Why smartwatches failed

Discussion in 'Wearables' started by scjjtt, Aug 27, 2017.

  1. scjjtt

    scjjtt A Former Palm User

    Messages:
    1,973
    Likes Received:
    3,064
    Trophy Points:
    288
    I think they failed because I like them!

    Interesting stats from the write up...

    Strategy Analytics said that during the first quarter of this year, Apple owned 57% of the market with its Apple Watches, while Samsung and Google are battling for scraps with 19% share with Tizen and 18% Android Wear. (Gartner says Apple will stay on top until at least 2021.)

    http://www.computerworld.com/article/3219854/wearables/why-smartwatches-failed.html

    Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
     
    lelisa13p, jigwashere, Mi An and 2 others like this.
  2. Hook

    Hook Phone Killer ;-) Arrrrr...f

    Messages:
    18,455
    Likes Received:
    6,980
    Trophy Points:
    288
    The article reflects a lot of my own conclusions that chased me away from smartwatches. Since I don't even care about notifications on my phone --I'll check email, texts, etc when I feel like checking them-- I clearly was not a customer for a smartwatch. :vbwink:
     
    scjjtt, lelisa13p and jigwashere like this.
  3. Mi An

    Mi An Nexus Refugee

    Messages:
    5,147
    Likes Received:
    3,945
    Trophy Points:
    288
    I think CW danced around the battery issue while over-emphasizing everything else (much of which connects peripherally to the battery issue). The 'dumber' smartwatches they noted were more successful were the ones with a week of battery life. The rest seemed like they struggled mightily to get through a whole day. In the context of a watch replacement where you could survive years between battery maintenance, that's quite a shock.

    I suspect even people who wouldn't identify the battery as the reason their swatch ended up in a drawer were most heavily influenced by battery issues. They might say the limited functionality wasn't worth it... but what's 'it'? I'm betting 'it' is actually battery monitoring, not the price tag. The same features with ambient charging would be a slam dunk, maybe even for me.

    But maybe I'm just projecting. I hate battery maintenance so much.
     
  4. raspabalsa

    raspabalsa Brain stuck BogoMipping

    Messages:
    8,241
    Likes Received:
    3,646
    Trophy Points:
    288
    I fully agree with Mi An, and the limited battery life is the main reason that's prevented me from getting a smartwatch. It's bothersome enough to keep the cellphone charged through one day, and to add a second device to this is too much of a hassle IMO. For me, most all other features/limitations of the smartwatch are subordinated to this one. In fact, for some time I considered getting one of the dumber smartwatches (what an oxymoron!) such as some Martian and Casio models because of their resemblance to regular watches and their battery life. But still they've failed to impress me enough to get one.
     
    Last edited: Aug 27, 2017
    scjjtt, lelisa13p, jigwashere and 2 others like this.
  5. Hook

    Hook Phone Killer ;-) Arrrrr...f

    Messages:
    18,455
    Likes Received:
    6,980
    Trophy Points:
    288
    I agree with MiAn and Raspy, but never got that far. No, for me, the stop was lack if desirable functionality. Only then, would the battery issue *also* have stopped me.

    Loved the advertising line of a Detroit conventional watch maker used recently: "Our watches are so smart, they can tell you the time just by looking at them." :vbrolleyes: (Paraphrased from memory)

    Of course, I wouldn't pay for their watches either. A $25-$30 Timex is just fine. :thumbsup:
     
    scjjtt, lelisa13p, jigwashere and 3 others like this.
  6. raspabalsa

    raspabalsa Brain stuck BogoMipping

    Messages:
    8,241
    Likes Received:
    3,646
    Trophy Points:
    288
    Re-reading the article, I believe it doesn't offer enough data to support its main premise:

    The author takes just one data point (Google Glass), presents it as a success story -which is still highly debatable, as Google Glass still has very low penetration of the enterprise market-, and generalizes to include all wearable devices. Are there actually other similar cases to support that premise?
     
    scjjtt, lelisa13p and jigwashere like this.
  7. lelisa13p

    lelisa13p Your Super Moderator Super Moderator

    Messages:
    22,348
    Likes Received:
    4,523
    Trophy Points:
    288
    I was wondering about Google Glass a few days ago. Isn't it defunct?
     
    scjjtt likes this.
  8. jigwashere

    jigwashere Life is a circus!

    Messages:
    16,024
    Likes Received:
    8,164
    Trophy Points:
    288
    Google Glass seems to be making a come back in some areas.



    BUSINESS
    AGCO among manufacturers seeing benefits of reborn Google Glass
    [​IMG]

    By DEE DEPASS , STAR TRIBUNE
    August 12, 2017 - 11:36 AM

    Google Glass pulled its smart eyeglasses from the consumer marketplace two years ago after privacy advocates screeched that the oh-so-cool computerized specs might be usurped by ne’er-do-wells to make secret YouTube videos.

    Fast forward two years. Glass has been reborn as an emerging “lean” industrial tool inside AGCO’s custom-tractor factory in Jackson, Minn. The technology cut costs so successfully, it will soon be rolled out to AGCO factories worldwide.


    Here’s why.

    Instead of repeatedly scrambling between a tractor on the production line and an instructional monitor 15 feet away, AGCO assemblers now just don a pair of Google smart glasses and scan a tractor’s serial number to get all instructions needed.

    The scan — or just the click of a button on the side of the eyeglasses — immediately downloads the tractor manual, assembly instructions, checklists or photos onto the tiny eyeglass computer screen above the worker’s right lens. The smart eyeglasses also use voice commands to free hands and so workers can leave voice notes or instructions for the next shift worker just by talking to the eyeglasses.


    “It’s neat stuff. With Glass, we have seen a significant increase in productivity, and our factory employees have reported being much happier doing their jobs,” said Peggy Gulick, director of business process improvement for AGCO.

    Since the giant tractor plant began experimenting with Glass technology three years ago, training, production and inspection times have dropped 25 to 70 percent. Right now, the factory has 850 workers but only 100 pairs of the smart glasses.

    “We will have 500 to 1,000 pairs in the next 12 to 18 months” in AGCO facilities in Minnesota, Kansas, Illinois, Germany, Italy and Brazil, Gulick said.

    AGCO is one of 50 corporate pioneers — which also include Boeing, Volkswagen, General Electric and DHL — that found commercial uses for Google’s consumer glasses inside factories or warehouses. With the partners’ input, Google reintroduced its defunct consumer Glass product last month. The new, lighter and commercial version is dubbed the Glass Enterprise Edition.

    “AGCO was an early adopter of Glass in the workplace, and their business results highlight how useful it can be for manufacturing workers to have all the information they need to get the job done right in their line of sight,” said Jay Kothari, the Glass Project lead at Google X.

    Like Google, Microsoft, Sony, Epson and Daqri are also developing “augmented reality” eyeglasses that might help manufacturing customers design prototypes, produce goods more efficiently, and train workers faster. Market research firm Forrester predicts that by 2025, 14 million workers will regularly use such devices to perform their jobs.


    “But right now, we are still very much in the early days of this [growing] technology,” said Alex West, principal analyst of IHS Markit’s smart manufacturing division. A recent IHS survey of 400 manufacturers found 20 percent were conducting trials or planning to use augmented reality devices next year.

    Some early adopters, like Lockheed Martin, used smart glasses to let factory workers and third-party engineers communicate remotely to fix problems. Some glasses let workers Skype with product support centers. In some cases, the glasses overlap an employee’s real product image with virtual instructive images that show where a particular part should go, West said.

    “Lockheed Martin introduced augmented reality solutions from Epson while manufacturing their F-35 fighter planes. And they have introduced glasses that show engineers where they should be fitting different parts along with things like the parts numbers,” West said. “They reckon there is a 30 percent productivity improvement for just helping engineers work more effectively.”

    AGCO saw similar results, Gulick said.

    AGCO’s journey with smart glasses started in late 2013, when an information technology worker in Minnesota received a pair of consumer smart glasses from Google.

    From there, he and other employees spent 2014 dreaming of how the gee-whiz eyeglasses might be used inside AGCO.


    The first solid idea solved a major problem, Gulick said.

    AGCO’s quality inspectors regularly used $3,000 computer tablets to perform quality checks on each custom-made tractor. But the tablets often dropped, broke or were run over. Perhaps smart eyeglasses could solve that.

    To find out, AGCO bought 12 Google Glass sets from Google in 2014 for about $1,100 to $1,500 each.

    The company asked its safety-equipment vendor, 3M Co., to retrofit the 12 smart glasses with safety glass so they complied with OSHA factory guidelines.

    Next, Gulick, AGCO system analyst Dane Zittritsch and the rest of the team partnered with Belgium software firm Proceedix.

    The software maker equipped the smart glasses with Wi-Fi accessible software so any AGCO worker could download tractor assembly instructions, checklists or process videos just by touching the eyeglass arm, talking or scanning a bar code.

    AGCO, Proceedix and Google met regularly to fine tune the new industrial uses. AGCO made changes that extended the battery life. It made sure no applications required employees to be tethered to their workstations.

    And they analyzed loads of data.

    When ready, Gulick’s team asked AGCO engine builder Heather Erickson to use the upgraded eyewear to do her job. With instructions for each custom tractor clearly in sight, Erickson started building each massive engine faster.

    Soon AGCO equipped other workers with the glasses, took suggestions and made changes. AGCO added software and tested the devices in new parts of the factory.

    Last year, tractor quality inspectors began using the glasses to pass or decline vehicle parts. A simple “OK Glass, proceed” command sent a tractor part to the next inspection station. The words, “OK Glass, decline,” sent the tractor part back to production for a detailed analysis on what went wrong.


    By March 2017, AGCO’s Jackson plant had enough data to know it was onto something significant.

    “We discovered that training with smart glasses is a grand slam,” Gulick said. “We found the greatest value from using Glass has been in the assembly and quality areas, through the easy and quick hands-free access to the instructions and checklists necessary to assemble our individually designed tractors.”

    With Glass, the time it took to make one tractor fell by 25 percent; inspection times dropped 30 percent; and new hires could be trained in three days instead of 10.

    “It’s amazing,” Gulick said.
     
    lelisa13p, Hook, raspabalsa and 2 others like this.
  9. scjjtt

    scjjtt A Former Palm User

    Messages:
    1,973
    Likes Received:
    3,064
    Trophy Points:
    288
    Of course my Pebble Time Steel goes usually about 4-5 days before needing to be charged (yes I know Timex goes years). Pebble claimed it was suppose to go 10 days but I never saw that. Mrs scjjtt's Pebble Round claimed to go 2 days. She has no problem getting through the day & night but now she just charges it at night while she sleeps. She liked having it on to record her sleeping patterns but didn't like the light flashing on when she moves her arm.

    My Asus Zenwatch 2 can easily get through the day with 50% left by bedtime. I've never worn the ZW2 to bed. The days I wear the ZW2 I charge it at night & wear my Pebble while I sleep.

    I'm fine with not wearing a watch at night & throwing them on a charger while I sleep like I do my phone. I just want to make sure they make it easily during the day and so far that is the case. What does bother me, somewhat, is I either have to carry an extra battery for my phone, which I do, or charge my phone sometime during the day. Phones not making it through the day is much more of a hassle to me than what I have experienced with any smart watch.

    Sent from my LG G4 using Tapatalk
     
    lelisa13p, Hook, Mi An and 2 others like this.
  10. headcronie

    headcronie Greyscale. Nuff Said. Super Moderator

    Messages:
    13,325
    Likes Received:
    1,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The smart watch died for me, when I realized it fed an undesirable addiction to always being connected. I did not need to change focus for every text, every email, every weather update. Yet, that is exactly what these devices do. It took me months to shed my automatic reaction to my phone making an audible alert - thus causing me to look at my wrist, for an update. It was terrible. Could not focus on the here and now. It made notifications take precedence over what should be more important.

    An interesting experiment, but that's where I will leave it. I'm back to a tried and true Swatch Watch. So smart, it tells you the time with just a passing glance, and has stellar battery life. :)
     
    lelisa13p, RickAgresta, Hook and 2 others like this.
Loading...
Similar Threads - smartwatches failed
  1. scjjtt
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    504

Share This Page