Wearable Technology 2015

The current batch of wearable tech reminds me of my childhood and for some reason I think of Tamagotchi when I see them except expensive ones which seem to have been produced not by demand, but as a way of creating demand for something we don't really need, which is the dream of any company. So I decided, with a slight biased view, to look at this tech and come to my own conclusions.

Google Glass

I suppose in the beginning there was Google Glass, an interesting concept but in the real world far too conspicuous for normal use, slightly creepy, and at a price which was rather surprising when you consider the people who bought them were helping Google develop the product.

It must be a bitter pill to swallow for those who paid a £1000-£1500 per unit when Google has changed the priority on the device. I use the past tense there as Glass is all but dead but I am pretty sure will appear again in a different form. Knowing Apple they will take the Google idea, make it twice as expensive, and then pass it off as their own for others to copy and produce a device at the price point it should be at.

I think Glass is a classic case of concept outpacing technology much like the original tablet PCs (tc1100 anyone?) but with the rapid pace of technological development it won’t be long before the v2 is mooted and outed.

Health Bands

I delve into my personal history once again and remember pedometers which there was a brief obsession with and that you had to do 10,000 steps per day. There are so many bands out there and they must have been one of the top presents in Christmas 2014 and as many of you will be aware as social media was flooded with messages from these devices posting what their owners had achieved. This normally happened as I was sitting eating something I shouldn't and on a scheduled basis. Ironically, earlier this year, there were several reports that the bands were no better than your smartphone for counting steps (link) and what was even worse is that the simple pedometer was better at counting steps than either your smartphone or fitness band (here).

Of course as I mentioned that the Fitbit, or other device, can then publish your achievements on social media but let’s be honest here….does anyone actually care?

Some of the more recent Fitness bands, such as the Microsoft Band have elements of a smartphone in it which means it does appeal to a wider market and that is a neat little introduction to smartwatches. But most "health bands" do tend to look like something more befitting a parolee than a consumer.

Smartwatch

Let’s have honest look at the reality of the situation with a slightly less-than-objective view. The current crop of smartwatches;
They a battery which lasts less than a day (rumours are that the Apple watch could last around the 4 hour mark with heavy use)
May mean you may need to purchase more apps for to pair those on your smartphone
Needs your phone to work properly and helps drain the battery on both devices
Has a small screen which means you would need to refer to your larger screened phone for larger messages
In less than a year it will be completely outdated to the extent of being worthless

And finally and my favourite....
You need both hands to operate (it’s already using one hand to wear it)

I think you’d have to question the need for the current crop of smartwatches and although you may say it is cutting edge, things have moved on so much in the short space of time they have been available and with all things tech they will continue to do so. The Motorola watch has been reduced already on the Google store in America is down to $160 . As consumers we expect a valid return on our investments especially when you consider the cost of having to buy a £300-£400 watch. The market is saturated with these devices to the extent that Samsung have stopped producing them for a while which I would say is to observe the impact of the Apple Watch and perhaps learn from some of the features on it. (Please note I saidlearn and not copy.)

My own watch is a Tissot analogue watch which was given to me by my wife on my 40th and not only does it tell the time it also shows the date, it has a stopwatch and can give me the time in different time zones and its waterproof so you can wear it in the shower or when swimming or generally in the glorious Scottish summer. I have replaced the battery a couple of times in its lifetime and it also looks a lot better than the rather bulky range of smartwatches available so far but there is something else out there which is interesting.

The Mont Blanc e-strap which replaces the strap on your watch to provide you with limited smart functionality.

It is expensive just now, costing the same as an Apple watch, but you would expect that from Mont Blanc, but it is a step in the right direction.

I just cannot see many people parting with analogue watch for the current range of smartwatches and this is a concept which I hope is developed, in fact I am pretty sure it will be. As a compromise is required.

Making a Difference

But wearable technology should be about devices which will make a real difference to people’s lives and not just about convenience. I firmly believe the smartphone made that difference and remember my first smartphone, the HTC Desire, being christened my "Life Appliance" how ironic that many years on Samsung used the term "Life Companion" for the Galaxy S5 and appologies to my colleagues from back then if it makes them groan to think of me going on about how good it was. Smartphones are now the norm and are just small improvements on the model which came before them and I can't see any of them having the same impact again a perfect example of evolution over revolution. However in terms of wearable technology making a difference I believe that the best example of this, personally, is this....

The Google/Novartis contact lens which reads you blood sugar. The lens then displays a blue or red coloured light in your vision based on high or low readings. Now I am a little biased as I have been a diabetic since I was 15 I have done all manner of things to test my blood sugars.

It started with a two minute blood test where you had to match the colours on a stick to the side of a bottle. Now it is a 3-5 second wait for the result with a meter which the hospital can then download into their own systems so there is no more hiding. The irony is that I get frustrated when it takes 5 seconds instead of 3 seconds which is ridiculous as what am I going to do with that extra 2 seconds?

The Google/Novartis lens isn’t about the day to day reading this is when something is going wrong and rather than wait to get the result from your test you would know you have a problem and can move directly to action to rectify this. This simple step could save lives. I view this development with great interest and see it as a step forward in producing a wearable device which will improve people’s lives and not just be another device to add to the list.

Mind you in saying all this, I am quite happy to trial a smartwatch if anyone wants to give one and who knows I could change my mind totally.

But I am looking for something which really make a difference to my life and that just isn't out there..........yet.