Latest from IMore in Android-wear

Can you use an Apple Watch with your Android phone?

Joseph Keller — Tue, 22 Sep 2020 15:30:00 +0000

Can you use an Apple Watch with your Android phone?

Best answer: No. While you can use a cellular Apple Watch while using an Android phone, the watch won't pair to the phone, so they won't exchange data. There are some ways around it if you really want to use an Apple Watch (in a limited way) and an Android phone without pairing them, but you'll still need access to an iPhone.

The Apple Watch needs an iPhone to get set up, and won't pair with Android at all

It's the perennial question every time new Apple Watch software of a new watch comes out: can you use the Apple Watch with an Android phone?

There's no getting around it: if you want to activate and set up your Apple Watch, you need an iPhone. You need to use the built-in Watch app on your iPhone to activate your watch, set up things like iCloud and Apple Pay and activate cellular connectivity if you have a watch with LTE.

There's no way to pair an Apple Watch with an Android phone after setup, either. While it is a Bluetooth device, the Apple Watch is made explicitly to work with the iPhone.

But if you're going to insist on taking this route, the best Apple Watch to get for it is probably the new Apple Watch SE 2, as it's the cheapest cellular model you can get brand new.

One workaround requires a cellular Apple Watch, and you'll still need an iPhone

To call this a 'workaround' might seem a bit disingenuous, but it's also technically correct, as this method lets you use your Apple Watch with an Android phone. Or, more accurately, it enables you to use your Apple Watch while using an Android phone. You'll need a cellular Apple Watch, along with access to an iPhone. You'll also want your nano-SIM card for your phone.

What you need to do is pair the Apple Watch with your iPhone, activate cellular capability on the watch, then swap the SIM card from your iPhone to your Android device, as outlined in our guide.

Because the Apple Watch with LTE can function semi-autonomously and has its own cellular line with your carrier, both your Android phone and Apple Watch will receive calls placed to you. You might also see text messages, though this might be less than reliable.

You also won't be able to offload any data, like fitness data, to your Android phone. Again, your phone and watch aren't paired at this point; they're just tied to the same cellular account. And of course, this won't work at all with the iPhone 14 or newer phones purchased in the US, since they only have eSIMs anyway.

From watchOS 7 on, another workaround appears

If you live with someone or are at least close with someone who uses an iPhone, it may be more possible than ever to use an Apple Watch with an Android phone. You still can't pair the two together, but thanks to watchOS 7 and Family Setup, you can now set up an Apple Watch on a friend or family member's iPhone, rather than having to have one of your own. You can then use the watch independently, though some features will be missing. Still, which ones are missing can depend on the Family Setup settings.

You might also need to trust your friend or family member not to look at your Apple Watch activity, so you at least have some sense of privacy. Family Setup is really intended for parents to keep track of their children (by giving the child an Apple Watch controlled by the parent.)

So, while Family Setup makes independent Apple Watch use more possible than ever, it's not a solution for people looking for true blue watch independence.

Hope for the future

Despite the fact that you still can't properly use an Apple Watch with an Android device, I still think there's reason to hope. While I don't think Apple will ever let you pair the watch with an Android phone or make a version of its Watch app for Android, I think true independence is nearly here.

Between features like Family Setup or the introduction of the App Store on watchOS 6, we're seeing the Apple Watch become increasingly independent from the iPhone. It's not hard to imagine a day when an Apple Watch can be activated on its own, or at least without the aid of an iPhone.

It might be that, one day soon, the answer to the question, "Can you use an Apple Watch with Android," will be closer to "Yes" than "No."

The budget cellular option

Apple Watch SE GPS + Cellular

If you absolutely must.

There's no reason to get an Apple Watch if you have an Android phone, but if you insist on doing so anyway, get the Apple Watch SE. It's the closest to a "budget" cellular model that you can buy new anymore.

Current model

Apple Watch Series 8

If you absolutely must, but more expensive

If you decide that you really want an Apple Watch to use with your Android phone, the Apple Watch Series 8 is a pricier option

TicWatch Pro vs Apple Watch: Features or polish, because I can't have both

Russell Holly — Fri, 20 Jul 2018 19:15:02 +0000

I've been an active Apple Watch user for 260 days. Not a lot compared to some of the Watch veterans here at iMore, but enough for me to know a fair bit about the strengths and weaknesses of the platform throughout my daily use. I'm largely a fan of the way Apple does things on the Watch, but like most smartwatch owners I find myself never truly happy with display performance in daylight or the battery after a day of constant use. Neither are easy problems to solve, and the watches offering solutions to date have compromised in other areas which make them downright unpleasant to wear in my opinion.

The folks at Mobvoi got my attention recently with its TicWatch Pro, a watch running Google's Wear OS promising between five and thirty days of battery life in certain modes and and a special display which works perfectly even in direct sunlight. After a week of using this new watch, I find myself ready to call TicWatch Pro the best Wear OS watch I have ever used. But compared directly to my Apple Watch, the title of best overall is less easily won.

So much more than round vs square

Any time you compare anything to the Apple Watch, the initial wave of reactions are the same. People on Twitter, in droves, respond to photos of the two watches side by side with a comment about how round displays actually look like watches and are therefore better. I think it's clear by Apple's sales record with the Watch so far that not as many people care about round vs square as these folks might think, but it remains a talking point int he general public. Personally, the physical shape of either watch doesn't impact me one way or the other. I've never really worn traditional watches, and I don't wear a TicWatch Pro or an Apple Watch to tell me the time. These are tiny computers I wear on my wrist to give me a deeper look into my digital self. From acting as a trusty notification dumpster to giving me fitness information, and everything in between. I don't need these things to look like watches, so I don't really care about the shape.

Apple's third generation Watch display is impressive, but the TicWatch Pro display is on an entirely different level functionally.

What I will say is, because the TicWatch Pro is round, it feels noticeably larger on my wrist than the Apple Watch. TicWatch Pro isn't appreciably thicker or taller, but the design feels roughly the same as it does when I'm wearing a leather cuff watch band on my Apple Watch. Since I wear a cuff-style band frequently, the size of the TicWatch Pro doesn't feel particularly big. But on those with smaller wrists, or those who prefer the smaller of the two Apple Watches, the difference will be significant.

TicWatch Pro and Apple Watch both have a pair of buttons for use on the side, but only Apple's watch has a rotating crown. I admit I almost never use the rotating crown on my Apple Watch, but those who take advantage of not needing to rub your finger on the display are going to notice it missing on the TicWatch. The secondary button on the TicWatch Pro is entirely programmable though, which I really enjoyed. I like having a shortcut to Strava on my watch, and the physical button is more convenient for me than adding a Complication to one of the Apple Watch faces.

The main event in comparing these two watches is the display. Apple's third generation Watch display is impressive, but the TicWatch Pro display is on an entirely different level functionally. It's called a "dual layer" display, with one layer being a fairly standard-looking round AMOLED display. That second layer is using Film compensated Super Twisted Nematic (FSTN) LCD tech, and it exists specifically to deliver high contract black and white displays at much wider viewing angles than anything else. And wow does it work well. This secondary display is on when the AMOLED display is off, which means when I'm on my bike I can glance down and my wrist and there's actually information I care about there. I don't have to lift my arm from the handlebars, or from my keyboard while typing, to gain access to the information I want.

When I do lift my wrist to see the full color display, the time it takes for the watch to transition from FSTN LCD to AMOLED is about the same wait time it takes for the Apple Watch to wake up when I life my wrist. Which is to say it's not as fast as I would prefer but it get the job done. There's never a time when the display is unresponsive, and if my wrist is still I can push a button in the bezel or touch the display to wake it as well, but there's never a time when some amount of information is being displayed on this watch and I'm a fan of that.

The other thing of note regarding the hardware is the method of charging. Both of these watches require you to use a fairly proprietary dock to charge the watch, but by nature of its popularity the Apple Watch charger is significantly easier to replace when you need to. The charger for the TicWatch Pro is also a pin-based charger instead of the smooth magnetic-seal wireless charger Apple is using. I personally prefer Apple's charger in general, but the use of pins instead of a fully wireless set up on the TicWatch is a real shame. Other Wear OS watches with wireless charging have been found to work with a host of third-party chargers, and it would have been nice to see this watch do the same.

Apps, watch faces, gestures, and everything in between

These little wrist computers need to earn that spot on my wrist, and for me that means delivering information when I want it and leaving me alone the rest of the time. While watchOS and Wear OS both have great notification controls to keep apps from pestering me when I'm busy, and Theater or Do Not Disturb modes when I really don't want to feel that vibration at my wrist, delivering information is another thing entirely.

Apple doesn't allow third-party developers to build faces for watchOS. The options you get from Apple are what you have available to you, and nearly all of them can be adjusted by adding Complications with additional information or links to apps you want shortcuts to. This is fine, but it means I'm only ever going to use the Activity Rings face on my Apple Watch. That is the information I care about the most, and this face is the only way to show that information with the detail I like. Wear OS takes a different approach, letting just about anyone make a face for these watches. It means I have access to my body tracking data in many different formats, with a ton of visual flourish. I like having access to so many options, though very few of these third-party faces have any customization options at all which is just limiting in a different way.

Apple's biggest strength against Google right now with its Watch platform is popularity.

Both Wear OS and watchOS do a great job delivering me notification I can interact with, but only Wear OS makes that interactivity possible with just my wrist. Gesture controls in Wear OS remain one of the biggest strong points the platform has, especially when I'm on my bike. Being able to dismiss a notification with a flick of my wrist, or scroll further into a text message with a simple wrist twist, is tremendously convenient. It means I don't have to slow down, and don't have to take my other hand away from its task. This is something Apple really should implement sooner rather than later, especially as the watchOS platform continues to offer features for fitness-focused folks, because it makes a huge difference in how convenient a lot of features actually are.

Apple's biggest strength against Google right now with its Watch platform is popularity. Developers know watchOS is where the people are, and that's where the energy for optimizing third-party apps goes. Strava on Wear OS is a prime example. The watchOS counterpart displays an order of magnitude more useful information about my ride while I'm moving, and is generally more stable for things like auto-pausing. The Wear OS app straight up isn't very good, which is a shame. Wear OS apps in general are at least a generation behind watchOS when it comes to things like optimizations for information density and battery performance.

On the subject of battery performance, a few notes about that exciting "5-30 day" experience on the TicWatch Pro. Mobvoi includes these numbers on the box with a caveat, it only really applies to when the watch is in one of two low power modes. These special modes turn off the color display and leave you with the always-on LCD, effectively blocking you access to most of the things which make the watch useful. While it is amazing that I can flip the watch into these low power modes and know it will still function for much longer than a day or two, the battery drain when you're actually using the watch is almost identical to the Apple Watch. I get a little over two full days out of it if I'm not using it for much, but 4-5 hours on my bike with Strava running will cut the battery down to 50% with no problem.

Finally, virtual assistants. To be perfectly honest, the less said about Siri on the Watch the better. I know things are going to be much better in the next generation of watchOS, but Google Assistant is more capable in every possible way on the TicWatch Pro. That's another one of those things that can be a big deal when you don't want to reach for your phone because you're driving and want that hands-free experience. I will say that, in comparing the two side by side, the microphones on the Apple Watch did a noticeably better job translating my speech to text when outdoors.

Which should you buy? It depends

Apple Watch is almost always the best experience for people who live entirely in the Apple ecosystem. It meshes better with its software, and the level of polish in the overall Apple experience can't be discounted. But if you lean into the Google ecosystem from your iPhone, and a MacBook isn't your primary computer, and you're not especially slender in the wrist, the TicWatch Pro is the first general non-Apple watch I've been genuinely happy using with my iPhone. The layered display tech is exceptional, the size is just right for my needs, and while the apps aren't all as functional as I'd like there's a lot to love about the Wear OS ecosystem.

If you're not totally sold on an Apple Watch and want something a little different, I don't think there's a better place to spend your $250.

See at Amazon

"Hey Russell, what Apple Watch strap is that?" - Check out the $16 Nickwea Apple Watch cuff on Amazon!

Google's Android Wear is changing its name to Wear OS

Tory Foulk — Thu, 15 Mar 2018 17:07:52 +0000

Yep, you read that right: Android Wear is dead. Or the name is, anyway. Dennis Troper, Director of Product Management for what is now Wear OS, announced the change in a blog post this morning, stating that the new name "better reflects our technology, vision, and most important of all—the people who wear our watches." Google has even transformed the Android Wear section of its website to reflect the rebranding, complete with a new logo and slogan: "Make every minute matter."

This rebranding does make sense, as Google's wearables are not only compatible with Android devices, but with Apple products as well. In fact, according to the release, one out of every three new Android Wear watch owners in 2017 also used an iPhone. Though Apple devotees may not receive the same amount of features as Android users do while using Wear OS, Google is committed to assuring possible customers that Wear OS is for everyone — especially with Baselworld 2018, the world's biggest watch and jewelry showcase, on the horizon.

Of course, some individuals were quick to point out that Wear OS sounds strikingly similar to its competitor, Apple's watchOS:

https://twitter.com/iRayanKhan/status/974327037203746817

Wear OS is a little too close to WatchOS. Not sure what the point is in the rebrand #androidwearWear OS is a little too close to WatchOS. Not sure what the point is in the rebrand #androidwear— Adam Bennett (@iateyourmic) March 15, 2018 March 15, 2018

watchOS and Wear OS.
Watch and wear? https://t.co/xiiT0kccX5watchOS and Wear OS.
Watch and wear? https://t.co/xiiT0kccX5— AndreTelevise (@AndreTelevise) March 15, 2018 March 15, 2018

However, many are also praising the more inclusive name (while speculating that Google is attempting to distance itself from Android branding altogether).

According to Troper's post, current Wear OS users will begin seeing the new moniker roll out in their watch and app over the next few weeks.

Thoughts?

How do you feel about Android Wear's new name? Share in the comments!

Apple Watch vs. Android Wear: Why most all smartwatches suck for small wrists

Serenity Caldwell — Tue, 17 Oct 2017 15:10:00 +0000

As anyone who reads iMore or my Twitter feed knows, I like my 38mm Apple Watch a lot. It fits well into my day-to-day activities, it helps keep me fit, and, oh hey — it fits my wrist.

And unfortunately, this is not something I can say for any other smartwatch out on the market today.

It's been more than three years since Apple announced the 38mm Apple Watch, and the device has been shipping for more than two. So what gives? Why aren't the engineers behind Android Wear — which arguably has a lot going for it on its software side — building smaller watches?

To this, I say: Manufacturers still have a lot to learn about the smartwatch market.

You're wearing it wrong

If wearable technology is the next big thing for our tech-connected society, why is Apple the only company paying attention to the smaller-wristed set? Lady or dude, there are quite a few people on this earth whose arms don't resemble the trunk of a Sequoia tree — many of whom would be excited to use a smartwatch.

And for that reason, I love that Apple supports multiple sizes for the Apple Watch. Smartwatches are one of the more personal technology purchases available out there today, and the company is committed to making them accessible to people young, old, large, or small. Engineering LTE inside a 38mm Series 3 was no small feat; Apple could have limited it to the 42mm set, but it chose to attack the problem and make it accessible to all.

I can't say the same for the rest of the smartwatch market. I've been looking avidly across the Android Wear (and Android Wear-adjacent, like Fitbit) lines since 2015 for alternative smartwatch options, but have struck out every time.

It's not that I dislike my Apple Watch — it'd probably be my favorite smartwatch even if I were limited to a 42mm size. But I want to like Android Wear. Competition is good, and Android Wear does some smart things with notifications that I'd love to see over on the Apple side. Its hardware (mostly) isn't terribly-designed, either: On the contrary, for those with applicably-sized wrists, the watches look quite natural.

Today, however, I can't even consider or recommend an Android Wear watch — because I have yet to find one that fits on my wrist without making it look like the technology equivalent of an iron shackle.

Don't look now, but a Gear S3 is trying to eat my wrist.

On my wrists, I find Android Wear watches too large for comfort, let alone style. My wrists are small, but they're not waiflike — I have about a 57mm height in which to wear a watch. But everything aside from the 38mm Apple Watch feels more like a pair of handcuffs than a comfortable timepiece.

Even the 42mm Apple Watch feels too large on my wrist. I could wear it, but as I said in my initial thoughts on Watch sizing back in 2015, it's the difference between wearing something comfortable and wearing something simply to have access to technology. I've carried a variety of bulky tech devices over my years in this field, but having something on your arm is different: It's personal, and if it doesn't blend into your daily activities, you're going to notice it constantly.

And to those who might argue about how big "boyfriend" watches are in fashion, here's the thing: To wear a watch this way, you need to have it loose around your wrist like a bangle; you can't do this with smartwatches unless you're willing to ditch reliable health tracking (most of the reason I wear a watch in the first place).

After chatting with my pals at Android Central, I made a list off the top 15 smartwatches out on the market right now, and compared their respective casing sizes and weights. There are many more Android Wear options and along with other watch manufacturers beyond this list, which I've looked at as well, but these are the ones from major manufacturers that are still being sold (RIP, Pebble) or have notable size differences. (Fossil and other watchmakers are starting to do some interesting things with Android Wear watches, but their smartwatch lines remain as large or larger than major manufacturers, so they didn't make the cut.)

The results are as unsurprising as they are depressing:

Category	Style	Height (Length)	Width	Depth	Weight
Apple Watch Series 1 (38mm)	Rect	38.6mm	33.3mm	10.5mm	25g
Apple Watch Series 3 (38mm)	Rect	38.6mm	33.3mm	11.4mm	26.7g (28.7g w/LTE)
Apple Watch Series 1 (42mm)	Rect	42.5mm	36.4mm	10.5mm	30g
Apple Watch Series 3 (42mm)	Rect	42.5mm	36.4mm	11.4mm	32.3g (34.9g w/LTE)
Fitbit Ionic	Rect	44.45mm	38.1mm	12.2 mm	30g
Gear S2	Round	39.9mm	43.6mm	11.4mm	30g
LG Watch Style	Round	42.3mm	45.7mm	10.8mm	46g
Gear S2 Classic	Round	42.3mm	49.8mm	11.4mm	30g
Gear Sport	Round	42.9mm	44.6mm	11.6mm	50g
Asus ZenWatch 3	Round	45mm	45mm	10.8mm	48g
LG Watch Sport	Round	45.4mm	51.2mm	14.2mm	89.3g
Gear S3 Classic	Round	46mm	49mm	12.9mm	59g
Gear S3 Frontier	Round	46mm	49mm	12.9mm	63g
Huawei Watch 2	Round	48.9mm	45mm	12.6mm	40g
Huawei Watch 2 Classic	Round	48.9mm	45mm	12.6mm	47g

Lightest/smallest in bold, heaviest/largest in italics.

The Series 1 38mm Apple Watch is currently the smallest, lightest, and thinnest smartwatch on the market. The only watch that comes close to beating those numbers? Its slightly heavier and thicker Series 3 sibling.

Theoretically, the next smallest watch out there is the Fitbit Ionic — but I say theoretically because the Ionic's measurements are obscured and confusing. They're not available on the main Ionic page at all, and the one place you can find them (the Ionic's purchase page) has incredibly misleading metrics.

Most smartwatches list the screen size of their case, along with its height, width, depth, and weight without a band attached. The Ionic avoids mentioning its weight, height, or depth — instead, it lists a questionable width (contradicted by a Fitbit moderator on the company's forums), along with… the height of the display only. It also lists a secondary width of the screen as being 35.99mm diagonal, but that's literally the glass front, not the display — the display is only 29.2mm-by-21mm.

If you're confused, well… so was I. Fitbit has no reason to obfuscate its watch measurements and weights — until you take into consideration that, based on those measurements alone, Fitbit's watch appears to be smaller than the 38mm Apple Watch. (It is not: A head-to-head at Wearable clearly shows the differences in casing sizes — and that's when compared to a 42mm Apple Watch, not a 38mm.)

I also took to Twitter to ask about the Ionic's size, where ZDNet's Matthew Miller was kind enough to supply me with ruler-based measurements.

https://twitter.com/palmsolo/status/918180327578673152 https://twitter.com/palmsolo/status/918181515627962368

iMore editor Daniel Bader, who also has an Ionic, used a curved tape measurer to properly grab the measurements of the convex screen and came away with measurements of 44.45mm height, 38.1mm width — similar in size to the 42mm Apple Watch.

After the Ionic, the aging Gear S2 is the next-smallest option — but as a result of its round face, the Gear S2 is a full 10mm wider on the wrist than the 38mm Apple Watch; wearing it feels more like trying to style a black hockey puck than a smartwatch.

Marketing and technical challenges

When I first ran into this back in 2015, I figured the problem to be more of a marketing challenge than a technical one: Targeting the consumers most likely to buy early-adoption gadgets (men with larger-than-average-sized wrists) over the general consumer market.

But as the years progressed, Apple found massive success attracting women to its watches, while other watchmakers… released similar sizes in rose gold. The 2017 LG Watch Style was arguably designed to appeal directly to women, but even then, LG couldn't get the case smaller than 42mm-by-45.7mm — a massive difference from the Apple Watch's 38mm-by-33.3mm. And it apparently didn't work: The $250 smartwatch has seen massive discounts since its launch (including a crazy drop to $108 in August of 2017, just six months after its release).

Part of that struggle is in the round face design (and it's why I suspect Apple has yet to publicly offer that option). Round faces, by their nature, will be slightly wider than a rectangular casing. But many analog circular watches for women are closer to the size of a fitness tracker than a smartwatch — in order to make a display that was easily tappable and readable, manufacturers had to supersize the watch body into something that fit the software design.

There are "connected" Android watches that manage to be reasonably-sized and round: Fossil's Q Neely and Q Jacqueline come in at just 36mm in diameter, smaller than all the smartwatches I listed above. But they come with a major caveat: They're not true smartwatches. They're analog watches that have a few smarts built in — step counting, sleep tracking, notification haptics, and some button triggers to work with your phone — and that might be enough for some Android users. Without heart tracking, a screen, and apps, however, I can't in good conscience call them smartwatches.

There's also hardware internals to consider: Apple's technology is impressive, and what they've crammed into a 38mm device is nothing short of a feat. It's the advantage they get from designing the whole widget. Heart rate sensors, 18 hour battery life, the taptic engine, LTE, GPS, the S3 chip — there's a lot going on under that hood.

That said, some of the consistent critiques against Apple's smartwatches are a lack of always-on display and multi-day battery life — features that the company can't add right now if it wants to keep the case size compact.

In contrast, most of the Android Wear options I mentioned incorporate both of these oft-requested features — but it's at the expense of their case size. Ultimately, these companies are betting that more users will prefer lengthy battery life or the option of an always-on display to a watch that fits their wrist properly.

In 2015, that was a bet these companies could make: The smartwatch industry was nascent and largely limited to the tech-obsessed. But their time is running out. Apple may not be releasing its watch sales numbers, but the company is more than happy to boast about its current spot as the top watchmaker in the world — and yes, that includes traditional watches, too.

Whether other smartwatch manufacturers want to acknowledge it or not, size matters. This is anecdotal, but most every Apple Watch I see in the wild around Boston or Montréal isn't on the wrist of a technology-savvy friend — it's on young mothers, baristas, joggers, and students. Smartwatches are moving into the mainstream.

And unless Android Wear wants to get left behind, it needs to figure out how to build smaller watches — and fast.

**Updated October 17 to highlight Fossil's connected watch line — and why they aren't real smartwatches.

Google takes on the Apple Watch with Android Wear 2.0 and two new LG watches

Daniel Bader — Wed, 08 Feb 2017 17:15:05 +0000

Google's Android Wear 2.0 update has been revealed after months of Developer Previews for select watches. Coupled with this update is a pair of watches made by LG — with Google's guidance — the LG Watch Sport and the LG Watch Style. There's a lot to unpack about all three, but the first thing Apple Watch fans will notice is a new control mechanism for Android Wear.

Andrew Martonik, in his LG Watch Sport Review:

Perhaps my favorite part about the Android Wear 2.0 update is its new emphasis on "rotational input." The new interaction method lets companies create smartwatches that can use other forms of input than just the touch screen, like LG did with a rotating crown on the Watch Sport and Watch Style. Rotational input isn't simply translating spinning hardware into touch, either — it's a whole new form of interaction that developers have to specifically target and choose what to do. For example it's used for scrolling throughout the interface, but zooming on Google Maps — developers can run with it.

Google's adoption of a scrolling-friendly UI isn't merely a Digital Crown clone, though: there's a specific focus on hardware manufacturers being able to implement a rotating bezel like the Samsung Gear S3 if desired.

LG's larger watch includes NFC for Android Pay, a first for Android Wear watches, as well as a cellular radio for LTE support. The cost for these features is a significantly larger body and the inability to replace the watch band, since the radio antennae are woven into the band to ensure quality cellular service.

Finally recognizing that not everyone wants a large watch, the LG Watch Style offers something much slimmer and more stylish. But it's not without compromise, as Florence Ion points out in her review:

You won't get the new fitness tracking abilities of Android Wear 2.0 on the Watch Style, and that's primarily because of hardware limitations. Unlike the Watch Sport, the Style doesn't have a heart-rate monitor, a barometer, or standalone GPS. It doesn't have NFC, either, which is the real tragedy here, considering how close to perfect the Watch Style would be if I could just pay for stuff with it.

This decision to offer form and function as separate products is an interesting decision, but the reason for this is reflected in the OS itself. Google's complete UX overhaul in Android Wear 2.0 is a focus on almost modular personalization. A new Complications API — yes, that's really what they called it — and apps that can now be installed and run entirely separate of the phone make an argument for many kinds of users.

It's possible to own a watch that is simply a notification bucket on your wrist, but it's also possible to replace your phone entirely for extended periods of time. As Russell Holly points out in his Android Wear 2.0 OS review, this strategy has a lot to do with how Google sees interacting with iPhone owners moving forward:

This is how Google creates the same Android Wear experience regardless of the phone platform you're using. If the app is on the Play Store, and the Play Store is on the wrist, it won't matter that you have an iPhone connected.

Several hardware manufacturers have come forward with plans to release new hardware with Android Wear 2.0 onboard, but it remains to be seen how many of these new features are going to be considered useful. If nothing else, this update confirms a lot of decisions Apple made early on with watchOS.

How to use the Galaxy Gear S2 (or other Android watch) with an iPhone

Daniel Bader — Mon, 20 Jun 2016 16:00:09 +0000

Android Wear has been around for just over two years, and it is slowly gaining traction among watch enthusiasts. As early functional designs from LG and Samsung have given way to stylish and mainstream products from Motorola, Huawei and even Fossil and Tag Heuer, Android Wear provides an assortment of great styles at prices often half that of an Apple Watch.

And while the Apple Watch may be the premiere smart wearable for the iPhone, many others, including Android Wear smartwatches, are compatible as well. While the experience isn't always as comprehensive as the Apple Watch, Google has ensured that Android Wear devices maintain quite a bit of functionality — including access to notifications, watch faces and, perhaps more importantly, Google Now.

What is Android Wear, exactly?

Like the Apple Watch, the Pebble Time, and many other so-called smartwatches, Android Wear is a platform based on Android itself, but pared down to be used on a wrist-based wearable.

Unlike watchOS, it uses card-based user interface to navigate vertically through stacks of notifications, some from apps, others from services like Google Now, which attempts to predict what you want to know when you need to know it.

Is Android Wear going to be as good on my iPhone as on an Android phone?

Not exactly, but close. Google isn't privy to the same low-level system access on the iPhone as it has on Android, so it's not possible to take actions directly from notifications when paired with an iPhone as you would on, say, a Galaxy S7. There are also fewer apps available, since Google must distribute them directly from inside the Android Wear app, rather than through the much more versatile Google Play Store.

But there are great things, too.

Will my Android Wear smartwatch work with my iPhone?

Before you get started, you need to figure out whether your watch is compatible with your iPhone.

Google says that your iPhone must be on a minimum version of iOS 8.2 or above, which is pretty well over 90% of iPhones at this point. And while Google officially supports the following Android Wear products, we've confirmed that many others are compatible, too.

How to connect your Android Wear device to an iPhone

On your iPhone, Download the Android Wear app.
Turn on your Android Wear watch and ensure it is reset to factory settings.
On your iPhone, open the Android Wear app and proceed through the instructions, until you reach the Connect to your watch screen.
On your Android Wear watch, choose your language.

Proceed through the instructions until the Android Wear model shows up on your iPhone.
On your iPhone, tap the model number and accept Bluetooth Pairing Request on phone. Ensure the pairing code matches the one on your watch.
Once paired, sign into your Google account (if you aren't already).

Turn on watch notifications.
Turn on location.
Enable calendar access if desired.

What now?

When the pairing and syncing procedure is complete, you can feel free to customize your Android Wear watch from the iPhone app. This includes changing watch faces, or learning about the wearable's functionality.

As when paired to an Android phone, users can interact with Google Now on the watch because the Android Wear app for iPhone remains open in the background (in a low-power state) to route any voice requests.

What can you do with an Android Wear device paired with an iPhone?

Lots of stuff, especially when connected to Google Now.

In addition to receiving all of your iPhone's notifications, when connected to Google Now your Android Wear device can sync your preferences and information, such as favorite places, sports teams, stocks, and media. The service also provides Google Now cards for any birthdays, flights, hotel reservations, movie releases, public alerts, restaurant reservations, public transit times, road traffic, and weather, if you have chosen to sync them.

That can lead to a lot of notifications — perhaps more than you want on your wrist. Unfortunately, due to system limitations, to disable an app notification on your watch you must disable it on your iPhone. That's the one major downside to using Android Wear (or Pebble, or any smartwatch platform that isn't Apple Watch) on Apple's mobile platform.

Other things that are great: you can use the existing navigation gestures to navigate between cards on your Apple Watch. Twisting your wrist forward or back, or lifting and lowering your arm, can navigate between cards or enter and exit them, respectively. These gestures take some getting used to, but there is a tutorial available in the watch's settings.

So, is it worth it?

Absolutely! I love pairing my Moto 360 (2nd gen) to my iPhone 6s Plus, because I love the look, and I really enjoy receiving relevant Google Now cards. While Android Wear doesn't have the same amount of functionality — the lack of apps is frustrating — as the Apple Watch, there are some distinct advantages.

First is price: You can pick up a Moto 360 (2nd gen), Asus ZenWatch 2, or LG Watch Urbane for under $150 if you know where to look. And because I'm a fan of round watches, I often find the understated aesthetic of the Moto 360 preferable to the Apple Watch depending on the day and what I'm wearing with it.

The second is Google Now: If you're invested in the Google platform, you've likely already enabled and configured Google Now to your tastes on either Android or the excellent Google app on iOS. Either way, having an existing relationship with Google Now sends just the right alerts to your wrist at just the right time. It's like magic.

The third is choice: If you decide to leave iOS for Androidy-green pastures, you can take your Android Wear watch with you. You'll likely never be able to pair an Apple Watch to your Galaxy or Nexus, and that's the way Apple likes it.

Did we miss anything? Anything else you want to know? What's your experience been like connecting your Android Wear device to your iPhone? Let us know in the comments!

Android Wear's latest missteps reinforce Apple Watch strengths

Daniel Bader — Thu, 19 May 2016 22:12:03 +0000

There is no question of the value of text input on a smartphone. As popular as Siri and other voice assistants have become over the past few years, pecking out an email or text message using an on-screen keyboard, with autocomplete and prediction, mimics physical keyboards in the best possible ways.

In the wearable space, the opposite is true. Screens are typically too small, and too oddly-shaped, to facilitate on-screen keyboards, which leaves dictation as the likely ideal way to send someone a message longer than a few words. The Apple Watch, in particular, utilizes Siri for a variety of purposes, from dictating text messages and email replies to asking about the weather.

This week at Google's developer conference, a new version of Android Wear tacitly posited that voice isn't ideal in every situation, adding three new ways to input text on a tiny, often circular, smartwatch screen. The first, Smart Replies, is already used by the Apple Watch in many situations, though Google's implementation varies the potential responses based not just on the text on screen, but data from the Google account connected to the watch itself.

Android Wear started out relatively focused, and has since expanded to mimic the functions of a smartphone.

The second, letter recognition, gives Android Wearers nearly the whole screen to trace out individual letters that are then converted into words and sentences, harkening back to the early days of stylus-based PDAs. Except instead of the precise point of a stylus, users must use the relatively fat stub of a forefinger.

The third, and most vexing, of new input methods is a full-size keyboard — or, as full-sized as one can get on a tiny 1.4-inch smartwatch display. We've seen such examples on many Samsung smartwatches, usually met in equal parts with derision and confusion. In the case of Google's implementation, Android Wear 2.0 will support trace typing, which is generally more forgiving than tapping on such small touch targets.

The bigger question is why. Android Wear started out relatively focused, and has since expanded to mimic the functions of a smartphone: native apps, then most recently, standalone apps with cellular support. Some Android-based watches can even make phone calls with a combination of microphones and a speaker, or the use of a Bluetooth headset.

In this way, Android Wear is straying from the promise of the Apple Watch, which despite criticism of being too reliant on the iPhone, was designed as a companion. Such tension has been meted out in think pieces on both sides of the argument over the past two years, with some companies like Neptune purporting to replace the smartphone entirely by bundling a watch with everything one needs to stay connected, including a large display, plenty of memory, a fast processor and, of course, a cellular radio.

In that case, little consideration was made to aesthetics — who wants a small smartphone strapped to his or her wrist — or battery life, which promises to be measured in minutes, not hours.

Moreover, the Apple Watch, despite its meandering and flawed user workflow, continues to build in popularity largely on the strength of its companion promise: Most owners we've spoken to prefer it over competing platforms not for its native apps but its ability to convey notifications in thoughtful ways.

The Apple Watch is not perfect, but it's also a fully-formed thought

While it's not even worth imagining an Apple Watch with an on-screen keyboard for text input — even the 42mm model has a screen considerably smaller than most Android Wear devices — it is important to identify the reasons Apple would never consider adding such a feature, and why Google, two years after the platform's debut, relented to that same tension.

The Apple Watch is not perfect, but it's also a fully-formed thought. With the latest version of Android Wear, it's increasingly clear that the platform is little more than a list of individual features crammed together, benefiting no one but the teams responsible for implementing them.

Apple Watch

○ Apple Watch Series 6 FAQ
○ Apple Watch SE FAQ
○ Apple Watch Series 6/SE Hands-on
○ watchOS 7 review
○ watchOS 7 FAQ
○ Apple Watch Series 6 deals
○ Apple Watch SE deals
○ Apple Watch users guide
○ Apple Watch news
○ Apple Watch discussion

Android Wear for iPhone and ... Apple Watch for Android?

Michael Gartenberg — Wed, 27 Jan 2016 17:00:09 +0000

For this experiment, I decided to try Huawei's watch: The reviews were solid, and I liked the overall look.

I went with stainless steel and a black leather band; it's a bit large, but just under the threshold of what I'd consider too big. The software is Android Wear and, unlike Android on phones, Google isn't allowing any skinning or weird forks for the platform — there can be only one!

The key differences among Android Wear devices, then, comes down to hardware — sensors, the display, the casing, and such — and any custom watch faces a vendor might pre-install.

Okay, now Google ...

Setup and installation are both pretty simple: Just install the Android Wear app for iOS, pair the watch, give it a minute, and you're up and running.

Android Wear has a little walkthrough to teach users how to tap and swipe your way through the watch. Features are pretty basic when connected to an iOS device, consisting mostly of notifications, although Gmail does support replying directly via voice from Android Wear. Alarms, timers, weather, basic fitness tracking, and the like are all available. There's also a nice option for an always-on ambient display that works quite well and doesn't take a huge toll on battery life. (It's definitely a feature I'd like to see on a future Apple Watch.)

Unlike Android Wear connected to an Android phone, however, there's no real app ecosystem for iOS — and a very limited selection of watch faces available. (The watch faces included are indeed skeuomorphism gone wild, but in a good way.)

Hello, analog watch — meet digital world

Going a full day was no problem for me, even with the ambient display on and keeping brightness at level 3. I was still at 40 percent battery before I retired for the evening. Only a few asked if it was a new secret Apple Watch; most were fascinated by the simulated watch displays.

Notifications worked well. I had no problem getting used to Google Now (as opposed to Siri) for command and control, and for receiving information from multiple sources.

Overall, I liked the experience and would recommend it. It's very different from the Apple Watch in how it presents information and, of course, in the lack of an app ecosystem on iOS — as you might expect, it has great developer support for Android apps on Android phones. It's a solid offering and a good one for those who also need to live in an Android world.

Android Wear watches live at all price points, from $129 up to $1,500 for the TAG Heuer Connected. I can't speak to differences among all the offerings, but at $349, the Huawei looks to be at the sweet spot for price and quality.

One more thought

Using Android Wear with an iPhone raises an interesting question in my mind: Should Apple create some form of Apple Watch compatibility for Android users?

Apple resisted bringing iPod support to Windows for a long time, but there's little doubt in my mind that iTunes for Windows helped make iPod a success. iPhones (and iPads) still sell to many more Windows users than Mac users. Is Apple Watch a differentiator for iOS users... or could it be the next Trojan horse to bring a new generation of switchers on to the Apple platform?

If you could advise Apple, what would you tell them?

Apple's HealthKit won't track fitness data from Android Wear

Dan Thorp-Lancaster — Tue, 01 Sep 2015 22:29:53 +0000

Google's Android Wear won't share fitness data with Apple's HealthKit platform, company spokespeople confirmed today. Instead, fitness data, such as step count and hear rate, will only be tracked through the Google Fit dashboard, rather than Apple's health dashboard. From Buzzfeed News:

An Apple spokeswoman confirmed to BuzzFeed News that Android Wear won't integrate with HealthKit, Apple's platform for developers of health and fitness apps. She also said that decision was entirely Google's.Google also confirmed that Android Wear–gathered fitness data would bypass HealthKit. "That said, Android Wear on iOS absolutely supports the mass majority of Wear features we see our Android users using and loving," a company spokeswoman said in an email.

While this news doesn't come as much of a surprise, it does point to a problem for those who would prefer to keep their fitness data within the confines of Apple's ecosystem. However, Google also isn't alone in this decision, as Fitbit has foregone sharing fitness data with Apple's HealthKit as well.

Android Wear made its debut on iOS yesterday, opening up the wide array of smartwatches based on the platform to iPhone users for the first time. However, it remains to be seen whether this will help Google gain any ground with its wearable platform.

Source: Buzzfeed News