Will a Freely Distributed OS for Smartwatches Succeed?

It seems that crowdfunded smartwatches have grown to be popular again, with Vachen and AGENT Smartwatch starting their Kickstarter campaigns and followed by Boddie and Emopulse closely behind. With the choices in smartwatches today, we the consumer, are spoiled for choice. You’ve got a large variety of features, os’s and watch designs. Just how do we select the one we really want? Perhaps one of these has features you think are actually important to you but you hate the look or vice versa. Will there be ways to have our cake and eat it?

Perhaps we can learn a little from what watchmakers have already been doing for a long period. Companies like Tag Heuer, Seiko, Swatch and many others produce a good selection of wristwatch models year after year. On the surface, they will have absolutely nothing in common, some have a stainless steel casing, other are covered in Swarovski crystals, some show the date, others barely have any numbers in it. Looking past the surface reveals similar as well as identical clock movements that power these watches. As these movements are constitute a complex and intricate network of springs, counterweights and gears, you can understand that watchmakers would like to use a design for as long as possible. It would simply take too long to design a fresh movement for every new design of a watch.

Hence, the usage of modules in watch design is important to getting models off the designing table to the manufacturing floor as fast as possible. https://mysmartwatch.se/dam/ had a need to cater to a large range of watches the better it really is for the watchmakers.

In a way, this is what Google did with Android and also. Google has created a usable and flexible operating-system that smart phone makers can take, tweak and ship with their hardware. By creating a base OS which might be dispatched to handsets that hold vastly different hardware, Google has been able to make sure that Android-powered handsets now outnumber the wildly popular Apple iPhone. Now, you can obtain an Android smart phone in a number of models with different technical specifications and prices that you can pick and choose which hardware suits you best, knowing that the software experience will be mainly similar.

For smartwatches, this has not been the case. For every smartwatch out there, you will find a proprietary operating system that powers it. This means that an individual experience is vastly different for every smartwatch model. It also implies that the makers of the smartwatches have to split their efforts and resources into two parts, watch design and OS development. While app development can often be “outsourced” to alternative party developers, the program development kit (SDK) must be created and this does take time and resources as well.

The various smartwatch makers have taken different methods to handle this. To begin with, Pebble has put a lot of effort in to the creation of its SDK and contains garnered a good developer community so far and have also partnered popular big-name app developers just like the RunKeeper. However, Pebble doesn’t look all that classy, it might are a sports watch or can be worn with casual wear, but it doesn’t really have the appearance to match office wear. Imagine if more was done on the design side of things? Would the program side have taken a productivity hit? Imagine if they used a pre-made smartwatch OS?

The Agent smartwatch on the other hand is trying to juggle both equally well at the same time. Secret Labs, the creator of the Agent knows electronics and software very well, but are no experts in watch design. So that they partnered with House of Horology, which creates really nice timepieces. Together, they hope to manage to tackle the electronics and the design areas of the smartwatch together. That is definitely commendable and an excellent strategy, but would this mean delays in the production cycle as it takes time to tweak the operating system and functionality. Secret Labs did however utilize the Microsoft.NET Micro Framework as a base because of its operating system. Is this the beginning to using a distributed OS for smartwatches?

What we need is one of the established software companies to spearhead this. A small time player may not cut it because not many will utilize an OS that may not be around if the company goes under. The OS ought to be produced by Google, Apple or Microsoft, so as to give weight to the program. It will provide trust to developers that the OS will undoubtedly be supported for years to come. These companies will be able to utilize their expertise in software development to generate an OS that’ll be able to perform under different hardware conditions, maximize battery life while providing usability and functionality, all at the same time looking great on the watch face.


Leave a Reply