News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Apple Watch by georgemcbay on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:40PM (#8292263)
Who would have thunk that of all the end-of-2014 smartwatches, the one that would make you look the least like a dork would be the one from Motorola?

Shame about the battery life, though. Please fix that Motorola, I want to give you my money so bad, but cannot do it until you fix the battery life.

Re:The Apple Watch by dkulchenko on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @05:38PM (#8293363)
Actual Moto 360 owner here to dispel the two most common complains because I'm tired of hearing them parroted online. You'll find that you only hear them from people who've never actually used/seen the watch in person.

1. Battery life. The initial reviews complaining about battery life are simply inaccurate. I have ambient mode on (always-on screen) which is supposed to kill battery, and am easily getting a day out of this watch (ending 16 hour days with 20-30% remaining). I'm using the watch all the time to read emails, respond to messages, etc. If you don't believe me, check /r/moto360, you'll find a bunch of people who actually have the watch corroborating that the battery life is perfectly fine.

2. Size. I have tiny wrists and it looks great on my arm. Not too thick or too big at all, and very much on par with typical men's watches. The fact that it's very light helps too.

It's a fantastic device and I'm really enjoying it.

Re:The Apple Watch by drzaiusapelord on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @07:37PM (#8294053)
I saw a girl wearing a moto 360 on the train yesterday. This was my first sighting in the wild. She just looked like a normal fashionable girl wearing a "boyfriend" sized watch. I think the size argument is very much overplayed. Large watches are already the norm, which is nice for smartwatches that'll be unusuable at super-petite sizes.
Re:The Apple Watch by georgemcbay on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @07:01PM (#8293877)
Thanks for the feedback; I'm now intrigued enough that I will at least try to find someone local to me that has one to get some real world impressions.

If the battery life is indeed a lot better than the vast majority of reviews are stating then Motorola really needs to get ahead of this message, because it would be foolish for them to expect most people to spend $250 just to try the device out when there is such a clear consensus of a major problem in the published reviews.

The size was never an issue for me because that's an easily measurable spec and I'm okay with the size as specced, but buying the device when almost all the reviews are telling me the watch will be dead in 12 hours represents a pretty big leap of faith, so if it really isn't an issue (other than PR), I do hope Motorola finds a way to get past it.

Re:The Apple Watch by taude on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:04PM (#8292563)
You know, I was thinking the same thing. I think I prefer the roundness of the 360, than the rectangular Apple design. However, you won't catch me wearing either of them until you don't have to have a phone with you.

I'm thinking Minimum Viable Phone (or communications device) that I can wear on my wrist when doing thing, and have some casual interactions with text messaging, and glancing at emails)...

Re:The Apple Watch by Kequc on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @04:37AM (#8295531)
But I never leave my phone behind anywhere and the way the watches work is quite brilliant in that they interface with your phone. They do everything you can do on your phone but at a glance, that's the whole point of them. They are small, easily accessible and harness the power of a larger device.

I fear that you might be representing too small a fragment of the market to get your desired product.

Re:The Apple Watch by andor on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @07:51PM (#8294098)
The Samsung Gear S will have a 3G radio of its own.

http://www.samsungmobilepress.com/2014/08/28/Samsung-Gear-S-...

Edit: replaced link

Re:The Apple Watch by masklinn on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:12PM (#8292670)
> I'm thinking Minimum Viable Phone (or communications device) that I can wear on my wrist when doing thing, and have some casual interactions with text messaging, and glancing at emails)...

The problem's these require extensive radio interaction/SoC, without a phone support (which can stream the information via bluetooth LE) you have to carry that in the watch itself.

Re:The Apple Watch by taude on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:16PM (#8292719)
Yeup. So wake me when this becomes a reality: I'm sure somone's patenting building a cellular antenna into a watch band as I type this. Plus, I'm sure 6G networks will be faster and require even less power....
Re:The Apple Watch by eloisant on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @05:09PM (#8293167)
They exist, but I don't think the experience is great.

http://fr.aliexpress.com/item/Intelligent-Bluetooth-watch-mo...

Re:The Apple Watch by masklinn on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:20PM (#8292757)
The antenna is not the problem, the radio chips (and power) are.
Re:The Apple Watch by alwaysdoit on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @05:09PM (#8293165)
Specifically, you need enough power to regularly transmit an electromagnetic signal on the order of miles that scales with the inverse square law.

Considering that they can't even get the battery life up without that requirement, it might be a while unless we make significant scientific breakthroughs in battery or wireless technology.

Re:The Apple Watch by andor on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @07:56PM (#8294113)
Considering that they can't even get the battery life up without that requirement, it might be a while unless we make significant scientific breakthroughs in battery or wireless technology.

"Both the Samsung Gear S and the Gear Circle will be available in global markets in phases through Samsung’s retail channels, e-commerce websites and via carriers beginning October."

Re:The Apple Watch by alwaysdoit on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @02:49PM (#8298282)
Gear Circle requires a smartphone for connectivity. I'm interested to see what kind of battery life the Gear S is able to get with a 300mAh battery.
Re:The Apple Watch by AJ007 on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @05:21PM (#8293261)
Those will be built in to the Apple Pants. You can leave your iPhone at home, you will just need to wear these special pants.
Re:The Apple Watch by masklinn on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:55PM (#8292459)
> the one that would make you look the least like a dork would be the one from Motorola?

The band connection to the very bottom is really too bad, it makes the watch look extremely thick.

Re:The Apple Watch by wikyd on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:08PM (#8292627)
Thanks! I was trying to figure out why the Watch looks thick from the side, but seemed not too thick in photos on peoples' wrists. That explains it.
Re:The Apple Watch by masklinn on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:18PM (#8292742)
Yes, bracelet attachment really makes a world of difference, I was shocked to learn that the 360 is "only" 11.5mm thick but looks much thicker than mechanical chronographs (routinely 15mm thick), and I've had multiple friends comment the 360 was a no-go due to thickness
Re:The Apple Watch by yincrash on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @10:29AM (#8296679)
For non-Mac users, the parent typed "(apple-logo)Watch". The Apple logo is only visible to mac (and iOS?) users because it's in the private use area on fonts on macs.
Re:The Apple Watch by fixedd on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @02:36PM (#8298197)
And Linux users, apparently.
Re:The Apple Watch by 4thjuly on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:06PM (#8292593)
Although it makes it much more comfortable to wear.
Re:The Apple Watch by marincounty on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:03PM (#8292561)
Yea--it's like they went out of their way to screw up the design? Tim should have taken off the watch and smashed it on the floor--said sorry; we will be back!

The Swiss are going to sleep well tonight.

I really wanted to like this?

Re:The Apple Watch by acjohnson55 on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:51PM (#8292402)
I feel like the next gen Moto watch will have the better SoC, much better battery life (as many Android watches already have) and higher resolution. And maybe more sensors. And hopefully match some of Apple's innovations.

I think I'm about a year from being able to join the bandwagon.

Re:The Apple Watch by dwild on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:01PM (#8292535)
Which Apple's innovations?
Re:The Apple Watch by Cookingboy on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:04PM (#8292564)
Watch to watch direct communication, haptic feedback, force sensitive screen on a sapphire display, just to name a few?
Re:The Apple Watch by deong on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @05:28PM (#8293297)
The watch-to-watch communication with all the sharing your heart rate and sending little pictures was the most Samsung thing I've ever seen anyone but Samsung do. Seriously, is there a real problem lurking around somewhere for which this is a solution?

The force sensitive display might be useful, I couldn't really tell from the coverage. At least one person there commented that they were having a hard time seeing the big difference between "force press" and "long press".

Is the "Taptic" feedback significantly different that the vibrating motor present on every other watch? I can't really tell, but I think functionally, vibration can already serve the purpose well enough, although the Apple implementation might be a bit more elegant -- I can't find enough information to say for sure.

I would say the Apple innovations here is mainly the digital crown. On every smartwatch, there's a lot of swiping around to do basic navigation, but there's not been a really good way to zoom in and out. Apple's implementation allows for apps like their photo demo to be more practical. I'm suspicious that they might be overusing it -- the idea of needing to zoom around to launch apps seems less like a good idea, but overall the novel input method is an innovation I'd say.

I assume they must have NFC in the watch to handle the payments system. That's (I think) novel among the smartwatch lineup, and maybe that's a thing that really catches on.

Mostly though, I think that the people who complained that Android Wear was just a mini cell phone on your wrist should be disappointed with the Apple Watch as well. I'm not one of them for the record, I'm wearing the Gear Live right now, and I quite like it. But I don't think Apple has revolutionized the smart watch. They've just made what looks to be a solid entry into the market.

Re:The Apple Watch by blinkingled on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @07:53PM (#8294105)
> The watch-to-watch communication with all the sharing your heart rate and sending little pictures was the most Samsung thing I've ever seen anyone but Samsung do.

Haha, yes I thought the same thing too - communicating heart rates, hand drawn fish for sushi, 3 dots for asking lunch - that was _very_ un-Apple-y.

Re:The Apple Watch by aioprisan on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @09:05PM (#8294346)
"But think of the teenagers! They will love this feature!" - words probably uttered at Apple HQ during the design phase that made Steve Jobs shake in his grave
Re:The Apple Watch by deong on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @09:45PM (#8294458)
And of course the one thing we've heard over and over for the past few years from Apple is "teenagers don't wear watches". Presumably one could also add, "teenagers don't have a grand in cash to spend on a phone/watch combo" as well.

I think the logical conclusion to draw here is that there was an elaborate "Trading Spaces" style bet in the Apple executive ranks on who could get Tim Cook onstage doing the most ridiculous product demo. Kudos to whoever won that one.

Re:The Apple Watch by interpol_p on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @10:23AM (#8296658)
> The watch-to-watch communication with all the sharing your heart rate and sending little pictures was the most Samsung thing I've ever seen anyone but Samsung do. Seriously, is there a real problem lurking around somewhere for which this is a solution?

I don't know that it felt Samsung. When I heard about the feature I immediately thought of how I might use it with my wife and family. It basically takes the trivial communication you have with people close to you throughout the day and makes it more physical and less complex. I don't think I've gotten that feeling from Samsung features — that said, I don't really have any desire to wear this (or any) watch at all.

> The force sensitive display might be useful, I couldn't really tell from the coverage. At least one person there commented that they were having a hard time seeing the big difference between "force press" and "long press".

Yeah, I'd like to know more about this. It felt like one of the more clever features if it is actually distinct from long press. That is, if it can feel easily distinguishable from a press or swipe while still feeling intuitive, I think they will really have something.

> Is the "Taptic" feedback significantly different that the vibrating motor present on every other watch? I can't really tell, but I think functionally, vibration can already serve the purpose well enough, although the Apple implementation might be a bit more elegant -- I can't find enough information to say for sure.

Well according to the keynote the "Taptic" feedback unit can actually mark out directions on your wrist. That is, telling you to turn left or right when you come to an intersection purely through touch. So unless it's something stupid like "two vibrates for left, one for right" it might actually be something interesting.

> the idea of needing to zoom around to launch apps seems less like a good idea, but overall the novel input method is an innovation I'd say.

It sounds like you can do either. They mention tapping to zoom in on an "app neighbourhood" and tapping once again to launch an app. I also think the digital crown is quite clever — and it will be a very Apple-thing to pull off if they can make it feel truly one-to-one with the UI animations.

> I assume they must have NFC in the watch to handle the payments system.

I've read that the NFC payments through the watch will be tied to skin contact. So they will only work while the device is touching your skin. If you lose skin contact you'll have to re-enter your pin code next time you wear the watch to enable payments. Seems like a well thought out use case.

> Mostly though, I think that the people who complained that Android Wear was just a mini cell phone on your wrist should be disappointed with the Apple Watch as well. I'm not one of them for the record, I'm wearing the Gear Live right now, and I quite like it. But I don't think Apple has revolutionized the smart watch. They've just made what looks to be a solid entry into the market.

I agree. Though I'm a little disappointed that the Apple Watch attempts to be so many things.

Re:The Apple Watch by Kayou on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @06:29PM (#8293718)
I hope so. Just by switching to a Cortex A7 or A53 @ 22nm instead of Cortex A8 @ 45nm, this should add 78% more battery life (according to the benchmark of Ars Technica). And by having a round battery instead of a square one, 57% more capacity. So if this 360 lasts 12h, we're looking at more than 33 hours of battery life. But the 78% improvement with a Cortex A7 would be under heavy load, probably not the same story for IDLE usage.
Re:The Apple Watch by drzaiusapelord on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @07:35PM (#8294043)
I was really expecting, from a looks perspective, that the Moto would look like garbage compared to the Apple watch. Instead we got the opposite. A made a little write-up here:

http://nothingjustworks.com/android-may-have-just-won-the-sm...

Re:The Apple Watch by rimantas on Wednesday September 10, 2014 @04:54AM (#8295588)
Android makes watches now? :O
Re:The Apple Watch by aikah on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:15PM (#8292710)
I love what moto did with their watch, the shape is great and the design is elegant. I personally dont like the shape of the Apple watch,but I'm waiting for more infos about battery life.
Re:The Apple Watch by gnopgnip on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @05:41PM (#8293386)
Withings Activite is a much better looking smartwatch
Re:The Apple Watch by skc on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:51PM (#8292393)
I haven't seen anything on battery life actually. You have some estimates?
Re:The Apple Watch by amitdeshwar on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:55PM (#8292455)
The Ars review talks about the poor battery life: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/09/moto-360-review-beaut...
Re:The Apple Watch by georgemcbay on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:17PM (#8292735)
Verge too:

http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/5/6108947/moto-360-review

OTOH, gizmodo says the battery life isn't quite that bad:

http://gizmodo.com/moto-360-battery-life-test-so-far-not-as-...

... but every other review I've read (about 6 including these) has really hammered it on the battery being dead well before the day is over.

I'm sure there is some YMMV depending upon usage and a moto 360 might last me a full day personally (since I'm not a reviewer and wouldn't be doing... reviewer things with it all day), but I'm not willing to slap down $250 to find out when even the positive reviews say it has the weakest battery life of all the current crop of watches. I can wait until revision 2 hits to be sure that I only have to take the thing off once per day.

Re:The Apple Watch by lagnarok on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:22PM (#8292771)
My primary gripe with the Moto 360 is that it's huge. My wrists just aren't big enough to sport a watch that size and not look or feel silly.
Re:The Apple Watch by krschultz on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:55PM (#8293058)
It's not "huge", it's smaller than a lot of analog watches I own.
Re:The Apple Watch by dkulchenko on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @05:41PM (#8293387)
I have tiny wrists and own a Moto 360. It's not huge at all. Try one on at a BB once they're in stores and see for yourself.