Will a Freely Distributed OS for Smartwatches Succeed?

It seems that crowdfunded smartwatches have become popular again, with Vachen and AGENT Smartwatch starting their Kickstarter campaigns and accompanied by Boddie and Emopulse closely behind. With the choices in smartwatches today, we the buyer, are spoiled for choice. You have a large variety of features, os’s and watch designs. Just how do we select the one we really want? Perhaps one of them has features you think are really important to you but you hate the design or vice versa. Is there a way to have our cake and eat it?

Perhaps we can learn a bit from what watchmakers have already been doing for a long time. Companies like Tag Heuer, Seiko, Swatch and many more produce a good variety of wristwatch models year after year. On the surface, they will have absolutely nothing in keeping, some have a stainless steel casing, other are covered in Swarovski crystals, some show the date, others barely have any numbers on them. Looking past the surface reveals similar and even identical clock movements that power these watches. As mysmartwatch.se/barnklockor/ are constitute a complex and intricate network of springs, counterweights and gears, one 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 each new design of a wrist watch.

Hence, the usage of modules in watch design is essential to getting models off the designing table to the manufacturing floor as quickly as possible. The fewer movements needed to cater to a large selection of watches the better it is for the watchmakers.

In a way, this is exactly what Google did with Android as well as. Google has created a usable and flexible operating-system that smart phone makers can take, tweak and ship making use of their hardware. By developing 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 Iphone. Now, you may get an Android smart phone in a number of models with different technical specifications and prices that you could choose which hardware fits you best, knowing that the program experience will be mainly similar.

For smartwatches, it has not been the case. For each and every smartwatch out there, there is a proprietary operating-system that powers it. This means that the user experience is vastly different for each smartwatch model. It also means that the makers of the smartwatches need 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 software development kit (SDK) has to be created and this does take time and resources as well.

The various smartwatch makers have taken different methods to handle this. For starters, Pebble has put plenty of effort into the creation of its SDK and has garnered a decent developer community so far and also have also partnered popular big-name app developers like the RunKeeper. However, Pebble doesn’t look all that classy, it might are a sports watch or could be worn with casual wear, nonetheless 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? What if they used a pre-made smartwatch OS?

The Agent smartwatch alternatively is trying to juggle either 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 desire to manage to tackle the electronics and the look areas of the smartwatch together. This 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 for its operating system. Is this the start to using a distributed OS for smartwatches?

What we need is one of the established software companies to spearhead this. A small time player might not cut it because few will utilize an OS that might not be around if the business goes under. The OS should be developed by Google, Apple or Microsoft, so as to give weight to the software. It will also provide trust to developers that the OS will be supported for years ahead. These companies can easily utilize their expertise in software development to generate an OS that will be in a position to perform under different hardware conditions, maximize battery life while providing usability and functionality, all at exactly the same time looking great on the watch face.