Smart Watches are underwhelming

[minervx]

Just a totally subjective opinion.  They sit somewhere between a smartphone and watch, and to me, they feel eclipsed by both.  A phone has far more utility.  A traditional watch is more convenience.  

 

With a smart watch, the time it takes to navigate through the OS on a tiny screen, you could've already done the same via your smartphone.  And traditional watches don't need to be charged every few days.

[Levent]

I agree to a point. I like some health related features like sleep tracking, blood oxygen level tracking, activity tracking, heart rate tracking and some even offer stress tracking. Though most of these features are trickling down to smart bands and I personally haven’t found a reason to change my mi band 6 I got over 2 years ago. Battery lasts me a week with non stop use and all features turned on.

[Senzelian]

Even the cheapest Fossil smartwatch is more durable than some of the most expensive wrist watches. No mechanical parts  

Also receiving notifications quietly without disturbing anyone is nice. Smartphones even in vibration mode are quite noisy.

[Bananasplit_00]

I love being able to see what is playing and control media from my wrist, especially if I'm riding a bike/moped/motorbike.(typically do not have my phone on my handlebars, I have a dedicated device for that as a phone is much too distracting.)

 

Don't care at all for "health utilities" so pretty much everything besides that one feature is wasted on me. Honestly dislike getting notifications that buzz on my wrist too.

[CrowTheRobot]

9 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

I love being able to see what is playing and control media from my wrist, especially if I'm riding a bike/moped/motorbike.(typically do not have my phone on my handlebars, I have a dedicated device for that as a phone is much too distracting.)

Same, though more with weight lifting.  I tend to have my phone off to the side, and it's easier to lift my Apple Watch and quick tap to the next song on Amazon Music than have to grab my phone and wait for it to unlock.  Also handy if I'm running a race and have my phone zipped up in a pocket or in a pouch.

[Blue4130]

1 hour ago, Senzelian said:

Even the cheapest Fossil smartwatch is more durable than some of the most expensive wrist watches. No mechanical parts  

Also receiving notifications quietly without disturbing anyone is nice. Smartphones even in vibration mode are quite noisy.

I trust the longevity of these mechanical parts way more than the electrical ones of a smart watch.

 

My omega speed master has been on my wrist daily for a decade and had a long life before I bought it.

[Senzelian]

25 minutes ago, Blue4130 said:

I trust the longevity of these mechanical parts way more than the electrical ones of a smart watch.

 

My omega speed master has been on my wrist daily for a decade and had a long life before I bought it.

I meant more in the sense of dropping it or banging it against things.

[Blue4130]

1 minute ago, Senzelian said:

I meant more in the sense of dropping it or banging it against things.

Both things kill electronics also...

[YoungBlade]

2 hours ago, Senzelian said:

Even the cheapest Fossil smartwatch is more durable than some of the most expensive wrist watches. No mechanical parts  

Also receiving notifications quietly without disturbing anyone is nice. Smartphones even in vibration mode are quite noisy.

That's just wrong. A high end watch should last for decades if it is not abused - it is very common for grandfathers and fathers to leave expensive watches to their grandsons and sons, but I highly doubt that anyone today is telling their wife "honey, it's okay that I spent $800 on this smartwatch because it'll be in our family for generations." A smartwatch's battery alone will be dead in a matter of years.

[Senzelian]

12 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

That's just wrong.

Nope, it's simply correct.

 

I have a bunch of wrist watches that I inherited from my father. Some only cost a few hundred DM (Deutsche Mark, pre-Euro) and some of which cost multiple thousands and are German made. A lot of them have failed in some way or another, because no one took care of them in recent years. They were all lying in a drawer. I also had a few wrist watches that cost around 200 to 500€, which also have all failed, due to them hitting something too hard or because I dropped them accidentally. (Interestingly enough the cheap BMW and Jeep watches that he got when buying two cars are still running lol)

 

On the other hand my ASUS Zenwatch2 was dropped from a building, the Fossil Explorist fell from a Bike at 40kph and my Pixel Watch was banged against desks and other hard surfaces multiple times (just like the others), sometimes even so hard that my wrist hurt. Apart from scratches, nothing. They just continue to function.

 

And yes sure, if you always take good care of your mechanical watch then yeah, it'll outlast a smart watch and only because of software and battery, but who does that? Mine are getting banged around, thrown around, dropped and completly f*cked up. I really can't be bothered to care and instead just buy a new one, once the software becomes unusable. And also, if you exchange a battery on a smartwatch, you can drastically increase its life. The Fossil Explorist I mentioned earlier is still on its first battery, still lasts over a day and is now 6 years old.

 

 

[YoungBlade]

4 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

Nope, it's simply correct.

 

I have a bunch of wrist watches that I inherited from my father. Some only cost a few hundred DM (Deutsche Mark, pre-Euro) and some of which cost multiple thousands and are German made. A lot of them have failed in some way or another, because no one took care of them in recent years. They were all lying in a drawer. I also had a few wrist watches that cost around 200 to 500€, which also have all failed, due to them hitting something too hard or because I dropped them accidentally. (Interestingly enough the cheap BMW and Jeep watches that he got when buying two cars are still running lol)

 

On the other hand my ASUS Zenwatch2 was dropped from a building, the Fossil Explorist fell from a Bike at 40kph and my Pixel Watch was banged against desks and other hard surfaces multiple times (just like the others), sometimes even so hard that my wrist hurt. Apart from scratches, nothing. They just continue to function.

 

And yes sure, if you always take good care of your mechanical watch then yeah, it'll outlast a smart watch and only because of software and battery, but who does that? Mine are getting banged around, thrown around, dropped and completly f*cked up. I really can't be bothered to care and instead just buy a new one, once the software becomes unusable. And also, if you exchange a battery on a smartwatch, you can drastically increase its life. The Fossil Explorist I mentioned earlier is still on its first battery, still lasts over a day and is now 6 years old.

I'd never heard of this Fossil brand before, but looking at their site, they don't sell cheap smartwatches. Their cheapest is over $200, which is mainstream pricing, but not what I was thinking of when you said "the cheapest Fossil smartwatch" considering that you can get Fitbit smart watches for under $100, and you can spend well under that for unknown brands.

 

But if you really want a durable watch, then smartwatches still aren't the best option. A digital watch is the way to go. They make Casio watches that can withstand basically any abuse - and those are available for under $100, some as low as $50. For the price of your smartwatches, you can get 4+ of those, meaning that if it does fall off your wrist and underneath a hydraulic press by mistake, you can have a spare ready to go. They also should have much better longevity, although opening it to replace the battery can harm its waterproofing. But again, at that price, you can probably just replace it every time the battery dies and still come out ahead compared to buying smartwatches.

 

The reason to buy a smartwatch is for the features, not for durability and especially not for longevity.

[Sarra]

2 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

I'd never heard of this Fossil brand before, but looking at their site, they don't sell cheap smartwatches. Their cheapest is over $200, which is mainstream pricing, but not what I was thinking of when you said "the cheapest Fossil smartwatch" considering that you can get Fitbit smart watches for under $100, and you can spend well under that for unknown brands.

 

But if you really want a durable watch, then smartwatches still aren't the best option. A digital watch is the way to go. They make Casio watches that can withstand basically any abuse - and those are available for under $100, some as low as $50. For the price of your smartwatches, you can get 4+ of those, meaning that if it does fall off your wrist and underneath a hydraulic press by mistake, you can have a spare ready to go. They also should have much better longevity, although opening it to replace the battery can harm its waterproofing. But again, at that price, you can probably just replace it every time the battery dies and still come out ahead compared to buying smartwatches.

 

The reason to buy a smartwatch is for the features, not for durability and especially not for longevity.

Smartwatches aren't made for the future, they're made for now. And they're made to be disposable. This is how 99% of modern everything is made.

[Senzelian]

2 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

I'd never heard of this Fossil brand before, but looking at their site, they don't sell cheap smartwatches. Their cheapest is over $200, which is mainstream pricing, but not what I was thinking of when you said "the cheapest Fossil smartwatch" considering that you can get Fitbit smart watches for under $100, and you can spend well under that for unknown brands.

Their watches are regularly on sale for 150€. Or at least used to be.

 

3 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

But if you really want a durable watch, then smartwatches still aren't the best option. A digital watch is the way to go. They make Casio watches that can withstand basically any abuse - and those are available for under $100, some as low as $50. For the price of your smartwatches, you can get 4+ of those, meaning that if it does fall off your wrist and underneath a hydraulic press by mistake, you can have a spare ready to go. They also should have much better longevity, although opening it to replace the battery can harm its waterproofing. But again, at that price, you can probably just replace it every time the battery dies and still come out ahead compared to buying smartwatches.

I agree. I count those into the same category when it comes to durability, as they also have no moving parts.

 

4 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

The reason to buy a smartwatch is for the features, not for durability and especially not for longevity.

Depends. I was in the situation that I had a mechanical watch that failed and then thought to buy a new one, but also considered smartwatches. I then bought a smartwatch specifically because the mechanical watch failed the way it did. The features were simply an added bonus and the negatives that come with a smartwatch I really don't mind at all.

[LogicalDrm]

8 hours ago, Senzelian said:

Even the cheapest Fossil smartwatch is more durable than some of the most expensive wrist watches. No mechanical parts

6 hours ago, Senzelian said:

I meant more in the sense of dropping it or banging it against things.

5 hours ago, Senzelian said:

Nope, it's simply correct.

 

I have a bunch of wrist watches that I inherited from my father. Some only cost a few hundred DM (Deutsche Mark, pre-Euro) and some of which cost multiple thousands and are German made. A lot of them have failed in some way or another, because no one took care of them in recent years. They were all lying in a drawer. I also had a few wrist watches that cost around 200 to 500€, which also have all failed, due to them hitting something too hard or because I dropped them accidentally. (Interestingly enough the cheap BMW and Jeep watches that he got when buying two cars are still running lol)

 

On the other hand my ASUS Zenwatch2 was dropped from a building, the Fossil Explorist fell from a Bike at 40kph and my Pixel Watch was banged against desks and other hard surfaces multiple times (just like the others), sometimes even so hard that my wrist hurt. Apart from scratches, nothing. They just continue to function.

 

And yes sure, if you always take good care of your mechanical watch then yeah, it'll outlast a smart watch and only because of software and battery, but who does that? Mine are getting banged around, thrown around, dropped and completly f*cked up. I really can't be bothered to care and instead just buy a new one, once the software becomes unusable. And also, if you exchange a battery on a smartwatch, you can drastically increase its life. The Fossil Explorist I mentioned earlier is still on its first battery, still lasts over a day and is now 6 years old.

Your examples are pretty bad if you want to counter your first argument. Smartwatches, at least the cheapest and most of the midrange, have mechanical parts. Band is mechanical in sense that its in constant friction to your wrist. Metal bands will last longer than rubber or leather. Smartwatches also need to be charged and that is constantly wearing mechanical part. Be it proprietary connector or USB. One could relate that to regular watches basic functions where gears are in works. Oh, and most cheaper watches use batteries too.

 

Normal watch doesn't just die if its let in drawer. Battery may die out and require to be changed, but really nothing more than that. Your smartwatch doesn't have changeable battery, in most cases not even one that would be done with specialized service center. Sure, they can die for other reasons, like failed gears. So can any electronic you buy. Thats weak way to say one is more durable than other.

 

Your example about extreme cases works, to some extent. Since there are no gears to dislodge or break, they are more durable to shock type impact. However, hardly ever to water resistance like watches of same price range (with little asterisk that on any battery change, they would need to be resealed to achieve advertised rating). But if smartwatch would suffer heavy impact that would damage chassis and make its IP rating trash, would they be serviceable like regular watches? You can always replace glass, gears and other parts of a watch, but how much of smart watch can be repaired or serviced? Even if we don't take account software.

 

So essentially, how long lifetime does smart watch have, in actual real life? Compared to something you can take to local watchmaker to be fixed. Ofc, with some asterisk. Older and more obscure or cheaper watches may not have spares available or fixing could be more expensive than the watch is even worth.

 

***

 

To actual topic. I have used regular watches a long time and just recently started to use smart watch. I mainly use it for notifications and idle measuring basic health stuff. I could do those with sports tracker band and continue to use normal watch. I don't see much benefits on using the more expensive or extensive smart watches. The screen is too small and battery is worthless if it needs to be charged more than overnight. For active sports there's more use since sports trackers were a thing way before smart watches.

 

 

[Senzelian]

9 hours ago, LogicalDrm said:

Your examples are pretty bad if you want to counter your first argument.

Counter my own argument? I don't even want to read further if that's what you think 

[LogicalDrm]

2 hours ago, Senzelian said:

Counter my own argument? I don't even want to read further if that's what you think 

I meant to back it up (don't really remember how to say it in English). Counter the counter arguments. Though if you don't want to have conversation, point of participating in the discussion seems rather pointless to start with.

[Senzelian]

7 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

Though if you don't want to have conversation, point of participating in the discussion seems rather pointless to start with.

You're just out for a fight. I really got better things to do than fight about this. I already gave into YoungBlade's "That's just wrong", which is a terrible way of starting any argument and now I should give into your "Your examples are pretty bad" ? No thanks. 

[Mihle]

I haven't found a smartwatch I want yet, so I don't wear any watch at all.

 

I want one that show time digitally, and can do simple things like show what kind of notification I got and control music and good battery time. Nothing more, not maps or anything advanced like that that makes shorter battery time. I don't care about heath stuff. Could have an eInk display.

[RoseLuck462]

Agreed.

 

I’ve had plenty of smartwatches from Apple Watch to Samsung watches and I have them all up a few years ago. The utility just isn’t there and needed a another outlet space for a another charger was an annoyance.

 

Being able to receive notifications is underwhelming, redundant even.

 

My daily driver watch a 15 year old solar charged Casio Sport, with tons of features such as altimeter, thermometer, etc. That’s a real smart watch.

[Monkey Dust]

On 7/18/2023 at 4:53 PM, Sarra said:

Smartwatches aren't made for the future, they're made for now. And they're made to be disposable. This is how 99% of modern everything is made.

This is the most damming argument against them. Short life, then e-waste. It's not a laptop, no one is going to the expense of recycling these things. It's not a phone (do we still need to specify smart?) which it is hard to function without these days.

[TastyTaco]

For me, Pebble was the real deal. It didn’t try to be anything that it wasn’t and it worked fairly well. You could use it for a week without charging it. I haven’t owned a smartwatch ever since it was mercilessly killed.

[Strongit]

This is why I want to see more hybrid smart watches. I've only ever seen one or two but they would be exactly what I want. They connected via bluetooth, had a small LCD strip display for notifications and status messages. From what I remember the battery life was over a month; throw in some biometric data that's sent to Google fit or an app and that's exactly what I would like in a watch.

 

EDIT: Of course I did a Google search for hybrid smartwatch after posting this out of curiosity and there's quite a few out there, lol. Guess what I want already exists

[Mark Kaine]

On 7/18/2023 at 5:50 PM, YoungBlade said:

Casio

this is all that needed to be said.

 

they even make "smart watches"... kinda

 

 

my personal favorite actual smartwatch:

 

 

 

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

 

 

 

[Montana One-Six]

Plus most of them look goofy as hell.

[Amp9k]

Smart watches are absolutely nowhere near perfect that's for sure. I've never had a smart watch that I actually enjoyed wearing, until I got the apple watch ultra. Only needs charging every 2-3 days (depending on how much u use it). It basically replaced my phone for the most of the day. Not worth the price though let's be honest here.