The IoT gadget – today’s case: the smart watch (I)

Today I will talk about one device that tries to break through the ice: The smart watch. Is it a real new product or just a minimized version of the touch-screen phones. For personal reasons, I will not use the word smartphone. So what is so hot about the smartwatches. Or should I spell gadgetwatches… Little matters. They are real. I’ve used google to find five watches labeled as “smart”:

Let’s judge these products. First, we apply  the 4Ps  to each one of them
Criterium:  Price (base price)
 1) 200€
2) 190€
3) 70€
4) 80€
5) 60€
6) 140€
There are three categories: below 100€, up from 200€ and in-between. Given that some touchphones cost  less than 100€, the Samsung Galaxy Gear ranks as high end, while the to MyKronoz watches are low-end. Are they ?
Criterium : Promotion
Samsung has promoted on a decent level its watch. Sony follows up close. There is little promotion for MyKronoz products, while Nike promotes its product on a very reduced scale, in some outlets.
Definitely, a watch priced 200€ must sell or there is a problem. So Samsung makes substantial efforts. Maybe not enough. But it tries.
Criterium : Placement
1) The Samsung watch is a gadget for Samsung phones. It sells through the same channels as the phone and on Internet. Not bad.
2) and 4)  The Sony follows the same politics as Samsung.
3) and 5)  The watch is promoted on internet. Today internet is the single most important distribution channel, so why spend money on outlet display cases when there is no need? Well done.
6) Nike tries to hide the Fuelband. there is little information about the product and it sells only on internet and only on specialized sites.
Conclusion: the phone makers use traditional channels as well as internet, while the other companies use only internet.
Criterium : Product
This should be the most important of the criteria, but the price weights much and biases the choice. However, the products have been designated as smart watches, so we try to make  the ranking based on the product itself.
1) Samsung has presented the SSG as an extension for its line of touch devices ( phones and tablets). The theoretical user base is huge.  And The watch  is not just a watch. Practically, it has all the functions of the phone, even a camera and an audio  jack for earphones.  For a smart watch, it   has too many features for a screen so small. Playing videos  ? given the size of the screen, one should look weird when watching a movie. Subtitles ? forget them. One needs eagle eyes. And most people have fingers thicker than half the size of the screen. Samsung has forgotten the only interface available for a device so small: voice. But well, Samsung is known best for building Apple clones at a cheaper price. And this is a huge advantage when building its user base.
2) and 4) Sony tries to keep the pace with Samsung so there is little surprise. The line of watches is a complement to the Android phones. From this point of view, Sony supports Samsung.  The price is the single most important argument.  The integration with the social networks might help sell the two products. As of today, Sony is much, much behind Samsung.
3) and 5)  Are a very bold initiative. MyKronoz products connect to any Bluetooth-abled smartphone. This means it targets products from Samsung and Apple. And at such low prices, it hits hard.These underdogs might become a threat to Samsung. Unlike Samsung and Sony, MyKronoz offers only basic functions like call-management and music listening. however, these are the most important uses for a phone, so the small bracelet does well on its job.
6) The Fuelband connects to Bluetooth-phones. The  target being active people, the uses are restricted to fitness. The major drawback of the Fuelband is the lack of realism of a product with a well-designed form factor.
Criterium:  the design
1) Brushed metal  for the  device, plastic for the bracelet. The screen is 36x56mm. The form factor is similar to  the one of the  android tablets.
2) Plastic and metal rim for the device, plastic for the bracelet. Screen dimensions : 42x41mm. An ugly big square, bigger than most wrist watches.
3)  Plastic for the device, plastic for the bracelet. Dimensions: 38x80mm, but the screen is curved and it blends well onto the wrist.
4) Plastic and metal rim for the device, plastic for the bracelet. Dim: 36x36mm.
5) Plastic for the device, flat screen, plastic for the bracelet.  Dim: 38x80mm.
6) Plastic for the device, plastic for the bracelet. Little or no information available. however, the formfactor and the bracelet blend well onto the wrist.
For this criteria, there are only two products that have a good design: the ZeBracelet and the Nike Fuelband. The other products are more like the cheap Casio watches of the 80’s.  The plastic and metal mix is a poor choice for products
To be continued in a future article…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s