Smartwatch Shipments Fall For the First Time; Apple Only Company In Top 5 To Decline (venturebeat.com) 129
Emil Protalinski, reporting for VentureBeat: The smartwatch market has hit its first bump, and it's all Apple's fault. Vendors shipped a total of 3.5 million smartphones worldwide last quarter. This Q2 2016 figure is down 32 percent from the 5.1 million units shipped in Q2 2016, marking the first decline on record. It's important to note that smartwatches are just a subcategory of the larger wearable market. As such, these figures don't count basic bands sold by companies like Fitbit. Apple is thus the undisputed leader, even after the losses it saw in Q2 2016, and it could easily see a return to growth with the release of Watch OS 2.0. Apple's market share decreased 25 percentage points (from 72 percent to 47 percent) and it shipped less than half the smartwatches (1.6 million). But the company still holds almost half the market, with every other vendor shipping fewer than a million units.
What is the appeal of these things? (Score:5, Insightful)
These always struck me as a fad waiting to die, but I'm not trying to be the usual Slashdot curmudgeon, so I'll ask: what are the killer features of a smart watch?
The best my buddy could come up with who bought an Android one was some mumbling about how its more socially acceptable to glance at texts on your wrist, than to take your phone out.
Re:What is the appeal of these things? (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem is that they designed the Apple Watch as a crippled device. They didn't want it to cannibalize iPhone sales, so it's basically a remote control for the phone in your pocket.
If they make a watch that can make calls, people will buy them. It could be the iPod Shuffle for the iPhone line. But they don't seem to understand this.
People don't want to carry an additional device to do things their existing device will already do. They want functions combined into a unity device, not more things to be strapped onto their bodies all day.
Re: (Score:2)
No they wont and in reality they dont. you have been able to buy GSM watch phones for over 5 years now all over ebay and other places from china makers. They just do not sell because they sound like shit and have battery times measured in minutes. I had one, the latest china iteration of one and it's battery life sucked, it's OS sucked, it's audio quality and call quality sucked. oh and you cant change the band as the antennas are in that.
smartwatch+phone+bt headset is my killer mix and it works fantast
Re: (Score:2)
I seem to recall one Douglas Adams mocking digital watches in 1980, it seems that the improvements in functionality have not really changed their appeal.
Unlimited battery life and a full medical diagnostic suite are the only things that might make them worth wearing.
Re:WOT is the appeal of these things? (Score:1)
Was I supposed to read that or make the Mexicans pay for it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
smartwatch+phone+bt headset is my killer mix and it works fantastically. glance at watch, press answer, talk to person on my headset. Best of all worlds.
Why do you need the watch? Sounds like you only need a headset with a button.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you need the watch? Sounds like you only need a headset with a button.
You need the watch to see who's calling.
Re: (Score:2)
or you get your phone out of your pocket...
Re: (Score:2)
No they wont and in reality they dont. you have been able to buy GSM watch phones for over 5 years now all over ebay and other places from china makers. They just do not sell because they sound like shit and have battery times measured in minutes. I had one, the latest china iteration of one and it's battery life sucked, it's OS sucked, it's audio quality and call quality sucked. oh and you cant change the band as the antennas are in that.
smartwatch+phone+bt headset is my killer mix and it works fantastically. glance at watch, press answer, talk to person on my headset. Best of all worlds.
That's 3 separate things you need to charge. Two of them daily. Technology serves me, not the other way around.
Resistence is futile (Score:2)
Anyone else worried this is how the Borg started?
People are tired of strapping on a watch, having pockets for a phone and requiring an audio receiver jammed in one's ear - all with abysmal battery life.
Wouldn't it be simpler if one had nano-implants powered by one's own metabolism, connected via 4G 24/7 to all your friends who could sense your thoughts, with a gigapixel video camera augmenting your eye socket?
Shove a cable into your belly button and you could directly charge all your USB devices via your ow
Re: (Score:2)
Or, maybe it's not feasible yet. One is lucky to get a couple days of battery life out of the current batch of smart watches, the ones that are just remote controls. Enabling GPS cuts this down to hours. Adding a full fledged cell service that would be on all the time just isn't feasible yet*.
*I think one of the Samsung watches can make/receive calls, no idea about its battery life, or overall usefulness of it.
Re:What is the appeal of these things? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is that they designed the Apple Watch as a crippled device. They didn't want it to cannibalize iPhone sales, so it's basically a remote control for the phone in your pocket. If they make a watch that can make calls, people will buy them. It could be the iPod Shuffle for the iPhone line. But they don't seem to understand this.
No, you don't understand physics.
How long do you think the battery-life of such a watch would be? Conversely, how THICK are you prepared for your watch to be, to fit in a cellphone-sized battery capacity? How large to be able to have a meaningful cell antenna system?
It has NOTHING to do with "cannibalizing" iPhone sales. They are just using the iPhone to do the "heavy lifting" of cell communications. Nothing else is practical in a watch, until some SERIOUS advances in battery technology happen. Yes, there have reportedly been "autonomous" smartwatches; but none of them seem to gain any traction, and most don't even seem to make it to being "real products", possibly because their relatively miniscule batteries give relatively miniscule running-times.
So, here is a review [tomsguide.com] of one of the most "promising" of the "autonomous" (which is actually only semi-autonomous at best) Smartwatches. Not only is it over a half-inch thick ("like strapping on an ankle monitor") and HEAV-Y (THREE times as heavy as the Apple Watch!), and not only is it too dim to be seen in sunlight and too quiet to be used on the street as a phone, and not only is it buggy as all get-out, and not only is it only semi-autonomous at best; but for all this, the battery life is abysmal.
So, all-in-all, I would say that Apple is doing the best that can PRACTICALLY be done, given the laws of physics.
Re:What is the appeal of these things? (Score:5, Insightful)
The primary buyers of expensive watches today (that apple and others tried to lure with "classy" designs) will be first caught dead than using a quartz watch, so it is pretty useless to try to sell them smartwatches.
So close :-) It's not just about quartz vs mechanical. There's a large difference between watches.
Tier-1, there's the functional ($20-$40 casio) which is accurate and will probably last longer than you will live. I wear a $40 casio daily and haven't changed the battery in the last ten years or more. It's fallen into the pool, it's fallen from a moving car, it fell from the second floor of my house. All that resulted were scratches which I can live with. I use it while metal-working, brick-laying, and rebuilding the engine on my car, and despite all the knocks it gets, it still works. The tier-1 watches can be sponges for punishment!
Tier-2, the slightly pricier ($50-$200) fashion watches, made by Guess, Police, Fossil, etc. They are fashion items, same as handbags, hats, etc. I've got a few of these as gifts (Hugo Boss, Armani, Guess), although I don't buy these for myself.
Tier-3, Pricier watches made by watch companies like Seiko, Tissot, Citizen, etc, and not made by fashion companies like Tier-2. I've got a pricier Tissot. These watches can be quiet rugged and should also last a lifetime, regardless of quartz vs mechanical movement. They can come with functional complications, like tachymetre, diving bezel, etc. They cost anywhere from $600 dollars up to around $2000.
Tier-4, Even pricier watches by watch companies, for example Longines (+$2000). These are meant to be heirlooms. They can get quite pricey, such as with Rolexes, Breitlings and similar. A Rolex submariner used to sell for +$10k. A Patek Philip sells for +$30k.
In all of these tiers there are certain requirements of the watch (other than keeping time). For example, regardless of whether the movement is quartz or not (I've got a very expensive Longines that has a quartz movement), at tier-3 and tier-4 the watch is intended to have value even 20 years later, closer to 50 or more for tier-4. For tier-1 the watch has to be durable and cheap.
Which only leaves tier-2 - the fashion accessory watches; these top out at around $200 and are treated as fashion accessories (i.e. they won't be passed down!). They have a useful life (as an accessory) of only a few years; some models are out of fashion even before the battery dies!
Apple was, whether they knew it or not, selling in tier-2, but attempting to get tier-3 prices. A smartwatch is a fashion item that will be superceded in about the same time as a smartphone (maybe three years?).
The type of person to drop $500 on a watch is going to get one that isn't mostly obsolete in three years, they'll buy a Seiko, Victorinox or similar. Watches are jewelry, not electronics, and people expect jewelry to have lasting value and not novelty value. The smartwatch is electronics, not jewelry, so traditional watch enthusiasts won't be all that interested in it simply because it has no lasting value.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is that "the best that can be practically done" today is rather underwhelming to the über geek crowd
Tough shit.
Maybe some of THEM can stop playing Pokemon Go long enough to figure out how to stuff 3000 mAh of battery capacity into a quarter-inch thick by 46mm dia. battery. Because that's EXACTLY what it's gonna take.
Re: (Score:2)
My old MotoACTV was pretty functional.
It had on board GPS, WiFi, BlueTooth 4.0, and ANT+.
This allowed you to use it as a fitness device and leave your phone at home. It could track a run via GPS, while having a heart rate monitor connected via ANT+ (it also supports footpods, and bike modules). You could have a pair of Bluetooth or wired earbuds connected and listen to locally stored music or Podcasts/Audio Books. And when you get home it automatically uploaded the run to your online profile.
When connect
Re: (Score:2)
My old MotoACTV was pretty functional.
It had on board GPS, WiFi, BlueTooth 4.0, and ANT+.
What it didn't do was replacing a phone - which is what the thread was about. But thanks for trying to change the topic.
Re: (Score:2)
The thread is about how some smartwatches are nothing but a remote for a phone. It was asked about just how functional a smartwatch that wasn't connected to a phone was.
Other than not making calls which I don't want. It was extremely functional.
Re: (Score:1)
It's just further proof of the old saying, "A fool and his money are soon parted".
some mumbling about how its more socially acceptable to glance at texts on your wrist, than to take your phone out.
Here's a radical idea. If you're in a situation where it might be rude to take out your phone to look at texts, DON'T FUCKING DO IT. Seriously. Just turn your phone off and stop being an asshole.
Sorry doctor, your patient died because you didn't react to the message we sent you. But on the up side, at least one Anonymous Coward doesn't believe your an asshole. At least not for the reason of looking at your phone.
Re: What is the appeal of these things? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Also more convenient than taking your phone out, especially when doing other things. If you've got home automation products, you can use them when you leave your phone in another room. It also fills the role of a fitness tracker. Just like the first good smartphones replaced the MP3 player most of us carried, the smartwatch combines functions of other devices and puts them in one spot.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
My phone combines other devices and puts them in one spot- with a screen big enough to use and small enough to put in my pocket. Putting it on my wrist adds 0 functionality, increases the likelihood it will break, is uncomfortable, and makes it much harder to write a decent UI for. The first thing I did when I realized my first cell phone told the time was throw out my watch.
Re: (Score:2)
You missed the point. For most people's its not about adding functionality, it's about adding convenience. Doing the same things you could do with a phone, but with less bother. If you receive a lot of phone calls, most of which you ignore, or if (like me) you tend to put a lot of notifications in your calendar, a smartwatch adds a considerable level of convenience, although obviously you *could* haul your phone out of your pocket a dozen times a day, look at it then put it back. If you have to check
Re: (Score:2)
Putting it on my wrist doesn't add convenience, it detracts from it- you're forcing me to use a tiny display with unusably small text. Taking my phone out of my pocket takes 0 effort. It provides literally a negative benefit and makes the experience worse. That's why sales are plummeting.
ANd no, I don't think a watch is more convenient even for telling time. I'd rather have a compact device in my pocket and not have to remember putting on a watch, or deal with the discomfort of wearing one. A phone be
Re: (Score:2)
I think you think the text is too small because you haven't actually used one. I have, and I'm almost 60 years old and need bifocals. I generally can't read ingredients on food or vitamin packages without glasses, but I have no difficulty whatsoever with reading calendar notifications or caller ID on a smartwatch without glasses. Would I want to read a book or webpage on one? Nope. But for notifications the text size is plenty big for me, and I have weaker-than-average eyesight.
Likewise it's not particu
Re: (Score:3)
I'd like to know the answer as well; short of the "neat" factor, what's the appeal of having a "smart" device on your wrist with a tiny screen that you have to worry about keeping charged?
Re: (Score:3)
I said the same thing of smart phones when they first came out. Why would anyone want a small phone screen when they can have a large monitor or laptop? I was wrong.
I love my smart watch. I am one generation behind because that makes it in my price range.
Reasons I like it:
* Being able to read and respond to texts discreetly
* People able to see who is calling by simply looking at my watch
* Fitness tracker (I know it's not exact but it still helps me set goals to beat)
* Helps me keep track of my phone (it
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing that interests me is the fitness tracker, and I'm not willing to spend more than 50 bucks to get something like that.
I'm probably the outlier. I have been in the past, although notably, not with smart phones. I recall disappointment with RIM, then with Apple, at the offerings. It wasn't until android phones actually started providing cost effective phones that I bought into them.
But I remember everyone getting excited about itanium and thinking, "This is shit. Why is everyone worked up ab
Re: (Score:2)
Voice control ... What is 12 lbs in ounces?
Yeah, I agree with you that would be handy. In about twenty years, when they get voice recognition to work well enough. I asked my phone the above question just now, and it turned that into "when is profound's announcements?" Currently I have to speak slower, louder, and with more effort than it takes to type.
Re: (Score:2)
Smart watches are trying to evolve to be everything a phone is, instead of a simple device to get simple stuff done.
Actually, I think Apple has a pretty good handle on what can, and can't be done PRACTICALLY on a smartwatch, and is attempting to live within, instead of trying to ignore, the laws of physics.
Re: (Score:2)
as always - things that HAVE NOT EVER been a problem.
Sure, but much of what I use the internet for doesn't "solve a problem," it's just convenience. When I wanted to look up a word, I used to grab a dictionary, instead of googling. When I wanted to learn about some event in history or similar, I'd grab the encyclopedia, instead of wikipedia. Once laptops became commonplace, it was about the same speed to look it up on the net (assuming I had to wake up the laptop first); now that smartphones are ubiquitous, it's decidedly faster to just whip out your phone.
Re: (Score:2)
> Internet for doesn't "solve a problem," it's just convenience. When I wanted to look up a word, I used to grab a dictionary, instead of googling.
Uh, that's a bad example.
Your definition of "problem" is flawed.
The problem is that I want to look something up that I don't know -- I may not even have access to the book(s).
The solution is that the internet has become a repository of shared knowledge.
i.e.
Problem: Look up a definition for a (slang) word that may or may not exist in the dead tree version.
Solut
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I think that they're a fad in the same way that 1990s smartphones were a fad: the technology to build good ones doesn't exist yet. A watch needs to have a battery that lasts long enough that I never accidentally forget to charge it and end up with it not working (my current one is on its second battery and the first one lasted about 5 years) and be light enough that I don't notice that I'm wearing it. I have both of those from a Skagen watch, but if I could keep those requirements then I'd find it very us
Re: (Score:1)
According to Apple's WWDC keynote, if you're in a wheelchair, a watch is far easier to access than a smart phone. That's apparently their biggest market: people in wheelchairs.
Please tell me you really aren't THAT stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you watch the keynote? The bulk of the watchOS 3 enhancements are related to improving the wheelchair user's experience with the Watch.
You don't spend that much time advertising to such a niche target unless they're the only ones buying the Watch.
This much time?!? You sir are both a liar and an idiot.
Yes, I did watch the Keynote [youtube.com]. I didn't think they spent that much time on the Handicapped application, so I went back and looked. In fact, the WatchOS "demo" started at 8:27 and ended at 27:37. The Handicapped part started at 21:47 and ended at 23:42. So, out of TWENTY minutes of WatchOS demo, the handicapped portion was a "whopping" TWO minutes.
So, you are obviously full of shit. And a liar. Period.
Re: (Score:2)
These always struck me as a fad waiting to die, but I'm not trying to be the usual Slashdot curmudgeon, so I'll ask: what are the killer features of a smart watch?
According to Apple's WWDC keynote, if you're in a wheelchair, a watch is far easier to access than a smart phone. That's apparently their biggest market: people in wheelchairs.
Well, there are more people in wheelchairs than people on Slashdot. And there are more people not in a wheelchair who own an Apple Watch than Apple Watch owners in a wheelchair. IOW, who cares what you think your point is.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a Moto360. For me, in addition to showing the time and date, it acts as a fitness tracker, a voice control for my phone, and a great way to look at the weather when my phone is in my pack when I'm biking (a realtime weather map is useful when biking home).
Indoors, it is a stylish timepiece, no different than any other watch. It does have the added advantage of allowing me to peek at incoming messages when I'm not in a situation where I can break out my phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People regularly spend much more on traditional watches.
Traditional watches in that price range (Victorinox, for example) will still be desirable to own and wear 25 years after purchase.
Re: (Score:2)
Good points, but $299 or $399 or $499 for those as features?
For less than $1 a day (considering using the watch for two years, for many it will be even longer), absolutely - not to mention less substantial but still useful benefit from other watch applications.
or, better yet, untether myself from my phone
That's a large benefit of having a smartwatch is I no longer car if my phone is on my person at home. I know you kind of meant the opposite but in essence the lack of physical presence is just as nice eit
Re: (Score:2)
Good points, but $299 or $399 or $499 for those as features? I'd rather either be rude and watch my phone or, better yet, untether myself from my phone and listen to someone's conversation without requiring instantaneous updates from social media rather than shell out that kind of cash for that.
That's why you get the previous generation
https://www.amazon.com/Motorol... [amazon.com]
Moto 360 watches ranging from 79 - 179.
Re: (Score:2)
If you would have read what I said -- I didn't mention checking on SM on it... I don't do that either.
When I bought it, on sale, about 18 months ago, I spent $160 for it. I think brand new, no discounts, the Moto360's went for $250 for the base model, and if you wanted the steel band, they were $300.
I would spend $500 for it? No. It really is mostly a toy. People spend a lot more on less useful things that get less use and are out of date just as quick (like video cards, high-end cell phones, dirt bikes
Re: (Score:3)
The best my buddy could come up with who bought an Android one was some mumbling about how its more socially acceptable to glance at texts on your wrist, than to take your phone out.
If somoene want to be more 'socially acceptable' then how about not reading texts at all in social situations, how about people, I dunno, pay attention to the people they're with, rather than retreating into their smartphones like some 12-year old who is bored with the adults' after-dinner conversation?
Re: (Score:2)
If somoene want to be more 'socially acceptable' then how about not reading texts at all in social situations, how about people, I dunno, pay attention to the people they're with, rather than retreating into their smartphones like some 12-year old who is bored with the adults' after-dinner conversation?
I can tell you've never worked in a position that required being on call.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> what are the killer features of a smart watch?
For me, fitness training. It tracks distance, heart rate, and calculates calories burned based on the workout, heartrate, age, and weight. I previously tried a vivofit but it sucked. It tracked only steps throughout the day, and was highly inaccurate.
I also use my smartwatch for sleep tracking, because I tend to be a night owl and am trying to correct that. The vivofit did track sleep very well but my primary goal is tracking fitness and for that the vivo
Re: (Score:2)
Reasons I've *thought* about getting an Apple Watch but haven't yet:
* No camera. There are places where it's not acceptable to wave a camera around, but where the watch notification would be enough to tell you whether you need to step outside to follow up or not. Also convenient for ... wait for it... checking the time without having to pull out your camera. (Crazy talk, I know)
* "Buzz" differentiation: My phone vibrates in my pocket. Was that a "cliuck ehre for freez viagrass!!" email, or something I
Re: (Score:2)
These always struck me as a fad waiting to die, but I'm not trying to be the usual Slashdot curmudgeon, so I'll ask: what are the killer features of a smart watch?
The best my buddy could come up with who bought an Android one was some mumbling about how its more socially acceptable to glance at texts on your wrist, than to take your phone out.
Killer features would differ from people to people, but this is what I'd love to see assuming the technology were to exist at an affordable price (affordable price, subjective, I know):
e-mail/sms/jabber/slack/infrastructure-devops notifications (be them sound or vibration) - if I need to reply I pull my phone or go to a computer, but at least I'd like to be notified without me having to pull my phone to read (yes, affordable laziness is bliss.)
fitbit-like capabilities to monitor my physical activity an
Re: (Score:1)
I'll give one management schmuck's experience with my apple watch.
I got it about a year ago as a toy. Expecting nothing. However, somewhere around 4ish months ago when I went on a trip to south america without it, how much I missed it. And realized that dumb watches were just... dumb. For me.
Again, I'm a people leader in IT. My day is meetings, email, and texts. For that, having a glance and quick canned reply to texts and emails while I'm sitting in meetngs with VPs is a lot less disruptive than pulling ou
Re: (Score:2)
I've got a Pebble Time Steel and the killer app for me is Music Boss. It lets me control my music player from my wrist instead of having to pull a phone from my pocket and key in the password every time I want to change tracks. Album art and track info is displayed on the watch face. Very handy when commuting on a crowded train.
I have also found the sleep and step tracking more useful than I would have imagined. The tracking may not be entirely accurate, but seeing the trends has motivated me to change
Re: (Score:2)
Easy, you don't need to use two hands to see your texts or make phone calls.
In certain markets, bigger is better, so people are buying gigantic phones that are impossi
Re: (Score:2)
These always struck me as a fad waiting to die, but I'm not trying to be the usual Slashdot curmudgeon, so I'll ask: what are the killer features of a smart watch?
I mean, there aren't any. And that's OK. There aren't any killer features to tablets either, but we have them too. They are marginally useful, and I have one. If I lost it I would probably replace it eventually, but it's not like I have a backup like I do my smartphone...
For what it's worth, it is marginally useful to me:
1. When the phone rings, it buzzes on my wrist, which is far more reliable to notice than a vibrate / ring happening in my pocket while walking. I'm more likely to notice / catch the call w
Re: (Score:1)
It may seem like a useless luxury but on busy 15+ hours work days where I have to use walkie-talkie and receive emails, sms, and calls practically every 4-5 minutes while trying to decrypt people's complaints in the walkie, it does make my job slightly easier.
I understand that few people have a need for it. It's basically just a 'phone notifications on your wrist' device.
Re: (Score:2)
I like my Apple Watch (the Sport - read "inexpensive" - model). I like having notifications on my wrist, because it's a lot less disruptive to make a quick glance at my arm than to pull out my phone. Don't underestimate the convenience of seeing your next scheduled appointment at a glance! I also really enjoy the activity tracking. I used to have a Jawbone UP but I had to send it back several times for repairs; it wasn't up to the rigors of my Desktop Warrior lifestyle. My watch (plus a couple of third-part
Re: (Score:1)
For me: looking at the wrist is easier than taking out the phone. I can easily tell if a notification is important enough for me to take out the phone or not, saving me a step. Secondary function is to monitor heart rate/calorie consumption, which may not matter to the average /. user who sits in front of a computer all day. I'll easily pay $100 for a device that does this.
Re: (Score:2)
Not just socially acceptable, but easier to actually multitask. Also more readily accessible, and often better single-armed use.
For me, killer app is airline boarding passes. Going through security, my phone can be packed away already, and the watch goes through the metal detector. Payments are great too, often being faster than chip-and-pin. Fitness apps are nice too, along with stock ticker and temperature on watch face.
It is an expense most people can easily do without, but I love mine and look forward
Re: (Score:2)
There is always one of these posts for every story about wearables. I put money down for an original Pebble on Kickstarter (that I still wear) because I commuted by train from an outdoor stop. The trains are sometimes delayed, and I want to see their status (which I scraped at the time from a public API) in the winter without taking my gloves off to dig around in my pocket for my phone.
I have a hackable wrist computer I bought for a hundred bucks. It doesn't have a lot of screen, CPU, or memory, but I can d
Re: (Score:2)
I'll at least chime in with the things I do on my Apple Watch. I've had it since launch (so about 1.5 years) and I've worn it every day. Here are the things I use it for in decreasing order with the number times I use it for that activity daily:
1. Time (might be obvious, but I didn't wear a watch before this... so I really didn't know if I cared to have the time on my wrist. Turns out it's crazy convenient!)
2. Weather. I have the current temperature, the forecast for the next 6 hours and a notificatio
Re: (Score:2)
These always struck me as a fad waiting to die
They will be fine and I will have one when they are an order of magnitude more power efficient, are one quarter the volume, and have batteries with twice the power density.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It was a correct copy/paste. That sentence is as-is in TFA. So, he didn't fuck it up, he just didn't fix the typo from TFA.
Well, if the summary is to believed, the submitter linked to his own fuckingly bad report at venturetards.
Ah yes the old "shipped" vs "sold" play (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Pretty much. The local walmart(Ontario, Cdn) here has an Apple Store section with all their junk. In the year that it's been available they've sold 1 apple watch. The store management and area management can't even see a reason to have more then 2 in stock and took a different approach. If the product isn't available in store, they'll have it next day with a 13% discount(basically knocking the tax off).
Pebble? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm surprised Pebble is not on the list. Maybe its because they sell most of their watches direct from their website and through KickStarter which isn't covered by this report.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
it's because pebble's numbers decimate all the others combined.
Re: (Score:2)
Both my pebbles were purchased off the shelf at BestBuy (because BestBuy ran them on sale way cheaper than you could get them direct).
James
Re: (Score:2)
and they have no idea how to fix it.
How do you "fix" a stupid product that serves no purpose and has no reason to exist?
Well that was quick (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's even more basic than that: these reports base on the idea that all products are constantly bought, and ignore durable goods. So a new product comes out, everyone in the freaking world buys one, and then everyone has one; because the product doesn't wear out in a year, 10% as many people buy them next year, and suddenly you have headlines about how it's a dead product nobody buys anymore.
This happens with things like smart phones as the market matures. Across 10 years we went from 516MHz 256MB RAM
What? No pebble? (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the biggest sellers of smart watches is Pebble and they aren't there?
If they're in decline, it's only because the Pebble 2 is going to get released soon and everybody is waiting for it.....
Re: (Score:2)
If they're in decline, it's only because the Pebble 2 is going to get released soon and everybody is waiting for it.....
Which is also likely why the Apple Watch is in decline...september is coming.
Re: (Score:1)
If they're in decline, it's only because the Pebble 2 is going to get released soon and everybody is waiting for it.....
Which is also likely why the Apple Watch is in decline...september is coming.
Exactly.
Re: (Score:2)
From looking at people's wrists, the Apple Watch is the most common device I see in Toronto.
Not particularly fashionable (Score:1)
I had an opportunity to try a smart watch for a few weeks. It was nifty, but compared to some of my more antique time pieces from the 40s and 50s it couldn't hold a candle in terms of style.
I agree with the other guy, this is the end of the mobile OS bonanza. Smart watches won't be the next "new thing" no matter how much Sillycon Valley wants it to be.
Too much luxury (Score:2)
There are no low end devices, no $150 ones don't count. Where is the model that simply mirrors notifications, tells time, lasts at least 24 continuous hours, and will pass voice and audio for a call over BT for 50 bucks?
Oh, no one has made that yet. It seems this is another market where you can't buy a basic version. Cars cost what they do now because there is almost no basic one, and is also why I don't have any desire to own one currently.
Stop trying to make it more and more "useful" while driving the pri
Re: (Score:2)
"There are no low end devices, no $150 ones don't count."
The Pebble does count and is a fantastic smartwatch that is the most refined and the only one with a good battery life.
You should check out the oldest smartwatch maker and actually use their devices before you claim they dont count.
Re: (Score:2)
The original poster is asking for something low end, and doesn't consider $150 as low end. A pebble at $50 would be nice (and that's what I paid for one of mine on sale)
Re: (Score:2)
"You should check out the oldest smartwatch maker"
You mean the Palm-OS based Fossil [wikipedia.org] or the ones that appeared before?
Re: (Score:2)
I want the opposite - I have a Samsung Gear S2 Classic and am thinking about either buying the 3G version of it, or the nextgen version of it (I wish they would include a speaker as well as mic on the non-3G version). I want the built-in speaker and cell connection and added functionality. Its primary use for me is fitness tracking (I've owned a Vivofit and it sucked, and the Fitbit I tried was almost as inaccurate and limited) and I find it is very accurate in its tracking my workouts and steps throughout
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
At US$17,000 a clip, how many people did iApple think would buy one...?
BTW, been using OSx Yosemite. What a throwback to the stone age... KDE much nicer...
CAP === 'stubby'
WTF you smokin', Jackson? And can I have some?
From what I have seen, KDE is nothing more than a cheap Windows UI clone [kde.org], down to the Start Menu and Taskbar. How in the HELL can that be better than OS X? Its tools to manage multiple windows and multiple "desktops" (Spaces) are second-to-none.
Every UI has its good points and its annoying points. But KDE is simply just derivative.
orly? (Score:1)
/youdon'tsay.jpg
Smartwatches: the most useless product yet to be bouyed into semi-relevance by the Apple Hype-train.
Innovate (Score:2)
They need to figure out how to make a smartwatch that is whole-room charging or automatic. That is, you never have to plug it in.
My biggest issue with smartwatches is having to charge them. They need to figure out how to make it charge while you are wearing it in the car or sitting in a cafe.
Headline draws the wrong conclusion (Score:2)
iWatch sales are slowing, other smart watch sales are growing. So this means that people realized the Apple product sucks as badly as most Apple products. But that people like the other smart watches as their volumes are still growing. So instead of yet another "smartwatch market is doomed" article, it should be "apple watch sucks, smart watch sales from other manufacturers continue to grow" unfortunately as so many stupid reporters try to link the 2 together, the horrible apple watch experience is being us
Smile (Score:2)
Still waiting for a better smartwatch! (Score:2)
I don't want it to be tied to a smartphone and have short :P
battery lives. I will stick with my old school Casio Data Bank watches.