Android Wear is for notifications not for "full-fledged" apps, is that expected or disappointing?
1. wilsong17 (Posts: 1131; Member since: 10 Mar 2013)
Noo I was expecting a black ops 2 like watch
8. AppleHateBoy (unregistered)
No kiddin. I was expecting an Omnitrix. Google disappointed me.
2. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 4754; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)
I was expecting something more similar to what pebble is offering. It'd be crazy for google to just make a notification on your wrist when there's so much more possible.
12. marbovo (Posts: 658; Member since: 16 May 2013)
Just face it, you would expect anything, excluding what google would do no matter what they would do
13. Reluctant_Human (Posts: 867; Member since: 28 Jun 2012)
This is actually just what I expected and looking forward to. Simple voice functionality for quick responses and searches. Something that will ;let me save some time and battery on my phone without having to worry about constantly charging my watch either.
3. jian9007 (Posts: 21; Member since: 20 Nov 2012)
Not surprising at all. I just need a fitness wearable which is why I'm getting the Gear Fit. Like Android Wear, it does notifications and along with the fitness part, that's all I need. I like the looks of it as well.
4. NoFanboy (Posts: 252; Member since: 18 Nov 2013)
I like this. Phones are for full apps. IMO the gear was just too much. As long as it can play simple apps like music streaming apps and health apps I'm game
7. Retro-touch (Posts: 265; Member since: 24 Oct 2011)
I completely agree we already have smartphones, tablets and laptops, it would be counter-intuitive to have full fledged apps on a watch, first of all you'd have to think about useability of large apps on a watch, second battery life concerns; don't think people would like to charge their phones and watches daily, third utility of watch is in displaying time only; having easily viewable (at a glance) notifications doesn't detract the watch from its main purpose. I know Samsung went all out but its not really a practical solution for the use-case of a watch, though I'm sure there are lots of people who will appreciate it but we'll just have to wait and see if its successful in its implementation but I think Google's way makes more sense
5. Killua (Posts: 270; Member since: 25 Nov 2013)
Already dead set on the gear from the start. This news just further prove my choice is the best for me.
6. kaikuheadhunterz (Posts: 852; Member since: 18 Jul 2013)
The picture from Inspector Gadget gives me an idea of a Skype-based smartwatch. It's just that, Skype on a watch, complete with a front-facing camera
9. fuelband (Posts: 23; Member since: 19 Jul 2013)
"...it won't be a truly smartwatch." It will be the Notifiwatch by Google Android wear. Notifies you every second of everything.
10. CX3NT3_713 (Posts: 2015; Member since: 18 Apr 2011)
Disappointment... The technology is not there yet. ..#failed
11. jroc74 (Posts: 5192; Member since: 30 Dec 2010)
I am kind of confused as to what full apps would even be usable on a watch?
"When manufacturers try to offer "full-fledged applications" on a smartwatch, it usually ends badly, because the screen is too small, the processor too slow, and the battery too small."
The article could have ended right there...lol. Battery life, tiny screen, processor... I never expected this or any smart watch to have full apps on it. Full apps designed for a smart watch....that might be different. But you still have to worry about battery life. That should be the #1 goal....decent battery life.
GPS/navigation/maps would probably be the only full app I would want or use. Streaming music, mp3 player too. But not launchers, games, etc.
14. garyII (Posts: 160; Member since: 26 Feb 2014)
definitely is what i expected...android wear is far more rational than other smartwatches...