“Samsung yesterday demoed and announced its [US$300] Galaxy Gear smart watch,” Kirk McElhearn writes for Kirville. “It only works with one Samsung phone, the Galaxy Note 3, and one tablet, the Galaxy Note 10.1 2014 Edition tablet. It has ten hours of battery life.”
“Samsung’s smart watch is doomed to fail. It’s too expensive ($300 is what many people pay for phones), and it’s another device that has to be charged every day,” McElhearn writes. “With only ten hours battery life, it’ll certainly run out of juice when you need it.”
McElhearn writes, “I’m probably not the best candidate for a smart watch. If I did buy one, it would have to be cheap ($150 would probably be the upper limit), light, compact (and not looking like an iPod nano on a strap), and not need to be charged every day. The Galaxy Gear doesn’t fit those conditions, and above all, it requires one specific phone. In my book, that’s a fail.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Samsung’s stupidwatch is nothing more than Physical Vaporware™.
It exists not with any sales expectations, but only for the Korean slavish copier to be able the say “we had a smartwatch before Apple” after they find out from Apple how to correctly do a smartwatch and begin stealing Apple’s innovations in order to produce salable knockoffs.
When Samsung’s next watch is released, the one that looks and acts like Apple’s iWatch, patented intellectual property and trade dress infringement be damned, Samsung will say, “We had a smartwatch before Apple.” iCal it.
Related articles:
Samsung Galaxy Gear watch looks rushed, misses the mark – September 4, 2013
The Galaxy Gear stupidwatch: Without Apple to copy, Samsung is clueless – September 4, 2013
Apple’s iWatch cleared for takeoff – September 4, 2013
Samsung announces ‘Galaxy Gear’ watch accessory for Galaxy Android devices – September 4, 2013
Samsung is the worst company in the history of companies.
How does Samsung’s watch compare with Apple’s iWatch? Please be specific.
Samsung’s smartwatch: CEO reads tech headlines… issues orders… must have smartwatch… rushes crappy product… calls it innovation.
Apple’s smartwatch: After years of research, CEO concludes that technology hasn’t advanced enough to warrant the introduction of a suitable product in this category… waits… waits… waits… and we’ll see something, or not, when the product is able to be done *right*.
Maybe the main difference is that with the Apple iWatch the question we’re supposed to be asking is not “is it a watch.” But more “what are we watching?”
Apple’s first “iWatch” was the iPod nano on a watch band. It told the time with 15 watch faces, played your music, worked with Nike for physical fitness and had an event timer.
And it looked pretty neat on your wrist. The refurbed ones went for $99. Bought several myself. NOTE> my first one was as a trade in when Apple said its iPod nano first gen could have a battery problem and to send in for a free battery upgrade. A bunch of us still had them and after running out of replacements, they upgraded to latest gen nano for free. Ain’t Apple just so great..!!!!!!
PS, Nano watch came out, what,,,, three or four years ago???
Just saying.
Birdy, love you
1st..?? . They cant claim that ..unless they live under a rock.
Pebble and sony Already have smart watches in the market !
http://www.imsmart.com/en
ugly or not / battery pig or not
it was the first and official smart watch
and it’s better then Slamdung Gearless crap
ok
further more – it really sets the bar – as to what would be expected in a wearable smart watch… so lets see how well Apple does. because no one else besides imWatch has anything comparable until now from Slamdung
imWatch should be like the iPhone of watches – first so Apple care to claim patents – better to buy out imWatch and patent like mad
er,,,, you have seen the iPod nano 6th gen on a wrist band. music,time, fitness, radio,, ????
This is a comment.
ce n’est pas un commentaire
Is a comment a comment when it neglects to comment on anything? Perhaps it’s a meta-comment.
Self-referential: commenting on its own content, therefore a comment, independent of the truth value of its content
Are you sure?
No comment.
I’m curious… How many people would be willing to walk around with a $150 smart watch. Personally, I can’t see any business person wearing something like that if they want to be taken seriously.
Depends on the style and function.
Samsung’s biggest problem is it just slapped a mini Galaxy phone onto a wrist strap.
A smartwatch has two possible markets: Cool tech gadget and jewelry piece with useful smart functions. I could see Apple eventually offering both levels, but the cool tech gadget would come first.
It’s not a phone. That’s why it needs to be tethered to a phone to get full functionality.
full functionality depends merely on what those functions are set out to be… a watch set to wifi or blue tooth tethering will still interrupt business intranets everywhere – it’s neither a solution or need… so why have a watch to make calls or receive notifications from my phone in my pocket.
in a meeting. it’s bad idea to check your phone, you receive a vibration to your wrist notifying an important email or call came in… oh brother are we so in need of constant connectivity that this is needed – no way… after the meeting check your phone
The whole idea behind a tethered smartwatch is to keep the device in it’s respective pocket, so that you don’t have to fish around for your phone/ miss notifications because you didn’t notice it.
On your second point, a businessman should probably either turn off his phone or put it in a do not disturb mode if he’s going into an important meeting. That way he just won’t get notifications and can check them outside of the meeting.
I’ve been using the Pebble watch for a month or so. Surprisingly I’ve gotten a lot of positive comments from people at airports and such.
The Pebble provides two good features that make it worthwhile in some cases. First, it vibrates when you get a phone call or text (email optionally). When you are at an airport, a trade show or other noisy place this is really helpful so that you don’t miss a call. I spoke with one woman who is hard of hearing who really would like this. Second, it displays the phone number or text so that you can glance at it and make a quick decision about what to do. This is really helpful when I”m making a long presentation. I can ignore most messages but if there is an emergency call from my wife I can take that. Anything more than this is gravy.
I saw a video of a guy expecting this to be a full fledged phone that sits on your wrist. I don’t think we need that. A gadget that adds utility to the existing phone is fine.
All these people comparing Samsung’s Gear to the iPod nano on a strap are missing a very important point: The iPod nano was smaller and looked better, even though it was stuffed into a third party watch band.
A smartwatch won’t be successful unless it has long battery life and can operate independently of a smartphone, etc. to some useful degree. An expensive, ugly extension of a phone just won’t cut it.
but the iPod nano was not a smart watch…
nor a great watch either… it was a mp3 player okay. strapped to your wrist while you jog to the tunes you loved.
apps were made later on for nike and i believe a clock once iPod nano got a touch screen – still it is hardly a smart watch
Winter of your discontent???
mp3 player with lyrics and cover art
multi watch face
Nike fitness
FM radio
screen went to sleep to save battery life. Lasted about 4-5 days with intermit use.
Yep the samdung watch is just so much better /s
im with you on your point about – a watch without a good battery life is useless… expensive there are plenty of expensive jewellery watches available — a dick tracy wrist phone would be best
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Tracy
great price too – lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wearable_computer
copy right 1997 Hitachi America
Just seen a video of it on the news.
My god it’s aweful.
I never realised how bad it is, it looks like in unfinished and rushed out product.
The OS on it looks unfinished.
What a massive POS.
The OS was also better. It looked nicer and had more functions.
MDN take is right on the money. This is, in essence, vaporware. At $300 they do not expect too many buyers, so they will do a VERY limited production run. BUT it will give them the opportunity to claim “WE DID IT FIRST!” Apple is copying us. Expect lawyers to become involved sooner than later.
These devices have to have a purpose to exist in their own right, not just as an extension of what they have in their pockets. Biometric sensors and utility are much more important than as a gaudy and expensive smartphone companion piece.
Karma is a bitch when they rush into their spotlight
Apple was not first in MP3 players, cell phone, or tablets. Apple is known to come in late and do it right.
Hell, the first Mac was not the first computer with a Graphic User Interface.
i give samsung credit for having the balls to release such a piece of trash
Agreed; their hubris is most impressive.
Sure enough, on tonight’s news (in Melbourne, Australia) was an announcement that Samesung beat Apple by releasing their so-called smart watch first.
The sad thing is that most people probably won’t remember much about the product, but they’ll remember that “Samesung beat Apple”.
“Samsung is the worst company in the history of companies.”
Yes, of course Samsung should be polite and wait until Apple had their iWatch out. How dear they present their watch now, before Apple was able to make such a watch? Naughty Koreans!
But how can anybody wait for Apple … they need years and years to produce anything these days …
USA Inc. made and used the first Atomic Bombs.
My vote for the worst company in the history of companies.
Apple has ALWAYS taken their time to get their products right, and savvy consumers realize this. Being first means pretty much nothing, unless it is also the best.
And this thing is NOT going to be the best.
Kurt,
The point is Samsung should have waited because since they’re already so good at copying Apple (iPhone, iPad, UI/UX , icons, stores, mini-stores in best buy, etc.) their iWatch clone would’ve been far better if they copied Apple’s upcoming version.
They forgot the keyboard.
Yes, that is why I am waiting for the Microsoft Surface Watch.
It will have have a keyboard. It will also have a flick out lever like the ‘kickstand’ because it has to go “click’.
The flick out lever will also be its most hyped feature: ‘Sundial mode’
SamSuck = RAT
Behold the essence of Samsung’s lament that Apple should be innovating in the market and not in the courts. The implication that Samsung was actually capable of anything more than this senselessly-featured wrist-brick is now laid bare. They should go back to doing what they’re good at: jerking off the US courts for a year+ while they continue to rip off real innovators.
The apple I watch will be a tiny pearl of crystallised unicorn tears you insert under your fingernail. With you will physically know the time. And the display will be in your retina.
I find it hard to get excited about a limited device (with any OS, actually) that still requires a phone be carried.
Why? What are you going to use a standalone smartwatch for? Texting? Nope. No where to put even a virtual keyboard. Games? Nope. Screen’s too small. Calls? Nope. Why when you already have a phone? Email? Nope. See reason for texting.
And I could go on longer.
The only way a smartwatch would truly work is as a second screen for your phone, allowing you to get a quick glance at notifications just by looking at your wrist and giving you a convenient remote for music and calling.
If they make it a standalone device, it’ll be useless, if they make it one of those fitness bands like the Nike Fuelband or the Jawbone up, it’ll be useless, because so many other devices do it better. The only way to make it work is to make it a second screen.
Boy, that’s a relief… good to know someone is “reblogging” this important info for all. /s
An even greater relief to know that the benign MDN webmeister in the cloud nixes the rebloggers and reslots our retorts as unintelligible
No problem
You don’t get any GoogleJuice for doing this.
lol
Never mind. HP beat apple with the Slate… Remember?
Samsung can hardly say, “we were first.” Here’s a smartwatch from Sony that does similar things, and seems to be compatible with more Samsung devices than Samsung’s own smartwatch
http://www.sonymobile.com/us/products/accessories/smartwatch/
and its “street price” on Amazon is less than $100. The specs claim longer battery life too.
And I’m glad someone is pointing out that the $299 price tag is crazy for a device like this Samsung “stupidwatch.”
What I want…
1) Waterproof. I’m going to want to use it in environments where I don’t want to expose my iPhone.
2) Full day of battery life. I’m going to take it off when I go to bed, so I don’t mind charging it then, but wearing a dead watch on my arm isn’t going to make me happy during the day, and neither will forgetting that I took it off to charge.
3) Utilization of physical capabilities. Custom vibration codes for emails, calls, alerts, etc…
4) Speakerphone capability.
5) Siri.
6) SDK
Samsung should ship 900 millions for this stupid watch.
Hey Samsung:
1) Being First-To-Market with crap only means you were First-To-Market with crap.
2) You weren’t First-To-Market with a ‘smartwatch’ an anyway, as I already pointed out around here via a link to the gigantic Garmin smartwatch horror.
3) It has to be tethered to one of your nasty phone things for full functionality.
So darn.
Oh and it’s ugly too. What a fashion statement.
Yo smartwatch so ugly, Bob the Builder took one look at it and said “We can’t fix that!”
Yo smartwatch so ugly, it made an onion cry.
Yo smartwatch so ugly, pictures of it have the disclaimer “Viewer discretion is advised”.
Yo smartwatch is so ugly, it scares the roaches away.
Yo smartwatch is so ugly, when you look at it in the mirror the glass cracks.