Selling consumers a multipurpose wearable device is clashing with the idea of cheaper, single-serving products. At CES 2015, companies are eager to figure out the future.
When it comes to wearable technology, more may not always be better.
At
 the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas next week, 
device makers will tackle this conundrum as they display cutting-edge 
new devices on the world's stage, discussing what's to come and how 
we'll get there. 
Wearable devices are undoubtedly a key new 
technology. By 2018, wearable shipments are expected to jump to 112 
million units, more than five times last year's figure, according to 
market researcher IDC. Even the fashion magazine Vogue put the Apple Watch,
 one of the most anticipated devices next year, on one of its covers. 
Smart glasses and virtual-reality headsets, once reserved for sci-fi 
fantasies, are at last trickling into the market as consumer products.
So
 what's next? Gadget makers at this year's show will duke it out to see 
not just who else is in the wearable game, but also whose take is the 
best fit for the future. Wearable tech's biggest names, from Samsung and
 LG to Motorola and Intel, are expected to stake out their positions 
ahead of the Apple Watch's arrival. Other, smaller wearable companies 
are expected to partner with each other and larger traditional 
companies, like Adidas and other big names in sports, fitness and 
apparel, to try to stay in the game. 
But the real debate playing out at CES
 and beyond will be much more technical. At hand is a philosophical 
question: Do customers want to buy one device that can do almost 
everything? Or do they want to buy a bunch of connected products -- like
 shoes, shirts and glasses -- that work together toward a common goal.
Companies are already choosing sides, but analysts say they aren't convinced there's a clear answer yet.
"I
 think that's going to be one of the real issues in the market," said 
Wes Henderek, an analyst and director of connected intelligence at the 
NPD Group. What probably won't work, he said, is any device that tries 
to do too much, and ends up being good at nothing. 
All for one, or one for all?
Apple
 is solidly in the do-it-all camp. The Apple Watch, expected this 
spring, will have a full color screen, heart-rate-reading technology, 
fitness- and health-tracking software and a host of apps, from 
productivity to communication. It will cost upward of $350.
Apple's approach is not an exception. Google's Android
 Wear software, which powers smartwatches from Samsung, LG and Motorola,
 is also designed to do many things. The Moto 360 smartwatch, for 
instance, can now play games, sport an interactive James Bond-inspired 
watch face, run note-taking app Evernote and take voice commands to feed
 walking and driving directions to your wrist. Samsung's Gear S watch 
even has a cellular radio in it so users can make phone calls, just like
 Dick Tracy used to in the comics, or even leave their phones behind. 
But not everyone agrees with this approach. A growing collection of 
startups are making specialized devices instead. They're outfitting 
sensors on everything from shirts and skis to assembly plant gloves and 
3D-printed prosthetics, and they're generally cheaper than those watches
 made by the big boys. 
Because these devices are not trying to do
 everything for everyone, they're both less expensive and potentially 
more useful and powerful in performing specific tasks. There's also the 
promise of a way for these gadgets to talk to one another, creating a 
network of devices around our bodies. Smart earbuds could read your 
heart rate and send the information to a wristband that tracks body 
movements. A smart shirt could collect more sensitive data like 
perspiration, skin temperature and hydration levels. Then mobile apps 
can wrap everything in a neat package and display it on your smartphone. 
There are already signs some customers agree. Forrester surveyed
 thousands of US consumers in March and found a majority of people want a
 wearable for their wrist, like a do-it-all Apple Watch. But demand is 
still growing for specialized devices, like jewelry, clip-on devices and
 embedded sensors for shirts and shoes. In 2015, industry researcher 
Gartner expects shipments of smart clothing to jump from 100,000 units 
to more than 10 million, notching almost a third of the total expected 
global sales of smartwatches.
Even some within Google's ranks say 
this approach makes sense. When the Internet giant first unveiled its 
connected headset called Google Glass in 2012, the company thought of it
 as a head-worn computer. Now, as other devices have proliferated, some 
Google executives are arguing no one device can do everything. 
"Glass
 is meant to be one device of many," said Astro Teller, head of the 
secretive Google X research lab, where Glass was developed. "You're 
going to end up wearing lots of things." 
He said Google's 
approach can be summed up by looking at another wearable to come out of 
Google X: the smart contact lens. The product, which is set to be 
produced by the pharmaceutical giant Novartis, has a small computer 
processor embedded onto the contact lens. The goal is to help diabetes 
patients by reading the glucose levels in tears. 
He said it would
 be silly to try to load the lens up with different features and uses, 
especially given how small the product is. "You're not going to want to 
put everything in the kitchen sink onto a contact lens," he said.
So
 far, that idea of restraint has proved successful, albeit with devices 
that are quickly becoming outdated. Startups like Fitbit, Jawbone and 
Withings, alongside traditional device makers like watchmaker Garmin, 
have long been selling wearables that do just a few things well enough 
to catch on with consumers. Smart bands and fitness trackers, as they're
 called, have become the face of wearable tech. 
Though some of 
those companies, like Fitbit, have begun packing in more features -- 
like a display for telling the time and showing steps walked -- these 
devices have focused on specific fitness-oriented functions like 
measuring workout activity and tracking sleep. A companion smartphone 
app lets consumers input calories consumed and other things these 
devices can't measure. 
Fitbit is expanding its efforts, though. The company in October announced the Surge, a smartwatch of its own. The device isn't meant to compete against Apple though: It doesn't have a color screen or a collection of apps, and it's still geared toward the company's fitness-tracking focus.
Jawbone, Fitbit's primary competitor, released its Up3 this fall. The device, which is a successor to the popular Up bands it's been making since 2012, still does not contain a screen either. But, Jawbone says it doesn't need one to perform popular functions, like heart rate monitoring.
"I'll probably buy a smartwatch, but the smartwatch is not how I'll 
track my sleep," Andrew Rosenthal, Jawbone's manager for wellness and 
fitness, said last month at a wearable roundtable. "We're not trying to 
build a smartwatch. It's not where we'll win." 
There are still 
indications that specialized devices ultimately won't succeed as large 
tech companies push consumers toward smartwatches. Apparel giant Nike 
entered wearables in early 2012 with its FuelBand fitness tracker, a 
no-frills wristband designed for athletes and fitness junkies. 
Yet
 barely two years later, the company fired the hardware team responsible
 for FuelBand development, while Nike CEO Mark Parker confirmed the 
company's focus was moving to its Nike+ software.  Nike, perhaps, saw 
the writing on the wall -- the company has partnered with Apple in the 
past and Apple CEO Tim Cook has been a member of Nike's board of 
directors for almost a decade. A Nike+ app is expected to appear on the 
Apple Watch next spring. 
From smartphone to smartwatch
There's
 a reason to believe wearable devices will ultimately become all-in-one 
machines: The smartphone market went through the same transition. The 
first devices were wireless phones, then two-way pagers. But eventually,
 they added capabilities, replacing fax machines, calculators, handheld 
cameras, GPS devices and more. 
"That's usually how these device 
wars play out: the battle of general purpose versus single purpose or 
specialized," Tim Chang, a venture capitalist at Mayfield Fund, said. 
Chang co-founded wearable maker Basis Science in 2010 and earlier this 
year sold it Intel for about $100 million. 
Why is it different this time? One challenge is battery life.
Marquee smartwatches like the Samsung Gear Live and Moto 360 have been criticized for bad battery usage. (CNET's review
 of the Gear Live in July called the battery life "terrible.") Apple CEO
 Tim Cook also suggested the Apple Watch wouldn't last more than a day 
before needing a charge, saying users would juice it up overnight. 
There
 are some exceptions, though. The Pebble smartwatch lasts between five 
and seven days of use, thanks in part to the company's choice to use 
buttons instead of touch, and to avoid a color screen. Microsoft's Band,
 a cross between a fitness wristband and a smartwatch with a color 
screen and a heart rate reader, has a battery life up of to 48 hours. 
Simpler
 devices that don't try to do too many things tend to last longer -- as 
opposed to something as monolithic as a smartwatch, which can be a power
 suck. Google's Teller said he thinks wearables will be distributed 
across our bodies in ways that best suit fashion and battery life. 
He's not the only one who thinks so. For example, musician Will.i.am launched his own smartband, called the Puls, in October. The device has been panned
 in reviews, but when he made the announcement, he also talked about 
other wearables in the pipeline for his company, I.am+. One of the 
items: a smart jacket that charges your watch when the sleeve touches 
it. 
Ultimately, analysts say an all-in-one design will likely 
win out in the short term, particularly since that's how it's gone for 
everything else. Laptops, desktops, printers, smartphones -- they all 
tend to take on extra functions over time.
Mayfield's Chang notes 
TomTom grew successful selling GPS units to car owners only to have its 
primary product become commonplace software built into mobile phones. 
"It's the specialized ones that have been around awhile that have to be 
the most nervous," he said.




No comments:
Post a Comment