Moto 360
moto360.motorola.com
moto360.motorola.com
Also, is this the first mass-market device with a round screen? I'd be interested to see how the layouts work from a developer perspective. Whether relative or fixed, desktop, mobile or web, we're all so used to rectangular, grid based layouts.
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/images/2011/04/IMG_0486A-720x479....
I tried finding pictures of the internals of that watch, but my google-fu is not strong enough.
Why, why on earth do I need the web on my watch?
This seems like one of those cases where less is definitely more.
If it could be done, maybe. But I do not think it can be done well. A watch's screen is maybe 2". It's designed to be glanced at and not stared at for extended periods of time.
I don't want a watch that has the Web. It fundamentally doesn't do what I want a watch to do.
- fake / inconsistent lighting accents & bevel
- screens in the photos are pixelated (looks like a screen-res quality source was rotated), yet the 3D model's screen is totally smooth suggesting 400 dpi or better
- clip rotation angles are off
- the cropping is poor, has antialiasing problems
Now look at the edges of the 3D watch's hands: they're all smooth at every angle. That means either a 3D mock-up or an incredibly high res screen. Yet look at the black watch face in the prior shot: all the hands are jagged.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xQ3y902DEQ&noredirect=1#t=6...
It says that the screen is simulated at 0:23.
I've never seen Android that smooth and I'm an Android UI expert. That's all After Effects.
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/android-wear-facts,news-18491.ht...
http://i.imgur.com/yP1Qpa9.png
I was kind of excited after viewing the Motorola page, but after the videos, I'm disappointed. I don't want to speak to my watch, and I don't care about having yet another app for weather, calendar, etc. The videos just reminded me that I don't care about any of this information, or having it available on my wrist. I'll stick to a traditional watch, I think they're more stylish, and the time is really the only piece of information I need immediate access to on a constant basis. Everything else can be in pocket.
Doesn't everyone want to look like a TV show FBI agent?
On the other hand, I've seen a Galaxy Gear in person and the screen was not impressive. But I bet the 'simulated images' look pretty good.
Motorola has made a phone with a round screen before http://www.gsmarena.com/motorola_aura-2562.php
Haha, that takes "responsive" to a whole new level.
[1] http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/xMQM5UAtkAbVdFZL.me...
(http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Nest+Learning+Thermostat+2nd+..., step 12)
I think they are used in cars as dials and gauges.
I've been typing this way since like '94 and I've yet to have any carpal tunnel issues.
Attempting to type this line with elevated wrists feels very strange and something that I couldn't do for long periods of time.
So... yeah, strap a couple pound weight to your arm, and until you bulk up, there's going to be some sagging by the end of the day.
After years of getting irritated with watches and leaving them off half the day, I just stopped wearing them and I've very rarely ever regretted it.
Until the battery died, that Casio, sans wristband, served as a sort of pocket watch. Now, I just look at my phone -- when I don't already have a clock on-screen somewhere.
Aside: I'd prefer a URL that didn't necessitate dynamic content in order to get a basic idea of what the product is. Call me old-fashioned... or paranoid (exploits); take your pick.
Have some fat wrist porn: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/kjed7wq0p23l42h/RbCpiuaGjH
I don't usually work directly on my MBP, being of the one true religion (external keyboard/mouse/monitor), but when I do, the first is approximately how my left wrist normally rests, and the second is with my Pebble on, showing the buckle in contact with the MBP.
It was hard to get the angle right on the second picture, so the position of my wrist is slightly off, but you get the idea.
When actually typing (especially for more than a couple words, like I am now), my wrist isn't usually resting so heavily on the surface, but the buckle is still in contact with the laptop.
The scratching is annoying, as is the pressure on my wrist. This has been the case for every watch I've owned with several different straps, so I almost always take them off when using any laptop without an external keyboard.
Personally, I find my watch tends to sit above my wrist, so it's not over the palm rest at all.
In other words: This is how reality works. And here in reality, the buckle is annoying. Speculation as to its annoyance in an alternate reality is beside the point.
I've had carpal and nerve issues in the past, so I watch this a lot... generally you can drive the better habits simply by reconfiguring the work setup.
But all of this is quite irrelevant when one is talking about the inherently non-ergonomic use of a laptop that only happens in meetings and hotel rooms.
http://mindfulmotionphysicaltherapy.com/what-is-an-ergonomic... (For info purposes - not endorsing this particular practitioner.)
I wonder why that is.
This is also why Apple's profit margins are sky high. Consumer electronics is an industry with razor thin margins, but with fashion, the sky is the limit (given that you can effectively manipulate the minds of consumers, which Apple is excellent at). An iDevice cannot be commoditized, no matter how hard Apple's competitors try.
I am wearing a pair of very cheap no-brand jeans, they are extremely durable and comfortable (the label also ironically reads "Unsigned", which I admit made me smile a bit, but it's not a brand, in a few years that store chain (Scapino) will have different labels, and nobody will notice one bit). I'm not going around saying "Unsigned has great durable comfy jeans"--also because they're not, extremely varying quality, you just have to try on at least 5 different ones that are ostensibly the same size (which they are also not). They're cheap though and this makes me very happy with them :)
Yeah, you're going to need at least some form of evidence for that claim.
Needless to say, I disagree that that's the reason I use a Mac.
It feels weird to know that it cost more than many people's cars, but if you work in the privileged person startup bubble it's a weak shibboleth, not a luxury item that draws attention.
sorry, what? I thought macboook cost $2-3k? Is that how much a car costs in your country?
>Apple is more a fashion company than a tech company.
Not even remotely accurate for possible definitions of either of those terms.
>Those who buy and use its products are primarily concerned with advertising the fact that they use Apple products - conspicuous consumption.
Oh really? You don't think it has anything to do with their excellent track record of hardware design, software design, reliability and usability?
>It's no different from how Gucci or Prada owners make sure to prominently display the brand of their handbag when they are in public.
Yes, because Dell and HP laptops are completely devoid of physical branding...
>It's a simple form of signaling your identity, that you belong to a particular group.
Or it's because Apple products let productive people be productive.
Of course. It has to do with Apple's branding of "hardware design, software design, reliability and usability".
Just like G-Star advertises their clothing as "raw", while their jeans are actually quite flimsy and rip or tear easily.
Sure, they look pretty and well-fitted. Just like I would recommend my grandmother an iPad because I know it's well-designed and she'd have less trouble using it.
> >It's no different from how Gucci or Prada owners make sure to prominently display the brand of their handbag when they are in public.
> Yes, because Dell and HP laptops are completely devoid of physical branding...
You're proving his point here: It's not like other brands of handbags (or shoes) are completely devoid of physical branding either. Yet it's not like their owners are even aware of its brand, half the time.
In this context I'd sooner compare Apple products to Nike shoes, rather than the fashion "I have money to spend" signalling Gucci/Prada handbags.
Come on, the evolution of "brands as lifestyle + identity" has been around for at least 30 years now. You should know a thing or two about how it works. It's not really a disputed theory.
And you can't seriously deny that Apple isn't fighting along in the Big Brand mindshare arena just as much as Coca-Cola, Nike, Red Bull and Calvin Klein, in a sense that Dell, Asus or Lenovo are very much not. A quick litmus-test is whether they have a significant brand-identity that can be separated from their products (sometimes even more prominent than their actual core product, especially in the case of Coca-Cola or Red Bull).
> >It's a simple form of signaling your identity, that you belong to a particular group.
> Or it's because Apple products let productive people be productive.
See what you just did? Put Apple product users in the group of "productive people being productive"? :) Would you ever say something as generic about a Lenovo laptop? (which has excellent hardware and lets productive people be very productive) That's because Apple is a brand identity, over just being a brand of laptops. As if they're charged with a kind of "soul".
You don't have to consider it a bad thing, but I think it's important to at least be aware of these very real differences, because they do influence the way people act, behave and feel about their stuff. And it's nothing new, and it's nothing you can or should prevent, everyone is affected by these ideas to some extent, which is again why it's so important to be aware of it. Just don't deny it.
I'll address them in order. 1. there was a marked discoloration when i saw pictures on the forums, and i almost returned it due to bing scared. When i got it, nothing. Absolutely nothing, though it looked a bit over saturated, which i kinda like on a non-workstation device.
2. The flimsy hinge is not a problem, end of story. Its stiffer than a MBA or MBP,m and only wobbles significantly if you tap it real hard.
3. Battery life is a problem, but if you're like me, i use it in multiple short spurts, coupled with a few long ones. It lasts all day, and while i do wish for a bit more, as for waht it is, it's good. Not great, but good.
4. No backlight bleed, nuff' said.
Furthermore i have found myself using the touchscreen far more than i anticipated. It's hands down, IMHO, the best laptop availible today thats an ultraportable. Go get one.
On the plus side, it has a Ubuntu logo on it instead of that crappy Windows logo.
I don't parade around with the laptop: it's a desk job, with as few dashes over to the datacentre as possible. I work in a highly diverse Windows/Mac/Linux environment.
I've been very satisfied with it, except for the slight lack of ports. The speed, solid/useful construction, 16:10 screen, battery life, reasonable OS, et cetera, all suit me well. A Macbook Pro, which has lots more ports and a better screen besides, would likely satisfy me 100%.
The extremely similar Lenovo X1 Carbon that I also use in the office is not unfortunately quite as enjoyable, though it's equally utilitarian. The price-point is virtually identical, at least with how we specced them. I had had high hopes for it, because I was considering one to replace my X220.
At what point is fashion involved in this equation? Where is the bragging? Where is the fanboyism?
That's completely false. They make good looking products sure but they aren't just pretty little bricks.
Like it or not, the simplicity of Apple's product line and naming scheme makes their product names more meaningful.
Like a William Gibson novel.
I don't know what a "Dell Latitude 3300" looks like because its owners do not mention they own one when they talk about "their laptop". If they did, after a few mentions, I'd have gotten a clearer idea on the type of machine, or have looked it up.
there's nothing more meaningful about "MacBook Pro" than, say, "EeePC Seashell" (which is arguably an even more evocative name).
and especially among computer geeks who care for this kind of thing, adding a series number instead of some word, isn't a problem and actually helps.
Apple laptops have numbers too, right? It's easier for me, even because I don't keep track of all the different kinds of Macbooks out there, at least for iOS I can figure "higher number is newer". Just the term "Macbook Pro" merely tells me it's shiny, probably white or aluminium, expensive and owner is either from the US or in the graphic design/music industry.
Posted from my Asus EeePC 1215B "Seashell", with Linux Mint, hooked up to a Samsung SyncMaster SA350 24" monitor, typed on a Microsoft Comfort Curv--ahh, sod it.
Apple laptops don't have numbers in the last decade. There's been several generations of the "MacBook Pro". The screen size is a descriptor and not actually part of the product name.
The same effect is evident in cars: if I say "BMW 3-series" or "328i" you have a pretty good idea what I'm talking about, but if I say "Kia Cadenza"... and that's because BMW has maintained that brand for what, 30 years now?
It's not about what people choose to say, it's about Apple's clever naming conventions.
It would never occur to me to refer to it by its model name.
My wife has an iPhone 5s. As in, "Hey, toss me your phone. It has a better camera". Guess we're safe there too.
I wear/wore a watch while typing on my chromebook, my Dell laptop, my Lenovo laptop, my old white macbook, and various external keyboards, but when I type on my macbook pro, the watch comes off almost immediately.
The watch clasp grating on the wide aluminum bezel quickly drives me to remove the watch.
I think it's reasonably to say, "Macbook Pro" as a generic reference. Nothing is really gained/lost by saying, "Mac Laptop". And, you do need to distinguish it's your unibody mac laptop, not a dell laptop, which likely doesn't mind being scratched by a watch that much. This is a Point for Dell! - My Latitude 2120 has been all over the planet in all sorts of rough conditions, doesn't have a visible scratch, unlike my macbook air - which is pretty ugly (but still working) shape after the same two years.
One thing that I learned after years of scratching the glass on several watches is that you should take it off often.
Sleep with watch, and bath with watch are just two of the no-go. :)
Now I've got a computer in front of me a majority of my waking hours, and a smartphone in my pocket for the times when I don't; _really_ no need for a watch.
Two big concerns for me: 1) Battery life 2) Display visibility
They go hand-in-hand for me. Get that nice high-res display but will it last me a day? For battery life it would be nice to have induction charging if it were to last about 8 hours (my personal guess).
All that said I agree with you about the battery. It'll have to be nice enough to make it worth it. Lots of people need one less reason to get sucked into checking notifications on their phone.
Also Adding new calendar events and setting the alarm, are both so much easier via voice. Sports too "ok Google Now, did the Bulls Win?"
Once you get in the habit of using it, its very convenient.
Glad to see this is being integrated within the watch.
Battery life, screen brightness/visibility (can I read the screen on a clear summer day at noon?), size, and ease of use are all really important. Price matters for business purposes, but I wonder what could be done if that were not considered as a factor.
But since they'll have to compromise on those parameters (or just physically can't push them too far) it makes you wonder if this thing will actually be worth it. It's definitely cool, but is it really that much better than just having a smart phone? Is it $600-$1,000 better? I have a hard time imagining it would be... hopefully I'm wrong!
If they skimp and try to put in cheap hardware and go for a $500 price target then this is going to fall flat. Hopefully they understand the watch market and know to charge more and put in the best materiel, but knowing the tech industry I doubt it a lot.
[1] http://www.thewatchquote.com/List-Price-and-tariff-for-Montb...
...which will render the product DOA.
If all you want to do is tell the time quickly, a $10 quartz watch does the job just fine.
I am sure Vertu or some other ridiculous company will sell you your insane diamond-encrusted titanium penis size signifier with a touch screen and Android Wear integration, but it won't be any more functional than the regular version.
Also, Swatch have some very nice ones, with a VERY good price.
Simple, round, small.
With this round steel case, you could even exchange the wristband for a brown lethear one and get a more mature look (all this for only 30 bucks).
For comparison: My first two watches lasted 2 years each and costed me ~$10 a pop plus they had a WR rating of 300m. Sadly they looked kinda juvenile and I needed something with a little more status, but I'm leaning on just going back because they really worked!
I personally never bath with a watch on and never go swimming with this particular watch (I have another one that I use mainly for outdoor activities. A Casio rated to 100 meters).
I really dig watches, and when you start to collect some of them you actually find it's quite fun to chose the right one for the right ocasion! :)
For those of a certain extreme old age, say, over 30, one problem is not wearing a watch has been a display of wealth for some decades now. The signal is, "I don't wear a watch anymore, I pay an expensive cellphone contract instead". Last time I wore a watch was during the Clinton presidency.
For elders like me, wearing a watch would indicate I'm too poor to have a phone.
Put another way the first cell phone contract I was aware of, was four times our current cable TV bill. Or about ten times the landline bill. So that would be quite expensive indeed.
Most over 30 who want to show off their wealth actually do wear a watch, an expensive one at that. I don't know where you get this bs notion that NOT wearing a watch is a sign of wealth. You don't have to be rich to afford a $50-80/mo. contract but you do for that $100,000 Vacheron.
— Blake, Glengarry Glen Ross (1992)
You'd have better success taking that $4000 watch and adding android bits to it. Advertise it as the same expensive fancy watch with more smarts in it. That ball is in the fancy-watch company's court, not google's.
The use of color is limited imho, you won't look at high res pictures (or really anything that isn't very limited in size and scope).
Monochrome or 'a couple' colors would be more than enough for me.
eInk has serious benefits, especially when it comes to battery life. I love my Kindle. I can see how something like the Pebble would be a nice watch and eInk's battery drain is probably a big part of what makes it work so well.
But if you want it to feel interactive with a nice touch screen for swipes, eInk isn't going to do it. Take that video but change all the animations to 5 fps... would it be an amazing watch or just feel like a product that was reaching too far?
Similarly, color is a nice add but it could go wrong. The only pictures of color eInk I've seen look much worse than cheap newsprint. At that point the color isn't adding much, it's just detracting.
Samsung supposedly has much better battery life on the Gear 2. Keeping the display off most of the time would definitely help too. I want to see a review of this. If it's half as cool as it looks in their promo I'll be quite impressed.
I feel like not having color is a price I'm willing to pay to not have to charge my watch every day
I can't decide whether this is genius or ludicrous, but on your phone, you can ask Google Now "What time is it" and get a spoken-word response. So presumably, you could wear a watch that you have to just ask for the time when you're outside. :)
The features presented (est. time to work based on my route, etc) is not data I want to be present in googles dataset.
On the other hand these wearables are pretty great in this sense, for the first time you are the customer (usually the businesses buying ads are).
Because if it's the latter it's no better on the key feature of portability than the existing Samsung/Pebble devices (AIUI).
Make it bluetooth only. Try to give it a decent battery. Maybe a peltier could help stretch it further (seen on some watches, though I suspect the space would be better used for a larger battery since this watch would be much more power hungry)?
Still. Pretty pumped about this.
Why does a watch need a touchscreen? What are you touching on your watch?
Digital watches already have a wonderful UI: they're called "buttons", and they're located on the sides of the screen, so you can still see what you're doing while using the thing.
It reminds me of DeusEx2. Before release all the PC gamers lamented the dumbed down circular menu interface developed to accommodate console gamers. Turns out it was just a flat out better/simpler interface in general though.
So while I could see buttons working OK (well, not really, watch buttons have always been real imprecise and difficult for me, but still), simple swipes, taps, and maybe radial or quadrant based options seems like a solid interface to me.
Say someone texts me while I'm using the walking directions. Swipe that stuff away with a flick of the finger similar to WebOS. Much better UI than hitting a button IMO.
I don't get this "can't see what you're doing" thing at all. Do you not use touchscreen phones? What's your finger doing in front of the thing you're going to touch before you go to touch it?
Current smart watches remind me of those Windows convertible tablets from 2006-2007. It was a good idea, and for certain use-cases it was the best thing out there, but the technology just wasn't quite advanced enough to make them practical for most people. I see smart watches catching on when they are sleek enough to function as a no-compromises watch while also integrating all the contextual information they promise to make available.
Why?!
- Gorilla arms; When your in bed or on the couch, keeping the watch turned towards your face takes a toll on your wrists. It's tiring. See how the people in the video look down towards their watch, try doing that 20+ times a day for prolonged times.
- Call quality; Calling with it sound like your wearing a skimask. A bluetooth dongle is the only option for good voice quality, but its another extra device on you.
- Battery quality ; Battery lasts one day if your taking it easy.
- Restricted Controls; The only thing you can do is swipe or touch. I can manage the onscreen keyboard, but its tiny! The only things you can truly use it for is a notification system.
Meta: Why after so many comments am I the first to ask this?!?
The biggest problem is that they haven't demonstrated it will be even halfway decent yet, and none of the existing comparables give any confidence to that.
AMOLED fits the bill easily because the technology allows you to place dots however you need to place dots and doesn't restrict you to arrays or rectangular shaped emitters or even planar geometry. The only challenge is running wires to each LED to drive it.
According to the android emulator profile.
>Say "share now" to share your cardiovascular activity on Google+
>...
>Synchronization completed!
>5 minutes later
>ping! One new message. Say "read" or "later"
>"read"
>Enjoying the run? Try these Adidas XYZ shoes for only 99$, perfect for athletic running!
Call me a tinfoil hatter, but I am not touching this tracking device with a five foot pole.
The device depicted in the images does not appeal me, it’s seems massive and old fashioned. I don’t think a smartwatch should have this look. We do not need a touch screen enabled watch, we are talking here about a ‘smart’ watch.
The best use is typically just getting notifications. So you can see SMSes, IMs, whatnot. The fact is that 90% of the time it's more important to have read a message than to reply to it. It also saves you the trouble of having to remember to read something when you notice you've gotten a message but you can't check it just now 'cause you are busy with something else. That alone is a huge use case. Sure, it doesn't apply to everyone, but it applies to enough people that it justifies the product.
And ultimately it is just a product not a way of life being imposed on humanity. If it doesn't work for you then don't use it. If you don't like sailing you don't have to buy a sail boat, but you also don't have to decry their existence either.
* I'm Swiss and this comment was made in good humour
(Sorry for the off topic. You are right that Omega watches are by no means what I would consider a "good old swiss watch")
The trend I see here is - if your shit does not sell in first attempt then repackage it under a new name.
MotoActv Features - 1. gps 2. heart rate 3. monitor 4. music 5. challenges 6. texts 7. ant+ 8. wi-fi 9. clock 10. weather 11. display
The Moto360, which looks absolutely nothing like the MotoActv (seriously, where the hell are you getting that they're repackaging an existing watch under a new name? They're completely different) is meant for an entirely different market, has completely different features, and probably features none of the same internals as the MotoActv.
They are two watches, with completely different functions, with completely different UIs, meant for completely different people. The only similarity is that they're both made by Motorola but even that's a stretch because the Motorola of today (I'm referring to Motorola, a Google company) is nothing like Motorola of 2 years ago, when the MotoActv was released.
Anybody care to enlighten an amateur how they did it?
window.mobilecheck = function() {
var check = false;
(function(a){if(/(android|bb\d+|meego).+mobile|avantgo|bada\/|blackberry|blazer|compal|elaine|fennec|hiptop|iemobile|ip(hone|od)|iris|kindle|lge |maemo|midp|mmp|mobile.+firefox|netfront|opera m(ob|in)i|palm( os)?|phone|p(ixi|re)\/|plucker|pocket|psp|series(4|6)0|symbian|treo|up\.(browser|link)|vodafone|wap|windows (ce|phone)|xda|xiino/i.test(a)||/1207|6310|6590|3gso|4thp|50[1-6]i|770s|802s|a wa|abac|ac(er|oo|s\-)|ai(ko|rn)|al(av|ca|co)|amoi|an(ex|ny|yw)|aptu|ar(ch|go)|as(te|us)|attw|au(di|\-m|r |s )|avan|be(ck|ll|nq)|bi(lb|rd)|bl(ac|az)|br(e|v)w|bumb|bw\-(n|u)|c55\/|capi|ccwa|cdm\-|cell|chtm|cldc|cmd\-|co(mp|nd)|craw|da(it|ll|ng)|dbte|dc\-s|devi|dica|dmob|do(c|p)o|ds(12|\-d)|el(49|ai)|em(l2|ul)|er(ic|k0)|esl8|ez([4-7]0|os|wa|ze)|fetc|fly(\-|_)|g1 u|g560|gene|gf\-5|g\-mo|go(\.w|od)|gr(ad|un)|haie|hcit|hd\-(m|p|t)|hei\-|hi(pt|ta)|hp( i|ip)|hs\-c|ht(c(\-| |_|a|g|p|s|t)|tp)|hu(aw|tc)|i\-(20|go|ma)|i230|iac( |\-|\/)|ibro|idea|ig01|ikom|im1k|inno|ipaq|iris|ja(t|v)a|jbro|jemu|jigs|kddi|keji|kgt( |\/)|klon|kpt |kwc\-|kyo(c|k)|le(no|xi)|lg( g|\/(k|l|u)|50|54|\-[a-w])|libw|lynx|m1\-w|m3ga|m50\/|ma(te|ui|xo)|mc(01|21|ca)|m\-cr|me(rc|ri)|mi(o8|oa|ts)|mmef|mo(01|02|bi|de|do|t(\-| |o|v)|zz)|mt(50|p1|v )|mwbp|mywa|n10[0-2]|n20[2-3]|n30(0|2)|n50(0|2|5)|n7(0(0|1)|10)|ne((c|m)\-|on|tf|wf|wg|wt)|nok(6|i)|nzph|o2im|op(ti|wv)|oran|owg1|p800|pan(a|d|t)|pdxg|pg(13|\-([1-8]|c))|phil|pire|pl(ay|uc)|pn\-2|po(ck|rt|se)|prox|psio|pt\-g|qa\-a|qc(07|12|21|32|60|\-[2-7]|i\-)|qtek|r380|r600|raks|rim9|ro(ve|zo)|s55\/|sa(ge|ma|mm|ms|ny|va)|sc(01|h\-|oo|p\-)|sdk\/|se(c(\-|0|1)|47|mc|nd|ri)|sgh\-|shar|sie(\-|m)|sk\-0|sl(45|id)|sm(al|ar|b3|it|t5)|so(ft|ny)|sp(01|h\-|v\-|v )|sy(01|mb)|t2(18|50)|t6(00|10|18)|ta(gt|lk)|tcl\-|tdg\-|tel(i|m)|tim\-|t\-mo|to(pl|sh)|ts(70|m\-|m3|m5)|tx\-9|up(\.b|g1|si)|utst|v400|v750|veri|vi(rg|te)|vk(40|5[0-3]|\-v)|vm40|voda|vulc|vx(52|53|60|61|70|80|81|83|85|98)|w3c(\-| )|webc|whit|wi(g |nc|nw)|wmlb|wonu|x700|yas\-|your|zeto|zte\-/i.test(a.substr(0,4)))check = true})(navigator.userAgent||navigator.vendor||window.opera);
return check; }
var isMobile = mobilecheck();
It's light on product shots, however.
But let's assume that I have no taste: assuming that the model shown is an average western white male, the size of that watch cuts out 50% or more of the population because it is too wide for their wrists.
And yes, they do mention "a selection of styles", but I doubt that will include size differences. If you scale it down to the size of a ladies' watch, chances are you will run into problems w.r.t. Battery volume.
Power usage may be the Achilles heel, anyways, but they may have tweaked that through software (I think it might be possible to use motion and light sensors to infer when the user might be looking at the watch and switch off the display when he isn't)
It also appears that the watch has color LCD that would display analog faceplate. It would be pretty expensive to run color LCD full time though. Another alternative could be color E-Ink but unless there have been any recent advancement that was still experimental.
I don't know why people invest in these things. I don't know where this vision is coming from, but this is not a tech breakthrough. These things will not be used in the long run, period.
Do you think that Eric Migicovsky wears a freaking pebble watch? I hope not. I hope he can afford a cheap Rolex or a little more expansive IWC.
There should be a disclaimer, product for 5-16, 16-18 if your mom still changes your diapers, or for true tech lovers.
And like i said, some people will definitely go for it.
Or did Google, in addition to the patents, keep the motorola brand?
This watch, for better or worse, is now going to be seen as the Google watch.
I somehow feel it as a step between a phone and an hand-free device like google glass (or even implants). But because we have already google glass I don't even see why we need to go a step back.
Edit: downvotes with no comments? I did not expect that here.
What I want is the smallest possible watch out there, and so far I really haven't found anything.
Try a Nike Fuelband however, it's very thin. It's not always on, but it sure is fancy when you click the button in public.
What you are asking for is premature optimization.
Looking forward to seeing how they solved this.
I'm pretty sure I'm going to pick up a Nexus5 soon, but it still bugs me that I can't figure it out.
I mean, if the phone is face down it doesn't display anything on the screen. I get that. It's kinda clever. But it's so minor I have a tough time calling it a "feature" much less a compelling one.
Otherwise I was more annoyed with the MotoX notification system than anything. When you get a notification your unlock slider changes position. If you get more than one you can't jump to the specific one you want, only the latest. iOS didn't have either of these issues but it seemed like everyone considered Active Notifications somehow revolutionary. Or at least state-of-the-art. And it felt like neither to me.
So I dunno. Going off on a tangent I guess. Just curious what I was missing is all...
I think they will need to hit a pretty big number for battery life. A "40-hour power reserve" (what most mechanical automatics have) would be a big step towards being taken seriously as a watch instead of a gadget.
[1] http://www.omegawatches.com/collection/seamaster/aqua-terra-...
With the Moto 360's stem I can see getting up down and select, but now how they'd do back. Maybe a long-press?
1. The dynamo would take up too much room
2. Pinching a tiny metal shaft is ergonomically awful
3. have you seen the tiny wind-up flashlights? they're huge, and they require quite a lot of winding, and that's just to power an LED for a few minutes.
4. groundbreaking features like a wind-up piece of personal electronics, are *flagship* features. If this thing had a 1 week battery, or was windup, or whatever, that would be a *very high visibility* part of the ad campaign.Besides that: don't count on it. If you pay close attention, you see that the bottom part of the round screen stays black. Most likely to accommodate the controller for the screen. Upside down will not work for that reason.
In a square watch, it might.
With a completely digital display though, theoretically, it would be possible to rotate the watch and have the display rotate as well. The clasp would still potentially be upside down, but depending on the type of clasp, that doesn't matter much.
As you said, if the controller face of the screen is dedicated and not able to be rotated as well, that wouldn't work.
The fact that it seems to be relatively large may unavoidably limit its appeal to smaller individuals of either gender.
There is definitely a size below which usage would suffer too much for many people, but such a device doesn't need a very large UI, since most of its utility is in displaying small bits of information quickly, and extensive data input is performed better on a phone anyway.
Problem is, I love real watches. More specificaly, I love mechanical watches. You know, those little miracles with cogs and spring in it. And jewel bearings. And balance wheel. See-through back, where you can watch movement running.
And I love technology at the same time. I think that this is the future of technology, everybody will now jump onto bandwagon of smartwatches. But I don't want to replace my beatiful mechanical watches with something like this. I hate that I love watches, because otherwise I would be thrilled to put something like this on my wrist. But I'm not.
- make it smaller, it's bloody huge
- better battery
Given the full color display and the current abysmal battery life for any smart watch not using e-ink, I'm pessimistic about the battery life of this product. I would be very happy to be surprised though.
Makes me wonder.
I know more women that wear watches than men, but let's go with something that is gigantic and only men would wear. Seems to be a sound strategy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrqZl2QIz0c
That's the official Android Wear teaser video.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/20q8qf#cg5q70u > bicyclemom: As a woman who really wants a smartwatch but who absolutely hates the big, manly square look of all prior efforts, I want to kiss Moto on the lips for doing this.
Well you got to test the waters somehow. Its better to test it in one segment and if it doesn't flop, expand it further. Else, complaints can also include why they din't target children or the elderly.
Also gender specific products are established by society. You don't have necessarily follow them. If a female wears a men's watch, it won't automagically stop working.
Its huge. I think the concern is more female upper body strength than aesthetics. Or fear she will grow massive biceps if she wears it.
The only company I know of that's specifically targeted a smartwatch to women is Sony Ericsson back in 2009 (5 years ago), but it didn't quite catch on... https://www.google.com/search?q=MBW-200&rls=en&source=lnms&t...
Also, now that I look, he might be Hispanic... not that it should matter to anyone.