Ask Slashdot: What Would It Take For You To Buy a Smartwatch? 427
An anonymous reader writes: I don't wear a watch. I never have. So, to me, the push for smart watches has always been a non-starter. But I was discussing with friends some of the features of Android Wear that Google demonstrated at the I/O conference today, and it got me wondering: what set of features would be required for a smartwatch to become viable? Obviously, this is different for everybody — millions of people wear regular watches even though they could easily pull out their phone and check the time there. Any smartwatch can also tell time, but it has advantages (apps that do other things), and disadvantages (needs charging). Clearly, there are some functions for which it's useful to have an object strapped to your wrist, even if that function could be served by the device in your pocket. Telling time is one, and lots of people use sundry fitness doo-dads to measure exercise. It makes sense to me that checking the weather forecast would fall into this category, and perhaps checking notifications. (Conversely, other functions do not translate at all, like taking photos or playing games.) Thus, two questions: if you already wear a watch, what would it take for a smartwatch to replace it? If you don't wear a watch, what features would motivate you to get one?
Acceptable battery life (Score:5, Insightful)
Cool, opt-in tracking bracelet (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it's rather novel that Google is figuring out how to *sell* tracking bracelets.
Previously the government, and of all its marketing prowess -- had to actually convict people of a crime in order to drive sales, let alone get people to wear them after the 'newness' factor wore off.
Was the key change to make them in a wristwatch format vs ankle bracelet? I suppose that's why they get the big bucks eh?
So kudos to Google, real men of genius.
Something useful? (Score:5, Insightful)
I would need it to do something useful that would either not be available on my smartphone, or completely replaces my smartphone.
I doubt that I will be able to (or WANT to) talk on the phone using a smartwatch...while Dick Tracy *looks* neat in comics, It's essentially putting everyone on speaker phone which I think is pretty retarded. With that as my initial stance, it would have to do something other than what my phone does.
I'm currently in the market for a blood pressure monitor, and I've used the gimmicky pedometers/calorie trackers before. These are things that my phone doesn't do (or doesn't do well), so I guess more or less sets the bar for me.
I don't care that they can do "neat" stuff. I need it to do *useful* stuff. Simplify my life, don't complicate it even more.
Re:Cool, opt-in tracking bracelet (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes yes very good. How's being clever going for you?
Since that this "tracking bracelet" requires a GPS from the phone you're carrying and the network connection from the phone your're carrying... it's of course nothing to do with a dumb screen on your wrist.
Re:No plans to wear a watch (Score:5, Insightful)
It's useful in a very small handful of circumstances. The main one that comes to mind is checking the time in a meeting or other situation where it would be inappropriate to haul out a phone (although the social expectation of not playing with your phone in these situations is eroding fast).
Mainly though, it's a piece of jewelry. I know some people are repulsed by the very idea of wearing anything more than the most utilitarian of cloths, but I like wearing one. Mine has a clear faceplate showing off the intricate mechanical workings, which is something I find cool and suits my personality. Other people get something out of the workmanship that goes into those $2000 watches.
Not everything needs a practical purpose. Some stuff is just cool.
Google would have to offer a new service (Score:5, Insightful)
called "Google Private", where they take a subscription fee from you for services and in return, they send noise data to their marketing customers about you while providing you with a list of all entities that make user-specific queries about you.
Two necessary requirements (Score:4, Insightful)
Firstly, like in an ordinary watch the battery life should be measured in years and it should require no other maintenance.
Second, people should be openly admiring of it - both as a technological marvel and as a timepiece.
If it could do anything else than keep good time, that would be nice but not necessary.
Personally, I consider the first of these needs to be the most achievable.
Re:Acceptable battery life (Score:5, Insightful)
The Android-based things we've seen so far need to be recharged at the very least once a day. I can't even stand the thought of owning a smartphone model that requires recharging every day.
Back when I wore a watch, I had a Casio that was supposed to be "solar-assisted". It was so well assisted that I think I only used 1 set of batteries in 10 years. So definitely I would resent having to rush back to the power well daily or even more often.
Also, I don't want to wear a 5-pound brick with a 21-inch bezel on my scrawny little wrist. When I want a big screen, I'll find a device that has one.
Re:Second category (Score:2, Insightful)
Since this is addressed to non-watch wearers too (last sentence).... ok, I'll answer.
If you want me to wear a watch, it needs to have:
1) extreme reliability - it will last at LEAST 5 years, which I have never seen in any watch, cheap or expensive.
My Omega and Seiko watches (quartz not mechanical) have been running non stop (barring the change in battery every 3 or so years) constantly for the last 30 years. Is that enough for a reliability figure ? And furthermore while my Omega cost me something like 1500$ my Seiko was a 400$ purchase. Can't think of any other product that's been as reliable as these 2 are. Ok maybe HP calculators of old come close enough.
2) Battery will last 3+ years, or it will require no battery.
Buy a decent quartz watch (hint not 5$ bottom of the barrel watch).
Eco drive watches don't even have a battery, they use sunlight and that isn't going out of fashion anytime soon.
3) It doesn't have a shitty leather strap or shiny shit that will make it get stolen or some shitty material
You know watches are still made with stainless steel bracelets right ?
4) It costs less than $40.
I have never seen a DUMB watch which satisfies these, and I suspect that any smart watch would fail miserably at ALL of them. All I want is something which won't fall apart will tell me the fucking time when I'm hiking in the woods for a week and my cell phone dies. ALL watches have failed me so far.
A Casio G-Shock is nearly indestructible and goes for 50$ more or less.
Re:To make it worth it. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:all I'd need there is a sports iPod (Score:5, Insightful)
Several hours battery life? I would want at least several weeks, so I can go on vacation without a charger.
My normal watches run for years, so a few weeks is really not too much to ask.
Inspired to... meh (Score:5, Insightful)
Until it can sit on my wrist for a year or so without needing my attention, it's not a watch, it's an annoyance. I'm so unwilling to fuss with stuff like that, I bought a deep water capable tritium watch that is illuminated (glows) all the time, numbers, hands and outer ring.
I think this is how smartwatches will go over with just about everyone else. Less function than the phone, which we already have, twice the annoyance (have to take it off to charge it.) Not likely to fly. Google glass (which I *despise* but anticipate the success of) is a much more functional wearable (and you could easily shoehorn med sensors in there, too... just a little more integration, etc.)
As for the medical/sports aspect, it's a pretty lame "sport" (croquet?) that would let a watch get by unscathed, and medical sensor suites are already available, and with considerably longer time-between-charges, too.
Just gonna go ahead and call this the Segway of wrist thingees. :) Sounds good, looks good, isn't good.
Semi related, when is someone going to market a solar-cell surfaced skullcap? I mean, heck, if you're going to wear a computer on your face, you might as well wear a power supply assist on your head. Maybe a little propeller for when the wearable's batts and the skullcaps reserves are fully charged. ;)