Wow, that looks bad on a small wrist. That's basically a deal breaker for me. I also think that default watchface looks very tacky, though I'm sure that can be changed.
The Moto 360 suffered the same problem. Here's what it looks like in a promotional shot:
I've seen the moto 360 in person, on a smallish wrist (compared to mine) and it looked fine, I only noticed it was the 360, because the screen was off.
Somehow it looks thicker in the pictures than it does on your wrist, then again I don't really care because I got a WP which won't work with any of google's stuff D:
I just saw a Moto 360 on display at Best Buy, and you're right. It's a lot smaller and lighter than I expected. Although it does look bad in that photo I linked to, honestly I was really impressed with how it looked on my wrists--and my wrists are pretty small.
In the early day of these smart watches they are going to be a bit larger as the technology matures. Even the iWatch is going to look bigger and the newly announced Microsoft Band.
I just like how they're presenting the true globetotter, super rich lifestyle: Getting notifications for dinner in London while you brood by Sydney harbour. I wonder if it integrates with the gulfstream?
Yeah, but in that context this watch makes no sense. Its materials are cheap and it just is this obviously cheap device, build of a mobile phone, not an expensive watch. Just look at the back of this thing!
This is so obviously a tech gadget, not a fashion anything.
Nice! Screen looks a bit off, but the hardware design is streets ahead of the main competitor: Apple Watch. These round devices look way better. A bit big, so maybe it'll only work on men, but round is a significant advantage.
Agree that the LG looks better. The Apple Watch, designed by any other company than Apple, would be getting lambasted in the tech media for being ugly, techy-looking, chunky, etc...but guess we'll have to wait to see how all these watches really look in person for the final call.
The materials and build quality look like total crap, to be honest. That’s phone level care, not watch level. There doesn’t seem to have been put any care at all into the details of this watch. On a micro level this watch is about a billion miles behind what it looks like the Apple Watch seems it will be like.
On a macro level tastes differ. That said, I do think this watch looks like a cheap tech gadget while the Apple Watch clearly doesn’t. You might not like how the Apple Watch looks overall, but at least it doesn’t look like a cheap toy like this watch does. (I mean, look at the back of this thing! That’s unacceptable for a watch.)
(That said, I do agree that, while on a micro level the details of the Apple Watch look to be astonishing, on a macro level the overall impression doesn’t do those micro level details justice. It’s certainly possible to do better – but not by completely ignoring that micro level like this watch does.)
I think watches are going to be a tough sell in general. Watches are fashion accessories subject to trends. Many people, myself included, wear different watches depending on dress or occasion. So the look of these things is going to be a hard target to hit.
My main problem with the Apple Watch is that it looks like an Apple product. It's a tech gadget which, by the way, is also a wearable watch. I can't see myself wearing one. I'm looking for a watch which, by the way, is also a tech gadget.
So while I agree with you about the LG G Watch R–it looks cheap and misses the details–on the plus side, it is clearly a watch and I can judge it based on its watch-merits. With the Apple Watch I can only really scratch my head in wonder.
Wow that is bad. I found that watch looking pretty good on LG's website, but from gizmodo's picture, it seems like the screen is low res and super pixelated. Even DEC / JUN are hard to read =\
Yes, the screen didn't look great in the Gizmodo review. He summed it up nicely with : "it just becomes a >£200 way of reminding you that yes, you own a smartphone."
The use-cases of "dictating a message whilst walking down the street" is a bit odd too - do you want people talking to their wrists all the time? It'll like being in a never-ending episode of Knight Rider.
This page makes 360 separate requests and loads 55MB of assets. They did not minify or concatenate assets. It disables itself unless it is used at specific aspect ratios. It disables scrolling and requires clicking small triangles to navigate sideways.
In all the smartwatch reviews I have read, I fail to see the high-level overview: what kinds of tasks should I be able to accomplish with this kind of device, at all?
Are Android Wear devices only usable in a vicinity of my Android phone or can I use them without one? Could I use them with an iPhone, Firefox OS phone, Surface Pro tablet, 3G modem or any Wi-Fi source (Moto 360 does have Wi-Fi)?
Do Android Wear devices need apps written specifically for them, and/or specific support in a tablet/phone app. Say, I know there is a VK app for Android, but I'm not sure about smartwatch support. Should I be getting VK notifications (or whatever watch is good for) by default?
Could I pair a Wi-Fi-equipped smartwatch with a Bluetooth headset and get rid of a phone, with smartwatch providing VoIP connectivity over Wi-Fi?
What kinds (if any) of non-default configurations can I expect to use a device like that? (default being pairing it with an Android phone and a specifically supported app)
I'm not sure if you're asking because you legitimately don't know, or just underscoring how terrible some of the marketing and advertising for these devices has been. If it's the former, though, a lot of the info you're asking about can be found online[0]. In general, though, the primary mode of operation of an Android Wear device is to work with the existing notification system of an Android device, so most apps should automatically have some reflection on the watch. If they take advantage of Android notification actions, you may be able to interact to a degree with them right off of the watch.
Android Wear devices don't (as far as I know) work with non-Android phones because non-Android phones don't give them the required integration with the notifications and applications.
In general, though, the primary mode of operation of an Android Wear device is to work with the existing notification system of an Android device
In other words, these smartwatches are not a replacement for an Android smartphone.
On the other hand (no pun intended), the Chinese have been creating smartwatchphones for a while now, which are fully-functional Android smartphones in a slightly bigger watch-sized casing.
The Microsoft Band at least seems to be more targeted towards health focused users although it can do all of the smart things that these smart watches do.
I guess he is talking about reviews that lack all such information and rather talk about how exactly it looks on your wrist rather than talking about what exactly you could do with one.
I have observed this too and makes me think reading smart watch reviews rather redundant.
Plenty of use cases...heres one: I've been loving my 360 for exercise. Not only for the step counting (and the Asus Wear watch has GPS I believe).
I've always taken issue with carrying a phone around with me while running. With the 360 (and the latest update), you can pair with bluetooth headphones and play music that you've synced from your phone. And obviously since it's a watch, I can time myself. I can then sync my interval timing results, etc.
Regarding your request for a high-level overview...it's an extension of the Android platform designed specifically for wearables, is it really that hard to see the potential? Take what you know about Android and what it can do, and Wear is that + APIs for tiny UIs + an sync-focused abstraction layer on top of bluetooth pairing. Additionally, consider not only that the screen is tiny, but the HCI ramifications/opportunities given that it's on your wrist, or ankle, or whatever. AFAIK, you can build a Wear device with any hardware you want. The models we're seeing right now are leaving out things like GPS and LTE radios for obvious cost and battery life concerns. When I think about what Wear could do, that's the context I consider.
I own a moto360 one for almost a month now. You are probably not going to say "ok google" all the time so most of the features that require your voice are pretty useless. To be honest I only use them when driving. What I really use it for is:
1) Check who is calling. If I am on a meeting or otherwise busy I can drop the call.
2) Read messages/gmail(full message)/whatsapp etc. I will have to get the phone out of the pocket only if I need to respond.
3) Notifications/reminders/weather reports etc.
It's interesting how the advertisements for tech these days all feature beautiful people in their 20s interacting with Facebook + Youtube + Twitter etc. Whilst all saying "awesome" to each other. Doesn't seem long ago that all the ads had beautiful people in their 30s sending each other messages about meeting sales and marketing for a presentation at 11, then taking a long lunch with their spouse, as well as updating their portfolio, and maybe buying tickets to a Nicks game. An actual physical game in meatspace. How retro can you get?
That's harsh, it's more versatile than that - there's a beautiful person in their 20s checking the stock price while on a yacht, there's a beautiful person in their 20s out running, a beautiful person in their 20s making a note of an idea while in an amazing office.
There really is no limit to what beautiful people in their 20s can do with this sort of product.
Wait till they hit 30 and then it's the cubicle farm and Happy Monday and the printer that keeps saying PC LOAD LETTER.
Then they go home to a closet apartment, devoid of any caring human soul to ease the empty loneliness inside their heart, eating frozen TV dinners in front of a reality show filled with 20-somethings living beautiful lives, while the landlord hammers on the door, yelling in an incomprehensible accent about when he can expect the rent. Also, the cat died.
Very nice I laughed my AO. Goddammit for years I wondered why the damn printer kept saying PC LOAD LETTER. It was a revelation when I eventually discovered why. A disappointing revelation since in my part of the world you never see and basically can't buy letter size paper (we use A4). Shame about the cat but it will crystalise the cat total cost of ownership.
Or their late 30s when they're hollow eye-d with tiredness from the screaming children, knee deep in the detritus of a young family and wondering when they might get five minutes free to set up the smartwatch which is sitting in an unopened box on the side under a weeks worth of unread mail and newspapers.
There's something rather odd about showing off what I would consider to be a massive design flaw. They haven't worked out how to design interfaces for a circle yet, so everything just gets chopped up.
Samsung did this when they first introduced their watch. In the ad for it, the guy is holding his phone in his right hand, his watch on his left wrist 'rings' letting him know who it was, then he proceeds to answer on the phone, that he's still holding.
If the first ad for your product basically says, "I'm useless", then I think you're doomed.
I kinda wish Apple was just trolling the tech world with the possibility of their watch. Just watching their competitors pour money into something with no real use case. Probably in 5-10 years there will be a buzzfeed article, "13.2 reasons you know you grew up in the 10's when..." and number 3.7 will be, "You remember those useless smart watches".
Great point. The round shape itself is very skeumorphic because that's very conducive to the hand movement of an analog watch. A true digital watch has no business being round. I think iWatch, Fitbit Surge and Microsoft Band get it.
not to defend the lousy advert too much, but up in the Northern Coastal areas, we have beaches too, and they're nice to go to even when it's a little chilly (actually the next month or two is actually my favorite time to go to the beach, temperature in 50s and 60s, nobody there, wildlife is out in droves migrating or fattening up for winter)...
Yeah if the guy were wearing pants I wouldn't have made the comment.
I mean clearly it's an aesthetic for an advertisement, but it does not make said aesthetic appealing to me. Yay, I can take my work to the one place I should find some semblance of relaxation and best yet I can dress like a Lands End model. Sold!
I will often wear shorts and a warm shirt. My legs can take the cold a lot better than my arms/core. I have actually worn shorts and a jacket to the beach.
Seems pretty narrow-minded. There are many ways to enjoy a beach. A surfer might say the same thing about you just sitting on a towel (or whatever you do at the beach).
I'd love to see a round smart watch that homaged the Rolex GMT look-and-feel and then utilized a rotating (and maybe clickable?) diver-style bezel for input (maybe like the 1st gen ipods) in addition to the touch screen.
Classic, understated look, but another few interesting dimensions of input.
Wow, why has no one done the rotating bezel yet? I hadn't thought about it before, but that seems like such a simple, obvious way to interact with a smartwatch. That should be done.
I think some of the trouble with a rotating bezel is accidental input. I have a diver with a sturdy, mono-directional bezel, and it gets bumped around to odd positions from time to time -- maybe once every couple weeks. And that is with a bezel not designed to be used often.
A UI-driving bezel would have to be bi-directional, for starters. Then, it would have to be looser AND more resilient than normal bezels, since they will be used more often. And even once those items are fine-tuned, we only have navigation without confirmation. Do we press the bezel to confirm? Can the bezel be mounted as a rocker, for multiple inputs, like a volume key? Maybe. A glass or ceramic capacitive bezel, though, would really "wow" me!
I concede that I'd rather have a bezel input than Apple Watch's crown input, which to me looked inconvenient, but seeing as the jury is still out on round vs. square design for these "smartwatch" UIs (a rotating bezel only works on round watches) it would be quite risky from a usability perspective.
Accidental input is a big issue for watches in general. But after a month or so with the Moto 360, I think they struck a good balance. It generally doesn't respond to your input unless you rotate it towards you, which kicks on the display. It's not foolproof, but I think it'd be plenty for most input mechanisms, this bezel included.
As for the square bezel, it'd be interesting to see a sort of 'tread' running around a square bezel, which would be rotatable as well.
I think the bezel would need to be tight enough to not bump easily, and then not be used for destructive input. If it was selection (maybe face selection by default) and got bumped, not a big deal. Or maybe a mix of both a physical bezel with a capacitive function to determine if a finger is causing the rotation? (I do love the tactile click when I rotate mine.)
The concept does require OS-level support though, to get value out of it. Given that Apple didn't do it, I have a hard time seeing it coming out any time soon.
Agreed, the satisfying click of the bezel rotation would be a painful loss.
However, the later-model iPods had a pretty satisfactory capacitive wheel with 4 selection inputs on each directional. The capacitive nature inhibits accidental inputs... maybe not all, but most.
The Nest UI is also wonderful with it's rotation and selection method.
Honestly it would be very interesting to see something like a movable bezel be utilized on a watch... I would definitely like to see it be explored.
Touchscreens are more prone to accidental input, and the solution that smartphones and tablets have is a button to lock/unlock it. I think the same could be done for a rotating bezel - or possibly two buttons, diametrically opposite, that need to be pressed simultaneously in a "pinch" type of motion to unlock it.
The lack of using rotating bits confounds me. I've wanted that since watching Big O years ago. It's such an obvious input method for selection, especially after the iPod popularized it. Truly bizarre blind spot.
The website is horrible. I hate that it dictates how your browser should be sized, with the brilliant text "Please adjust your BROWER for optimal service." - http://cl.ly/image/2i3w2y3h3K35
It's using some weird kind of JS resizing, too – window size doesn't matter but aspect ratio does. Side scrolling instead of vertical, and almost all of the text content is contained in background images. Just terrible.
Call me a nitpicker and you'd be right, but the screenshots in this[1] and other ads[2] where they showcase this watch for GPS navigation while on a bike (or motorcycle) where the watch is not doing a 90 degree rotation on the content area so you can read it while your hands are on some handlebars really bugs me. I guess it bugs me more than some model getting on a motorcycle wearing what looks like a blazer with no helmet or gloves, too.
But to make this comment, say, 20% hn worthy, can someone explain whether it's unrealistic that I think the accelerometer should be able to figure out the "holding handlebars with forward velocity" scenario and orient the display properly?
I find it weird that these smartwatches don't have GPS built in them. I feel like if you were to use it on your runs/bikes, you'd prefer to just be able to take your watch rather than having both your phone and watch.
I could definitely see how excluding it would help price and battery life, but to have a selling point be "it helps with fitness" but with a caveat of "oh, but you have to bring your phone with you too" kinda kills the whole appeal.
This. It seems like most people don't realize how much power GPS requires, especially for it to be on 24/7. Even advanced sport watches (e.g., Garmin's Forerunner 620) don't last half a day with it on.
Android Wear devices don't require GPS, and you're right that most (so far) don't, but the new Sony Smartwatch 3 does have it (and the platform does support it when it's available[0]).
I wish someone would flip the paradigm upside down. Put the whole computer in the watch and then have a dumb screen the size of a credit card that fits in your wallet. You can use that for talking on the phone, browsing the web etc. Make the watch primary and the big screen secondary.
Product apart, this website is horrible. I can't scroll with my mouse. When I opened it on my vertical screen, all I had was a white background with "please adjust your screen"( http://www.lg.com/global/gwatch/images/common/rotate_bg.jpg )...
On a motorcycle, on the highway, looking down on your wrist and reading the directions off a watch is a sure shot way to get killed. What were these designers thinking?
Sincere question -- is your concern looking away from the road, or looking down at your wrist? I take glances out of the direct line of my travel all the time, to check lanes around me, look at the speedometer, tachometer, fuel level, etc.
I do find it surprising that the pictured model would wear it on the right arm, though, since it's much easier to take your left hand off of the handlebar -- you don't tend to need to use the clutch when cruising on a highway, whereas (unless you have a throttle lock) your right hand will typically stay on the bar.
I do think motorcycle safety is important, but your reaction seems a little overboard to me. Having navigation on a small screen on my wrist seems like a relatively nice perk.
Exactly. As a little more paranoid motorcycle rider I'd welcome being able to pull over and check my watch - instead of having to pull over, take off my gloves, unzip my jacket, and check my smartphone.
I've used my Moto 360 on my motorcycle, on the highway, wearing it on my right wrist. It's not for use with gauntlet gloves, but really all you need to know is that you need to take the next exit - a wrist buzz and the screen lighting up is an easy way to tell. Mounting your smartphone on the bars/using bluetooth speakers is obviously preferable, but it's better/safer than duct taping your phone to your wrist (which I have also done).
Wouldn't be the worst thing, but you definitely wouldn't wear it on your right wrist (throttle). 99% of the time if you ride one-handed, it's the left hand (clutch) you lift up.
Hopefully he's wearing a single-ear bluetooth or something in the ear you can't see and getting his turn by turn that way, but the inset of a screenshot and the highly visible watch on his wrist to match certainly give an implied bit of poor usage advice.
In any case, more of a failure of the website marketing team than the watch or Android Wear designers, but it is a valid point.
Those photos are massively overexposed or have some strange HDR processing on them, but it's lovely to see material textures and facial hair in such detail.
The one photo to sell "checking your stocks" is a funny one. "I'm on a yacht looking to the horizon and I NEED to know whether I should BUY BUY BUY or SELL SELL SELL". What a witty photo.
I really wish the could name their products better. Their two watches right now are named:
- LG G Watch
- LG G Watch R
Fortunately, the product is fairly decent. (I've seen it in person.) I happen to have a Samsung Gear Live, which is quite comparable in terms of specs. I think that Android Wear probably needs another year (or 2nd generation of watches) to mature a bit more.
Perhaps a very naive question - how hackable is this?
I mean how hard is it to strip Android off all its phone-home Google goodness and have just the kernel, basic OS services with complete root access? I used to do a lot of embedded work, but I have to plead almost complete ignorance of Android. This watch though ... damn ... so many possibilities for making such a nice toy out of it.
Given the amount of big brand smartwatches that keep surfacing but don't seem to be gaining traction (or at least doesn't appear so) I get the feeling they are going to go the way of tablets - in other words "there isn't a tablet market, there's an iPad market".
BE AWARE OF THE RECENT STATE OF YOUR (CURRENT) HEALTH
That's... quite interestingly worded. It seems to suggest that it only supports repeated single readings on-demand, a shame for sport enthusiasts who would rather not be talking into their watch during the action.
Why isn't there a single chronograph type clock face that displays the current date in an easily readable form and does't clutter month and day of month all other the place?
It's just feels quite unimaginative to stick to the limitations of an mechanical apparatus when you're using a digital display.
Is it possible to have some kind of reflective semi-translucent high contrast High-PPI E-Ink with with a P-OLED Backlight? Or have it flippable?
Why do these product images, all of them, look like a rushed photoshop slap-on hack? Does it mean that LG views this watch as an experimental throw-away project or something?
I think LG, like others, is struggling to push this product out in time for Christmas shopping.
Won't be surprised if they ship it with rather obvious hardware or design issues.
That "where to buy / coming soon" image is not clickable for me, though it looks like an input field.
Anyone else tried using it to find a pre-order form?
The fashion type ad is very good, and very different from most of the other smart watch ads that I've seen. The other ads focus on the watch and technology. The LG ad emphasizes the fashion aspect of the watch and is more consumer oriented which is probably the best thing to do when expanding the market to beyond the early adopters and techno types.
wow, that's an obnoxious website. It won't show anything except a promt to resize my browser window for "optimal service". my browser is covering half a 27" 2560x1440 screen, i think it's probably big enough to show a picture of a wristwatch
This is the first smart watch I've seen that actually looks good. It's clearly aiming to look as much as possible like a traditional watch when not actively being used.
It does look huge on the woman's wrist on the second slide/page/section thing. Big watches tend to be a men's fashion thing, so I wonder if this will present problems.
The heart rate feature seems really out of place and useless. What use is a recent history of your heart rate? Presumably there are plans to integrate more features into the health part of things, because at the moment it looks a lot like a "because we can" feature.
Wow. A "responsive" page that hates all but a couple specific aspect ratios. It literally won't show you the page if you aren't in an aspect ratio it expects. WTF? http://d.pr/i/12ZBj
I had a similar issue, tfw "responsive" means adapting to the site rules, not the other way around. Reminds me of "This site is best viewed in 1024x768", just poor web dev work.
I wish that this doesn't require any phone. I wish that the watch could completely replace the smartphone. You'd look really stupid looking at your watch all the time while you are walking or in the restaurant.
I'm not sure that's possible or desirable. They're relying on a bigger device for their cellular connection. Given that there's no immediate mention of battery life, we can assume it's quite a problem already without jamming more radios in there.
http://media.gizmodo.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/DSCF71...
From full Gizmodo review here: http://gizmodo.com/lg-g-watch-r-review-worthy-of-your-wrist-...