Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
Tag Heuer Connected Modular 45 (anandtech.com)
23 points by DiabloD3 65 days ago | hide | past | web | 27 comments | favorite



Looks like Google has their annual 'give the employees a gizmo' idea. :-)


That only a small minority will wear...

EDIT: So the people voting this down think a majority of Google employees (e.g. >50%) or large minority (20-49%) would wear this thing if they received for free? I'm genuinely curious. But I'd be willing to bet not even a large minority of Google employees wear any smart device.


Of course. Sort of like giving everyone an android phone (I've still got my Nexus 1! :-) which I never actually used as my 'main' phone but hey it was free right?


Smart watches are different though - like giving everyone the same pair of shoes or jewelry. At least the phone you could use if you wanted to. Something that goes on your body is pretty different.


That is true, although IBM gave everyone an Apple Watch as part of their wellness initiative. It helps encourage exercise.


Any idea how many are still wearing it?


Many a company give out watches or similar to commemorate something.


That only the executives can afford


25 hour battery life...


This is starting to be the end of an era. I know the luxury watch industry (to which Tag Heuer belongs) successfully resisted Quartz, but at the end of the day mechanical and quartz is a question of degree, not kind: they both tell time, after all. Rolex had Quartz watches. Such as this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolex_Oysterquartz

However this was during a "crisis" in the watch industry, after which it reinvented itself as all-mechanical (in the luxury market.) You can read a story here (I didn't have time to read this one, looks fine): http://www.watchtime.com/featured/when-rolex-went-quartz/

But smart watches aren't a difference in degree rather than kind. They are fundamentally different in a lot of ways that bring benefit to some users.

If Apple started doing a good job with their watch product, the watch industry could not long resist. It is already on the wrists of many celebrities all the time.

The only saving grace for the luxury watch industry is that apple haven't quite gotten it right yet. if people started wearing their apple watch every day, there would be no room on their wrist for a traditional luxury watch as well.


I've been studying these trends closely for the last five years given our startup's survival depends on the outcome. In short, I don't agree. It's looking more and more to me that we're in the middle of the Palm and flip phones era of wearables. If you track Fitbit closely, we're actually close to the first crash with momentum generating for wearables 2.0. The watch industry is adding these features but given their prior existential crisis with quartz, I see a very mature industry taking their time and not feeling threatened at all. The biggest drawback to smartwatches remains their screens and battery life. There they aren't competitive at all with very nice mechanical watches for the most basic function - showing the time. The more I've used the Apple watch, the more I've found it pointless with a battery that dies and I don't notice for hours. I'll learn more at Basel this week, I doubt any one there is fearful the way they were even two years ago.

Furthermore, I'm still amazed that none of these devices have changed mobile phone user experiences at all. When that happens we'll be talking about wearables 2.0, there's a lot of fodder there for deep integrations.


Frankly the only thing that could make them change anything is by them being able to tell us more about or bodily state at a glance. And i am not talking about something superficial as pulse, but something deeper.

Frankly smartwatches are stuck in the same stats game as phones have been since Apple kept hammering built in storage.

We need more like the CAT S60, and less "higher numbers on stat X, Y and Z".

It is the only recent phone that could even get close to the often touted comparison between smartphones and tricorders. Because tricorders were first and foremost a sensors package, telling the away team things about their surroundings that their senses could not.


I agree with everything you've written. Emphatically, Apple haven't gotten it right.

But that doesn't mean the game wouldn't change if they did. They are moving a lot of units on what is not a great and must-have product yet - imagine if the product were a must-have one that got the things you've mentioned right instead of wrong. That would change the game. It's not beyond them that they might do so in the future, and, again, they are moving a lot of units as it is. Celebrities are wearing them.


I agree on that Apple sentiment and where clearly they have a huge head start on what comes next.


There will always be a market for mechanical watch, because its core function is that of fashion, not time telling. For men, watch is the only fashion accessory available to them. It's about making a statement. It's about appreciating the intricacies of delicate movements. It's about being in that minority circle of people who adore watches.

Smartwatch does not compete in the same space, so it's not a threat.


The only part that is on point is about "making a statement". And that statement is via the brand, not via the watch itself. Sadly these days Apple is more fashion brand than anything else. Straddling the line between fashion and affordability. Heck, that may always have been the case with Apple beyond the initial AppleII runs. At least while Jobs was in charge.


"The only part that is on point is about "making a statement". And that statement is via the brand, not via the watch itself. "

You may be speaking for yourself, but people wear mechanical watches for different reasons, and I've just listed a few of them.

For me? It's about appreciation of the movement, and also how it makes me feel wearing it

Nobody has ever commented on my mechanical watch, yet I continue to wear it.

I do agree that Apple has sort of become a fashion brand. They have embraced that, and I don't really see it as a bad thing. But as I said, it's not a fashion brand that is in direct competition with luxury mechanical watch makers.


We're a bit off from the smartwatch killing off the traditional watch. I wouldn't blame it on Apple doing a bad job if that is what you meant. If anything, they brought the smartwatch more mainstream with the release of the Apple Watch. So, we ask ourselves what is the reason the smartwatch hasn't replaced the traditional watch? There is a myriad of reasons. Let's start off with price points, then battery life, and go from there?


What makes you so sure Apple is even doing a bad job and maybe instead the expectations were overly hyped? If the bar is an Apple Watch for every iPhone user (let alone every smart phone user), the expectation was Steve Jobs distortion field-esque.

When I lived in NYC (or traveled back to Silicon Valley), I kinda expected to see them everywhere (and did). But unintuitively, I also see them all the time in places I'd never expect (like say seeing a half dozen people wearing them in a Wal-mart in rural Arkansas). Yes, I'm looking for people wearing them so obviously I'll see them more, but that doesn't negate my point that I see more Apple Watches than any other brand of watch (smart or otherwise).


The Apple watch is probably the worst example of a company trying to create a 'smart watch' without understanding what people use watches for. None of the smart bezel or anything like that make it more useful than just taking your phone out of your pocket.

On the other hand, sports watches that track GPS and heart rate etc, do something that you don't want to use your phone for. (I have a Garmin that is fantastic.)

Smart watches will take off when people nail the use case, and don't forget that we already have phones, so the watch doesn't need to do everything.


> So, we ask ourselves what is the reason the smartwatch hasn't replaced the traditional watch?

Because I just don't need it. I get only a dozen emails and whatsapp messages a day, I might spent at max an hour per week talking on the phone and my current schedule is very simple (e.g. wake up in the morning and drive to work).

There is just no way how a smart watch could improve my day.

I can see some usecases if you are a very busy person with a crammed schedule but for normal person there is just no need to have one.


The only reason I keep my G Watch R is because I get real time traffic notifications while driving two/from work. It has saved me quite some times from getting stuck in a car jam... Except the time it notified me after being rear hit... That time it pissed me off a bit, but stil worked :)


>So, we ask ourselves what is the reason the smartwatch hasn't replaced the traditional watch? There is a myriad of reasons. Let's start off with price points, then battery life, and go from there?

There's also that the watch (traditional or smart) is not so traditional to wear anymore anyway. Most people just don't bother owing one.


Yes I wore a wristwatch every day purely out of habit for most of my life, until a few years ago when I realized it was pointless and uncomfortable so I quit. Now I only wear one on rare occasions as a fashion accessory.


As much as I like my Citizens Echo, I think the smartphone killed the watch for many. To introduce a watch after many abandoned them is odd. Until the screen is about as big as half a smartphone with twice the battery, I don't see the devices going mainstream.


For me, in my case, was not even the smartphone, the mobile phones did it, having a watch in my pocket was enough.


Price point is actually quite good. Battery life is terrible. After that though, what are the features that say you have to have this thing? I honestly can't name any. It's my phone with worse features.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: