Android Wear
-
Personally I’d only ever see myself using something like this during sports or some physical activities. I cycle quite a bit and in that situation it is awkward to whip out your phone while on the move; so I could see myself using it then. Besides that, in everyday life I don’t really like the idea of a watch like this. I can see the attraction of devices for glanceable information, but personally I don’t like to overcomplicate things; I want my watch simply to be a watch. Besides its pure function, aesthetically I find them unappealing too.
I don’t think it’s gimmicky to the extend of 3D TV/Movies - it does provide some benefit and seems to do what it does well - however I don’t see them being super popular either.
On another note, I find myself wanting to get away from technology. I don’t want to always be connected and be reachable at every moment; that’s why I want my watch - which I wear almost all the time - to function purely as a watch. Of course you could tell me to disable the network connectivity and use it just as a watch, but that’s besides the point. I also do not trust nor want Google to have any ability to physically access parts of my home; like in the wearable Android video where they women gets the device to open her garage. The next step for Google is to get into peoples’ homes, but no, gtfo, I don’t want you here.
-
@Schamper Did some transcribing work recently, helping fix problems with that voice recognition software. And goddamn, people talking over each other happens so much you wouldn’t believe. That or little kids shouting at the top of their lungs, blowing out my poor eardrums. :(
-
-
The next step for Google is to get into peoples’ homes
cough nest cough
For those of you complaining about the stigma of talking to your device, I think you’re missing the point entirely.
Yes, voice commands are a part of it (what other input method is going to work on a wearable?), but I would argue that it’s still auxiliary; the point is passive, contextually-aware information. Some of that is actionable, and the ability to act is provided, but again: not the central point.
Maybe public opinion will doom android wear to “a watch you can talk to”. I hope it doesn’t, though, because there are so many cooler things that this offers.
-
I can do all that with a quick glance at my phone. Most of the newer versions of android are capable of lock screen widgets so you don’t even need to unlock your phone to get your notifications.
-
@Scuzz Still missing the passive glancability. You still need to act to determine whether or not your notification is actionable.
What are the steps to check a text while you’re walking?
- Pull out phone
- Wake it up
- if you don’t have a lock screen notification, pull down the notification bar
Same thing with checking the weather or making sure your meeting is actually where you think it is. I don’t know about you guys but when people (including myself) do this there’s a much higher chance that they’re going to run into me or something else.
When you have it on your wrist (or on your face in the case of glass) it’s truly just a glance. Quickly glancing at your phone still requires you to go get your phone.
-
My hands are usually by my side when I’m walking about so they are in close proximity to my pockets. When i feel a message i pull my phone out press the button on the way up. The screen is usually on way before i even glance down at my phone. Then it goes back into my pocket. If I need to reply or do anything else, i stand to the side so people don’t walk into me and i don’t walk into them.
I can understand for quick glances but i personally don’t need to save about 2 seconds when checking a notification.
-
It’s those 2 seconds that take too long for me when checking the time though.
Looking at my wrist is just easier and quicker. -
@Scuzz - Yeah, I’m sure I’m in the minority of people here who think they would use it.
I’m also one of the few who think a macbook is worth the expense, but does that make it a gimmicky product? (I know this analogy is a bit of a stretch, but I’m more trying to point out the difference between “would I use it?” vs “will it catch on?”)
I really think that the general consumer will be sold on the idea once they get their hands on one. The bigger question IMO is whether companies will market it right to get people to try them.
-
The thing is @scuzz, its not about the two seconds. Whenever I am talking to someone I don’t like it when they pull out their phone, even for a quick glance, but when they look at their watch for a quick glance I feel nothing. I don’t know if I am just being a bitch, but I’d use any tech-watch if it allowed me to subtly check who sent me a message.
-
Until you realise they are actually reading their text messages and not checking the time. You’ll end up feeling the same way.
-
@Scuzz ignorance is bliss.
-
@Scuzz But would you read an entire text message on your watch? Personally I’d only check if I have a message, and read it after I’m done talking.
I suppose the idea would stay the same though.
-
Would this be the same OS that’s on glass or is that completely different?
I’m guessing they would all integrate with each other. I could see the touch screen on the watch being used to control menus and stuff on the glass. That would be pretty useful.
Does anyone actually have one yet or is it something you want. -
@Scuzz I don’t think anything actually uses Wear yet. I think the SDK and emulator are just out in beta to get developers a head start.
That said, it is android Wear and not android Watch, so I wouldn’t be surprised if Glass ended up with it soon. I would expect wear to have a LOT of different interaction types and each device would only expose those that it supports.
It’s definitely something I want. Although the price point is going to be a deterrent for a while (I bet the moto360 is going to cost the same or even more than a full phone)
