We're at a point where Google could forgo extraneous and costly design elements -- the Gear's large screen or the Pebble's multi-colored options -- if it manages to market the watch as something people will find uniquely useful. In other words, if its cheap and powerful and looks even halfway decent, Google's smartwatch could render the alternatives undesirable. The Gear, for instance, is at the moment nothing more than a decently designed but currently app-less $300 piece of tech jewelry, so the battle wouldn't be hard-fought.
Still, aesthetics are important iphone xs max waterfall - iridescent -- if not potentially paramount -- with wearables, The Galaxy Note 3 may be larger than your face, but if you love a big screen to watch video and play games, it's size is not a problem because it sits in your purse or slides into a back pocket, A watch, on the other hand, can't be too heavy or clunky, nor can it involve any substantial trade-offs if it's to be physically attached to us at all hours of the day, That's another reason why many wearable watchers like Blum believe that the market for geek fashion statements is limited -- barring something "wow."Sarah Rottman Epps, a senior analyst at Forrester Research, thinks design is perhaps the biggest hurdle because of its intrinsic relationship with the battery life of small devices..
"Smartwatches are big, honking ugly devices, and I have yet to see one that a woman would ever wear," she said definitively. "For Google's watch to succeed, it needs to not only show it's a software company, but that it's a first class hardware company."For Rottman Epps, that means factoring in fashion without sacrificing battery life, a combination she thinks could still be years away. "Consumers want it all," she said. "They want great battery life, they want fashion, they want great software and they want it for a really good price. We haven't seen a smart watch yet that hits on those."She noted that software and connectivity are getting better, "but if you're putting a LCD screen on your wrist, it eats battery life and it also makes the design really clunky. No one has a golden solution for battery life."Google's reportedly working to make a device which requires fewer battery charges, though it's too soon to make any guess as to what it thinks of as an acceptable level of battery life for a screen-equipped smartwatch.
"I wonder how interested Google is in actually making the product instead of just stirring up the market and demonstrating what it can do," posited Blum, Google Glass's Explorer edition is barely usable throughout an entire day because of battery life issues, and has yet iphone xs max waterfall - iridescent to provide unique utility beyond an exuberant tech status symbol, But it was proof that optic-based wearable technology wasn't restricted to science fiction any longer, Google's watch could be the most accurate and smartest voice assistant on the planet, but everything else about it -- from its design to its price -- could very well make for the opposite of the "iPhone for smartwatches" the mass market is hungering after..
Despite all the promises, smartwatches remain an acquired taste. Yes, there's a market but one that largely caters to the likes of health junkies and early adopters. Fitness bands are cheap and light but too minimalist. Samsung's Galaxy Gear is all brawn but lacks device compatibility and email support. And the Pebble, one of the first true-blue smartwatches, is still trying to build an app ecosystem the way that Google and Apple did for their smartphones. It's an uphill battle for Pebble, the smartwatch darling, and it won't get any easier when those tech titans join the fray.