LG was one of the first out of the gate with an Android Wear smartwatch and, well, let’s just say there was room for improvement. The original G Watch suffered from short battery life, a high price and a homely design. Now, just a few months later, LG is back with the G Watch R, the first smartwatch with a completely circular screen (read: no black strip at the bottom, like on the Moto 360). Unfortunately, the G Watch R doesn’t correct all of the original’s shortcomings – it has a similar-sized battery, rated for up to two days, and an LG rep told us it will be more expensive.
This – and the Moto360 – looks like the first smartwatch that appeals to me. The Gear things from Samsung, the Pebble devices, and so on, all look like you strapped a computer to your wrist that happens to be able to display the time. They look like computers, not watches. This, however, is starting to look like an actual watch – that also happens to display Android notifications.
Today, I devised the funeral test. You see, a watch is something I always wear when I’m outside the house, no exceptions. All my regular watches can be worn at any time, during any occasion – even a funeral. The moment I can wear a smartwatch to a funeral and not look like an inconsiderate ass (because it looks like a smartphone and thus people might think I’m checking Twitter or something – which I will not be doing, of course), that’s the smartwatch that will be a winner, because it can replace an actual watch.
This LG watch is getting closer, but it’s still not there – it’s still bigger than even my biggest watch (the red one in this photo), and looks uncomfortable. However, it’s getting closer, and I’m very curious to see what Apple will come up with.
You may mock the pebble but it is the device with the most watchfaces and watchlike battery life. The pebble steel is also quite nice looking.
My pebble lasts about a week on one charge. I’d like to see any other power guzzling watch do the same things. Not to mention that all these watches are quite a bit larger than the pebble.
Edited 2014-09-05 02:25 UTC
Agreed. A watch screen should always be on and be something like e-ink.
Apple is rumored to do kinetic charging on their watch. That should yield a few hours of standby, assuming you move your hands. Hm, I guess jerking off with the watch-hand will have a double payoff
And the pedometer will say you have walked 2000 miles
I’m not entirely sure that kinetic charging is enough to offset the power consumption significantly.Normal watches get away with it because they use next to nothing.
Also it should be noted that any mechanism is bound to take up space. You will notice that the kinetic watches tend to be bulkier (vertically) than other watches too.
_txf_,
Not only that, but doesn’t this need weights to create an inertial reference from which to generate forces?
F = m*a
E = F*d = d*m*a
So I guess there’s three ways to increase the energy captured from motion, none of which are particularly appealing for a wrist watch.
1. Make the device bigger to capture motion over a longer distance.
2. Use a heavier mass.
3. Shake your wrist faster & more frequently.
I wonder if solar power could be a better idea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar-powered_watch
Might be difficult if most of the surface area is e-ink/LCD though. E-ink is already lit by the sun, but for the CPU maybe we could interlace some solar capture cells among pixels. We can’t see individual pixels anyways. This way perhaps 1/4 of the display is actually a solar collector for storing energy and powering the watch’s electronics.
While the topic is about watches, this could be useful for tablets as well. The larger display would mean you could capture even more energy this way.
perhaps apple has developed the first human powered battery that directly taps into our life force, simultaneously amazing us and draining us of our will to live, leaving us plugged into the wall through a white cable while sleeping?
;-P
they will literally make a killing on human power adapters.
oye it’s friday.
Yup, everything you said is correct. My point was that those energy generating mechanisms take up space beyond simple power storage.
Conventional watches can get away with reducing power storage. Smartwatches cannot.
Much of the size of the pebble is attributed to the battery not the other components and the pebble has a low current and energy sipping display, not a (comparatively) power guzzling amoled screen.
Solar collection is very inefficient (even at research grade tech). If you’re going to reduce the size such that it is unoticeable, then you’re practically collecting nothing (even for a device such as the pebble). Also interlacing them is probably not such a good idea as it reduces their effectiveness at capturing all light at large angles as oblique rays will be obstructed by adjacent pixels etc.
Edited 2014-09-05 16:09 UTC
_txf_,
The efficiency has been climbing slowly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cell_efficiency#mediaviewer/File…
Obviously it’s not my area of expertise, but why would solar collectors be obstructed by other pixels any more than the pixels obstruct each other? Angles were a huge problem on old displays, but that got (much) better over time I assume due to a better manufacturing process.
It’s not really the CPU that concerns me most since it could be in power save most of the time. The radio components on the other hand suck up energy even at idle, those components will put a lower bound on energy consumption. Also, people might not be in sufficiently bright light, making it that much more difficult to collect solar energy, perhaps even making the whole thing mute.
Anyways solar power was just a thought, maybe it could employ audio based charging for people who are always loud
Edited 2014-09-05 20:14 UTC
Because not all rays will enter the panel perpendicular to the surface. A great deal of research on solar panels is creating structures to increase the surface area of the surface and the pn junction inside a solar cell. Also size limitations of such cells will mean a reduced ability to absorb multiple wavelengths of photons.
When looking at a screen we adjust it to see better. If the watch/tablet etc. is at rest then there is no way to adjust it for optimum efficiency.
Yeah, Radio is an issue indeed, let alone the screen.
All alternative forms of energy generation are just as problematic, mirroring the large scale issues in generating and storing electricity.
_txf_,
Yes, it’s the cross section and not merely the surface area that matters. Cos(a): At 0 degrees the cross section equals the surface area, at 90 degrees, the cross section is zero and all light sails right past the panel.
I’d say that modern display have improved dramatically over the years and have good characteristics even at moderate angles, I’ve noticed this especially with TVs that seem to be designed for that use case.
Does e-ink work at high angles?
My question is if we are bumping into fundamental physical limits (ie quantum mechanical) or merely just manufacturing limits that can be solved over time?
The difficulties are mostly related to physics. Recombination rate between holes and electrons, inability to absorb full spectrum of em waves (panels at their most basic are pn junctions, essentially the same structure as leds).
I think that the most efficient panels at research are something like 29% efficient and are completely unfeasible to manufacture commercially.
Some of the techniques people in research attempting is to stack panels to absorb a greater spectrum and angle of rays (higher energy photons penetrate deeper) and surface structures such as pyramids to increase surface area.
Most commercial techniques involve attempting to reduce costs of production of much more simple and comparatively inefficient panels
_txf_,
The link in my earlier response showed multicell junction efficiencies of 45% with a trajectory I’d roughly estimate at .5% improvement/year.
Thinking off the cuff, we could try another approach that might be more compatible with today’s manufacturing processes. Put the solar cells in another layer in front of or behind the pixels, and adjust the translucency of the layers to adjust brightness/power ratio.
Another possibility would be to have white pixels which reflect light normally, but let black pixels pass through to the solar collector, so white pixels bounce light back, but dark pixels produce electricity.
http://www.wired.com/2010/11/how-e-inks-triton-color-displays-work-…
I like to look past the limitations of modern manufacturing. Nano-tech manufacturing is on the horizon, and with a bit of optimism our processes will improve, costs will come down, and we’ll be able to mass produce the most efficient designs we know of. We’ll be able to take small patterns and nano-printers will replicate them trillions of times. At that point will be bumping into the limits of physics itself, rather than the limits & costs of our manufacturing capabilities. Put enough bright engineers on the problem, they’ll find a way to crack the nano-tech problem. When they do manufacturing will be revolutionized.
Edited 2014-09-07 15:59 UTC
…be right over, I have to charge for a few minutes first…
A wrist-worn computer is a very different form factor than a phone, tablet, laptop, TV screen and desktop. This requires a completely different UI model. When working with new form factors it is critical to focus on core functions. It’s never enough to resize existing interfaces to the new screen. There are many things a watch can do that the others can’t. There’s also many things you can’t or shouldn’t do on a watch.
Apple’s design restraint should really be an advantage here. While other makers are going to put entire Android smart phones on your wrist, I fully expect Apple to define it’s own space with a very focused product that, at first glance, doesn’t “do as much” as the android wearables.
But much like the iPod and all subsequent iDevices, the advantage will be that Apple says “no” to all sorts of features that distract from the main functions.
Apple has probably determined 2-4 core features for iWatch, and will remove any other features that delude or counter those core functions. The first iWatch will be quickly attacked for what it can’t do, while those living with it will more than likely start to understand Apple’s design decisions as time wears on (badump!). Simple, consistent operation is the key to a smart watch, and that plays to Apple’s design strength.
I found Apple products to be designed for long-term use, while many other makers design things for the sales portion of it’s life. They appear to have lots of flashy features, more than the Apple, and at a lower price! What a deal! But much of what draws you in is fluff, crud, and marketing, and the day to day use of the device often lacks the “polish” of the Apple device.
Jon Ivey also likes going back in time to classic designs. The iPod was a melding of a 1960’s transistor radio and a 1980’s walkman. With his comment about Swiss watchmakers needing to take notice of Apple, that tells me they will push forward with a design that takes from some classic watches of the past.
If the simple iWatch v1 is successful, Apple will take 3-4 iterations to slowly add more power features and complexity. They smartly don’t compete on the feature checklist chart, they play the long game of daily use, enjoyment, and ultimately continued purchases in the Apple ecosystem.
—
IMHO you shouldn’t have to touch a watch very often, and when you do it should not require focusing on a small touch screen sort of thing. If it tries to do everything my phone can do but on my wrist it will fail. I want a new concept that might ultimately replace the phone (especially since I’m down to about 1 real phone call needed per day). I also have 2-3 fully capable screens near me at most times, and I don’t want that on my wrist 24/7. If my watch is constantly blinking and buzzing about every email and tweet I think they missed an opportunity to simplify.
I’d like to see time, weather, calendar and notifications on the main screen, with quick access to Nav, Messages, and Health tracking. I’d like to see it pair with a wireless headphone/mic so you can do some voice control and dictation of messages. I’d like the whole thing to to be very quiet and unassuming, using custom vibrations and maybe slight color changes to the frame to indicate.
The best UI mockups I’ve seen so far are the column-wristband types — where it’s iOS app icons in a single scrollable column on a narrow rounded band. 1 flick either way slides you into that app, maybe with a dock sort of concept that keeps the critical time/date info in front. It looks a little feminine to not have a big bulky watch head and I can imagine the jokes about everyone wearing Apple jewelry, but keeping that UI simple and brand new (it’s not a small smartphone) could be the key to Apple’s success.
It sounds like you prefer an old Granny Watch. Seriously, dude, watches haven’t looked like what you like in a few decades unless you buy an old Granny Watch. Any reasonably MODERN watch looks like the Samsung Gear S, and whether YOU think it lacks taste, the majority of Americans think it’s the design of choice for watches.
You obviously never visit watch websites. Pretty much every quality modern watch looks old skool.