
Android coming to wearables - deepblueocean
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2014/03/sharing-whats-up-our-sleeve-android.html
======
kshatrea
I am in the position of being torn apart by two very strong feelings. One is
the world where information flow due to companies like Google does a real
service to humanity: for e.g. wearing devices that can keep us reminded of our
meds or monitor sugar levels, to talk just about the possibilities in
healthcare. Then I think of Edward Snowden and I now know that what Google
knows, maybe America/Russia/China/WhatHaveYou know. Although at this point I
am as normal a citizen as you can find, that can't be taken for granted
forever. For e.g. in my nation (India) being gay is illegal and so is
marijuana, and so is alcohol (in some states) and so is a lot of stuff. This
feeling makes me want to minimize my footprint.

Wish there was a way to combat either the wariness, or to exacerbate the joy.
For, I must be assimilated into the Borg, too. :)

EDIT: spellings

~~~
smokinjoe
More and more I'm thinking that some sort of Digital Bill of Rights is
necessary to carry on in this technological-based World. At first I always
thought of it as a nice thing, but perhaps a little too abstract or extreme to
really do what it needs to do. However now we have some very large and real
threats to our personal lives via this medium.

I just feel like it makes a lot of good sense to produce something of the
sort. I'm also naive enough to believe that it isn't too late to attempt to
establish such a document and have it not contain all sorts of loopholes that
would render it useless.

I can understand why the feds want to monitor the Internet and various
communications, however there needs to be that pushback, that line drawn where
we can hold their overreach accountable. It may not always work, but there
needs to be something that us ordinary citizens can lean back on for
protection.

~~~
CodeMage
Call me defeatist, but when I see an _existing_ Bill of Rights being violated
so frequently and carelessly, I don't think a _new_ Bill of Rights would be a
solution.

~~~
lugg
I find the existing bill of rights quite adequate. We don't really need
anything new, maybe an amendment here and there but in reality most of today's
issues are already covered, they're just being utterly violated and nobody
seems to realize as the ap has so eloquently demonstrated.

------
fab13n
We're in a situation comparable to smartphones pre-iPhone: we know there is
value in displaying stuff on your wrist, we know we need some way to send
information in response to those received from the screen, but all of this
doesn't click together. We have fragments of a solution, but we don't know
which problem it solves, and certainly not how to integrate it into a life-
enhancing experience.

Smartphone builders had similarly vague ideas about which problem they were
solving: they knew they needed to give access to some dumbed-down subset of
the web and of our computer data. They knew that mails were part of that
subset. Mail is easy, it's SMS with a different transport protocol, right? So
they were looking for a dumbed-down keyboard, dumbed-down mouse, dumbed-down
windows, scrollbars, etc.

The iPhone took a mile-high view of the problem. "Dumbed-down mice (stylus)
and keyboards suck. How do we make them superfluous? And how do we get
adequate access to non-dumbed-down Internet, too?"

Now with the watch. We have some vague fragments too. We know when we don't
want to take our phone out, so in each of those cases we plan to use the watch
as a dumbed-down phone screen. It's probably touch-sensitive, too (in a
dumbed-down way no doubt), and it lets you awkwardly have a subset of the
interactions you'd have had with your phone. So, I bet that watch is nothing
but a dumbed-down proxy of our phone.

I'm still waiting for someone, not unlikely Apple, to show me what I really
wanted from a smart watch, without realizing it. And if apple figured this out
as well as they figured out the smartphone, the Google-wearable guys will kick
themselves during the demo, the way the Android guys decomposed themselves
while Jobs was showing them what they should have done.

~~~
frio
Looking at all these things -- workmate has a Galaxy Gear, I've got a Pebble,
another friend has a Basis B1 -- they're all so tall and clunky. They're
uncomfortable and not particularly useful. The obvious answer, IMHO, is just a
phone on your arm. I'm looking forward to the device that stops trying to pack
things into a watch form-factor; that makes use of curved OLED displays, and
puts a longer, thinner device on my wrist.

That said -- I've sort of thought for a while that the display should actually
be decoupled from the device. I have a phone, a kindle, a smartwatch and a
laptop -- all of which have separate user accounts, need cloud syncing (blech)
and in general are a PITA to manage. I'd much prefer it if I had a computer on
my wrist, which could wirelessly connect to external displays (Miracast?), and
make use of them. So, my phone, kindle, laptop -- even a new tablet! -- are
all just differing views of the same actual computer.

~~~
sevia
I hope that the idea of separating I/O from computing gains traction in the
next few years. Dropbox, Google Docs/Drive, app stores, etc. all prove that
there's demand for true cloud computing at the hardware level (unlike the web-
based kludges currently offered).

I'm imagining a world where monitors, keyboards, touchscreens, etc. are all
just dumb devices with a network connection, interfacing with a nearby server,
which acts as a hypervisor platform for nearby peoples' operating systems
(which might 'follow' a person from home, to work, to the grocery store).
Brushing aside privacy issues, it _almost_ seems feasible - and infinitely
preferable to the fragmented mess we have now.

------
IgorPartola
The thing is, hardware is key here. The OS matters, and I would bet that
someone could do way better than running Linux in a watch (something much more
low-level on a much weaker processor could extend the battery life
significantly).

The hardware and sensors is the big problem. Currently, the best smartwatch
specs I have seen are the Basis B1. It claims it can monitor your heart rate,
track your sleep, etc. But that is all a lie. Sure, it can track your heart
rate at rest, but during intensive exercise there is no comparison with
something like a Polar chest strap. At the same time the claim that the B1 can
monitor your sleep phase based on your heart rate is a bit far fetched as
well. From what I've read the heart rate does not change by more than 1-2 bpm
between REM and deep sleep, which is within the margin of error of the
measurements, so the data out will be all wrong. As for the non-fitness
functions of a smart watch, I don't see a huge value in having my wrist buzz
every time a random ticket on GitHub gets updated or NewRelic sends me a
performance metrics summary. Even text messages are much easier to process on
the phone.

I want to believe in the smartwatch idea. I want it to be a gadget that
somehow improves my daily life. So far, aside from things like the Garmin
Forerunner, I haven't see anything that would remotely come close to improving
anything.

~~~
devcpp
I disagree, we already have watches with weak processors (e.g Pebble) but they
lack features. Android can bring those, and ARM processors are powerful
enough.

Indeed, the only difference between an Android watch and a full-size
smartphone would be the smaller casing. The largest component nowadays is the
battery, which can be greatly reduced thanks to the smaller screen.

So, I don't see a major obstacle to an Android watch, and the benefits of it
are worth the CPU. Of course temperature will be a concern but I'm sure demand
will produce lower-powered CPUs powerful enough to run Android.

~~~
IgorPartola
A watch that aim supposed to wear 24 hours a day cannot runout of battery
every three days. Give me two months of battery life on an ARM device that is
smaller than an average cheeseburger and I will be impressed.

------
untog
I'm _far_ more interested in how we're going to solve issues like battery life
with these devices than how they're going to look. So yes, this preview looks
great. But for now I still consider my Pebble watch to be a much better
option.

~~~
wvenable
Moore's Law will eventually catch up. The Pebble is currently the PalmPilot of
smartwatches; perfectly suited to the current state of the art. However,
progress being what it is, eventually the technology will be good enough that
Android (or iOS) on a smartwatch will become the better solution.

~~~
svenkatesh
Moore's law is about transistor count; what does that have to do with battery
life?

~~~
DSingularity
Everyone is interested in maintaining the growth in compute devices diversity
and capabilities that Moore's Law has enabled in the past decade. To do that
we need to continue to pack more and more transistors on chips.

As you pointed out, todays problem is not the transistor size, but rather it
is the energy consumption. Both dynamic and static power are not decreasing
proportionally with node size, and therefore we have gotten to the point of
asking "why add them if we can't use them?". This is the problems of the power
wall and the observation that we must continue to turn off more and more of
our silicon if we can't scale dynamic and static power characteristics of
transistors with their size. This problem threatens the well being of all semi
conductor companies.

Do you think that Intel will just surrender and go bankrupt? If they don't
defeat this problem, soon companies will have no reason to buy chips from
Intel. So what if they have 2x the cores on the chip if you can only keep half
of them active? Without breakthroughs in energy storage and heat dissipation,
how can google/apple/... create exciting new compute devices if the processors
continue to sip as much power as they did two years ago? Do we decrease the
compute capabilities (i.e. give up on the additional transistors) or run them
slower than we are used to and is that acceptable?

There is a lot of interest in continuing Moores law. Todays problem is power,
like you pointed. Tomorrows problem will be different. With 100 billion dollar
livelihoods on the line, I have no doubt they will be solved in the coming
years!

~~~
humanrebar
> As you pointed out, todays problem is not the transistor size, but rather it
> is the energy consumption.

If >10 GHz processors were available, that's where the excitement would be.
Instead, because we've hit such a wall in raw compute power, the bleeding edge
is in things like multiprocessor architectures, power consumption, and sensor
integration.

------
angersock
It'll be a cold day in hell before I let Google have an always-on device
attached to my person, wearable or otherwise.

These folks have proven--proven!--that they are unable to protect their
infrastructure from state actors, that they do not care about individual
customers, and that they will hijack our services on a whim to try and raise
money. Fuck that noise.

Any wearables need to be completely open-source, and with the ability to
retarget their output to servers that _we_ control, with security that _we_
verify.

And you know what? Not a single "normal" person understands the issue here.
Aaaargh.

~~~
nfoz
I feel your pain. Out of curiosity, do you carry a mobile phone?

~~~
quest88
Or drive a car?

~~~
angersock
Nope--issue came to a head after my insurance company wanted me to put a GPS
tracker in my car to get lower rates.

So, I do without now. If I decide it's unavoidable, I'll buy an ancient
clunker (preferably one with as little electronics in it as possible, think
classic car).

~~~
quest88
Whoah! What insurance company is that?!

~~~
aestra
Tons. I am going to say the majority. It is optional though. You usually get a
discount just for signing up, then you get an additional discount for your
driving

Progressive, Travels, Allstate, The Hartford...

They not only track your location, they track your speed, the amount of quick
stops you make (an indication you are tailgating), and time of day (some times
of day are more risky than others statistically), and how much you drive.
People who drive at low risk times, don't drive very fast, don't make quick
stops, and drive only a little bit get discounts. Usually you leave the device
in your car for 6 months-1 year and your discount is forever. My insurance
(Travelers) gives you a 30% discount max. You can also log on online and view
all your stats.

You plug a device into your OBD-II port.

There are significant privacy issues at hand here. In one case, it can be
argued that you shouldn't be tracked, in another case it can be argued that
driving is extremely dangerous (more dangerous than many people assume) and
every attempt should be made to make driving safer. Humans have already
demonstrated that they will alter their driving behavior for financial
gains.[1][2]

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage-
based_insurance](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage-based_insurance)

[1]
[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457511...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457511000662)

[2] [http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/will-insurers-pay-you-
no...](http://money.msn.com/auto-insurance/will-insurers-pay-you-not-to-speed)

------
fidotron
I had expected them to be aiming more for commonality with the API of Google
Glass. Maybe in turn Glass will move more towards this. But they're going to
end up with a lot of notification UIs for devs to worry about (Android,
Android wear, Chrome, Glass are different) unless they are working on
consolidating this.

Given that Glass rapidly deteriorates to being a fun camera, but otherwise not
too much else, the only compelling use they presented here was the checking
sports scores and needing water resistance. Until it's clearer just what scope
for customisation there is going to be for the "cards" it's going to remain
looking like a solution in search of a problem (EDIT: thanks todd for obvious
correction :) ).

Finally, I think this space will be won by the "Game Boy" approach. Lower fi
(possibly even no touch screen), but longer battery life and easier to view
screen in bright direct sunlight.

~~~
todd3834
I was actually thinking it was more of a solution searching for a problem.
Unless that is what you actually meant to say, then I agree.

------
k-mcgrady
Although the software important I think with wearables hardware will be key.
No matter how functional these devices are they are first and foremast a
fashion accessory and need to look good. There will also need to be a large
variety. Every time I look at buying a new watch I cycle through dozens and
dozens of devices before I find one I like the look of. This is where I think
Google has the upper hand on Apple with wearables. Apple will most likely
produce the only device running their software and a lot of people won't like
wearing the same fashion accessory as everyone else - they will want choice.
Of course if Apple knocks it out of the park with the software/sensors (which
is plausible from what I read about Healthbook yesterday) the functionality
may just edge out the important of fashion.

------
justinph
Those things look huge. Until "smart watches" can be made smaller and lighter,
the adoption rate will be abysmal.

Seriously, those things are electric hockey pucks with straps.

~~~
de_dave
Saw a new metal Pebble watch yesterday and was actually shocked to discover it
was both smaller and thinner than my own analog watch, which isn't
particularly big or chunky.

~~~
maxerickson
Here:

[https://getpebble.com/steel](https://getpebble.com/steel)

It looks like a calculator watch for the 21st century.

(But I guess given that I don't like watches much it isn't surprising I don't
find these devices very interesting)

Edit: Adding maybe a little bit of value to this comment, the function of the
device is very apparent in it form.

------
babesh
Why not approach this from the computing as a bicycle for your mind point of
view?

Smartphones were the latest computing evolution bringing general purpose
computing with you all the time and with an incredibly ease to use interface.
Now people are trying to introduce this new computing device (the smart
watch). What does it bring?

It doesn't take up a hand since you don't have to hold it. You don't have to
get it out of your pocket or turn it or pick it up to use it. To get it to do
stuff you speak to it (possibly even easier to use than touch computing). It
can be attached to your skin and read all sorts of data through your skin.

What it doesn't bring you is a sizable enough screen to view photos or text
(yet). Also it doesn't take advantage of one of our most precise tools (our
hands).

From this we may be able to predict what niches smart watches will evolve into
to fill. Heavily voice based, quick call and respond style communications,
updates and reminders, location based notifications, no-hand enhancers such as
leveling, altimeters, etc... And since the watch is oriented towards your own
face... it is heavily personal and can't be easily shared like a phone.

------
XorNot
Urgh...I wish we could skip this whole awkward smart watch phase and just
realize its a bad idea.

~~~
macspoofing
If you watch people interact with their phones for a few minutes you realize
it __is __a good idea. Take any average person and you 'd see them constantly
checking their phone for time(!!), messages, emails, weather, missed calls,
current calls (i.e. who is calling me right now), change playing song etc. All
those functions could be easily handled by a companion watch device.

~~~
XorNot
Firstly: you can't fit all those notifications on a watch sized display. So
you'd have to interact with the display.

Secondly: To interact with something strapped to your risk, involves both
hands.

To interact with your phone requires 1 hand.

There's also a mild security element - notifications and information are
essentially constantly being displayed to anyone looking at you, projected
outwards from the body.

Add in all the other unsolved issues - i.e. no improvement in battery energy
density for a couple of years now, and the whole thing is a non-starter. It
can only provide less information, less conveniently.

The only benefit a watch brings to the table is when for whatever reason you
_can 't_ carry something in your pocket.

~~~
gareim
Have you used a smartwatch before?

I got a Pebble recently and although you bring up good points, real world
usage isn't quite the same.

>Firstly: you can't fit all those notifications on a watch sized display. So
you'd have to interact with the display.

Watch defaults to a "watchface". Usually is time and/or date with maybe
weather info. If a notification hits my phone, my watch pops that open on the
display automatically. I hit one button to dismiss it. Quite faster than first
realizing I have a notification (felt the vibration? Saw the flashing LED?)
and then turning on the screen, unlocking the phone, and then checking the
notification.

For music, it's two button presses to get into the music app and and one more
to change songs. Can be improved here (buttons should have shortcuts enabled),
but still a bit faster than pulling phone out of pocket to change songs.

>To interact with your phone requires 1 hand.

True, but I only use my watch to do quick, simple tasks that would take longer
to do if I had to get my phone from my pocket.

>There's also a mild security element - notifications and information are
essentially constantly being displayed to anyone looking at you, projected
outwards from the body.

No arguments here! I was also thinking the other day how bad it would be to
for someone to see a text they weren't meant to, haha.

>Add in all the other unsolved issues - i.e. no improvement in battery energy
density for a couple of years now, and the whole thing is a non-starter. It
can only provide less information, less conveniently.

Can't speak for the Moto 360, but my Pebble lasts for about 3 days on average
(I've had it for a week only).

If the price isn't too high (has to be < $200 IMO), the battery lasts at least
a day on HEAVY usage, and the UI is designed well, smartwatches can have a
place in the world. For me, it's a bit about freedom from my phone. I used to
obsessively pull my phone out to check if the LED was flashing and even feel
"phantom vibrations" while in my pocket. Now, I leave it on silent and pull my
phone out much less.

It feels good, it really does. This is one of those cases where more
technology actually liberates us from tech.

------
roc
When someone has a 'session' with a wearable that involves anything more than
the the most minimal of operations [1], I feel like that's the "stylus moment"
[2].

Sure, there are narrow use cases when 'interacting' with a wearable is
conceivable where a phone still is not (e.g. while biking or jogging). But
that's going to run into the same problems that Glass runs into: how many
people can really justify an electronics purchase to enable _interactive_
computing during those situations? [3]

[1] Swiping to cycle through glance-able cards or triage notifications

[2] "If you see a stylus, they blew it"

[3] Particularly not when purely-passive devices will inevitably be available
with lower cost, smaller size/weight, better battery life, etc. (e.g. Pebble
vs Fuelband)

------
kh_hk
The last time I used Google Now was too scared to use it ever again. I don't
want to report my location, see cool pictures of my surroundings, or know
about the events of my city. It's not just only about the surveillance, it's
about the future. The connected future, the uninteresting one. The one on
which one must "opt-in" or just stay out. Personally, I do not get Google Now
cards. When they are relevant, they are depressing.

Hopefully this stage of the future is just a step into a more positive and
fulfilling one.

That being said, give me a rooted version of this device where I can install a
custom OS that allows me to use it as a computer and I am in.

~~~
itp
I want to be careful not to imply that I'm passing judgement on your feelings,
or implying that they're invalid, because I certainly have my moments where
I'm a little creeped out by Google Now as well. But I do want to push back a
little bit on Google Now cards being necessarily depressing.

I recently traveled up to Boston on a short hybrid work/vacation trip with my
wife. When we were headed to the airport, Google Now had a card letting me
know my flight was on time, and letting me know when I had to leave to make it
to the airport on time. It was information I could have otherwise looked up,
but it surfaced that information for me, and it was nice.

When we landed in Boston, we wanted to contact our hotel to verify the check
in time and ask if we could leave luggage there for the day if necessary. When
I pulled my phone out, there was already a card with the hotel address, travel
time, and contact info. Again, stuff I could have looked up (check my email to
verify hotel name, look up number, call), but it was nice to have it there and
ready for me.

When I head to work in the morning, Google Now has a card for my commute,
along with notifications about any accidents that may impact my travel. I also
live far enough away that there are a few very different routes I can take,
and day to day one or the other may be the best. Finding out my commute needs
to go a different way, or I should plan for it to be a bit longer (or shorter,
sometimes!) doesn't seem depressing to me.

I keep a pretty close eye on how Google is using my information, and if I
begin to feel like it has crossed a line from mutual benefit (helping me, and
deriving value as well) to something more one-sided (exploiting me for value),
I hope I won't prove to have been naive, but in the meantime, this is
something that really seems to make my life better. Just my experience.

~~~
kh_hk
Fair enough, I did not test Google Now for a long period of time, and I would
not be able to use it as it is meant because I stopped using smartphones the
way they are meant to be used many years ago (circa Nexus One). Now they are
just a target platform for work, occasional mp3 player, offline map, emergency
travel thingy. What you explain sounds perfectly useful if you already use an
smartphone.

That Google is able to give you the information you where going to check
anyway is not an small accomplishment and, while a bit creepy or invasive on
sensitive data, is an amazing achievement for a search engine (I do not know
for "don't be evil", but at least for "the search engine" it makes total
sense).

My mind might have associated looking at a smartphone as a depressing feeling,
and that would be it (and is wrong). I decided I want to spend time figuring
out things by myself, even when that will cost me my own time. The backlight
from the screen has something it makes me want to play with it when I am idle.
Similar as my laptop at 4 AM in the morning.

What I think might explain this a little bit more, I like to see devices as
what they are, hardware that can be used to do stuff. When devices start being
life enhancing experiences I am out. What does bother me is that as a
developer I am no longer a target for the things I do develop. The moment my
70 y.o. uncle is more connected than I am really speaks for my future in
technology as a career.

~~~
MattHeard
Google Now is not something you can briefly "test" because the benefits really
only develop after giving it time to learn your habits. The longer I have used
it, the more useful it has become.

There is a trend away from discrete computing, where your computer sits at
your desk and only at your desk, and while there will continue to be options
for people who prefer that lifestyle, there is a much larger market for people
who want their computing to be blended into the rest of their lifestyle.
Whether its "laziness" or "augmentation", a lot of people find value in
smartphones and smartglasses and smartwatches.

------
jamesfranco
Whatever you wear reflects on you. I don't think this is something for someone
who is fashion conscious people (like many people in LA). Wealthy people would
prefer an Audemars or a Rolex any day compared to a Motorola or Samsung.
Definitely see maybe teens and techies in Silicon Valley wearing these.

Like the iPad when it first when out, the smartwatch should do some key things
better than any other device, which it does and some minor things like telling
the weather, taking notes etc. although reading long articles, viewing photos
or anything that involves a lot of interaction is be suited on a phone, tablet
or computer.

------
apendleton
The key to the success of these things will be the ability to get information
from the display without having to touch it. At first I figured this would
mean an always-on display (so, e-ink, I guess), but this clearly isn't that,
and yet they don't seem to turn the displays on in the videos (though I'm sure
they're all fake).

I wonder if you could do something with the accelerometer that would be good
enough? Like, if your arm orientation changes to look-at-your-watch position,
the display turns on, and it turns off again when your arm goes back down to
your side.

~~~
DanAndersen
It seems quite possible -- it's like how smartphone screens detect when you've
moved it from your ear while on the phone to use the number pad.

~~~
garretraziel
No, it's not like this. Smartphone has distance sensor, but I am not really
convinced that the distance sensor would work in this case too.

------
kellyhclay
Glass is going to quietly shift to being a device for niche groups - not the
average consumers. Google has likely realized via the beta of Glass that it's
not going to be accepted into the mainstream - but a watch (which is much more
discreet, yet performs many of the same functions as Glass) will. If Google
wants to really saturate the market, this is a super smart move.

------
bane
So it's like an amped up google now on a watch?

I'm intrigued, but the price has to be good. Anything over $100 is just going
to be a nonstarter in my opinion.

Will I have to charge it 3 times a day, not going to work...etc.

There's lots of difficulties with packing this in to a usable form factor and
selling it.

The galaxy gear had a return rate > 30%. But it's also a $300 watch. For $300
it better do more than make it mildly easier for me to do things that I
already do on my phone, which sits literally inches away from where my watch
would be on my wrist.

And let's say it's wildly successful, I'm really interested in how a watch, on
a bus full of people with watches, will know that _you_ are saying "ok google"
to it and not somebody else. Imagine sitting in a subway car, and some guy
comes in and shouts "ok google, find me a bukake site!" or similar and now
everybody on the train has to deal with that.

~~~
wutbrodo
As far as I'm aware, the Moto X is very much able to avoid triggering by
anyone's voice except the one it's keyed to. I was curious about how well it
worked, so I tried repeatedly to launch Voice Search on my girlfriend's phone
(even trying to imitate her voice); I wasn't able to do it at all. Trying to
do so to an arbitrary person's device would be even harder.

~~~
bane
That's good to know, but also a bit disconcerting, that Google has a voice
print profile for me sitting on their servers somewhere.

~~~
wutbrodo
How would this even work if it was stored on the server? Every singkr sound
triggers a roundtrip to the server from your phone to check the voice? I can't
imagine this working any other way than being stored locally.

~~~
notatoad
if it's stored locally, it's probably stored on a server too.

~~~
wutbrodo
I don't really see how this follows, particularly since I don't believe you
can sync the voiceprint across phones. If you're saying that it's _possible_
to send voice prints to the server unnecessarily, then sure: but this has
nothing to do with always-listening/voice-print storage; it could be the case
for any sort of voice command, which means that what we're talking about here
isn't any different from any voice command system in that respect.

------
level
> Voice Actions

> Register your app to handle voice actions, like "Ok Google, take a note."

I think this is what most interests me. Hopefully we won't be locked into
Google's pre-defined tasks and developers can start working on their own voice
actions.

------
deathcakes
Not sure why but saying 'Ok Google' feels a little creepier than saying 'Ok
Glass'. More obvious that you aren't interfacing with a mere gadget, but a
multi billion dollar corporate entity...

~~~
psbp
I've never heard anyone say "search for it", but rather "google it".

~~~
deathcakes
True - but that I would argue is a slightly different thing. Referring to a
thing is not the same as addressing the thing. Would Siri have been as
successful were it to be addressed as Apple?

~~~
psbp
Yeah, I guess it makes you sound like a tool, but I'm not sure what unique
phrase would work better.

~~~
glenstein
As a person who finds both "okay, Glass" and "okay, Google" to be somewhere on
a spectrum from merely awkward to full-on creepy, I would just prefer people
could set their own custom keywords.

------
tobyjsullivan
The part of the advert that impressed me most was that Google Now's voice
recognition worked well enough to be useful. Something tells me that isn't
actually a new feature.

~~~
jessriedel
The Google Now voice recognition is incredible. I never search for direction
manually, and I use it to compose most of my text messages and all of my
reminders.

------
phreeza
Two points:

\- This looks basically like an amped up google now, so maybe this means
developer access to Now as well, which would be more exciting to me at the
moment.

\- Pretty much all of the info they showed in the demo would work on an epaper
display, maybe minus the swiping gestures. I sure hope the experience will
include pebble style watches with a battery life longer than a few hours, but
I am not holding my breath.

------
supergauntlet
This looks really cool, but I worry about the battery life of these devices.
Doesn't the Galaxy Gear already have not amazing battery life?

~~~
Kiro
My Pebble has a battery life of 7 days and that's one of the biggest benefits
compared to Galaxy Gear.

------
bryanl
The software is an important part of this, but I'm more interested in seeing
what new types of hardware will run this OS. The watch concept is only neat to
me right now.

It definitely feels like Android is ripe to bust the confines of the phone and
move in to other parts of our lives. The work that Qualcomm is putting in
their Snapdragon platform is evidence of this.

------
yeukhon
The commerical, PoC is great. But its idea has the same flaw as Facebook Paper
([https://www.facebook.com/paper](https://www.facebook.com/paper)).

I can check the weather, get alert and listen to my music from my smartphone.
I can enjoy some home automation with Canary
([http://canary.is/](http://canary.is/)). If I have free time I can design my
own app and integrate a speech recognition to open the door (I am sure there
are companies selling this too).

What unique "innovations" \- conveniences will Google wearable (which at this
stage seems to be just a watch) offer?

I say it has the same flaw as Facebook Paper because Paper 's success is based
on rich, beautiful, poetic content. If your circle is casual writer, Paper
will look lame to you. I love Google Glass because I can take pictures and
record the world from a first-person view attached to my head. I don't plan on
making a phone call directly from Google Glass yet - that's kind of weird.

So what else can Google watch do? I just can't see it.

 _The ability to better monitor your health and fitness._

You see, I can still get away with it with other accessory. I will give Google
credit and say this is useful, but other than that, I really don't see it.

You know what is unique? What I want to see?

Iron Man computer screen + Iron Man interactive airtouch computer system....
That's what we are lacking. I want to be able to swipe through contents, web
pages from thin air with gesture. We can do some of that already. Push it
forward!

 _edit_ :

I will say this is useful as assistive technology. People who are visually
impaired or motion disable can benefit from it. Just put it on wrist and good
to go. But other than that, I just don't see it.

~~~
Kiro
That's an argument against all smartwatches, not just Google. Nevertheless, I
think you're wrong. I have a Pebble and it has changed my life. I will never
leave the house without a wearable on my arm again.

~~~
hanley
In what ways has it changed your life?

~~~
Kiro
* My phone is on permanent silent mode.

* I never miss a call.

* When biking I know if I need to stay and bring out the phone just by glancing my wrist.

* It's very convenient to be able to read texts and emails on your wrist (this is even better than you imagine).

* Great for meeting notifications.

* If I leave the phone on my desk I still see when people call (several times I've catched calls by running to my desk from the other side of the office if I see that it's an important call).

* When using RunKeeper I can see all the stats (speed, distance etc) immediately and also control the music without touching the phone.

* I can use Sleep Cycle without putting the phone on my bed.

* Silent alarm which does not wake up my spouse.

* I can easily access my grocery list (through Evernote) and have it available right in front of me until I'm done shopping.

* I can play Flappy Bird on it.

~~~
atrilumen
When do you charge it? (Sounds like you wear it 24/7.)

~~~
Kiro
Only need to charge it once a week but I do it at my desk via USB.

------
adamman
I can't help but think of this as a pimped out house arrest ankle bracelet.

------
gfodor
It's going to be pretty great now that everyone has shown their "huge black
square on the wrist" design before apple has shown anything. Looking forward
to seeing them scramble to steal apples design.

~~~
corresation
Yeah, something like that.

I actually wonder if Apple will ever manage to come out with a wearable,
because honestly they are in a can't win situation: everyone else is iterating
through technologies and designs, and while these aren't for everyone (though
everyone who it isn't for is sure that means it is for no one), they're
getting better and more reasonable, while Apple needs to come out with some
sort of God watch that will completely upend technology.

They can't win. They are absolutely bound to disappoint.

Nonetheless, though, I'm sure six months after they come out with something,
you'll be on here proclaiming that everyone else is copying Apple.

~~~
gfodor
every watch design i've seen so far is uninspired and unrisky. they basically
slapped a phone on the wrist.

if apple ever releases anything, it will almost certainly not be an ugly
square touchscreen with a wristband around it.

and i won't need to proclaim anything, it will be obvious just like it was
with the iPhone.

edit: Also your point above doesn't make much sense. Apple has surely been
working on their watch for many years. I would be really shocked, and it would
be very un-Apple like, if they came out with a new piece of consumer hardware
like this that didn't leapfrog over everyone else by just thinking a bit
outside the box. Most likely they are not coming out with a "watch", but a
smart wristband that has tons of patented UX and hardware that will be a
complete new experience for people.

~~~
corresation
The Motorola device is neither square (which you've stated repeatedly, almost
like you didn't even bother looking at the site before you declared that Apple
does it better), nor ugly. I'm not a watch person, but it looks pretty
beautiful to me.

I imagine that Apple has been working on it for years. So has everyone -- this
is hardly unanticipated technology, having been predicted for many, many
decades. It just needs technology to make it possible.

And processors are getting faster, while sipping far less juice. Screens are
getting better (such as the amazing, likely AMOLED round screen on the
Motorola 360). Batteries are getting better. Connectivity options like
Bluetooth LE are making connectivity possible. Samsung might take a lot of
deserved flack for products like the Gear, but they're trying to iterate the
product to make it happen.

While Apple might have had some luck timing entrants at the right time a
couple of times, they have no particular advantage in any of those realms. The
halo of the iPod won't carry this product launch, so they don't have the
normal heads up they used to. It's going to be interesting. But I have
absolutely no reason to soundly denounce alternatives against some imaginary,
not actually existing foe.

------
lutusp
I hope you're all paying attention to the trend this represents, a trend
fueled by ever-smaller and more intimate Android devices. Pretty soon the term
"Android" may become literal.

~~~
maxerickson
What do 'intimate' digital devices have to do with humanoid robots?

~~~
lutusp
I's saying this trend toward a closer and closer association between computers
and people -- beginning with a huge, noisy room with lab-coat-wearing
attendants who accepted your stack of 80-column cards through a little window,
sort of like a bank (my first exposure to computers years ago) -- and now
moving toward blurring the line between the computer and its "wearer", and
given a number of neurological experiments in which the line between the
computer and the human is blurred, I can see the handwriting on the wall.

That sentence was way too long, but I think you get the idea. :)

~~~
maxerickson
That would traditionally be called a cyborg, not a literal android (a sci fi
reader would expect the android to be fully synthetic).

------
sailfast
I agree that software is secondary to current hardware concerns at the moment,
but doesn't this effort make it more attractive for hardware experts to try
and dive in to improve the wearables market?

They've already got a "ready to go" OS with which to prototype. Pretty awesome
since I'm sure Samsung worked hard to get its Gear integration working. Maybe
this will improve the number of players in the space? I'm all for efforts that
help bring more options to the table.

------
lowglow
We're throwing a IoT/Wearables Hackathon in april. Check it out:
[http://hackendo.techendo.co/](http://hackendo.techendo.co/)

------
hawkharris
Asking me to strap a computer to my risk is like assigning me homework: it
requires a new way of thinking and interacting.

Having said that, I'd better see a significant improvement over using other
interfaces. That's why I'm at least initially disappointed with the Android
watched.

I get that we all love new interfaces because they're new and fun to play
with, but what will this watch do for me that my smartphone can't do?

------
webwanderings
So we now want to wear Ads on our wrists? Just checking!

------
michaelkohen
If helpful for anyone, I put together a collection of coverage on today's
Android Wear announcement + other neat stuff on the rise of wearables

[http://wayfinder.co/pathways/5328b918bf637c0a00000001/what-y...](http://wayfinder.co/pathways/5328b918bf637c0a00000001/what-
you-need-to-know-about-android-wear)

------
krexit
Why do they have any expectation of success at the sort of power consumption
that Android requires, with the power supply that wearables can contain? I
note that the previous Galaxy Gear was Android - the new one is running Tizen
and has around double the battery life. That's not all battery improvements,
and no coincidence besides..

------
hawkharris
Sorry for the typos; I wrote this on my phone and can't edit it. Also, I
should note that I'm putting myself in others' shoes with the "homework"
analogy. I'm a geek, so I don't mind learning about technology for tech's
sake, but the same isn't true for most non-developers.

------
jamesfranco
I have 3 question:

1\. Will this only work with Android phone for now?

2\. Do you agree that smart watches are more for apps that don't need a lot of
user interaction. Like Instagram or Dropbox will not be great on these. Simple
things like showing weather etc. will be okay.

3\. Does anyone know the price of the Moto G or another Android Wear devices?

------
robocat
Optical illusion: does anyone else see the guy's sleeve move left/right when
the page is scrolled up/down?

I am using an iPad4, and scrolling the part of the page with the second video
showing the guy's wrist with a checkered cuff. (The video is not playing, just
how it shows on page initially).

------
pilooch
People wearing this watch do not seem very much interested in news articles ;)
More seriously, my fuzzy estimate is that 80% of the time spent on my phone is
for reading stuff that is definitely not the departure time of my next flight
(that I can memorize five months in advance :) ).

~~~
warfangle
While I don't fly much, Google Now was absolutely fantastic the last time I
flew. From notifications about flight delays to checking in. It was one of
those things that I didn't think I was ever going to use, but when it came
into play it was magical.

------
chillingeffect
Just another crapshoot from a research institution trying to divest as its
core business decays.

Google is showing evidence they can't predict the future very well and won't
sustain development in shaky fields.

Instead, they're going for PR and military research projects, like IBM and
Veridian Dynamics.

------
cfolgar
I'm more interested in the watches that were shown on the video. I realize I
might be confused, are the watches in the video just placeholders/random
design concepts to get the idea across? Still, I'm wondering what devices will
eventually support this SDK.

~~~
wjoe
They appear to be the LG G Watch [1] and Moto 360 [2], which were announced at
the same time.

[1] [http://www.lgblog.co.uk/2014/03/lg-
gwatch/](http://www.lgblog.co.uk/2014/03/lg-gwatch/)

[2] [http://moto360.motorola.com/](http://moto360.motorola.com/)

------
amanuel
This is not wearables. It is just a tiny screen mobile device. I'd consider
labeling Google Glass a wearables before what was demoed here.

Wearables is the idea of changing what we wear with technological
augmentation. Watches have had tech for a long time....nothing new here
sadly....

------
JamesBaxter
I wonder what precautions Google will take to avoid fragmentation of smart
watches.

If this software works well I'd be interested to see an actual watch
manufacturer implement it, seeing as software has always been their downfall.

~~~
iLoch
Same thing they've done to prevent it on android phones. ;)

------
swang
Why are we still using watches as the base of new wearables? Is it because it
makes users more comfortable with wearing a computer on their wrist?

Also not really sure about the round LCD, why not a curved rectangular LCD?

------
SunboX
Try to look ten minutes onto your arm and than tell me your feelings. Smart
watches are a nice add on to a phone. Don't expect it to be a news reader, nor
a phone replacement.

------
ardz
First rule of privacy: keep private things private. Second rule of privacy: if
two people know then everybody knows.

------
supercoder
They should focus on getting the regular Android working and looking good
before diverting attention to wearables.

------
guiomie
Such a tacky video. I prefer pulling my phone out over wearing a watch ...

------
SimpleXYZ
If they can shrink the size of that watch in half, I'm in.

------
skimmas
How much will google pay its user for using this spywearable?

------
mavdi
Constant cringing state with that video...

------
g4ur4v
Come on Microsoft !!! Where are you ?

~~~
JetSpiegel
Reading this news on a desktop, laughing on the way to the bank.

------
kimonos
Totally cool! Can't wait to have one!

