Comment by tlipeep | Hacker News Reader

Comment by tlipeep | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That's wishful thinking from Gruber so he can withhold judgement/criticism. Apple clearly demonstrated the fundamental functionality of their Watch and the hardware does determine the software — they have a hardware button dedicated to one particular feature ffs. Any additional functionality via WatchKit will at best be supplemental. It'd take a while for iOS developers to get to grips with the new paradigm.

Furthermore, in his haste to differentiate Apple from the competition

> My impression of Android Wear is that it’s best thought of as a wrist-worn terminal for your Android phone and for Google’s cloud-based services. An extension for your phone, not a sibling device. Android Wear devices are almost useless other than for telling time when out of Bluetooth range from your phone. I don’t think that’s a device that many people want; it’s a solution in search of a problem. Call me biased if you want, but I think Android Wear is simply the result of the rest of the industry trying to get out in front of Apple, out of fear of how far behind they were when the iPhone dropped in 2007. On the surface, they do look like the same basic thing: small color LCD touchscreens on your wrist. But all Android Wear devices are larger and clunkier than the larger 42mm Apple Watch, and none of them are even close to the smaller 38mm one. Is there anyone who would dispute that Apple Watch is far more appealing to women than any other smartwatch on the market?

The new Sony Smart watch(1) already has more functionality (gps, waterproof, longer estimated battery, transreflective screen visible in sunlight) than the specs of the AppleWatch while the Asus ZenWatch(2) matches it in feminine looks (if not in expensive materials). Both will be out before the AppleWatch and likely for lower prices than the cheap entry-level AppleWatch. AndroidWear OEMs are iterating faster with a wider range of options. Gruber is comparing actual shipping products (Moto360) to promised unreleased products from Apple, indeed he's hoping Apple exceeds their promises. That's his bias showing

(1) http://www.sonymobile.com/global-en/products/smartwear/smart... (2) http://www.asus.com/Phones/ASUS_ZenWatch_WI500Q/

Spot on. As is typical of Gruber he is conveniently missing the fact that Android Wear updates come straight from Google - i.e. the barrier to software side of innovation is almost non-existent compared to Android phones. There is nothing in hardware or software innovation and differentiation that the OEMs and Google cannot add down the line.

There is really no merit to this article at all - it comes across as a series of bending, twisting, confusing hogwash that tries to get you to somehow believe that Apple has gotten everything right and if they haven't gotten something right they surely have secret plans to get it all right. (There is one consistent thing with Gruber - he conveniently ignores or otherwise pooh poohs facts that get in his way. Apple didn't state battery life numbers and Moto 360 battery life is widely varied in the reporting - ranging from half a day to 40 hours - but that doesn't stop him from claiming Apple Watch will run throughout the day irrespective of usage and Moto 360 will top out at half a day! Given his emphasis that Apple is doing more with the watch than competitors and given the physical limitations the claim that it will last a day no matter how you use it - is dodgy a best.)

Also wrong about being useless outside of phone range: offline music playback (for bluetooth music playback) and GPS Support.

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2014/09/android-wear-moving-f...

" Android Wear devices are almost useless other than for telling time when out of Bluetooth range from your phone"

Yeah. This is the part that gets me.

Gruber is willing to withhold judgement and assume apple has not shown off everything.

But android wear makers, you see, they've shown everything in their presentation. No android wear manufacturers are planning anything different than what was shown at I/O.

> But android wear makers, you see, they've shown everything in their presentation. No android wear manufacturers are planning anything different than what was shown at I/O.

Most tech companies over-promise and under-deliver. Apple has a tendency to do the opposite (if you ignore they hyperbole). I'm sure most Android Wear manufacturers are planning beyond what they've actually announced, but I would be amazed if we see anything new before the new year.

" I'm sure most Android Wear manufacturers are planning beyond what they've actually announced, but I would be amazed if we see anything new before the new year."

So around the same timeframe that apple will actually release something? :)

> AndroidWear OEMs are iterating faster with a wider range of options.

That's the critical point.Both ecosystems are starting from a similar point. AndroidWear is iterating faster. And since watch apps are probably much simpler to build than phone apps, we'll probably won't see a big difference between the app ecosystems. And there's probably little that can be patent protected.

Probably the only difference would be that your phone will determine which watch you'll use. But the watches will pretty much be the same.

Android wear is basically on gen 2 or 3. By the time Apple's Watch actually comes out they'll be on Gen 4 or 5. The iteration in Android land is breathtaking right now. And I think the devices (phones) at the mid and high end are basically better and fill many more niches than Apple's stuff.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com