In addition to looking good, successful smart watches should also be able to fulfill their obligations as smart watches.

First of all, what should the screen be? Touch screen, normal LCD screen or cheap electronics ink? Each option has its strengths and weaknesses and affects several key considerations of smart watches such as design, functionality and power consumption. For beginners, does the touch screen of a smart watch make sense? Can you use the watch by clicking on such a small screen without feeling frustrated? A small screen also means it can’t display a lot of information. Apple seems to have tried this with the introduction of touch-enabled iPod nano, many of which have become watches. But the iPod nano is still an iPod. Can it do the smart watch we need? Maybe Apple has learned some interesting ideas about portable teaching from the “experience” of iPod nano?

In other words, compared to pressing the scroll and select buttons, I think the touch screen will greatly increase the ease of use of the watch (this is what happened in the 1990s, isn’t it not? Also, because touch screen smartphones are now everywhere This may be something people are waiting for. However, the increase in usability is offset by an increase in energy consumption. Although it’s good to have touch, it’s great if your watch needs to be recharged every two hours.

When designing a new gadget, it’s always tempting to go beyond the feature addition feature. But as Apple has shown, sometimes it’s more likely to be worse. Does adding a feature or function add value to the clock or delete something? For example, adding a microphone to a smart watch to allow a call from a hands-free clock (good) would mean that the watch would not be as waterproof as a microphone. Similarly, the addition of clips on the back of the watch provides convenience at the expense of thickness. What is the best choice? There will always be promises, everything is a balanced act. High-performance products can choose the features that users want and remove those that only add lint. If no one wants to talk about the end, why add it?

Notifications are an important part of the smart monitoring value proposition. First, they must be reliable and must be sent to the user as needed. If the notice is lost periodically, the user will not trust the watch and will be asked to continue checking his phone to cancel the watch. In addition, notifications must provide information and access. There must be enough information on the surface, not too messy. One problem with Pebble is that it only displays the last notification, which reduces the usability of the device.

Finally, reliability is another important part of this puzzle. Because smart watches contain small computers running an operating system, they can also be blocked or frozen like our computers. For smartphones like the iPhone, connecting your device to your computer and syncing with iTunes usually solves the problem. But because smartwatches can’t do the same thing, that is, by directly connecting to the computer through a hardware connection, they should have the means to restart themselves to restore functionality, or at least get basic functions such as a dial. And run Bluetooth. Imagine if you blocked the watch and couldn’t restart it

One thing I really like about agents is the use of redundancy to reduce the chances of opening a watch. For beginners, it uses two memory firmware libraries as a security device and a secondary processor that can restart the clock in recovery mode. This ensures that even if something doesn’t go well, nothing will be lost.