Samsung to Add iOS Support to Gear S2 Smart Watch Later This Year

[igorsky]

Why? I quit wearing my Apple Watch after a month, and switched to Gear S2. It's much better overall than the Apple Watch.

Either you're trolling or have no idea what you're talking about. You can use a fraction of iOS features with any Android Wear device, so not sure what "much better" means to you.
[doublepost=1452097201][/doublepost]

I don't know, man. The Gear S2 does actually look like a watch. The Apple Watch doesn't. It's a square.

Seriously? All watches are round? How about you open up your browser of choice and search for images of "square watches".

 

[Aston441]

Isn't this the watch that most of the time doesn't need a phone at all, has its own SIM card, and connects to 3G networks? I know Samsung makes one, I just don't know if this is it. At the bottom of the Gear S2 Samsung official website, it says Networks "Wifi/3G" but no one really ever seems to comment on that.



Edit: I found it:

3G / 4G2 Network Connectivity3
Once paired with a compatible AndroidTM phone, 3G or 4G2 standalone capability3 lets you make calls directly from your wrist – even when your phone isn’t close at hand4 – thanks to a built-in speaker and microphone.

http://www.samsung.com/us/explore/gear-s2/

That's really a killer feature for me. Let's me leave the phone behind. If they make it work with iOS, I think I'll get one.

I have zero interest in a notification bobble on my wrist that is the Apple Watch.



Edit2:

I found that the 3G version of the Samsung Gear S2 is called the "Samsung Gear S2 3G" and costs $50 more. T-Mobile charges $5 a month to tack it onto your existing phone plan.

I would guess that when Apple finally adds GSM to their watch and makes it standalone, Verizon will only charge $100 extra a month to add the Apple Watch to your existing phone plan LOL!!!

 

[nymetsfan25]

Either you're trolling or have no idea what you're talking about. You can use a fraction of iOS features with any any Android Wear device, so not sure what "much better" means to you.
[doublepost=1452097201][/doublepost]

Guess he's not entitled to his opinion...

 

[igorsky]

Guess he's not entitled to his opinion...

Ok then let's just all post opinions just for the sake of it. Here's one...the Yankees are better than the Mets. I know that the Yankees didn't make the playoffs and the Mets went to the World Series but, hey, I'm entitled to an opinion!

 

[Rogifan]

If Apple designed this watch, everybody would be praising the design.

Right because everybody here is always praising whatever Apple does.

 

[nymetsfan25]

Ok then let's just all post opinions just for the sake of it. Here's one...the Yankees are better than the Mets. I know that the Yankees didn't make the playoffs and the Mets went to the World Series but, hey, I'm entitled to an opinion!

You certainly are entitled to your opinion...there have been plenty of occasions where better teams didn't make the playoffs or won a World Series...so yes, perfectly valid opinion.

But, neither watch made the playoffs...so maybe they both suck?

 

[acidsoul]

Personally, I like the apple watch design, but this one also looks authentic and might consider it when I get my first smart watch.
It would be interesting if Apple could offer the watch in several shapes/designs.
They shifted to offering different screen sizes recently, I think it would be possible considering the limited real estate of a watch by offering a proper API.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

You know you raises an interesting question for me, especially following Apple leveraging their unique access to the OS with their latest opus, the external battery hunch-pack, over their competitors products, and charging a premium for it.

This restricted access to the OS to enhance its own products, reminds me of Microsoft bundling IE with Windows, giving it exclusive access and tighter integration with the OS, that competitors didn't have.

I have to wonder if this isn't going to become a problem for Apple sooner rather than later. Certainly they can't be accused of having a monopoly on the smartwatch market, but their domination of the mobile phone market is getting up there. And once they are shown monopolizing certain OS features to the exclusion of their competition on a dominant platform, it won't be hard to apply to other products where they are doing the same thing, even if not a monopoly.

When Microsoft was taken to court over Internet Explorer, it had about 95% of the world's PC OS market share, and used that position to strong-arm PC manufacturers to accept IE as part of the Windows software bundle. The courts determined that web browsers were independent products, not an integral component of the operating system, so Microsoft was using its dominance in one product to compete unfairly with another product.

Android (82.8% market share according to IDC), not iOS (13.9% share) is the mobile OS that holds the dominant position today. So, it's really hard to say that Apple is in the same position as Microsoft was (or still is, in regard to PC operating systems). There's no legal principal prohibiting Apple from doing what it does. Consumers know it's a closed system, and a very viable alternative exists. Competition is quite healthy, so "anti-competitive" doesn't enter the picture.

Apple sells an integrated product, little different than if they were a mechanical watchmaker that made every component of its product. The fact that some parts are hardware and some are software is besides the point. The fact that other products are built on the premise that an "off-the-shelf" OS can be used does not obligate Apple to follow that same approach. Apple is also under no obligation to sell its components to other manufacturers, or to make its components compatible with other manufacturers products.

What I find more interesting is Samsung's claim that their watch will bring Gear 2 to iOS. Just how will they accomplish that without Apple's cooperation? The only viable avenue would be an interface app, like the Watch app on iPhone. Do the iOS API and App Store rules allow for the kind of tight integration we see between Watch apps and iPhone apps? I'm not about to make predictions, but it sure seems like a significant challenge to do it well.

 

[Rigby]

Them plastic though

According to Engadget, the Notebook 9 is made of a Magnesium alloy.

 

[Keirasplace]

If Apple designed this watch, everybody would be praising the design.

It wouldn't make this POS, so this is a total non sequitur. Looks a turd.
[doublepost=1452102542][/doublepost]

...that would actually be a much nicer shape, ergonomically, for making phone calls. Nice to hold, puts the mouthpiece by your mouth, the earpiece by your ear, you can pick it up without accidentally pressing 6 touch-sensitive buttons and you could wedge it against your neck for 'hands free' use.

Of course, it wouldn't fit in your pocket so well - but if that wasn't an issue it would be a better design for a handset. Even in the 1960s they could have made it smaller (remember the Trimphone?) or put it in a box with rounded corners... but they didn't, because it was a good design for a (non-portable) phone handset.

Likewise, all watches could have been made square since forever (especially since the advent of digital) - and some are - but round ones have remained popular, maybe because its more comfortable to have a round watch on your wrist?

The circular clock face has been technically obsolete for decades but, guess what, its actually a bloody good way of representing the time, that lets you do simple time calculations (e.g. what time will it be in 20 minutes?) and approximate readings (its about quarter to) visually without resorting to mental arithmetic.

Is that why most bracelets have a big round crap on top, because it's "more comfortable"... They do not...
square, as long as you don't have sharp corners is a good as a round.

The main reason watches are mostly round is convention coming from pocket watch makers not wanting to retool when watches started to come into fashion post WWI. Square Watch were quite popular during the 1920s to early 30s.

Round watches were easier to manufacture (read cheaper) and more robust, that's why they caught on when watches really took off in a big ways post WWII. Big round watches used by aviators, the army, provided the template for watches in the post war era.

Before the war, watches were to expensive for most people.

Round is a good way to tell time, but a smart watch's main function is not to tell time; just like a smart phone's function these days is clearly not a phone.

 

[igorsky]

But, neither watch made the playoffs...so maybe they both suck?

I don't know what the sales figures for the Samsung watch are, but most estimates for the Apple Watch indicate around 10 million units sold, up to 15 million. One thing I've learned on MacRumors is that opinions often don't support reality.

 

[numlock]

I don't know what the sales figures for the Samsung watch are, but most estimates for the Apple Watch indicate around 10 million units sold, up to 15 million. One thing I've learned on MacRumors is that opinions often don't support reality.

whats that got to do with timborama liking the s2 more than the apple watch?

It wouldn't make this POS, so this is a total non sequitur. Looks a turd.

there are numerous apple designs that look worse and the apple watch is certainly not the greatest design apple ever made.

 

[igorsky]

whats that got to do with timborama liking the s2 more than the apple watch?

This wasn't in response to timborama so not sure what you're talking about.

 

[numlock]

This wasn't in response to timborama so not sure what you're talking about.

no this wasnt a direct reply to timborama. however it was a back and forth after nymetsfan25 picked up your reply to timborama.

did the baseball analogy take it so much off topic that you werent talking about the same thing anymore in post 111?

 

[kdarling]

I actually think the giant dial is rather unattractive and unnecessary. Imagine getting things stuck in that thing... I much prefer the small and elegant digital crown on the Apple Watch.

Uh...

"If the Digital Crown gets stuck or won’t move, it might be because of dirt or debris. If you find substances like dust or lotion around the Digital Crown, follow these steps to clean, and repeat as needed:" - Apple Support document for those with junk stuck in their Digital Crown

Watches traditionally have been stuck with the round shape, because they relied upon rotating parts, and could only really indicate time in a circular fashion.

Wait. You previously said that many watches with round faces had rectangular cases. So they weren't stuck with round shapes, after all.

The reason most (~90%) of traditional watches are round, is because it makes the best use of space for a round watch display.

The reason most smartwatches were rectangular until recently, is partly because that's the only kind of display they had available. Now makers can choose between square to optimize text, or round to optimize style and the display of round watchfaces.

but at least you can fill the area around the round watch face with complications on a square display

Those are the same complications that round displays put inside their round clock face. The difference is, the clockface itself is larger since it goes to the edges of a round display.

--

I think a lot of shape preference might be tied to whether a person likes analog or digital faces. (Many kids these days cannot read analog at all.)

Of course, available choice is a huge factor, too. If Apple sold both shapes, I'd bet round would sell like crazy (see reference to 90% round in regular watches above).

 

[theluggage]

A square will always show more area then a circle with in the same size.

...since when is a circle with diameter x "the same size" as a square with side x?

A circle with diameter x has largest dimension x. A square with side x has a largest dimension of x * 1.414 (root 2). That's not "the same size".

A circle will give the biggest area for a given perimeter & surface area (hence: less material, less weight, since a watch case is basically hollow). If you base your designs on a circular watch face, you'll "waste" the corners of a square.

Plus, if you're losing sleep over how much text you can cram on the face of a watch, you're designing it wrong. Watches are for at-a-glance info. For my money, being able to fit the biggest, boldest dial is more important than cramming loads of info.

 

[Alenore]

Lol, TAG has quite the amazing ecosystem that makes it worthwhile to go without some features, for all the convenience and cross compatibility, does it?
No? Then hardly a comparison.

I don't see how the ecosystem is relevant, here, as I simply stated that Apple tends to makes design come before functionnality. Slimmer iMac in exchange to upgradeability and ports, maybe-soon-to-be no headphone jack to make things slimmer, "stylish" Mac Pro instead of a computer that'll be upgradeable for professionnals needing a lot more horsepower in the future, etc.

Now if you wish to compete on the smartwatch functionnalities :
- TAG's watch is running on Android Wear, so also has an interesting ecosystem,
- TAG's is working on both iPhone and Android, unlike the Apple Watch,
- TAG's design is much more "common" which makes it fit in more than the Apple Watch (for me, it's quite an important point : i don't wish to stand out as the guy with the new shiny tech toy whenever i'm in a work environnement)

 

[gaximus]

...since when is a circle with diameter x "the same size" as a square with side x?

A circle with diameter x has largest dimension x. A square with side x has a largest dimension of x * 1.414 (root 2). That's not "the same size".

A circle will give the biggest area for a given perimeter & surface area (hence: less material, less weight, since a watch case is basically hollow). If you base your designs on a circular watch face, you'll "waste" the corners of a square.

Plus, if you're losing sleep over how much text you can cram on the face of a watch, you're designing it wrong. Watches are for at-a-glance info. For my money, being able to fit the biggest, boldest dial is more important than cramming loads of info.

I never said it was the same size, I specifically said it was bigger. A circle with a diameter 'x' will fit inside a square with sides 'x', proving that the square is bigger.

Yes an app can be optimized for a circle screen, optimized being a key word, but that means if I get a text with an image the image will have to be shank down so that the corners will be inside the circle, or the corners of the image will be cut off. This is why we don't have round monitors or phone screens. Yes, I agree that round watch displays looks nicer, but my argument that more information will fit on a square screen still holds true.

 

[manincognito]

The silly argument is saying that laptop or movie screens aren't round, so watches shouldn't be, because you ignore the value of round displays and their ability to provide information at a glance, in things like speedometers, tachometers, pressure gauges, and yes, clocks. You're not reading the NY Times or watching movies on your watch. You're getting the time, seeing steps toward a goal, or screening notifications. Only for notifications can you make an argument for a square face as something more immediately consumable.

If you are looking for "immediately consumable" as the main function of data then surely presented in a digital format is a far better solution then dials & hands? In which case no a round face wouldn't be any better then a square face and seeing as a smartwatch offers more then just basic functions nowadays I would say a square face is the better option for reading texts, emails, sports results etc...
[doublepost=1452112400][/doublepost]

If Apple designed this watch, everybody would be praising the design.

No they really wouldn't, some may yes but "everybody"?Good god no. This may be a website for Apple news but it doesn't stop some strange individuals spending too much time hating on anything apple related. If Apple do decide to go with a round display in the future the same individuals will hate on that as well, basically if the product isn't the same as what they've invested their 'hard' earned money on, then baffling to me they have to be on here criticising it...

 

[Rogifan]

Good grief these new Huawei watches are huge!

https://twitter.com/JoannaStern/status/684835710122119168

 

[kdarling]

If you are looking for "immediately consumable" as the main function of data then surely presented in a digital format is a far better solution then dials & hands?

They're not even close, for many of us.

Digital clocks only immediately show the exact time, but no other info. Trying to figure out a future time, or how long a period is, can take some time to calculate in your head with hours rolling over, etc.

Analog clocks immediately show the time, and you can also instantly see relationships of other times, past, future and the times between them. That's the great advantage of round analog clocks... you can glance down and estimate instantly how far away another time is, future or past.

I would say a square face is the better option for reading texts, emails, sports results etc...

Sure, so why aren't we all wearing that Samsung Gear watch with the huge screen? After all, then we could REALLY see a lot of text

It's because most of us use our smartwatches for quick notifications, not reading tons of text.

Real life comparisons of even text shows that many current round watches display just as much text as the Apple Watch with its enormous (hidden) bezels:

Good grief these new Huawei watches are huge!

It's cute, the way that you always search out pictures of Android watches on tiny wrists.

I would say something about it still being better than looking like someone strapped on a TV watch from the 1980s, but I'll refrain

 

[numlock]

Uh...

"If the Digital Crown gets stuck or won’t move, it might be because of dirt or debris. If you find substances like dust or lotion around the Digital Crown, follow these steps to clean, and repeat as needed:" - Apple Support document for those with junk stuck in their Digital Crown
.

reminds me of the joys of owning the past version of the apple mouse.

Good grief these new Huawei watches are huge!

https://twitter.com/JoannaStern/status/684835710122119168

it is and certainly dosent appeal to me. i wonder though if it will follow the current smart phone trend as in bigger = better.

 

[manincognito]

They're not even close, for many of us.

Digital clocks only immediately show the exact time, but no other info. Trying to figure out a future time, or how long a period is, can take some time to calculate in your head with hours rolling over, etc.

Analog clocks immediately show the time, and you can also instantly see relationships of other times, past, future and the times between them. That's the great advantage of round analog clocks... you can glance down and estimate instantly how far away another time is, future or past.

I have no figures to back this up but I imagine the majority of people checking the time just want to know the current time & not to estimate future or past time, whilst I don't doubt this happens I think it's just another small detail that people fixate on when in real world conditions, & for the majority of consumers who don't daily frequent a tech website, more basic functions are what they use their smartwatches for. Unfortunately on these sites people tend to believe companies should make the ideal product for them & them only regardless of cost & practicality & shove in all the latest tech regardless of whether it serves a real purpose whilst still demanding wonderful battery life in a small form factor...



Sure, so why aren't we all wearing that Samsung Gear watch with the huge screen? After all, then we could REALLY see a lot of text

View attachment 609174

Because it's a watch made by Samsung? Who also went with a rectangular face & who will probably do so again when they bash out yet another model in a couple of months time, throw enough **** & eventually something will stick hey...

It's because most of us use our smartwatches for quick notifications, not reading tons of text.

Real life comparisons of even text shows that many current round watches display just as much text as the Apple Watch with its enormous (hidden) bezels:

The Bezel is rather large I'll give you that but I imagine over time that will greatly reduce & you will be able to get more info on a square watch face (with less bezel) then on the equivalently sized round one.

View attachment 609175




It's cute, the way that you search out pictures of Android watches on tiny wrists.

I would say something about it still being better than looking like someone strapped on a TV watch from the 1980s, but I'll refrain

View attachment 609179

 

[KPOM]

At least they look like watches...

...and not cheap toys like the Watch

How so? My Hermès does not look like a toy. It's based off a quartz watch that is square. Or are you suggesting that Hermès mechanical watches look like toys?
[doublepost=1452125853][/doublepost]

At least they look like watches...

...and not cheap toys like the Watch

How so? My Hermès does not look like a toy. It's based off a quartz watch that is square. Or are you suggesting that Hermès mechanical watches look like toys?


Apparently this is what AustinIllini, Benjamin Frost, David UK awer25 and 2 others consider to be a toy, as opposed to a round Timex, which looks like a real watch. https://www.therealreal.com/product...=80280910020&gclid=CLrnkfy1lsoCFUiFfgodymMBBQ
[doublepost=1452126166][/doublepost]

Uh...

"If the Digital Crown gets stuck or won’t move, it might be because of dirt or debris. If you find substances like dust or lotion around the Digital Crown, follow these steps to clean, and repeat as needed:" - Apple Support document for those with junk stuck in their Digital Crown



Wait. You previously said that many watches with round faces had rectangular cases. So they weren't stuck with round shapes, after all.

The reason most (~90%) of traditional watches are round, is because it makes the best use of space for a round watch display.

The reason most smartwatches were rectangular until recently, is partly because that's the only kind of display they had available. Now makers can choose between square to optimize text, or round to optimize style and the display of round watchfaces.



Those are the same complications that round displays put inside their round clock face. The difference is, the clockface itself is larger since it goes to the edges of a round display.

--

I think a lot of shape preference might be tied to whether a person likes analog or digital faces. (Many kids these days cannot read analog at all.)

Of course, available choice is a huge factor, too. If Apple sold both shapes, I'd bet round would sell like crazy (see reference to 90% round in regular watches above).

I don't disagree that a round Apple Watch would sell, but I still think that the square design is better for its intended purpose. The 38mm design is perfect for me. A round design would be too big to provide the same information. The Hermès looks great in square, since that what Hermès Quartz watches look like.

Jony Ive is a watch guy. He has plenty of round watches in his stable. I'm sure he considered round designs. I think he wants the Apple Watch to pay homage to the watch without slavishly copying it. It's not as if our smartphones look like the landline phones of ages past, or have round dials like our old rotary phones.

 

[CarlJ]

The silly argument is saying that laptop or movie screens aren't round, so watches shouldn't be, because you ignore the value of round displays and their ability to provide information at a glance, in things like speedometers, tachometers, pressure gauges, and yes, clocks.

Speedometers, tachometers, and pressure gauges, like watches, have been round because the only implementation available of the underlying mechanism was based on necessarily circular components. its not like someone sat down and said, "what's the best way to display this information", they were going with what technology was available. So you're essentially arguing "this is the best way because it's the way we've always done it."

The horse is the best form of transport because that's how we've always done it. And one phone per house, wired to the wall, is the best way to communicate. And heating and powering everything by burning coal is the best way to get energy. Just because something was done the one way that was available at the time, doesn't mean that's the best way to do it. Maybe it is, by coincidence. But it does not automatically follow.
[doublepost=1452129656][/doublepost]

Wait. You previously said that many watches with round faces had rectangular cases. So they weren't stuck with round shapes, after all.

They were stuck with a round mechanism that they put into a square case for fashion purposes. I didn't this that was so hard to understand.