Hacker News Reader

Comment by bsurmanski | Hacker News Reader

I like the idea of smart watches, but I don't see why there would be a demand for them. Specifically, I can't think of a single "killer app" that would make a smart watch better than the phone that everyone is currently carrying around.

Can someone enlighten me? Whats going to be the killer app for smart watches?

View on HN

I can speak of the one I'm developing.

We're using the Pebble to track seizures through the accelerometer (neutun.com).

With these new bands, and the amazing battery life, we could have multiple device and signal support, allowing us to branch out to other types of seizures and conditions.

Cool. That's sort of the opposite of a killer app.

We have users buying Pebbles for the soul purpose of using our application, that would otherwise not have purchased it.

He was making a joke as your app saves lives instead of being a "killer".

ahah sorry, about that @jkestner. Thanks for the clarification @robwilliams. Guess thats what I get for reading fast! :P

That's what I get for being pithy. By the way, are you aware of the Embrace wearable that's doing it the other way? Seizure sensor first, watch second. Handsome and minimalist.

https://www.empatica.com

Yup, we are well aware :)

There are three things for me (this is just my subjective account):

1) Ease of receiving texts. Reading a text went from 7 seconds to 1.7 seconds for me. Really nice while driving (I can keep my eyes near the road and not be mentally distracted) or when I'm in lab with latex gloves on ("Oh yes, I do want to get lunch in 5 mins, good thing I saw this"). BTW, if my time is worth $50/hr and I get 100 texts a day, saving 5.3 seconds per text, the $250 watch pays for it self in 33 days.

2) Social implications of checking your phone vs checking your watch. The latter is impatient, but the former is outright rude in many contexts.

3) By filtering the important things through my watch rather than my phone, if my phone buzzes but my watch doesn't, I can safely ignore it, because it is of lower-tier importance. This benefit surprised me, but it is actually rather nice to have an automatic hierarchy of notification importance.

re #2, I would argue that both, done repeatedly, are considered to be outright rude in many contexts.

Killer app? I don't know about killer, but here are some super useful things I can imagine smartwatches doing:

1. Use as a navigation device (walking, driving, biking, etc), so you don't have to constantly pull your phone our and check which way to go.

2. Control music / tv / computer from across the room without needing a remote (always on your hand, always paired)

3. Homekit control (lighting, locks, appliances, etc) e.g. set your oven to preheat, go in the backyard and do whatever, watch notifies you when over is ready

4. Healthkit (many people wear health trackers already, this will just bring more features to a device they already wear). Also biometrics.

5. Someone texts / calls / emails you as you sit in a meeting / walking with your hands full / etc you can glance at your wrist and see how important the notification is before you excuse yourself to take the call or whatever.

Basically, most of the potential with this device is doing things which phones can already do but in a less intrusive manner. These features alone interest me in smartwatches; I can't imagine what other people will come up with.

Killer app? I don't know about killer, but here are some super useful things I can imagine smartwatches doing:...Basically, most of the potential with this device is doing things which phones can already do but in a less intrusive manner.

We shouldn't ever dismiss this avenue for product/business development: Duplicating an existing functionality/service but with greater convenience. One of the charges raised against both the iPhone and iPad, was that they merely duplicated functionality that was already in other devices. However, making that functionality more convenient and mobile turned out to be of incredible value to the market.

I can't label a "killer app", but smart watches have opportunities a smartphone doesn't. The most obvious is the opportunity for biometrics, as they rest on your skin.

Thats a truth few wearable companies understand. Many just shove the same functionality of the phone onto your wrist, which is the worst of both worlds. They miss out on the unique opportunities wearables have and focus on smartphone features that are sub-optimal (at best) for a wearable.

Pebble is the leader in this way of thinking. They are showing more innovation than Apple with the announcement of the smartbands. Opening up a world of possibilities for software and hardware engineers/ideas

Specifically which biometrics? Perhaps the sensors still need to be invented but what would you like to track regardless of technical feasibility?

I'm not close enough to biometrics to know what is truly feasible, but I would think you might be able to get SPO2, bpm, EKG, body temperature, maybe even hydration... Then from there you can start building second-order measurements, like how much time you spend at your resting HR, how quickly you return to resting HR, how well your lungs are working, sleep activity. From there maybe you could even extrapolate that data to give feedback. "Dave, your temperature has been gradually increasing the last 36 hours and your skin is unusually clammy, you might be on the verge of a cold" Or maybe "Dave, your SPO2 is falling and your bpm is rising rapidly, you are going into shock, seek medical attention immediately". History is useful for these measurements- what is "normal" is different from person to person, so a running history could let you discover these things earlier.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com