“The wearable revolution is real and it’s coming fast,” Kyle Vanhemert writes for Wired. “For designers, though, putting computers on our bodies means tackling two very tricky questions. First, what should these gadgets look like? And second, what can they actually do for us?”
“We can make some good guesses about that first question. The current crop of wearables sorts out into two categories: things we wear on our arms and things we wear on our faces. Assuming we’re not quite ready for the good cyborg life that Google Glass prescribes, that leaves us with the wrist,” Vanhemert writes. “The continued interest in these devices—and, of course, the perennial intrigue surrounding the elusive iWatch—makes one thing clear: People are ready to wear a computer on their wrist. The question that none of the existing products yet answered, however, is this: What should a smartwatch really do?”
“When you consider where the existing crop of smartwatches have failed—trying to cram too much crap in too little space—you start to wonder if we haven’t got the utility here backwards. What if instead of just supplying us with yet another screen, the true potential of the smartwatch lies in giving us an entirely new way to control our digital lives?” Vanhemert asks. “The newer version of Siri that shipped with iOS 7 is much improved, and it stands to reason that our ability to process natural language requests will only get better form here. In terms of device-to-device chatter, Apple recently filed a patent based entirely around the idea of using Siri to control one gadget from another–just the type of technology you’d need if you had a Siri-enabled smartwatch piggybacking off the smartphone in your pocket. So what would this all look like in a few years, if we’re just having fun?”
Much more in the full article – recommended – here.
Related articles:
Apple’s ‘iWatch’ to arrive in October 2014 with wireless charging, sources say – December 13, 2013
iWatch: Apple to make 2014 the year of the smartwatch? – November 13, 2013
Apple to make two iWatch models: 1.7-inch display for men, 1.3-inch for women, sources say – November 13, 2013
What Samsung will learn from Apple’s iWatch? – August 29, 2013
—
About those 800,000 Samsung Galaxy Gear stupidwatches: Shipments, not sales; 1/3rd of units actually sold have been returned – November 19, 2013
Samsung says Galaxy Gear stupidwatch sold 800,000 units in 2 months – November 19, 2013
Samsung’s new ad for Galaxy Gear stupidwatch slavishly copies Apple’s original 2007 iPhone ad (with video) – October 7, 2013
Jim Cramer: ‘The curtain has closed’ on Samsung’s stupidwatch – October 3, 2013
David Pogue reviews Samsung’s Galaxy Gear stupidwatch: A human-interface train wreck – October 3, 2013
The Verge reviews Samsung’s Galaxy Gear stupidwatch: Orwellian, unintuitive, oversized, and overpriced – October 2, 2013
Jean-Louis Gassée: I hope Tim Cook had fun goading Samsung to make their Galaxy stupidwatch – September 9, 2013
Stupidwatch: Why Samsung’s Galaxy Gear is a flop – September 5, 2013
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
Samsung announces ‘Galaxy Gear’ watch accessory for Galaxy Android devices – September 4, 2013
I’ve been saying for years that a big upcoming thing for Apple will be a Siri button. I thought it would just be a button connected to Apple’s servers with a few chips inside and a small speaker/mic. No display. It would sense where you are, listen to what you need and respond accordingly. Put one in the car. Put one on the fridge. Dangle one on your backpack.
Now I see that this is essentially what an iWatch would be — a Siri button. Use bluetooth to have it talk to your phone and car and wifi and you’re always connected without hauling the beast from your pocket.
So maybe part of the iWatch wait is waiting for Siri to get good enough in enough areas?
I agree, in fact I like to think of “iwear” more of “iwatch” because it’s more fashionable and diverse to be able to take a device and wear it on your wrist or ankle as a watch or bracelet, around your neck as a chain or chocker, from your ear as an earring or on your clothes, as a lapel or cuff links, tie it to your tie pin.
Many accessories to wear, one device to guide them, that’s iwear.
Lose the button. It’s inconvenient. Siri needs a way to voice activate it. A user definable term so strangers won’t annoying by shouting “Siri, do (fill in the blank)” when they see you wearing an iWatch.
The wrist module is the traffic cop. Pushing pulling commanding directing the data, all from our wrist. Are we going to speak to our watches like Dick Tracy?
Might work, background noise might by an issue….
ain’t “real” to me.
I love the idea of a $200 iWatch and would purchase one.
But Apple would have to sell a zillion of them to make substantial profits in a $200 market. Then after everybody copies them and sells their copy for $100, it is not worth getting to and won’t sustain long term.
If I was Apple, I would call it none other than the latest new iPod nano that is curved and fits on the wrist and does more cool stuff in addition to all the cool stuff it already does.
It is already a successful product in the sub $200 market…why introduce another cheaper similar device?…just jack up the new iPod nano into a curved watch style device and jack up some new features that communicate with all iDevices and let it stand alone as the already cool iPod nano.
Sure, you will have to charge it daily, but don’t you already do that with your other iDevices?
“I love the idea of a $200 iWatch”
Really? My interest peaks at 50-bucks, especially if it turns out the watch is a gateway to my stuff, protected by that scurrilous wench.
If she steps & fetches docs and music and sends them where and when I need it fine, but that still isn’t worth $200.
It could debut at that price, but the following day we’ll see a tsunami of watches from Asia for 50¢ offering data access, virtual babies, and skins galore.
I can imagine my having to tunnel my ear buds up through my sleeve to connect the iWatch and my face.
Another method of controlling our other devices will not be enough.
What would be great is to add new man/machine sensors from simple room temp, skin temp, pulse rate, movement exercise, rest, sleep, API for other interfacing devices such as blood pressure, breath analyzer, blood glucose levels, etc…
The iWatch has to become another development platform for the developers to innovate and help eliminate so much waste since every manufacturer is duplicating Screen, CPU, cloud connectivity, alerting, and hardly any integration.
iWatch will be a major disappointment if it does not become another platform visually appealing to people. Most people will not be able to see past the initial image (sad but true).
Of course that does not stop the Siri interface to make the device more usable as well as many standard functions expected by so many so one needs to remove the phone out of pocket or purse less often.
Amazing how much inspiration Apple has gotten from Star Trek. Yesterday’s SciFi is today’s reality.
Yep I’m walking around in my silver suit eating pills instead of food… Its so damn depressing, but I have a pill for that too.
Microsoft was inspired by F-Troop, I guess. Smoke signals always meant trouble; hence their inclination to stay away from the hardware side of things; The Red Ring of Death is a reality for Microsoft and is always lurking about.
Imagine the nightmare that would ensue if Microsoft was forced to recall a billion PCs because of smoke signals? It cost them a billion just to restore their credibility in the console market after their foray into computer gaming with a seriously flawed product.
Imagine, 8-years between upgrades in world where Microsoft also makes the desktop PC?
Odds are this company would collapse in on themselves, if they made a PC.