Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Leak: Almost a Third of Samsung Galaxy Gear Smartwatches Are Being Returned

timothy posted about a year ago | from the this-smart-ring-communicates-with-your-smart-watch dept.

Cellphones 365

llebeel writes "Almost a third of Samsung's Galaxy Gear Smartwatches sold are being returned, a leaked document has revealed, which shows that over 30 percent are being returned after sale at Best Buy locations in the US. The higher than expected return rate could be due to that realisation, with customers impulse buying and then realising that the smartwatch isn't everything it's cracked up to be." I'd like to hear from more people with smart watches who are happy with them, to better understand the appeal.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Maybe (5, Insightful)

ralf1 (718128) | about a year ago | (#45268757)

One out of three people decided they looked like a dork with that awful thing on their wrist.

Re:Maybe (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268857)

I got my smartwatch so I could beat off to porn in the restroom, but the problem was that since my wrist was moving up and down so fast, I couldn't focus on the picture.

But Ethanol, dude, why not just put it on the other hand?

I don't have another fucking hand, asshole!

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:Maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269025)

And here I thought you other hand was holding your drink.

Re:Maybe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269129)

My girlfriend holds a wine glass in her hand while I'm fucking her. Quite unique in my experience, and it's funny you posted this.

Captcha: harder

Re:Maybe (-1, Flamebait)

SJHillman (1966756) | about a year ago | (#45269185)

"I don't have another fucking hand, asshole!"

Then just put it on your regular hand. Besides, don't most people wear it on their wrist?

Re:Maybe (5, Funny)

CrzyP (830102) | about a year ago | (#45268873)

The other 2/3 haven't yet realized it.

Re:Maybe (2)

jeremyp (130771) | about a year ago | (#45268897)

Or they have, but they think it's cool.

Re:Maybe (4, Insightful)

Austrian Anarchy (3010653) | about a year ago | (#45268999)

One out of three people decided they looked like a dork with that awful thing on their wrist.

All the makings of a future collector's item! Anybody who has one and is thinking of returning it, place it back in the original box and stow it away. A whole new generation of nostalgia geeks is being born right now who will beat a path to your door about the time you need retirement money.

Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (5, Interesting)

iPaul (559200) | about a year ago | (#45268761)

I sometimes thought the iWatch rumor was just a plant by Apple to get everyone else in the industry to trip over themselves trying to get the watch out before Apple.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (1)

ilsaloving (1534307) | about a year ago | (#45268841)

If they did, that would be the most masterful bit of trolling ever. Look at us! We got Samsung and others the blow ridiculous sums of cash for a stupid product that no one will ever buy!

Now we just need someone to photoshop a troll-apple logo. :)

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268843)

I sometimes thought the iWatch rumor was just a plant by Apple to get everyone else in the industry to trip over themselves trying to get the watch out before Apple.

I see enough iTools wearing their iPod Nano on their wrist like its a watch, and it has no connectivity at all. Apparently the appeal of something on your wrist is that it doesn't do much. That's where Samsung went wrong.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269091)

ipod nano tells time and you listen to music on it. and its under $100

not $299 because its cooler to read an email on a small screen instead of that 5.5" phablet in your pocket

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (2)

Doug Otto (2821601) | about a year ago | (#45269203)

And you only need to recharge it about once a week.....not 3 times a day.

It's a trApple! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269137)

:)

Seriously just alter the logo to look sort of like an unfinished Death Star, and you're set :)

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268911)

Smart watch but dumb marketing. This idea came to market about twenty years too late. Perhaps if it arrived before the market was flooded with smart phones, it might have enjoyed a short life, maybe one on my wist before being added to the junk box collection of smart-looking but quite dumb wrist-watches. Now where did I put that sun-dial ?

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (1)

Austrian Anarchy (3010653) | about a year ago | (#45269027)

Smart watch but dumb marketing. This idea came to market about twenty years too late. Perhaps if it arrived before the market was flooded with smart phones, it might have enjoyed a short life, maybe one on my wist before being added to the junk box collection of smart-looking but quite dumb wrist-watches. Now where did I put that sun-dial ?

20 years too late? Similar gadgets have been introduced and failed long before that. Seiko wrist TV is but one.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269107)

No. 20 years ago we had the Casio databank watch... A calculator, world time clock, and personal contact manager. It wasn't cool back then either, it made you a nerd.

The only universal socially acceptable watch is one with an analog dial.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (4, Interesting)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#45268913)

Wouldn't be the first time they used rumours to their own advantage. It's widely accepted that Apple seeded rumours of an "under-$1000" price point for the original iPad to make its actual $500 price look really, really good. I doubt it's a coincidence that HP and Microsoft's own tablet, the Slate 500, wound up costing $800 later that year. They surely hoped to undercut Apple's rumoured target price when they were doing the original design work.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268923)

I doubt it. How would they claim to have invented them if they did that?

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (2)

Jabrwock (985861) | about a year ago | (#45268991)

Apple didn't invent a lot of things. What they did was find a way to make existing things better in ways that made them mass marketable. Not the fastest, not the most feature rich, not the smallest, but enough of all three to make it appeal to a bigger slice of the market.

Now that Samsung has failed so miserably, Apple knows what worked and what didn't, and can better bring their design to market when it is ready.

IMHO Samsung failed to include the front-facing camera and the ability to play video. This is supposed to be a Dick Tracy watch dammit!

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268997)

I doubt it. How would they claim to have invented them if they did that?

Pffft, like that's ever been a problem in the past...

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (5, Interesting)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about a year ago | (#45268969)

I think people want them, but Samsung tried to get the jump on Apple by pushing a half-baked product. I don't think Apple will nail it either because what people want in a smart watch is out of reach of current technology - the components are just too big. People want a smart watch which is indiscreet. It looks like a regular watch in both design, function and form factor yet magically can interface with your phone in a way which is neither cumbersome or frustrating. I think right now, people would be happy with a watch which simply vibrates when the phone in their pocket or backpack gets a text or phone call. Maybe scrolls an indiscreet caller id on the screen, or marquee of the text. Perhaps does a voice reply to a text message. That would be enough for now instead of trying to fit a phone on your wrist.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269127)

Maybe scrolls an indiscreet caller id on the screen, or marquee of the text.

Why would you want that?

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269199)

That word - indiscreet. It doesn't mean what you think it means.

Re: Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (2)

AvitarX (172628) | about a year ago | (#45269209)

Sounds a lot like pebble.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (5, Insightful)

swillden (191260) | about a year ago | (#45269011)

Responding to your subject line, I want a smart watch. I want one that's done right, which means the right functionality, integrated in the right way with my other personal electronics.

I ultimately want to have Google Glass (or similar), a smart watch and a smart phone with a large screen (6" is about right). I think the three devices could work very well together.

The phone, of course, is the brain, the connectivity, and the user interface for "heavy" work. Anything involving data entry or interacting with large amounts of data. Glass is an audio/video output device, to provide no-hands, no-interference content when I need it. Heads-up navigation, audio playback, video messages, etc. But it's not something I'd want to wear all of the time, both because I don't think the battery will stand up to constantly being on and because it's awkward in some social situations. A smartwatch is an ideal form factor for lightweight I/O. It can provide unobtrusive notifications and quick, easy access to small but important pieces of information. It can also be an input device for controlling Glass, one that's a lot more convenient than the frame-mounted touchpad (in fact, I hope a future version of Glass does away with the frame-mounted touchpad using smartwatch integration instead) and provides a lot more control than head gestures.

Galaxy Gear isn't yet the smartwatch that I want, though.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269041)

I have been very satisfied with the watch. It really depends on what you need a wrist mounted device for. For me the notifications of messages and email during numerous meetings, allows me to only pull out my phone for things that I need to respond to immediately. When I am in the factory I used to frequently miss things due to the noise and movement. Now I never miss anything because I always feel my wrist vibrate. Battery life has been satisfactory. I have never went below 50% in a 18 hour day of use and frequently have 65% left. I charge my phone and laptop every day, so it’s not a problem for me plugging in another device. I also use the watch as a speaker phone in my car with great success.
If you are looking to run apps on the watch rather than the phone then you are going to be disappointed.

Re:Really? Did we ever really want smart watches? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#45269077)

Why have you set your phone to give you immediate notifications about things you don't need to respond to immediately?

first! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268765)

suck it

I am happy with it! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268769)

I can say I am happy with my smart watch. Now that I made my post to slashdot, please excuse me but I have to run to Best Buy to return it.

Best Buy? (5, Interesting)

Jamie Wood (2916359) | about a year ago | (#45268775)

Or maybe most of them are just treating Best Buy as "try it out before I order it from Amazon."

Re:Best Buy? (0)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45268867)

they wish. Best Buy is for "try something that might be cool, so I see if I even like it".

Re:Best Buy? (3, Informative)

pak9rabid (1011935) | about a year ago | (#45269195)

Doesn't Best Buy price-match their competitors (including Amazon)?

A "smart watch"... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268779)

...which interacts only with your smartphone, requiring you to always the smartphone with you. This whole idea is so fundamentally flawed, and almost unfathomably stupid - as stupid as buying a mini remote control for your main remote control. Why on earth would anyone bother with a "smart" watch if they can just as easily use the phone with a much better experience?

Re:A "smart watch"... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268877)

...which interacts only with your smartphone, requiring you to always the smartphone with you. This whole idea is so fundamentally flawed, and almost unfathomably stupid - as stupid as buying a mini remote control for your main remote control. Why on earth would anyone bother with a "smart" watch if they can just as easily use the phone with a much better experience?

Because people ARE stupid and gullible.
Smartwatches are dead on arrival, wether done by Samsung, Motorola or Apple. A smartwatch is simply an answer to a question nobody asked.
The day companies come out with a computer, a real computer that you can wear on your forearm now that's something else (like what the character of Aki Ross wears in the film Final Fantasy The Spirits Within). A true wearable computer with a holographic display interface. Until then, smartphones are good.

Not even then... (1)

Junta (36770) | about a year ago | (#45269097)

A lot of people don't even like wearing watches, I can't imagine people going for full-on bracers.

Either things are going to stay pocketable or some sort of augmented reality solution are the things I could believe. If I were a betting man, I would bet that pocketable will continue to rule the day.

Re:A "smart watch"... (4, Insightful)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#45268973)

Notification triage. A lot of people who apparently haven't figured out the Notification settings on their phones get a beep or a buzz every time there's an email or a Facebook message or an app update or whatever the fuck, and for those people being able to see what it was and dismiss it without pulling their phone out their pocket would be convenient.

Personally, I simply turned off notifications windows, sounds, and vibration for everything that doesn't require my immediate attention (SMS and phone calls). I look at my Notification list the next time I unlock my phone and deal with the trivial stuff then.

Re: A "smart watch"... (2)

Karlt1 (231423) | about a year ago | (#45269017)

I do one better than notification triage. I keep my iPhone on Do Not Disturb and have it set to only allow calls through for select people or if you call more than once within three minutes.

I do something similar with Android phones using a third party app - AutoRing.

Re: A "smart watch"... (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#45269069)

I'm lucky, I don't get enough calls or texts that I have to go that far. I turn that on between the late evening and morning, or when I'm at the movies, though.

Re: A "smart watch"... (1)

Karlt1 (231423) | about a year ago | (#45268989)

which interacts only with your smartphone, requiring you to always the smartphone with you. This whole idea is so fundamentally flawed, and almost unfathomably stupid - as stupid as buying a mini remote control for your main remote control. Why on earth would anyone bother with a "smart" watch if they can just as easily use the phone with a much better experience?

Or selling a phone with a second phone.....,

http://mobile.theverge.com/2013/1/25/3915700/htc-mini-tiny-phone-companion-for-your-oversized-smartphone

Re:A "smart watch"... (3, Insightful)

johnlcallaway (165670) | about a year ago | (#45269029)

Because I don't have to take it out of my pocket to see why it buzzes?? Or just to check the time or weather??? Lot's of apps don't need a lot of screen real estate .. weather, calculator, phone, calendar, checking if emails are worth reading, text messages. Having an easy-to-reach display serves a real function even if it has reduced functionality. How about incorporating a small, wide angle camera that one could operate with voice commands?? It doesn't have to be the highest resolution, just enough for quick, uncomposed snaps. I take a lot of blind shots with my camera phone now so people don't know I'm taking them, you get really good at it after awhile. But I have to take it out of my pocket and set it to camera mode, which takes awhile.

Just because someone isn't clever enough to think of any use doesn't mean there aren't any.

I haven't worn a watch in over 10 years because I don't like something on my wrist with only one function. When I did, I bought the slimmest watch I could find. At one point, I had a nice Seiko multi-function watch that was very slim and had a stop watch and alarm in addition to being just a watch. Still have it in my nightstand. I might reconsider once these become a bit less nerdish and slimmer. I'll never have google glass because it's too big and labels someone immediately to other people, often in non-complimentary ways. Incorporate something into my existing eye glasses that disappears and I'd reconsider.

Re:A "smart watch"... (4, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#45269089)

Same reason people started wearing wrist watches instead of pocket watches - it is faster and more convenient to look at your wrist. Yes, the analogy lacks a bit since you still carry around the phone - but consider the use case of receiving an email:
You are working on something, perhaps debugging a piece of equipment, mowing the lawn, maybe painting - pick an activity. Your phone buzzes with the familiar tone of an incoming email or sms. You can either: (a) look at your wrist to see if it is worth a damn or, (b) stop what you are doing, dig into your pockets for your phone, turn on the screen, maybe swipe it to unlock, and then pull down the notifications. Even if you don't have your phone buttoned up like Ft. Knox and your SMS and emails are set to show up on your lock screen, it is still less convenient than getting it on your wrist.

Also consider that some people still wear a watch... a plain old ordinary watch. Having a more functional watch is not exactly a revolutionary way of thinking for these people.

I'm not going to buy a smartwatch, but a particularly geeky guy (but in a cool way) at work has one of those Pebble watches and he made the above points to me when I teased him about it.

Re:A "smart watch"... (2)

moschner (3003611) | about a year ago | (#45269147)

"I'd like to hear from more people with smart watches who are happy with them, to better understand the appeal."

The appeal was the idea of a watch that was also a freakin phone! That is just cool. That is something many a geek has wanted since they were little geeklings.

However, that is not what the Gear is. That is what the Gear was advertised and sold as, and hence the high return rate. They advertised a watch phone like the ones from TV and comics. What people got was a glorified phone accessory that only works with a handful of phones.

And this is news? (1)

Mr D from 63 (3395377) | about a year ago | (#45268783)

Not sure why this is news. Most folks already carry a smartphone & don't need their watch to do some of those functions.

One day battery life. (2)

thevirtualcat (1071504) | about a year ago | (#45268791)

I guess the people who bought it realized that having a watch you have to charge every night isn't all that useful.

(Contrast with a regular watch which, at the very worst, you replace the battery twice a year. Or other smart watches that you can go a week between charging them.)

Re:One day battery life. (5, Funny)

jeremyp (130771) | about a year ago | (#45268875)

Ha! My first regular watch had to be"recharged" every day. You didn't need to plug it in though, you just rotated the little knob on the side of it until the spring was tight.

Re:One day battery life. (5, Funny)

thevirtualcat (1071504) | about a year ago | (#45268963)

True. But I bet you never left your charger at home!

Re:One day battery life. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269175)

Self charging watches are now available. link [wikipedia.org]

Re:One day battery life. (1)

ctrl-alt-canc (977108) | about a year ago | (#45268881)

You probably never owned a mechanical watch...You know, one of those little devices powered by a mainspring [wikipedia.org] , that needed to be recharged once a day. Owning one of them gave to the owner the feeling of how precious and unique is the time of our life, a sensation that seems to have been forgotten by the i-something generation.

Re:One day battery life. (2)

khallow (566160) | about a year ago | (#45268967)

Owning one of them gave to the owner the feeling of how precious and unique is the time of our life, a sensation that seems to have been forgotten by the i-something generation.

Can't say that I ever felt that when I owned one. Guess that's why I switched to battery power.

Re:One day battery life. (1)

kav2k (1545689) | about a year ago | (#45268977)

To be fair, automatic self-winding mechanical wristwatches were invented in the XVIII century and, quoting Wikipedia, "by the 1960s [...] became standard in quality mechanical watches." As long as you wear them, it's a non-issue.

Smartwatches don't have similar tech, and are still making baby steps. People who buy them now should bear in mind they are almost prototype-level products.

Re:One day battery life. (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#45268987)

The i-something generation being everyone who has owned a watch since batteries and self-winding mechanisms were invented?

Re:One day battery life. (1)

thevirtualcat (1071504) | about a year ago | (#45269087)

I actually do own a pocket watch that belonged to my grandfather. I need to take it to a watchsmith, though, since the spring is going bad and it won't stay... er... charged for more than a few hours.

Some things never change.

Re:One day battery life. (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#45269121)

Winding one's watch does not require you to even remove it from your wrist, let alone plugging it in for an hour or so.

Re:One day battery life. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269159)

I own many mechanical watches, mostly auto winding though. In fact I don't own any digital watches, I appreciate the mechanical precision and effort that goes into building and maintaining such. Somehow I still love my i-somethings. You can become a bitter old man or a happy old man. I see you chose the former.

Re:One day battery life. (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about a year ago | (#45268883)

meanwhile, some mechanical watches of decades ago *never* needed anything because they were self-winding from wrist movement. ah progress...

Re:One day battery life. (1)

quipalicious (1036368) | about a year ago | (#45269073)

mind blown

Re:One day battery life (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269211)

So, Samsung, with all their tech prowess, managed to create a watch with a one day battery life that needs to be "recharged" every night.

A.K.A., a sundial.

Nice job Samsung.

Why is anyone surprised? (1)

f00zbll (526151) | about a year ago | (#45268793)

The last time I wore a watch was in high school before I started playing volleyball. After I started, there was no point to a watch. There's basically no point of wearing a watch today. It's only useful for people that want to show how expensive their Rolex is.

Re:Why is anyone surprised? (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | about a year ago | (#45268863)

How do you tell time? By pulling the phone out of your pocket, pressing the screen button on the phone, looking at the time and then putting the phone back in your pocket.

Re:Why is anyone surprised? (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about a year ago | (#45268933)

reminds me of the led watches that were the first direct reading digital ones. red plastic bezel and actual 7segment led displays inside. press a button to read the time, you have a few seconds and then it times out.

and we were damned happy to have them, too! even though it needed an extra 'hand' to read time ;)

lcd displays last a long time on a watch battery. the fact that they didn't use one indicates samsung didn't really think this whole wrist-watch thing out. its bad enough I have to charge a smartphone every day. doing so for a watch is not acceptable no matter how 'smart' the watch is.

Re:Why is anyone surprised? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269141)

reminds me of the led watches that were the first direct reading digital ones. red plastic bezel and actual 7segment led displays inside. press a button to read the time, you have a few seconds and then it times out.

and we were damned happy to have them, too! even though it needed an extra 'hand' to read time ;)

lcd displays last a long time on a watch battery. the fact that they didn't use one indicates samsung didn't really think this whole wrist-watch thing out. its bad enough I have to charge a smartphone every day. doing so for a watch is not acceptable no matter how 'smart' the watch is.

My grandfather bought one of those in the seventies. He used it for less than a month then put in back in its box and continued to use a good old mechanical watch until quartz watch technology really improved. Those led watches were big, heavy (relatively) and drained batteries quicker than an suv gaz guzzler. That's why it displayed the time only when the button was pressed so as to conserve the battery. Freaking cool, but expensive prototypes that never went anywhere. That's what they were.

Re:Why is anyone surprised? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269005)

How do you tell time? By pulling the phone out of your pocket, pressing the screen button on the phone, looking at the time and then putting the phone back in your pocket.

...while driving.

Re:Why is anyone surprised? (2)

JustOK (667959) | about a year ago | (#45269063)

I have a sundial app for telling time.

Re:Why is anyone surprised? (1)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#45269189)

It's a pocket watch.

Re:Why is anyone surprised? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#45269047)

I'm curious, why did volleyball obviate the need for a watch? I mean I can understand it making a watch inconvenient (although they come off, you know) but when I started playing hockey, I still needed to check when my break ended at work or whether I was late getting back to school from lunch.

Re:Why is anyone surprised? (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | about a year ago | (#45269079)

The last time I wore a watch was in high school before I started playing volleyball. After I started, there was no point to a watch. There's basically no point of wearing a watch today. It's only useful for people that want to show how expensive their Rolex is.

It's not often that I have to get dressed up in a civilized fashion and behave in public, but when I do a watch is invaluable.

That said, Rolex is for pussies.

Samsung exclusivity hurting it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268795)

I wonder how many of them are returned because Samsung likes to make their stuff only compatible with Samsung phones. If they would realize that supporting more phones would give them more compatiblity.....if I don't have a Samsung phone, I'm not going to wait until my contract is up, get one, and then buy your watch.

Worst smart watch (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268807)

Maybe because Galaxy Gear is the worst smartwatch on the market. Go read the reviews.

Re:Worst smart watch (1)

TWX (665546) | about a year ago | (#45269013)

I wonder how good the design process was really...

If I'm going to have a watch-type device whose purpose is to interface with my phone, I want it to do the following WELL:

Dial calls.
Show caller ID and answer calls.
Show navigation/map data.
Control audio playback.
Control method of output for phonecalls (switch between bluetooth headset, watch speakerphone, and phone speakerphone, and conventional phone).
Compass and orienteering (direction and distance).
Quick-launching, mid-resolution camera pointed out the side (2048x1536 at most for still images).
Clock.

Make it do these things well, make it cheap, and make it thin enough to not look ridiculous, and you may have something. It doesn't have to do everything, it doesn't need a notepad or high-resolution camera or Angry Birds, it just needs to do a few simple things that will allow one to leave one's phone in one's pocket or backpack or purse for the basics of communication, and give just a few more useful features.

When the Palm Pilot was designed, the designer carried around a block of wood and figured out when it would have been nice for that block of wood to do something. Hence the calendar, the notepad, the contacts list, the tasks list, and the like. This approach should work well for something watch-sized too.

Showrooming (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268809)

Returns to Best Buy?
Maybe a portion of those returns are just people who wanted to try it out before buying from Amazon.

Re: Showrooming (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268955)

That doesn't make any sense. Best Buy matches Amazons prices.

Re: Showrooming (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269085)

That doesn't make any sense. Best Buy matches Amazons prices.

But Amazon is less horrible than Best Buy?

Because it's a terrible hardship... (1)

Picass0 (147474) | about a year ago | (#45268819)

...reaching in your pocket to get your phone.

It's sad in that same way as the family member who's sitting by the TV but searching desperately for the remote.

Re:Because it's a terrible hardship... (1)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#45268859)

As best I can tell, the main market for such a device would be keeping your phone in your backpack and letting the watch do all the interface work. I certainly don't have the need for such a device, but I could see some value for commuters. Until they get out a tablet and piss all over the idea that the watch is useful.

Re:Because it's a terrible hardship... (2)

isorox (205688) | about a year ago | (#45269067)

...reaching in your pocket to get your phone.

It's sad in that same way as the family member who's sitting by the TV but searching desperately for the remote.

Many tvs have functions that can't be accessed with a remote. My STB has 1200 channels, selecting channel 503 when I'm on channel 141, without a remote (and thus limited to ch+) is a right pain.

I wear a watch, it's handy to be aware of what the time is, as my body clock is usually screwed from 1 or 2 long haul trips a month. If that watch also showed me who was ringing, allowing me to ignore my phone (which may be in my pocket, or on the other side of the office), that would be useful.

Because it's not an apple... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268821)

I'm sure people realized it wasn't an Apple and returned it.... being the first to come out with this gadget isn't a sure way in getting market domination. When Apple releases theirs I'm sure those customers will buy those and keep them.

Not suprised. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268839)

Samsung forgot one critical step in their usual business plan.
You actually have to wait for Apple to release a product before you can copy it.

I played with these for about 20 minutes in my local ATT store while waiting for a bunch of tablet data plan sim cards to be activated. (Att's retail ipad based point of sales system is cool looking but slooooow) These things look like prototypes. They're HUGE and chunky and really awful looking. I'm also not sure what you're supposed to do with them, because they're literally worse at everything the smart phone in your pocket that they're tethered to.

They might sell better if they were about 1/3 the thickness and sport an apple logo (Don't kid yourself. These things are supposed to be conspicuous)

Open up the installer base (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268847)

If you build it, the programmers will come and make the apps that make it useful.
I'm assuming they have locked down the application installer to prevent the useful 3rd party apps.

technology for idiots (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year ago | (#45268865)

I knew since they launched it that it'd be too small to read, too big, too heavy, too warm, too annoying to charge, and too underperforming. I have a feeling so did Samsung. Obviously the average consumer knows nothing about mobile technology or they'd have known it too. At least they finally figured it out days after buying it. What a bunch of idiots. I wouldn't be surprised if some returned it because their magic magnetic energy field anti-cancer aura-boosting magnet wristband was interfering with it.

It doesn't even work with the S4 yet (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268891)

They're just rolling out the update now. Unless someone owns a Note 3 the Gear is basically worthless. I bet a good % of the returns are people who didn't realize it wasn't compatible with their phone.

They suck (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268899)

I had a Sony Live View.

It couldn't even tell time without syncing to my phone. I had to open my phone, sync the watch, then see the time. In that time I went past 3 clocks on my phone.

Smart Watches (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268905)

The only benefit I see offered by the Smart Watch is the ability to have the phone auto lock after 0-5 seconds, and then as long as you are wearing the watch in close proximity to the phone itself, it will unlock for you. When you walk away and it locks it will require a passcode. That passcode can be long and complicated, making the device secure. Like I said, this is the only benefit I see for it.

Maybe someone can just develop a wrist band that does the same thing?

I like my smartwatch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268907)

I've been using a Sony Smartwatch (first gen) and I really enjoy it. I like the notifications system and since I work in a meeting-heavy tech/business role it's really handy to be able to keep track of communications without bringing my phone out and disrupting things.

That said, the touch screen could be better and the software selection is only OK. On the flip side, the SDK is easy to use and I've created an app to address the lack of a media controller that works on certain apps by just coding my own in about a day.

I would very much consider getting a Smart Watch 2 for the better screen.

I got a Ks pebble (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268909)

And it does everything I need I think. I don't need to talk through it or hear through it. There is one thing that is a downside, and thats public perception of its use.

You look like a total jackass when someone is talking to you, you get a message, and look at your watch. It's an easy habit to fall into, looking at your watch when you immediately getting a message. But to whom you are talking, you look like you are looking at the time and being rude.

Re:I got a Ks pebble (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269183)

That is not the pebbles fault. You are a jackass when you pull your phone out to look at a message when already talking to someone as well.

incomatible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268917)

at the moment, it only works with Note 3, an expensive phablet. the watch is half that price. running gingerbread and doesnt even work with note 2 (which i have).
how the hell did they manage to fuck up this bad ?

Kids like big watches (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45268947)

When I made a similar comment when some kids were talking about the watches (which I think requires you to have a blue tooth enabled phone to do many things?) they told me that big watches were a fashion item these days, particularly in urban settings. So having an expensive fancy one makes some sense. I have no idea if that is true, but it is what the kids are saying. As they say.

race (1)

watcher-rv4 (2712547) | about a year ago | (#45268975)

Samsung is trying to win the race of smart watches, but there is no good smart watches in the market to be copied.

The same should apply to chromecast dongle (0)

cabazorro (601004) | about a year ago | (#45268981)

So far, kind of useless.
But is only $35.00 Dlls but who would bother to return it?

Re:The same should apply to chromecast dongle (1)

jittles (1613415) | about a year ago | (#45269177)

So far, kind of useless. But is only $35.00 Dlls but who would bother to return it?

There is no pandora app for my TV or for any of my other set top boxes, so I just use my Chromecast to stream Pandora into the living room while I do other things. But I got it only because of the 3 months of Netflix (which I did get). I would have never bought it otherwise. It has very limited uses.

not as bad as sony (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269031)

Most of the sony ones were returned due to battery failures and overall Bluetooth failures.

The entirety of the explanation (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about a year ago | (#45269065)

From TFA: the watch only works with tablets. It didn't work with Samsung cell phones except since this morning or something like that.

My Pebble does what I want out of a smartwatch. (4, Insightful)

marbike (35297) | about a year ago | (#45269075)

I detest ringtones in the office, so my phone is always set to silent. My Pebble allows me to see my wife calling/texting me. This alone justifies the price. The Gear is overpriced for what it offers, and requires their phone to work. My Pebble works with android and iOS. (disclaimer, I only use mine with android) I can set the watch face to whatever I like, including the very useful Beer O'Clock face that a friend made.
I prefer to check the time with a watch. Till I got my Pebble, I usually wore one of several Invicta chronographs that I own. I don't like digging a phone out of my pocket to verify the time, especially when in meetings. A quick glance is sufficient to tell when I am going to be late getting home, without the rudeness of pulling my phone out and conspicuously checking time.

Galaxy Gear is great. Usage model misunderstood. (5, Interesting)

The Real Dr. Video (1218040) | about a year ago | (#45269111)

I have had my Gear (and Galaxy Note 3) for most of the month now. As a business user (I own an IT consulting firm) I find the Gear supremely useful. I don't agree with most of the bad reviews I have read. To dispel some myths: I can go for a few days on a battery charge. I do sleep eventually so slipping it on the charger overnight is no biggie. I am an Exchange user and I get notified of incoming e-mail (and can read a summary) and can see my appointments for the day. Actually taking a call via hands free on the watch works well too, which I was surprised by. I didn't expect that part to be of particular value but I find myself taking calls like that and wearing my Bluetooth earpiece less. This stuff alone is worth the price for me. I think people are expecting this to be some whiz-bang toy and blow sunshine up their butts. This is a productivity tool and delivers it's value in that manner.

Proprietary garbage. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269133)

It only works when paired with a Samsung smart phone. I think the only company that can get away with that is Apple. Samsung will have to make their watch universal to android devices if they want any hope of selling these.

Pebble (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269143)

Displays text messages, who's calling you, integrates with pandora and amazon mp3, and displays run keeper information. A beeper for your wrist, more or less.

Satisfied Pebble Owner (1)

tazbert (824165) | about a year ago | (#45269149)

I've had my Pebble for about 3 months and am very happy with it. I like wearing a watch and this device provides a simple remote notification display and limited-feature remote control for my Android phone. It's waterproof, lasts a week on a charge, and was inexpensive enough that I won't be heartbroken if it gets lost or damaged.

Love my Pebble! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45269151)

I have a (KS) Pebble and I love it! Using Pebble Glance, Tasker, SSH, Yatse and a Telldus stick, I can play music, pause videos, change the volume, and turn lights on/off in my flat. Pebble Glance crams in a lot of info in the screen too.

I don't believe it (1)

DrXym (126579) | about a year ago | (#45269169)

What possible excuse could a person have to return a $300 watch which needs recharging every single day, doesn't tell you the time unless you light up the display (and you can't see any way in strong sunlight) and offers functionality which people don't need and doesn't work properly even if they did?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?