Stupidwatch: Why Samsung’s Galaxy Gear is a flop

“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

64 Comments

      1. 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*.

      2. 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.

      1. 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

    1. 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.

        1. 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

          1. 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.

    2. 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.

  1. 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.

    1. 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

      1. 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

    2. 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

      &w=408&h=502&ei=CNQoUsncIrGgyAHq3YDAAg&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:56,s:400,i:172&iact=rc&page=9&tbnh=178&tbnw=144&ndsp=55&tx=83&ty=71

      copy right 1997 Hitachi America

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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”.

  6. “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 …

    1. 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.

    2. 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.

    1. 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’

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.