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
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 months ago
At that scale, the connector and the necessary electronics are too large.
Sorse@discuss.tchncs.de 4 months ago
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 months ago
With vastly lower power requirements compared to a smartwatch
Hawke@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Not really relevant: power requirements would affect battery size much more than charging port size. And USB-C supports much greater power transport than the old dock connector.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Right, my point is that we want to use that space for battery, not bulky connectors.
dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Given that an iPod nano only lasted a few hours on a charge and most smartwatches can last multiple days, I’m pretty sure that’s not so. Even if they had apples-to-apples identical functionality I think a modern device would consume less power simply due to current chips being more power efficient via using smaller dies and lithography processes.
Plus, an iPod has to crank its weedy little processor full time as long as it’s playing music. Your smartwatch pretty much only has to do anything when an external stimulus wakes it up, be that pressing a button or tapping its screen or receiving an alert or whatever. I’ve developed software for some of the Garmin models myself and I can tell you that the power consumption and processing time limitations imposed by the system are extremely stringent. The majority of the time even in a second-by-second basis your watch is completely idle, specifically to consume as little power as possible and conserve the battery.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 4 months ago
The last gen iPod nano toured a 30-hour battery life. Also, you don’t need to peg the CPU for rendering audio - this can be accomplished with a very low-power DSP. The lack of radios also offers significant savings when compared to a smart watch, which you forgot needs to be able to receive notifications.
I’ve professionally developed the firmware for several embedded systems and consumer electronics devices with very strict power requirements.
edent@lemmy.world 4 months ago
And yet, I literally have one on my wrist now. It’s not noticeably bigger than the Pixel 3 watch.
Here’s a video of it in action - tube.tchncs.de/w/vYTnG6eKghnicdNj5nkhVx
natecox@programming.dev 4 months ago
[deleted]buffing_lecturer@leminal.space 4 months ago
A standardized magnetic pogo pin connector
That’s something I hadn’t considered before. What a neat idea.
gkaklas@lemmy.zip 4 months ago
The charging base is just breaking out the 5V of the USB to the pogo pins!
edent@lemmy.world 4 months ago
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.
shalafi@lemmy.world 4 months ago
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.
edent@lemmy.world 4 months ago
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.
mesamunefire@piefed.social 4 months ago
Some watches already have USB - C.
roofuskit@lemmy.world 4 months ago
It’s also hard to make a port like that water resistant. Using wireless charging is easier to make flat and seal tightly.
Zak@lemmy.world 4 months ago
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.
roofuskit@lemmy.world 4 months ago
And that requires more space than a typical port. In a compact device that is difficult.
jonathan@piefed.social 4 months ago
They can be waterproof but are also non functional until the water is fully cleared from the port.
fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 4 months ago
That kind of waterproofing wears over time (years). It keeps it’s resistance, but not a submersible seal. Watches have longer use years than phones on average.
vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 months ago
oh quit that bs. There was waterproof (not resistant) micro usb more than a literal decade ago. If anything they should have gottn better.
roofuskit@lemmy.world 4 months ago
And that requires more space than a typical port. In a compact device that is difficult.
paraphrand@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Eww, micro usb. I get the shakes just thinking about it.
medgremlin@midwest.social 4 months ago
I have the pixel watch 2, and waterproofing is very important to me when it comes to a smartwatch. I work in healthcare and have to wash my hands upwards of 30 times a day. If I had to take off my watch every time or gamble on a rubber flap adequately covering the charging port, it simply would not be worth the hassle.
BussyCat@lemmy.world 4 months ago
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