Editor’s Note: Welcome to our weekly Reality Check column where C-level executives and advisory firms from across the mobile industry share unique insights and experiences.
September brought us two of the most anticipated smart watches from the Android and Apple ecosystems: Motorola’s Moto 360 and Apple Watch. Motorola received decent scores for its circular design, but poor battery life and an experience that basically extends the phone to a watch resulted in lukewarm reviews. Apple is faring a bit better based on initial impressions and is largely getting the benefit of the doubt until its actual 2015 launch. While there have been gripes about the thickness of Apple Watch, the consensus seems to be that Apple did its homework on the fashion front and, as always, nailed the user input experience.
Overall, Motorola made a good first showing but missed the mark this time out. Will Apple have created a device with mass market appeal by the time 2015 rolls around? The generational leap beyond the rectangular slab smartphones? Well, that depends on how much Watch can change our lives.
“Life-changing” is a pretty tall order and takes more to accomplish than simply introducing a new form factor. But history has shown us that in mobile, this is what device-makers need to achieve to condition the market and help prepare users for mass adoption. And life-changing is what the wireless carriers should be looking for when deciding which wearable devices are deserving of precious retail shelf space.
Where does mobile innovation come from?
By the turn of the millennium, basic feature phones had reached mass adoption. The biggest competition came from manufacturers trying to one-up each other by reducing device size or adding incremental features. Who knows how long they may have gone on had Research In Motion not come along with the BlackBerry, BlackBerry Enterprise Service and a life-changing feature: e-mail on your phone. Suddenly, millions of people were liberated from their offices and desktop email apps. We could finally be more mobile, more productive and more accessible (for better or worse). E-mail was pervasive and it wasn’t long before consumers wanted in, too.
There was no stopping BlackBerry – until a company traditionally focused on computers and laptops anticipated the mobile opportunity as well. Apple came from out of nowhere with a few life-changers in addition to mobile e-mail: true mobile Internet and the App Store, tied together into a mobile operating system that was instantly intuitive for most consumers. This was information and entertainment on the go. A phone experience that wasn’t just functional but also fun. The world was in your hand – although the high cost shut many out. Until, wait for it … yet another new entrant to mobile that needed continued scale to drive its core advertising business, emerged in the market. Google came a little later to the party but brought the more open Android platform that ultimately helped make smartphones more available and affordable. Now anyone could join the smartphone generation, driving even more adoption. Suddenly, we all had computers in our pockets.
There’s another lesson that three of the biggest mobile advances of the last decade have taught us: Innovation that pushes the industry forward and attracts big audiences keeps coming from companies most wouldn’t have expected. The three examples above include a brand we didn’t know (RIM), a company we didn’t expect (Apple) and a startup (Android) that Google acquired to put itself on the mobile map.
Wearables – the next frontier?
We’ve seen some interesting features added to smartphones over the past couple of years, but device-makers are largely finding that despite spending a lot of time building new functionality, they usually end up being perceived as gimmicks. Amazon Fire Phone tried to reinvent scrolling and introduce a 3D-like experience that took years to develop. Although some consumers were initially curious, 3D is being perceived as gimmicky until there are more games or features that take advantage. Samsung developed hundreds of new software features on top of Android. However, most Galaxy owners would have a hard time differentiating what feature came from Android versus Samsung.
It’s no wonder device-makers are running as fast as they can to wearables – the next potential generational leap from smartphones. But many manufacturers may be missing the point. Trying to squeeze a bunch of smartphone features from a four- to six-inch viewing experience to the wrist with a one-inch viewing experience just doesn’t make much sense. So instead of pulling my smartphone out of my pocket or bag, I look at my wrist. That’s nice, but it’s not “gotta have it” nice yet, especially at current prices. It’s definitely not “life-changing” nice.
For most device-makers, until they figure out how to get to the next big thing, the current crop of wearables will be a bridge. The soon-to-be-released wearables that stand out from the pack won’t be the ones that try to cram all smartphone features into a little square or circle. It will be the wearables that thoughtfully bundle a focused set of functions into a clear experience, execute them really well and free us from our smartphones for certain experiences. A wearable that was inspired to unmistakably serve a purpose, to the point where users clearly understand the value. A wearable that can help us do something we couldn’t do before, priced for adoption and delivered in an appealing way.
Apple seems to be on the right track, although most consumers might have trouble telling you why they “need” versus “want” one right now. The company’s HealthKit and HomeKit at least show the direction in which Apple can take Watch, even if consumers don’t fully understand the value just yet.
In IBB Consulting’s opinion, in order to condition the market for mass adoption of wearables, device-makers cannot just build an extension of the smartphone, but rather create a standalone wearable that is hyper-focused on a set of core experiences beyond just using your eyes as the primary sense. To help increase the chances that the wireless carriers will want to be a channel and offer it to their subscribers, they must partner with them to add extra value, potentially through truly mobile, standalone services. This extends beyond Bluetooth connectivity, further creating a standalone experience that is powered by the cloud instead of reliance on another device.
For now, a wearable concentrated on both fitness monitoring and health treatment/compliance is the right approach. One that can consolidate the different fitness monitoring bands we have today, share post doctor visit information with healthcare providers and integrate the analysis for proactive healthcare. One that keeps us balanced; not only monitors our steps, vitals and what we intake, but also understands our habits and helps us do more of the good and less of the bad. It has to be part of an ecosystem that helps motivate us with healthy reminders, motivational music and inspirational pictures. It has to offer a solution that can analyze our patterns and offers suggested changes that could potentially extend our lives. Proactively catching health warning signs even before we feel sick. Perhaps even reminding us that we need to schedule our annual physical and dentist trips. Oh, and it can’t do this with a bunch of annoying buzzing and alerts that we quickly end up ignoring. That is the wearable solution and ecosystem that will attract a mass audience and spark the start of a true generational leap.
Even with the first iteration of Watch coming next year, we’re still a bit away from seeing the full potential of wearables. What we expect first is innovation in line with what RIM gave us in 2003. Something that makes the market stop in its tracks after getting a glimpse of what’s possible. The question is: Will current smartphone manufacturers get things right before a completely new competitor enters the market? The clock is ticking … .
