catch up easier than they lead.
A decade lead is absolutely unthinkable- if google/samsung wants to do wearables seriously I think it'll be 2 years at most -- especially as they're almost certainly working on it already, and they can use the product that's already on the market as a meter to measure against for anything they're building.
Though I also disagree with the article itself, but for one particular reason: I don't think it'll be nearly 10 years to catch up.
I was skittish on the idea of a watch I have to charge (nearly) every day, but it really has improved my life, in fact it's _nearly_ to the point where I don't need a phone.. since I can pay, take calls, respond to messages, play music (though, not browse the web or take photos) without having my phone anywhere near me.. I've trialled entire days with no phone and it's worked pretty well honestly.
There's nothing coming close to this anywhere else.
But, I think people catch up easier than they lead.
A decade lead is absolutely unthinkable- if google/samsung wants to do wearables seriously I think it'll be 2 years at most -- especially as they're almost certainly working on it already, and they can use the product that's already on the market as a meter to measure against for anything they're building.
Most days I can put it on the charger when I get in the shower, and put it back on when I grab my keys and wallet. It’s not like you have to charge it over night. Half hour will last you quite a while.
Depends a lot on the model and usage; I did that too (after recommendations from my friend) but ended up with low power warnings fairly often.
And now of course the battery has significantly lower capacity than new, or the OS is much heavier. The watch was charged while I took a shower after the gym this afternoon. Was fully charged this morning. It’s currently on 37% at 19:51.
(for context, my watch is a 44mm (or, large) series 4)
And now of course the battery has significantly lower capacity than new, or the OS is much heavier. The watch was charged while I took a shower after the gym this afternoon. Was fully charged this morning. It’s currently on 37% at 19:51.
(for context, my watch is a 44mm (or, large) series 4)
I find the article’s mention of the “static smart speaker mirage” unconvincing. I use Amazon Echo at home and have found its voice recognition and capabilities vastly superior to those of Siri. In my opinion it’s fair to say this is an area where Apple is flat out losing to the competition. I too had assumed the watch or phone would provide all that functionality, but it appears I was mistaken.
I think the major lead Apple has in wearables has to do with ecosystem. I wear and Apple Watch because I want to listen to Apple Music while running. Doing so is clumsy with any other device.
I think the major lead Apple has in wearables has to do with ecosystem. I wear and Apple Watch because I want to listen to Apple Music while running. Doing so is clumsy with any other device.
Aside from some niche health-focused areas, the only value prop that wearables currently have to most people is in tech ecosystem integration. This just so happens to be an area where apple is head and shoulders above their competition.
Pertinent point, IMO:
> Google I/O 2021. At its 2021 developers conference, Google showed signs of finally taking wrist wearables seriously by ditching Wear OS and partnering with Samsung on a new OS. While it is fair to be skeptical that the effort will end up being successful, the announcement was a marked change from prior Google I/Os when wearables were all but ignored. Diving a bit deeper into Google’s announcement, it’s easy to see how far behind Google truly is in wearables.
Google completely dropped the ball on Wear OS. To add to this, Qualcomm’s wearable SoCs have also been lagging. Samsung is generally good at keeping pace with hardware, but has been hobbled by Tizen and a weak ecosystem. These things cannot change overnight, and Google’s stewardship track record is something that doesn’t improve drastically, regardless of any announcements it makes.
For wearables as a whole, I don’t believe Apple has a decade-long lead though. We’ll have to wait and practically see what it does for AR wearables before concluding on a number.
> Google I/O 2021. At its 2021 developers conference, Google showed signs of finally taking wrist wearables seriously by ditching Wear OS and partnering with Samsung on a new OS. While it is fair to be skeptical that the effort will end up being successful, the announcement was a marked change from prior Google I/Os when wearables were all but ignored. Diving a bit deeper into Google’s announcement, it’s easy to see how far behind Google truly is in wearables.
Google completely dropped the ball on Wear OS. To add to this, Qualcomm’s wearable SoCs have also been lagging. Samsung is generally good at keeping pace with hardware, but has been hobbled by Tizen and a weak ecosystem. These things cannot change overnight, and Google’s stewardship track record is something that doesn’t improve drastically, regardless of any announcements it makes.
For wearables as a whole, I don’t believe Apple has a decade-long lead though. We’ll have to wait and practically see what it does for AR wearables before concluding on a number.
And yet it can't make a smartwatch with a power consumption less of a freaking nuclear submarine. Wearable balttery should be counted in weaks, not fractions of a second.
That is in general a ridiculous claim to make when talking about consumer technology. No company has a decade-long lead in anything. If there is sufficient economic motivation competitors will always catch up in a year or two. It happened for smartphones, tablets, TVs, speakers, headphones, cameras, voice assistants and just about everything else.
In case of the watch specifically I actually think there isn't enough motivation to innovate considering the space hasn't blown up like everyone expected. If you take headphones out of the picture wearables as a whole is still a relatively niche device category.
In case of the watch specifically I actually think there isn't enough motivation to innovate considering the space hasn't blown up like everyone expected. If you take headphones out of the picture wearables as a whole is still a relatively niche device category.
Google put a ton of R&D effort into gesture sensing with short range radar (Soli) but it doesn't seem to have gone much of anywhere as yet. I don't think this type of interface is as important as the author claims.
https://atap.google.com/soli/
https://atap.google.com/soli/
Google's gesture sensing went nowhere because it was laughably bad. It routinely failed to recognize gestures, was poorly integrated into the OS, and couldn't even be sold in several countries because of its use of radar.
It was such a gimmick on the Pixel 4, probably because it required you position your hand over your phone. However, if you can just make the gesture of turning a knob regardless of your hand position (which a wearable probably could do), that seems like it'd have a use case.
Apple wearables are terrible, sorry. What use is a watch that I have to reload every night and can't be used decently on it's own?
Anyone who has worn a decent, say, polar or garmin, sports watch for more than a day will be amazed and terrified to discover how bad apple wearables are. A good touchscreen is all they have to offer.
Anyone who has worn a decent, say, polar or garmin, sports watch for more than a day will be amazed and terrified to discover how bad apple wearables are. A good touchscreen is all they have to offer.
I’m not convinced the wearable market has been cracked at all.
I feel when it finally is we’ll roll our eyes at the current day smartphone concept.
I feel when it finally is we’ll roll our eyes at the current day smartphone concept.
I'm wondering if Apple tried selling it's current line of smartwatches a decade from now whether they would be competitive or just retro.
I'd hesitate to put a time estimate like that on their lead in anything. They've had a "decade-long" lead on a lot of things for over a decade. The rest of the market (unfortunately) acts like it's decided not to actually compete directly with them at all, and to chase other segments instead, putting out products that might look kind-of similar but aren't really serious alternatives to most people considering the Apple version of whatever-it-is.
I want a watch that stands alone.
I mean isn’t that the Apple Watch with cellular? You can even set up with its own phone number.
Do you still need an iPhone to set it up, etc.?
Apple has a decade-long lead in wearables for the Apple ecosystem.
What a joke. Google, Facebook and Microsoft have face wearables in the market already. In Google's case, they've had enough time to do a full, release and kill cycle. And the Quest runs Android.
How is that an Apple lead?
How is that an Apple lead?
> How is that an Apple lead?
Because they have a wearable that people (and not just people in a niche) use and buy in significant numbers?
Because they have a wearable that people (and not just people in a niche) use and buy in significant numbers?
Does this logic mean Casio is the AR leader? In my eyes it seems like a ludicrous leap.
Did you miss the significant numbers part?
Apples watch is a mainstream consumer electronics hit. The closest other thing close to comparable I can think of is the fitbits - at least their simple ones. Nobody in AR (or face wearables) is playing in that space at all.
I think "decade lead" is unsupportable. But the article is right that all of their competitors or potential competitors are well behind in some combination of capability in hardware, software, manufacturing, ecosystem. Most of them in all categories.
Apples watch is a mainstream consumer electronics hit. The closest other thing close to comparable I can think of is the fitbits - at least their simple ones. Nobody in AR (or face wearables) is playing in that space at all.
I think "decade lead" is unsupportable. But the article is right that all of their competitors or potential competitors are well behind in some combination of capability in hardware, software, manufacturing, ecosystem. Most of them in all categories.
More numbers in a completely different tech stack is meaningless. How does a watch give you any learnings on an AR headset?
I'm not sure what argument you are trying to make. That in some putative future where AR headsets become a meaningful product category for wearable Apple might not be in a strong position?
True but not really germane.
True but not really germane.
If the article isn't implying Apple is ahead in AR wearables I guess I don't understand why AR wearables are brought up at all.
I suppose for why you would have to take that context from the article; the argument that was in the "out there" parts of AR (e.g. glasses/goggles) nobody has shipped anything with real impact, but in the less flashy areas (e.g. assistive touch) Apple is years ahead. Plus a bit about M&A shifting apples capability in these areas. All sounds plausible. What this translates to in some potential future where more ambitious AR projects find a fit with consumers, who knows. But it terms of systems that ship today, article seems pretty accurate, and not at all deserving of your "what a joke".
Apple needs a little competition. I expected the Watch to advance much quicker.
6 years ago I wrote this blog saying everyone would be wearing a smart watch within a decade. My reasons were “health and safety“
https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2015/07/28/in-the-future-everyo...
“ There has been much discussion on the need for smart watches like the Apple Watch. People have a hard time believing that a large market exists. I can’t say with certainty that you’ll be wearing an Apple Watch a decade from now but you’ll definitely be wearing a smart watch from Apple, Google, or some new kid on the block.”
6 years ago I wrote this blog saying everyone would be wearing a smart watch within a decade. My reasons were “health and safety“
https://h4labs.wordpress.com/2015/07/28/in-the-future-everyo...
“ There has been much discussion on the need for smart watches like the Apple Watch. People have a hard time believing that a large market exists. I can’t say with certainty that you’ll be wearing an Apple Watch a decade from now but you’ll definitely be wearing a smart watch from Apple, Google, or some new kid on the block.”
Looks like you were wrong.
Yes, smart watches haven’t advanced as much as I thought they would.
Apple needs competition. They wouldn’t make large screen iPhones until Android started winning, for example.
Hopefully we get there. There’s a lot of promise in wearables:
https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/12/smartwatch-ca...
Apple needs competition. They wouldn’t make large screen iPhones until Android started winning, for example.
Hopefully we get there. There’s a lot of promise in wearables:
https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2020/12/smartwatch-ca...
On the other hand this is always the case and Apple's been the best at creating a general consumer wearable that appeals to the masses. Its integration into the apple ecosystem is a big selling point and that's probably the biggest factor that is basically impossible for competitors to replicate.
On a tangential note, I'd like to take a moment to recognize the amount of work that Apple has put into its accessibility features. Assistive Touch on the apple watch will probably serve a remarkably small portion of the user base and perhaps costs more to develop than the return they'll ever see on it. Still, year after year Apple keeps advancing accessibility features in all of its products. This is definitely an area where big tech companies like Apple and Microsoft excel at.