Casio F91 smart watch reboot
gitlab.com
gitlab.com
But this is really amazing work. I hope you find some collaborators to continue!!
I recently got an F-105W which I had when I was a teen (which is basically the F-91 but with a cool glowy EL backlight). And one thing that really surprised me how small that thing is. It seemed bigger at the time.
I'm really amazed how much technology this project managed to fit in that tiny case. Battery, OLED, bluetooth.. Just wow.
I would pay for this, I was thinking of buying that other project on crowdsupply but without BT connectivity I just don't really have any use for it.
Quick review: I have one of the early units and I've really enjoyed using it. It's totally hackable, well documented, and I fully anticipate using mine for the next decade or longer. It's far from a smartwatch - it's more like you're sitting in on the Casio product meeting where they wrote the original F-91W specs. The year-scale battery life remains, but it comes with the ability to fully customize the watch behavior. For me, that meant adding sunrise/sunset and moon phase faces. I might build a quick-timezone switcher in the future.
https://www.crowdsupply.com/oddly-specific-objects/sensor-wa...
It's a pity that shipping and taxes outside the US effectively doubles the price.
I want a future where we have bare-metal versions of smart watches with low power screens, thin form factor and long battery life compete with full feature dick tracy phone watches.
This is the way Apple works. You don't own enough products so you aren't worthy of full functionality. Last time I checked you can't update Airpods firmware without another Apple device nor can you change settings on the pro XDR display without a device running macOS.
Making it so Android users can update their bluetooth headphones is not supporting every hardware combination. Adding a OSD to your monitor so people don't need OS X specific software to change their monitor settings is not supporting every operating system or hardware combination.
Who buys airpods and expects them to work well with anything other than an apple device? You buy them because it'll work well in their ecosystem, really well.
I have some cheap earbuds that work decent everywhere, as well as a generic bluetooth speaker, but I generally use my apple earbuds because they work the best with what I have.
When you support only your ecosystem you can improve the connectivity that bluetooth alone doesn't allow.
This feels like a hindsight kind of statement. We are conditioned to think that since it's Apple it won't work well with other ecosystems, so "you don't buy apple if you don't have everything apple" which... I mean, it makes sense but it's the reverse logic. I bought my pixelbuds and I can use them on a wide range of bluetooth devices that aren't Google-specific, and they work as you'd expect them to. It's fine if Apple wants to have Apple-specific features if you use them with Apple devices, just like Google pixelbuds have specific integration with google home app and similar google-specific devices, but at least the core bluetooth functionality (+ settings) should be provided to be able to work on any device.
Disclaimer: I've never used airpods so I have no idea how they work, just commenting on the logic of the original statement alone.
There is definitely some proprietary “glue” in there. One nice thing about them is that you pair them to one device and then all of your other iCloud devices can see them. I would not expect that kind of feature to work elsewhere for obvious reasons. I could be wrong?
They also support spatial audio which is now supported with Android.
There are definitely features of the AirPods which are new or were new when they were released. It’s up to Apple to support those features on their own hardware/OS. It’s up to others to add support to their own operating systems if they deem it worthwhile. Similar goes for other hardware. Yes, the hardware works differently than so many generic components out in the world but that’s kind of the point.
Ended up just getting a UTWS5 and Moondrop Katos and being a lot happier.
Could you imagine a world where telephones couldn't make calls to each other or cars needed special gasoline that was only available from gas station chains that licensed it from your car maker?
What a terrible world that would be.
Why do we accept similar things with computers?
I wonder if mandatory opening of interoperability protocols for popular products would improve health of electronics markets.
A standard is just something that gets adopted by a bunch of people. There are competing standards for all kinds of things… the market generally decides what standards win. Any company doing something new is by definition attempting to set a new standard.
When innovation was occurring in integrated circuits the companies standardized on the 0.1" DIP. Then as needs for smaller packages came they worked together on TSSOP and others. Obviously the innovation isn't a matter of packaging.
If you look at the USB implementors forum, you'll notice many of the big players are there (including Apple.)
I would argue that the 0.1" DIP was a technology innovation of its own. It was adopted because it solved a problem with scalability of TO-5 and similar packaging which was somewhat round in nature, maybe borrowing from the design constraints of vacuum tubes? (complete guess on that part!) There are variants of DIP which have different dimensions than the 0.1" DIP we see almost everywhere today. While there may have been cooperation in choosing 0.1" DIP, I think it's more likely that available parts were largely made in this form factor and thus it was adopted.
That's nonsensical - none of your examples came about from regulation, they were market-driven.
RS232 for any wired data connectivity 110 VAC for any kind of power 802.11b for any kind of wireless data connectivity …
Now that we have these mandated, let’s zoom to the present day and figure out just how bad of an idea each of those decisions were.
I don’t know what “mandating interoperability” would mean for all cases in the original argument. eg: Does someone need to write software that can run on every single operating system that supports Bluetooth to perform a firmware update for AirPods before releasing them? That sounds pretty abysmal for anyone that doesn’t have the resources to understand/target/maintain a process for BeOS/Haiku/Linux/Android/iOS/Windows/whatever my car’s console is running/etc.
OTOH, you could write a standard for firmware updates to devices over different channels and see who would adopt it. Make sure it is future proof and covers all currently known use-cases. If it’s adopted by enough people, you aren’t using your local government to write something in stone which will likely be outdated in a decade or so anyway.
Most modern electronics convert from 110VAC to something else and spend a lot of hardware dealing with the fact that they are given single-phase AC and actually need somewhat clean DC. The big exceptions to this would be things like heaters/ovens/stoves or incandescent bulbs which just use 110VAC (or 220VAC split-phase) directly. None of those exceptions require AC and some might even work unmodified with DC. The big issue with single-phase or split-phase AC that's annoying for DC devices is the fact that you can get no power 100-120 times per second when the voltage crosses 0. Thus we end up with giant adaptors/fancy power supplies that plug into the wall sockets and produce DC.
On a power-distribution level, we use AC because we figured out how to transform voltages easily early on. However, we couldn't always agree on frequency (or voltage, or connectors) and thus we have situations like Japan's power grid to this day. Fast forward and we now have efficient ways to convert DC voltage but still pay the cost of AC everywhere because it's both ingrained and regulated.
edit: 0-voltage crossing is 2x the frequency in AC
You can't even natively change brightness nor volume on non-Apple displays, even though DDC/CI is a thing and third party apps can do just that. The Mac Mini M1 HDMI port is even crippled at the hardware level and DDC/CI flat out doesn't work there (works fine via USB-C which uses DP).
The usual public rationale from Apple is that a perfect experience can only be achieved within a fully owned ecosystem.
I don't quite buy that the core strategic intent is intentionally using this to push people into owning only/buying more of Apple stuff, I bet it's more about not having to handle dev, fixes, workarounds, and a storm of support cases for third party hardware that may be of less than stellar quality, and then Apple being blamed for things not working.
IOW brand image control + dev resources, not a sales ploy.
1. long battery life. (as in a week+) 2. Always on display. 3. Notifications. (Ability to display all notifications that make a sound/vibrate in android, ideally also providing access to notification's quick actions, and ability to dismiss notification from phone. It should also provide incoming call notification, with caller name or number and hang-up button support). 4. Media controls for phone. (I don't really care about this, but if a watch lacks it, it would be suspicious). 5. Basic watch functions, like time, date, stopwatch, timer, alarms. (Possibly synchronized with android device, but not is not a requirement).
Beyond those five, things health sensors, app support or whatever are just bonuses.
The display should probably be a reflective display with optional backlight triggered by tilt-to-view, or even a button. It probably should use something like epaper or memory lcd to be low power. Honestly color is not even critical, although would be a nice-to-have.
Pebble came somewhat close, although its notification support was somewhat more limited than I would have liked. But I've seen nothing else since then. Everybody is too focused on apps, fitness sensors, etc, and have laughable battery life, even without an always on display.
1) Gets about 14 days with default sensors (HR, GPS, altimeter, barometer, compass, etc) enabled (turning on high resolution Sp02, for instance, will knock it down to 6-8 days)
2) Yup
3) Yup, all features requested
4) Technically, only for a few apps. And it supports Android's media APIs better than Apple's. But they're there. This is probably the weakest supported of your requirements.
5) Admirably.This is not moving forward, it looks like the author is just lofting it up as a resource for others to use as a starting point for similar projects.
Deeply heartfelt thanks to the original author for taking it this far.
Hackaday is something I'd definitely recommend to the average HN reader if they like the hardware side of things.
I'd also recommend N-O-D-E's channel for anyone interested in such things, here's his video on his F91 mod: https://youtu.be/cvtvm7N_qj4
Forcing all setup to go through the needle's eye of a couple of buttons is profoundly limiting, and a wired connection would violate F91 design esthetic more.
A transparent back for the watch, and optical components, could open biomedical opportunities. There, Bluetooth readout of logged data would be useful.
I love Casio watches, I own many. I have dreamed about having an F91 with smart functionality, ideally, a private, security focused device.
I feel you might have hit the nail on the head.
Can't wait to see this grow.
I would help out if I knew where to start! I'll have a read and see if I can dip in.
I think it’s plausible that none of operational nuclear warheads were designed with supercomputer clusters more than half as fast as the latest Apple Watch. Resources packed into watches are that plenty.
Bad Casio and Pebble comparison photos: https://imgur.com/a/LrS8xI4
(1) https://pebble-help-legacy.rebble.io/help.getpebble.com/cust...
Check out r/F91Ws_on_NATOs for inspiration.
https://www.google.com/search?q=bin+laden+casio+F91&client=f...
:(