1. A Glass-like device (until it's replaced by proper AR overlays).
2. A large, flexible control surface on my forearm
3. A light, thin "phone" that is basically a physical high resolution screen and control surface for immersion interaction (until this is obviated by a proper AR overlay).
4. A battery and uplink device that I can just strap to by body or otherwise never interact with other than occasionally charging it.
Those new Pebble watches look really cheap and shitty to me. I actually prefer the first version because that was, in the terminology of Jony I've, true to itself.
I have an iPod nano, the version that could be worn as a watch. If that had pebble functionality, but I could still clip it somewhere rather than have it attached to my wrist, I'd buy it again.
It shouldn't be too hard to map pebble's buttons to Glass. The only thing stopping it at this point is a lack of broadcast intents / API between phones and Glass, and I'm sure that'll come. Hell, someone's probably mucking about in the myGlass source code right now, since it can already do this for things like screen sharing.
Oh a personal note, I'd usually rather control Glass from a smartwatch than either via voice or touching my head. The main menu commands need some work, and I'm not sure how they'll handle conflicts between different glassware ("ok glass, check in" could trigger literally dozens of potential apps).
I'm in the camp of a heads up display being superior to a "smart" watch.
One less step of moving your hand.
You're less likely to have your face get scraped or bumped than your wrist.
All that needs to happen is development.
I personally wear a watch everyday however because taking vitals from patients still requires you to count over 15 seconds, you need something that can survive a bunch of dog saliva or a puppy trying to chew your arm.
It would be cool to have a heads up display showing 15 second timer and possibly recording the vitals you take via voice.
Ideally glass would be something symmetrical (as in physically and also in hitting both eyes), compatible with various form factors esp for those who use corrective lenses, thought-reading for control, and sync completely with a phone device to nearly eliminate the need for a phone device with a display, other than for use without the glasses.
I would even suggest that any hi-def camera modules are removable so that they can be taken into camera-restricted areas.
And be like, $300.
Until then, the pebble and other smartwatches are a great, affordable, wearable technology with many benefits that cross with glass-like device. Though certainly not as fluid or neat as a HUD, it is less visually obtrusive to our current fashion norms, less conspicuously so that is, and still keeps the phones in the pockets.
In time when glass-like devices are more the norm (as it took time for Bluetooth headsets, or cell phones, or even wrist watches back in the day) I think we'll see social adoption and cost reductions and then the argument against a smart watch will be almost a beeper vs cellphone case. And indeed eventually still we will likely see phones themselves as a discrete omnibus device stuffed into something like glass before all of it being one with our very bodies.
Who the fuck even wears a watch these days? What use does a smart watch serve that another device does not already serve? Is it so hard to check your phone for the time?
Shit, the prices on those expensive watches bounce around a bit. You show an Omega Seamaster(2-4 grand), then a Rolex Submariner, which can drop 245 grand on before you even start getting fancy with it, and then a Brietling for Bently, which is about eight grand.
I just searched flickr for creative commons images that allow commercial use for those brand names and picked the best pictures. I don't wear watches so I don't know. In fact, I find most jewelry or other such wearables uncomfortable.
No, a real product is a real product. A design for a future product isn't a real product. Even a prototype for a future product isn't a real product.
In the video about the design, they never once mention the very real problem of the round display with touch screen. Everything they save is about the feel of the materials, not the fact that the only reason it looks good is due to the round shape. We are treated to shots of 3D printed designs and computer renderings. This is not a real product. Not even close.
Until I see a video of someone with one of these on their wrist, and interacting with it in a real way, I consider it no better than vaporware. So far we've had actors and renderings. I believe the software might exist, as Google is very good at software, but there is zero evidence of a shippable product.
Meanwhile "summer" is enough time for Apple to swoop in with their wearable device and make everyone not care about Motorola and LG. I'm not saying it will happen, but there's a reason Apple doesn't announce its new products 6 months in advance.
Remember that the biggest issues (in terms of usability, size, weight, and thus comfort) with wearables is the battery. I like my pebble because the battery lasts for a really long time (mostly due to the display), but it's still thicker than I think a mature smartwatch should be.
With the apple watch and other watches they keep showing all these interchangeable bands and fancy gold watch bands, but I'd just like a decent one with an extra battery or several small cells in the band. If it's something I'm supposed to wear and use all day, it should last that long. Hopefully at least 3rd party companies will make that so.
If it's something I'm supposed to wear and use all day, it should last that long. Hopefully at least 3rd party companies will make that so.
The problem with any device is that you shouldn't need a suite of 3rd party hardware companies for a product to work. Personally I don't have a problem with charging every 2 days, usually my phone and laptop last at least this long unless I'm playing games for hours.
No, a real product is a real product. A design for a future product isn't a real product. Even a prototype for a future product isn't a real product.
In the video about the design, they never once mention the very real problem of the round display with touch screen.
So it was a real product, kinda. My point about the round display was spot on though. How would they make a round screen with touch input? By making it not round:
Which led to the jokes about it being called the Moto 270, not the 360. Personally I don't think that's a big deal, but is was a bit of a switch to show perfectly round renderings and then real photos with a black section at the bottom.
Meanwhile "summer" is enough time for Apple to swoop in with their wearable device and make everyone not care about Motorola and LG. I'm not saying it will happen, but there's a reason Apple doesn't announce its new products 6 months in advance.
Turns out Apple did announce their watch 6 months (or more) in advance. However, it seems like most people are still in the sceptical stage of reaction to watches, and not in the pragmatic appreciation stage just yet.
The Moto 360's non round display was specific to that model, a few months after it's launch the LG G Watch R was released with a perfectly round screen, the downside was having a thicker bezel, it also had much better hardware.
It's the basic first to market strategy, build something half ass, yet flashy, get the advertising and rumours out and profit on being first with trivially better looks.
I just looked at that video again, and in the very final shot, the black bottom of the screen might actually be visible. In the split second before it turns away from the camera, and in the split second it turns back. But because the watch face shown is black, it's hard to tell.
I read the Jony Ive profile that came out a few days ago, and he talks about how they want the whole front to be black, and the black of the rectangle screen to be totally black, more black than the normal blacks of a screen. But then the genius move is to always have the background of the image on the screen black, or the edges of the screen black. So it always feels like there is just a shape that is visible against black, and the image shape is independent of the screen shape.
This would be a really good move for the Moto 360. If every watch face had a black circle or outline, as thick as that slice at the bottom, text and other designs could overlap the black in the main part, to make it seem as though they are overlapping the edge of the screen. But not at the bottom... and then it would be less noticeable than those mostly white faces.
But, of course, this kind of thinking is what sets Jony Ive aside from 99.99999% of other designers.
Comments
1. A Glass-like device (until it's replaced by proper AR overlays).
2. A large, flexible control surface on my forearm
3. A light, thin "phone" that is basically a physical high resolution screen and control surface for immersion interaction (until this is obviated by a proper AR overlay).
4. A battery and uplink device that I can just strap to by body or otherwise never interact with other than occasionally charging it.
I also won't need batteries because it will be powered by either Rage or my unbelievable coolness.
I have an iPod nano, the version that could be worn as a watch. If that had pebble functionality, but I could still clip it somewhere rather than have it attached to my wrist, I'd buy it again.
Relevant personal plug.
Oh a personal note, I'd usually rather control Glass from a smartwatch than either via voice or touching my head. The main menu commands need some work, and I'm not sure how they'll handle conflicts between different glassware ("ok glass, check in" could trigger literally dozens of potential apps).
One less step of moving your hand.
You're less likely to have your face get scraped or bumped than your wrist.
All that needs to happen is development.
I personally wear a watch everyday however because taking vitals from patients still requires you to count over 15 seconds, you need something that can survive a bunch of dog saliva or a puppy trying to chew your arm.
It would be cool to have a heads up display showing 15 second timer and possibly recording the vitals you take via voice.
I would even suggest that any hi-def camera modules are removable so that they can be taken into camera-restricted areas.
And be like, $300.
Until then, the pebble and other smartwatches are a great, affordable, wearable technology with many benefits that cross with glass-like device. Though certainly not as fluid or neat as a HUD, it is less visually obtrusive to our current fashion norms, less conspicuously so that is, and still keeps the phones in the pockets.
In time when glass-like devices are more the norm (as it took time for Bluetooth headsets, or cell phones, or even wrist watches back in the day) I think we'll see social adoption and cost reductions and then the argument against a smart watch will be almost a beeper vs cellphone case. And indeed eventually still we will likely see phones themselves as a discrete omnibus device stuffed into something like glass before all of it being one with our very bodies.
In the video about the design, they never once mention the very real problem of the round display with touch screen. Everything they save is about the feel of the materials, not the fact that the only reason it looks good is due to the round shape. We are treated to shots of 3D printed designs and computer renderings. This is not a real product. Not even close.
Until I see a video of someone with one of these on their wrist, and interacting with it in a real way, I consider it no better than vaporware. So far we've had actors and renderings. I believe the software might exist, as Google is very good at software, but there is zero evidence of a shippable product.
Meanwhile "summer" is enough time for Apple to swoop in with their wearable device and make everyone not care about Motorola and LG. I'm not saying it will happen, but there's a reason Apple doesn't announce its new products 6 months in advance.
Personally I don't have a problem with charging every 2 days, usually my phone and laptop last at least this long unless I'm playing games for hours.
Which led to the jokes about it being called the Moto 270, not the 360. Personally I don't think that's a big deal, but is was a bit of a switch to show perfectly round renderings and then real photos with a black section at the bottom. Turns out Apple did announce their watch 6 months (or more) in advance. However, it seems like most people are still in the sceptical stage of reaction to watches, and not in the pragmatic appreciation stage just yet.
It's the basic first to market strategy, build something half ass, yet flashy, get the advertising and rumours out and profit on being first with trivially better looks.
I read the Jony Ive profile that came out a few days ago, and he talks about how they want the whole front to be black, and the black of the rectangle screen to be totally black, more black than the normal blacks of a screen. But then the genius move is to always have the background of the image on the screen black, or the edges of the screen black. So it always feels like there is just a shape that is visible against black, and the image shape is independent of the screen shape.
This would be a really good move for the Moto 360. If every watch face had a black circle or outline, as thick as that slice at the bottom, text and other designs could overlap the black in the main part, to make it seem as though they are overlapping the edge of the screen. But not at the bottom... and then it would be less noticeable than those mostly white faces.
But, of course, this kind of thinking is what sets Jony Ive aside from 99.99999% of other designers.