Why don't smart watches use USB-C to recharge?
Technology
107
Beiträge
63
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
This post did not contain any content.
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.
-
don't give them ideas
I know, right?!
-
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.
Get a BangleJS2; it's þe spiritual successor to Pebble, and it's better in many ways.
-
Ive heard it works with solar too? Does it stop working after a certain timeperiod of just go into low power mode until it gets enough sun?
The good Garmins last 2 and half months no charge. An hour in the sun adds a week. Ink display and solar glass. It's awesome. In the smart watch health space garmin is second to none. Especially so for battery.
-
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.
As I understand it you can do USB-C at a basic 5V level with 2 resistors, and for a watch that would be plenty of power.
-
This post did not contain any content.
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.
-
Also: Garmin recently enshittified by simultaneously adding an AI slop component that works by taking all of your recorded fitness and location data and doing gods know what with it, as well as a paid subscription tier to their obligatory smartphone app -- the latter after explicitly promising for many years that they wouldn't. So not only is their hardware expensive (and their owners are now rightly pissed), they're also liars. I would not give them any money until they shape up, if I were you. Assuming they ever do...
Gadgetbridge works with most Garmin models. I have the Instinct 2 Solar and have never created a Garmin account or downloader the app.
It does not work with either my Fenix 6 Pro Solar (specifically that one, other Fenix 6 variants are listed as working) nor the Forerunner 230 that somebody just gave me. Both of which are a drag, and I can't be arsed with learning how to add my own support right now at this minute.
Honestly, I've just been using my Fenix unconnected and it's really surprising all it can still do. The only function I don't have that I cared about was receiving notifications. The sensors and topo map and all still work fine and you can even still track rides and hikes, but you have to offload thr GPX tracks via USB and figure out what to so with them yourself.
It's almost like the dumbass limitations of the app are all just artificial, to the surprise of absolutely no one.
-
A flashlight is literally one of the simplest electronic devices there is
You might be surprised at everything going on inside a modern flashlight. I'll grant that it's probably easier to find room for extra seals around the port than in a smartwatch though.
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.
-
As I understand it you can do USB-C at a basic 5V level with 2 resistors, and for a watch that would be plenty of power.
yeah but that wouldnt be USB C because usb C is a standard that requires a ton of different things like double way data and power rails and handle 60watts etc. If you just need 5v then you can do it in a much smaller way via another connector or even wirelessly.
I'm gonna assume you know more about this and I do because i cant even light up an LED in a circuit.
-
It does not work with either my Fenix 6 Pro Solar (specifically that one, other Fenix 6 variants are listed as working) nor the Forerunner 230 that somebody just gave me. Both of which are a drag, and I can't be arsed with learning how to add my own support right now at this minute.
Honestly, I've just been using my Fenix unconnected and it's really surprising all it can still do. The only function I don't have that I cared about was receiving notifications. The sensors and topo map and all still work fine and you can even still track rides and hikes, but you have to offload thr GPX tracks via USB and figure out what to so with them yourself.
It's almost like the dumbass limitations of the app are all just artificial, to the surprise of absolutely no one.
Yeah it's a shame the path Garmin is going
-
yeah but that wouldnt be USB C because usb C is a standard that requires a ton of different things like double way data and power rails and handle 60watts etc. If you just need 5v then you can do it in a much smaller way via another connector or even wirelessly.
I'm gonna assume you know more about this and I do because i cant even light up an LED in a circuit.
USB C is only the plug… USB 3.2 is the specification
USB power delivery is part of the specification that you can support without support for the other parts and is incredibly simple to implement by itself
-
yeah but that wouldnt be USB C because usb C is a standard that requires a ton of different things like double way data and power rails and handle 60watts etc. If you just need 5v then you can do it in a much smaller way via another connector or even wirelessly.
I'm gonna assume you know more about this and I do because i cant even light up an LED in a circuit.
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.
-
yeah but that wouldnt be USB C because usb C is a standard that requires a ton of different things like double way data and power rails and handle 60watts etc. If you just need 5v then you can do it in a much smaller way via another connector or even wirelessly.
I'm gonna assume you know more about this and I do because i cant even light up an LED in a circuit.
You don't need to follow the entire spec for a usb c. Usb c has a display port mode, but most laptops that have this won't have it on every port. Most usb c cables also don't support display port mode, which is annoying because they usually won't say if it supports it.
Usb c extension cords are not allowed and yet they exist
-
A standardized magnetic pogo pin connector
That's something I hadn't considered before. What a neat idea.
PineTime
An Open Source Smartwatch For Your Favorite Devices. Low Cost, High Fidelity. The PineTime is a free and open source smartwatch capable of running custom-built open operating systems. Some of the notable features include a heart rate monitor, a week-long battery, and a capacitive touch IPS display that is legible in direct sunlight. It is a fully community driven side-project which anyone can contribute to, allowing you to keep control of your device.
PINE64 (pine64.org)
The charging base is just breaking out the 5V of the USB to the pogo pins!
-
This sounds like an authoritative post. Thread over.
Unfortunately it's a bit of a misinterpretation. Yes the overall USB C spec is complicated, and cables can support different things without being labelled clearly, but you can use it just to deliver power much more simply.
-
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.
Some do, but the limitations of usb C (or any physical plug) are present and while it sounds nice in principle to have all the devices use the same cord it’s in general not worth the sacrifices that others have mentioned like it taking up extra room and the increased likelihood of water/sweat/particulate ingress
-
The good Garmins last 2 and half months no charge. An hour in the sun adds a week. Ink display and solar glass. It's awesome. In the smart watch health space garmin is second to none. Especially so for battery.
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
-
This post did not contain any content.
4x the volume
-
I wrote the post above. So far, the USB-C watch has lasted over 3 days and still has over 50% battery power.
Obviously, at that price it isn't running a cellular radio or GPS. BLE is amazingly efficient - as are the built in sensors.
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.
-
At that scale, the connector and the necessary electronics are too large.
Let’s ignore the iPod nano 6th gen, which managed to fit a 30 pin dock connector and a headphone jack into a watch sized body
-
U.S. Senator Tom Cotton probes Intel board over CEO Lip-Bu Tan's former China links, raises national security concerns amid Cadence scandal
Technology
1
-
-
-
-
UK: X's design and policy choices created fertile ground for inflammatory, racist narratives targeting Muslims and migrants following Southport attack
Technology
1
-
-
-
