Samsung and Google need to stop trying to reinvent the smartwatch, because it already exists

• Being in a hospital, giving blood, despite the fact that I hate needles
• Tending to a minor burn, caused by a miniature stove that I had attached to my wriest
• Experiencing the joyous bliss of nostalgia in a way that fueled my hope for the future

The diary of a Mad Lad #4: How to fix everything

Once upon a time, in a land that was probably not real because it was hosted in a server:

Someone: Hey!~ I made a smartwatch.
Google: Ooh, nice. I can make that better, you know.
Someone: Really? Have at it!
Samsung: Wait, look here. We actually added more things to it. Can we add software support?
Google: I mean, why not?

And that’s how I think we got here. This conversation went on basically forever and now just because wearOS supports all of these features like tracking your workouts and your stress levels, and your heart rate, then that must mean that all smartwatches must have these features.

But is it really a “must”? Because we have that saying of “Jack of all trades, but master of none” for a very good reason. And just in case you need that reason explained, you can go re-read all my previous articles, because the modern smartwatch is a testament to why that saying even exists in the first place. 

Now. Android. It’s great. But one of the best things about it is that it is open source, meaning that anyone can take a look under the hood and fix something, or add something or suggest something.Remember how I told you how many awesome and creative apps and watchfaces Pebble has? Well, that is precisely why: because when the code is open to anyone, people actually invest time in making cool stuff. Like a watchface that converts your steps into experience points for a fantasy party and at the end of the day, you either kill the boss or die. And that is fun! 

Here’s how I see things:

• Smartwatches, which are just watches that happen to be smart.
• Health trackers, which are trackers for your health with different, more apt form factors to allow maximum accuracy.
• Fitness bands, which are bands that fitness. You know what they are, they already exist.

An effective separation of these three pillars of modern smartwatch engineering into three distinct pieces of tech has several advantages that simply can’t be ignored, such as:

• People who want a watch can go and just buy one.
• Companies like Fossil can get back to making watches.
• My smartwatch can’t guilt trip me into working out.
• People interested in fitness can get a fitness band for cheap, instead of a way more expensive — and easy to break — smartwatch.
• People, who actually have a viable, real reason for needing active tracking of their health metrics can just get a tracker that works reliably and properly. Because people’s health is not some sort of joke, Samsung! 

Now, I’m not saying that smartwatches that are a all-in-one product shouldn’t exist. In fact, I am saying that each year, major wearOS representatives should continue to do their best in making at least one such model per year, aimed at enthusiasts. 

But I am also saying that the tech, required for such a combination which works properly and reliably, is simply not here yet. I mean, the tech is, but battery constraints—Elon Musk—Tesla is a battery company—yada-yada-yada. 

• An open-source ecosystem, completely available to every developer for free
• Features and functions that are fun to use, like watchfaces that can be more than just numbers on a dial
• Physical buttons that can let you do more in all situations, instead of them not working in half of the menus
• A smartwatch that doesn’t rely on your phone to work, but one that can do its own thing on its own
• A smartwatch that doesn’t try to replace your phone, but one that adds to the experience

The overall point is that I’d love to wear such a device. Some future rendition of the Galaxy Watch 5 Pro, which is capable of all of the above — and hopefully, even more — in a way, which I can trust. But I see no way of that happening in 2023 or the next five years.

What worries me most is that it feels like the industry is headed in the wrong direction. Instead of manufacturers creating products that suit the needs of their consumers, we are all collectively forced into purchasing products that very few of us want or need.We get told that we need to track our sleep, we need to track our workouts, we need to see all of the useless notifications that our shovelware apps are sending us and then, of course, a sensor to track all of the stress that this creates for us.

I’d ask why, but I am pretty confident that we just lost track along the way. At this point, major manufacturers are most likely simply afraid to release a smartwatch without, let say, a heart rate monitor — ineffective as it may be — because who’d buy that, right? Every other watch offers one, so we can’t just exclude it!

Well, you can and you should!

And my argument is pretty simple: if people really cared about that, then why is the Pebble community blooming? Why are individuals supporting hardware from ten years ago, which is completely incapable of health tracking, without getting a dime for their efforts?

Food for thought.

And while I wait for this imaginary perfect smartwatch of the future, I will continue to be a rebel and wear my Pebble. Because all I want is just a watch that can also be smart, without taking my smarts out of the equation.