Android Wear Is Getting Killed, and It's All Qualcomm's Fault (arstechnica.com) 174
The death of Android Wear is all Qualcomm's fault, largely due to the fact that the company "has a monopoly on smartwatch chips and doesn't seem interested in making any smartwatch chips," writes Ars Technica's Ron Amadeo. This weekend marks the second birthday of Qualcomm's Snapdragon Wear 2100 SoC, which was announced in February 2016 and is the "least awful smartwatch SoC you can use in an Android Wear device." Since Qualcomm skipped out on an upgrade last year, and it doesn't seem like we'll get a new smartwatch chip any time soon, the entire Android Wear market will continue to suffer. From the report: In a healthy SoC market, this would be fine. Qualcomm would ignore the smartwatch SoC market, make very little money, and all the Android Wear OEMs would buy their SoCs from a chip vendor that was addressing smartwatch demand with a quality chip. The problem is, the SoC market isn't healthy at all. Qualcomm has a monopoly on smartwatch chips and doesn't seem interested in making any smartwatch chips. For companies like Google, LG, Huawei, Motorola, and Asus, it is absolutely crippling. There are literally zero other options in a reasonable price range (although we'd like to give a shoutout to the $1,600 Intel Atom-equipped Tag Heuer Connected Modular 45), so companies either keep shipping two-year-old Qualcomm chips or stop building smartwatches. Android Wear is not a perfect smartwatch operating system, but the primary problem with Android Wear watches is the hardware, like size, design (which is closely related to size), speed, and battery life. All of these are primarily influenced by the SoC, and there hasn't been a new option for OEMs since 2016. There are only so many ways you can wrap a screen, battery, and body around an SoC, so Android smartwatch hardware has totally stagnated. To make matters worse, the Wear 2100 wasn't even a good chip when it was new.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Nobody wants a wristwatch. The market was never big, and is shrinking. They serve no purpose that your pocket watch doesn’t already fill, better. Their market is literally people too lazy to take their watch out of their pocket. Just accept that nobody found the reality as cool as it seemed in Jules Verne novels, and let it die already.
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't seen anyone wear a wrisrtwatch in years, other than a few people who bought an iwatch right when they came out and haven't worn them again in years. So yeah, this seems accurate.
Re: (Score:2)
I see what you did there. The reference to pocket watches and Jules Verne gives it away.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because that market is so close to 0 as to be non-existent. And the fact that most smart watches still need a phone to be useful. But I'm sure there's literally hundreds of people buying it for this reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Women who wear clothing without pockets wear purses which hold things and thus don't need to have it on their wrist in an almost unusable form. Thus there's still almost 0 market there. And as proof- the majority of existing smart watch users are not women, whereas they would be if you had something within a mile of being a valid point.
Re: (Score:2)
You're an idiot... (Score:5, Interesting)
1. The Qualcom chip is based on an ARM core. ARM don't make chips, they license their IP, etc to manufacturers. For example, the ARM-based CPU in the Raspberry Pi is made by Broadcom.
2. Try running your Pi on a battery the size that will fit in a watch, and see how long it lasts.
Re: (Score:1)
Two reasons:
1. The Qualcom chip is based on an ARM core. ARM don't make chips, they license their IP, etc to manufacturers. For example, the ARM-based CPU in the Raspberry Pi is made by Broadcom.
2. Try running your Pi on a battery the size that will fit in a watch, and see how long it lasts.
Yes, but he has a point. There are many other companies making ARM processors. Why not use some Mediatek or Rockchip processors in a watch?
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, the Qualcom SoC is the best of a bad bunch and, unless the competition up their game, why should Qualcom spend money making a better one?
Doesn't make sense anyway... (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't get it either. How can you have a monopoly on something that you're not making? Either they are making them and have a monopoly, or they aren't making them and don't have a monopoly and the market is open for someone else to come in and make them.
If a previous single-source provider decides to get out of the market and no one else even wants to enter it after that, that's simply because there is
Re: (Score:3)
Owning a great deal of the manufacturing capacity, raw materials, or intellectual property can create an effective monopoly without a vendor having interest in development of new technologies with new featuresets. There may not be profit there for Qualcomm: Many of the features of the ideal smartwatch are already embodied in the current round of smartphones, and smartwatches lack the screen space, the battery capacity, or the control surfaces to be equivalent to a modern smartphone.
I can't be certain... (Score:5, Interesting)
but I think you may have reversed the cause and effect here. It may be that Qualcomm isn't doing anything because the market isn't there. Because, honestly, most people don't care about smartwatches.
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, if Google REALLY wanted to put some serious R&D effort into reinvigorating Android Wear, they could commission an updated SOC from the likes of Qualcomm, Samsung, or Intel. They have the money to do so if they wanted, but it seems that they also seem to be OK with letting that product line wither on the vine and focus their efforts on Cloud Hosting and Smart Speakers instead.
Chicken and egg (Score:4, Insightful)
I think people don't care about the smartwatch because it is still a glorified watch instead of what it should be. A leap in tech is needed to make it what it should be though Apple is nearing the ballpark. If Android Wear matched Apple tech, we'd be within a generation or two of the critical tech mass for smartwatches.
I'd like for it to have full-time EKG as opposed to HR, SPO2, body temperature sensor, blood sugar from sweat for the diabetics out there, a display at least as large as the ionic, Google Assistant, different vibration patterns for different reminders, LTE, WiFi, android apps, accurate GPS augmented by WiFi and accelerometers to get very accurate locations, speaker, mic, bluetooth, etc.
I'd then have everything I need in one place and could eliminate the bulky smartphone. I hate having things in pockets or on my belt. This is why it isn't being pushed. Ultimately, it could replace the more lucrative smartphone.
Frankly, I'm not sure I need the watch function though the computer has to have it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I can't be certain... (Score:2)
Indeed, so many people didnâ(TM)t care about smart watches last year that the Apple Watch outsold the entire Swiss watch market combined last year.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, so many people didnâ(TM)t care about smart watches last year that the Apple Watch outsold the entire Swiss watch market combined last year.
Exactly.
Re: (Score:3)
So basically the watch is dying and only victims of Apples marketing are still buying what's left of the watch market. Bought a smart phone, took off my watch, never put it back on again, not once and I fell liberated from the discomfort, having no need to pose with a wrist bracelet. As for the phone, I generally strive to use it for the smart features and make calls not so into receiving calls where even I am, I strive to avoid that, very invasive. I am older and jumping in a car to drive to a business tri
Re: (Score:2)
So basically the watch is dying and only victims of Apples marketing are still buying what's left of the watch market. Bought a smart phone, took off my watch, never put it back on again, not once and I fell liberated from the discomfort, having no need to pose with a wrist bracelet. As for the phone, I generally strive to use it for the smart features and make calls not so into receiving calls where even I am, I strive to avoid that, very invasive. I am older and jumping in a car to drive to a business trip, the way there and on the way back, was a great escape from the office and the phones. Young people have no idea what they are missing out on. Make the device your tool don't let the device turn you into a tool to be used.
So, in typical Slashtard fashion, your Preferences should be EVERYONE's Preferences, right?
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, so many people didnÃ(TM)t care about smart watches last year that the Apple Watch outsold the entire Swiss watch market combined last year.
Some people are dumb enough to go buy anything with an Apple logo on it, even if it puts different characters into text input fields than what they typed. The swiss watch market is dying because it is stupid. A $15 Casio tells better time than a $5,000 conglomeration of gears and springs. They're just jewelry for men.
I'll thank smartwatches for getting me into (Score:2)
wristwatches... But I no longer have the two smartwatches that I bought. Instead, I have a handful of wristwatches, any one of which I wear on a given day, without fail. The smartwatches themselves are long gone to eBay.
The smartwatches were a pain to use and did nothing well, had a hit-and-miss UI that only sometimes felt even partially usable, and they had to keep coming off and on for charging, which meant that I'd routinely forget to wear them for the day (I tried two in succession). I really liked havi
Re: (Score:1)
In other words, you are not interested either.
An opening for another manufacturer? (Score:2)
Unless there is something magic about the Qualcomm parts (or Qualcomm holds patents that are required to build an SoC suitable for an Android wear device) why couldn't someone else who makes SoCs of this sort get into the market?
Does Samsung sell its Exynos SoCs to other vendors?
Does Mediatek make a SoC suitable for a smartwatch?
Re: (Score:2)
Unless there is something magic about the Qualcomm parts (or Qualcomm holds patents that are required to build an SoC suitable for an Android wear device) why couldn't someone else who makes SoCs of this sort get into the market?
Does Samsung sell its Exynos SoCs to other vendors?
Does Mediatek make a SoC suitable for a smartwatch?
Because Apple doesn't want to make Android Wear...
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung are using their Samsung Exynos chips in their smartwatch line so they obviously have something suitable, they just dont sell it to 3rd parties (and certainly wouldn't sell to someone making a direct competitor to their own smartwatches)
Re: (Score:2)
And unfortunately, Samsung wants to push their unnecessary Tizen OS on watches. I'm not interested in using inferior Samsung services that mimic Google/Android services badly and have a fraction of the developer support.
excuses (Score:2)
The article has it backwards... (Score:5, Informative)
The smartwatch was always going to be a niche offering, and primarily of interest to a geek market (iFans not withstanding). Adding health monitoring was a good step to expand the niche, but even then these are not devices that lend themselves to an upgrade cycle like phones (once again, iFans not withstanding).
For example, I own an original (Kickstarter) Pebble, and the core functions of caller ID, SMS/email notification and controlling music playback are great, but I don't care about health monitoring, so I haven't felt a compelling need to buy a another smartwatch to do the same things in a larger and less comfortable form factor.
So, the volumes and demand are not there for Qualcom to be able to return a profit on the investment in R&D resources and production costs for an updated SoC.
Oh, and while I'm here, I'd just like to add "FUCK FITBIT" for screwing Pebble owners over...
Re: (Score:3)
rather, Qualcom hasn't made a new SoC because the smartwatch market is dead
As someone else has pointed out the Smartwatch market is only dead because the company declared it dead without every bringing it to life in the first place. There exists a non-Android company that has pulled in some $3bn in revenue on their wearables last year. Not bad for a dead market eyh?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and while I'm here, I'd just like to add "FUCK FITBIT" for screwing Pebble owners over...
Well while you're still here, I'd just like to add that Pebble was screwed to begin with and it's not Fitbit's fault. Pebble made the ugliest non-touchscreen smartwatches you could buy. Functionality was great, but they missed the fashion aspect.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree - I find the Pebble to be pleasingly retro, to the point that my default watch-face is a Casio LCD lookalike. However, this is a matter of personal taste, so YMMV...
To my mind, the only fault with the Pebble is that it has no means for inverting the button functions and display so that it may be worn and used comfortably on the right wrist - a feature that is lacking from every "smart" watch I've ever looked at.
However, to their begrudged credit, this is something FitBit *do* have
Does not compute (Score:2)
The problem is, the SoC market isn't healthy at all. Qualcomm has a monopoly on smartwatch chips and doesn't seem interested in making any smartwatch chips.
They have a monopoly, but won't make decent chips? That's just a malfunction of language. They can't have a monopoly if they're not interested in making the chips. Why is no one else stepping up to the plate here? Maybe it's cuz no one wants a smartwatch? Hell, I've never worn any watch. I don't need a clock on my body. I can slip my phone out of my pocket just as fast as I can pull my sleeve back to see a watch.
If no-one else is making them (Score:1)
maybe it's because they're stupid,ugly things and nobody wants them. Or can you find anything else on the market which is popular but where only one company is producing them (a category, not a brand - don't say "iPhone").
Re: (Score:2)
Or can you find anything else on the market which is popular but where only one company is producing them (a category, not a brand - don't say "iPhone").
Konami essentially owns the foot-operated rhythm game market.
Whats Stoping all the others? (Score:2)
What's stoping Huawei from Developing a Kirin chip for it's own smartwatches? Instead of paying a HUUUUUGE amount of money to Qualcomm for the Snapdragon 2100 it uses (Huawei makes their own SoCs for their android Phones)
What's Stoping Mediatek from developing a SoC for smartwatches? It would add nicely to the bottom line, after R&D costs are paid.
What's Stoping AllWinner from developing a SoC for Smartwatches? Would be a nice way for them to get in the spotlight.
Whats's stoping Rockchip from developing
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung and Apple own the market. (Score:5, Informative)
Patent Issue? (Score:2)
The problem is, the SoC market isn't healthy at all. Qualcomm has a monopoly on smartwatch chips and doesn't seem interested in making any smartwatch chips.
I was trying to reconcile "monopoly" and "does not want to make the chips." Is this a patent issue then? Is that why they have a monopoly? Is that why no one else will make the chips. I know the smartwatch market isn't huge, but it does exist. There are people who like those things.
I'm so happy (Score:2)
To be a samsung customer with a samsung tizen watch!
Two Year Old Chips ZOMG (Score:3)
so companies either keep shipping two-year-old Qualcomm chips or stop building smartwatches
When my smartwatch had its 2nd birthday, its hands flipped to "time to" and "get a new smartwatch". I promptly heaved it at the backboard adorning my dustbin, scoring 3 points, and gleefully preordered a new shiny smartwatch. After camping out in the cold and snow for 12 hours, I was first in line to be told that it would be released in the summer, as clearly indicated on the website. I still await this new smartwatch, but timepieces wait for no man. /s
Market-driven ... (Score:2)
... goods that have very little market are allocated funds to reflect same.
Samsung Gear S (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hybrid smartwatch (Score:1)
Sigh (Score:2)
It's the other way around:
Most people wouldn't use them, which is why people aren't buying them, which is why people don't make chips specifically for it.
That said, we could have had them in the 1980's. An LCD watch lasts for years on a tiny battery. Make that LCD screen a generic matrix like on almost every piece of electronic equipment manufactured at the time.
Now put a tiny radio in it that receives only and puts what's received on the screen. Now put a bunch of buttons on it that only actively transm
I like my SmartWatch (Score:2)
I got my SmartWatch as a present. I didn't think I had much need. But having one is helpful but not essential.
For me really useful to get calendar alerts for meetings when I don't have my phone in my pocket when walking around the office.
Eh, I have my doubts... (Score:2)
Smartwatches are niche, just the reality of it.
Apple watches lives in a separate realm because Apple successfully sold it's image as a status symbol of fanboys and such, which is harder on Android land.
Truth of the matter is though that the first generations of Android watches didn't sell enough to justify investing more on it.
Qualcomm doesn't have a domination on making chips for smartwatches because they somehow blocked others from trying. It's just that not many chipmakers are even interested in investin
Clarification due to title gore (Score:2)
Pretty sure... (Score:1)
...the death of Android Wear is Appleâ(TM)s fault.
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Insightful)
So are regular non-smart watches, designer jeans, jewelry, makeup, a Corvette, and any other luxury you care to name. What is your point? People like what they like.
Re: (Score:1)
A smart watch is a watch, we need to tell the time somehow, may as well be a smart watch?
Re: (Score:1)
Do you sleep with your analog watch on every night?
YES!
Does it take any more time to put your watch on a decent inductive charger than it does to put it into a winding box, or just set it on the night stand?
yes it does and requires me to remember in the morning to grab it before running out the door, it also won't charge when camping, can't be taken into security rooms and requires me to cart a charger around with me when travelling
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Who cares? (Score:1)
I wear a Farrari Tshirt, Bugatti cap, BMW pants and carry a Mercedes umbrella.
I also use a Volvo pen to write on my Mont Blanc notebook.
You poor folks can only dream of emulating my style.
Re: (Score:2)
There was literally no use change between my analog watch I wore before, and the smart watch I wear on a regular basis now.
Playing a bit of Devil's Advocate here, but it sounds like there was, perhaps, no reason for the change, then?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not the one who said handguns should be heavily regulated and long guns should be openly available, then cried about accidental shootings which can happen with any gun in untrained or careless hands.
That wa
Re: (Score:2)
I've never said anything about regulating any type of gun.
You're right, that comment was made by pnutjam long before you showed up. My apologies for attributing it to you; it was over two weeks ago and I've had the flu.
You're just deflecting from your idiotic position that guns are as just as dangerous as spoons in the hands of 12 year old girls.
Could it not be, rather, that you are misunderstanding my position, despite having had almost 2 weeks to figure it out [slashdot.org]? And that thread would have been where to sort that out; not here. Sorry, you just don't get it and this isn't the place for me to explain it to you.
And if guns went away gun violence would just be replaced with some other equally dangerous weapon.
Right now, the most powerful weapon is a nuclear bomb. Since most of us can't wield
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you sleep with your analog watch on every night?
I used to, but I stopped a few years ago. I often take it off downstairs and leave it on the side somewhere in the evenings, rather than putting it on my bedside table though, so it would be annoying to have to plug it in. Oh, and it's about a quarter the thickness and weight of most 'smart' watches.
Re: Who cares? (Score:1)
Makeup gives charisma boost, smart watch does not.
Mine does, it also increases my wisdom and constitution, lets me take 10 on Endurance checks, adds a bonus to Weathersense and once every 24 hours lets me summon a pit fiend from the depths of Hell. Plus I get Send as a free cantrip without any need for Arcane Feats.
It doesn't count as a class implement, but it does function for ritual performance. Also I get a bonus Saving Throw to Resist Poison.
Re: (Score:2)
wait, smart watches don't last even a decade.
"Smart" watches don't last even a whole day.
Re: (Score:1)
Wrong. My Apple Watch Series 3 regularly uses about 20% of it's battery in a day. Thus, even if battery depletion isn't a linear progression (it's not), it would still last three days before needing charging.
Don't fucking lie.
Re: (Score:3)
>""Smart" watches don't last even a whole day."
Really? My now old Moto 360.2 does- in fact, it lasts over TWO days. And I certainly don't wear it to bed, it goes on the charger at that point (and is fully charged quickly, often before I am even asleep).
My watch easily outlasts any phone charge... I don't wear that to bed, either.. And the Moto 360.2 display is on ALL THE TIME.
Sure, there are issues with smart watches, but battery really isn't one of them. Size/weight is probably my biggest complaint.
Re: (Score:2)
They could reduce the size and weight, but likely by reducing the battery size so it would be a problem then...
Re: (Score:2)
And I certainly don't wear it to bed, it goes on the charger at that point
The fact that you have to charge it daily kinda proves my point.
Which is that it is a power hungry device whose power usage makes it unreliable at any of its functions, without a power cable nearby.
and is fully charged quickly, often before I am even asleep
It's charged quickly cause it has a tiny battery. Which is a THE main reason for your "biggest complaint" - size and weight.
Half of its insides is taken up by the battery. Probably more when counting the wireless charging circuit.
Next main reason for its size being the dumb UI and skeumorphic design.
Which waste s
Re: (Score:1)
I get compliments on my smart watch.
It was on sale for $70, isn't bad looking (zenwatch 2, the small one), I can pick a stylish watchface (I use literal watchface), and ignore or quick reply to texts at home without worrying about where my phone is, as well as control tv or music (play pause, nothing major) check the weather too. Probably most useful is a safer way to get my GPS directions while driving.
It certainly isn't life changing, but it is mildly life improving.
I was really looking forward to the nex
Re: (Score:1)
I have the ZW2 as well. How's the battery life on yours? Mine seems very unpredictable as one day it'll be fine and the next it will chew through 3/4 of the battery by noon.
Re: (Score:1)
I get 12-24 hours (never need to worry about charge on even a pretty long work day, sometimes I can use it for sleep tracking).
If it didn't reliably make it through work until I got home I would not be pleased.
I had three criteria for a smart watch.
1) reliably 18 hours battery (zw2 is close)
2) not giant (zw2 is a touch thick, but good)
3) under $200 (I got mine for $70)
I actually figured I'd use it and see how I felt with no big expenditure and buy the zw4 when it came out new if I liked having a smart watch
Re: Who cares? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Regular watches do not need charging every day or week.
As someone who just had to wind up my $10000 Breitling because I didn't wear it for 3 days in favour of a sports watch, let's just agree that you have literally no idea.
Re: (Score:2)
People like what they like.
And apparently Android Wear watches aren't what people like. I haven't looked at sales numbers but if Qualcomm can't be bothered updating the chip, there must not be enough money in it. That tells me not many people like Android Wear watches,
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently they don't much like smartwatches, or the market would justify producing the chips.
Re: (Score:2)
It's right twice a day.
Re: (Score:2)
I care. I'd like a Samsung Gear S3 Frontier that's waterproof - or similar. I'd like to get to the point where I don't carry a phone around to make calls, I just wear my watch. I'd like to get to the point where my watch is my BYOD for basic usage at work/elsewhere with wireless display and wireless keyboard - no dock. Et cetera...
Re: (Score:1)
I have an s3 frontier. it is waterproof. well, waterproof enough anyway. it's ip68. i wear it in the jacuzzi all the time. as long as you're not a diver, you'll be fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Same here. I've loaded tons of custom stuff on mine letting me use it as a control for my smart home stuff. It's great for when I pop down to the bar and forget my phone. I can walk home, and unlock my door with my watch.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Who cares? (Score:4, Insightful)
The summary claims " the primary problem with Android Wear watches is the hardware, like size, design (which is closely related to size), speed, and battery life." Nope. The primary problem is lack of demand. If they were selling like hotcakes, Qualcomm would be investing in new chips.
Heck, Apple is so embarrassed by their smartwatch sales numbers that they refuse to break them out separately.
Re:Who cares? (Score:4, Informative)
Heck, Apple is so embarrassed by their smartwatch sales numbers
I find that hard to believe. Horace Dedieu of Asymco estimates that Apple is now the biggest watchmaker in the world, overtaking Rolex during the last quarter of 2017.
http://www.asymco.com/2017/09/... [asymco.com]
Re:Who cares? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure if your trolling or not, but smart watches have plenty of uses. Such as being able to look at notifications without having to pull out your phone, which sometimes might be unacceptable, like in a meeting. I use my smart watch as a second authentication device for my smart home, when someone puts in my door code, the system looks to see if my watch is in range, if not, doesn't open. Additionally I use my smart watch to monitor my heart rate and for someone with a heart condition, it's useful.
So while you may find this tech useless, doesn't mean the entire world does.
Re: (Score:2)
Additionally I use my smart watch to monitor my heart rate and for someone with a heart condition, it's useful.
Considering the reliability of PPG heart sensors on "smart" watches...
You either don't have a "smart" watch... or a heart condition... or you are about to die on account of putting your faith in a toy.
There's a reason why even wrist mounted oximeters [wikipedia.org] still do actual measuring through the sensor attached to a finger.
Light seepage around an optical sensor.
Re: (Score:2)
My s3 Frontier charges from dead to full in under 2 hours.
I charge it while at work, at my desk. Takes a whole 20 minutes if I do it daily instead of waiting for it to die.
Smartwatch are usefull (Score:2)
I have a tizen smartwath and love to read notification on it and control my note 8 media reader with it .
Re: (Score:3)
You are an idiot. My smartwatch allows me to safely send and receive messages at a stop light on my motorcycle. That alone is worth what I paid for it.
Re: (Score:2)
What messages do you send and receive that can't wait until you get where you're going? Just curious.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:There's a reason (Score:5, Informative)
The reason Qualcomm doesn't give a flying fuck about smart watches is because no one is buying them.
If google etc wanted one so badly they could order custom designs, or make their own.
They is no money in that market.
Apple made $1.6B in the last quarter on their watches. The segment "Apple wearables" is equivalent to a Fortune-500 company in its own right
From: https://qz.com/973920/apple-aa... [qz.com]
There was a steady increase in the unit’s sales in the first year the Watch was on sale, rising from $1.7 billion at the start of the year to $4.35 billion by the end. Other products cooled off in 2015, but saw another strong holiday quarter. This time, the business unit generated $2.87 billion, a jump of about 30% over the same quarter last year, but still relatively small compared with even Apple’s other non-iPhone businesses. Even so, Cook said its wearables business, which he defined as the Apple Watch, AirPods, and Beats headphones, was comparable to the size of a Fortune 500 company.
Sure, it's no iPhone-X, but it's hardly buttons either. My ole gran used to have a saying "look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves", and the same applies writ large here.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Apple made $1.6B in the last quarter on their watches.
The link does not say that. "Apple wearables" includes AirPod (a necessity if you have an iPhone without a jack) and Beats headphones (which I didn't even know that Apple owned because I don't give a shit).
Re: (Score:1)
No they didn't, they made 1.6 billion in the division that ALSO makes the watches.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:There's a reason (Score:4)
I like that. *I* need to read...
From the same link: "Analyst Gene Munster said the Apple Watch represents just 3 percent of Apple's revenue, which would equal $1.6 billion during the quarter"
They have not undershot estimates - the watch has posted 50% increases in sales for 3 quarters running. I don't know of many products that do that.
And you're still ignoring the point I was making. Just on its own, the watch is the equivalent of a Fortune-500 company. Your original statement was "They (sic) is no money in that market". It is *you*, sir, who are wrong; in every respect.