Am I the only one who goes "meh" at all these wearables?

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Lumo, Fitbit, etc. all this stuff that's supposed to act like a smart device, reminding you of this and that, can't that all be accomplished with a phone? And maybe the phone needs a bit more bells and whistles, but it should be doable, no? For example the Nexus 5 already has a step counter. Granted it's nowhere as good as a Fitbit, but this could change?

 

[cronos]

They're definitely more of a fashion statement than anything else (sort of like the iPhones prior to iPhone 4).

Oh and I'm pretty sure that Google Now has some kind of step counter as well, so there you go.

 

[Ravynmagi]

Lumo, Fitbit, etc. all this stuff that's supposed to act like a smart device, reminding you of this and that, can't that all be accomplished with a phone? And maybe the phone needs a bit more bells and whistles, but it should be doable, no? For example the Nexus 5 already has a step counter. Granted it's nowhere as good as a Fitbit, but this could change?

I'll agree, I'm not super excited about wearables. But I did end up buying a Fitbit Force. Was actually about to return it, but missed my return window by a day (doh).

The nice thing about my Fitbit is it's always tracking my activity. A phone could do this, but it wouldn't be very good for me because I have a large 5 inch phone and tend to put it down on my desk sometimes and when I'm at home I always leave it on a table. So that is a lot of time it wouldn't be tracking me. And the Fitbit also tracks my sleep, which a phone can't do.

My problem with the wearables is they are a bit expensive. $130 for a pedometer, I probably paid a bit too much. The social aspect is nice, I have a few friends using it. And it motivates me a little. So I guess its' not the worst thing I've spent $130 on. But I wish it did a bit more, had a better always on watch.

And that's an issue I see with a lot of wearables. Most of the activity trackers have little or no watches on them. Most of the watches don't have activity trackers. I'm puzzled why these two worlds haven't come together yet.

 

[BrightCandle]

Everyone kind of said the same thing about smartphones back when Microsoft owned the market with Windows CE. Baby steps will eventually lead to a real product that gets people excited and its well worth playing in this space to try and determine what is worth making and move us on. 10 years ago tablets were heavy, Windows based and had very little battery life. A decade of progress and now they are much lighter, have capacitive touch interfaces and the software is much more refined. Yet tablets as a concept existed 10 years ago it never took off, it took refinement before it caught on.

Wearables will catch on, its simple a matter of refinement.

 

[Red Storm]

The only wearables I'm interested in are Google Glass, and Oculus Rift.

 

[KidNiki1]

i dont carry my phone around in my pocket all the time (sometimes i don't even have pockets to put it in) and im not sure how well a phone based step counter would work in my purse. especially when my purse is in a desk or on a counter somewhere where i am not.

my fitbit force, while basically a bracelet, is not something i would consider fashionable so i completely disagree with it being a fashion item. it's bulky and not something i wear to make a 'statement' at all. i wear it for functionality.

it tracks my steps and helps motivate me to move around and walk more. also, since i leave it on while i sleep, i can use it to track my sleeping habits (waking up a lot, etc). it also has a vibrate alarm that wakes me up without being loud or disruptive to anyone else.

i do agree about it being a little bit on the spendy side.

i do use apps on my phone for specifically taking walks, in addition to having the fitbit on, but thats because the phone does gps level mapping and i like to see where i went through the neighborhood and how that worked out in miles. the phone apps also provide a mph rate which i find useful for comparing when i walk with the dog vs walking with others vs walking by myself. if the fitbit could do those things, i would probably still use my phone for music.

as it is now, it works for me to use the two technologies in conjunction rather than feeling the need for one over the other.

 

[openwheel]

that's because they don't have the fruit.

 

[crashtestdummy]

Everyone kind of said the same thing about smartphones back when Microsoft owned the market with Windows CE. Baby steps will eventually lead to a real product that gets people excited and its well worth playing in this space to try and determine what is worth making and move us on. 10 years ago tablets were heavy, Windows based and had very little battery life. A decade of progress and now they are much lighter, have capacitive touch interfaces and the software is much more refined. Yet tablets as a concept existed 10 years ago it never took off, it took refinement before it caught on.

Wearables will catch on, its simple a matter of refinement.

This, for the most part. I'm not excited at all at this point, but I'm also not an early adopter. In 5-10 years, when they've come up with a compelling reason to have one and a significant amount of the economy revolves around having one (like smartphones now), then maybe I'll get one.

 

[bearxor]

I'm actually kind of enjoying my Pebble now. I can leave my phone in my pocket and only pull it out for things that are important. Looking forward to getting the app store and some more functionality, especially fitness stuff. If that doesn't pan out, i'd probably look at a FitBit Force.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Everyone kind of said the same thing about smartphones back when Microsoft owned the market with Windows CE. Baby steps will eventually lead to a real product that gets people excited and its well worth playing in this space to try and determine what is worth making and move us on. 10 years ago tablets were heavy, Windows based and had very little battery life. A decade of progress and now they are much lighter, have capacitive touch interfaces and the software is much more refined. Yet tablets as a concept existed 10 years ago it never took off, it took refinement before it caught on.

Wearables will catch on, its simple a matter of refinement.

Really? Back then I was just thinking it was a matter of when a smart device will trickle down to the masses. I think price was a huge factor when smartphones were first coming out. Plus data plans. The iPhone 3G pricing changed everything with the $199 pricing, and it's the same reason why every smartphone uses that pricing now too.

I see this kinda like netbooks. It's a niche market, and you can easily replace them with ultrabooks or tablets. Like smartwatches I can see them having a place because they're more of an extension of your phone, but all the whole Lumo thing, really? And Fitbit can be accomplished on a phone I'm pretty sure.

 

[pm]

My mother gave me a Fitbit One for my birthday. It's kind of neat. I'm certain that I'd never actually buy one myself, but since it was a gift, I've been using it and it seems vaguely useful in a limited sort of way.

 

[BrightCandle]

The original Windows CE smart phones were about £230, it wasn't a price issue it was a capability problem. They were in many ways awesome for email, but they were not fast enough to run a web browser. It took a lot of technologies to come together and reach a particular maturity before smartphones took off. 3G was a vital one (2G was too slow), as was lithium ion batteries and the rise of ARM processors to a performance level that was made possible by improved silicon processes. It wasn't really a price issue, they just weren't anywhere near as a useful as they were when all this tech came together into a device.

We probably will have smart watches and other devices like glass or maybe just blue tooth like ear pieces that we talk to (and talk back). But none of it is really there or compelling for the majority yet.

 

[bearxor]

The original Windows CE smart phones were about £230, it wasn't a price issue it was a capability problem. They were in many ways awesome for email, but they were not fast enough to run a web browser. It took a lot of technologies to come together and reach a particular maturity before smartphones took off. 3G was a vital one (2G was too slow), as was lithium ion batteries and the rise of ARM processors to a performance level that was made possible by improved silicon processes. It wasn't really a price issue, they just weren't anywhere near as a useful as they were when all this tech came together into a device.

We probably will have smart watches and other devices like glass or maybe just blue tooth like ear pieces that we talk to (and talk back). But none of it is really there or compelling for the majority yet.

My first Windows CE smart device cost $650 USD.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Thanks to the excellent advice here (that I originally rejected but then went with) I bought my wife a Force for Christmas. She loves hers- it lets her know how active she is day-to-day and then therefore how much to eat and how hard to workout tomorrow. I can't wait until it lets her do call screening (she has an iPhone).

I would love a good smartwatch if they would just make one. Until they do, I am considering getting an Up just for the silent alarm.

 

[pm]

I will say one nice thing about the fitbit is the ~5 day battery life. I could use my phone as a pedometer, but whenever I do that, I notice a massive decrease in battery life. It's nice to have something that just sits in my pockets and that doesn't need frequent charging rather than using my phone and having to deal with barely getting through a day of use.

 

[biostud]

couldn't care less.

 

[BladeVenom]

Until you have something that combines the best features of Google Glass with Oculus Rift for augmented reality, then I think I'll stick with something I can carry in my hand.

 

[WelshBloke]

I agree with the OP.
I spend pretty much all my 12 hour shift on my feet, I don't need my steps counted!

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

I guess the thing is people already had a chance with pedometers. Those things existed for years, and I remember some dumbphones had them like the Sony Ericsson Walkman phones. I mean what's the big deal? Create a brand new website with a typical startup minimalistic look and it's all the rage to wear a pedometer on your wrist now? If you were serious about monitoring your activity, you would've done it with a pedometer, and how many people are making serious changes to their lifestyle? To me it doesn't take a glorified pedometer to do it, which is why Fitbit et. al are complete hype to me.

My friend showed me how many times she woke up last night. My question is is she going to do anything about it? I'm going to sleep on. If anything, you can find out your sleep cycle already without even using a fitbit.

I guess my point is you can already accomplish these tasks, so why the change now? I guess it's a fashion and cool statement.

 

[dagamer34]

People seem not to be aware that the iPhone was not the first smartphone. There were smartphones a good 6 years before the iPhone. As such, it takes a while to figure out what is "good".

 

[Joe1987]

I'm waiting for the Samsung c@ck ring so I can be my true quantified self.

:awe:


But yeah, as time goes on, I'm thinking the technology isn't mature enough to hold my interest.

A wrist screen is too small, and voice recognition isn't good enough to be the only means of interacting with a "smart watch"

 

[corkyg]

Am I the only one who goes "meh" at all these wearables?

No, not at all. There are, IMHO, too many people tied to communications gadgets who are not paying enough attention to what they are physically doing.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I guess the thing is people already had a chance with pedometers. Those things existed for years, and I remember some dumbphones had them like the Sony Ericsson Walkman phones. I mean what's the big deal? Create a brand new website with a typical startup minimalistic look and it's all the rage to wear a pedometer on your wrist now? If you were serious about monitoring your activity, you would've done it with a pedometer, and how many people are making serious changes to their lifestyle? To me it doesn't take a glorified pedometer to do it, which is why Fitbit et. al are complete hype to me.

My friend showed me how many times she woke up last night. My question is is she going to do anything about it? I'm going to sleep on. If anything, you can find out your sleep cycle already without even using a fitbit.

I guess my point is you can already accomplish these tasks, so why the change now? I guess it's a fashion and cool statement.

You CAN use the data to make good conclusions.

Like for example I will sneak a look at my wife's phone in the morning to see how well she slept, as its a proxy to her mood that day. I know when to walk on eggshells.

That to me alone is worth the $130 or whatever.

 

[Red Storm]

You CAN use the data to make good conclusions.

Like for example I will sneak a look at my wife's phone in the morning to see how well she slept, as its a proxy to her mood that day. I know when to walk on eggshells.

That to me alone is worth the $130 or whatever.

lol, that would make for a great targeted ad towards guys buying for their woman.

 

[poofyhairguy]

lol, that would make for a great targeted ad towards guys buying for their woman.

Actually the big thing there is the activity monitoring plus calorie counting almost gave her an eating disorder. I told her to stop inputting calorie consumption, but it certainly had an effect for a while. It is quite a trojan horse for the classic problem of "how do I push my SO to stay in shape?"

"Here honey, a new piece of the latest in technology (that will make you feel more self conscious than the scale and mirror put together)!"