Meta Halts Development of Apple Watch Rival with Two Cameras (bloomberg.com) 39
Facebook parent company Meta Platforms has halted development of a smartwatch with dual cameras and is instead working on other devices for the wrist, Bloomberg reported Wednesday, citing a person with knowledge of the matter. From the report: The device, which has been in development for at least two years, was designed to include several features common in other smartwatches, including activity tracking, music playback and messaging. A prototype of the now halted device includes dual-cameras, a key differentiator from market leaders like the Apple Watch. One camera was located below the display and another sat on the backside against the wearer's wrist, according to images and video of a prototype seen by Bloomberg. The second camera was designed so users could remove the watch face from its strap to quickly take pictures. But the presence of the camera caused issues with another feature for translating nerve signals from the wrist into digital commands, the person said. Having that technical ability, known as electromyography, is a top priority for Meta.
Tha'ts just stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
How in the world is unhooking your watch, lining up a shot without a high res screen, then fumbling to put it back on your wrist more convenient than just taking your phone out of you pocket and using that? And you'll get a higher quality as well.
Re: (Score:3)
You may not have your phone with you.
My spouse has an Apple Watch. She wears it when she runs. She doesn't take her phone.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
She rarely takes photos with her watch. But it is still good to have a camera in an emergency such as an accident or witnessing a crime.
Re: (Score:1)
She rarely takes photos with her watch.
Either she owns an Apple watch from an alternate dimension where it includes a camera, or you're trying to redefine the word "rarely".
Re: (Score:2)
How in the world is unhooking your watch, lining up a shot without a high res screen, then fumbling to put it back on your wrist more convenient than just taking your phone out of you pocket and using that?
Convenient for who? Convenient for you or convenient for Meta^WFacebook?
Re: (Score:2)
How in the world is fishing around in your pocket, dragging out a huge, unwieldy phone to take a picture, then fumbling to put it back again more convenient that just unclipping your watch and using that? Especially if you don't have any pockets.
Prejudicial language aside, I imagine it might be quite convenient to use a camera watch with a face that flipped up 90 degrees from the strap, to expose a lens on the underside, while still remaining attached. But that's not how Meta's smartwatch worked, from the d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Who in God's name (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Who in God's name (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple has figured out that smartwatches are fashion accessories, They are Veblen goods [wikipedia.org] used as status symbols.
I don't believe Facebook is going to be successful in this market. You aren't going to impress anyone with a "Facebook Watch".
Re: (Score:3)
It is good FB/Meta killed this project. A watch needs an ecosystem behind it, be it Android's or Apple's, and unless FB's watch was an Android watch, it would have neither.
They haven't killed it, they're, um... "pivoting" it.
Re: (Score:2)
Wristwatches are fashion accessories?! Who'd have thunk it!
Re: (Score:1)
Mine cost $15. It's a way of telling the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You aren't going to impress anyone with a "Facebook Watch".
Nobody is impressed by Apple watches, either. Apple sells an el cheapo aluminum sport edition. I mostly wear mine for utilitarian purposes when going to the theme parks, to keep track of fast pass return times and because it finally works with all of Disney's RFID readers (so you don't have to wear one of those sweaty nasty rubber magic bands).
In fact, if you visit Disney, you see lots of guests wearing Apple watches - even on kids. They're not a status symbol.
Re: (Score:2)
While I guess anything is possible with human behavior....
It's hard for me to imagine that an Apple Watch or phone would act as a status symbol for anyone.
I mean, phones and smart watches, by now for sure, are pretty much just commodities?
If you want a watch that is a status symbol, I would think the classics, like Tag or Rolex, etc....something that actually costs a good bit of
Re: (Score:1)
I think you would impress everyone if managed to take a half decent photo with the back camera.
The hipster with the Snapchat glasses (Score:2)
0.01% of a large audience is still a very large audience for these kind of hipster goodies.
But I'll wait for the watch with 3 cameras and the retina display projector.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
The political left and right may not agree on much, but on this we all agree: Meta cannot be trusted.
The politicians hate social media because it's a wild card. In ye olden days, you'd drop a bunch of campaign cash on newspaper/billboard/radio/TV ads and that influenced voters. Now, you've got viral memes and the peanut gallery has their own soapbox.
The average non-technical person actually likes Facebook, otherwise they wouldn't be using it.
Shake weight (Score:2)
Metà is working on integrating a shake weight into the watch as a fitness tool
Maybe they should do some market research (Score:2)
Wait, I'll do it for them. Lets see: 1) facebook is like 20th to the market 2) Nobody wants a watch with two cameras 3) Nobody wants a meta watch.
Other wrist devices (Score:5, Funny)
Why? (Score:2)
Who is going to remove the expensive dinky dink to take a picture, and risk losing it when people are accustomed to holding their phone to do the same thing?
Also the special release mechanism introduces another point of failure, and one that can cause the dinky dink to become lost long before the wearer even realises what happened.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, this is a spectacularly dumb idea. If I wanted a camera in a watch (I don't) what I would want is for the camera to be on the other side of my wrist, because I wear my watch on the inside of my wrist so I don't smack it on things. So I could look at the screen while I pointed the back of my wrist at stuff (fist clenched ala Ultraman, natch) and take photos. If they managed to keep the electromyography, maybe I could use my middle finger as a shutter release.
I've said it before (Score:2, Interesting)
I'll say it again: Just because you got lucky once doesn't make you smart, intelligent, or even useful.
is instead working on other devices for the wrist (Score:2)
This being Meta, are these devices called "handcuffs"?
What's Meta? (Score:2)
Oh... You mean Facebook.
translating nerve signals from the wrist into digital commands
In other words, Facebook wants to track user's wanking habits now.
Apple Wannabe (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
I think Zuck realises he's a one trick pony and is trying desperately to prove he isn't, maybe he just needs to befriend some more college kids he can steal ideas from.
Wonder if bracer would sell (Score:2)
The talk of "other wrist devices" makes me wonder if people would buy bracers.
Watches are nice and all but the screens can only be so large. Why not just drop the whole watch things and go for a whole bracer? Then you could have a much larger screen, and way more are to put electronics and battery.
Sure the vibe is a little roman warrior but I think people might go for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds interesting.
What's a "bracer"?
Re: (Score:1)
I don't really have a good definition but basically a kind of hard or semi-soft plate that wraps around your wrist and/or forearm, search Google or Amazon and you'll find a lot of possible examples. Or, you can also think of it as the upper part of a gauntlet with no glove.
Do not build products around unproven technology (Score:2)
The story states that the watch was shelved because the camera on the bottom interfered with some kind of myoelectric sensor. That sounds like PR spin. The myoelectric sensor is a novel device with no proven examples of prior commercialization.
What is more likely is that the myoelectric sensor failed to operate reasonably well, and taking off the watch to take a photo was unwieldy, meaning the watches two key features were failures. This probably killed the product before it even started production.