14 ms·

Android coming to wearables

412 points by deepblueocean 13y ago

supergauntlet 13y ago
This looks really cool, but I worry about the battery life of these devices. Doesn't the Galaxy Gear already have not amazing battery life?
- Kiro 13y ago
  My Pebble has a battery life of 7 days and that's one of the biggest benefits compared to Galaxy Gear.
kshatrea 13y ago
I am in the position of being torn apart by two very strong feelings. One is the world where information flow due to companies like Google does a real service to humanity: for e.g. wearing devices that can keep us reminded of our meds or monitor sugar levels, to talk just about the possibilities in healthcare. Then I think of Edward Snowden and I now know that what Google knows, maybe America/Russia/China/WhatHaveYou know. Although at this point I am as normal a citizen as you can find, that can't be taken for granted forever. For e.g. in my nation (India) being gay is illegal and so is marijuana, and so is alcohol (in some states) and so is a lot of stuff. This feeling makes me want to minimize my footprint. Wish there was a way to combat either the wariness, or to exacerbate the joy. For, I must be assimilated into the Borg, too. :) EDIT: spellings
- k-mcgrady 13y ago
  I find myself also questioning this often. It leads to me regularly switching between iOS and Android, Google services and Apple services. Ideally I would like privacy but I think as we go forward keeping privacy would leave you in the same kind of position someone like RMS is in by sticking to his Free Software philosophy so strongly. I'm always surprised at the number of friends and family I see who have their Facebook set to public - especially considering what they post. When I tell them they don't care. I think the majority of people want some semblance of privacy but they are willing to give up a lot for the efficiency these new products, that require us to give up privacy, provide.
  - Touche 13y ago
    > I'm always surprised at the number of friends and family I see who have their Facebook set to public - especially considering what they post. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they are set to public by default... in fact, IIRC they even reset everyone to public when they released that "feature" a couple of years ago. > When I tell them they don't care. I think the majority of people want some semblance of privacy but they are willing to give up a lot for the efficiency these new products, that require us to give up privacy, provide. Sure, and smokers are willing to risk a slow painful death to forgo the pain of quitting. Humans are short-term thinkers.
  - lutusp 13y ago
    > It leads to me regularly switching between iOS and Android, Google services and Apple services. The difference between Apple and Google has recently occurred to me: with Apple, their secrets are in jeopardy. With Google, yours are.
    - danford 13y ago
      I feel the only reason your secrets may not be in jeopardy with Apple is because they don't know as many... If you really want your secrets to be safe you wouldn't use any closed source code at all and would take security precautions to secure the code you do use. Unfortunately we live in a time when closed-source software is the norm and too many people think having a secure, open, communications infrastructure is too complicated and don't quite understand the reasoning behind it (thankfully that attitude seems to be changing a little), but I hope one day we'll look back on this time and wonder what we were thinking by allowing digital goods to be closed source. With 3D printers, neural implants, augmented reality, food and organ printers, and the age of automation, what the future holds is a digital realm that's going to be very scary for people who understand it, especially if the infrastructure is completely owned by corporations and un-trustable governments and even a small amount of the source is closed. I mean look around the room and think of all the things that could be augmented or replaced with 3D printed components.. Why have a physical laptop in front of you when you can augment the key board, 25 screens, and everything else? Not only that, but you can do it for nothing if you know how to code it. We can already print organs and I don't think it will be too long until we can print good tasting food, but what if you execute some code on your food printer that prints a steak with anthrax in it? I think in the next 50 years all this is going to be fairly common place in the developed world and I really hope I have confidence in the system that we have in place at that time.
- smokinjoe 13y ago
  More and more I'm thinking that some sort of Digital Bill of Rights is necessary to carry on in this technological-based World. At first I always thought of it as a nice thing, but perhaps a little too abstract or extreme to really do what it needs to do. However now we have some very large and real threats to our personal lives via this medium. I just feel like it makes a lot of good sense to produce something of the sort. I'm also naive enough to believe that it isn't too late to attempt to establish such a document and have it not contain all sorts of loopholes that would render it useless. I can understand why the feds want to monitor the Internet and various communications, however there needs to be that pushback, that line drawn where we can hold their overreach accountable. It may not always work, but there needs to be something that us ordinary citizens can lean back on for protection.
  - maxerickson 13y ago
    One approach would be to require that a person/group/company that is aggregating information report the storage and use of the information to the people in the database. You could have some arbitrary cutoffs, like don't worry about information on less than 1000 people or stored less than 3 months (or whatever numbers you want to pick out of the air, the point is that the threshold for reporting might not be 0). What I think this might do in many cases is make storing the information more expensive than any value derived from it. It also gives people a chance to learn that the water company is sharing their usage with the police (or whatever).
  - AndrewKemendo 13y ago
    I think a Digital bill of rights is great, but completely unenforceable. Largely because the powers that would be enforcing it wouldn't desire to be signatories.
    - smokinjoe 13y ago
      That's just one of the issues - however like I said, I'm naive enough to believe (and donate/protest/assemble) if there was a strong enough movement for it.
  - 13y ago
- dictum 13y ago
  > in my nation (India) being gay is illegal Sorry for the flame material, but why is it that this is rarely mentioned in western news media (at least in the countries whose news I follow)? For those who, like me, didn't know that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_India
  - hugofirth 13y ago
    It is odd - there was uproar around the Russian propaganda laws regarding Homosexual relationships running up to the winter olympics (and rightly so! I am not suggesting otherwise). Yet, I (who, perhaps arrogantly, consider myself fairly well informed) had absolutely no idea that homosexuality is illegal in India. This is wtf-worthy.
    - wutbrodo 13y ago
      This was the case in something like 15 us States until the Supreme Court struck it down.... In 2003. (far more States are included if you go back just another decade) http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_Sta...
    - chaosmonkey 13y ago
      It's really incompetence. The issue went to the supreme court and they said this matter is for the legislature to decide. The good thing (unlike Russia) is that almost everyone from the ruling government, media, public, etc want this law abolished.
      - 0x006A 13y ago
        Sadly that is not true. The right-wing party, that will most likely win the upcoming elections, will never approve an amendment to change this through parliament. The judge that reverted the supreme court decision if fully aware of this and it was a political decision on his side.
    - DominikR 13y ago
- pizza234 13y ago
  Watch out, because it's a common (and extremely dangerous) misconception that personal data abuses afflict only people who are perceived (or perceive theirselves) as criminal. There are two reasons. First, legal systems with an excessive power in the hands of the prosecution can take an ordinary, civil citizen, and legally rape him (this description was used some time ago on an HN article) Second, anybody that lives a regular life has secrets to hide; this is just a fact. And that secrets will be abused if it would be instrumental to the authorities. I've said "extremely dangerous" - why? Because data collection today is considered/perceived/felt as a big nuisance, but not much more. In reality, it's an oppression instrument, and it's not perceived by the general population just because they're not in prominent positions towards the government.
  - danford 13y ago
    Don't forget that even if you believe you can trust the entity collecting the information, can you trust all the persons that have access to it? Is it inconceivable to believe that people who work for the Chinese government have never sold top secret data to US officials or even corporations? Why couldn't an NSA employee do the same thing? What if the NSA's servers weren't as secure as they thought they were?
untog 13y ago
I'm far more interested in how we're going to solve issues like battery life with these devices than how they're going to look. So yes, this preview looks great. But for now I still consider my Pebble watch to be a much better option.
- wvenable 13y ago
  Moore's Law will eventually catch up. The Pebble is currently the PalmPilot of smartwatches; perfectly suited to the current state of the art. However, progress being what it is, eventually the technology will be good enough that Android (or iOS) on a smartwatch will become the better solution.
  - svenkatesh 13y ago
    Moore's law is about transistor count; what does that have to do with battery life?
    - cwings 13y ago
      More efficient computing requires less battery power http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law
    - untog 13y ago
      I think at this point "Moore's Law" is just used as shorthand for "technology will solve technology's problems given enough time"
      - JetSpiegel 13y ago
        It's just 3-5 years away!
    - Crito 13y ago
      Go back in time 15 years, then build a computer as powerful as a modern smartphone. It wouldn't be easy, but it could be done. Now try to power that computer with a modern smartphone battery. Not gonna happen.
deathcakes 13y ago
Not sure why but saying 'Ok Google' feels a little creepier than saying 'Ok Glass'. More obvious that you aren't interfacing with a mere gadget, but a multi billion dollar corporate entity...
- psbp 13y ago
  I've never heard anyone say "search for it", but rather "google it".
  - deathcakes 13y ago
    True - but that I would argue is a slightly different thing. Referring to a thing is not the same as addressing the thing. Would Siri have been as successful were it to be addressed as Apple?
    - psbp 13y ago
      Yeah, I guess it makes you sound like a tool, but I'm not sure what unique phrase would work better.
      - glenstein 13y ago
        As a person who finds both "okay, Glass" and "okay, Google" to be somewhere on a spectrum from merely awkward to full-on creepy, I would just prefer people could set their own custom keywords.
- martythemaniak 13y ago
  No, I think the "Ok Google" is something they absolutely nailed. Why? Because that is exactly what you're doing - whether addressing your watch, glasses or phone - you're interacting with that robot-like corporate entity. The replies are also suitable - they have a human voice, but in no way do they pretend to be anything human-like. Contrast this with Apple (Siri) and Microsoft (Cortana?), who do the same thing, but try to make you treat their apps as some kind of human with crude tricks like pre-written jokes and puns. Personally I find that way creepier.
fidotron 13y ago
I had expected them to be aiming more for commonality with the API of Google Glass. Maybe in turn Glass will move more towards this. But they're going to end up with a lot of notification UIs for devs to worry about (Android, Android wear, Chrome, Glass are different) unless they are working on consolidating this. Given that Glass rapidly deteriorates to being a fun camera, but otherwise not too much else, the only compelling use they presented here was the checking sports scores and needing water resistance. Until it's clearer just what scope for customisation there is going to be for the "cards" it's going to remain looking like a solution in search of a problem (EDIT: thanks todd for obvious correction :) ). Finally, I think this space will be won by the "Game Boy" approach. Lower fi (possibly even no touch screen), but longer battery life and easier to view screen in bright direct sunlight.
- todd3834 13y ago
  I was actually thinking it was more of a solution searching for a problem. Unless that is what you actually meant to say, then I agree.
bryanl 13y ago
The software is an important part of this, but I'm more interested in seeing what new types of hardware will run this OS. The watch concept is only neat to me right now. It definitely feels like Android is ripe to bust the confines of the phone and move in to other parts of our lives. The work that Qualcomm is putting in their Snapdragon platform is evidence of this.
level 13y ago
> Voice Actions > Register your app to handle voice actions, like "Ok Google, take a note." I think this is what most interests me. Hopefully we won't be locked into Google's pre-defined tasks and developers can start working on their own voice actions.
cfolgar 13y ago
I'm more interested in the watches that were shown on the video. I realize I might be confused, are the watches in the video just placeholders/random design concepts to get the idea across? Still, I'm wondering what devices will eventually support this SDK.
- wjoe 13y ago
  They appear to be the LG G Watch [1] and Moto 360 [2], which were announced at the same time. [1] http://www.lgblog.co.uk/2014/03/lg-gwatch/ http://www.lgblog.co.uk/2014/03/lg-gwatch/ [2] http://moto360.motorola.com/ http://moto360.motorola.com/
angersock 13y ago
It'll be a cold day in hell before I let Google have an always-on device attached to my person, wearable or otherwise. These folks have proven--proven!--that they are unable to protect their infrastructure from state actors, that they do not care about individual customers, and that they will hijack our services on a whim to try and raise money. Fuck that noise. Any wearables need to be completely open-source, and with the ability to retarget their output to servers that we control, with security that we verify. And you know what? Not a single "normal" person understands the issue here. Aaaargh.
- nfoz 13y ago
  I feel your pain. Out of curiosity, do you carry a mobile phone?
  - quest88 13y ago
    Or drive a car?
    - angersock 13y ago
      Nope--issue came to a head after my insurance company wanted me to put a GPS tracker in my car to get lower rates. So, I do without now. If I decide it's unavoidable, I'll buy an ancient clunker (preferably one with as little electronics in it as possible, think classic car).
      - quest88 13y ago
        Whoah! What insurance company is that?!
        aestra 13y ago
        Tons. I am going to say the majority. It is optional though. You usually get a discount just for signing up, then you get an additional discount for your driving Progressive, Travels, Allstate, The Hartford... They not only track your location, they track your speed, the amount of quick stops you make (an indication you are tailgating), and time of day (some times of day are more risky than others statistically), and how much you drive. People who drive at low risk times, don't drive very fast, don't make quick stops, and drive only a little bit get discounts. Usually you leave the device in your car for 6 months-1 year and your discount is forever. My insurance (Travelers) gives you a 30% discount max. You can also log on online and view all your stats. You plug a device into your OBD-II port. There are significant privacy issues at hand here. In one case, it can be argued that you shouldn't be tracked, in another case it can be argued that driving is extremely dangerous (more dangerous than many people assume) and every attempt should be made to make driving safer. Humans have already demonstrated that they will alter their driving behavior for financial gains.[1][2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage-based_insurance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage-based_insurance [1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457511000662 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457511... [2] http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/will-insurers-pay-you-not-to-speed http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/will-insurers-pay-you-no...
k-mcgrady 13y ago
Although the software important I think with wearables hardware will be key. No matter how functional these devices are they are first and foremast a fashion accessory and need to look good. There will also need to be a large variety. Every time I look at buying a new watch I cycle through dozens and dozens of devices before I find one I like the look of. This is where I think Google has the upper hand on Apple with wearables. Apple will most likely produce the only device running their software and a lot of people won't like wearing the same fashion accessory as everyone else - they will want choice. Of course if Apple knocks it out of the park with the software/sensors (which is plausible from what I read about Healthbook yesterday) the functionality may just edge out the important of fashion.
XorNot 13y ago
Urgh...I wish we could skip this whole awkward smart watch phase and just realize its a bad idea.
- deelowe 13y ago
  Care to explain why? My wife wears a "smart watch" [1] every day she runs and so do most of her peers. There're definitely markets out there for this sort of thing. Also, if the watches switched from the pebble form factor to something like this: http://moto360.motorola.com/ http://moto360.motorola.com/ would you still have the same opinion? [1] - For all intents and purposes, this is basically a "smartwatch": https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/into-sports/running/forerunner-210/prod83280.html https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/into-sports/running/forerunn...
- beefydude 13y ago
  the existing android systems might look bulky and no be very practical. their marketing campaigns have been terrible. but the idea has feet and is probably a lot more useful than other technologies like google glass at a fraction of the cost
- macspoofing 13y ago
  If you watch people interact with their phones for a few minutes you realize it is a good idea. Take any average person and you'd see them constantly checking their phone for time(!!), messages, emails, weather, missed calls, current calls (i.e. who is calling me right now), change playing song etc. All those functions could be easily handled by a companion watch device.
  - TarpitCarnivore 13y ago
    The flip side of this is that if it's interactive it doesn't stop the person from either A. constantly interacting with their phone or B. constantly interacting with their watch. I think people would be better served taking a step back and asking "Do I really need all these notifications?" and the answer will likely be no.
  - XorNot 13y ago
JamesBaxter 13y ago
I wonder what precautions Google will take to avoid fragmentation of smart watches. If this software works well I'd be interested to see an actual watch manufacturer implement it, seeing as software has always been their downfall.
- iLoch 13y ago
  Same thing they've done to prevent it on android phones. ;)
justinph 13y ago
Those things look huge. Until "smart watches" can be made smaller and lighter, the adoption rate will be abysmal. Seriously, those things are electric hockey pucks with straps.
- rch 13y ago
  Absolutely correct. They are almost painful to look at. I'd rather see them start purposefully small so developers will have to be more creative when adapting to the form factor.
- agumonkey 13y ago
  At least some models are round. And don't tease the industry. Remember that not long ago cell phones..
- de_dave 13y ago
  Saw a new metal Pebble watch yesterday and was actually shocked to discover it was both smaller and thinner than my own analog watch, which isn't particularly big or chunky.
  - maxerickson 13y ago
    Here: https://getpebble.com/steel https://getpebble.com/steel It looks like a calculator watch for the 21st century. (But I guess given that I don't like watches much it isn't surprising I don't find these devices very interesting) Edit: Adding maybe a little bit of value to this comment, the function of the device is very apparent in it form.
apendleton 13y ago
The key to the success of these things will be the ability to get information from the display without having to touch it. At first I figured this would mean an always-on display (so, e-ink, I guess), but this clearly isn't that, and yet they don't seem to turn the displays on in the videos (though I'm sure they're all fake). I wonder if you could do something with the accelerometer that would be good enough? Like, if your arm orientation changes to look-at-your-watch position, the display turns on, and it turns off again when your arm goes back down to your side.
- DanAndersen 13y ago
  It seems quite possible -- it's like how smartphone screens detect when you've moved it from your ear while on the phone to use the number pad.
  - garretraziel 13y ago
    No, it's not like this. Smartphone has distance sensor, but I am not really convinced that the distance sensor would work in this case too.
- moonka 13y ago
  The pebble is always on, but the backlight can be set to turn on when you flick your wrist to look at it. While it could definitely benefit from a more sensitive accelerometer, it works well enough 90% of the time.
yeukhon 13y ago
The commerical, PoC is great. But its idea has the same flaw as Facebook Paper (https://www.facebook.com/paper https://www.facebook.com/paper). I can check the weather, get alert and listen to my music from my smartphone. I can enjoy some home automation with Canary (http://canary.is/ http://canary.is/). If I have free time I can design my own app and integrate a speech recognition to open the door (I am sure there are companies selling this too). What unique "innovations" - conveniences will Google wearable (which at this stage seems to be just a watch) offer? I say it has the same flaw as Facebook Paper because Paper 's success is based on rich, beautiful, poetic content. If your circle is casual writer, Paper will look lame to you. I love Google Glass because I can take pictures and record the world from a first-person view attached to my head. I don't plan on making a phone call directly from Google Glass yet - that's kind of weird. So what else can Google watch do? I just can't see it. The ability to better monitor your health and fitness. You see, I can still get away with it with other accessory. I will give Google credit and say this is useful, but other than that, I really don't see it. You know what is unique? What I want to see? Iron Man computer screen + Iron Man interactive airtouch computer system.... That's what we are lacking. I want to be able to swipe through contents, web pages from thin air with gesture. We can do some of that already. Push it forward! edit: I will say this is useful as assistive technology. People who are visually impaired or motion disable can benefit from it. Just put it on wrist and good to go. But other than that, I just don't see it.
- wiremine 13y ago
  > So what else can Google watch do? That's the key question for me. I don't look at my watch and think "man, that experience sucks" like I did with the pre-iPhone cell phones. In a way, it feels like Google is extending Android into wearables for the same reason they are doing Google Glass: because they can, not because it solves some frustration. I think that's why Apple is looking into health-related functionality (if the rumors are to believed). They are solving/improving the fitbit experience, not solving/improving the telling-piece/communication experience.
- Kiro 13y ago
  That's an argument against all smartwatches, not just Google. Nevertheless, I think you're wrong. I have a Pebble and it has changed my life. I will never leave the house without a wearable on my arm again.
ApacheEcho 13y ago
I think they should focus on bettering battery life on Android because it's honestly despicable.
lutusp 13y ago
I hope you're all paying attention to the trend this represents, a trend fueled by ever-smaller and more intimate Android devices. Pretty soon the term "Android" may become literal.
- maxerickson 13y ago
  What do 'intimate' digital devices have to do with humanoid robots?
  - lutusp 13y ago
    I's saying this trend toward a closer and closer association between computers and people -- beginning with a huge, noisy room with lab-coat-wearing attendants who accepted your stack of 80-column cards through a little window, sort of like a bank (my first exposure to computers years ago) -- and now moving toward blurring the line between the computer and its "wearer", and given a number of neurological experiments in which the line between the computer and the human is blurred, I can see the handwriting on the wall. That sentence was way too long, but I think you get the idea. :)
    - maxerickson 13y ago
      That would traditionally be called a cyborg, not a literal android (a sci fi reader would expect the android to be fully synthetic).
guiomie 13y ago
Such a tacky video. I prefer pulling my phone out over wearing a watch ...
roc 13y ago
When someone has a 'session' with a wearable that involves anything more than the the most minimal of operations [1], I feel like that's the "stylus moment" [2]. Sure, there are narrow use cases when 'interacting' with a wearable is conceivable where a phone still is not (e.g. while biking or jogging). But that's going to run into the same problems that Glass runs into: how many people can really justify an electronics purchase to enable interactive computing during those situations? [3] [1] Swiping to cycle through glance-able cards or triage notifications [2] "If you see a stylus, they blew it" [3] Particularly not when purely-passive devices will inevitably be available with lower cost, smaller size/weight, better battery life, etc. (e.g. Pebble vs Fuelband)
IgorPartola 13y ago
The thing is, hardware is key here. The OS matters, and I would bet that someone could do way better than running Linux in a watch (something much more low-level on a much weaker processor could extend the battery life significantly). The hardware and sensors is the big problem. Currently, the best smartwatch specs I have seen are the Basis B1. It claims it can monitor your heart rate, track your sleep, etc. But that is all a lie. Sure, it can track your heart rate at rest, but during intensive exercise there is no comparison with something like a Polar chest strap. At the same time the claim that the B1 can monitor your sleep phase based on your heart rate is a bit far fetched as well. From what I've read the heart rate does not change by more than 1-2 bpm between REM and deep sleep, which is within the margin of error of the measurements, so the data out will be all wrong. As for the non-fitness functions of a smart watch, I don't see a huge value in having my wrist buzz every time a random ticket on GitHub gets updated or NewRelic sends me a performance metrics summary. Even text messages are much easier to process on the phone. I want to believe in the smartwatch idea. I want it to be a gadget that somehow improves my daily life. So far, aside from things like the Garmin Forerunner, I haven't see anything that would remotely come close to improving anything.
- devcpp 13y ago
  I disagree, we already have watches with weak processors (e.g Pebble) but they lack features. Android can bring those, and ARM processors are powerful enough. Indeed, the only difference between an Android watch and a full-size smartphone would be the smaller casing. The largest component nowadays is the battery, which can be greatly reduced thanks to the smaller screen. So, I don't see a major obstacle to an Android watch, and the benefits of it are worth the CPU. Of course temperature will be a concern but I'm sure demand will produce lower-powered CPUs powerful enough to run Android.
  - IgorPartola 13y ago
    A watch that aim supposed to wear 24 hours a day cannot runout of battery every three days. Give me two months of battery life on an ARM device that is smaller than an average cheeseburger and I will be impressed.
- 13y ago
g4ur4v 13y ago
Come on Microsoft !!! Where are you ?
- JetSpiegel 13y ago
  Reading this news on a desktop, laughing on the way to the bank.
sailfast 13y ago
I agree that software is secondary to current hardware concerns at the moment, but doesn't this effort make it more attractive for hardware experts to try and dive in to improve the wearables market? They've already got a "ready to go" OS with which to prototype. Pretty awesome since I'm sure Samsung worked hard to get its Gear integration working. Maybe this will improve the number of players in the space? I'm all for efforts that help bring more options to the table.
amanuel 13y ago
This is not wearables. It is just a tiny screen mobile device. I'd consider labeling Google Glass a wearables before what was demoed here. Wearables is the idea of changing what we wear with technological augmentation. Watches have had tech for a long time....nothing new here sadly....
gfodor 13y ago
It's going to be pretty great now that everyone has shown their "huge black square on the wrist" design before apple has shown anything. Looking forward to seeing them scramble to steal apples design.
- corresation 13y ago
  Yeah, something like that. I actually wonder if Apple will ever manage to come out with a wearable, because honestly they are in a can't win situation: everyone else is iterating through technologies and designs, and while these aren't for everyone (though everyone who it isn't for is sure that means it is for no one), they're getting better and more reasonable, while Apple needs to come out with some sort of God watch that will completely upend technology. They can't win. They are absolutely bound to disappoint. Nonetheless, though, I'm sure six months after they come out with something, you'll be on here proclaiming that everyone else is copying Apple.
  - gfodor 13y ago
    every watch design i've seen so far is uninspired and unrisky. they basically slapped a phone on the wrist. if apple ever releases anything, it will almost certainly not be an ugly square touchscreen with a wristband around it. and i won't need to proclaim anything, it will be obvious just like it was with the iPhone. edit: Also your point above doesn't make much sense. Apple has surely been working on their watch for many years. I would be really shocked, and it would be very un-Apple like, if they came out with a new piece of consumer hardware like this that didn't leapfrog over everyone else by just thinking a bit outside the box. Most likely they are not coming out with a "watch", but a smart wristband that has tons of patented UX and hardware that will be a complete new experience for people.
    - corresation 13y ago
      The Motorola device is neither square (which you've stated repeatedly, almost like you didn't even bother looking at the site before you declared that Apple does it better), nor ugly. I'm not a watch person, but it looks pretty beautiful to me. I imagine that Apple has been working on it for years. So has everyone -- this is hardly unanticipated technology, having been predicted for many, many decades. It just needs technology to make it possible. And processors are getting faster, while sipping far less juice. Screens are getting better (such as the amazing, likely AMOLED round screen on the Motorola 360). Batteries are getting better. Connectivity options like Bluetooth LE are making connectivity possible. Samsung might take a lot of deserved flack for products like the Gear, but they're trying to iterate the product to make it happen. While Apple might have had some luck timing entrants at the right time a couple of times, they have no particular advantage in any of those realms. The halo of the iPod won't carry this product launch, so they don't have the normal heads up they used to. It's going to be interesting. But I have absolutely no reason to soundly denounce alternatives against some imaginary, not actually existing foe.
adamman 13y ago
I can't help but think of this as a pimped out house arrest ankle bracelet.
lowglow 13y ago
We're throwing a IoT/Wearables Hackathon in april. Check it out: http://hackendo.techendo.co/ http://hackendo.techendo.co/
swang 13y ago
Why are we still using watches as the base of new wearables? Is it because it makes users more comfortable with wearing a computer on their wrist? Also not really sure about the round LCD, why not a curved rectangular LCD?
bane 13y ago
So it's like an amped up google now on a watch? I'm intrigued, but the price has to be good. Anything over $100 is just going to be a nonstarter in my opinion. Will I have to charge it 3 times a day, not going to work...etc. There's lots of difficulties with packing this in to a usable form factor and selling it. The galaxy gear had a return rate > 30%. But it's also a $300 watch. For $300 it better do more than make it mildly easier for me to do things that I already do on my phone, which sits literally inches away from where my watch would be on my wrist. And let's say it's wildly successful, I'm really interested in how a watch, on a bus full of people with watches, will know that you are saying "ok google" to it and not somebody else. Imagine sitting in a subway car, and some guy comes in and shouts "ok google, find me a bukake site!" or similar and now everybody on the train has to deal with that.
- wutbrodo 13y ago
  As far as I'm aware, the Moto X is very much able to avoid triggering by anyone's voice except the one it's keyed to. I was curious about how well it worked, so I tried repeatedly to launch Voice Search on my girlfriend's phone (even trying to imitate her voice); I wasn't able to do it at all. Trying to do so to an arbitrary person's device would be even harder.
  - bane 13y ago
    That's good to know, but also a bit disconcerting, that Google has a voice print profile for me sitting on their servers somewhere.
    - wutbrodo 13y ago
      How would this even work if it was stored on the server? Every singkr sound triggers a roundtrip to the server from your phone to check the voice? I can't imagine this working any other way than being stored locally.
      - notatoad 13y ago
        if it's stored locally, it's probably stored on a server too.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
kh_hk 13y ago
The last time I used Google Now was too scared to use it ever again. I don't want to report my location, see cool pictures of my surroundings, or know about the events of my city. It's not just only about the surveillance, it's about the future. The connected future, the uninteresting one. The one on which one must "opt-in" or just stay out. Personally, I do not get Google Now cards. When they are relevant, they are depressing. Hopefully this stage of the future is just a step into a more positive and fulfilling one. That being said, give me a rooted version of this device where I can install a custom OS that allows me to use it as a computer and I am in.
- teach 13y ago
  My issue with Google Now is more about how rough it still is around the edges. I have a Nexus 5. me: "Okay, Google... text [my wife]" Goog: "Mobile or home fax?" 1) Why would you even ask that? 2) There is NO WAY to tell Google Now to default to a number. I get that question EVERY TIME. Still needs quite a bit more polish before I'm going to be comfortable using it the way my wife uses Siri on her iPhone 5S.
- itp 13y ago
  I want to be careful not to imply that I'm passing judgement on your feelings, or implying that they're invalid, because I certainly have my moments where I'm a little creeped out by Google Now as well. But I do want to push back a little bit on Google Now cards being necessarily depressing. I recently traveled up to Boston on a short hybrid work/vacation trip with my wife. When we were headed to the airport, Google Now had a card letting me know my flight was on time, and letting me know when I had to leave to make it to the airport on time. It was information I could have otherwise looked up, but it surfaced that information for me, and it was nice. When we landed in Boston, we wanted to contact our hotel to verify the check in time and ask if we could leave luggage there for the day if necessary. When I pulled my phone out, there was already a card with the hotel address, travel time, and contact info. Again, stuff I could have looked up (check my email to verify hotel name, look up number, call), but it was nice to have it there and ready for me. When I head to work in the morning, Google Now has a card for my commute, along with notifications about any accidents that may impact my travel. I also live far enough away that there are a few very different routes I can take, and day to day one or the other may be the best. Finding out my commute needs to go a different way, or I should plan for it to be a bit longer (or shorter, sometimes!) doesn't seem depressing to me. I keep a pretty close eye on how Google is using my information, and if I begin to feel like it has crossed a line from mutual benefit (helping me, and deriving value as well) to something more one-sided (exploiting me for value), I hope I won't prove to have been naive, but in the meantime, this is something that really seems to make my life better. Just my experience.
chillingeffect 13y ago
Just another crapshoot from a research institution trying to divest as its core business decays. Google is showing evidence they can't predict the future very well and won't sustain development in shaky fields. Instead, they're going for PR and military research projects, like IBM and Veridian Dynamics.
babesh 13y ago
Why not approach this from the computing as a bicycle for your mind point of view? Smartphones were the latest computing evolution bringing general purpose computing with you all the time and with an incredibly ease to use interface. Now people are trying to introduce this new computing device (the smart watch). What does it bring? It doesn't take up a hand since you don't have to hold it. You don't have to get it out of your pocket or turn it or pick it up to use it. To get it to do stuff you speak to it (possibly even easier to use than touch computing). It can be attached to your skin and read all sorts of data through your skin. What it doesn't bring you is a sizable enough screen to view photos or text (yet). Also it doesn't take advantage of one of our most precise tools (our hands). From this we may be able to predict what niches smart watches will evolve into to fill. Heavily voice based, quick call and respond style communications, updates and reminders, location based notifications, no-hand enhancers such as leveling, altimeters, etc... And since the watch is oriented towards your own face... it is heavily personal and can't be easily shared like a phone.
phreeza 13y ago
Two points: - This looks basically like an amped up google now, so maybe this means developer access to Now as well, which would be more exciting to me at the moment. - Pretty much all of the info they showed in the demo would work on an epaper display, maybe minus the swiping gestures. I sure hope the experience will include pebble style watches with a battery life longer than a few hours, but I am not holding my breath.
tobyjsullivan 13y ago
The part of the advert that impressed me most was that Google Now's voice recognition worked well enough to be useful. Something tells me that isn't actually a new feature.
- jessriedel 13y ago
  The Google Now voice recognition is incredible. I never search for direction manually, and I use it to compose most of my text messages and all of my reminders.
webwanderings 13y ago
So we now want to wear Ads on our wrists? Just checking!
pilooch 13y ago
People wearing this watch do not seem very much interested in news articles ;) More seriously, my fuzzy estimate is that 80% of the time spent on my phone is for reading stuff that is definitely not the departure time of my next flight (that I can memorize five months in advance :) ).
- warfangle 13y ago
  While I don't fly much, Google Now was absolutely fantastic the last time I flew. From notifications about flight delays to checking in. It was one of those things that I didn't think I was ever going to use, but when it came into play it was magical.
- ithkuil 13y ago
  lucky you: you have a good memory and/or don't fly very often.
skimmas 13y ago
How much will google pay its user for using this spywearable?
kellyhclay 13y ago
Glass is going to quietly shift to being a device for niche groups - not the average consumers. Google has likely realized via the beta of Glass that it's not going to be accepted into the mainstream - but a watch (which is much more discreet, yet performs many of the same functions as Glass) will. If Google wants to really saturate the market, this is a super smart move.
fab13n 13y ago
We're in a situation comparable to smartphones pre-iPhone: we know there is value in displaying stuff on your wrist, we know we need some way to send information in response to those received from the screen, but all of this doesn't click together. We have fragments of a solution, but we don't know which problem it solves, and certainly not how to integrate it into a life-enhancing experience. Smartphone builders had similarly vague ideas about which problem they were solving: they knew they needed to give access to some dumbed-down subset of the web and of our computer data. They knew that mails were part of that subset. Mail is easy, it's SMS with a different transport protocol, right? So they were looking for a dumbed-down keyboard, dumbed-down mouse, dumbed-down windows, scrollbars, etc. The iPhone took a mile-high view of the problem. "Dumbed-down mice (stylus) and keyboards suck. How do we make them superfluous? And how do we get adequate access to non-dumbed-down Internet, too?" Now with the watch. We have some vague fragments too. We know when we don't want to take our phone out, so in each of those cases we plan to use the watch as a dumbed-down phone screen. It's probably touch-sensitive, too (in a dumbed-down way no doubt), and it lets you awkwardly have a subset of the interactions you'd have had with your phone. So, I bet that watch is nothing but a dumbed-down proxy of our phone. I'm still waiting for someone, not unlikely Apple, to show me what I really wanted from a smart watch, without realizing it. And if apple figured this out as well as they figured out the smartphone, the Google-wearable guys will kick themselves during the demo, the way the Android guys decomposed themselves while Jobs was showing them what they should have done.
- cinquemb 13y ago
  I think that's a really good point to make with wearable computing in general. And assuming power/computing requirements are able to satisfy the technical demands in 5-10 years, I can imagine small breakouts in eye-wear, wristwatches, and if I look a bit farther (10-20 years), I can imagine it breaking out to the clothing market. But I'd have to say I'm more intrigued into how traditionally ephemeral everyday situations will be cataloged and increasingly available for everyone else to see, where the battles will arise, where the new opportunities will lie, and what social systems will be shaken up.
- frio 13y ago
  Looking at all these things -- workmate has a Galaxy Gear, I've got a Pebble, another friend has a Basis B1 -- they're all so tall and clunky. They're uncomfortable and not particularly useful. The obvious answer, IMHO, is just a phone on your arm. I'm looking forward to the device that stops trying to pack things into a watch form-factor; that makes use of curved OLED displays, and puts a longer, thinner device on my wrist. That said -- I've sort of thought for a while that the display should actually be decoupled from the device. I have a phone, a kindle, a smartwatch and a laptop -- all of which have separate user accounts, need cloud syncing (blech) and in general are a PITA to manage. I'd much prefer it if I had a computer on my wrist, which could wirelessly connect to external displays (Miracast?), and make use of them. So, my phone, kindle, laptop -- even a new tablet! -- are all just differing views of the same actual computer.
ardz 13y ago
First rule of privacy: keep private things private. Second rule of privacy: if two people know then everybody knows.
ardz 13y ago
First rule of privacy: privte things do not leave your house. Second rule of privacy: if two people know then everybody knows.
robocat 13y ago
Optical illusion: does anyone else see the guy's sleeve move left/right when the page is scrolled up/down? I am using an iPad4, and scrolling the part of the page with the second video showing the guy's wrist with a checkered cuff. (The video is not playing, just how it shows on page initially).
michaelkohen 13y ago
If helpful for anyone, I put together a collection of coverage on today's Android Wear announcement + other neat stuff on the rise of wearables http://wayfinder.co/pathways/5328b918bf637c0a00000001/what-you-need-to-know-about-android-wear http://wayfinder.co/pathways/5328b918bf637c0a00000001/what-y...
mavdi 13y ago
Constant cringing state with that video...
hawkharris 13y ago
Asking me to strap a computer to my risk is like assigning me homework: it requires a new way of thinking and interacting. Having said that, I'd better see a significant improvement over using other interfaces. That's why I'm at least initially disappointed with the Android watched. I get that we all love new interfaces because they're new and fun to play with, but what will this watch do for me that my smartphone can't do?
hawkharris 13y ago
Sorry for the typos; I wrote this on my phone and can't edit it. Also, I should note that I'm putting myself in others' shoes with the "homework" analogy. I'm a geek, so I don't mind learning about technology for tech's sake, but the same isn't true for most non-developers.
kimonos 13y ago
Totally cool! Can't wait to have one!
jamesfranco 13y ago
I have 3 question: 1. Will this only work with Android phone for now? 2. Do you agree that smart watches are more for apps that don't need a lot of user interaction. Like Instagram or Dropbox will not be great on these. Simple things like showing weather etc. will be okay. 3. Does anyone know the price of the Moto G or another Android Wear devices?
jamesfranco 13y ago
Whatever you wear reflects on you. I don't think this is something for someone who is fashion conscious people (like many people in LA). Wealthy people would prefer an Audemars or a Rolex any day compared to a Motorola or Samsung. Definitely see maybe teens and techies in Silicon Valley wearing these. Like the iPad when it first when out, the smartwatch should do some key things better than any other device, which it does and some minor things like telling the weather, taking notes etc. although reading long articles, viewing photos or anything that involves a lot of interaction is be suited on a phone, tablet or computer.
supercoder 13y ago
They should focus on getting the regular Android working and looking good before diverting attention to wearables.
SunboX 13y ago
Try to look ten minutes onto your arm and than tell me your feelings. Smart watches are a nice add on to a phone. Don't expect it to be a news reader, nor a phone replacement.
krexit 13y ago
Why do they have any expectation of success at the sort of power consumption that Android requires, with the power supply that wearables can contain? I note that the previous Galaxy Gear was Android - the new one is running Tizen and has around double the battery life. That's not all battery improvements, and no coincidence besides..
SimpleXYZ 13y ago
If they can shrink the size of that watch in half, I'm in.

412 points by deepblueocean 13y ago

This looks really cool, but I worry about the battery life of these devices. Doesn't the Galaxy Gear already have not amazing battery life?

Kiro 13y ago
My Pebble has a battery life of 7 days and that's one of the biggest benefits compared to Galaxy Gear.

kshatrea 13y ago

I am in the position of being torn apart by two very strong feelings. One is the world where information flow due to companies like Google does a real service to humanity: for e.g. wearing devices that can keep us reminded of our meds or monitor sugar levels, to talk just about the possibilities in healthcare. Then I think of Edward Snowden and I now know that what Google knows, maybe America/Russia/China/WhatHaveYou know. Although at this point I am as normal a citizen as you can find, that can't be taken for granted forever. For e.g. in my nation (India) being gay is illegal and so is marijuana, and so is alcohol (in some states) and so is a lot of stuff. This feeling makes me want to minimize my footprint. Wish there was a way to combat either the wariness, or to exacerbate the joy. For, I must be assimilated into the Borg, too. :) EDIT: spellings

k-mcgrady 13y ago
I find myself also questioning this often. It leads to me regularly switching between iOS and Android, Google services and Apple services. Ideally I would like privacy but I think as we go forward keeping privacy would leave you in the same kind of position someone like RMS is in by sticking to his Free Software philosophy so strongly. I'm always surprised at the number of friends and family I see who have their Facebook set to public - especially considering what they post. When I tell them they don't care. I think the majority of people want some semblance of privacy but they are willing to give up a lot for the efficiency these new products, that require us to give up privacy, provide.
- Touche 13y ago
  > I'm always surprised at the number of friends and family I see who have their Facebook set to public - especially considering what they post. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe they are set to public by default... in fact, IIRC they even reset everyone to public when they released that "feature" a couple of years ago. > When I tell them they don't care. I think the majority of people want some semblance of privacy but they are willing to give up a lot for the efficiency these new products, that require us to give up privacy, provide. Sure, and smokers are willing to risk a slow painful death to forgo the pain of quitting. Humans are short-term thinkers.
- lutusp 13y ago
  > It leads to me regularly switching between iOS and Android, Google services and Apple services. The difference between Apple and Google has recently occurred to me: with Apple, their secrets are in jeopardy. With Google, yours are.
  - danford 13y ago
    I feel the only reason your secrets may not be in jeopardy with Apple is because they don't know as many... If you really want your secrets to be safe you wouldn't use any closed source code at all and would take security precautions to secure the code you do use. Unfortunately we live in a time when closed-source software is the norm and too many people think having a secure, open, communications infrastructure is too complicated and don't quite understand the reasoning behind it (thankfully that attitude seems to be changing a little), but I hope one day we'll look back on this time and wonder what we were thinking by allowing digital goods to be closed source. With 3D printers, neural implants, augmented reality, food and organ printers, and the age of automation, what the future holds is a digital realm that's going to be very scary for people who understand it, especially if the infrastructure is completely owned by corporations and un-trustable governments and even a small amount of the source is closed. I mean look around the room and think of all the things that could be augmented or replaced with 3D printed components.. Why have a physical laptop in front of you when you can augment the key board, 25 screens, and everything else? Not only that, but you can do it for nothing if you know how to code it. We can already print organs and I don't think it will be too long until we can print good tasting food, but what if you execute some code on your food printer that prints a steak with anthrax in it? I think in the next 50 years all this is going to be fairly common place in the developed world and I really hope I have confidence in the system that we have in place at that time.
smokinjoe 13y ago
More and more I'm thinking that some sort of Digital Bill of Rights is necessary to carry on in this technological-based World. At first I always thought of it as a nice thing, but perhaps a little too abstract or extreme to really do what it needs to do. However now we have some very large and real threats to our personal lives via this medium. I just feel like it makes a lot of good sense to produce something of the sort. I'm also naive enough to believe that it isn't too late to attempt to establish such a document and have it not contain all sorts of loopholes that would render it useless. I can understand why the feds want to monitor the Internet and various communications, however there needs to be that pushback, that line drawn where we can hold their overreach accountable. It may not always work, but there needs to be something that us ordinary citizens can lean back on for protection.
- maxerickson 13y ago
  One approach would be to require that a person/group/company that is aggregating information report the storage and use of the information to the people in the database. You could have some arbitrary cutoffs, like don't worry about information on less than 1000 people or stored less than 3 months (or whatever numbers you want to pick out of the air, the point is that the threshold for reporting might not be 0). What I think this might do in many cases is make storing the information more expensive than any value derived from it. It also gives people a chance to learn that the water company is sharing their usage with the police (or whatever).
- AndrewKemendo 13y ago
  I think a Digital bill of rights is great, but completely unenforceable. Largely because the powers that would be enforcing it wouldn't desire to be signatories.
  - smokinjoe 13y ago
    That's just one of the issues - however like I said, I'm naive enough to believe (and donate/protest/assemble) if there was a strong enough movement for it.
- 13y ago
dictum 13y ago
> in my nation (India) being gay is illegal Sorry for the flame material, but why is it that this is rarely mentioned in western news media (at least in the countries whose news I follow)? For those who, like me, didn't know that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_India
- hugofirth 13y ago
  It is odd - there was uproar around the Russian propaganda laws regarding Homosexual relationships running up to the winter olympics (and rightly so! I am not suggesting otherwise). Yet, I (who, perhaps arrogantly, consider myself fairly well informed) had absolutely no idea that homosexuality is illegal in India. This is wtf-worthy.
  - wutbrodo 13y ago
    This was the case in something like 15 us States until the Supreme Court struck it down.... In 2003. (far more States are included if you go back just another decade) http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_Sta...
  - chaosmonkey 13y ago
    It's really incompetence. The issue went to the supreme court and they said this matter is for the legislature to decide. The good thing (unlike Russia) is that almost everyone from the ruling government, media, public, etc want this law abolished.
    - 0x006A 13y ago
      Sadly that is not true. The right-wing party, that will most likely win the upcoming elections, will never approve an amendment to change this through parliament. The judge that reverted the supreme court decision if fully aware of this and it was a political decision on his side.
  - DominikR 13y ago
pizza234 13y ago
Watch out, because it's a common (and extremely dangerous) misconception that personal data abuses afflict only people who are perceived (or perceive theirselves) as criminal. There are two reasons. First, legal systems with an excessive power in the hands of the prosecution can take an ordinary, civil citizen, and legally rape him (this description was used some time ago on an HN article) Second, anybody that lives a regular life has secrets to hide; this is just a fact. And that secrets will be abused if it would be instrumental to the authorities. I've said "extremely dangerous" - why? Because data collection today is considered/perceived/felt as a big nuisance, but not much more. In reality, it's an oppression instrument, and it's not perceived by the general population just because they're not in prominent positions towards the government.
- danford 13y ago
  Don't forget that even if you believe you can trust the entity collecting the information, can you trust all the persons that have access to it? Is it inconceivable to believe that people who work for the Chinese government have never sold top secret data to US officials or even corporations? Why couldn't an NSA employee do the same thing? What if the NSA's servers weren't as secure as they thought they were?

untog 13y ago

I'm far more interested in how we're going to solve issues like battery life with these devices than how they're going to look. So yes, this preview looks great. But for now I still consider my Pebble watch to be a much better option.

wvenable 13y ago
Moore's Law will eventually catch up. The Pebble is currently the PalmPilot of smartwatches; perfectly suited to the current state of the art. However, progress being what it is, eventually the technology will be good enough that Android (or iOS) on a smartwatch will become the better solution.
- svenkatesh 13y ago
  Moore's law is about transistor count; what does that have to do with battery life?
  - cwings 13y ago
    More efficient computing requires less battery power http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koomey%27s_law
  - untog 13y ago
    I think at this point "Moore's Law" is just used as shorthand for "technology will solve technology's problems given enough time"
    - JetSpiegel 13y ago
      It's just 3-5 years away!
  - Crito 13y ago
    Go back in time 15 years, then build a computer as powerful as a modern smartphone. It wouldn't be easy, but it could be done. Now try to power that computer with a modern smartphone battery. Not gonna happen.

deathcakes 13y ago

Not sure why but saying 'Ok Google' feels a little creepier than saying 'Ok Glass'. More obvious that you aren't interfacing with a mere gadget, but a multi billion dollar corporate entity...

psbp 13y ago
I've never heard anyone say "search for it", but rather "google it".
- deathcakes 13y ago
  True - but that I would argue is a slightly different thing. Referring to a thing is not the same as addressing the thing. Would Siri have been as successful were it to be addressed as Apple?
  - psbp 13y ago
    Yeah, I guess it makes you sound like a tool, but I'm not sure what unique phrase would work better.
    - glenstein 13y ago
      As a person who finds both "okay, Glass" and "okay, Google" to be somewhere on a spectrum from merely awkward to full-on creepy, I would just prefer people could set their own custom keywords.
martythemaniak 13y ago
No, I think the "Ok Google" is something they absolutely nailed. Why? Because that is exactly what you're doing - whether addressing your watch, glasses or phone - you're interacting with that robot-like corporate entity. The replies are also suitable - they have a human voice, but in no way do they pretend to be anything human-like. Contrast this with Apple (Siri) and Microsoft (Cortana?), who do the same thing, but try to make you treat their apps as some kind of human with crude tricks like pre-written jokes and puns. Personally I find that way creepier.

fidotron 13y ago

I had expected them to be aiming more for commonality with the API of Google Glass. Maybe in turn Glass will move more towards this. But they're going to end up with a lot of notification UIs for devs to worry about (Android, Android wear, Chrome, Glass are different) unless they are working on consolidating this. Given that Glass rapidly deteriorates to being a fun camera, but otherwise not too much else, the only compelling use they presented here was the checking sports scores and needing water resistance. Until it's clearer just what scope for customisation there is going to be for the "cards" it's going to remain looking like a solution in search of a problem (EDIT: thanks todd for obvious correction :) ). Finally, I think this space will be won by the "Game Boy" approach. Lower fi (possibly even no touch screen), but longer battery life and easier to view screen in bright direct sunlight.

todd3834 13y ago
I was actually thinking it was more of a solution searching for a problem. Unless that is what you actually meant to say, then I agree.

bryanl 13y ago

The software is an important part of this, but I'm more interested in seeing what new types of hardware will run this OS. The watch concept is only neat to me right now. It definitely feels like Android is ripe to bust the confines of the phone and move in to other parts of our lives. The work that Qualcomm is putting in their Snapdragon platform is evidence of this.

level 13y ago

> Voice Actions > Register your app to handle voice actions, like "Ok Google, take a note." I think this is what most interests me. Hopefully we won't be locked into Google's pre-defined tasks and developers can start working on their own voice actions.

cfolgar 13y ago

I'm more interested in the watches that were shown on the video. I realize I might be confused, are the watches in the video just placeholders/random design concepts to get the idea across? Still, I'm wondering what devices will eventually support this SDK.

wjoe 13y ago
They appear to be the LG G Watch [1] and Moto 360 [2], which were announced at the same time. [1] http://www.lgblog.co.uk/2014/03/lg-gwatch/ http://www.lgblog.co.uk/2014/03/lg-gwatch/ [2] http://moto360.motorola.com/ http://moto360.motorola.com/

angersock 13y ago

It'll be a cold day in hell before I let Google have an always-on device attached to my person, wearable or otherwise. These folks have proven--proven!--that they are unable to protect their infrastructure from state actors, that they do not care about individual customers, and that they will hijack our services on a whim to try and raise money. Fuck that noise. Any wearables need to be completely open-source, and with the ability to retarget their output to servers that we control, with security that we verify. And you know what? Not a single "normal" person understands the issue here. Aaaargh.

nfoz 13y ago
I feel your pain. Out of curiosity, do you carry a mobile phone?
- quest88 13y ago
  Or drive a car?
  - angersock 13y ago
    Nope--issue came to a head after my insurance company wanted me to put a GPS tracker in my car to get lower rates. So, I do without now. If I decide it's unavoidable, I'll buy an ancient clunker (preferably one with as little electronics in it as possible, think classic car).
    - quest88 13y ago
      Whoah! What insurance company is that?!
      - aestra 13y ago
        Tons. I am going to say the majority. It is optional though. You usually get a discount just for signing up, then you get an additional discount for your driving Progressive, Travels, Allstate, The Hartford... They not only track your location, they track your speed, the amount of quick stops you make (an indication you are tailgating), and time of day (some times of day are more risky than others statistically), and how much you drive. People who drive at low risk times, don't drive very fast, don't make quick stops, and drive only a little bit get discounts. Usually you leave the device in your car for 6 months-1 year and your discount is forever. My insurance (Travelers) gives you a 30% discount max. You can also log on online and view all your stats. You plug a device into your OBD-II port. There are significant privacy issues at hand here. In one case, it can be argued that you shouldn't be tracked, in another case it can be argued that driving is extremely dangerous (more dangerous than many people assume) and every attempt should be made to make driving safer. Humans have already demonstrated that they will alter their driving behavior for financial gains.[1][2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage-based_insurance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage-based_insurance [1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457511000662 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457511... [2] http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/will-insurers-pay-you-not-to-speed http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/will-insurers-pay-you-no...

k-mcgrady 13y ago

Although the software important I think with wearables hardware will be key. No matter how functional these devices are they are first and foremast a fashion accessory and need to look good. There will also need to be a large variety. Every time I look at buying a new watch I cycle through dozens and dozens of devices before I find one I like the look of. This is where I think Google has the upper hand on Apple with wearables. Apple will most likely produce the only device running their software and a lot of people won't like wearing the same fashion accessory as everyone else - they will want choice. Of course if Apple knocks it out of the park with the software/sensors (which is plausible from what I read about Healthbook yesterday) the functionality may just edge out the important of fashion.

XorNot 13y ago

Urgh...I wish we could skip this whole awkward smart watch phase and just realize its a bad idea.

deelowe 13y ago
Care to explain why? My wife wears a "smart watch" [1] every day she runs and so do most of her peers. There're definitely markets out there for this sort of thing. Also, if the watches switched from the pebble form factor to something like this: http://moto360.motorola.com/ http://moto360.motorola.com/ would you still have the same opinion? [1] - For all intents and purposes, this is basically a "smartwatch": https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/into-sports/running/forerunner-210/prod83280.html https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/into-sports/running/forerunn...
beefydude 13y ago
the existing android systems might look bulky and no be very practical. their marketing campaigns have been terrible. but the idea has feet and is probably a lot more useful than other technologies like google glass at a fraction of the cost
macspoofing 13y ago
If you watch people interact with their phones for a few minutes you realize it is a good idea. Take any average person and you'd see them constantly checking their phone for time(!!), messages, emails, weather, missed calls, current calls (i.e. who is calling me right now), change playing song etc. All those functions could be easily handled by a companion watch device.
- TarpitCarnivore 13y ago
  The flip side of this is that if it's interactive it doesn't stop the person from either A. constantly interacting with their phone or B. constantly interacting with their watch. I think people would be better served taking a step back and asking "Do I really need all these notifications?" and the answer will likely be no.
- XorNot 13y ago

JamesBaxter 13y ago

I wonder what precautions Google will take to avoid fragmentation of smart watches. If this software works well I'd be interested to see an actual watch manufacturer implement it, seeing as software has always been their downfall.

iLoch 13y ago
Same thing they've done to prevent it on android phones. ;)

justinph 13y ago

Those things look huge. Until "smart watches" can be made smaller and lighter, the adoption rate will be abysmal. Seriously, those things are electric hockey pucks with straps.

rch 13y ago
Absolutely correct. They are almost painful to look at. I'd rather see them start purposefully small so developers will have to be more creative when adapting to the form factor.
agumonkey 13y ago
At least some models are round. And don't tease the industry. Remember that not long ago cell phones..
de_dave 13y ago
Saw a new metal Pebble watch yesterday and was actually shocked to discover it was both smaller and thinner than my own analog watch, which isn't particularly big or chunky.
- maxerickson 13y ago
  Here: https://getpebble.com/steel https://getpebble.com/steel It looks like a calculator watch for the 21st century. (But I guess given that I don't like watches much it isn't surprising I don't find these devices very interesting) Edit: Adding maybe a little bit of value to this comment, the function of the device is very apparent in it form.

apendleton 13y ago

The key to the success of these things will be the ability to get information from the display without having to touch it. At first I figured this would mean an always-on display (so, e-ink, I guess), but this clearly isn't that, and yet they don't seem to turn the displays on in the videos (though I'm sure they're all fake). I wonder if you could do something with the accelerometer that would be good enough? Like, if your arm orientation changes to look-at-your-watch position, the display turns on, and it turns off again when your arm goes back down to your side.

DanAndersen 13y ago
It seems quite possible -- it's like how smartphone screens detect when you've moved it from your ear while on the phone to use the number pad.
- garretraziel 13y ago
  No, it's not like this. Smartphone has distance sensor, but I am not really convinced that the distance sensor would work in this case too.
moonka 13y ago
The pebble is always on, but the backlight can be set to turn on when you flick your wrist to look at it. While it could definitely benefit from a more sensitive accelerometer, it works well enough 90% of the time.

yeukhon 13y ago

The commerical, PoC is great. But its idea has the same flaw as Facebook Paper (https://www.facebook.com/paper https://www.facebook.com/paper). I can check the weather, get alert and listen to my music from my smartphone. I can enjoy some home automation with Canary (http://canary.is/ http://canary.is/). If I have free time I can design my own app and integrate a speech recognition to open the door (I am sure there are companies selling this too). What unique "innovations" - conveniences will Google wearable (which at this stage seems to be just a watch) offer? I say it has the same flaw as Facebook Paper because Paper 's success is based on rich, beautiful, poetic content. If your circle is casual writer, Paper will look lame to you. I love Google Glass because I can take pictures and record the world from a first-person view attached to my head. I don't plan on making a phone call directly from Google Glass yet - that's kind of weird. So what else can Google watch do? I just can't see it. The ability to better monitor your health and fitness. You see, I can still get away with it with other accessory. I will give Google credit and say this is useful, but other than that, I really don't see it. You know what is unique? What I want to see? Iron Man computer screen + Iron Man interactive airtouch computer system.... That's what we are lacking. I want to be able to swipe through contents, web pages from thin air with gesture. We can do some of that already. Push it forward! edit: I will say this is useful as assistive technology. People who are visually impaired or motion disable can benefit from it. Just put it on wrist and good to go. But other than that, I just don't see it.

wiremine 13y ago
> So what else can Google watch do? That's the key question for me. I don't look at my watch and think "man, that experience sucks" like I did with the pre-iPhone cell phones. In a way, it feels like Google is extending Android into wearables for the same reason they are doing Google Glass: because they can, not because it solves some frustration. I think that's why Apple is looking into health-related functionality (if the rumors are to believed). They are solving/improving the fitbit experience, not solving/improving the telling-piece/communication experience.
Kiro 13y ago
That's an argument against all smartwatches, not just Google. Nevertheless, I think you're wrong. I have a Pebble and it has changed my life. I will never leave the house without a wearable on my arm again.

ApacheEcho 13y ago

I think they should focus on bettering battery life on Android because it's honestly despicable.

lutusp 13y ago

I hope you're all paying attention to the trend this represents, a trend fueled by ever-smaller and more intimate Android devices. Pretty soon the term "Android" may become literal.

maxerickson 13y ago
What do 'intimate' digital devices have to do with humanoid robots?
- lutusp 13y ago
  I's saying this trend toward a closer and closer association between computers and people -- beginning with a huge, noisy room with lab-coat-wearing attendants who accepted your stack of 80-column cards through a little window, sort of like a bank (my first exposure to computers years ago) -- and now moving toward blurring the line between the computer and its "wearer", and given a number of neurological experiments in which the line between the computer and the human is blurred, I can see the handwriting on the wall. That sentence was way too long, but I think you get the idea. :)
  - maxerickson 13y ago
    That would traditionally be called a cyborg, not a literal android (a sci fi reader would expect the android to be fully synthetic).

guiomie 13y ago

Such a tacky video. I prefer pulling my phone out over wearing a watch ...

roc 13y ago

When someone has a 'session' with a wearable that involves anything more than the the most minimal of operations [1], I feel like that's the "stylus moment" [2]. Sure, there are narrow use cases when 'interacting' with a wearable is conceivable where a phone still is not (e.g. while biking or jogging). But that's going to run into the same problems that Glass runs into: how many people can really justify an electronics purchase to enable interactive computing during those situations? [3] [1] Swiping to cycle through glance-able cards or triage notifications [2] "If you see a stylus, they blew it" [3] Particularly not when purely-passive devices will inevitably be available with lower cost, smaller size/weight, better battery life, etc. (e.g. Pebble vs Fuelband)

IgorPartola 13y ago

The thing is, hardware is key here. The OS matters, and I would bet that someone could do way better than running Linux in a watch (something much more low-level on a much weaker processor could extend the battery life significantly). The hardware and sensors is the big problem. Currently, the best smartwatch specs I have seen are the Basis B1. It claims it can monitor your heart rate, track your sleep, etc. But that is all a lie. Sure, it can track your heart rate at rest, but during intensive exercise there is no comparison with something like a Polar chest strap. At the same time the claim that the B1 can monitor your sleep phase based on your heart rate is a bit far fetched as well. From what I've read the heart rate does not change by more than 1-2 bpm between REM and deep sleep, which is within the margin of error of the measurements, so the data out will be all wrong. As for the non-fitness functions of a smart watch, I don't see a huge value in having my wrist buzz every time a random ticket on GitHub gets updated or NewRelic sends me a performance metrics summary. Even text messages are much easier to process on the phone. I want to believe in the smartwatch idea. I want it to be a gadget that somehow improves my daily life. So far, aside from things like the Garmin Forerunner, I haven't see anything that would remotely come close to improving anything.

devcpp 13y ago
I disagree, we already have watches with weak processors (e.g Pebble) but they lack features. Android can bring those, and ARM processors are powerful enough. Indeed, the only difference between an Android watch and a full-size smartphone would be the smaller casing. The largest component nowadays is the battery, which can be greatly reduced thanks to the smaller screen. So, I don't see a major obstacle to an Android watch, and the benefits of it are worth the CPU. Of course temperature will be a concern but I'm sure demand will produce lower-powered CPUs powerful enough to run Android.
- IgorPartola 13y ago
  A watch that aim supposed to wear 24 hours a day cannot runout of battery every three days. Give me two months of battery life on an ARM device that is smaller than an average cheeseburger and I will be impressed.
13y ago

g4ur4v 13y ago

Come on Microsoft !!! Where are you ?

JetSpiegel 13y ago
Reading this news on a desktop, laughing on the way to the bank.

sailfast 13y ago

I agree that software is secondary to current hardware concerns at the moment, but doesn't this effort make it more attractive for hardware experts to try and dive in to improve the wearables market? They've already got a "ready to go" OS with which to prototype. Pretty awesome since I'm sure Samsung worked hard to get its Gear integration working. Maybe this will improve the number of players in the space? I'm all for efforts that help bring more options to the table.

amanuel 13y ago

This is not wearables. It is just a tiny screen mobile device. I'd consider labeling Google Glass a wearables before what was demoed here. Wearables is the idea of changing what we wear with technological augmentation. Watches have had tech for a long time....nothing new here sadly....

gfodor 13y ago

It's going to be pretty great now that everyone has shown their "huge black square on the wrist" design before apple has shown anything. Looking forward to seeing them scramble to steal apples design.

corresation 13y ago
Yeah, something like that. I actually wonder if Apple will ever manage to come out with a wearable, because honestly they are in a can't win situation: everyone else is iterating through technologies and designs, and while these aren't for everyone (though everyone who it isn't for is sure that means it is for no one), they're getting better and more reasonable, while Apple needs to come out with some sort of God watch that will completely upend technology. They can't win. They are absolutely bound to disappoint. Nonetheless, though, I'm sure six months after they come out with something, you'll be on here proclaiming that everyone else is copying Apple.
- gfodor 13y ago
  every watch design i've seen so far is uninspired and unrisky. they basically slapped a phone on the wrist. if apple ever releases anything, it will almost certainly not be an ugly square touchscreen with a wristband around it. and i won't need to proclaim anything, it will be obvious just like it was with the iPhone. edit: Also your point above doesn't make much sense. Apple has surely been working on their watch for many years. I would be really shocked, and it would be very un-Apple like, if they came out with a new piece of consumer hardware like this that didn't leapfrog over everyone else by just thinking a bit outside the box. Most likely they are not coming out with a "watch", but a smart wristband that has tons of patented UX and hardware that will be a complete new experience for people.
  - corresation 13y ago
    The Motorola device is neither square (which you've stated repeatedly, almost like you didn't even bother looking at the site before you declared that Apple does it better), nor ugly. I'm not a watch person, but it looks pretty beautiful to me. I imagine that Apple has been working on it for years. So has everyone -- this is hardly unanticipated technology, having been predicted for many, many decades. It just needs technology to make it possible. And processors are getting faster, while sipping far less juice. Screens are getting better (such as the amazing, likely AMOLED round screen on the Motorola 360). Batteries are getting better. Connectivity options like Bluetooth LE are making connectivity possible. Samsung might take a lot of deserved flack for products like the Gear, but they're trying to iterate the product to make it happen. While Apple might have had some luck timing entrants at the right time a couple of times, they have no particular advantage in any of those realms. The halo of the iPod won't carry this product launch, so they don't have the normal heads up they used to. It's going to be interesting. But I have absolutely no reason to soundly denounce alternatives against some imaginary, not actually existing foe.

adamman 13y ago

I can't help but think of this as a pimped out house arrest ankle bracelet.

lowglow 13y ago

We're throwing a IoT/Wearables Hackathon in april. Check it out: http://hackendo.techendo.co/ http://hackendo.techendo.co/

swang 13y ago

Why are we still using watches as the base of new wearables? Is it because it makes users more comfortable with wearing a computer on their wrist? Also not really sure about the round LCD, why not a curved rectangular LCD?

bane 13y ago

So it's like an amped up google now on a watch? I'm intrigued, but the price has to be good. Anything over $100 is just going to be a nonstarter in my opinion. Will I have to charge it 3 times a day, not going to work...etc. There's lots of difficulties with packing this in to a usable form factor and selling it. The galaxy gear had a return rate > 30%. But it's also a $300 watch. For $300 it better do more than make it mildly easier for me to do things that I already do on my phone, which sits literally inches away from where my watch would be on my wrist. And let's say it's wildly successful, I'm really interested in how a watch, on a bus full of people with watches, will know that you are saying "ok google" to it and not somebody else. Imagine sitting in a subway car, and some guy comes in and shouts "ok google, find me a bukake site!" or similar and now everybody on the train has to deal with that.

wutbrodo 13y ago
As far as I'm aware, the Moto X is very much able to avoid triggering by anyone's voice except the one it's keyed to. I was curious about how well it worked, so I tried repeatedly to launch Voice Search on my girlfriend's phone (even trying to imitate her voice); I wasn't able to do it at all. Trying to do so to an arbitrary person's device would be even harder.
- bane 13y ago
  That's good to know, but also a bit disconcerting, that Google has a voice print profile for me sitting on their servers somewhere.
  - wutbrodo 13y ago
    How would this even work if it was stored on the server? Every singkr sound triggers a roundtrip to the server from your phone to check the voice? I can't imagine this working any other way than being stored locally.
    - notatoad 13y ago
      if it's stored locally, it's probably stored on a server too.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

kh_hk 13y ago

The last time I used Google Now was too scared to use it ever again. I don't want to report my location, see cool pictures of my surroundings, or know about the events of my city. It's not just only about the surveillance, it's about the future. The connected future, the uninteresting one. The one on which one must "opt-in" or just stay out. Personally, I do not get Google Now cards. When they are relevant, they are depressing. Hopefully this stage of the future is just a step into a more positive and fulfilling one. That being said, give me a rooted version of this device where I can install a custom OS that allows me to use it as a computer and I am in.

teach 13y ago
My issue with Google Now is more about how rough it still is around the edges. I have a Nexus 5. me: "Okay, Google... text [my wife]" Goog: "Mobile or home fax?" 1) Why would you even ask that? 2) There is NO WAY to tell Google Now to default to a number. I get that question EVERY TIME. Still needs quite a bit more polish before I'm going to be comfortable using it the way my wife uses Siri on her iPhone 5S.
itp 13y ago
I want to be careful not to imply that I'm passing judgement on your feelings, or implying that they're invalid, because I certainly have my moments where I'm a little creeped out by Google Now as well. But I do want to push back a little bit on Google Now cards being necessarily depressing. I recently traveled up to Boston on a short hybrid work/vacation trip with my wife. When we were headed to the airport, Google Now had a card letting me know my flight was on time, and letting me know when I had to leave to make it to the airport on time. It was information I could have otherwise looked up, but it surfaced that information for me, and it was nice. When we landed in Boston, we wanted to contact our hotel to verify the check in time and ask if we could leave luggage there for the day if necessary. When I pulled my phone out, there was already a card with the hotel address, travel time, and contact info. Again, stuff I could have looked up (check my email to verify hotel name, look up number, call), but it was nice to have it there and ready for me. When I head to work in the morning, Google Now has a card for my commute, along with notifications about any accidents that may impact my travel. I also live far enough away that there are a few very different routes I can take, and day to day one or the other may be the best. Finding out my commute needs to go a different way, or I should plan for it to be a bit longer (or shorter, sometimes!) doesn't seem depressing to me. I keep a pretty close eye on how Google is using my information, and if I begin to feel like it has crossed a line from mutual benefit (helping me, and deriving value as well) to something more one-sided (exploiting me for value), I hope I won't prove to have been naive, but in the meantime, this is something that really seems to make my life better. Just my experience.

chillingeffect 13y ago

Just another crapshoot from a research institution trying to divest as its core business decays. Google is showing evidence they can't predict the future very well and won't sustain development in shaky fields. Instead, they're going for PR and military research projects, like IBM and Veridian Dynamics.

babesh 13y ago

Why not approach this from the computing as a bicycle for your mind point of view? Smartphones were the latest computing evolution bringing general purpose computing with you all the time and with an incredibly ease to use interface. Now people are trying to introduce this new computing device (the smart watch). What does it bring? It doesn't take up a hand since you don't have to hold it. You don't have to get it out of your pocket or turn it or pick it up to use it. To get it to do stuff you speak to it (possibly even easier to use than touch computing). It can be attached to your skin and read all sorts of data through your skin. What it doesn't bring you is a sizable enough screen to view photos or text (yet). Also it doesn't take advantage of one of our most precise tools (our hands). From this we may be able to predict what niches smart watches will evolve into to fill. Heavily voice based, quick call and respond style communications, updates and reminders, location based notifications, no-hand enhancers such as leveling, altimeters, etc... And since the watch is oriented towards your own face... it is heavily personal and can't be easily shared like a phone.

phreeza 13y ago

Two points: - This looks basically like an amped up google now, so maybe this means developer access to Now as well, which would be more exciting to me at the moment. - Pretty much all of the info they showed in the demo would work on an epaper display, maybe minus the swiping gestures. I sure hope the experience will include pebble style watches with a battery life longer than a few hours, but I am not holding my breath.

tobyjsullivan 13y ago

The part of the advert that impressed me most was that Google Now's voice recognition worked well enough to be useful. Something tells me that isn't actually a new feature.

jessriedel 13y ago
The Google Now voice recognition is incredible. I never search for direction manually, and I use it to compose most of my text messages and all of my reminders.

webwanderings 13y ago

So we now want to wear Ads on our wrists? Just checking!

pilooch 13y ago

People wearing this watch do not seem very much interested in news articles ;) More seriously, my fuzzy estimate is that 80% of the time spent on my phone is for reading stuff that is definitely not the departure time of my next flight (that I can memorize five months in advance :) ).

warfangle 13y ago
While I don't fly much, Google Now was absolutely fantastic the last time I flew. From notifications about flight delays to checking in. It was one of those things that I didn't think I was ever going to use, but when it came into play it was magical.
ithkuil 13y ago
lucky you: you have a good memory and/or don't fly very often.

skimmas 13y ago

How much will google pay its user for using this spywearable?

kellyhclay 13y ago

Glass is going to quietly shift to being a device for niche groups - not the average consumers. Google has likely realized via the beta of Glass that it's not going to be accepted into the mainstream - but a watch (which is much more discreet, yet performs many of the same functions as Glass) will. If Google wants to really saturate the market, this is a super smart move.

fab13n 13y ago

We're in a situation comparable to smartphones pre-iPhone: we know there is value in displaying stuff on your wrist, we know we need some way to send information in response to those received from the screen, but all of this doesn't click together. We have fragments of a solution, but we don't know which problem it solves, and certainly not how to integrate it into a life-enhancing experience. Smartphone builders had similarly vague ideas about which problem they were solving: they knew they needed to give access to some dumbed-down subset of the web and of our computer data. They knew that mails were part of that subset. Mail is easy, it's SMS with a different transport protocol, right? So they were looking for a dumbed-down keyboard, dumbed-down mouse, dumbed-down windows, scrollbars, etc. The iPhone took a mile-high view of the problem. "Dumbed-down mice (stylus) and keyboards suck. How do we make them superfluous? And how do we get adequate access to non-dumbed-down Internet, too?" Now with the watch. We have some vague fragments too. We know when we don't want to take our phone out, so in each of those cases we plan to use the watch as a dumbed-down phone screen. It's probably touch-sensitive, too (in a dumbed-down way no doubt), and it lets you awkwardly have a subset of the interactions you'd have had with your phone. So, I bet that watch is nothing but a dumbed-down proxy of our phone. I'm still waiting for someone, not unlikely Apple, to show me what I really wanted from a smart watch, without realizing it. And if apple figured this out as well as they figured out the smartphone, the Google-wearable guys will kick themselves during the demo, the way the Android guys decomposed themselves while Jobs was showing them what they should have done.

cinquemb 13y ago
I think that's a really good point to make with wearable computing in general. And assuming power/computing requirements are able to satisfy the technical demands in 5-10 years, I can imagine small breakouts in eye-wear, wristwatches, and if I look a bit farther (10-20 years), I can imagine it breaking out to the clothing market. But I'd have to say I'm more intrigued into how traditionally ephemeral everyday situations will be cataloged and increasingly available for everyone else to see, where the battles will arise, where the new opportunities will lie, and what social systems will be shaken up.
frio 13y ago
Looking at all these things -- workmate has a Galaxy Gear, I've got a Pebble, another friend has a Basis B1 -- they're all so tall and clunky. They're uncomfortable and not particularly useful. The obvious answer, IMHO, is just a phone on your arm. I'm looking forward to the device that stops trying to pack things into a watch form-factor; that makes use of curved OLED displays, and puts a longer, thinner device on my wrist. That said -- I've sort of thought for a while that the display should actually be decoupled from the device. I have a phone, a kindle, a smartwatch and a laptop -- all of which have separate user accounts, need cloud syncing (blech) and in general are a PITA to manage. I'd much prefer it if I had a computer on my wrist, which could wirelessly connect to external displays (Miracast?), and make use of them. So, my phone, kindle, laptop -- even a new tablet! -- are all just differing views of the same actual computer.

ardz 13y ago

First rule of privacy: keep private things private. Second rule of privacy: if two people know then everybody knows.

ardz 13y ago

First rule of privacy: privte things do not leave your house. Second rule of privacy: if two people know then everybody knows.

robocat 13y ago

Optical illusion: does anyone else see the guy's sleeve move left/right when the page is scrolled up/down? I am using an iPad4, and scrolling the part of the page with the second video showing the guy's wrist with a checkered cuff. (The video is not playing, just how it shows on page initially).

michaelkohen 13y ago

If helpful for anyone, I put together a collection of coverage on today's Android Wear announcement + other neat stuff on the rise of wearables http://wayfinder.co/pathways/5328b918bf637c0a00000001/what-you-need-to-know-about-android-wear http://wayfinder.co/pathways/5328b918bf637c0a00000001/what-y...

mavdi 13y ago

Constant cringing state with that video...

hawkharris 13y ago

Asking me to strap a computer to my risk is like assigning me homework: it requires a new way of thinking and interacting. Having said that, I'd better see a significant improvement over using other interfaces. That's why I'm at least initially disappointed with the Android watched. I get that we all love new interfaces because they're new and fun to play with, but what will this watch do for me that my smartphone can't do?

hawkharris 13y ago

Sorry for the typos; I wrote this on my phone and can't edit it. Also, I should note that I'm putting myself in others' shoes with the "homework" analogy. I'm a geek, so I don't mind learning about technology for tech's sake, but the same isn't true for most non-developers.

kimonos 13y ago

Totally cool! Can't wait to have one!

jamesfranco 13y ago

I have 3 question: 1. Will this only work with Android phone for now? 2. Do you agree that smart watches are more for apps that don't need a lot of user interaction. Like Instagram or Dropbox will not be great on these. Simple things like showing weather etc. will be okay. 3. Does anyone know the price of the Moto G or another Android Wear devices?

jamesfranco 13y ago

Whatever you wear reflects on you. I don't think this is something for someone who is fashion conscious people (like many people in LA). Wealthy people would prefer an Audemars or a Rolex any day compared to a Motorola or Samsung. Definitely see maybe teens and techies in Silicon Valley wearing these. Like the iPad when it first when out, the smartwatch should do some key things better than any other device, which it does and some minor things like telling the weather, taking notes etc. although reading long articles, viewing photos or anything that involves a lot of interaction is be suited on a phone, tablet or computer.

supercoder 13y ago

They should focus on getting the regular Android working and looking good before diverting attention to wearables.

SunboX 13y ago

Try to look ten minutes onto your arm and than tell me your feelings. Smart watches are a nice add on to a phone. Don't expect it to be a news reader, nor a phone replacement.

krexit 13y ago

Why do they have any expectation of success at the sort of power consumption that Android requires, with the power supply that wearables can contain? I note that the previous Galaxy Gear was Android - the new one is running Tizen and has around double the battery life. That's not all battery improvements, and no coincidence besides..

SimpleXYZ 13y ago

If they can shrink the size of that watch in half, I'm in.