Why don't smart watches use USB-C to recharge?
Technology
109
Beiträge
63
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
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
-
If you mean a USB-C port in general, they can be made waterproof. If you mean something specific to putting one in the most compact form factor possible, that might be true.
They can be waterproof but are also non functional until the water is fully cleared from the port.
-
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
With vastly lower power requirements compared to a smartwatch
-
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.
I don't know if you looked at the photo in my post - but there's a rubber flap covering the USB-port.
-
This is confirmation bias, you know it’s possible so you’re discounting downsides.
Yes, a connector can fit in the watch, but the internal footprint of the connector is comparatively huge. All the other components of the watch would need to be designed to fit around a large connector essentially directly in the middle of the device internals.
If that’s really important to you, more power to you. I don’t have an issue with it existing. I do have a bit of a problem with pretending that compromises aren’t being made in features to accommodate it.
A standardized magnetic pogo pin connector would meet my needs quite a bit better, personally.
I'm not discounting the negatives - I'm saying it is possible and feasible.
As I point out in the article, the Pixel watch is now on its third charging format. None of which seem to be compatible with Apple or Samsung.
There are also compromises with the pogo-pin connector. You can't charge while wearing it. You have to bring along another cable. Bits of metal can be attracted to the magnets and cause mechanical or electrical damage.
-
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.
Pros? It is cheap, it uses USB-C, step counter and heart monitor work, bluetooth calls work.
Cons? App is a bit crap, but works with GadgetBridge. UI is a bit slow and janky. Lots of watch faces but you can't design your own.
Full review on my blog later today.
-
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.
cough cough
Nintendocough cough -
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.
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.
-
4x the volume
16 times the detail
-
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.
Btw, using fiddly electronics in a work environment is neither.
-
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.
Then again my flashlight has a microcontroller with open source firmware on it
-
Get a BangleJS2; it's þe spiritual successor to Pebble, and it's better in many ways.
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/
