Ask Slashdot: What Smartwatch Apps Could You See Yourself Using? 471
An anonymous reader writes: It's official: the smartwatch wars have begun. Apple's announcement of the Apple Watch added a contender to the race already shaping up between the Pebble watch, the Moto 360, and others. Personally, my doubts about wanting one were put to rest when I learned of the health-related features. Smartwatches will be able to track your movements and pulse rate, calculate how many calories you burn, and coach you continuously to improve your fitness.
If you have one or plan on buying one, what apps or functions do you see yourself getting the most use from? If you're still skeptical, what would it take? (If an app developer sees your requirements here on Slashdot, your wish might come true.)
If you have one or plan on buying one, what apps or functions do you see yourself getting the most use from? If you're still skeptical, what would it take? (If an app developer sees your requirements here on Slashdot, your wish might come true.)
No comments here yet... (Score:4, Funny)
I'm shocked!
Re:No comments here yet... (Score:5, Insightful)
LOL, true. We were talking about this at work. I'm far from an Apple hater. I bought a first-gen iPod and loved it, along with some later generations. I've had two iPhones (though now am on my second Android). I'm on my 4th Mac. I have Kindle tablets but admit that the iPad is a very nice machine.
With that said, it is hard for me to imagine why I would want - price aside - another device on my wrist that does a subset of the thing in my pocket. If the watch were useful away from the phone, I could see some applications. But as is? The uses are contrived and niche.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
LOL, true. We were talking about this at work. I'm far from an Apple hater. I bought a first-gen iPod and loved it, along with some later generations. I've had two iPhones (though now am on my second Android). I'm on my 4th Mac. I have Kindle tablets but admit that the iPad is a very nice machine.
With that said, it is hard for me to imagine why I would want - price aside - another device on my wrist that does a subset of the thing in my pocket. If the watch were useful away from the phone, I could see some applications. But as is? The uses are contrived and niche.
If you're like a lot of people, you carry a backpack/computer case with you on a regular basis. Keeping your phone safely inside that bag for most circumstances would be a benefit, freeing your pockets of the burden. You could still receive/triage incoming communications while the phone was tucked away. "Nearby" for a well designed bluetooth transceiver is 30-45 feet which is enough to keep you from having to unsheathe your phone in most circumstances. If you're worried about EIRP from carrying a phone
Re:No comments here yet... (Score:5, Interesting)
If you're like a lot of people, you carry a backpack/computer case with you on a regular basis. Keeping your phone safely inside that bag for most circumstances would be a benefit, freeing your pockets of the burden. You could still receive/triage incoming communications while the phone was tucked away. "Nearby" for a well designed bluetooth transceiver is 30-45 feet which is enough to keep you from having to unsheathe your phone in most circumstances.
The correct solution is to put all the "phone" functionality (antenna, transmitter, etc.) in the "watch", and use the "phone" as nothing more than a remote display and computing platform. It would be tricky to create the right split (since the watch has to have some computing power), but not impossible. The second trick would be to get the battery life of the watch high enough with the added power requirements.
The current split of "watch is a peripheral" won't appeal to enough people to make true sales inroads. Sure, Apple is going to sell a lot of these just because of the Apple name, but it's still going to be just a small percentage of iPhone owners, much less smart phone owners.
Re:No comments here yet... (Score:5, Insightful)
The correct solution is to put all the "phone" functionality (antenna, transmitter, etc.) in the "watch", and use the "phone" as nothing more than a remote display and computing platform.
This is completely backwards. The cpu, antenna, and trasmitter are the bulky items as well as the power hungry items that need bulky batteries.
That's the part (along with the large display) that needs to be tucked away. The watch should basically just be a fancy remote display and remote
buttons for the phone. A small VNC type remote display protocol would probably work perfectly. The cpu hungry app can run on the phone and
export it's display to the watch (obviously taking into account the smaller screen size). The apps would still be android/iphone apps. It would
just be that now your android/iphone has a 2nd virtual screen and a few extra buttons that it can interact with.
Re: (Score:3)
For the latter, I heard there are some sharks which could do it...
Re: (Score:3)
But he has a point, which you chose to ignore.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
misogyny
You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means...
Re: No comments here yet... (Score:3)
Nope, no misogyny at all in insulting a man by implying he's a woman.
Re: (Score:3)
I think it would be a fun toy. If somebody gave me one, I might not sell it on eBay. I definitely would not pay $350 for a gen-1 piece of hardware. You know they're already working on iWatch2.0 which will have twice the battery life and a Dick Tracy camera and blah blah blah.
The only new form-factor thing I could really see myself wanting would be a (much cheaper) second or third generation Google Glass. Not to wear all the time like a douchebag, but for things like when I'm working on my car or assembling
It's not just apps, but speed and UX. (Score:5, Informative)
This is I think the thing that so many people miss about the Apple Watch announcement. The problem with existing smart watches hasn't been that the features aren't useful, it's that the promised features simply don't work. I owned two different smart watches and had the same experience:
- Extremely limited app selection
- Very, very slow and oversimple apps that did exist
- With input that was just plain cumbersome and unreliable
- And bluetooth connectivity that had to be constantly restarted/reconnected (like, every time you tried to use it, bluetooth was down)
As I've said in previous posts, I'm one of those that does still wear a watch every single day, so I could be an obvious target for a smart watch, at least moreso than people that don't wear a watch at all and haven't done so in years, if ever.
But for a smart watch to make sense, it can't be a worse experience than pulling out the phone. Watches will always lose on the screen size front, so it's got to be compelling in other areas. The phone experience does have some problems (you have to pull it out, it's risky to pull out and manipulate in some contexts—walking in the city, for example, where a drop can kill it and jostles from pedestrians can come easily, it's bulky and conspicuous, you have to put it back, and so on), so it's not inconceivable that a smart watch could make sense.
But smart watches thus far have been lessons in user friction—you had to really, really, really want to do a given task *on your smart watch*. One that I tried for a few days (the Sony watch) only recognized about 10% of the taps that you made (Want to tap that button once? Then tap manically on the screen over the button 15 times in rapid succession and hope one of them takes.) and was so slow and oversimple (presumably due to lower processing power) that even aside from UI horribleness, it just plain didn't do anything very well in practical terms.
If the Apple Watch has:
- Processing power analagous to that of smartphones
- A high-resolution display
- Input surfaces and controls that are as reliable as those of smartphones
- Battery life long enough to get through a day with certainty
- Reasonable ruggedness
- Stable bluetooth connectivity without hassles
Then it could well be a winner, not because it claims to do anything new, but because it actually managed to do what smart watches claim to do. So far, my experience with smart watches was that they claim a lot, then do absolutely none of it in practice. It's not that the feature list sucks, it's that the features themselves haven't actually been implemented in such a way that you can use them without sitting down for ten minutes to have a "smart watch session" and eke out a tap or two.
Re:No comments here yet... (Score:4, Insightful)
Their iPhone is stolen from Sony's blue-prints, for example.
I saw this a while back and the similarity is certainly striking. It raises the question as to why Sony hasn't seen the same success as Apple, if the iPhone is a mere copy of Sony's design.
Re:No comments here yet... (Score:5, Funny)
The app that functions like a clock.
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like a pudometer to me. ;-)
Tell time (Score:3, Funny)
Is there even an app for that?
Re:Tell time (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know, right?
I was also thinking a stopwatch, one ore more alarms, the ability to set for a different time zone or account for DST. Maybe even keep track of the date and day of the week.
Those would be sweet.
And, then, I'm afraid I'm firmly in the camp of "don't give a crap about smart watches"
Perchance (Score:4, Insightful)
Is the submitter of the article a developer looking for ideas?
No Need (Score:2)
an Apple rep looking to build more hype
Apple doesn't do that, they have no need. The tech press does that for them... you seriously think a post on Slashdot moves the needle either way on AppleWatch hype?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No. Slashdot hasn't been a tech site for years. These days, it's mostly irrelevant rewarmed posts that everyone saw somewhere else two days ago.
The war that no one wanted (Score:5, Informative)
Can you really have a "war" when you no one shows up?
Don't get me wrong, some of these smart watches rate as "neat", but not for several hundred dollars. I could see dropping 100 bucks, maybe, on something that tracks health telemetry, but honestly? It'd probably have to be a gift before I got it.
This is kind of like saying 3D TV companies were in a war with each other. While that may have been true, consumers didn't notice because the tech just wasn't that interesting to them.
Re:The war that no one wanted (Score:5, Interesting)
I could see dropping 100 bucks, maybe, on something that tracks health telemetry,
If price is the only hurdle, then Apple will be fine. Your line of $100 is someone else's line at $350.
But I'm not sure I'd bother wearing it after the first few days even if it was given to me. That is a bigger problem than "too expensive".
Re: (Score:2)
Well, cost and interest. As we both touched on, the tech just isn't that interesting. That plus the cost pretty much covers this story.
If companies really want the smart watch to take off, they'll have to drop the cost and increase it's interest factor.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Not necessarily. I drew my line at $100, too, and I've spent somewhere in the neighborhood of $300 on a watch before. Based on Apple's product history, there are likely to be several major differences between this and a nice watch that diminish its value from my perspective:
The war that no one wanted (Score:4, Insightful)
I could see dropping 100 bucks, maybe, on something that tracks health telemetry, but honestly? It'd probably have to be a gift before I got it.
One thing I haven't read thus far about the smartwatch situation is that Motorola, Apple, Samsung, etc. are new entrants to an area where Polar, Suunto, Garmin and a few others have already been building this sort of equipment for a long time. These guys have build watches with heart rate and other sensors with varying degrees of ruggedness, specifically for the purpose of surviving sports use. Spending ã100-ã300 for a device that needs daily charging, in a shell that can't go into the sauna, sea and mud just for the sake of having 1000 apps (at ã0.99 each) instead of 10 functions built-in is not that compelling until SPECTACULAR apps turn up.
This article comes at a great time, because heart rate and GPS as apps aren't that convincing IMHO. Maybe a fart-rate app is what the world needs.
Re: (Score:3)
That's Garmin's entire wearables business, and they've been in it for years. And they aren't $100 bucks, they're more like $450.
Re: (Score:2)
Totally off-topic ... but I've started seeing commercials for curved ultra-HDTV displays.
My frickin' cable company doesn't give me full 1080p now. No way they're gonna give me uncompressed 4K video.
I just looked at the commercial and figured some rich guys would soon be parted with their money, and the rest of us won't care.
W
What I think would be most useful (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What I think would be most useful (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah.
I was hoping the Apple Watch would include Ant+, but it looks like they expect fitness centers to switch to bluetooth, so it's going to be a pass from here.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ant+ has been the standard for fitness and sports sensors (Cycling especially) for a long time. Recently, though, everyone has started supporting low power bluetooth (A specific subset of the bluetooth spec designed for very low power communication that's a lot like Ant+. This enables things like a sensor that works for a year on a single button cell battery)
All of the new Garmin equipment does. Pretty much all new devices (heart rate, speed/cadence for bikes, etc) on the market do to, I think in part by sm
Re: (Score:2)
1) GPS / pedometer for running
It isn't clear to me from the info available yet if the watch has stand alone GPS functionallity, or has to be tethered to an iPhone. Anyone know?
Re: (Score:3)
It does not have a integral GPS unit. It requires your iPhone to provide location information.
It does have internal storage for music, apps, and so on, and other sensors that the phone does;t have (like pulse) and some that replicate function (gyro, accelerometers).
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see (3) and (4) working well on a screen that's not even as big as my wrist (and I have pretty big wrists).
In case of (3), if there's a message so important that it's worth interrupting a meeting for (why else would you check notifications?), just have your secretary check on it and warn you in person when such a message comes in.
Re: (Score:2)
In case of (3), if there's a message so important that it's worth interrupting a meeting for (why else would you check notifications?), just have your secretary check on it and warn you in person when such a message comes in.
First off, most people don't have "secretaries" to take their messages. Secondly, it allows you to discreetly tell if the incoming alert is just an email that you don't care about or your wife saying that she has to take one of the kids to the hospital. A quick glance at your wrist lets you know if you can just ig
None, seriously, none. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
My Nexus 5 doesn't have to be recharged every 12 hours as I've heard these "smart" watches do, so +1 for the Nexus 5.
Re: (Score:2)
How about a flexible screen that is 5" that folds up to a watch form factor. Then when you want it, it unfolds into something useful.
Nah, that would be silly. Creases in my display? No thanks. Flexible devices sound cool until you actually consider how they would work and how they might break.
Needless engineering complexity for no real purpose, sort of like Samsung's stupid flexible TV.
The Measure of Man (Score:4, Funny)
You will be reduced to a series of numbers.
You will find these numbers matter to you.
You will want to increase, decrease or maintain these numbers.
Keep your eyes on the numbers.
These numbers matter.
Nothing else matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing else matters.
Except posting at /.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd worry about these numbers too [brusimm.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Also number of Twitter followers and Facebook friends.
I don't even wear watches (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
watches are pretty great (Score:2)
I have Pebble Steel (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I have Pebble Steel (Score:5, Insightful)
I get 7+ days with mine. Try a watch face that doesn't update every second -- just every minute.
The Pebble is cheaper and lasts longer without needing to juice up than any of the other options available. And looks decent for casual wear (for those who care). Unless you have really really small wrists and hands (and I mean REALLY small).
While ~$150 was pricy for me and I'm unsure I'd buy it again given the opportunity, That said, I'm hooked on notifications. I find that JUST for notifications I'm keeping my phone in my pocket far more often now. I really thought I was done with watches. Haven't worn one in 15 years.
With regards of "two way" communication, I really don't see a need for "two way" (like SMS reply) if it's going to be a battery killer. Unless you can make using such a small device easier than taking your phone out and using that, it's pointless. It's the notifications that make the difference.
The war hasn't started (Score:4, Interesting)
Not until the health/life insurance companies start offering incentives to wear and heed a smartwatch's fitness advice. Given the recent findings correlating sitting for extended periods with poor health outcomes (even for those that exercise and have an otherwise "fit" life) , a smartwatch that guided the user to the right level of daily activity could significantly reduce their risk of many chronic diseases later in life and thereby reduce the cost profile for insurers.
Re: (Score:2)
Not until the health/life insurance companies start offering incentives to wear and heed a smartwatch's fitness advice.
My work-provided health insurance currently does this, reducing premiums for people who use such devices and provide the collected data to them. Nonetheless, that's not nearly enough incentive for me to go along with it.
Must-have features (Score:4, Informative)
My watch is a Tissot PRC200 Automatic. Not a very expensive watch, but it would take some effort from a company to make me take it off my wrist.
To even consider a smart watch, it would need to have:
- a classy, attractive design (nothing convinced me so far, the LG G Watch R is the closest to something I'd use but still feels cheap; Apple watch looks too much like a gadget)
- a smaller size. I don't have a big wrist, my watch has 42mm diameter, anything larger looks bad on my wrist.
- much longer battery life. Current smart watches get 12-24 hours. I don't want a watch I must charge every night.
Get these right and then we can talk about software.
Re: (Score:3)
"Apple watch looks too much like a gadget"
That certainly wasn't my reaction. I thought it was as beautiful as a really high end watch. I'll be getting one.
Re: (Score:3)
My watch is a Tissot PRC200 Automatic. Not a very expensive watch
At US$600, it's also not "cheap".
But, you do make a good point in that people who already wear watches tend to like the style they have, and won't trade that for smart watch functionality. And, that people who wouldn't mind spending $350 on a smart watch likely already have a watch at least that expensive that they won't give up.
I'm not sold yet.... (Score:5, Informative)
Currently I see no reason to have a smartwatch, it just seems like an expensive watch that relays notifications from my phone. I have no problem reaching into my pocket to grab my phone when needed. Everything these smartwatches can do, my phone can already do and usually better. This to me just seems like having a pager and a cell phone years ago, is it really necessary? I do see the potential for these devices, I just don't think they are there yet.
Nothing (Score:3)
They are just too tiny
I would have to carry a magnifier with me
Re: (Score:2)
Currently? Can't see it (Score:3, Insightful)
My feelings are summed up by Joseph Volpe's article at Engadget, http://www.engadget.com/2014/0... [engadget.com],
As a category, it needs to replace -- needs to completely replace our need for a cellphone. Otherwise, it's just one more thing to remember to charge throughout our busy days. To date, there's nothing any of these thinly veiled, proof-of-concept, wrist-worn devices can do that the smartphone already in your hand can't.
In my own case, I would be most likely to use one while working ... but work involves dust, steam, liquids, and 70kg kegs. It's not a good environment for something on my wrist.
Clock. (Score:2)
Discreteness (Score:2)
Naturally, the health/fitness tracking is going to be awesome - I mean a fitbit is about $100 so condensing all the other features with
just one (Score:3)
Dubious (Score:2)
I don't wear a watch and don't want to. When I try to think of some application that would overcome my aversion to watch-wearing, I can't really think of any at all: everything I'd want to do with it would be equally (or more) convenient by using my phone directly.
That said, here's what a watch would have to be for me to even begin to consider it: small and lightweight, look "normal" (not like a smartwatch), and the ability to effectively interact with me without me having to raise my arm or look at it. It
is it just me... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was useless when Samsung did it, and I still think it's useless now. The only interesting benefit is for fitness tracking, which can be done with a number of smaller, less obtrusive, cheaper bands already on the market that already sync to your android or iPhone.
On the other hand, my wife and kids saw the Samsung and were like "oooh... new shiny toy!" So... they got that going for them.... all they need is a bunch of idiots with disposable income.
Voice Translator (Score:2)
None (Score:2)
I stopped buying watches when my phone was small enough to carry in a pocket at all times. Motorola StarTac I believe was the clincher.
Phone requirement (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the same thing people have seen with bluetooth ear pieces. They are really nice for a small percentage of the time, but not enough to capitalize for the majority of the market.
The another problem with watches is size. You have to competing design constraints. People want small and light and durable on their wrist. Versus large screen size for reading what was sent.
Lastly many people don't want to be that connected. They want to be able to ignore the notifications every 5 seconds that someone posted a new tweet or your grandma sent you a hilarious forward. You eventually want to see them, when you can have the time to stick your hand into your pocket. But it can generally wait 2 seconds for that to happen.
I don't know... (Score:2)
It might be nice to be able to just look at my wrist to check the time, rather than always having to yank out my cell phone.
For fitness? Really? (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally, my doubts about wanting one were put to rest when I learned of the health-related features. Smartwatches will be able to track your movements and pulse rate, calculate how many calories you burn, and coach you continuously to improve your fitness.
You mean like fitbit, polaris, and other brands have been doing for years now? I guess it's news when Apple does it.
My wife has a polaris band she can combine with an accurate chest strap heart rate monitor, they sync together via bluetooth and her phone to track progress.... all without needing some big clunky, ugly "watch," or the premium cost for Apple products.
Needs a tiny joypad (Score:2)
I think smartwatches need a tiny joypad that can be clicked in as an extra button, kind of like old cell phones had. This would greatly expand the potential for video games, since you can't do much on a tiny touchscreen.
A Truely "Killer" App (Score:5, Funny)
I'll be happy when I can use it to detonate those remote mines [wikia.com] that I set.
I don't wear a watch, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
If it could monitor blood sugar without stabbing you for blood, it'd be a great tool for diabetics (not a category I need it for)
If it can somehow monitor whether I've fallen asleep and beep/vibrate (and stab you for blood?), it'd be great while driving, or other dull work
Black hatting: Read every RFID/NFC object I pass my wrist near.
None, because the primary problem solved is ... (Score:2)
For Apple and not for the consumer.
Basically the iPhone is like DSLRs these days. Once you have one there's really no reason to upgrade generationally because they're THAT good. So what can Apple do? Well, sell you something for your iPhone.
So, it solves a problem for Apple. What critical-path problem does it solve for consumers? Well, you don't have to fish your phone from your pocket to see who's calling. That's a bit of an issue for those of us who live where we have winter but it's not a really, really
I like watches but.... (Score:2)
nobody (including Apple) has made a smart-watch that I can see a compelling reason to buy. Primarily for two reasons:
1) You have to charge it every day
2) It needs a smartphone to pair with it in order to be functional.
A conventional watch will either have a battery that lasts for a year or more or an automatic mechanism that can be wound simply by spinning the rotor inside the watch movement. A good automatic watch will run for 24-48 hours without needing any attention. With a smart-watch we are once again
Wrist-centric use cases (Score:3)
A successful smartwatch app would need to be one that was most usable in the same way you use a wristwatch - glancing at it occasionally, non-complicated UI interaction, etc.
Aside from the obvious fitness apps, there will be infinity variations on telling time - one that uses the number system from "Predator" would be neat - and calendar/agenda apps would be the most useful. If they support NFC, you could share schedules and contacts with a fist-bump and give new meaning to the phrase "synchronize your watches."
GPS navigation might be useful as a wrist-based app too, especially when on foot, bike, or when driving in jurisdictions that prohibit use of cell phones.
The key is they have to be apps that are better suited to a wristwatch form factor than a phone, although I'm sure there will be tons that aren't, just because devs will want to cash in on the latest new thing.
I'm not a watch person (Score:2)
I don't like having things on my wrist and I don't mind taking my phone out of my packet to check the time.
I'm certainly not going to pay $350+ for one that has to be charged at least once a day.
the app that increases battery life (Score:2)
until smart watches battery life are measured in years, I wont buy one.
It's apparently not ready yet (Score:2)
With Apple announcements I'm used to them giving a date the gadget will be in the shops. Not just a year, but a month, and often a day even. And that date is usually in the quite near future.
A launch date of "early 2015" makes me wonder whether it's even ready for production, or that quite some development is still to be done before it can be released. No specific date, and it's like half a year out. That's almost a full generation when it comes to mobile phones!
First see, then believe. When it's released i
Currently Close to Useless (Score:2)
Apps (Score:5, Insightful)
I had a Sony Smartwatch for a while before it broke. Here are the apps I would like to see/write, besides the obvious notification apps:
Nextbus predictions
Remote control for mythtv
Monthly calender
Google maps with walking route
Weather
Display brief text, like shopping lists
Looks like a lot of these where covered in the Apple Watch presentation.
There lots of things people use their smartphones for that only require a quick glance. They are the kinds of things a smartwatch is suited for.
Tinder/Grindr/Match.com instamatch instafication (Score:5, Interesting)
Holy moley, you could get an instafication when a compatible/willing partner is nearby. That would be hilariously awesome!
GPS (Score:4, Interesting)
Consider owner !=user (Score:3)
I started trying to think of situations where a person can have a wrist-worn PC but cannot have a handheld PC with them -- situations where people are constrained for some reason.
The obvious thing most people come up with, is where it's a natural or convenient constraint. You don't want to be holding something extra while you're swimming or swinging an axe or climbling a cliff. I think the related applications are already well-discussed.
What about when it's an artificial constraint? I initially drew a blank on how such a constraint would emerge, until I considered situations where the served parties by the two PCs are different, so that the handheld (if one is present) might serve the user (or manufacturer) but the wrist-worn serves someone else.
Once you start thinking of situations where the user is in an adversarial (or seemingly or potentially adversarial) relationship with the owner then it gets easier to see the applications.
Prisoners, parolees, etc. It's not so much that you let them wear the Pebble or iWatch, as you make them wear it. And your prisoner doesn't need to be surfing the web or otherwise doing things where the PC needs to communicate things to the user, so many of the disadvantages relative to handhelds, become totally irrelevant. The application, of course, is monitoring: being an open spy for the government.
Somewhat similarly: children. Mom wants to know where you are, but isn't really interested in giving you Yet Another porn terminal. Quit fapping and get back to your homework at the libra-- your friend's house?!? Get back to the library!
Marketing. Get 'em cheap enough, and these could replace your "frequent shopper" cards as your cookie. Wear our wrist PC as you walk around our store and check out, for a 2% discount. The application is spying, again. And I guess as long as it has a speaker, it can play location-triggered ads. "Whoa, you just walked right by our delicious canned spoo and instant flarn. Are you sure you don't want some?" The idea here is that you could perform the application with a handheld, but the existing handheld PC would be too pro-user so it might not really play the ads out loud and it might report false travel data. So you want the pro-store computer to be a physically different one. Then it becomes a wrist-worn simply because that's smaller and cheaper ($10 instead of $100).
Sweatshops. The Slurm factory employees are spending too much time on bathroom breaks, and texting their friends. Well, the employee wearable PC doesn't do texts, and it delivers a shock after 90 seconds in the bathroom. If a supervisor ever sees you without your wearable, you're fired.
Jealous spouses. Hubby's "Love Watch" chemical sensors are picking up interesting volatiles: perfume? My, he sure is breathing hard and the GPS has him in a residential neighborhood, not at the mid-town office. Oh, those are just fringe use cases: everyone knows the real purpose of the Love Watch is that it instantly relays every time you speak "I love you" into it. (OMG, that last part is so sickening that I bet a variant of this product already exists today.)
Think in terms of why you might want to "plant" (though not necessarily with subterfuge) your computer on someone else, to be your agent rather than the wearer's. Those may be the best applications for wrist-worn PCs.
AFK: Developing self-repair app (Score:4, Informative)
If the watch is broken, it will automatically get directions to the nearest watch repair shop.
Then it will display a large, friendly, compass arrow to point you on your way.
If the problem is a display failure, it'll speak out loud: "Hotter" or "Colder" until you reach your destination.
If the speakers are broken, it'll just run the phone hot or cold against your arm.
If the strap is broken, you're SOL.
I use my Pebble every day, and not just as a watch (Score:4)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
And with in that clock app, I should be able to choose the back ground to be generated by the app of my choosing.
So maybe my twitter feed changes every 10 s or so, maybe texts pop up in the back ground for a sec or two givng me the oppretunity to look at them and full, and send back a cave drawing indicating where the buffalo are.
Re: (Score:2)
Prison Planet / panoptonomnomnomicon (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hate wearing watches and certainly cannot imagine an app that would make me reconsider.
How about wrist porn?
Re:None (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah but then your eyes couldn't follow the display fast enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at texts and playing music, the basic things are probably the only things most people would use on one.
Yep, and for those tasks a smartphone is sufficient already. We have to imagine apps that would explicitly benefit from the smartwatch characteristics over smartphone's.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't want yet another device to carry around.
Isn't the whole idea of a watch-like product the fact that you don't need to carry it? It's attached to your wrist, no need to carry it, or put it in a pocket.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the watch form factor fails at this. It's still effectively "carrying" yet another device, and it's not that much more convenient than a phone.
Re: (Score:3)
Just to confirm...you're upset that they implemented exactly the feature you wanted?
And while I think your post was forward looking, I'm going to take a wild guess and say it wasn't the design document for the Apple Watch. And if it was, well, I'm glad they didn't take your suggestion of a lightning connector.
Re: (Score:2)
Know what I mean? Nudge, nudge. Wink wink. Say no more.
Re: (Score:3)
Golf would be my choice.
Show me how far I am from the next hole.
Show me how far I am from the nineteeth [wikipedia.org] hole.
FTFY
Re: (Score:2)
Golf would be my choice.
Show me how far I am from the next hole.
Ok, do you want the result in:
1) yards
2) meters
3) Libraries of Congress
4) Strokes
?
Re: (Score:3)
What's a watch and why would I want one? I mean, why do I need to wear something on my wrist when I have a perfectly good smartphone fully loaded with every application I want? I can browse the web, read books, do all sorts of things.
In many social situations (perhaps you don't often find yourself in these sorts of situations) it is more acceptable to glance at your wrist than to pull out a phone and start fiddling with it. For example, a business meeting, a dinner party or the symphony.
In many sporting situations (perhaps you don't often find yourself in these sorts of situations) it is more convenient to glance at your wrist than to break rhythm to pull out a phone and start fiddling with it. For example, while running, playing tennis