I have spent two weeks using A Daily. I did this with a Motorola Moto 360, the smartwatch I liked. And I've drawn some very precise conclusions. I'd tell you about them in two lines, but I'd almost prefer to use the whole post. The question is: Is it really useful? Google's operating system, Android Wear?
How is Android Wear useful?
I'm going to focus on what we can use Android Wear for and what can be useful. If you do sports, it can be a second screen that allows you to control your smartphone or access some information displayed on your smartphone. It doesn't let you forget about your smartphone because either It does not have GPS, or if it does, it doesn't have a heart rate monitor, which means it loses all of its sporty component. In this case, it's useful for changing the song you're listening to, checking your pace, calories, or speed, or even checking if you're following the correct route.
To all this we must add its capacity to monitor heart rate, the steps we take, and in general, our sports activity. Although we already have many of these things on a smartphone, Android Wear apps They perform these tasks autonomously and continuously. They'll know how many steps we've taken, how long we've been walking, and whether we've been walking, running, or cycling.
In addition to this, we cannot forget the usefulness of Android Wear for reply to messages, whether they're WhatsApp or emails. The biggest problem is that you'll have to use the voice system, which limits us when using English terms like OK and very long sentences. It can be useful for responding to messages confirming or denying, or similar, although in the end we prefer to take our smartphone out of our pocket, as it will take less time, and people won't think we're crazy for talking to a watch on the street.
Finally, and for me the most useful thing about the watch, is that we can see the notifications and other information on the smartwatch. This way, we don't need to carry our phone around to see the messages we receive, or even other information like Tweets or social media messages, which we'd like to be able to see every time they're posted.
At this point comes a practical reality that is often not valued: the more apps and watchfaces you install on the clock, the lower the autonomy. Non-native spheres With real-time data, they consume more, as do apps that run in the background. If your Wear OS tends to make it through the day, over-customizing it will cut battery life even further. That's why some people prefer watches with lighter systems that, without a full app store, offer one or two weeks per charge in exchange for limiting interaction with notifications to reading or performing basic actions.
Are they useful in something else?
Right now, the usefulness of these devices doesn't go much further than that. In the future, they certainly will, we have no doubt. We'll be able to turn the lights on or off at home, or control our phone or computer. The volume of our stereo, the movies we watch on TV. And even, why not, have access to the refrigerator, washing machine, or stove from our smartwatch, being able to turn on the stove whenever we want, or activate the washing machine whenever we want to start the wash program. But today, unfortunately, the functions of a smartwatch aren't very advanced, and it seems too expensive for what it actually does.
All not to mention that there is no smartwatch right now that meets all the features that it should, and that we already talked about in the article on what the perfect smartwatch should look likeTo this we must add several Key learnings comparing different market approaches:
- If you prioritize very long battery life and sport, models with lightweight systems allow you to record health and GPS for hours, but they usually limit the reply to messages from the wrist and the variety of apps.
- If you prioritize apps, complete answers and Google services on the wrist, Wear OS is more capable, although its typical battery life is around one or two days and is reduced with customization and additional software.
- There are full Android watches that allow you to use the Assistant to open YouTube, play news audio, or display tappable web results. On Wear OS, the Assistant handles dictation, queries, and controls, but does not always reproduce content nor does it offer navigable results on the screen.
On the voice side, it's important to be clear about expectations. The Assistant on Wear OS responds to commands, timers, basic navigation, and dictated messages fairly quickly, but its ability to play multimedia content or listing web results within the watch is more limited than on a full Android watch. If your primary use is “talk to the watch to do everything,” you might prefer that profile; if your focus is notify and reply fast, Wear OS fits better.
Finally, the autonomy It's the lever that most changes the daily experience. Charging daily can weigh you down if you don't accept the routine, even more so when you install apps and watch faces that rely on sensors and connectivity. On the other hand, switching to devices that last two weeks It makes you forget the charger, but you also give up part of the versatility With notifications and deeper integration with Google Maps, YouTube Music, and full messaging, there's no universal winner: it depends on whether you value viewing and acting from your wrist or stretching the battery to the max.
After my two weeks, my feeling is that Android Wear does brings value When used as a notification shortcut, music control, casual sports, and quick voice responses. When you expect it to replace your phone or have an infinite battery life, friction arises. The current balance rewards the user who wants it. less friction with their phone and accepts frequent charging; those who prioritize pure battery life will be more comfortable with simpler systems. And while we wait for that "perfect" watch that has it all, adjusting expectations and prioritizing well is what makes the difference.
