Google to Release Android SDK for Wearable Devices in Two Weeks

[Renzatic]

I think there will always be people like this with any technology. I'm sure years ago there was a caveman saying "Fire is a waste of time. A stupid fad."

I could see plenty of potential in tablets and smartphones long before they hit it big. But wearables? Eh. I'm just not feeling as much love over them. Not yet.

Do they have potential? Yeah, they do. Plenty of, in fact. But it's going to be a little while yet before the tech gets to the point anyone can actualize it. For the next 5 years or so, they're all gonna be niche companion devices for your smartphone.

 

[roadbloc]

I think there will always be people like this with any technology. I'm sure years ago there was a caveman saying "Fire is a waste of time. A stupid fad."

You may be right. But I have always seen the potential in mobile devices. I just don't see the potential in having an A8 processor and apps on my wrist watch. I already have a phone that does that stuff in my pocket. And it comes with a bigger screen. I just don't see point in smart watches and all this gimmicky wearable tech.

 

[jm001]

Since it's Android, and Google is Android, will these wearables have ads in the apps? That would be a bummer as you want to quickly check your heart rate, but have to wait through an ad for healthy living or heart meds.

 

[spinedoc77]

Wearable technology has been around for more than a decade and still hasn't seen mainstream adoption.

Yep, how long were smartphones and tablets around until they saw mainstream adoption? Yet you saw critics every single day saying how they would never catch on.

----------

Good comparison!! the survival of humanity V a new iToy.

Did you really take that so literally? Lol.

----------

I could see plenty of potential in tablets and smartphones long before they hit it big. But wearables? Eh. I'm just not feeling as much love over them. Not yet.

Do they have potential? Yeah, they do. Plenty of, in fact. But it's going to be a little while yet before the tech gets to the point anyone can actualize it. For the next 5 years or so, they're all gonna be niche companion devices for your smartphone.

Oh absolutely, I couldn't agree more. I think especially the aesthetics are important, but those clash with things like battery life and screen size, definitely issues which need solving before they go mainstream. Yeah, I think 3-5 years is about the timeframe seeing as how flexible screens and such are just now emerging.

----------

You may be right. But I have always seen the potential in mobile devices. I just don't see the potential in having an A8 processor and apps on my wrist watch. I already have a phone that does that stuff in my pocket. And it comes with a bigger screen. I just don't see point in smart watches and all this gimmicky wearable tech.

Everyone's needs are different. For some to not have to take their phone out of their pocket is priceless enough where it makes sense. Also, while I'm not a proponent of paying such close attention to heartrate while exercising, this does have some valuable in a wearable instead of having the sensor on your phone. There are quite a bit more examples that come off the top of my head on how useful a watch can be, but once again it depends on the user and his needs. Just to reiterate it's not like I see EVERY person out there with a smartwatch, and certainly not 1:1 with a smartphone, yet I still see a significant enough demand eventually for profitability.

 

[Oletros]

You may be right. But I have always seen the potential in mobile devices. I just don't see the potential in having an A8 processor and apps on my wrist watch. I already have a phone that does that stuff in my pocket. And it comes with a bigger screen. I just don't see point in smart watches and all this gimmicky wearable tech.

Wearables is not only smart watches. A Fitbit Flex is a wearable, a Nike Fuel band is a wearable

----------

Since it's Android, and Google is Android, will these wearables have ads in the apps? That would be a bummer as you want to quickly check your heart rate, but have to wait through an ad for healthy living or heart meds.

I didn't knew that Android had ads.

 

[roadbloc]

Wearables is not only smart watches. A Fitbit Flex is a wearable, a Nike Fuel band is a wearable

I guess I must have imagined typing this part...

You may be right. But I have always seen the potential in mobile devices. I just don't see the potential in having an A8 processor and apps on my wrist watch. I already have a phone that does that stuff in my pocket. And it comes with a bigger screen. I just don't see point in smart watches and all this gimmicky wearable tech.

Oh wait... I didn't.

 

[winston1236]

Since it's Android, and Google is Android, will these wearables have ads in the apps? That would be a bummer as you want to quickly check your heart rate, but have to wait through an ad for healthy living or heart meds.

Despite the fact that I know you're trolling I would say no being that Android phones don't have ads.

----------

Wearables is not only smart watches. A Fitbit Flex is a wearable, a Nike Fuel band is a wearable

----------



I didn't knew that Android had ads.

It doesn't.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

I meant smartwatches more specifically, which is still a new market that not many people aren't jumping on board with right now. Similar to how there was a smartphone market in 2006 but it didn't explode until the iPhone was released.

But Blackberries (dubbed Crackberries b/c users were addicted to them) and Treos were required business equipment back in the mid '00s. They were quite prevalent everywhere adults were. What the iPhone did was bring kids and younger 20-something's into the market. Don't reinvent history. The smartphone market was quite sizable pre-iPhone.

 

[Solomani]

It's crazy to see so many brands put out products in a never before thought of market segment solely based on the rumor that Apple is planning on creating a product in that market...

Apple creates reality out of rumors.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Do they have potential? Yeah, they do. Plenty of, in fact. But it's going to be a little while yet before the tech gets to the point anyone can actualize it. For the next 5 years or so, they're all gonna be niche companion devices for your smartphone.

What's wrong with that? You could say the same of the original iPad & even the iPhone which had to be synced via a computer. Most consumer tech evolves slowly model year by model year, growing users along the way.

The question is will the first version be relevant to people's lives b/c it's the only way more self contained models can happen. I think it will IF Apple can channel Steve Jobs salesmanship. Otherwise people might just scratch there head like it was a Surface RT.

 

[Oletros]

Similar to how there was a smartphone market in 2006 but it didn't explode until the iPhone was released.

You have to look at the growth curves, it was already growing

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

I don't think that's the case at all. My opinion is that nothing has been released that is appealing, aesthetically or functionally. Look at smartphones. What kind of market did smartphones have before the iphone? What kind of market does the smartphone enjoy today? I'm not saying Apple is the one to innovate this round, maybe maybe not. But what's been released now has little mass appeal.

I think smartwatches are a VERY useful category functionally, although today's smartwatches are not great examples of that. But give people aesthetics, coolness, exclusivity and all of the sudden everyone wants one. Look at the iphone, what percentage of consumers use 100% of the iphones power and potential? What percentage even use half or 10% of the potential? I'll bet you could take the majority of smartphone owners and from a functional point of view replace their iphone with a regular phone and functionally they wouldn't know the difference.

I hope Apple breaks into this as they have with the smartphone and tablet. They seem to understand you can have all the functionality in the world but if the aesthetics are not there then only the hardcore minority will buy it. Google seems too driven at shoving internet searches down your throat, that's why Google Now will always suck as a personal assistant and I shudder to think what it will be like on a tiny smartwatch screen. Plus I don't think Google has that aesthetics smarts, their products are still clunky and cheapie IMO, but they seem more willing to release beta versions of their hardware and slowly perfect them which is fine by me. Still, I'm intrigued and definitely want to check it out.

The problem is that I don't think there's any killer app that can be made for a smart watch. Everyone wanted to access websites while on the go, and that's what was delivered with the iPhone.

Health related stuff? That might be interesting to some small portion of the population that is really concerned enough about their health to spend a few hundred on a smart watch.

 

[xoneo]

Yap, they have developed an API for wearables in less than a month

I'm just asking and never afraid of asking, though Google might have known and just waited for that to come or anything else...

 

[kdarling]

Sorry to break it to you, but here's Apple's patent from 2006 (before iphone) on their own head mounted apparatus -- however, google is obviously more vocal about their project.

http://pdfpiw.uspto.gov/.piw?Docid=...&SectionNum=&idkey=NONE&Input=View+first+page)

That's just a head mounted display, like some other patents Apple got back then. It's not a computer or anything like Google Glass.

As for watches, most people think that Google will use the Glass and Google Now paradigm of cards.

 

[spinedoc77]

The problem is that I don't think there's any killer app that can be made for a smart watch. Everyone wanted to access websites while on the go, and that's what was delivered with the iPhone.

Health related stuff? That might be interesting to some small portion of the population that is really concerned enough about their health to spend a few hundred on a smart watch.

I think the killer app is simply not having to take your phone out of your pocket. Although I think the health stuff is verging on being a killer app, I doubt its usefulness, still people love extra stuff like that and in the fitness industry the more money you spend the more you are supposed to be in shape.

But as phones get larger and larger you definitely cannot disregards the killer app nature of not having to take your phone out of your pocket. There are so many things we glance at our phones for, dozens of time each day or more.

 

[LagunaSol]

The Google fanatics here won't be satisfied until Google can collect, sort and analyze even their very thoughts. Anything for subsidized hardware. Wearables are a good first step, but what they really can't wait for are Google brain implants. And by gum they'll convince the rest of us too!

Sheep of the lowest order.

 

[thekev]

A companies market cap it what it is. Of course direct comparison is valid. It's just what company A is worth to the market vs what company B is worth at a single, same point in time. Pundits and analysts can argue all day long on what kind of multiple is reasonable, but that doesn't change the stock price one iota. But lets not kid ourselves here. Both Google and Apple are money printing machines.

But I fail to see how any of that is relevant to the topic of an Android wearable SDK..

One is trading at a much higher multiple, just as Apple was before. Admittedly I didn't track what google was back when Apple was around $700. Apple fans who wish to be investors can be a bit weird. They were all annoyed when it was down to the $300s. I don't see why they wouldn't have treated it as a buying opportunity, given that there was no potential for Apple to fall off the map.

If anything Apple is copying the idea from Nike who copied the idea from Fitbit. Tim Cook has said he wears a Fuelband and its what made him think about Apple getting into the wearable market. An Apple band will presumable be the most robust band ever, but it won't be the first and people are already enjoying them.

I wasn't aware of Fitbit. I figured they would have gotten the idea from Nike. As for wearables though, the other poster isn't very logical. A wearable wouldn't really displace other devices like a phone. It could be popular, but a presumably $200 watch wouldn't bring the kind of growth they saw with the iphone.

 

[brinary001]

I usually don't care for Anroid (I think it's nasty) but as a developer I'm curious for this SDK. I just wanna snoop around.

 

[mdelvecchio]

Except that Google has been in development of Google Glass before the iWatch was even rumored. So perhaps it is Apple following the leader again. The iWatch hasn't even been unveiled so how can Google be reacting to something that doesn't even exist and wasn't even rumored at the time they created their product? I'm sure the fanboys though will try to rewrite history again like usual.

i think youre confusing rumors with fact. the rumor of such an apple device is new. the fact of its development time is unknown to you.

apple playing follow the leader? hah. for that to be true thered have to be a *leader* to follow -- but there is none. in mobile computing all players follow apple's lead. google, samsung, etc.. iphone, ipad, and iOS lead. (notifications tray? whatever. the entire android OS is following the lead of iOS entry into the marketplace)

----------

What makes you think that other companies do it because Apple might do it too? There are so many products in this world that other companies sell and Apple does not. You probably think that other companies started producing MP3 players only because they knew that Apple would soon release iPod, right? Have you ever though that maybe it's Apple that copies other company products?

except that they dont. the iPod was not a *copy* of existing MP3 players at the time, of which i owned copies (such as the Rio and Nomad). it was a complete re-do of how they were designed. same w/ cell phones, same w/ tablets.

 

[SlCKB0Y]

Nope, pretty much fact. If you think Google Glass has any chance of seeing mass appeal, you're delirious. People are already rejecting it and it's not even out due to the fact that looking like an creepy idiot isn't really something people like to do.

People had a similar reaction when mobile phones first started gaining in popularity. My dad was actually screamed at by some woman for answering a call on a bus in the late 80's and called a yuppy scumbag etc.

Then in the late 90's people were outraged when phones started to get cameras because of course they would be used by perverts and weirdos in public toilets and change-rooms.

It's just the normal reaction from Luddites and like everything else, the population will get used to it.

 

[the8thark]

Apple dead last to the party as always

And always seem to walk away with the lion share of the profits.

 

[Michael Goff]

but the only one to get it perfect and sell billions of dollars worth.

Perfect?

Then they'll be able to sell the first version, with only some spec bumps, forever... right? I mean, they won't change the size, or the resolution of the screen or type of screen, or the shape, or where the speakers are located, or anything.

Version 1 will be perfect.

 

[luckydcxx]

Perfect?

Then they'll be able to sell the first version, with only some spec bumps, forever... right? I mean, they won't change the size, or the resolution of the screen or type of screen, or the shape, or where the speakers are located, or anything.

Version 1 will be perfect.

ok maybe perfect isn't the correct word. They will be the one's to actually make it mainstream.

 

[Michael Goff]

ok maybe perfect isn't the correct word. They will be the one's to actually make it mainstream.

I can agree to that, but the reasoning will only half have to do with how good the product is.

 

[Tech198]

You know why Google can do this and Apple can't ?

Because they have a product out, as promised

In fact they have the Gear 2........ while Apple is a sitting duck and not released anything yet. regardless of their so called Sapphire improvements...

Also, maybe the slower may win the race, and i guess people who rush out first with products may not be what they expect since usually its plastic, while Apple takes time to come out with something that's scratch resistant more etc... However, taking responsibility away from the user, i'd rather Apple releases a product first, and eliminate sapphire... Just go wit Gorilla glass, and say to people "Be more careful! !!"


I've never dropped any Apple devices, and all function perfect to this day, because "I Protect them" keeping them in cases, when *I'm not using them" not setting a phone on the edge of a sink filled with water in it, in the hope it would balance ok.. etc...

Personally, I think technology is taking over more than the freedom to use it, and interact...