Samsung Confirms Galaxy Gear Will Eventually be Compatible with Non-Galaxy Devices

[dgstorm]

Right now it seems like the primary complaints against the new Galaxy Gear smartwatch is the price and the fact that it will only work with the Galaxy Note 3 or Galaxy Note 10.1. While there isn't likely to be much of a change on the price anytime soon, at least the second complaint is being addressed. Samsung recently confirmed that eventually the Galaxy Gear will be compatible with other devices, and not just other Galaxy devices either.

At the moment the main compatibility issue is two-fold. The first problem is that the Galaxy Gear uses Bluetooth 4.0 (LE). This is a limit that is based upon devices that are compatible with that specific Bluetooth standard. That leaves the question, "why wouldn't it then work with any Nexus device which has been upgraded to Android 4.3, since Bluetooth 4.0 (LE) is a part of that upgrade?" The answer leads to the second problem, and that is software specific APIs. Basically the Galaxy Gear currently only has software built-in that is designed to sync-up with the GNote3 phone and the GNote10.1 Tab. Here's a quote from Samsung director of product marketing Ryan Bidan,

“Right now the specific APIs and functionality are tied to the Galaxy Note 3. For obvious reasons we are looking for additional devices to support it,” Bidan said. “We will announce those when they come, but right now it is Galaxy Note 3 specific.”

It's great to see that Samsung plans to make the Galaxy Gear compatible with other Android devices in the future, but would that be enough to draw your interest considering the $300 price? Share your thoughts.

Source: TalkAndroid

 

[xtor]

I'd buy one now if it worked on my note 2, I have a few dive watches that cost way more then sammy's smart watch and do far less.

sent from a note yee (2)

 

[Dusty]

YEP... A lot of people are crying about the price. But they fail to realize that a decent watch will cost $500. A specialty/luxury watch will kick off at around $1200+.

$300 is about right for how much timepieces cost. The only watches that cost $50-$100 are the cheap ones.

 

[xtor]

The watch market has been dieing for years now because of cell phones, maybe the smart watch will bring them back. Who knows maybe watch companies will start making smart watches?

sent from a note yee (2)

 

[RemyL75]

I haven't owned a watch in years (mainly because I was waiting on a smartwatch that I liked). Last one i owned was an MP3 watch. I have been patiently waiting for a watch like this and was willing to go as much as $350-$400 for what the Galaxy Gear does. I mean, c'mon, most things with a GOOD and PROPER FUNCTIONING touch screen are going to run you around $200-$300 anyway. Add the camera in and the Bluetooth 4.0 LE and it has more than enough potential to go beyond it's current limitations (hackers/programmers, get to work lol). Personally speaking, they had me at "Samsung announces..." lol. Needless to say, i am def getting this watch, as i plan to be in a Verizon store on 10/10/13 to get a Note 3. It's great that it will eventually support non-Samsung phones in the future, but I plan on having a Samsung phone for at least another 2-3 years (or until they piss me off.... *evil stares at Motorola*).

If for some reason I don't get the Note 3 (Rapture/End of the world/Zombie Apocalypse/etc.), functionality is coming soon for the Note 2 so I will still have a good reason to get it (other than my need/desire/tech fetish craving for a smartwatch with a touchscreen lol).

 

[squeak]

I just can't help but compare this to the Nexus 4. I know that sounds crazy, but hear me out:


Nexus 4 vs Galaxy Gear
Screen: 4.7" 1280x768 vs 1.63" 320x320
Processor: 1.5Ghz Quad Core vs 800Mhz Single Core
Storage: 8gb vs 4gb
Battery: 2100mAh vs 315mAh
Camera: 8MP Rear 1.3MP Front vs 1.9MP
Price: $199 vs $299

I know watches are generally pretty expensive, but how many people are going to choose to wear this instead of a Rolex? In 10 years that Rolex will still work, and work well, this will be ancient technology. Look at the precision and time involved in making something with tons of tiny moving metal parts. Let's face it, a smart watch is easier to build. I'm not suggesting that this should be $50, but it shouldn't be $300. I bet this price drops by $50-$100 by Christmas. Samsung is just trying to make big bucks off early adopters.

 

[RemyL75]

If you are going to compare it to anything, you could at least use the Sony SmartWatch 2 or Motorola MOTOACTIV. Comparing a watch that doesn't make calls to a phone, not really making sense. And true, probably shouldn't be $300, but the Sony and Motorola offerings are only $50 below it. And if you don't want/need a smartwatch, you prob won't be getting one from anyone. The same can be said for a $500 Rolex, regardless of how long it will last, if your desires or needs lie elsewhere, then any argument towards getting it versus not getting it is moot. It's a niche product, just like the Note series as a whole. Samsung thinks they can make money and beat Apple and Google to market, I want to see them try. Hope they at least beat Apple lol

 

[Dusty]

Agreed. You wear a Breitling (I'm not a fan of Rolexes) for a different reason than a smartwatch. I doubt anyone will cross shop for the two.

On a side note I can totally see a premium watchmaker getting in on this action when the market matures.

 

[squeak]

The only reason I compare it to a phone is because I believe that the Nexus 4 is one of the few examples of aggressively priced technology that gives us as consumers a peek into how affordable devices could be.

 

[NOVICE]

I personally have never met anyone who purchased a Rolex because they were concerned about a watch that would last 10 years or longer.

 

[WestOkid]

This is a complete fail. For $300 dollars, I get a watch that I can't get wet and will die everyday unless I connect it to an outlet. It's ridiculous. Coupled with the fact that it isn't smart since it doesn't work alone or do anything you can't do by simply taking your phone out of your pocket. It get's worse... for the privilege of not taking your phone out of your pocket, it will eat away at your phone's battery via the constant Bluetooth communication. Someone please convince me this is more than Samsung trying to launch a half-baked device to beat Apple to market. I hate sounding like an Apple fanboy, but I assure you they will not put out a "smart" watch that isn't waterproof, cannibalizes the cell phone's battery, and requires charging once a day. What was Sammy thinking?

 

[delcopa]

i tend to agree with you. plus a few posts back someone stated to compaire to sony isnt fair due to not able to do calls then whatabout the kreyos watch can wear while swimmimg plus make phone calls hand free.also. plus price 169.00 or maybe the hot.watch i believe can male."private" voice calls from watch and can go swimming. both can do more.for.less
dont know why all the periods but keyboard keeps adding lol

This is a complete fail. For $300 dollars, I get a watch that I can't get wet and will die everyday unless I connect it to an outlet. It's ridiculous. Coupled with the fact that it isn't smart since it doesn't work alone or do anything you can't do by simply taking your phone out of your pocket. It get's worse... for the privilege of not taking your phone out of your pocket, it will eat away at your phone's battery via the constant Bluetooth communication. Someone please convince me this is more than Samsung trying to launch a half-baked device to beat Apple to market. I hate sounding like an Apple fanboy, but I assure you they will not put out a "smart" watch that isn't waterproof, cannibalizes the cell phone's battery, and requires charging once a day. What was Sammy thinking?