Forgot your password?

I think wearable computing will take off...

Displaying poll results.
In 2014
  1316 votes / 5%
In 2015
  3058 votes / 12%
In 2016
  3054 votes / 12%
In 2017
  1400 votes / 5%
In 2018
  1037 votes / 4%
In 2019 or later
  4309 votes / 17%
Never
  5779 votes / 23%
I'm a nudist, you insensitive clod!
  4294 votes / 17%
24247 total votes.
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
  • Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
  • Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
  • This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

I think wearable computing will take off...

Comments Filter:
  • 2014 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rmdingler (1955220) on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @08:25PM (#45893427)
    I mean, I pretty much always (and already) wear the phone holster with the computer in it.

    If the compiled knowledge of our time is available as an accessory, I would wear it if it only came in purple boots.

    • by JWSmythe (446288)

      They're talking about the infamous computer in a pack, eyepiece display, voice control, with optional wrist keyboard. No one would ever ... well ...

      I'm fairly sure Google Glass won't take off, just like the previous wearable displays haven't. There have been may attempts [wikipedia.org].

      Most people want to have the opportunity to hand off their device for whatever reason, even if it's "hey, look at these pictures of my cats." The "wearable" simply doesn't allow for that. sure, you can "wear" your cell phone in a holst

      • by genik76 (1193359)

        Most people want to have the opportunity to hand off their device for whatever reason, even if it's "hey, look at these pictures of my cats."

        In ten years, this will sound as absurd as the predictions in 1950's that we would communicate in the future by having robots deliver us letters from each other. When the number of wearable computer users reach a critical mass and the technology is sufficiently advanced, there's absolutely no need to hand over a mobile device - content can be transferred to another device nearby so easily that the process will seem almost telepathic.

    • The Fitbit [fitbit.com] is a wearable computer already. Lots of people wear it. Cheaper models don't have a display, but the more expensive ones do, telling you the time and your steps for the day. The Pebble Smartwatch [getpebble.com] is another wearable computer available today. Pebbles have similar interfaces to 6th gen iPod Nano [google.com] (which should also count...).

      Of course, there's also the Intel Edison [slashdot.org], which is a full pentium-class computer crammed into the size of an SD card (and that's just as a proof of concept!), so the next

      • by antdude (79039)

        I have been wearing Casio Data Bank (DB) [currently 150 model] calculator watches since my teen(ager) days! :D However, Casio doesn't make these DB types anymore. I don't own or use mobile phones. I want something tiny like a light and thin watch to wear and not have to hold (have disabilities).

        However, all the smartwatches are expensive, thick, heavy, and requires mobile phones. :( The (six/6th) iPod Nano would have been perfect with a wrist band, but it doesn't have a scheduler, calculator, etc. I wished

        • by Khopesh (112447)

          Neither Pebble, Fitbit, nor the iPod require a phone. You can also buy a 6th gen Nano [amazon.com] plus wrist strap [amazon.com] for $130 or so, which is $30 cheaper than your Casio DBC150 [amazon.com] (though this doesn't necessarily provide the apps you want).

          I'd be surprised if smartwatches don't go down in price, thickness, and weight in each following generation. We're probably 3 or so years from a fully functional smartwatch the size of your Casio, though I'd imagine it would still run around $250 until it hits a higher tier of mass pr

          • by antdude (79039)

            Um, Pebble's web site said iPhone and Android. Also, https://getpebble.com/retail [getpebble.com] says phone services which I do not want.

            Fitbit seems to be for exercising stuff. I don't exercise so it is useless. I do have a (6/six)th generation iPod nano, but it doesn't have the stuff I want. I just want a calendar scheduler, calculator, phone book, etc. Simple stuff. :(

            • by Khopesh (112447)

              Um, Pebble's web site said iPhone and Android. Also, https://getpebble.com/retail [getpebble.com] says phone services which I do not want.

              Hm, I was under the impression the Pebble was stand-alone but could benefit from connections to your smartphone.

              Oh, and it's just the new "Steel" Pebble (announced a few days ago) that's $250. The standard one is $150.

              • by antdude (79039)

                Nope. :( I did leave a suggestion to them for having an offline stand alone model, but I doubt they will make one. :(

  • Wear it?!? (Score:5, Funny)

    by ackthpt (218170) on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @08:33PM (#45893503) Homepage Journal

    Peasant! I'll pay someone to wear the technology for me.

    "Look where I'm looking through the Glass, you incompetent lackey!"

    • by ah.clem (147626)

      "Look where I'm looking through the Glass, you incompetent lackey!"

      Ah, for want of mod points... thanks for the chuckle, a very funny comment. I think you've pretty accurately portrayed the entitlement attitude of the glass folks.

  • er... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by msauve (701917) on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @09:11PM (#45893733)
    Calculator watches are so '80's.
    • I have been wearing these calculator watches since my teen(ager) days! :D However, Casio doesn't make these DB types anymore. I don't own or use mobile phones. I want something tiny like a light and thin watch to wear and not have to hold (have disabilities). However, all the smartwatches are expensive, thick, heavy, and requires mobile phones. :(

      The (six/6th) iPod Nano would have been perfect with a wrist band, but it doesn't have a scheduler, calculator, etc. I wished there were third party firmwares for

      • by davidbrit2 (775091) on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @04:07PM (#45900849) Homepage
        I feel your pain. I will wear my current DBC-150 into the ground. As soon as somebody can make a "smart watch" that runs for 3 years on a charge (or at least a solid month), has a scheduler with persistent event preview, doesn't require a paired cell phone to do anything useful, and can easily survive the occasional scrape against a cement wall, I'll take a look. The current breed of smart watches are just a novelty.
        • by antdude (79039)

          I noticed Amazon's prices are crazy high for these DB 150 and 300 models. Ugh! Where did you get yours from and how much? I got two because from local Costco stores because they were harder to find! :(

          • I wish I had a good source; I've had my current one for several years now. I think I must have bought it shortly before they discontinued that line.

            There's a no-name clone of the DBC-150 selling for about $10 on Amazon. I bought one out of curiosity, and it's not too terrible. The scheduler is pretty much the same, and you can store longer text strings than the Casio allows, but it's missing world time, and doesn't have a proper countdown timer. Also, the light is almost useless. The raised buttons actually

            • by antdude (79039)

              Hmm, is that DigiTech 50 Memory Data Bank Calculator Smart Watch? If so, then it seems like people hate it? I rarely use the world time, timers, stop watches, etc. Light is rare because my very old one's broke so I lived without it. Haha. Did you stop wearing this clone one?

              • Yup, that's the one. I haven't actually worn the clone full-time. I bought it partly out of curiosity, and as a possible backup in case my Casio kicks the bucket. It's no Casio, but it's usable. There aren't a lot of reviews on Amazon, but it sounds like build quality - namely the band - is the biggest concern. So, hard to say if it would hold up as well as a Casio. I'm guessing it wouldn't, but I don't know exactly how far it might fall short.
    • by OzPeter (195038)

      Calculator watches are so '80's.

      Thats funny .. I distinctly remember them in the '70's

      Now git off my simulated lawn

      • Now I've got 'Yellow Rose of Texas' repeating in my head!

        (Obscure reference to digital watches of the late 70s all playing one tune because they all used the same chip.)

  • People will buy it for the bling effect . . . even it they don't need it.

    Just make it shiny, half-way affordable . . . and it will sell.

    "Look at how much money I have . . . I can afford to buy this! . . . Even if I have no clue what it actually does . . ."

  • by Truth_Quark (219407) on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @09:18PM (#45893789) Journal
    And then it will take off.

    Not just face recognition to remember people's names for you, it'll be something networky so it can go viral. Or something that increases safety so parents get it for their kids.
    • by Harlequin80 (1671040) on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @11:46PM (#45894571)

      I know this will get me hated but face recognition is THE killer app for me. Combine that with a database / CRM and I am utterly sold.

      I must have the worst memory for names of anyone I have ever met. I can remember your phone number but your name escapes me. And it's not that I have forgotten you, I can remember everything else, just not your god damned name. So if you could give me a contact lens that floated your name above your head. Oh yes please.

      Of course the next step would be to have it link back to a CRM which I could refer to in real time. Has it really been 3 years since I last saw you? No I saw you at that kids birthday party 6 months ago. Oh yeah, that's right!

      Taking it out of personal and moving it into professional, I attend conferences with 1000s of people. Being able to pick someone out of a crowd would be so useful. In that instance it would be incredibly useful to link back to a company database.

      Finally you are out somewhere with others. You split up and agree to meet again somewhere else. Massive sea of people, where the hell are they. Oh they are the one with the big red arrow bouncing up and down above their head!

      • by bonehead (6382)

        I know this will get me hated but face recognition is THE killer app for me.

        The problem is that for every benign application of facial recognition, pretty much all of which are marginally useful at best, there are a dozen VERY useful, VERY harmful applications.

      • by Bo'Bob'O (95398) on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @06:21PM (#45902045)

        Hi there *pause* Bob! How are the *pause* wife and 404 not found?

      • So if you could give me a contact lens that floated your name above your head.

        Along with guild and stats?

        Errr, what did you mean by "killer app"?

  • Define "wearable" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by erice (13380) on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @09:34PM (#45893877) Homepage

    When I think of wearable, I think of devices imbedded in clothing. Smart watches and smart glasses are just devices held in a slightly different manner.

    For truly wearable computing, the devices needs to be survive in all the same conditions that clothing does and be comfortable enough to wear without a thought. Those are pretty hard problems. Not many devices today would still be functional after going through the washer and the dryer and are much too bulky and/or heavy to wear all the time.

    • by TWX (665546) on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @01:47AM (#45895183)
      "Wearable" has not meant "embedded in clothing" for as long as I've known, and that's more than a decade. A buddy of mine had one of those Wintel machines that was considered to be wearable, so long as you put up with the battery pack in the fannypack, the computer strapped to one arm with the screen on it, and the input device on the other arm. It was wearable because you didn't hold on to it in order to carry it with you or to use it, not because it was clothing.

      Jewellery is not clothing, and it's considered wearable.

      As to the original question of it becoming popular, I think that it'll come down to inexpensive, practical devices that interface wirelessly with the cell phone in the pocket. The wristwatch or bracelet that notifies of calendar events, or provides navigation feedback, or provides more phone call control than the single button on most headsets, that sort of thing, so one doesn't have to pull the phone out of the pocket for some basic, simple stuff. Right now wearable wrist phone accessories are too complex and too expensive, once that changes then they may well take off.
      • by gsslay (807818)

        So you've defined what wearable isn't, but it's still not clear what it is. Why doesn't the cell phone in your pocket count as "wearing"? Why do you need some secondary device attached to you in some other fashion before it becomes wearable?

    • by dargaud (518470)

      When I think of wearable, I think of devices imbedded in clothing.

      Well, yeah, it would also need to 'survive' a changing of clothes. Geeks are already not renown for their wardrobe and that's certainly not going to be an incentive to change often if you only own one high-tech T-shirt...

  • The Ericsson R380, [wikipedia.org] the first smartphone, was released in 2000. Even if it was designed to be carried in a pocket or purse, it was still something that you kept with you at all times, and that makes it a form of wearable computer.
    • by msauve (701917)
      Meh. If the criteria is that loose - then a Palm, or Apple Newton, or Psion would count. Heck, the Psion was user programmable, in the mid '80's. There's nothing particularly unique about the R380.

      But, none of them count. "Pocketable" is NOT "wearable."
    • by fatphil (181876)
      I can't see how the Nokia 9000 Communicator doesn't tick every box that Ericsson does. Apart from the one "released in the 21st century", which it misses by 4 years.
  • Do they count as one even though they are very old and primitive? I have been wearing them since my teen(ager) days! :D However, Casio doesn't make these DB types anymore. I don't own or use mobile phones. I want something tiny like a light and thin watch to wear and not have to hold (have disabilities). However, all the smartwatches are expensive, thick, heavy, and requires mobile phones. :( The (six/6th) iPod Nano would have been perfect with a wrist band, but it doesn't have a scheduler, calculator, etc.

  • I am thinking never, because there will only be a subset of the population that would trust any compute device that's on their person possibly tracking them and their every activity after what we know the NSA and Anonymous can do. Cars are the current target that freaks me out, could you imagine someone hacking your clothes?!?! No thanks. I don't want my electronic underwear to get hacked and fry my genitals or something more gruesome.
    • Lol. I think you have your splits round the wrong way. There will only be a subset of the population that doesn't blindly trust the toys that are handed to them. Yes there will be people who won't use something because they are paranoid about having their short and curlys roasted. But most either won't know enough to care or if they do know enough will take measures to protect themselves.

      After all you posted on Slashdot, despite knowing it means that people can build a profile on you based of it.

  • Besides... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by multimediavt (965608) on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @10:11PM (#45894047)
    ...I can put a laptop on a cable and wear it like a Flav-a-flav clock now if I want to. There's nothing stopping people from wearing their compute devices now, other than public embarrassment.
  • I'd say whenever Millennials outnumber Gen-Xers and Boomers.
  • Wearable, like Google glass or smart watches are a step toward a very integrated computing experience. Although I don't believe it will be as crude or pervasive as the Borg, I think we are headed in that direction. When you can send and/or read a text, or message, by thinking it, how long till verbal communication is gone? Thought control over your computer/smart phone/eye glasses, whatever, will be here sooner or later.

    It will be a fundamental change in the human experience.
  • by Rary (566291)

    I had a calculator watch back in 1983. Doesn't that count?

    Here's my bold prediction: Nobody other than hardcore nerds will ever really want to wear any device other than a watch (if anyone will still wear those) or a bluetooth headset. As the years go by we will carry even more powerful and versatile devices in our pockets than we do today. Google Glass and its ilk will never be more than a novelty item.

    • Personally, I think I would much prefer wearing something like Google Glass than a smart watch once all the UI and ergonomic hiccups are smoothed out.

  • I chose "never" even though I am 100% sure that people will always want their tools and devices to be more usable in more situations...

    I wanted this poll to make sense, I really genuinely tried to pick a year based on intelligent criteria...but alas.

    I'm a (self described) cyberneticist. I'm ABD in Systems Science. I absolutely love all of this stuff, but 'wearable tech' is such a reductive concept for tech-minded people to use in conceptualizing what digital devices to deploy where and what functions they s

  • They're called smartphones. Even my dad has a smartphone. I carry mine everywhere I go. It's got high speed communication, high resolution graphics, runs tons of applications, takes picture, takes video, sends said pictures and videos to social media sites, keeps my calendar with reminders and alarms, etc.

    • by Z00L00K (682162)

      I agree - as soon as you were able to put a phone in your pocket that could do more than taking calls and sending messages you had a wearable computer.

      So we are already there. Now go figure out the next big thing instead.

      • Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees, but: when are we all going to buy an unnecessary large amount of smart phones, sown into the fabric of our clothes?

        • My son's have a hoodies with a pocket you can place a smart phone or mp3 player with a headset sown through it and I didn't buy them for them they picked those out on their own.

    • by tompaulco (629533)
      Well, I don't wear mine, I clip it to my belt. Apparently most people don't even do that, they put it in their pocket. Unless your wallet and your keys are also considered wearable, I don't think the phone counts either.
  • Garmin Forerunner 310XT GPS Sports Watch [amzn.com]

    It has a processor, inputs and a display. It might not do Facebook or be general purpose but it's a computer and its wearable.

  • Why no potion for 1984 [geeksugar.com]?
  • My uncle would go off and rant and rave about how everyone was wearing these "gosh dang fangeled computers" on their wrists every time he saw me with my digital watch back in the 90s.
    We didn't visit him much.
  • I think wearable computing will take off... people's clothes and replace them with computers eventually maturing into borg like biological implants.
  • Missing option: April 4, 2015, at 5:37pm.

  • People are already wearing computers, and have been since cell phones got small enough to take everywhere. That phone might be in their pocket or purse rather than strapped to their wrist, but it's as much an omnipresent part of their ensemble – that they'd feel "naked" without – as a pocket watch once was.
  • Never mind wearable tech, in the UK, mens trousers (pants to the US audience), are getting ever smaller pockets, and now same happening to coats too (or vanishing pockets). Guys put their stuff in their pockets, we don't want to look like idiots like ex-footballer David Beckham with bags trying to look as if men should have them to carry their stuff like women.

  • Props to Rudy Rucker...

  • Wearable tech makes it even more hazardous to be in public, let alone drive. We've already seen backlash from things like people not being served if they're talking on the phone at a counter. The rudeness (or perceived rudeness) of constantly using, or even looking at devices while interacting with live people (dates and meetings are prime examples) are already eating away at feelings of well-being and self confidence. If wearable tech "takes off" people will become much less personable, and such interpers
  • I wonder if implants could be considered wearable. I think wearable tech will become popular right about the same time a market opens up for elective implants.

    • I wonder if implants could be considered wearable. I think wearable tech will become popular right about the same time a market opens up for elective implants.

      I think you're onto something! We should merge computers with breast implants! Think of the possibilities.

  • When the "wearable tech" becomes implanted "wetware". I'm thinking direct neural interface with computing / memory augmentation: Being able to interface a computer system at a _far_ higher level than "think hard about a purple sky and have a blinky light turn on".

    - Being able to directly access synthetic memory or networked data.
    - Enhancing logic / mathematical processing / thinking.
    - Using synthetic elements to replace / enhance senses (vision / hearing loss / enhancement)
    - Using synthetic element to enhan

  • by mendax (114116) on Thursday January 09, 2014 @01:41AM (#45904537)

    This poll reminds me of a hilarious scatological joke I heard years ago. I found a version of it here [jokelibrary.net]:

                Bill Gates, Andy Grove, and Jerry Sanders (Heads of MicroSoft, Intel, and AMD, Advanced Micro Devices) were in a high-powered business meeting. During the serious, tense discussion, a beeping noise suddenly is emitted from where Bill is sitting.
                Bill says, "Oh, that's my beeper. Gentlemen, excuse me, I need to take this call." Bill lifts his wristwatch to his ear and begins talking into the end of his tie. After completing this call, he notices the others are staring at him. Bill explains, "Oh, this is my new personal communication system. I have an earpiece built into my watch and a microphone sewn into the end of my tie. That way I can take a call anywhere."
              The others nod, and the meeting continues.
              Five minutes later, the discussion is again interrupted when Andy starts beeping. He states, "Excuse me gentlemen, this must be an important call." Andy taps his earlobe and begins talking into thin air. When he completes his call, he notices the others staring at him and explains, "I also have a personal communication system. My earpiece is actually implanted in my earlobe, and the microphone is actually embedded in this fake tooth."
              The others nod, and the meeting continues.
              Five minutes later, the discussion is again interrupted when Jerry emits a thunderous fart. He looks up at the others staring at him and says, "Somebody get me a piece of paper... I'm receiving a fax!"

  • by trongey (21550) on Thursday January 09, 2014 @10:38AM (#45906233) Homepage

    According to this poll 16% of nerds are nudists. This is why we don't go to nudists camps.

  • How many people have smartphones that they carry/wear everywhere? Not quite everybody 15-55 but close?

    Next step is working out the controllers for glasses etc. See if it gets done before implants with direct brain connections are workable...
  • drunkenly at the foot of a single bed with someone who wasn't someone else's first choice.

  • Wearable is so 20th century. Implantable is where it's at, baby!
  • I could see this becoming big for militaries and police, but that's it. They're already talking about making cops wear cameras in Canada. They'd also want it for facial recognition, which means a computer could tell them who is wanted, or if a person has ties that makes them shady.

    I think consumer versions won't take off for all the above reasons. Once people realize the other uses for these devices and what that means, I think they'll avoid them (especially since the early adopters probably need to be geek

  • Where you draw the line on wearables? A smartphone in your pocket, belt or with a strap on your arm is wearable? fitbit? a smartwatch?

    For me the line on wearable is more related to the interface to the user, like google glass, hear what you speak, see what you see, shows information right into your eyes, no action needed. But for seamless wearable computing in that sense still will take some time to get there. Liked the idea of SixthSense [pranavmistry.com] some years ago, but never come to light. Google glass, iOptik [rt.com], Innov [ieee.org]

A committee is a group that keeps the minutes and loses hours. -- Milton Berle

 



Forgot your password?
Working...