Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Google's 'Pixel Watch' Planned for 2022 Launch to Compete With Apple Watch

subi257 said:
....because that ain't jewelry and never will be. a watch that will be jewelry and status i my eyes is in the Baume Mercier realm.
Click to expand...
So we can agree that people wear watches as jewelry.

I am thinking that if it's "jewelry" then it is not to compete with the AW. Besides, why would you want a device that is out of the apple ecosystem....If it's going to track all my exercise, other parameters, and not have them appear on my iPhone, then what's the point.
Click to expand...
I would argue that buying watches primarily based on functionality is a mistake for most people. Outside of special circumstances like a health condition that needs monitoring or training as a serious athlete where you actually need to know your heart rate and oxygen levels–people are kidding themselves if they think they need the features that smart watches have while they already carry around smart phones. I have to hand it to tech companies for convincing people that counting steps is a legitimate alternative to high intensity workouts. Silly from a health standpoint but brilliant marketing.
 
Even Big Brother from 1984 couldn't dream of a world where people buy spy devices with their own money willingly and install it on themselves.
 
Enlightened Doggo said:
You were implying that there's some kind of problem here, and clearly based on the number of round watches it's not.
Click to expand...

All of my real watches have lugs for attaching bands. There are standard widths for bands and changing out bands between watches is not an issue.
 
mikegoldnj said:
What are “dog ears?” Are you referring to lugs?
Click to expand...
The part of the watch case that accepts the pins to hold a traditional band on, might not be the correct technical term.

WJ011-tem5-3.jpg
 
iamgalt said:
I do like the round watch face more than square. I'd like to see Apple move in that direction. Obviously, there are complications that come with a round LED screen. But it'd still be nice to see.
Click to expand...

People need to get beyond that these are "watches". They are not. They are wrist worn computers. There's no arguing that round watches are better looking and round watch faces are perfect for a mechanical watch which the main function of which is to display the time on a dial. But when you have much, much more types of data to display... rectangles will win out every time.

A round smart watch is form over function. Period. (Like the "trash can" Mac Pro.)
 
I'm sure it will do very well especially as Apple seems to have taken the lazy approach with the Apple Watch since Series 4. If Google can release something that's 'different' it will sell well.
 
the future said:
The difference is that Google doesn‘t have an ads division, it is an ads division.
Click to expand...

It’s fun to exaggerate, isn’t it? A large part of their revenue definitely comes from ads but that doesn’t make them an ads-only company. But I guess you aren’t actually interested in the facts.
 
MrTangent said:
Think you meant to write “accuracy”, friend.
Click to expand...
The implied message is that Google copied Apple by going into the smartwatch business. All you have to do is look at the history of smartwatch and see who did what.

At one point in time, Google owned Motorola which had the Moto 360 even before Apple Watch. And Samsung was before Apple too. Here's Apple originality compared to Sony's smartwatch in 2012 three years before Apple Watch:

SmartWatch_MN2_auf_der_Internationalen_Funkausstellung_2012_in_Berlin_3_PD.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: miq
nylonsteel said:
all the expensive r&d work has been done by aapl
then it is easy for samsung and google to make their own watch
Click to expand...
It would have been easier to just say you don’t understand anything about how making a tech product works
 
KevinN206 said:
The implied message is that Google copied Apple by going into the smartwatch business. All you have to do is look at the history of smartwatch and see who did what.

At one point in time, Google owned Motorola which had the Moto 360 even before Apple Watch. And Samsung was before Apple too. Here's Apple originality compared to Sony's smartwatch in 2012 three years before Apple Watch:

SmartWatch_MN2_auf_der_Internationalen_Funkausstellung_2012_in_Berlin_3_PD.JPG
Click to expand...

Well, if we want to go all the way back, the iPod nano (released in 2010) could be worn on your wrist.

But this is also why I generally don’t really focus on who did something first, because a lot of smartwatch pioneers like Pebble and Fitbit don’t seem to have gotten anywhere with their ventures. Even android wear is hit and miss, with companies releasing a product, then neglecting it subsequently when it doesn’t sell as well as hoped.

Conversely, Apple has consistently iterated on the Apple Watch since its release in 2015, and the end result is a product I am willing to invest in for the long haul, knowing Apple’s track record for supporting their products.

This may explain why so many of my iphone-using friends also sport apple watches, but those using android phones are less likely to use wearables (or sport cheaper alternatives like Fitbit or Xiaomi). With Apple, you know what you are going to get, you know it’s going to be supported with software updates for the next 3-4 years, and you know everything’s going to work together because they are all from the same company.

It’s more a crap shoot on the android side. The question isn’t whether company X will release an android wear device. It should be how long said company will support said product and keep up the venture.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: mjs916 and tridley68
Good I love my series 7 but it does feel like there’s been a huge plateau in smart watch development. If another decent watch on the market will push them on for everyone that’s a good thing.
Still it’s unlikely I’m ever going to buy a google product myself.
 
Jason2000 said:
I hate when people complain that a new piece of tech isn't enough of an upgrade. Just because a new version comes out doesn't mean you have to get it. People...lol. I agree competition is good. This will not be much competition to the Apple Watch but at least the few Pixel users will have something to go along with their defective phones....lol.
Click to expand...
This was really harsh of you to post……


….But so true and completely accurate.😁

So many people think the Apple Watch should be so far more advanced than it really is. Apple has always been very conservative with what they introduce with what changes every year, it’s matured slowly, but I would rather have a smart watch device that doesn’t need to have ‘groundbreaking’ features every year just to appreciate how well it executes what it currently does. Plus, the critics on sites like this, they’re not the ‘norm’ of the average consumer, they think Apple should be leaps and bounds ahead of where the Apple Watch is, but they don’t understand the maturation of technology and how it evolves, or what goes behind the scenes with R&D.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mjs916
boss.king said:
I'm surprised by the negative sentiment here. More competition is good. With all the complaints this year of how the Series 7 wasn't a big enough upgrade, you'd think people would want someone else competing in the smartwatch space.
Click to expand...

I think the people saying this are not wrong, but they are also completely missing the point. Apple is not expecting its users to run out and upgrade their watch every year, which is why this year’s Apple Watch 7 wasn’t never going to be so significant an improvement over the previous iteration. It’s likely going to be the case for next year’s series 8, or the one after next.

You have to consider the target audience for the series 7, which are like those still on the series 4 or earlier, as well as people who are still not wearing one. The upgrade cycle for the Apple Watch is likely every 3-4 years, and so it makes sense for Apple to pace itself accordingly.

It’s simply not sustainable to expect Apple (or any other company) to cram so many improvements into each generation of Apple Watch. It’s wasteful, and not everyone is going to upgrade anyways.
 
  • Love
Reactions: mjs916
Abazigal said:
I think the people saying this are not wrong, but they are also completely missing the point. Apple is not expecting its users to run out and upgrade their watch every year, which is why this year’s Apple Watch 7 wasn’t never going to be so significant an improvement over the previous iteration. It’s likely going to be the case for next year’s series 8, or the one after next.

You have to consider the target audience for the series 7, which are like those still on the series 4 or earlier, as well as people who are still not wearing one. The upgrade cycle for the Apple Watch is likely every 3-4 years, and so it makes sense for Apple to pace itself accordingly.

It’s simply not sustainable to expect Apple (or any other company) to cram so many improvements into each generation of Apple Watch. It’s wasteful, and not everyone is going to upgrade anyways.
Click to expand...
I never said people need to upgrade their watch every year or that Apple needs to cram more improvements into a watch every year. There are other aspects to competition. Pricing, software, styling, etc are tall things that strong competition could improve without having to cram more sensors into a watch. I'm not one of the people who was whining that the S7 isn't a big enough upgrade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ackmondual
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back