Liking that! Pros and cons? I'm pretty damned rough on my gear, why I almost exclusively wear Casio. Water is a serious concern for me.

USB C does not require all applications use all aspects available in the current spec (USB 3), that’s just silly. Take the latest iPhone for example (not the pro series,) they are all essentially running USB 2 through a USB C cable. And that’s perfectly fine.

The real problem is when a company uses USB C but follows none of the wiring or standards requirements for any standard. Such as running power over data pins making the charger some proprietary Frankenstein of bullshit.

That gives me no information. What's the battery size? I've had multiple smartwatches and all their batteries could last a week or a day depending on usage, setup and features.

The point is USB C is noticeably larger than pogo pins for the sake of including a whole bunch of additional pins a smartwatch has zero use for. Larger means less room for other stuff. The ideal state for a smartwatch is having an always-on display and heart rate monitoring, among other things. All watches out there, even the most efficient ones, could use more battery and efficiency than they have. Because all smartwatches are coming up short from their desired usage and are working around their limited battery life.

The idea of making that worse for the sake of having a clearly unfit for purpose connector as opposed to standardizing a connector that actually does the job is really weird. There is no need to have a different charger on every watch, but there certainly isn't a need to sacrifice any functionality or performance at all for the sake of USB C. And not all watches are the same size, so this would impact smaller watches more, which now is limiting what type of watches you can make if you make USB C a standard. And if it's not a standard, then it's not fixing the problem.

And all that's even before you begin to consider that watches are more comfortable to charge when they have a stand to do so, since they're small, light and fiddly, so it's entirely possible for a bulky USB C cable meant for fast charging to be heavier than them or stiff enough to actively move them around. There's a reason watch chargers tend to come with very thin, flexible wires. All you need to fix this problem is a magnetic stand that can hold any watch. Half the USB C cables I own would knock over my watch stand if plugged into my watch or drag my watch across the table.

You can make a watch that charges via USB C and still works. That's not an optimal solution, but you can. But it's not a valid standard because you can't very practically make all watches charge via USB C. Standards need to be standard.

4x the volume

I can't imagine how filthy the port would get on mine. Industrial work plates and open ports are not conductive to the healthy life of electronics.

A switch mode LED driver can be made very tiny with as few as 4 components. Battery protection and a single cell battery charger can also be very simple.

Get a BangleJS2; it's þe spiritual successor to Pebble, and it's better in many ways.

What’s the battery size?

The website claims 280mAh. That's a smaller than the newest Pixel watches - but then it is only about 10% of the cost of those models.

The point is USB C is noticeably larger than pogo pins for the sake of including a whole bunch of additional pins a smartwatch has zero use for.

Agreed! But that rather depends on what you want to use it for. This model is charge only. But it could be useful to use it as a USB drive to store music, or to get health data off it. The main advantage for my personal use-case is being able to charge while wearing it.

The ideal state for a smartwatch is having an always-on display and heart rate monitoring, among other things.

Yes! This does have always-on heart rate monitoring and step count. The screen is only on when you glance at it or tap the button.

And if it’s not a standard, then it’s not fixing the problem.

Agreed! But as the Pixel watch has gone through three different charging standards, all of which are incompatible with other watches, we don't seem to be any closer to solving that problem with wireless.

And all that’s even before you begin to consider that watches are more comfortable to charge when they have a stand to do so, since they’re small, light and fiddly

That's a personal preference. My Pixel watch stand is fiddly to use - the magnets don't always align. And the puck charger is pretty lightweight and moves around easily. By contrast, my lightweight USB-C cables don't move my watch when it is charging directly.

Standards need to be standard.

I agree! But sometimes it is nice to experiment with things to see what works. And I'm very happy that this normal-sized watch is able to charge with the same cable I use for my toothbrush, eBook, headphones, fan, and phone.

Some watches already have USB - C. but I find it interesting to see if you are correct or not.

I would see standardizing wireless charging as a decent alternative...if it didnt take up even more space.

It's not e-ink though, which was one of the defining features of a Pebble (and why the battery life was so good). Also, the Pebble guy is back with some new Pebbles: https://repebble.com/

It's not e-ink though, which was one of the defining features of a Pebble (and why the battery life was so good). Also, the Pebble guy is back with some new Pebbles: https://repebble.com/

From listening to a 1hr presentation by a furry in VR chat. Its likely because USB C is bloated. Its to complicated if all you need is power delivery in a small form factor.

You could use a usb c connector and not comply with the rest of the spec maybe idk shit about electronics.

While it would be lovely if watches could support Qi charging, they are just too small to make it work effectively

Ha ha ha.

I can charge my wife's Samsung watch off Qi on my phone. We had to learn how AND do it while on vacation when the Samsung inductive rig for it was left at home.

Worked like fucking gangbusters.

This article is shit.

As a current Garmin user I really like a lot of the features of the Garmin but the app for smart watch health tracking is atrocious and some of the values you get are clearly wrong like it recording my resting heart rate at 15 bps lower than it actually is.

The battery life is still insane which makes things like sleep tracking really nice

I and my family have had Garmin's like the venu line for years and I am in the hospital all the time. I've tested mine against the polar h10 and multiple medical tests and during times of Hospital stays for lengths of time. Mine has always been accurate and within a beat or two in the heart rate and a single percentage or 2 on pulse ox.

Garmin has fantastic customer service. Perhaps updating your device, or contacting them for an exchange would be worth while. All their watches I have had, seen, have been accurate. I'm not refuting what your saying just trying to give my perspective.

You can also set to track every second vs the default smart tracking every few minutes. Switch wrists as everyones vein layouts are better or worse to get a reading, keep it snug but not tight and not loose the sensor shouldnt indent your skin. Hope any of this helps. Don't settle for subpar results or experience. They make good equipment IME.

When my latest Fitbit dies, I'll be taking a look at the UNA watch.

USB-C charging and repairable.

The only thing lacking is some Fediverse presence.

No mention if it is waterproof so i bet it isn't. Modular and waterproof are tough to achieve simultaneously.

Edit: see below. It does not yet have a waterproof rating but is not currently submersible.

it is explicitly mentioned : IPX8

I miss my pebble. It was such a good watch. It would last a week on one charge with eink.

The power connector was the fiddliest thing in the world and proprietary so when it failed and the batter failed soon after...the watch was dead.