# Smartwatches - Will they be the next "revolution" or "crisis"



## tony20009

Even not knowing the age demographic of folks on WUS, I suspect a great many folks here have heard of or remember the "Quartz Revolution" or "Quartz Crisis," depending on where one sat in the market in the '70s and '80s. Now we have the smartwatch evolving and gaining interest among the general public. That's important because like it or not, WISes don't and can't keep a whole industry afloat. We are in many ways at the mercy of the general consumer's whim, as expressed by what such consumers buy.

So what are your thoughts on the smartwatch? And I don't mean whether you think it looks good or solely whether you would buy one, although I won't discount the impact of WISes as early adopters. The reason I don't care if WISes would buy one is that as the smartwatch is techie thing, I suspect WISes aren't the target market for early adopters. More important is that if you are keen on collecting mechanical watches, and you don't have tons of money, it's conceivable that within the next lustrum or decade, you may not have anywhere near as much choice as you do now about what watches you can buy.

What I am asking about are things like:


 What are your thoughts on the impact of the smartwatch on the future of the low to midrange mechanical watch market segment? 
With the recent release of a somewhat pricey smartwatch, will that trend continue and if so, how will it affect the top end of the market? 
What is the future of mechanical watches? Will they become the exclusive purview of "antiquarians," rich collectors and dilettantes? 
As the "love child" of watches and computers, and recognizing that many young folks simply don't wear/want watches, will the smartwatch motivate an interest in watches in general among young people or will it take center stage and become the watch people wear. 
Keeping in mind that computer processing power takes less and less space as years pass, will the much greater functional capabilities of a smart watch be the death knell for mechanical watches? 


What will the Swiss watchmakers do? Will they get on the bandwagon, or will they do what they did in the '70s and '80s: stick their heads in the sand? 
Like it or not, a wrist watch is a horological technology. In the ongoing battle between horology and technology, who wins? How and why? 

Here are a few articles on the matter along with a website of one smartwatch maker. If you've found others, please share.

Will Smartwatches Be The Second Coming Of The Swiss Quartz Crisis? - Forbes 
Hyetis Crossbow already has sold 300 smartwatches at $1200 a pop 
Blog 
TECH NOW: Smartwatch roundup 
Smartwatch Articles on Engadget 
Smartwatch Profiles (here are some smart watches) 
VACHEN (another smartwatch maker) 

All the best

Imagination is not only the uniquely human capacity to envision that which is not, and, therefore, the foundation of all invention and innovation. In its arguably most transformative and revelatory capacity, it is the power that enables us to empathize with humans whose experiences we have never shared.
- J.K. Rowling
*
Vachen Smartwatch*

















*
Hyetis (a Swiss smartwatch brand -- the only one AFAIK)*


----------



## Orsoni

Computers aren't watches.


----------



## drunken monkey

As far as I can tell, no one knows what they actually are yet.
Will they be a successful product?
No idea.

All I know is that if they are successful, that doesn't automatically mean it will come as a cost to the traditional wristwatch industry.


----------



## dinexus

No, I think mechanical watches have already seen the worst. They're enjoying a huge resurgence now, and that's not for a lack of other cheaper or reliable time-telling alternatives. That tells me that the interest isn't based on convenience (which they're really not) nor accuracy (which they're also arguably not), but rather the 'purity' and romanticism of a mechanical watch.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## twiceaday

Orsoni said:


> Computers aren't watches.


More accurately and pedantically, all watches are computers (in that they complete a logical operation (telling the time) based on input (the time you set as starting point)), but all computers are not watches. 

Personally, I'm not a fan of the smartwatch idea. I already have a phone, and I'm usually one more call away from throwing it in a lake, so why would I want a watch that accomplishes the same thing as a device I'm ambivalent about at best and downright loathe at worst?

I imagine it will be a huge craze for a while, especially among the 'gotta have the latest and greatest tech' types but the interest will cool after a time and we'll be on to neural implants that tell the time and allow you to levitate small objects with the power of your mind.


----------



## bluloo

At this point, I'd say neither. But, if they are the next big thing, the counter-culture response will be a return to analog watches of yore, and a resurgence of traditional watches.


----------



## QueensBoulevard

I could be terribly wrong but I don't see them appealing to many people, WIS or not. 

They are pretty much a smartphone strapped to your wrist right? 

So who would want a smaller screen to browse the web, smaller battery life, and no keyboard to send texts, and look like a moron out in public when they take a call or try to send a text by voice command? Then again there are those people who take calls on blutooth out in public and look like an insane person talking to themselves so maybe that won't be a hindrance to the smartwatch:think:.


----------



## tony20009

Orsoni said:


> Computers aren't watches.


So would you wear a mechanical watch on one wrist and a smart watch on the other? After all, you surely carry a smartphone and wear a watch right now, so the appeal of both isn't lost on you and you likely desire the functionality of both.

Note: I'm not trying to go down the "smartphone vs. watch" road. Part of what I'm getting at is the convergence of the two.

Like you I understand the appeal of art also. Presently, there's certainly an aspect of watches that is artful. Yet arguably, the only expressions of "art" we take with us as we move through our day is our clothing, our cars and our other accessories. While there's nothing on the horizon threatening to erase the ubiquity of a bag, a car, and a garment, so basic are they to human existence, the mechanical watch as we know it isn't quite so secure.

All the best.

The four stages of [a thing] are infancy, childhood, adolescence, and obsolescence. 
- Art Linkletter


----------



## StufflerMike

Thread moved to the more suitable forum.


----------



## tony20009

QueensBoulevard said:


> I could be terribly wrong but I don't see them appealing to many people, WIS or not.
> 
> They are pretty much a smartphone strapped to your wrist right?
> 
> So *who would want a smaller screen to browse the web*, smaller battery life, and no keyboard to send texts, and look like a moron out in public when they take a call or try to send a text by voice command? Then again there are those people who take calls on *blutooth *out in public and look like an insane person talking to themselves so maybe that won't be a hindrance to the smartwatch:think:.


I appreciate your lines of thinking. I'll start by saying that "looking ridiculous" rarely is enough to stop folks from doing something. LOL.  Wii gaming devices are evidence of that, along with the example you provided.

To the extent that they remain smaller, I don't see smartwatches being a real threat to a wrist watch, and yet, I'd wear one or the other, but not both. But then that's really all about the user interface and I'm sure the interface approach we have today will evolve over time.

Today, yes, a smartphone is essentially a phone on one's wrist. Throughout history, technologies consistently supercede one another. Clearly at the most basic of levels, many techs cannot be supplanted. Yet the manner in which those most basic of innovations are implemented drives out prior execution approaches.


Open fires --> brick/clay ovens --> gas stoves/ovens --> electric stoves/ovens --> induction cook tops and microwaves. (cooking technologies)
Footwear --> horses --> trains --> cars (personal transportation technologies)
Live performers (vocal chords) --> records and tapes --> CDs --> MP3 and streaming audio --> ??? (sound transmission technologies)
Daylight/nighttime --> Planetary/stellar motion observations --> Sundials/shadows --> mechanical clocks --> pocket watches --> mechanical and quartz wrist watches --> ??? smartwatches ??? (time telling technologies)
I think the march of progress is immutable and something will necessarily come after wrist watches as we know them now. As someone above said, it's not clear if that replacement will be the smartphone.

A wrist watch, mechanical ones especially, could also become the next necktie. A thing that endures for another half century, maybe even century, but eventually loses it's appeal outside of limited situations. The thing is that a tie is solidly a fashion thing and not technology at all. (If it were a tech, it was surely made obsolete as such by the button.) Watches are solidly technology items.

All the best.

The real danger is not that computers will begin to think like men, but that men will begin to think like computers.
- Syndey J. Harris


----------



## Robotaz

Smart watches are here to stay, and grow. I'm not a big fan or anything, but it's presence seems like common sense to me.

I also think mechanical watches will continue to grow in popularity.


----------



## avers

I remember discussion on other watch forum about why people - especially younger generation - don't wear watches anymore. One of the main reasons was that you don't need to carry extra item on your wrist as there are many places today that tell you time - cell phones, computers, other electronic devices, digital boards in public places etc.

Also, the trend in the recent years is to consolidate many gadgets into one, that's why smart phones became so poplar.

To me digital watches go against above mentioned thoughts, hence I don't see people who gave up on traditional watches jumping on the "smart" watches. Most of the functionality of the smart watches is available in the smart phones.

My opinion is that these devices will occupy niche market (just like now with sports watches and G-Shocks) and will not be hugely popular.


----------



## James Wierson

LG Smart Phone watch:


----------



## 31 Jewels

I wonder if people will have an interest in wanting to repair them in the future. Or discarded because of the cost to fix, let alone finding skilled repairmen to do the work. 31


----------



## rationaltime

31 Jewels said:


> I wonder if people will have an interest in wanting to repair them in the future. Or discarded because of the cost to fix, let alone finding skilled repairmen to do the work. 31


As long as you don't take in in the water I guess obsolescence is a bigger risk
than damage for most of these smart watches.

The first few generations of mobile phones are now unusable in most places,
because the networks that support them have been shut down. Communication
standards will evolve, though perhaps more slowly as the market matures. The
operating systems and drivers will go through multiple iterations. I think eventually
current smart watches that talk to phones or the network will become obsolete.

Many phones and smart watches use display technology made by special processes
that are difficult to reproduce. The display screens are not reparable. If the display
is damaged, replacement is the answer. It seems unlikely the factory will sell proprietary
parts. Looking at the prices, most of these phones and smart watches are cheaper to
manufacture than repair. In most cases if you send your phone or smart watch to the
manufacturer for structural repair I think they will toss it and send you a new one.

Thanks,
rationaltime


----------



## tony20009

31 Jewels said:


> I wonder if people will have an interest in wanting to repair them in the future. Or discarded because of the cost to fix, let alone finding skilled repairmen to do the work. 31
> 
> 
> 
> rationaltime said:
> 
> 
> 
> As long as you don't take in in the water I guess obsolescence is a bigger risk
> than damage for most of these smart watches.
> 
> The first few generations of mobile phones are now unusable in most places,
> because the networks that support them have been shut down. Communication
> standards will evolve, though perhaps more slowly as the market matures. The
> operating systems and drivers will go through multiple iterations. I think eventually
> current smart watches that talk to phones or the network will become obsolete.
> 
> Many phones and smart watches use display technology made by special processes
> that are difficult to reproduce. The display screens are not reparable. If the display
> is damaged, replacement is the answer. It seems unlikely the factory will sell proprietary
> parts. Looking at the prices, most of these phones and smart watches are *cheaper to
> manufacture than repair*. In most cases if you send your phone or smart watch to the
> manufacturer for structural repair I think they will *toss it* and send you a new one.
> 
> Thanks,
> rationaltime
Click to expand...

I have to agree with rationaltime overall. I know with any high-tech device I've had "go South," (only one: Motorola Razr), I just replaced it.

Overall, I don't think smartwatches will be a death knell for mechanical watches, but I do think that the population of folks who collect them will shrink down to something on par with the size of the population who today collect pocket watches.

I agree with someone who earlier mentioned that they'd hardly want to read webpages on a smaller screen than a phone screen. However, I can see the "smart eyeglass" evolving into something that interfaces with smart watches so that one doesn't have to look at the watch to do so. The watch may morph into the "central controller," if you will, rather than being the sole human interface point.

All the best.

What is Man? Man is a noisome bacillus whom Our Heavenly Father created because he was disappointed in the monkey.
- Mark Twain


----------



## Wellington

Smart watches will have little to no effect on mechanical watch sales. They are totally different and fill totally different markets.

Sent from my HTC6435LVW using Tapatalk 2


----------



## FeralWoodsman

avers said:


> My opinion is that these devices will occupy niche market (just like now with sports watches and G-Shocks) and will not be hugely popular.


I wouldn't say G Shocks fall under a niche market category, I see a lot of them where I live. I would liken them to a fad, something that in a year or so, no one will care about.


----------



## ttimbo

I think there's a very obvious use case for a smart phone, which coincides with the changing role of our cellphones -- or, as they are these days -- pocket computers. These devices are capable of so much more than simply making telephone calls; they're an office in your pocket, with all the attendant value...and dross! To be useful in that respect, they're not going to grow any smaller, so one is left with the options of leaving the thing in one's pocket, or ostentatiously placing it on a desk or table in front of you.

The ability to monitor notifications and messages via a smartwatch obviates the rudeness of the smartphone...and that's a very clear and valuable use case for many people, IMO. 

But the problem is, they just need to be a whole lot less geeky!!!


----------



## rationaltime

*The Future for Smartwatches*



Wellington said:


> Smart watches will have little to no effect on mechanical watch sales. They are totally different and fill totally different markets.





FeralWoodsman said:


> I wouldn't say G Shocks fall under a niche market category, I see a lot of them where I live. I would liken them to a fad, something that in a year or so, no one will care about.





avers said:


> I remember discussion on other watch forum about why people - especially younger generation - don't wear watches anymore. One of the main reasons was that you don't need to carry extra item on your wrist as there are many places today that tell you time - cell phones, computers, other electronic devices, digital boards in public places etc.
> 
> Also, the trend in the recent years is to consolidate many gadgets into one, that's why smart phones became so poplar.
> 
> To me digital watches go against above mentioned thoughts, hence I don't see people who gave up on traditional watches jumping on the "smart" watches. Most of the functionality of the smart watches is available in the smart phones.
> 
> My opinion is that these devices will occupy niche market (just like now with sports watches and G-Shocks) and will not be hugely popular.


Maybe that is the future, but I am not convinced.

Given wrist phones that perform as claimed I think they may replace
pocket phones for most casual communications. Unlike pocket phones
the wrist phones compete for space with traditional watches. We do 
not see people wearing two watches (in public), and I am pretty sure 
we will not see people wearing both a wrist phone and a traditional
watch. I don't know about smart watches that can not act as
independent phones, but I predict wrist phones will attract customers
and displace traditional watches on many wrists. I think they will
also displace pocket phones.

What about those "small" displays when you want to see a detailed
image? Perhaps the wrist phone will send data to your heads up
display, which is currently represented by Google "Glass".

That is my thought on the wrist phone market.

Thanks,
rationaltime


----------



## ttimbo

Wrist "phone" is definitely not on...waaaay too geeky. But, per my earlier, some sort of good looking (ie, "traditional") analogue/digital, or even a full hi res digital, will find a good market, IMHO


----------



## Chascomm

Looking at these three related questions:


tony20009 said:


> [*] What are your thoughts on the impact of the smartwatch on the future of the low to midrange mechanical watch market segment?
> [*]What is the future of mechanical watches? Will they become the exclusive purview of "antiquarians," rich collectors and dilettantes?
> [*]Keeping in mind that computer processing power takes less and less space as years pass, will the much greater functional capabilities of a smart watch be the death knell for mechanical watches?


I don't see the smartwatch having any significant impact on the market for mechanical watches at any price point.

In the 21st century 1st world, mechanical watches are a luxury item. Even the $10 fleamarket pieces are a luxury; a really cheap luxury, like fast food. By contrast, a smartwatch is an extension to the almost ubiquitous data interface that we call the smartphone. As it happens, it also tells the time. Affordable multifunction quartz digital watches killed the low-grade (pin-lever) mechanical watch, leaving only those mechanical watches that were worth owning as an item of special interest. Over time that end of the industry has grown to include some very cheap watches, but the product remains a niche product; a niche that is continuing to grow, so far as I can see.

The only way in which smartwatches might impact the sales of timepiece watches (mechanical or quartz) is that they occupy the same real estate, your wrist. Perhaps that will be the game changer, but I'm not convinced.


----------



## WnS

Not a fan of smart watches, but smart arm bands like the one Leela has in ........ would be sweet. Just imagine, biometrics, maps, phone calls, updates, videos, and remote control functionality. It can't be pick pocketed nor lost as a normal phone could.


----------



## tony20009

WnS said:


> Not a fan of smart watches, but smart arm bands like the one Leela has in ........ would be sweet. Just imagine, biometrics, maps, phone calls, updates, videos, and remote control functionality. It can't be pick pocketed nor lost as a normal phone could.


I have no idea who Leela is or what she's "in;" however, I don't need to. The smart armband thing is where I see watches going and that's more to the point of what I meant by creating this thread.

If you can, there's a show called _Continuum_ (Continuum (TV series) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and the protagonist in the series has a "smart suit" that contains an information device in the sleeve. She also has a "chip" embedded in her head that allows here to on demand view whatever information she can obtain from the suit via "visible only to her" holographic imaged projected in front of her eyes. Other folks who have similar suits --cops and military types -- have the same capabilities. The era of the suit and visual interface is 2077.

All the best.

Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been playful, rebellious, and immature.
- Tim Robbins


----------



## WnS

tony20009 said:


> I have no idea who Leela is or what she's "in;" however, I don't need to. The smart armband thing is where I see watches going and that's more to the point of what I meant by creating this thread.
> 
> If you can, there's a show called _Continuum_ (Continuum (TV series) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and the protagonist in the series has a "smart suit" that contains an information device in the sleeve. She also has a "chip" embedded in her head that allows here to on demand view whatever information she can obtain from the suit via "visible only to her" holographic imaged projected in front of her eyes. Other folks who have similar suits --cops and military types -- have the same capabilities. The era of the suit and visual interface is 2077.
> 
> All the best.
> 
> Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been playful, rebellious, and immature.
> - Tim Robbins


You've probably seen pictures, but didn't know the name.










The biggest advantage of the smart arm band is that you still have room for a nice watch 

Smart watch is just a fad.


----------



## Andrew McGregor

I work for Google, and there are a LOT of Pebbles around the office; they outnumber any other watch. I'm a bit odd with my AT Citizen. Glass is still a real rarity even inside Google, although that is very gradually changing.

Anyway, most of the people who have Pebbles use them to figure out which of the blizzard of notifications their phones are producing actually matter, because it is easier to check one on a Pebble than to fish out your phone.


----------



## ttimbo

WnS said:


> You've probably seen pictures, but didn't know the name.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The biggest advantage of the smart arm band is that you still have room for a nice watch
> 
> Smart watch is just a fad.


Eeeeek! I'll never wear anything like that, even though I'm a geek!


----------



## tony20009

ttimbo said:


> Eeeeek! I'll never wear anything like that, even though I'm a geek!


I wouldn't either. The similar concept to which I referred is the one woven into the sleeve of this woman's suit. Sorry, I couldn't find any video stills of her actually using it. The best I could come up with is this description of it:
Keira's special suit is equipped with a HUD, or Head's Up Device, that lets her scan stuff and see through people's eyes (it also allows Alec to see through her eyes).​
All the best.


----------



## BreitlingDXB

Smart watches don't really get my interest at the moment. I want a watch for telling the time and not also taking emails e.t.c. Also the whole digital watchface thing is hilarious and pathetic. Nothing compares to the statement that a proper watch makes and I don't think that any smart watch will be able to reach the same level of class. What does interest me however is smartbands such as the Razer Nabu because this is not a replacement to my watch but rather a smart accessory to wear on my other wrist. I'm all for technology and electronics but smart watches are a step too far for me.


----------



## FeralWoodsman

Not to mention the fact that anything you can do on a smartwatch you can do on your phone. They're a novelty at this point


----------



## ttimbo

But I think that's missing the point. The smartphone does so much these days, so there is a niche for a device that enables a user to be aware of certain information without reference to the smartphone. A complementary device. But it should also complement, and not replicate, the classic watch, IMO. So maybe it's a "smart strap" (should I patent that?!  )


----------



## tony20009

Personally, I think several folks are missing the point. The question I posed has to do with looking forward, not evaluating the present status of the smartwatch _vis a vis _watches. I think anyone can see that today, as we write our posts the smartphone isn't a meaningful threat to watches of any sort. What I think interesting is whether my children in 30 years, or my grand or great grandchildren will wear watches as I do today or whether they will wear smartwatches. Perhaps, I don't know, the time line for such a thing will be much shorter than 30 years, but it could too be far longer....

Some of you may recall or have leaned in your research about he history of time pieces -- we are all WISes, and we care about watch history, right? -- people said the wrist watch would never overtake the pocket watch. Well, well, well, it didn't take 50 years to prove them wrong. The transition of watches from the pocket to the wrist was more evolutionary than revolutionary.

In the 1970s, the quarts movement really took off and in fewer than 20 years it almost destroyed the mechanical watch industry. But for the economies of scale and quality that ETA provided to allow mechanical watches to remain competitive with quartz ones, we wouldn't be talking about mechanical watches at all. Quartz was far closer to being a revolutionary change in the watch industry than was the pocket watch.

Now we have the smartwatch emerging. I'm sure there will be folks who will continue to buy mechanical watches in much the same way folks today still buy pocket watches. But those folks, if the smartwatch does replace the mechanical watch, will be collectors who do so purely out of interest for the item. I have only ever met one pocket watch collector and even he doesn't use them to tell time day in and day out.

The heart of the matter, however, is whether the mechanical wrist watch will assume a similar place as the pocket watch holds today? If so, how long will it take? What sorts of improvements will be needed to a smart watch if it is to displace wrist watches as we currently know them? What factors will prevent it from replacing the mechanical and present day quartz watch?

All the best.

Societies in decline have no use for visionaries.
- Anais Nin


----------



## snafunl

When they make something similar to the Bvlgari branded Omega in Minority Report, I might consider buying one. The current generations of smart watches really disinterest me.


----------



## tony20009

snafunl said:


> When they make something similar to the Bvlgari branded Omega in Minority Report, I might consider buying one. The current generations of smart watches really disinterest me.


I know you are going to think me a loon for asking, but what about that watch is appealing enough to make you want one if it were a smartwatch?

I'm asking because it basically looks like a digital stop watch with a dive bezel. I'm sure I'm missing something....










All the best


----------



## James A

Can I wear my smart and wristwatch at the same time!


----------



## tony20009

James A said:


> Can I wear my smart and wristwatch at the same time!


I don't know....do you have room for both?


----------



## ttimbo

I've decided I'd be quite interested in a smart strap, rather than a smartwatch. But I'd be pretty fussy as to how it looked


----------



## pronstar

IMHO people who are interested in SmartWatches, are not at all interested in "clock bracelets" :think:


----------



## rationaltime

pronstar said:


> IMHO people who are interested in SmartWatches, are not at all interested in "clock bracelets" :think:


What will happen when people interested in "clock bracelets"
develop an interest in smart watches?

Thanks,
rationaltime


----------



## Jollytron

Until the smartwatch gains an identity they'll be little more than a niche product. Cell phones only got so small before their screens were hindering usability, and I can't imagine what using a smartwatch as a phone is like. Granted, this isn't how many are approaching the market, but I still get the feeling manufacturers are saying "let's just throw these features in a small wristband and see what happens".


----------



## Tovarisch

QueensBoulevard said:


> They are pretty much a smartphone strapped to your wrist right?
> 
> So who would want a smaller screen to browse the web, smaller battery life, and no keyboard to send texts, and look like a moron out in public when they take a call or try to send a text by voice command?


No, smart watches aren't meant to be smartphones or web browsing devices. They're meant to be notification devices (missed call, text message, e-mail, next appointment etc&#8230 that also give time and some quick information (weather, stock quotes, whatever). Stuff that can be read and accessed easily on a tiny screen, without taking out your smartphone out of your pocket (which would also require turning it on and possibly unlocking it with a pin number or pattern).

When displays get fine enough (high pixel density), it might be a lot of fun to download "skins" (or make them yourself) to create an entirely different look (dial). And perhaps some company (Apple?) will manage to make it look shiny enough to increase the appeal of smart watches as fashionable wrist watches.

I would definitely not write them off just yet.


----------



## Paulo 8135

Tovarisch said:


> No, smart watches aren't meant to be smartphones or web browsing devices. They're meant to be notification devices (missed call, text message, e-mail, next appointment etc&#8230 that also give time and some quick information (weather, stock quotes, whatever). Stuff that can be read and accessed easily on a tiny screen, without taking out your smartphone out of your pocket (which would also require turning it on and possibly unlocking it with a pin number or pattern).


That's not 100% true. Some smartwatches do run Android or a basic OS and take a SIM card and have WiFi and can make calls, send texts, browse the web independently of another 'normal' phone. Examples of this are the Tigon, Z1 Rock etc.

The other main category is, as you stated, the 'notification devices'.


----------



## JATO757

I've got to respectfully disagree with most of the sentiments regarding smart watches. I think they're here to stay, and in a big way. Right now we're just seeing the tip of the iceberg. Smart watches are a new technology and they're still trying to find their place in the world. As of now, most are just niche products for techies like me who like to be early adopters. Personally, I think the iWatch by Apple will take the smart watch from niche to mainstream. As usual Apple will lurk in the shadows and emerge with a groundbreaking, revolutionary product that will turn the industry upside-down and redefine what a smart watch is. Why do I have so much faith in Apple? Because this is the kind if stuff Apple does best and their history proves it.

Also, as a fan of mechanicals myself it pains me to say this, but I just don't think the younger generation cares about them that much. Being fascinated by the craftsmanship and precision of mechanicals I wore them daily for many years. I'd get a watch and describe it's movement to my friend or girlfriend and they could care less. I display my watch collection and have had many parties where I get a lot more comments on my hookah than I do my watches. Often times people make fun of me for making something as "archaic" as watches a hobby. Now I see these people wearing FuelBands, FitBits and Up's, hence why I think the smart watch market is gaining traction. Most of my friends could care less about a Breitling, but when I show them that I can turn my lights on and off and check-in on Foursquare with my Pebble they're floored. My Pebble is the only watch I get positive comments on.

Luckily I think smart and "dumb" watches can coexist. There will always be puritans like me who enjoy a fine mechanical, or simplicity and durability of a quartz. I do however think smart watches are the next big thing. As a tech geek I remember reading very similar comments to these on tech forums in regards to the iPhone "my phone already does that", or "I already have a laptop, why would I want to write a paper on a small phone" were common. Now look where we are. Smart watches will bring features we can't even dream of right now and will be much more than a glorified 'phone on a watch'.

As a wiser man than myself once said, "don't hate, appreciate". 

This is an artists rendition of what the iWatch could possibly look like. Of course the actual design is an Apple secret.










 iPad Air


----------



## MRoy888

I personally think smart watches are the way to go. Historically, we’ve been moving from one technology to another in watches and with these smart watches, the options are quite endless. Imagine all sorts of apps and functions possible right on your wrist! Makes me super excited!


----------



## tony20009

Tovarisch said:


> No, *smart watches aren't meant to be* smartphones or web browsing devices. They're meant to be notification devices (missed call, text message, e-mail, next appointment etc&#8230 that also give time and some quick information (weather, stock quotes, whatever). Stuff that can be read and accessed easily on a tiny screen, without taking out your smartphone out of your pocket (which would also require turning it on and possibly unlocking it with a pin number or pattern).
> 
> When displays get fine enough (high pixel density), it might be a lot of fun to download "skins" (or make them yourself) to create an entirely different look (dial). And perhaps some company (Apple?) will manage to make it look shiny enough to increase the appeal of smart watches as fashionable wrist watches.
> 
> I would definitely not write them off just yet.


I think the thing is that what we seen right now is but the nascence of the smartwatch. I think it'll take folks who are more visionary than many of the posts I've seen in this thread, more than a few of which reflect views that are mired in what the smartwatch is today. Consider the mobile nee cell phone. Who thought in the 1980s that they would evolve into being handheld computers that also make phone calls? Clearly some folks could see that far ahead, but I doubt many folks did.

Now, I can count on one hand how often I use my land line phone at home. I suspect that if cell phone connectivity becomes cheap enough, even businesses will dispose of land lines for all their employees who don't work in a call center, instead, just giving them a cell phone.

At the end of the day, every technology ends up being supplanted by another, better technology. Some folks like to think of mechanical watches as "horoology" and quartz ones as "technology." Those folks have fallen prey to familiarity. The mechanical watch was, hundreds of years ago, a piece of technology. It just doesn't seem that way now because we are so used to it. Moreover, the mechanical watch is such a very basic, and functionally essential aspect of modern life: few of us can get by without a reliable means of knowing the time of day.

The "time of day" aspect has been overcome for quite some time, so clearly nobody wears a watch for that purpose. As we move into the future, what's going to happen is that the mechanical watch is quite likely to assume the same place that fine art holds today. While I am willing to make that prediction, I cannot predict exactly what the form and nature will be of the thing that replaces them. Certainly, a wrist watch is such a simple and basic thing it'll be hard to replace, but it's not so basic a technology as a needle or hammer. Accordingly, unlike needles and hammers which get improved over the ages, the wristwatch will eventually go the way of the slide rule, at least as a ubiquitous element of most folks' daily life.

All the best.


----------



## James A

I have a company phone and if at sometime in the future our company moves to smart watch tech I will take it up . Currently I carry my phone and wear a watch . I would have no problem in wearing both.


----------



## Andrew McGregor

tony20009 said:


> Now, I can count on one hand how often I use my land line phone at home. I suspect that if cell phone connectivity becomes cheap enough, even businesses will dispose of land lines for all their employees who don't work in a call center, instead, just giving them a cell phone.


Already there... my office, with about 1000 employees, has zero land lines (and only about 50 desk phones, which run over the internet anyway). But nearly all of our conference rooms have built in videoconferencing suites that happen to be able to call phones as well.


----------



## tony20009

Andrew McGregor said:


> Already there... my office, with about 1000 employees, has zero land lines (and only about 50 desk phones, which run over the internet anyway). But nearly all of our conference rooms have built in videoconferencing suites that happen to be able to call phones as well.


Most of my firm's office phones are VOIP as well. As part of our disaster recovery/business continuity plan we have a few land lines as back-up, and I think one of phones at the main receptionist desk may be a true land line, and I know certain key execs have land line phones. Now God help the soul that actually needs to call any of those lines if the VOIP goes down. I know I have numbers in my cell phone, but they are all cell phone numbers. LOL.

(I'm sure the emergency numbers are written somewhere in the disaster procedures doc I keep stored on my phone and laptop. <wink>)

That said, when I wrote the earlier post, I was just generically thinking of a desk phone as a land line, but you are right, VOIP isn't really that at all.

All the best.


----------



## basaro88

If smartwatch is going to really endure, it probably has to invent a special occasion making it irreplacable. If being smart is the issue; one smart device should be enough. What good does it make if it is not 'smart' enough to require another 'smart'. I believe the problem has similar sides with other tech devices peculiar for daily life such as smart glasses. Saying that they could be handy in some cases would be different than asserting that they would be the next best thing using a not so exciting input output technologies.
If the sales strategies are to be more assertive than the not so exciting technology, watch dealers could really prove to be better at selling unneceassary products than their innovation driven cousins.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Chris19delta

Personally I'm kind of conflicted on the smart watch thing, the Samsung galaxy gear looks decent (other than the silly camera on the strap) and does a bunch of cool stuff, and working in a technology field and liking cool tech stuff I want one, but at the same time I don't want to feel that I'm loosing out on functionality I've come to depend on if I strap on a real watch from my collection.


----------



## tony20009

basaro88 said:


> If smartwatch is going to really endure, it probably has to invent a special occasion making it irreplacable. If being smart is the issue; one smart device should be enough. What good does it make if it is not 'smart' enough to require another 'smart'. I believe the problem has similar sides with other tech devices peculiar for daily life such as smart glasses.* Saying that they could be handy in some cases would be different than asserting that they would be the next best thing* using a not so exciting input output technologies.
> If the sales strategies are to be more assertive than the not so exciting technology, watch dealers could really prove to be better at selling unneceassary products than their innovation driven cousins.


I agree with the distinction you make above. It makes sense to me that the smartwatch might not replace the wrist watch. Perhaps it'll be the "smart glasses" or "smart contact lens"(assuming the tech can actually get that small). There's no denying that the convenience, ease of use, and simplicity of a basic wrist watch is very hard to beat. I believer, however, that if "smart glasses" were something that displays the time in a corner on a constant basis, they would pretty well kill the wrist watch for many folks. Perhaps not for dyed in the wool mechanical junkies, but then they are the majority of folks buying wrist watches either.



Chris19delta said:


> Personally I'm kind of conflicted on the smart watch thing, the Samsung galaxy gear looks decent (other than the silly camera on the strap) and does a bunch of cool stuff, and working in a technology field and liking cool tech stuff I want one, but at the same time *I don't want to feel that I'm loosing out on functionality* I've come to depend on if I strap on a real watch from my collection.


Out of curiosity, what functionality might you lose? The only thing I can think of in that regard is perhaps the ability to turn one's wrist and glance at the time; however, as digital watches have overcome that problem, that seems a stretch to me.

All the best.


----------



## garublador

paulopiper said:


> That's not 100% true. Some smartwatches do run Android or a basic OS and take a SIM card and have WiFi and can make calls, send texts, browse the web independently of another 'normal' phone. Examples of this are the Tigon, Z1 Rock etc.
> 
> The other main category is, as you stated, the 'notification devices'.


That's part of the problem right now. No one knows what a "smart watch" really is how how people will use it. Right now the manufacturers are guessing at what a vast majority of people might want to do with a smart watch. Are they full on mobile devices or just satellite devices for a mobile phone?



tony20009 said:


> I agree with the distinction you make above. It makes sense to me that the smartwatch might not replace the wrist watch. Perhaps it'll be the "smart glasses" or "smart contact lens"(assuming the tech can actually get that small).


I think that's one huge question that's up in the air that makes answering the OP's question difficult. Will the watch be the preferred form factor for a wearable, mobile device? It may be like the smart phone where a large portion of the population has one or it could be like the pre-smartphone PDA where it turns out to be a niche device. You really need the former to happen to "threaten" traditional watches.

One gigantic problem that smart watches will have to overcome to be a "crisis" to traditional watches is obsolescence. Even an OK quartz watch can be just as functional after 20 years as it was the day you bought it. Who's to say that in 10 years a Pebble will work with a single phone?

One thing that will be difficult to guarantee is that a large portion of the population will believe they require a wearable device like a smart watch. You have to get a certain number of notifications to make it worth while. If you don't get lots of calls, texts, emails or have lots of calendar events or reminders, then your "smart" watch will just act like a regular watch a vast majority of the time. If that's the case you might as well pick something that won't become obsolete in a few years.


----------



## Chris19delta

tony20009 said:


> Out of curiosity, what functionality might you lose? The only thing I can think of in that regard is perhaps the ability to turn one's wrist and glance at the time; however, as digital watches have overcome that problem, that seems a stretch to me.
> 
> All the best.


I meant going from a smart watch back to a real watch, loosing email notifications, texts, make calls etc w/o having to take my phone out, and feeling forced to wear the smart watch daily to have access to that functionality.


----------



## tony20009

Chris19delta said:


> I meant going from a smart watch back to a real watch, loosing email notifications, texts, make calls etc w/o having to take my phone out, and feeling forced to wear the smart watch daily to have access to that functionality.


Ah...okay, I understand now. TY


----------



## Crunchy

yea smart watches will at least kill the high end quartz watch industry, and slowly relegate the mechanical watch to become like the pocket watches of today like others have mentioned. 


The only function an expensive mech watch will serve in the post iwatch era will be as jewellery. Young men will not wear jewellery and as they grow up, other forms of jewellery will be used by men. Perhaps rings, bracelets and neckchains etc


----------



## JATO757

Crunchy said:


> The only function an expensive mech watch will serve in the post iwatch era will be as jewellery. Young men will not wear jewellery and as they grow up, other forms of jewellery will be used by men. Perhaps rings, bracelets and neckchains etc


It's interesting you say this, and I totally agree. I notice lots of guys wearing 'Livestrong' type rubber bracelets or the woven survival bracelets these days, yet not wearing a wristwatch. Most of my friends use the argument "why would I wear a watch when I have a clock on my cell phone?". I think we're already seeing this phenomena in society.

 iPad Air


----------



## garublador

Crunchy said:


> The only function an expensive mech watch will serve in the post iwatch era will be as jewellery.


Isn't that the only function it serves now? An expensive mech watch doesn't tell time better than a cheap, quartz watch, yet people still buy them.



Crunchy said:


> Young men will not wear jewellery and as they grow up, other forms of jewellery will be used by men. Perhaps rings, bracelets and neckchains etc


I may be wrong, but my guess is that all the stuff we're seeing with bracelets rather than watches is more of a passing fad than a permanent change in style. There are "classic" looks that evolve slightly over the years, but never really go out of style. The t-shirt and jeans, the suit and tie, the sweater, the khaki pants and wearing a watch are all styles that have morphed a bit in the past half century or so, but have never gone out of style. Parachute pants and Zubas didn't kill of denim jeans. Reebok Pumps and Air Jordans didn't make Converse All Stars obsolete. I think the only way that the smart watch could nearly end traditional (either mechanical or quartz) is if they become and absolute 100% must have all the time device. I'm not sure they'll ever get to that status. They may be the type of thing most people want to have, but it won't prevent people from also wanting a nice, "traditional" watch. You won't have a Pebble instead of your other watches, you'll have one in addition to your other watches. This is a hobby where people talk about owning and wearing several, if not dozens of different watches. There's probably room for one more "slot" in most people's collection. They may even be happy to have something new to gawk at.

What's interesting about this conversation is just how speculative you really have to be. I'm having a hard time coming up with any sort of precedent for any argument. It's easy to make predictions about how people will use and buy things like smart phones and tablets because cell phones, laptops and PC's have been around for a while now. There are other wearable accessories that serve some other function than just fashion (like shoes or glasses), but I can't think of one that could have ever been made totally obsolete because their function drastically changed rather than just being improved. There's also no piece of rapidly changing technology that's ever been used as a fashion statement by such a large group. Yeah it may be important to have a cooler phone than someone else in some circles, but your phone has never really been seen as an accessory by the population as a whole.

You really have to go back to the history of watches to try to find any sort of precedent, but really is isn't there. I'm far from an expert, but my understanding is that wrist watches pretty much made pocket watches obsolete. There's no reason to carry a pocket watch when you have a wrist watch. How the device is accessed changed dramatically. That was enough to more or less end the popularity of pocket watches.

Auto winding seemed to do a number of manual wind mechanicals. They basically function the same but the autos are easier to deal with.

Quartz brought several improvements over auto mechanicals, but there's some down sides, too. They're much simpler, which isn't always good when it comes to wearable accessories. There's also probably a limited life span on them. The circuits will eventually fail and the watch will not be salvageable. The time span is long, but ultimately they're disposable. They don't have the coolness factor of the auto, either. Because of that, autos have survived. They didn't change how you access the information and aren't better in almost every single way.

Smart watches are totally different. There's a good chance that they'll just become cheaper and cheaper to produce, like quartz, but the technology changes so fast that your watch can actually become obsolete. A $50 quartz watch from 20 years ago functions pretty much exactly the same as one you can buy today. In 20 years your $250 Pebble will likely be useless if it functions at all. They're an order of magnitude more disposable than watches that are an order of magnitude cheaper. You have to find the extra functionality extremely useful (or cool) to justify the smart watch when you look at it that way. That's why I think that the smart watches will be more of a part time watch for most people with the means, or desire to buy a new one every several years. Having those extra notifications will be very useful sometimes, but looking cool will always be desirable.


----------



## ttimbo

Interesting idea from an Israeli company - Modillian - the 'smart buckle': http://www.ablogtowatch.com/introducing-modillian-bluetooth-smart-watch-strap-buckle/


----------



## msp1518

I don't see this taking off unless Apple launches something truly extraordinary. Half my my fiends and family have an iPhone. The other half an Android run phone. Most have an iPad. But NONE have a smartwatch. I don't know anyone who has one and that includes my countless so called facebook friends. 

For me I would want one that is water resistant to at least 100 feet, has a sapphire crystal and a hell of a sweet stainless case and bracelet. And it will have to be highly functional, workable with both Apple and Android products and pretty big and thin (you can be both). The current crop of smart watches are garbage, with very cheap bands. The steel bracelets are WalMart level bad. 

I'll be a hard sell. Ho can I go from an Omega Seamaster Pro and its superb bracelet to the current crop of Smart Watches? it's just not possible.


----------



## dinexus

I just don't think smart watches and analog watches are competing for the same market like mechanical and quartz once were. I'd even go so far as to say that the guy that owns a smart watch will still own an analog watch for more formal occasions. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tony20009

dinexus said:


> I just don't think smart watches and analog watches are competing for the same market like mechanical and quartz once were. *I'd even go so far as to say that the guy that owns a smart watch will still own an analog watch for more formal occasions. *
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I think you are correct about that. I also think that mostly watch companies aren't of the mind that watches for formal occasions is a viable business model even if they offer watches that are standouts for such use.

I say that as someone who probably attends a good deal more formal events than the average American, going to about 20 to 25 each year since 1996. Even though I have one watch that I wear only to those sorts of events (Calatrava), I just can't see that many folks, even typical well heeled, non-watch collector folks, spending "big coin" for a watch to wear fewer than 30 days a year. Maybe other watch junkies like you and I will, but that's not going to be enough sales to sustain many a watch company unless there is one company from whom _all _of us buy the watch. Sure, low volume producers like FPJ or P. Dufour can make just a few watches and sustain a business, but then aside from the real watchies of the world, who even knows to buy a watch (or want to buy) from those makers?

Don't spend time beating on a wall, hoping to transform it into a door. 
-- Coco Chanel


----------

