What Does Everyone Think About Wearable Tech?

[Hollabyte]

I got a pebble recently and find it insanely useful. Not only for the notifications, but also for the ability to control my music as well.

There is also Google Glass, the Nike FuelBand, and the rumored iWatch coming from Apple.

What do you guys think about this coming era of technology?

[ThatOneFox]

I think an interactive watch would be the best out of the upcoming options, as I can't really see myself wearing technological eye-wear. To be honest, I think people spend too much time glued to their phones as it is (I have to wade through crowds of these "phone zombies" at college), adding something like google glass to the mix would just make navigating crowded streets a nightmare!

[Hollabyte]

Haha that's a funny perspective. I'm also thinking a watch will be the most practical for most people, but of course I'm only guessing. For me, I have a few things that I would like in a smart watch.

Main function: time. A watch that doesn't immediately tell you the time would be almost useless. Its default screen should be a clock (for me). Secondly, I want it for notifications. I sort of already have that with the Pebble, but it also has a lot of growing room. Finally, I don't think the smart watch will be a content consumption device. The screen is just too small and the placement is too awkward to consume content for more than a minute at a time. However, I think it would be useful as a control device. Perhaps you could use it to control your music (I do this now) or perhaps to turn your bedroom lights on. (Phillips Hue?)

That's my two cents. And without a doubt there are things that I haven't thought of.

Hey, I just thought of something. A smart watch would be the prime device to detect and/or record your movement. This could be interesting for a lot of different applications, including gaming.

[ThatOneFox]

Hey, I just thought of something. A smart watch would be the prime device to detect and/or record your movement. This could be interesting for a lot of different applications, including gaming.

[ElectroYoshi]

To be entirely frank, wearable tech may very well be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of.

Have people really sunk that low? Sounds mean, I know, but think about it. StreetLights said this already, but I'm gonna say it anyway: People spend way too much time glued to their phones. And that realy does get in the way of genuine relationships. Sounds so cliche, I know, but it's true. People text now instead of talking face to face, and they're always on Facebook at dinner instead of talking with their families. That's pretty ridiculous on it's own, and now having that sort of thing separate isn't enough? Now they have to have it ingrained into what they wear?

What are people even gaining from wearable tech? Real quick, let's think about why smartphones are so popular. Why is that? Maybe it's because, oh I don't know, they give you quick access to EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING you might want to use throughout your day? Wearable tech is just not as practical, simply because anything it can do a smartphone can probably do vastly better. Google Glass doesn't seem at all useful to me, and based on what I've heard about iWatch, I'm guessing it wouldn't be either. What else is there? Nothing a phone can't do better, by the looks of it.

I see wearable tech as nothing more than a display of how low people have sunk when it comes to technology. They've already got insanely small and portable devices that can give them everything at their fingertips. Was that really not good enough? Now they have to have it installed into accessories? Has it really come to that? More importantly, is it really freaking necessary? Well, IS IT??? No, it's not. Check out this interview Green Day did about the iPad when it first hit.

[media=youtube]V3H_zP_2dWk[/media]

I think Billie Joe hit the nail right on the head with his response. His question "When is enough enough?" was said in reference to Steve Jobs, but it can easily apply to the entirety of the tech industry. It's also what I wondered when I first heard about this new wearable tech. Enough is enough, and there's no way around that.

Honestly, now that wearable tech does exist, there's probably no going back. But honestly, I hope to GOD it doesn't become the next big thing. Its existence is ridiculous enough, and if it were to become an everyday trend, my faith in humanity would take a HUGE blow.

[/angryrant]

[Sebastian Lawe]

Supposedly theres some carpenting and roofing companies that are thinking of using google glass for calculating and displaying measurements of tangible items on the spot. Rather than having to pull out a ruler, google glass would already have the measurements.

[Hollabyte]

<image>

Haha that's exactly what I was picturing when I was writing that.

For me, wearable technology is supposed to give me the freedom to spend less time on my phone. It's supposed to be able to give me quick access to information so I can be on my merry way. The way current watches work, for example. Quickly glance at the time, and go back to whatever you were doing.

So ElectroYoshi, while I agree with you to an extent, (I didn't watch the video because I'm about to go to bed) I also disagree with you at the same time. Wearable technology does indeed sound ridiculous, especially when heard for the first time. But the point isn't necessarily that it will stand out and become another device craning for our attention, but that it will blend in and become almost unnoticeable in our everyday lives. I don't want to spend hours browsing iFunny on Google Glass and I certainly don't want to watch movies on a watch face. If I have that capability, cool, I guess. But otherwise, it isn't why I would want wearable tech.

[Entity]

Yay, I like discussions like this.

I think trying to assign a moral value to an object because of the way some people use it doesn't really work (e.g. smartphones are bad because most people are glued to them instead of forming irl relationships). I think we can agree that some people do use them excessively, and that's probably not the greatest choice, but the smartphones themselves aren't "evil."

It's sort of like the gun debate. Guns are used by bad people to shoot good people, therefore they're bad right? No... guns are just a tool. They can be used by good people or bad people for good purposes or bad purposes.

Anyway...

Another point--nevermind, proto seems to have already made it (Wearable tech seems to be aimed at feeding you information in the background while you go about your every day life, while smartphones seem to be aimed at grabbing and holding your attention).

[kroltan]

I'll put it simple, and this is also a resume of Yoshi's opinion: posers. People want attention. <End of resume>

A smartphone may do 10000 things more than a techgear (GGlass, smartwatches, etc) in 1/10000th the time, but everyone has a smartphone these days (well, most people). Now whoever started the smartphone trend will need to find a new money dumpsite to defend their reputation of "techy" or simply "cool".
Sadly, most people buy these kind of things for the reputation, not the actual use. I bet 70% of smartphone users don't really need them. They just text eachother (SMS), browse the Internet, mostly social networks (Facebook, Twitter, etc) and do freaking phone calls. All of this is covered by a "dumbphone", which is basically the predecessor of smartphones with standardized OSes, and much less computing power. It can make calls, use SMS, have apps (in J2ME) that do extra stuff and contains a web browser. There, you see? No need for all the fancy extra stuff.

I can say my opinion is very much of a biased opinion, but I've also been in the "edge"-team. Always wanted (even though I didn't buy) the latest phone or anything of that matter. Then I realised: it is completely unnecessary (for me). Currently, I happily own a LG T375 (sorry the link is in Portugese, but Google Translate helps. Couldn't find the English site), which comes with native apps for Facebook and Twitter, plus it accepts extra apps written using the J2ME SDK. Its interface is amazingly fluid for such a low processing power, and the resolution is passable. Previously, I had a GS290, which has higher resolution and a bit more responsive system, but sadly it broke after falling from 6ft. I have a plentiful of games installed, the most interesting are Age of Empires 3 (graphics like AoE1), Assassin's Creed 2 (gameplay like Prince of Persia), and the most fun of them: Gavity Defied (there's a Android version, but isn't nearly as awesome). And hell, this phone is very very durable, I've been using it for one and a half year, I drop it on a weekly basis and there's just one notable scratch on the screen, when you tilt it too much (other minor scratches are from sand and other pocket items colliding with it).

I don't need a smartphone, and I tell you, most people actually don't. But their friends have one, so why be "left out"?

[Entity]

I agree with kroltan... that's really the reason iPhones are so popular... because they're popular! Everyone has one.

That also goes for the latest iPhone. E.G. the iPhone 5 was a centimeter taller, and the headphone jack was moved. Wooooahhh. Actually not that cool. The money you spend upgrading from the iPhone 4 to 5 probably isn't worth the features you're getting. A lot of what you're paying for is "coolness"

[Sebastian Lawe]

While new tech is never going to to useful for the general public, there are specific situations in which new tech could possibly make things more efficient. I do homework on my phone if I'm not near a computer, as well as do photography and cinematography when I don't have my physical video camera with me. I like having the raw power to do whatever I want with my phone.

[Entity]

Like the idea of glass seems so silly and futuristic... I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it turned out to be an april fools joke or something. I know it's not, but still... I can't imagine it actually being useful.

[Hollabyte]

Actually Kroltan, I don't agree. I can see where you're coming from and how you could come to that conclusion, but I don't think you're entirely correct.

Certainly the younger generation buys smartphones for the 'coolness' factor, but the majority of people don't care as much about how their smartphone influences their appearance. They legitimately want a smartphone to use, and they want it to be able to do certain things. I think you're right about what a large percentage of people use their phone for (except phone calls- those are declining in popularity). But that doesn't mean that people don't want the capability to do more.

I feel the main things people want in their smartphones include ease of use, access to a large app store, and basic functions that you expect in every device. iPhones fulfill these needs for most people, so they choose to buy an iPhone. Other android devices also fulfill these needs for people, so they choose to buy a particular android device. Do smartphone users really need them? Well, that's hard to say. Each smartphone user is different. My grandmother certainly doesn't. But she has fun using it. Other people have very specific needs that they use their device for. These vary greatly, from the need for an interactive calendar to the use of airplay mirroring for work presentations, to the need to run a specific app for some specific purpose.

You're right in that there are other 'not-so-smart' (I disagree with your calling them 'dumb phones' but that's a discussion for another time) devices that can fulfill peoples' needs. But they aren't as widely known, as widely advertised, as widely available, as easy to use, or as flexible as smarter phones. And also (this is very important) many people have more than one specific need. Smarter smart phones are more flexible in that they have more capabilities to fulfill more needs (or lets face it, in some cases they're purely wants). Therefore, they appeal to a broader audience.

So in other words, generalizations are hard to work with and should be made sparingly. I am almost positive that your post is entirely correct for a specific demographic (and I think that demographic is a younger generation). But the majority of people rely on their phones to do a lot for them, and they are just the tool to use (for now).

Wearables will fill a need. I believe we have that need right now- the difficulty lies in correctly identifying that need. And the solution to this will come in the form of some type of wearable technology.

[Sebastian Lawe]

In defence of Hollabit.

Supposedly theres some carpenting and roofing companies that are thinking of using google glass for calculating and displaying measurements of tangible items on the spot. Rather than having to pull out a ruler, google glass would already have the measurements.

[Baufritz]

I'm still waiting for exoskeletons.

[ElectroYoshi]

Wearables will fill a need. I believe we have that need right now- the difficulty lies in correctly identifying that need.

At the moment, companies don't seem at all sure what that need is--That's my beef with it. At the moment, they're basically just making wearable tech for the sake of wearable tech. Jumping the gun, if you will.

Also, the tech industry already has a bad habit of cramming these things down your throat. They try to make the slightest thing look groundbreaking (The Panoramic camera on the iPhone 5 comes to mine), and more often then not, they succeed. And then people just have to have it, because they think it's absolutely necessary.

Until someone can prove that wearable tech is necessary, I will stand by my previously mentioned opinions.

[kroltan]

At the moment, companies don't seem at all sure what that need is--That's my beef with it. At the moment, they're basically just making wearable tech for the sake of wearable tech. Jumping the gun, if you will.

Also, the tech industry already has a bad habit of cramming these things down your throat. They try to make the slightest thing look groundbreaking (The Panoramic camera on the iPhone 5 comes to mine), and more often then not, they succeed. And then people just have to have it, because they think it's absolutely necessary.

Until someone can prove that wearable tech is necessary, I will stand by my previously mentioned opinions.

This.

Advertising is all about creating a need.

[steqheu]

MERGED THREAD:
----------------------------

What do you guys think about wearable technology?

• Google Glass
• Rumored iWatch
• Pebble smartwatch
• Kreyos smartwatch

Do any of you have any of these devices?

[ElectroYoshi]

I already posted a lengthy rant about this on another thread about this. I think it's too soon for this to be hitting it big. I think the actual need for wearable tech needs to be determined first.

[Entity]

I have an iWatch