Two days ago, we heard of Sony’s plans to build a watch made entirely of e-paper – one where the band and the watch face would both change in response to the user’s wrist gestures. It sounded wild and provocatively different, but what we really wanted to know was what it looked like. As it turns out, that watch is already in the public eye, though Sony’s involvement had until now been kept clandestine so as to judge the product on its own merits. Say hello to the FES Watch.
Certainly an interesting concept, but I’m not sure I like the entire band being e-paper – it just looks kind of like those glowsticks you can slap around your wrist that were cool when I was like 6.
“a hrf” instead of “a href”
Also, the timezone of the “linked” time is off… if not logged in, it shows what I assume is the correct UTC time of the post, but when I’m logged in, it still shows 00:37, but declares it PST.
Edited 2014-11-29 01:41 UTC
…and here’s the real link: http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/28/7301573/sonys-e-paper-watch-is-a…
Good show; If only I was as helpful, hah.
Thanks
Edited 2014-11-29 01:49 UTC
This seems like a good use of e-paper to me. Since it’s not supposed to be very smart, the display shouldn’t need a super-fast refresh rate. The battery life is the main payoff.
As far as the band is concerned, I’ve often thought that the band could be used to display information that doesn’t fit on the watch face (during those times when it’s needed), whether using a flexible OLED or e-paper.
All in all, an interesting idea.
I agree. This is much more interesting than all those other smartwatches companies have been pushing out and with better battery-life this will most certainly be much more useable, too.
Making the whole band a display is fancy, I like that approach, but what could it be used for? To display something that doesn’t change very often and thus doesn’t need to be refreshed all the time, but what? I, personally, don’t really have anything like that, but I would love to hear if other OSNews-readers could come up with some ideas and share them here.
Hour:Minute(:Second)
Year:Month/Day/Dow
Saint of the day (or whatever religion)
Birthday of the day (enter list via USB)
Sunrise/Zenith/Sunset/Day duration
Moonrise/Zenith/Moonset/Night duration
Moon phase/Next full moon/Next new moon
Current temperature/altitude (baro)
Current weather/Forecast (day, week)
Current sea level/Forecast (day, week)
Battery level, expected remaining use
Just enter a coarse position and current time, the watch would guess the rest. That would be definitively THE WATCH I’d gladly buy.
With a USB connection, configure the watch more easily, select your location, enter birthday list, user’s info (address, telephone, blood type, allergy, …) and the watch would become really usefull.
Check the ‘LunaSolCal’ widget on the PlayStore.
Edited 2014-11-29 09:30 UTC
Forgot to add :
Time zones (two or three)
And another one :
Full electroluminescent e-paper (read in the dark, flash SOS, whatever)
Frankly, these so called smart watches are a solution desperately seeking a problem. I have a $20.00 analog watch that I bought at Target that works beautifully. It does one thing and one thing exceedingly well, it tells time. But, so does my cell phone but since I don’t have my cell phone glued to to my hand 24/7 like a lot of people, I like to wear my watch. So where do smart watches really fit in since most of them need to be in close proximity to your smart phone in order to do anything.
Frankly, I don’t really care how many steps I take or what my heartrate was during my workout. Call me old fashioned, but I use a mirror and a bathroom scale to judge how effective my workouts are. Similarly, is it really so laborious to pull a smart phone out of one’s pocket in order to read a text, get driving directions or locate points of interest? I simply can’t see one good reason why I should wear a clunky smart watch and carry a smart phone. But, that’s just me.
I agree. I’m unaware of any real demand for a “smart” watch, and any actual problem they solve. One of the selling points I’ve read is that they can interface with your phone so you can check caller id on your watch without pulling your phone out of your pocket. That sure sounds like a desperate attempt to me. I know some lazy people, but I don’t know anyone so lazy they would buy a special watch to avoid taking their phone out of their pocket. Come on man…
So, they want you to pay $500+ for a spiffy new phone, and then another $200+ for a spiffy new watch that’s basically a severely crippled version of the phone you just bought. But hey, they can link to each other so you know, it’s totally worth it.
Or they could GTFO with that nonsense.
You don’t understand the main problem :
Profit, shareholders’ benefit.
Or presented from another angle :
Innovation, consumers’ benefit.
And last but not least :
Work, citizen’s benefit
How exactly is “profit” a problem? How exactly does creating a product with practically no demand lead you to profit?
I have yet to see anything innovative where these watches are concerned. Simply taking something that already exists, and moving it from your phone onto your wrist is in no way innovative. If consumers felt these watches were so innovative and beneficial, there would be much greater demand for them.
Are you actually trying to claim these watches create jobs that don’t already exist? I certainly hope not because that’s beyond laughable. And work for who? Chinese factory workers? I guess you could say chinese citizens benefit by having no shortage of devices coming down their assembly lines.
If you can manage to come up with something that sticks, I’ll reconsider “smart” watches not being almost completely pointless.
Have you never ever heard marketing babbling ? Are you really seeking for justifications why these products are made ? Then, as I’ve told you, listen to these marketing justifications…
I couldn’t care less about marketing nonsense (or sarcasm). I’m waiting for real justification with some kind of solid basis. Thus far, and expectedly so, nobody has risen to the challenge. There’s no demand because as the OP pointed out, these are a solution to a nonexistent problem.
Sadly no matter how little you (or I) care about marketing nonsense or sarcasm – a least half a dozen big consumer electronics firms have been investing big sums in yes probably trying to create a market which didn’t exist earlier and for which there is no real need.
But they obviously see an eventual (big) market whether you like it or no.
It’s new, they’re refining the model (several models even -for ‘smart’, ‘simple info relay’, and ‘sport/gps/accelerometer’ watches and wearables).
Few if any devices have really nailed any of those categories perfectly yet. But they surely will -and then ..with all that horribly inevitable advertising and marketing, will come the Want, and the implied Need. Little we plebeians can do about it
For an ‘info relay’ device – I think an all e-paper watch-face/’strap’ combo works in principle. I’d want it fully programmable/customisable to third parties, and license-free, mind.
Yep, outside of swimming, running, sleeping and other things bed related – there is NO time I won’t have my phone in my pocket or thereabouts – still an info watch serves a purpose – in meetings, social situations, dodgy urban areas (and running, swimming).
I think full on ‘smart’ (non-phone tethered) simply isn’t necessary unless the interface is very much refined from what’s currently available; battery life is up to 72hrs minimum!; and bulk and design slimmed right the hell down, which of course is years off.
But for occasionally tethered ‘info-relay’ devices.
A 72hr e-paper/mirasol device with GPS,low powered bluetooth and NFC for connection, and maybe waterproof and with accelerometer – that is workable already– and arguably pretty useful if implemented ‘right’! Design and software matter much of course.
Any ‘need’ still….no, you’re right.
Edited 2014-11-30 16:59 UTC
CEO: What exactly is stopping us from doing this?
Expert: Geometry
Marketing Manager: Just ignore it.
The main benefit will probably be various health monitor applications. You can expect this to suck for the first few generations, but give it a couple of years, and it may turn out to be worthwhile. So far, the ‘problem’ to this solution is to have something new to sell to the gadget freaks.
In otherwords, we’ll have even more idiot hipsters sharing how many calories they ate and how many steps they walk than we already do. What a bright future. I’ve met few groups more arrogant than those who use fitness monitors. They push these stupid things as if their eternal happiness depends upon it.
It /would/ be quite cool to automatically call an ambulance if you have a heart-attack, or to auto-medicate if you’re a diabetic and have low blood-sugar. Even better, what if you don’t know you’re a diabetic, and your wearable device detects this the moment it occurs (immediate diagnosis/warnings are beneficial for many diseases)
It’s easy to just dismiss something new out of fear/ignorance, and obviously easy to take this out on the early-adopter hipsters, sure they may be smug/arrogant, but these people are driving the changes that may help save lives, so go easy on them.
And no, the only biometric sensor I own is some bathroom scales
I thought it might be cool to have the band on this watch draw a graph of something you’re monitoring, but which doesn’t need to be updated every second. Say, you’re testing something and anna monitor server temperatures, so you could have the band draw a graph that’s updated every 15 minutes. Or if you’re a researcher and are monitoring some atmosphering effect or whatever.
At least this particular watch here would suit quite well for this kind of stuff — that is, stuff that you like to keep an eye on, but that doesn’t require to be kept up-to-date every second. It’s probably a waste of time trying to get the watch in a state where you can actively do things with it, but for passively displaying useful information in dense format it might be a great boon for certain kinds of people.