Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Android coming to wearables

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 206 posts

Re: Android coming to wearables

#151

Post by TarpitCarnivore »

macspoofing wrote: post #128
XorNot wrote: post #18

Urgh...I wish we could skip this whole awkward smart watch phase and just realize its a bad idea.

If you watch people interact with their phones for a few minutes you realize it is a good idea. Take any average person and you'd see them constantly checking their phone for time(!!), messages, emails, weather, missed calls, current calls (i.e. who is calling me right now), change playing song etc. All those functions could be easily handled by a companion watch device.

The flip side of this is that if it's interactive it doesn't stop the person from either A. constantly interacting with their phone or B. constantly interacting with their watch.

I think people would be better served taking a step back and asking "Do I really need all these notifications?" and the answer will likely be no.

Re: Android coming to wearables

#152

Post by lutusp »

happyscrappy wrote: post #132
lutusp wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I take issue with the idea that adding more restrictions improves freedom. Yes, but that isn't an idea the OP posted, it's an idea that you posted. A discussion of software license types doesn't automatically lead to either a preference for one kind of license over another, or the idea of governmental involvement. Those were things you made up on your own. > If you want to download possible malware that is your cho…

He was arguing that closed source software should be disallowed. Who else but the government is going to make such rules? Yes I brought freedom into it. I agree that both open and closed will have malware, so what is the point of banning closed software if not "freedom"?

> He was arguing that closed source software should be disallowed.

He did not make this argument. He argued that closed source has serious drawbacks -- he never suggested that it should be "disallowed". Find the word or an equivalent word -- but you must find it in his posts, not yours.

If I complain about women, am I saying they should be disallowed? Only to someone who invents positions for other people, then proceeds to object to the positions he has invented.

> Who else but the government is going to make such rules?

Is Apple under government mandate to have a closed-source system? Is Red Hat under government mandate to have an open-source system? Neither is true. The government is not involved at all, in any way, period.

> Yes I brought freedom into it.

Yes, you did, after inventing arguments no one made, using claims about society that aren't part of reality.

> ... so what is the point of banning closed software if not "freedom"?

You fabricated this entire argument out of whole cloth. No one advocated "banning closed software", no one brought up government, no one brought up freedom. These are all parts of your private fantasy.

Re: Android coming to wearables

#153

Post by frio »

fab13n wrote: post #141

We're in a situation comparable to smartphones pre-iPhone: we know there is value in displaying stuff on your wrist, we know we need some way to send information in response to those received from the screen, but all of this doesn't click together. We have fragments of a solution, but we don't know which problem it solves, and certainly not how to integrate it into a life-enhancing experience. Smartphone builders had…

Looking at all these things -- workmate has a Galaxy Gear, I've got a Pebble, another friend has a Basis B1 -- they're all so tall and clunky. They're uncomfortable and not particularly useful. The obvious answer, IMHO, is just a phone on your arm. I'm looking forward to the device that stops trying to pack things into a watch form-factor; that makes use of curved OLED displays, and puts a longer, thinner device on my wrist.

That said -- I've sort of thought for a while that the display should actually be decoupled from the device. I have a phone, a kindle, a smartwatch and a laptop -- all of which have separate user accounts, need cloud syncing (blech) and in general are a PITA to manage. I'd much prefer it if I had a computer on my wrist, which could wirelessly connect to external displays (Miracast?), and make use of them. So, my phone, kindle, laptop -- even a new tablet! -- are all just differing views of the same actual computer.

Re: Android coming to wearables

#154

Post by sliverstorm »

kh_hk wrote: post #72

The last time I used Google Now was too scared to use it ever again. I don't want to report my location, see cool pictures of my surroundings, or know about the events of my city. It's not just only about the surveillance, it's about the future. The connected future, the uninteresting one. The one on which one must "opt-in" or just stay out. Personally, I do not get Google Now cards. When they are relevant, they are…

I mean, the stock ticker card is depressing, but that's the fault of my stock picks...

Re: Android coming to wearables

#155

Post by robocat »

Optical illusion: does anyone else see the guy's sleeve move left/right when the page is scrolled up/down?

I am using an iPad4, and scrolling the part of the page with the second video showing the guy's wrist with a checkered cuff. (The video is not playing, just how it shows on page initially).

Re: Android coming to wearables

#156

Post by lutusp »

danford wrote: post #124
happyscrappy wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sorry if that offended you but I take issue with the idea that adding more restrictions improves freedom. If you want to download possible malware that is your choice.

I'm scared by the idea that I could one day have a neural implant with closed source code running on some insecure network all because the people of this time were too dumb to realize how software could affect them. Perhaps we should have laws that guarantee some form of open-ness but allow closed source code to exist on some sort of semi-to-fully-anonymous fully-encrypted secondary communications network?

> I'm scared by the idea that I could one day have a neural implant with closed source code running on some insecure network all because the people of this time were too dumb to realize how software could affect them.

It's a reasonable concern. People have already been injured and killed by software errors, both open and closed, so this is definitely on the table as a reasonable issue.

> Perhaps we should have laws that guarantee some form of open-ness but allow closed source code to exist on some sort of semi-to-fully-anonymous fully-encrypted secondary communications network?

My view is that we should let people sort this out without government involvement. Right now there are open-source companies and closed-source companies, and people get to vote with their feet. If closed-source causes problems or is more expensive or whatever, people can choose the alternative. Same with open-source.

There are any number of cases where government involvement turned out to be counterproductive, and I think this might be one of them. Remember that government can't just bust in and start issuing orders, they have to be invited by the voters. And sometimes, if things go wrong, they get voted out again.

Freedom of speech -- clearly a government issue. Open-source versus closed-source software -- sorry, how this is a government issue doesn't immediately occur to me.

Re: Android coming to wearables

#157

Post by lutusp »

angryasian wrote: post #126
lutusp wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It leads to me regularly switching between iOS and Android, Google services and Apple services. The difference between Apple and Google has recently occurred to me: with Apple, their secrets are in jeopardy. With Google, yours are.

I'm curious on this thought , care to expand ?

I just notice that Apple often finds themselves in court, suing someone (usually a company) for trying to steal one of their (corporate) secrets. And Google is often in court, defending themselves against someone (or a group) suing them for trying to steal their (personal) secrets.

It might all be more balanced in reality, it's just an impression from online articles.

Re: Android coming to wearables

#158

Post by garretraziel »

DanAndersen wrote: post #31
apendleton wrote: post #26

The key to the success of these things will be the ability to get information from the display without having to touch it. At first I figured this would mean an always-on display (so, e-ink, I guess), but this clearly isn't that, and yet they don't seem to turn the displays on in the videos (though I'm sure they're all fake). I wonder if you could do something with the accelerometer that would be good enough? Like, i…

It seems quite possible -- it's like how smartphone screens detect when you've moved it from your ear while on the phone to use the number pad.

No, it's not like this. Smartphone has distance sensor, but I am not really convinced that the distance sensor would work in this case too.

Re: Android coming to wearables

#159

Post by corresation »

gfodor wrote: post #139
corresation wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, something like that. I actually wonder if Apple will ever manage to come out with a wearable, because honestly they are in a can't win situation: everyone else is iterating through technologies and designs, and while these aren't for everyone (though everyone who it isn't for is sure that means it is for no one), they're getting better and more reasonable, while Apple needs to come out with some sort of God wat…

every watch design i've seen so far is uninspired and unrisky. they basically slapped a phone on the wrist. if apple ever releases anything, it will almost certainly not be an ugly square touchscreen with a wristband around it. and i won't need to proclaim anything, it will be obvious just like it was with the iPhone. edit: Also your point above doesn't make much sense. Apple has surely been working on their watch fo…

The Motorola device is neither square (which you've stated repeatedly, almost like you didn't even bother looking at the site before you declared that Apple does it better), nor ugly. I'm not a watch person, but it looks pretty beautiful to me.

I imagine that Apple has been working on it for years. So has everyone -- this is hardly unanticipated technology, having been predicted for many, many decades. It just needs technology to make it possible.

And processors are getting faster, while sipping far less juice. Screens are getting better (such as the amazing, likely AMOLED round screen on the Motorola 360). Batteries are getting better. Connectivity options like Bluetooth LE are making connectivity possible. Samsung might take a lot of deserved flack for products like the Gear, but they're trying to iterate the product to make it happen.

While Apple might have had some luck timing entrants at the right time a couple of times, they have no particular advantage in any of those realms. The halo of the iPod won't carry this product launch, so they don't have the normal heads up they used to. It's going to be interesting. But I have absolutely no reason to soundly denounce alternatives against some imaginary, not actually existing foe.

Re: Android coming to wearables

#160

Post by MattHeard »

kh_hk wrote: post #113
itp wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want to be careful not to imply that I'm passing judgement on your feelings, or implying that they're invalid, because I certainly have my moments where I'm a little creeped out by Google Now as well. But I do want to push back a little bit on Google Now cards being necessarily depressing. I recently traveled up to Boston on a short hybrid work/vacation trip with my wife. When we were headed to the airport, Google…

Fair enough, I did not test Google Now for a long period of time, and I would not be able to use it as it is meant because I stopped using smartphones the way they are meant to be used many years ago (circa Nexus One). Now they are just a target platform for work, occasional mp3 player, offline map, emergency travel thingy. What you explain sounds perfectly useful if you already use an smartphone. That Google is able…

Google Now is not something you can briefly "test" because the benefits really only develop after giving it time to learn your habits. The longer I have used it, the more useful it has become.

There is a trend away from discrete computing, where your computer sits at your desk and only at your desk, and while there will continue to be options for people who prefer that lifestyle, there is a much larger market for people who want their computing to be blended into the rest of their lifestyle. Whether its "laziness" or "augmentation", a lot of people find value in smartphones and smartglasses and smartwatches.

Post reply on HN