8 ms·

"Have you ever tried android wear? I read/watched some reviews (even with the 360) and seems to me far to be a completed thing." Yes, quite a lot. Have you? A

"Have you ever tried android wear? I read/watched some reviews (even with the 360) and seems to me far to be a completed thing." Yes, quite a lot. Have you? Additionally, apple's device won't even be out for a minimum of 3 months (assuming it came out in january). Which is the not completed thing again? Truthfully, seeing what I saw, Apple's watch is just not a leap forward in any interesting way i can think of over android wear. Maybe it'll win because of better marketing or whatever. But it's interface did not look appreciably better to me, nor did it have anything that i would consider "a killer app" that android wear does not. (I mainly use my wear device to track my running and biking paces, display notes like shopping lists, and display texts so that i know whether i should pull out my phone to respond to the person) They could have chosen some axis to improve upon - waterproofness (i can scuba dive with my pebble but not my wear device), battery life, screen[1], whatever. They are trying "software". Sometimes this is good, sometimes it's not (again though, I also don't find the ipad interface so much better than the android one. For the things i do on these devices, the ipad is a slim win, but has a shittier software keyboard by far). [1] Sapphire is not interesting to me. My watch does not sit in my pocket with things likely to scratch it. I woodwork, and have worn wear devices for 6+ months now, and while i've scratched phones from chisels, saw blades, etc, i've never scratched my watch. A higher res display or something would have been cooler.

DAddYE 12y ago
> Which is the not completed thing again? Apple Watch is not available yet, so I don't see the point. I rather prefer to buy something within few months than a "prototype" at retail price. Can I ask you what is the android "wear", the only one I read some good things is the 360 (also announced 3/4 months before selling it) but it's not 6 months old.
- DannyBee 12y ago
  "Apple Watch is not available yet, so I don't see the point. I rather prefer to buy something within few months than a "prototype" at retail price." Uh, what makes you think it also won't be essentially a prototype, like the iphone's first software basically was (web apps only), etc? "Can I ask you what is the android "wear", the only one I read some good things is the 360 (also announced 3/4 months before selling it) but it's not 6 months old. " Android wear is the name of the device operating system for the android watches. As for hardware, I've actually tried literally all of them. Right now, a samsung gear live happens to sit on my wrist most of the time. The retail 360 is not 6 months old, that is certainly correct. I can assure you i have worn wear devices for > 6 months :) As for "what you read good things about", i don't know what to tell you. I actually tend to try things out more than just believing whatever the internet happens to think on a given day, which is heavily influenced (in all directions).
  - girvo 12y ago
    I own a Pebble Steel, and am quite interested in a Moto 360. I'm guessing you've tried the former too? What are your thoughts on the two? I'm trying to decide if I should switch my mobile back to Android and get a 360 instead of my iPhone + Pebble Steel :)
    - sundvor 12y ago
      I have a Pebble Steel too, silver one, and if you've gotten used to the battery life of that, I have a feeling after reading Ars Technica's review that you'd find the Moto 360 less to your liking. I absolutely love the always on epaper screen on my Steel, plus how classy the whole device looks and feels - and the functionality it offers me. None of the new smartwatches have any appeal to me as having to charge them daily doesn't float my boat. If I need more functionality I'll just whip out my Samsung S5.
      - Terretta 12y ago
        Pebble Steel owner here since early shipments, and traveling without a charger is meaningful. The U i beats the rest! and the look does too. That said, it seems like Apple has taken each category of wearable, advanced it in some meaningful way, and merged all of them, for a device more than a sum of the others. Really depends how it feels as to whether that's true. I'm guessing these could get derided as "fondle-wear" because the interactions seem intended to be touchy-feely. Reaching out to "tap" someone, or "sketching" instead of texting your S.O., these offer a human/device bond of some kind. Clever.
    - DannyBee 12y ago
      It depends heavily on what you want out of life :) To be frank, for what i was using it for at the time, my Pebble worked wonderfully. It showed my running pace and my text messages, and when i was about to miss a meeting. That was pretty much what it was good for (I know it theoretically has an app ecosystem, but i gave up on things like evernote for pebble within about 3 minutes). Once I got the wear, i expected to just use it as a color version of that. But i don't. While I do all those same things, I actually find myself using it to look at notes, to navigate with walking directions, and when nobody is around, I ask it to do stuff for me when my hands are busy or my phone is not around. I often leave my phone on the counter when in the shop or outside, and if i wanted to respond on the pebble, I had to run back to grab it. If i want to respond on my watch, i can just talk to it for the most part. I basically use it as a companion device like i used to use my phone. It fulfills most of the basic purposes. So, all that said, if you are happy with the iphone + pebble steel, and there isn't anything you are hankering for, i personally doubt i'd change ecosystems just on a lark. But, certainly, i've found myself doing a lot more with my watch since i moved away from my Pebble. (I guess i should point out i just don't give a crap about some things, like charging daily or not. I have to charge my phone anyway. So when i go to bed, and put my phone on it's charger, i put my watch on it's charger. At least for me, it's not the deal-killer others seem to find it. Certainly, not worrying about charging the pebble as often was nice, but i have to charge other stuff anyway, so it's not a big deal)
Tycho 12y ago
On the other hand high-end wrist watches have been using sapphire crystal faces for over 30 years, so there's probably something in it. I have one - my watch still looks perfect 8 years since I got it.
- DannyBee 12y ago
  Sapphire is nicer on really high end stuff just for protection purposes. It's abrasion resistance is much much higher. If i was buying a smartwatch for 10 years, i'd agree it'd be a great feature. But i don't, i buy them for 3 years. High end watches have it for the same reason - people expect them to last forever. If people are expecting a smartwatch (apple's or anyones) to last them 10 years, sapphire is going to be the least of their problems :) FWIW: The reason they likely didn't put it on phones is because they haven't solved the brittleness problem that nobody else has really solved that well. If you drop sapphire, it tends to shatter. If you drop gorilla glass, it tends to bounce. It makes sense on watches because nobody really drops watches that often, since they are normally held on your wrists by bands.
  - Tycho 12y ago
    Lifetime will definitely be shorter than a luxury watch but 'face time' will be far greater (time spent actually looking at the face). So still seems like an excellent feature to me.
gress 12y ago
Have you stopped working at Google?
- DannyBee 12y ago
  Nope.
  - gress 12y ago
    I noticed you took it out of your profile.
madeofpalk 12y ago
> Truthfully, seeing what I saw, Apple's watch is just not a leap forward in any interesting way i can think of over android wear. Isn't this the whole point? When iPod, iPhone and iPad were first announced, it wasn't immediately obvious (to everyone) that they were a huge leap forward. It's not until people actually use them and we have the luxury of hindsight that we can say how groundbreaking they might have been.
- DannyBee 12y ago
  "Isn't this the whole point?" No "It's not until people actually use them and we have the luxury of hindsight that we can say how groundbreaking they might have been." I'm not even sure what to make of this statement. There have been a lot of history rewrites on why the iPhone succeeded. If you want to say "we should wait and see", i'm fine with that. If you are saying "i'm sure they are amazing, and we are all just dumb for second guessing apple", this sounds a lot like the emperors new clothes. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Apple had plenty of failures in the past that get glossed over and disappear (remember their social network?). This is true even of hardware (remember the cube? whee) and other major features. While I doubt they'd get called out over it in the media, it may just disappear the same way a lot of other things did that didn't work out. So assuming it will be one of the revolutionary devices, despite it seeming like it won't be, is a little too much for me. Happy to be wrong of course (i'd love to buy one if it's truly better), but not going to put faith in them :)
  - madeofpalk 12y ago
    > If you want to say "we should wait and see", i'm fine with that. If you are saying "i'm sure they are amazing, and we are all just dumb for second guessing apple", this sounds a lot like the emperors new clothes. Past performance does not guarantee future results. I'm kind of saying both. Of course, I'm holding off on judging until people actually use it. I know past performance does not guarantee future results, but it's hard not to see a pattern in Apple's products announcements.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]

DAddYE 12y ago

> Which is the not completed thing again? Apple Watch is not available yet, so I don't see the point. I rather prefer to buy something within few months than a "prototype" at retail price. Can I ask you what is the android "wear", the only one I read some good things is the 360 (also announced 3/4 months before selling it) but it's not 6 months old.

DannyBee 12y ago
"Apple Watch is not available yet, so I don't see the point. I rather prefer to buy something within few months than a "prototype" at retail price." Uh, what makes you think it also won't be essentially a prototype, like the iphone's first software basically was (web apps only), etc? "Can I ask you what is the android "wear", the only one I read some good things is the 360 (also announced 3/4 months before selling it) but it's not 6 months old. " Android wear is the name of the device operating system for the android watches. As for hardware, I've actually tried literally all of them. Right now, a samsung gear live happens to sit on my wrist most of the time. The retail 360 is not 6 months old, that is certainly correct. I can assure you i have worn wear devices for > 6 months :) As for "what you read good things about", i don't know what to tell you. I actually tend to try things out more than just believing whatever the internet happens to think on a given day, which is heavily influenced (in all directions).
- girvo 12y ago
  I own a Pebble Steel, and am quite interested in a Moto 360. I'm guessing you've tried the former too? What are your thoughts on the two? I'm trying to decide if I should switch my mobile back to Android and get a 360 instead of my iPhone + Pebble Steel :)
  - sundvor 12y ago
    I have a Pebble Steel too, silver one, and if you've gotten used to the battery life of that, I have a feeling after reading Ars Technica's review that you'd find the Moto 360 less to your liking. I absolutely love the always on epaper screen on my Steel, plus how classy the whole device looks and feels - and the functionality it offers me. None of the new smartwatches have any appeal to me as having to charge them daily doesn't float my boat. If I need more functionality I'll just whip out my Samsung S5.
    - Terretta 12y ago
      Pebble Steel owner here since early shipments, and traveling without a charger is meaningful. The U i beats the rest! and the look does too. That said, it seems like Apple has taken each category of wearable, advanced it in some meaningful way, and merged all of them, for a device more than a sum of the others. Really depends how it feels as to whether that's true. I'm guessing these could get derided as "fondle-wear" because the interactions seem intended to be touchy-feely. Reaching out to "tap" someone, or "sketching" instead of texting your S.O., these offer a human/device bond of some kind. Clever.
  - DannyBee 12y ago
    It depends heavily on what you want out of life :) To be frank, for what i was using it for at the time, my Pebble worked wonderfully. It showed my running pace and my text messages, and when i was about to miss a meeting. That was pretty much what it was good for (I know it theoretically has an app ecosystem, but i gave up on things like evernote for pebble within about 3 minutes). Once I got the wear, i expected to just use it as a color version of that. But i don't. While I do all those same things, I actually find myself using it to look at notes, to navigate with walking directions, and when nobody is around, I ask it to do stuff for me when my hands are busy or my phone is not around. I often leave my phone on the counter when in the shop or outside, and if i wanted to respond on the pebble, I had to run back to grab it. If i want to respond on my watch, i can just talk to it for the most part. I basically use it as a companion device like i used to use my phone. It fulfills most of the basic purposes. So, all that said, if you are happy with the iphone + pebble steel, and there isn't anything you are hankering for, i personally doubt i'd change ecosystems just on a lark. But, certainly, i've found myself doing a lot more with my watch since i moved away from my Pebble. (I guess i should point out i just don't give a crap about some things, like charging daily or not. I have to charge my phone anyway. So when i go to bed, and put my phone on it's charger, i put my watch on it's charger. At least for me, it's not the deal-killer others seem to find it. Certainly, not worrying about charging the pebble as often was nice, but i have to charge other stuff anyway, so it's not a big deal)

Tycho 12y ago

On the other hand high-end wrist watches have been using sapphire crystal faces for over 30 years, so there's probably something in it. I have one - my watch still looks perfect 8 years since I got it.

DannyBee 12y ago
Sapphire is nicer on really high end stuff just for protection purposes. It's abrasion resistance is much much higher. If i was buying a smartwatch for 10 years, i'd agree it'd be a great feature. But i don't, i buy them for 3 years. High end watches have it for the same reason - people expect them to last forever. If people are expecting a smartwatch (apple's or anyones) to last them 10 years, sapphire is going to be the least of their problems :) FWIW: The reason they likely didn't put it on phones is because they haven't solved the brittleness problem that nobody else has really solved that well. If you drop sapphire, it tends to shatter. If you drop gorilla glass, it tends to bounce. It makes sense on watches because nobody really drops watches that often, since they are normally held on your wrists by bands.
- Tycho 12y ago
  Lifetime will definitely be shorter than a luxury watch but 'face time' will be far greater (time spent actually looking at the face). So still seems like an excellent feature to me.

gress 12y ago

Have you stopped working at Google?

DannyBee 12y ago
Nope.
- gress 12y ago
  I noticed you took it out of your profile.

madeofpalk 12y ago

> Truthfully, seeing what I saw, Apple's watch is just not a leap forward in any interesting way i can think of over android wear. Isn't this the whole point? When iPod, iPhone and iPad were first announced, it wasn't immediately obvious (to everyone) that they were a huge leap forward. It's not until people actually use them and we have the luxury of hindsight that we can say how groundbreaking they might have been.

DannyBee 12y ago
"Isn't this the whole point?" No "It's not until people actually use them and we have the luxury of hindsight that we can say how groundbreaking they might have been." I'm not even sure what to make of this statement. There have been a lot of history rewrites on why the iPhone succeeded. If you want to say "we should wait and see", i'm fine with that. If you are saying "i'm sure they are amazing, and we are all just dumb for second guessing apple", this sounds a lot like the emperors new clothes. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Apple had plenty of failures in the past that get glossed over and disappear (remember their social network?). This is true even of hardware (remember the cube? whee) and other major features. While I doubt they'd get called out over it in the media, it may just disappear the same way a lot of other things did that didn't work out. So assuming it will be one of the revolutionary devices, despite it seeming like it won't be, is a little too much for me. Happy to be wrong of course (i'd love to buy one if it's truly better), but not going to put faith in them :)
- madeofpalk 12y ago
  > If you want to say "we should wait and see", i'm fine with that. If you are saying "i'm sure they are amazing, and we are all just dumb for second guessing apple", this sounds a lot like the emperors new clothes. Past performance does not guarantee future results. I'm kind of saying both. Of course, I'm holding off on judging until people actually use it. I know past performance does not guarantee future results, but it's hard not to see a pattern in Apple's products announcements.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]