Google Launches 'Android Wear' Project for Wearable Devices

[IFRIT]

Of course its a different core OS, its the UI over the top that originally started as a Blackberry clone and then ended up as an iOS clone. I suggest you take some time, in between your face smashing, to look at the history of early Android, you will see this is exactly what happened.

By the way if this type of discussion makes you want to self harm I suggest you go see a therapist

If you think Android has ever looked like iOS then I suggest you go get your eyes checked.

 

[beestigbeestje]

Why did no one on that bus looked surprised that guy was shouting at his wrist?

I don't think google voice would have even understood him in a driving bus with talking people in it. Certainly when talking so far from the watch.

Don't give me the "sound beam" crap

 

[apolloa]

There's no conflict. You can read a rumor site while still being intelligent enough to understand that a rumor, or in this case, an announcement is not the same as having a real, production ready, model ready to go.

Those "demos" they had in the videos? Two words: RENDERED SCREENS. They had an actor swipe around on a non-functional device and then edited in the screens afterward. It's extremely obvious in the developer video, with the Moto 360, but in case you really don't believe me, they even added fine print saying they did it. Feel free to watch them yourself. I'm sorry if I don't consider that "real".

ah I see, your now reaching for sheer desperation and out right lies to try and attempt to rubbish Apples competition, but carry on living in your bubble world, I'll enjoy the FACT that Alax Faaborg is not an actor and rubbishes your theory straight away.
But I guess you 'chose' to ignore that fact too didn't you. Tell me where the 'fine print' is in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xQ3y902DEQ#t=42

----------

If it's powered by Google Now, I doubt Apple is worried too much... unless they're trying to capture the market on poorly made apps that tell me the most useless information when I no longer need it while draining the battery as fast as humanly possible.

Apple aren't worried about Google Now simply because they know it is a system they cannot possibly ever match, they do not have the resources or the availability of the masses of information it uses to work incredibly well.
I doubt you have ever seen it outside videos and stories on Mac Rumors, but if you have ever used it on your own Android device please do tell.

 

[Bobleh]

Can't get excited about these 'smart watches'. The idea to have yet another piece of technology with pretty much redundant functionality to keep you constantly in the internet loop while making use of your collected data for whatever reason, doesn't seem very smart to me.

Whenever this thing will sense a rhythmic vibration you will be bombarded with Ads for Online Dating Services the next time you log onto your computer. Thank you very much

I agree. The added value of the current smartwatches is low and won't appeal outside of the techie market niche. What you are getting is basically a simple trade-off - a remote screen for your mobile which is nicely visible and always at hand but the smaller screen makes all the apps worse (eg maps).

Remember when Apple introduced the iPad? Steve said there needed to be a reason for the iPad to exist. It needed to be better than the netbook and the notebook. The smartwatch needs to be better than the watch and do things mobile phones cannot do.

That's why Tim Cook said at the end of D10 that he was interested in the ability of wearables to change one's behavior. The sensors are the key added value here. The ability to measure sleep, health, fitness. The ability to get information you are not living well and should change your ways. It could be a big thing for seniors. If the whole thing is one flexible display wrapped around your wrist, the possible custom skins would largely appeal to teenagers as well. The convenient location on your wrist will make it a great remote for all your things music, house automation, etc. There are so many possibilities.

That's why Apple is taking their time - they have a bold vision for what a 21st century "watch" should be. Others just take a low risk approach and offer what is merely a second screen for your mobile. And the mass market has already spoken - not interested.

 

[samcraig]

I have to chuckle at those insisting that Apple's non-existent iWatch is going to be something different. There's only so much you can do on/with a smart wearable. It's not going to be about what it can do - it will be the UI and perhaps design that will be different.

Those that really think that Apple is going to do something so different that it puts others to shame - clue us in. What exactly do you think it's going to be?

I'll set somewhat of a virtual goalpost here and rule out NFC/iBeacon type of functionality, heart/body/location based monitoring, notifications (weather, stocks, text, imessages, etc), siri, music or controls for music, watch functionality

 

[chocolaterabbit]

Wow. This place has changed so much recently. I been a member for a long time but regular post in here. Why are people so negative when it comes to Google? I use Mac, but also use Android. Is not our fault that Apple likes to keep everything behind the scenes unlike Google that opens up everything to public and they go from there. Competition is always good and Remember apple wasn't first in anything in a very long time.

I see the opposite. Sure, there are a lot of people here calling this vapourware, but there are an equally large amount of people who like how Android wear looks and in fact get more upvotes than the sceptics.
In any case, it doesn't really matter what Google does. Apple is so far in with their watch designs that there's only harm to be done if Jony copies the moto 360. The best thing they can do now is focus and not get distracted.

----------

I have to chuckle at those insisting that Apple's non-existent iWatch is going to be something different. There's only so much you can do on/with a smart wearable. It's not going to be about what it can do - it will be the UI and perhaps design that will be different.

Those that really think that Apple is going to do something so different that it puts others to shame - clue us in. What exactly do you think it's going to be?

I'll set somewhat of a virtual goalpost here and rule out NFC/iBeacon type of functionality, heart/body/location based monitoring, notifications (weather, stocks, text, imessages, etc), siri, music or controls for music, watch functionality

Apple's products have historically had the same or even lesser of a feature set than the competition. What they have differentiated on is UI and design, and I'd argue that that's what made Apple products superior for their users, who care about the experience.

 

[kdarling]

FWIW... A chat with the Motorola VP of Product Management and Wearables Lead - Wall Street Journal

(The reporter wondered if all the images were just Photoshopped virtual designs.)

Q: So, is this a real working product right now?

A: "It is a very real product. I am wearing it on my hand as we speak and have been using it for the last few weeks. It’s very, very real, I promise. I am touching it right now."

Q: Is it really going to ship? Is there any reason to be worried about that given the Lenovo acquisition?

A: "Yes, this is going to ship this summer. And we don’t foresee any issues with Lenovo."

 

[IFRIT]

ah I see, your now reaching for sheer desperation and out right lies to try and attempt to rubbish Apples competition, but carry on living in your bubble world, I'll enjoy the FACT that Alax Faaborg is not an actor and rubbishes your theory straight away.
But I guess you 'chose' to ignore that fact too didn't you. Tell me where the 'fine print' is in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xQ3y902DEQ#t=42

----------



Apple aren't worried about Google Now simply because they know it is a system they cannot possibly ever match, they do not have the resources or the availability of the masses of information it uses to work incredibly well.
I doubt you have ever seen it outside videos and stories on Mac Rumors, but if you have ever used it on your own Android device please do tell.

It's not worth replying to anything Todd says as he will just report your post and get it auto deleted if he does not like you say. Lolz

 

[samcraig]

----------

[/COLOR]

Apple's products have historically had the same or even lesser of a feature set than the competition. What they have differentiated on is UI and design, and I'd argue that that's what made Apple products superior for their users, who care about the experience.

I won't argue that point. However it appears that some people seem to think Apple is going to do something that others haven't thought of. And I'm asking what they can possibly believe that to be.

And since no one here has used the SDK or a device with Google's SDK - I find it laughable that they can criticize what these reported wearables can and can't do - how the UI will look like, etc.

 

[jlc1978]

No they are not going to win the watch snob that wants a mechanical watch that runs at 28,000 bph, that is hand assembled by swiss maiden horologists and lubricated by unicorn blood.

Meh. Unicorn blood is Rolex. Real quality watches use virgin unobtanium oil.

Still it is better looking than any other smart watch I have seen real or concept.

True. Rather than go for the "Hi tech" look they took the traditional look and added functionality via other screens. Not sure if I like the Portuguese style case but would need to see it on the wrist.

 

[Bobleh]

I have to chuckle at those insisting that Apple's non-existent iWatch is going to be something different. There's only so much you can do on/with a smart wearable. It's not going to be about what it can do - it will be the UI and perhaps design that will be different.

Those that really think that Apple is going to do something so different that it puts others to shame - clue us in. What exactly do you think it's going to be?

I'll set somewhat of a virtual goalpost here and rule out NFC/iBeacon type of functionality, heart/body/location based monitoring, notifications (weather, stocks, text, imessages, etc), siri, music or controls for music, watch functionality

Let's use the iPhone as a template. iPhone was a revolutionary concept of a large screen with a multitouch UI and cell/wifi/bluetooth/GPS connectivity. Apple then opened up all of this to developers who created hundreds of thousands of apps covering all areas of life. You could never imagine what your "phone" would be able to do. Apple could not imagine it themselves. Key lesson here is - enable software with great hardware and be amazed by the results.

Enter iWatch. Even Apple doesn't know what iWatch will be capable of in a few years time. Their software engineers cannot possible cover all areas of life. That's why their task is to build killer HW which will then be handed over to thousands of developers who will create now unthinkable apps.

What about the iWatch HW then? Again, the key is - it needs to enable greate software. Great software needs 3 things - display large enough to see context, simple UI, and connectivity to provide source data for apps. In my opinion, the most revolutionary thing about the iWatch will be an all-band wraparound display and high-tech sensors making use of wearing the device on the wrist.

This will create a combo which when handed over to developers, they will come up with apps you never thought were possible. Think all areas of life - health, security, finance, fashion, etc, etc.

 

[thekeyring]

nope it wont' scream. It will be similar to what they did with the iPod nano 6 gen.

I meant if the iWatch actually ran full iOS, not the iPod OS with an iOS skin.

 

[Beautyspin]

Really?

Perhaps if Google weren't headed by arrogant developers who only care about exploiting the user rather than producing quality products, it might be different.

Then there's also the whole thing where Google blatantly stole the entire iPhone concept and called it Android.

So somebody who offers cheap and free products is exploiting its users where as a company which fixes prices to screw its users and has industry topping margins (again to screw its users) is not exploiting its users.

I totally get it. Can you tell where you buy your dictionary?

 

[samcraig]

Let's use the iPhone as a template. iPhone was a revolutionary concept of a large screen with a multitouch UI and cell/wifi/bluetooth/GPS connectivity. Apple then opened up all of this to developers who created hundreds of thousands of apps covering all areas of life. You could never imagine what your "phone" would be able to do. Apple could not imagine it themselves. Key lesson here is - enable software with great hardware and be amazed by the results.

Enter iWatch. Even Apple doesn't know what iWatch will be capable of in a few years time. Their software engineers cannot possible cover all areas of life. That's why their task is to build killer HW which will then be handed over to thousands of developers who will create now unthinkable apps.

What about the iWatch HW then? Again, the key is - it needs to enable greate software. Great software needs 3 things - display large enough to see context, simple UI, and connectivity to provide source data for apps. In my opinion, the most revolutionary thing about the iWatch will be an all-band wraparound display and high-tech sensors making use of wearing the device on the wrist.

This will create a combo which when handed over to developers, they will come up with apps you never thought were possible. Think all areas of life - health, security, finance, fashion, etc, etc.

I think your vision of what Gen 1 of the iWatch/wearable is going to be is a bit advanced. But you're entitled to your opinion and vision.

I see something similar to what we've seen - but with Apple's spin (design and UI)

 

[Boomish69]

What an awful video from the music to the dialog to the actors, was this a seriously an official Goole video?

 

[spinedoc77]

And "business while driving" is the opposite of what most people do with their smartphones. Smartwatches may also become LIFESAVERS for some people and not be worth it for everybody else.
It's not a new category but a new peripheral to the category smartphones. Much like smart toothbrushes. You can make a good argument against a $200 toothbrush, you can't make a good argument against the usefulness of smartphones, who are really just general-purpose computers with thousands of useful applications. A dumbphone can't replace a smartphone. If both would cost the same, no one would choose a flip phone. Only movie criminals like flip phones, because they can be broken apart.

You are saying people don't talk while they drive? That's ludicrous. Get in your car and commute 1-2 or more hours every day and tell me you have no need to ever talk on your phone. Even if you don't, look around you and see how many people are talking on their phones, that's the ones you see plus the ones who are on headsets or car bluetooth systems. Sorry, but that was just a ludicrous statement.

I can definitely make a good argument against smartphones as I mentioned before. Specifically the argument that the majority of consumers do not "need" a smartphone over a non-smartphone. I don't disagree that for the same price consumers would choose smartphones, of course common sense of the overwhelming numbers of smartphone sales would show that's the case, but that's not my argument.

Smartwatches are different in some aspects though. I wear a Rolex, obviously I didn't spend all that money just to tell time. The fashion aspect is what companies will have to overcome IMO as watches are primarily a fashion accessory. If they cannot make watches which are fashionable then they will never sell many of them. There will always be a certain subset of consumers though who wear a watch more for brand and fashion than functionality, and those consumers may be unreachable. But hey, I'm one of those consumers and even I am considering ditching my Rolex for the functionality of one of these smartwatches.

 

[Syk]

I have to chuckle at those insisting that Apple's non-existent iWatch is going to be something different. There's only so much you can do on/with a smart wearable. It's not going to be about what it can do - it will be the UI and perhaps design that will be different.

Those that really think that Apple is going to do something so different that it puts others to shame - clue us in. What exactly do you think it's going to be?

I'll set somewhat of a virtual goalpost here and rule out NFC/iBeacon type of functionality, heart/body/location based monitoring, notifications (weather, stocks, text, imessages, etc), siri, music or controls for music, watch functionality

I dare say if Apple does a watch it won't do anything that the others will do.
I saw the concept art band iwatch and it looks nice but it looks like a Nike FuelBand. They'll probably bring out some classy design watches and in multiple colors but the Moto360 design is really slick looking IMO, the need to do a Casio GShock type design so if Apple does release one which I'm sure they will a challenge more so if it comes with an Apple premium price tag.

I think some people have the Samsung Gear stuck on the brain and I will say that looks rushed and looks like nothing I would buy. The Moto360 on the other hand looks like it's been thought out, looks dressy and has potential.

Another thing. I play golf and there are a couple of golf watches out there. If you could load up an app like the software on the golf buddy watch that would be useful for me. That and exercise/health apps

I wonder what battery life will be and storage. I can't see it lasting more than a day or two. They should include wireless charging. That way at night when I take it off I can just set it on the night stand and forget about it

 

[Vodka]

Can i watch 4k movie with those?

 

[spinedoc77]

Totally. Same applies to all sorts of situations. Cooking, working on a car, working in a metal shop, a crowded area, the list goes on and on. There are plenty of applications for this and I may well buy one if they pull it off.

Shhh, you are making "sense". That's looked down upon by many on these forums.

----------

I feel sorry for man babies who can't appreciate new tech and instead think they are in some kind of war of us v them..that would be a miserable life being like that

Lol man babies, perfect term. I love the freedom of NOT being a fan boy and buying from whichever company makes the product which fits my needs best.

 

[Bobleh]

I think your vision of what Gen 1 of the iWatch/wearable is going to be is a bit advanced. But you're entitled to your opinion and vision.

I see something similar to what we've seen - but with Apple's spin (design and UI)

I understand, Sam. I'm hearing the same from my friends. This vision does seem rather advanced and futuristic. I have my little doubts, myself. But when you think about it, it's the only way.

I think the reason why Apple's competitors keep inroducing the classic watch design+internet concept is two-fold:

1. Paradigm - they're not bold enough to make a paradigm shift, remove the attachable bands and make the whole thing one wraparound display. We've seen this before - mobile manufacturers didn't want to get rid of the buttons.

2. Technology - you need rather cutting edge technology to make a product with a wraparound display which by its nature needs a large battery which again needs to be wrapped all around the device.

You need to believe in this concept so much that you are willing to make the paradigm shift and invest billions in engineering and manufacturing this thing.
Two things make me a believer of iWatch - only Apple is not scared of paradigm shifts and has the resources and ability to mass manufacture this cutting-edge technology. BTW, flexible displays and batteries have just entered the mass-manufacture stage - eg the LG Flex mobile phone uses it.

 

[spinedoc77]

FWIW... A chat with the Motorola VP of Product Management and Wearables Lead - Wall Street Journal

(The reporter wondered if all the images were just Photoshopped virtual designs.)

Q: So, is this a real working product right now?

A: "It is a very real product. I am wearing it on my hand as we speak and have been using it for the last few weeks. It’s very, very real, I promise. I am touching it right now."

Q: Is it really going to ship? Is there any reason to be worried about that given the Lenovo acquisition?

A: "Yes, this is going to ship this summer. And we don’t foresee any issues with Lenovo."

Very nice, you shut down like half the posters in this thread.

 

[Carlanga]

I meant if the iWatch actually ran full iOS, not the iPod OS with an iOS skin.

Again, no it won't have full iOS.

 

[CausticPuppy]

you can only track someone if they are already in the market. Far as I know Appple's wearables are just vaporware. There is no product, no annoucement, zero. At least Google and others are out there pushing the market

Apple didn't invent the smartphone or the tablet. They're good at reinventing existing markets, but that implies that a market has to already exist.
Remember that Apple was "late" to the MP3 player market too.


Of all the "smart watches" released (or announced) so far, I think the Motorola one is the first one that doesn't look like an ugly brick. I wonder if it can display the watch face full time without running down the battery in 2 hours.

 

[RenoG]

I understand, Sam. I'm hearing the same from my friends. This vision does seem rather advanced and futuristic. I have my little doubts, myself. But when you think about it, it's the only way.

I think the reason why Apple's competitors keep inroducing the classic watch design+internet concept is two-fold:

1. Paradigm - they're not bold enough to make a paradigm shift, remove the attachable bands and make the whole thing one wraparound display. We've seen this before - mobile manufacturers didn't want to get rid of the buttons.

2. Technology - you need rather cutting edge technology to make a product with a wraparound display which by its nature needs a large battery which again needs to be wrapped all around the device.

You need to believe in this concept so much that you are willing to make the paradigm shift and invest billions in engineering and manufacturing this thing.
Two things make me a believer of iWatch - only Apple is not scared of paradigm shifts and has the resources and ability to mass manufacture this cutting-edge technology. BTW, flexible displays and batteries have just entered the mass-manufacture stage - eg the LG Flex mobile phone uses it.

Interesting, it all sounds exciting even, yet I still have zero desire to have one.

 

[deluxeshredder]

If you think Android has ever looked like iOS then I suggest you go get your eyes checked.

iOS 7 looks like a badly skinned take on modern Android.

Early (up to 2.3) Android actually wasn't much of a iOS lookalike.

Classic iOS was VERY unique.