Google has provided a few more details about the upcoming release of Wear OS 3, which combines Samsung’s Tizen with Google’s Wear OS. Sadly, but not unexpectedly, pretty much no existing Wear OS devices will be updated to Wear OS 3.
Wear OS devices that will be eligible for upgrade include Mobvoi’s TicWatch Pro 3 GPS, TicWatch Pro 3 Cellular/LTE, TicWatch E3 and follow on TicWatch devices, as well as Fossil Group’s new generation of devices launching later this year.
It would seem existing devices simply aren’t powerful enough, so the four existing Wear OS users – I’m one of them – are shit out of luck.
How can existing devices not be powerful enough? It’s an embedded OS for smartwatches ffs. Google appears to be making the same mistake Microsoft did with the Windows XP Tablet PC Edition and Project Origami (UMPC), taking an OS intended for larger and more powerful devices and cramming it into a much smaller class of devices (which have higher battery life requirements too).
Meanwhile, Apple is making a distinct OS for smartwatches and as a result the Apple Watch had become the second-biggest draw to iPhones after iMessage.
The google wear devices didn’t get many cpu upgrades. It looks like they’re requiring Qualcomm Snapdragon 4100, which makes sense. I was kind of surprised that my lg watch r was upgraded to wear 2, until I realized that the os updated, but qualacomm hadn’t created a new chip for wear devices.
I don’t know I liked google wear os, but the watches themselves…. are not built to last. the haptic notifications don’t provide enough oomph or those that have have died on me. To be fair nothing works for me, not to pick on any one company. The old pebbles were the closest.
Still, every Android Wear 2.x device has the equivalent specs of an early 2010s smartphone hardware in it minimum. It’s insane that a smartwatch OS can’t run on them when the pebble could run its own smartwatch OS with much less.
IMO the Motorola and Huawei made the best Android watches. Because they were well-known technology companies, not fashion brands who don’t care about the internals and build quality of what they sell. But now their watches have stopped getting OS updates a years ago. Still, I still cling to my Moto360 2nd gen and pray it doesn’t die, because all current Wear OS options are just so bad. I even paid to have the battery replaced by a third-party repair shop when it started to bulge so I can keep the watch longer.
Obviously smartwatch os’ can run on them, as wear 2.0 does. But its understandable to me that they want smartwatches to do more than what a 2010 soc could do.
If you’re interested in a minimal pebble like watch, checkout the pinewatch and the p8/p9 os projects. Not there yet.
Which is my gripe here. What on earth is a watch doing that’s more than what a early 2010s SoC could do? Browser the internet with 24 tabs open? Run Fortnite at full details? To me, it just smells of bloat.
kurkosdr Battery life. Background tasks, Improved networking ( wifi / bluetooth/ 5g) improved screens higher res/ better visibility in sunlight, better sensors
I mean playing reductionist, I don’t think there is anything my phone can do that my hp jordana couldn’t in terms of functionality., it just does them better with better equipment. I mean a pentium II is no slouch either, not sure I need anything my modern processor can do that it couldn’t. it was just slower with worse versions of software.
Now windows 11 feels different but probably same thing. You’ve managed to make me give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt grr.
I’m happy with my ordinary single purpose watch. It cost a magnitude less than a smartwatch and looks more expensive. I can wear it anywhere including the opera. It’s also not so honking big and heavy and the battery lasts around three years.
I genuiely had no idea why anyone wants a smartwatch so looked things up. There’s this feature and that feature. Many sound compelling and to some people I’m sure they are. On reflection including the issues of planned obsolecence and bloat I’m still not convinced by smartwatches. They’re just putting too much in there and not thinking through the architectural and support issues.
By its nature a watch is a very constrained device. There’s no need to load an entire OS and multiple frameworks. Just set a capacity and compile out eveything not needed and design from the point of view of A.) Industrial design with 20 year minimum support cycles (more like 50 or potentially 100+) and B.) Heirloom artifact design. Also C.) Military and aeronautical/space design. There isn’t a single company out there which has done this or even hinted at the integral view necessary to make it happen.
Ladies watches are another design challenge in themselves. There are much tighter constraints but also more opportunities in other areas. I would also go for touch sensitive areas and ditch the big buttons and consider whether haptics an provide an attention getting mechanism. The watch just needs to tingle. Jewels can also double as concealed indicator light covers. In fact the whole thing may not even look remotely like a smartwatch.