Hacker News Reader

You are comparing a very purpose-built chip in the original watch to a general purpose microprocessor in this design. The original won't have a single extra transistor than it needs, and it won't be operating one Hz faster than it needs to. Not a surprise to me.

And in reality, the real-life battery life of the Sensor Watch will drop further if you actually attach actual sensors to it or (I'd expect) start running your own code on it.

View on HN

The Movement framework for developing watch faces tries to steer folks toward low power consumption by default; the watch spends most of its time in standby, and a custom watch face only runs code once per loop (which is once a second by default, although you can request more frequent updates from 1 to 128 Hz). This means most watch faces can actually stay under 10 µA as long as they don't need to update too frequently; up to about 16 Hz, power consumption remains decent.

Anecdotally, my daily driver is coming up on 550 days on the same CR2016 coin cell from February 2022, and I think it's on track to make it to 2024. A far cry from the original's 7+ year battery life, but still pretty good considering all it's capable of!

That is really impressive!!! Are you able to do some kind of power management on any attachable sensors as well besides whatever their standby current is?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com