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

Pebble Round 2

repebble.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 303 posts

Re: Pebble Round 2

#41

Post by tills13 »

rationalist wrote: post #40
sho_hn wrote: post #36

I'm sorry for the sour grapes, but the recent ring announcement - disposable, single-charge electronics - soured me on the entire brand in a "never meet your heroes" sort of way. Somehow it makes the idea of wearing one of the watches a negative statement piece.

The miniscule ring? That size/time doesn't bother me. Now if it was something the size of a phone, that would bother me. I'm expecting that by the time I use up the first version ring's battery, a better version (maybe rechargeable) will be released.

The problem isn't the form factor, it's that it's guaranteed e-waste. Once it runs out of battery, that's it. I think the pebble guy said that it should last a few months with regular usage but like... What a waste of materials.

Re: Pebble Round 2

#42

Post by sho_hn »

tills13 wrote: post #41
rationalist wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The miniscule ring? That size/time doesn't bother me. Now if it was something the size of a phone, that would bother me. I'm expecting that by the time I use up the first version ring's battery, a better version (maybe rechargeable) will be released.

The problem isn't the form factor, it's that it's guaranteed e-waste. Once it runs out of battery, that's it. I think the pebble guy said that it should last a few months with regular usage but like... What a waste of materials.

Yeah, it's the principle that gets me. "By the time it run out of power, there will be a new version" does nothing to make it better, either. That's like Planned Obsolescence 2.0.

I just don't think we should make stuff like this, and I definitely don't want to signal support for it on my wrist.

Re: Pebble Round 2

#43

Post by tills13 »

erohead wrote: post #6
illright wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the Round 2 also going to have screws to potentially replace the battery, like Time 2 does? Also, while watching the announcement video, I noticed that the pixels are quite a bit more visible on the Round 2 on the same watchface, when compared to Time 2 — on the Time 2, the image is a lot more crisp. Is that a matter of adapting the watchfaces to the bigger screen?

> Screws Nope! No screws on this one. > Is that a matter of adapting the watchfaces to the bigger screen? Yes, exactly.

Why no screws when you specifically called out that there ARE screws on the Time and Duo 2s for the sake of longevity of hardware even if the company goes away?

Are you saying there's no access into the watch or that it's more like a traditional circular watch where you can twist off the back?

Re: Pebble Round 2

#44

Post by apparent »

erohead wrote: post #38
Willamin wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is a normal (non-rose) gold (or even a brass) color something we could look forward go in the future? Was the decision to not sell that color based on expected demand for the color or did it not work for some other reason?

No plans to offer more SKUs, sorry. Already have enough to manage.

How did you decide which colors/sizes to offer this time around? Seems like a reasonable mix, but I also wondered if regular gold could have broader appeal. Perhaps it wouldn't help though, since you'd have to make different SKUs based on band width, assuming women would get the narrower one and men would get the wider one?

Re: Pebble Round 2

#45

Post by apparent »

tills13 wrote: post #41
rationalist wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The miniscule ring? That size/time doesn't bother me. Now if it was something the size of a phone, that would bother me. I'm expecting that by the time I use up the first version ring's battery, a better version (maybe rechargeable) will be released.

The problem isn't the form factor, it's that it's guaranteed e-waste. Once it runs out of battery, that's it. I think the pebble guy said that it should last a few months with regular usage but like... What a waste of materials.

I'm curious how you feel about AirPods, for example. They also do not have replaceable batteries, and after a few years of regular use they become increasingly unusable for their intended purpose.

I have a different memory than you regarding the expected lifespan of the ring, which I think was 1-2 years with normal usage. I don't plan to get one, but it certainly hasn't soured me on the brand. There's pretty clear tradeoffs involved with putting replaceable or rechargeable batteries in such a small device.

Some people were very upset that iPhones didn't have replaceable batteries like Blackberries. But it would seem that pretty much everyone got over that. With even tinier devices like AirPods and smart rings, it would seem like even less of an e-waste issue. I say this as someone who has no plans to get one of these things, FWIW.

Re: Pebble Round 2

#46

Post by sho_hn »

apparent wrote: post #45
tills13 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't the form factor, it's that it's guaranteed e-waste. Once it runs out of battery, that's it. I think the pebble guy said that it should last a few months with regular usage but like... What a waste of materials.

I'm curious how you feel about AirPods, for example. They also do not have replaceable batteries, and after a few years of regular use they become increasingly unusable for their intended purpose. I have a different memory than you regarding the expected lifespan of the ring, which I think was 1-2 years with normal usage. I don't plan to get one, but it certainly hasn't soured me on the brand. There's pretty clear tr…

The ring doesn't just have irreplaceable batteries, it cannot be charged. You get it charged and once it's empty, it's obsolete. The more you use it, the faster this happens, and the usage they advertised was very much not using it very regularly at that.

I'm not tilting at the "the battery cannot be removed!" windmill. This is a whole new low. It's consumable consumer electronics.

The only thing that will prevent this from becoming a cautionary tale for the ages, a Juicero of e-waste, is its lack of cultural relevance.

Re: Pebble Round 2

#47

Post by apparent »

sho_hn wrote: post #46
apparent wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious how you feel about AirPods, for example. They also do not have replaceable batteries, and after a few years of regular use they become increasingly unusable for their intended purpose. I have a different memory than you regarding the expected lifespan of the ring, which I think was 1-2 years with normal usage. I don't plan to get one, but it certainly hasn't soured me on the brand. There's pretty clear tr…

The ring doesn't just have irreplaceable batteries, it cannot be charged . You get it charged and once it's empty, it's obsolete. The more you use it, the faster this happens, and the usage they advertised was very much not using it very regularly at that. I'm not tilting at the "the battery cannot be removed!" windmill. This is a whole new low. It's consumable consumer electronics. The only thing that will prevent t…

I get that, but if the question is about e-waste volume, don't we have to compare the amount of e-waste that results from tossing a non-rechargeable ring after it's depleted versus making all of the rings larger and creating chargers for them?

It's like the argument about reusable grocery bags: they can have a smaller carbon footprint than disposable ones, but only if you use them like 120 times (most people don't come close).

How big would the charger be, how much bigger would the ring be, and how many charge cycles would it have to undergo in order for the e-waste math to be favorable? And does that solve the issue, or will people still be complaining that it's not a replaceable battery?

I guess I just tend to give a little more benefit of the doubt to the creator, who has presumably thought about these things and at any rate is making a niche product that is physically very small. It seems like this could only reach a reasonable volume of waste if it were mass-market or much larger per-unit.

Re: Pebble Round 2

#48

Post by faldor20 »

I'm a staunch believer that watches should be small enough to never annoy, always show the time, and never have to be charged but I think this finally does all those things well enough that it's a legitimate option.

What is that warranty though? 30 days is pretty rough for a new and untested product. It's definitely enough to make me hold off for a year just in case.

Re: Pebble Round 2

#49

Post by girvo »

erohead wrote: post #3

Proud of this one! Feel free to ask any questions you might have. (Pebble founder)

As someone who had the original Pebble Steel, and then moved to the Pebble Round (20mm) until it literally stopped working, I'm super happy you've done this, and incredibly happy that you let me change my pre-order from my Time 2 to the Round 2. Can't wait!

Re: Pebble Round 2

#50

Post by com2kid »

I have no idea how the 2 major smart watches (android wear, apple watch) have such horrible battery life. Microsoft Band had a 3 day battery life that would've been 5 days if we weren't forced to use a trash accelerometer that drained our battery by a crazy amount.

That aside, Android wear being a complete OS is a waste of power. There aren't any useful apps for it that take advantage of the watch running a full OS.

I'm also miffed that OS updates have dropped by pixel watch's battery life from 3 days down to 1 and a half.

Good on Pebble for taking a reasonable approach to watch OS design. I presume apple decided they are minting money with a 2-ish day battery life so why bother improving things, but it is sad that most companies don't care about doing the right thing anymore.

Post reply on HN