Android Wear watches

If you can’t beat them, join them. This could be the motto for Google, which is rumored to bring iOS compatibility to Android Wear. And if strings of code that were recently discovered are any indication, it seems the rumor actually holds a lot of truth to it.

Considering this probable move, there seems to be a lot of excitement about the potential possibilities, especially among people who don’t believe in Apple Watch, or want the convenience of a smartwatch without all the strings attached to the Apple ecosystem.

One thing people don’t seem to realize is that even with full iOS support, Android Wear will never be more than a shiny screen with a handful of limited features.

Why would Google make Android Wear compatible with iOS?

With a pale 720,000 Android Wear smartwatches shipped in 2014, Google is having a hard time gaining traction in the wearable market. Google is only responsible for the software of course, and manufacturers such as Motorola and LG are the ones really shipping the end products, and maybe the ones to blame for the lack of success of Android Wear in general. Whoever you want to blame, there is one fact: Android Wear devices aren’t selling.

The problem is that Android Wear devices are currently compatible with phones running Android 4.3 or newer, amounting for roughly 50% of Android phones out there, and making the potential market even smaller right off the bat.

So naturally, Google is trying to expand its user base by reaching out to iOS users. Google will likely make the move sound like this is openness at its best, but don’t be fooled; the only reason why the Mountain View company will make Android Wear compatible with iOS is because it has no other choice if it wants to flood the market with wearables as it did with smartphones.

A crippled software with limited features

Android Wear compatibility with iPhone sounds like a smart move on paper, at least until you start thinking about it. The problem is Android Wear will never be able to get the same access to the core of iOS as Apple does, effectively turning a powerful OS into a crippled software with limited features.

If you want to imagine what Android Wear with iOS will be like, just think about Pebble, because any Android Wear device paired with an iPhone will never be much better than that. I am not discounting Pebble. I have been wearing one for over a year and I absolutely love it. It’s just a terribly limited device that doesn’t offer more than one way communication – from your iPhone to your wrist.

Apple Watch will be able to do much more than that of course, as it will offer what I like to call two-way communication, meaning that iPhone will be able to communicate with Watch (i.e. send a notification from iPhone to Watch), and Watch will be able to communicate with iPhone (i.e. send a message from Watch via iPhone).

Also read: A day in the life of an Apple Watch user

But Android Wear won’t be able to take advantage of the same APIs Apple is using, and of course, there is no way Apple will ever give Google access to deeper parts of its software.

So just like you can receive notifications on your Pebble, you will be able to receive notifications on your Android Wear device, but I wouldn’t expect to be able to do much more than that. Again, you certainly shouldn’t expect to be able to send messages from your device, to initiate phone calls, or anything actually helpful on a smartwatch.

The only possible way Android Wear could be somewhat useful when paired with an iPhone is if this iPhone is jailbroken. This would open up many more possibilities, assuming there is a strong hacker community interested in the project of course, which I doubt, although some people have successfully pushed iOS notifications on Android Wear.

You can’t blame Google for offering a crippled version of Android Wear to iPhone users. There is nothing Google can do about that. You also shouldn’t blame Apple for not granting Google deeper access to its software. It would just be silly.

At the end of the day, anyone considering buying an Android Wear device to pair with an iPhone should be aware that it will be a terribly limited experience. And I’m afraid that if manufacturers of Android Wear devices don’t make that clear, it could lead to really bad customer satisfaction ratings.

  • Al

    Although it would be a limited device… It’s key feature will be Google Now… And it will be a inexpensive as well present different form factors compared to Apple Watch.

    Don’t get me wrong.. The Apple Watch will offer an incredible experience, but Pebble (to me) doesn’t look like it’s worth it. Its all a matter of choice…

    • I agree to the different form factors. This is definitely a big selling point for AW devices.

      Now keep in mind that it is very unlikely you’ll be able to get Google Now if your AW watch is paired with iPhone. You might be able to start a Google Now query on your iPhone and push it to your watch, but I highly doubt you’ll be able to initiate a Google Now query from your watch.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        You can’t really say that. The trend of both Platforms seems to be directed towards being more open. In Apples case more slowly, but for example, the use of 3rd party keyboards, notification center. The iWatch may be specific to iPhones now, but 2 years from now who knows. The treads do speak towards more openness though.

        P.S, no negativity…..just an observation.

      • Merman123

        Big difference between third party keyboards and an entire new device. A 3rd party keyboard alone won’t make or break something. Every product Apple releases is geared to further make you stay in the Apple ecosystem. I doubt that’s something Apple would want to let go of with the Apple Watch.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Why I stated “but 2 years from now who knows.” They have started to be more open……that is all I am implying.

      • Merman123

        I insist. The type of “open” you’re referring to is not relevant to this. This type of opening would require them to break loose their tight ecosystem, which is something they haven’t done at all.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        We will see what happens over the next few years. I doubt Apple invested millions, if not billions of dollars into this project/product without the idea of eventually opening it up. Relying solely on iPhones to drives the sales would not make sense as it would take YEARS to break even and Apple, like all other organizations are not in the biz of making products to break event.

        Remember, we are not talking about totally opening up iOS, we are in reality speaking about opening up the watch os.

      • So are you saying that Apple would let manufacturers install WatchOS on their devices so they can work with iOS? If so, I think it’s never going to happen.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Naw that would be crazy. But I could def see the watch having at least one way communication with other platforms.

      • Merman123

        But you fail to see that in opening WatchOS, you indirectly break iOS in the process. Apple has invested millions in this product because they believe in THEIR products and services. Not relying on the possibility of “opening it up”. That doesn’t sound like Apple at all. The only time a company should be worried about having to open up their ecosystem, is when their own is shit. I think Apple is confident enough in their ecosystem to invest millions on something that would only work in conjunction with their other products. Why? Because they’ve done it. And it works. And it’s that very philosophy that has gotten them the millions to be able to invest.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        We really dont know too much about the WatchOS……it could very well follow suit after OS X and be more open…not as open, but open to one way communication or more.

        Remember the watch os is not iOS. it was made to work hand in hand with iOS. That does not mean it can’t be friendly with Android…..one day

      • Jurassic

        “Remember the watch os is not iOS.”

        That is incorrect.

        The Apple Watch operating system (Watch OS) is based on iOS, in the same way that Apple TV’s operating system is based on iOS, and CarPlay is based on iOS.

        It is NOT designed to be “friendly with Android” any more than the versions of iOS that run on AppleTV and CarPlay, or the version of iOS that runs on iPhones and iPads.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        We will see in a few years won’t we. Great points though.

      • Jurassic

        “We will see in a few years won’t we.”

        iOS has been in existence for 8 years now, so (realistically) you should not expect that Apple will suddenly make iOS “friendly with Android” (allow Android, or any other third-party software, to hook into the underlying operating system and essential apps) in the next “few years”.

        It should be clear to anyone by now that operating systems need to be protected in this way.

        In the past 8 years, due to Apple’s measures, iOS has been free of viruses. On the other hand, Android has been ravaged with hundreds of thousands of forms of malware over the years, due to Google’s lack of control.

        Google is only recently tightening access to the underlying Android OS, and Google is now taking a more active role in reviewing apps on Google Play, to weed out malware. Unfortunately, Google still has no control over third-party app stores that don’t oversee the Android apps they distribute to users of Android devices.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Like I said, I’m not talking about IOS, I’m talking about the watch OS. We believe two different things. You think they are the same. I think they are made to seemely work together. There lies the difference.

      • Jurassic

        “You think they are the same.”

        That is NOT what I wrote!

        What I wrote was: “The Apple Watch operating system (Watch OS) is based on iOS, in the same way that Apple TV’s operating system is based on iOS, and CarPlay is based on iOS.”

        I thought that this was clear enough. But if you are construing it to mean that iOS and Watch OS are “the same”, let me clarify my statement a bit for you…

        Watch OS, just like the version of iOS that makes up the Apple TV operating system, and the CarPlay operating system, are ALL derivatives of the same iOS that runs on iPhones and iPads.

        The Watch OS interface looks different (on purpose, to suit the different hardware) than the interface you would see on Apple TV, which is also different than the interface that you see in CarPlay, which is also different than the interface you see on an iPhone.

        BUT, they are all versions of the same operating system… iOS.

        So, while I do agree with you that the operating system running on iPhones, Apple TV, CarPlay in-dash units, and Apple Watch looks very different on each different product…

        … You should understand altho ALL of those devices are running variants of the SAME operating system… iOS.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Remember, IOS does not need watchOS, whereas watchOS needs iOS…..this implies they are not “the same.”

      • Jurassic

        “Remember, IOS does not need watchOS, whereas watchOS needs iOS…..this implies they are not “the same.””

        Watch OS does NOT need iOS. (If someone told this to you, they were incorrect).

        The Apple Watch (with the iOS derived Watch OS) is fully functional on it’s own.

        Yes, some of the APPS do require a connected iPhone, since those apps are really reflecting what the iPhone apps are providing. For example, you can’t use the Apple Watch to make phone calls without an iPhone.

        But MANY of the apps and functions of the Apple Watch DO NOT require an iPhone AT ALL!

        Things like: the watch function (of course), but also playing music and looking at photos (the Apple Watch has built-in storage for music and other media).

        MANY apps DON’T require an iPhone.

        Most health and fitness tracking can be done WITHOUT an iPhone (GPS in iPhone is only needed for distance and location).

        Using Apple Pay with Apple Watch does not require an iPhone.

        Using the Apple Watch as a remote control (for example with an Apple TV) is also done without needing an iPhone.

        Etc.

        A person buying an Apple Watch will get additional usage out of it if they also own an iPhone… BUT, an Apple Watch has MANY uses without an iPhone, and it is likely than many people who DON’T own an iPhone will buy and use the Apple Watch.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Let me rephrase my statement. For the watch to really be fully functional, other than listening to music, looking at photos, and telling time, it will need to be paired with an iPhone. The derivative OS cannot be used in total potential without being tethered to an iPhone. Again, they are not the same. A derivative is something that is based/tied to an underlining product/security, but again, it is not the same. If it was the same they would call it IOS. There differences between the iPad and iPhone, though subtle, but both are IOS.

      • Jurassic

        “Let me rephrase my statement. For the watch to really be fully functional, other than listening to music, looking at photos, and telling time, it will need to be paired with an iPhone.”

        No, it is NOT limited to those 3 things!

        You really DO need to learn a bit about the Apple Watch before making incorrect statements, like the ones you’ve been making so far.

        I highly recommend that you read and absorb the information about the Apple Watch that is available on the Apple website, as well as some of the MANY credible articles written about it (rather than reading articles that are written by people with limited knowledge).

        “The derivative OS cannot be used in total potential without being tethered to an iPhone”

        AGAIN, WRONG!

        The Apple Watch and its operating system is fully functional on its own WITHOUT requiring an iPhone.

        An iPhone is ONLY required to function with SOME of the included apps. But ALL of the other apps, and the operating system itself, is made to function independently!

        Please educate yourself about the Apple Watch, rather than making these incorrect assumptions.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Dude, those three things I used as examples were what you used! Holy cow! I’m gone. C-Ya man.

      • Jurassic

        “Dude, those three things I used as examples were what you used! Holy cow! I’m gone. C-Ya man.”

        So you are saying you STOPPED reading my comment when you read only those 3 things (music playing, photos, and time)???

        If you had read the ENTIRE comment, you would have read that the Apple Watch does MANY, MANY more things on its own… WITHOUT requiring an iPhone.

        Since you didn’t read my comment, here are some additional things I mentioned:

        “Most health and fitness tracking can be done WITHOUT an iPhone (GPS in iPhone is only needed for distance and location).

        Using Apple Pay with Apple Watch does not require an iPhone.

        Using the Apple Watch as a remote control (for example with an Apple TV) is also done without needing an iPhone.”

        And MANY, MANY other Apple Watch apps from Apple and third-party developers DON’T require an iPhone!

        Note: There is a difference between being uninformed and ignorance. Being uninformed is easily corrected by the learning and acceptance of information. But ignorance is the refusal to accept (or denial of) information when it is presented to you.

        I have been providing factual information to you in my comments, yet you are obstinately in denial of the facts.

        Tommy Gumbs: “I’m gone.”

        (You won’t be missed.)

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Your right, I have not been reading you over written reply’s.

        Your an a mission to attack anything I say, even if I use your own examples so what you say has no real interests to me.

        But yes, there are apps that won’t require an iPhone. Whats your point? If you can reply in one 4 sentence paragraph ill bite.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        BTW, the Apps that I have seen that dont require an iPhone are health apps, etc ,etc. Nothing special.

      • Jurassic

        “Your right, I have not been reading you over written reply’s.”

        That’s you’re excuse for ignoring (denying) the facts I presented to you???

        You are saying that you are only capable of reading the first sentence, but DON’T have the ability to read the rest of the factual information that decimates your foolish opinions about the Apple Watch?

        You are insulting yourself with that lame comment!

      • Tommy Gumbs

        No, I’m not insulting myself. I’m saving myself time.

      • Jurassic

        “No, I’m not insulting myself. I’m saving myself time.”

        If replying foolishly to comments that you admittedly don’t even read, is “saving” you time. Then you can save even MORE time by NOT responding to the comments that you DON’T read.

        This will have the extra benefit (in addition to the extra time saved) of you not making yourself look like a fool to others, by admitting to have written vacuous replies to comments that you HAVEN’T even read in the first place!

        (͡° ͜ʖ°)

      • Tommy Gumbs

        But now that your reply’s are getting shorter, we can actually have a conversation………..Just saying.

      • Jurassic

        Tommy, there is no “point” in continuing a conversation with someone who refuses to (or can’t) read the information I present.

        But if you are implying that you you were being dishonest previously, that you really DO have the ability to read and comprehend my comments, and that you were only being obstinate by choosing to the ignore facts, then…

        Go back and read (and hopefully absorb) the factual information I have written in my previous comments, which until now you have pretended to have not read at all.

        If you are ready to do that now, fine!

        If on the other hand, you are continuing to be dishonest and evasive, there is no “point” in repeating the facts that I have already presented to you.

        In that case, if the saying “ignorance is bliss” is true… You must be ecstatic.

        (͡° ͜ʖ°)

      • Tommy Gumbs

        I would but I dont care…..until the watch is released you can talk all you ( which mostly has seemed to be insults towards me anyway) want about what it will, and may do….but the reality is we don’t know….therefor any info you may have presented is not factual, unless it was taken directly from Apple. And if that is the case, I dont need to read through your post for that info.

      • Jurassic

        “But yes, there are apps that won’t require an iPhone. Whats your point?”

        Since you admit you didn’t even read my comments, here is the “point” I made at the close of my last comment:

        “Being uninformed is easily corrected by the learning and acceptance of information. But ignorance is the refusal to accept (or denial of) information when it is presented to you.

        I have been providing factual information to you in my comments, yet you are obstinately in denial of the facts.”

        In other words, there is no “point” in providing factual information to someone like you, who admits to not even reading the factual information presented. Instead you continue to live in denial, and cling to your ludicrous opinions that are in opposition to reality.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        ^^. My point. All of that but you couldn’t answer a direct question. Lol

      • Jurassic

        The “point” is that (as you yourself admitted) YOU don’t read the answers!

      • Tommy Gumbs

        No, you didn’t answer.

      • Alan

        Wow! You are one patient human. Unfortunately, wasting your time. Frustrating to watch him just not get it.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Lol. Naw, this was the perfect excuse to not study.

      • jake kneller

        Please do remover OS X is made to run on a computer which apple knows they can’t just lock there computers in an apple ecosystem any where near like how they have locked the iPhone in comparing OS X and watch OS does no justice

      • jake kneller

        Apple has been investing billions into products for years with no intention of opening it up in such a way not saying your 100% wrong but i can not predict the future

      • Benedict

        mp3? DRM?

      • I understand what you’re saying, but I can’t agree. I don’t think Apple will ever let Android Wear (or competing platforms) get deep access to iOS. It would just go against everything Apple has been doing all along.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        (insert thumbs up)

      • Moltakfire

        Reading your comments actually made me laugh out loud…

        Yeah, we’ll see in two years when Nintendo decide to let Microsoft and Sony use their IP’s, or when Android becomes a closed system.

        I get what you’re saying, but the chances of any of those happening (including the Nintendo thing. Going to mobile is not the same as selling off IP), is about 0.0000000005% likely.

        The number is made up, but the fact is evident. Apple aren’t just gonna open up their OS all willy-nilly. It’s a closed system for a reason, and it has been since its conception. That’s not going to change.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        When I say opening up, I mean, for example, Apple updating(opening) iOS to play nicely with Ford sync…I am referring solely to communication. I do not believe they would ever open up there systems. Sorry, too many conversations going on, and I do not like writing long posts if I do not need to………although I prob should.

      • igorsky

        Not to mention that it would negatively effect Apple Watch sales. That’s a sure sign that it’ll never happen, nor should it.

      • Rowan09

        Google is actually becoming more close while Apple since its ecosystem is more locked down is becoming more open.

      • Jurassic

        “Google is actually becoming more close while Apple since its ecosystem is more locked down is becoming more open.”

        That is a VERY confusing statement!

        If Apple’s ecosystem is “more locked down”, how does it make it “more open”.

        If something is “locked down”, logically it is LESS “open”.

        Also, I’m not quite sure what you consider to be “open”. It’s a very vague term, which can mean many different things to different people.

        Android fans always used to claim that Android OS is “open” without really understanding or making clear what they were saying.

        The general interpretation is that they are implying that Android is “free” and “open source”, and that iOS is not.

        In reality Android is not completely “free” and “open source”. Google licenses many patented and proprietary technologies from other companies (at very high licensing fees). The code licensed is NOT “open source”.

        For example, Microsoft (one of the many licensees) collects $5 to $15 from every Android device sold due to its proprietary code licensed to Android. Microsoft makes at least $2 billion per year from Android.

        Apple also licenses some of the technologies that go into iOS, but the underpinnings of iOS (and of OS X) for example Darwin and WebKit, are open source software that Apple has created and made available for the open source community.

        If you go to Apple’s Web site you can find a huge list of all the open source software that Apple has made available.

        Apple also uses open source software from other entities, such as Mach kernel, as part of both iOS and OS X.

        In reality Android is no more “open source” and “free” than iOS is. But Apple has protected its iOS operating system from the beginning, while Google has not done the same with Android.

      • Tyler Smith

        That was very well written. I did not know a lot of that stuff. Good reply 🙂

      • Rowan09

        I agree. My statement was a comparison with Android since its inception and comparing it to what it is today and it’s more locked down than open source. Keyboards was open source snd now they have Google Keybord which is closed, including YouTube, maps, all of Googles services are all closed. IOS on the other hand is opening up a lot more when compared to ts inception which is typical and this is all I was saying.

      • Jurassic

        Yes, I agree with you. In the sense that iOS 8 introduces many new APIs for developers, you could call it more “open” than previous versions of iOS.

        Things like 3rd party system-wide keyboards, system extensions, integration with Touch ID, etc. are completely new features that extend the range of what developers and users can do with iOS 8 devices.

        But iOS 8 is a completely re-write that allows for this integration, while at the same time continuing to protect the underlying operating system from intrusions.

        So, on a basic level of security of the operating system, iOS is not any more “open” than it has been in the past.

      • Alan

        They originated from a more “locked down” state. Making their relative current state more of a move towards “openness”

      • Tyler Smith

        that was the dumbest statement I have heard in a while

      • Rowan09

        Explain because you don’t understand what I was saying?

      • Tyler Smith

        No because it is false.

      • Rowan09

        Proof?

      • Alberto Espinal

        Don’t bother Tyler Smith is a lawyer never losses!

      • igorsky

        I think Google’s actions of closing Android off over time are a de facto acknowledgement that Apple had it right all along.

      • Ramone

        “P.S, no negativity…..just an observation.”

        That you felt the need to add this to your very reasonable post speaks volumes about a certain kind of Apple devotee.

  • Tommy Gumbs

    What makes this article awesome…….it’s about two products that aren’t available yet. Two products that have not been able to used by the general publics. 1 Of these product that will soon be avail, and the other that is a rumor. The writers acts as if they are. I guess that how rumors get started. They grow from bullshit

    If Androind didn’t sel more than 750k in 2014, I don’t see Apple doing much better. Yes only 50% of Androoids are running the required 4.3, but it’s no different than having to have a iPhone to use the iWatch, which is already a smaller market than Androoids.

    Hope it flops and they lower the price. No I’m not jealous, year I can afford it. and yes I own all apple products.

    • Al

      I don’t think it would flop. There’s so much hype with this product… It will sell millions then tapper off… Similar to an iPad, but I don’t think it will be as popular as an iPad. The fact that it “needs” an iPhone to work is its biggest drawback.

    • Do you come to these articles purely just to leave comments like this? The amount of negativity you spew across this site is astounding. Why even read the site if you accuse most articles of being bullshit, its fine you think that but you dont need to broadcast your negative opinion across the entires site.

  • Franklin Richards

    The more choices the better. If one should fail it’s nice to know there’s another to fall back on.

  • Elvin Topalov

    Sure, Android Wear watches will be limited in what they can do compared to the Apple Watch, but I believe people would much rather own a smart watch they would want to wear on their wrists. If someone preferred a circular smart watch, the Apple Watch wouldn’t suit that person and his options would include the many Android Wear devices. Smart move by Google, that’s for sure.

  • Tommy Gumbs

    OMG. IM SOOOOOO EXCITED FOR DA WATCH

  • Berchtwald

    “If you can’t beat them, join them. This could be the motto for Google…”
    We know that this is an Apple pro site, and I have no problem with that whatsoever since I visit iDownloadBlog daily. However, could you please try not to make statements which are so strongly wrong? Google’s move has nothing to do with what that motto means (according to which Google has lost the battle with Apple and now is doing something to join their Android Wear with Apple). No. What Google is doing has nothing to do with the competition posed by Apple watch. They are simply doing the right economic choice that any producer would do: not limiting their market share to a targeted audience (Android smartphones owners) but rather trying to target iPhone users as well. So please, try to word your thoughts better without misinforming readers.

    PS. I’m an iPhone user myself. Nothing I said has to do with the Android fans – Apple fans conflict.

    • Tommy Gumbs

      Hey, they deleted my original comment so if your not being positive and supporting IDB, I.e, being a lemming), you should prob keep your opinion to yourself. But I agree with you.

      I CANT WAIT FOR THE IWATCH. It’s gonna be the DA BES EVA!

      • Your comment was deleted because it was downvoted so many times.

      • Tommy Gumbs

        I need to see the stats on that……..J/K

        But I will relax on my iWatch negativity.

      • George

        This in the internet, you better sensor yourself! “If you can’t beat them, join them.”

      • Tyler Smith

        Well this blog.. (like reddit) works in an upvote down vote way. If you get down voted so many times it goes away. its pretty simple actually 🙂

    • Merman123

      Ok. I suppose that the fact that they do this around Apple Watch release is just mere coincidence ? Haha. C’mon.

    • I disagree but I do respect your opinion.

      I believe Google “would” (let’s remember it’s all hypothetical at this time) bring Android Wear compatibility to iOS because it doesn’t get enough traction on its own. Those 700,000 AW devices that were sold in 2014 is a pathetic number, and I have no doubt Watch will smash these numbers in its first month alone.

      Google needs Apple to sell more of these watches. They know it, but like I say in my post, they will make it sound that they’re all about openness to justify this move. In reality, it’s because they don’t have the same capability as Apple to lock people into their ecosystem.

      This is no fanboy thinking. This is just my own strategic thinking.

      • George

        Lol get over yourself. I bet you 75% of all apple watches will be returned after purchase.

      • Jurassic

        I would love to get rich by taking advantage of your “bet”, but I don’t believe that you are in any way seriously ready to make such a bet if your own money was at stake.

        It seems to me to be just crowing (or wishful thinking) on your part, rather than a real offer to bet your own hard earned cash.

        But, please let me know if I am wrong in that assumption. If you REALLY are eager to bet a substantial amount of money that “75% of all apple watches will be returned after purchase”, then please let me know, and you can make arrangements to contact me through the administrators of this website.

        I am willing to bet a minimum of $1,000 cash (higher if you prefer) with the website administrators holding our cash, for a reasonable time after the Apple Watch goes on sale.

        Talk is cheap. But placing bets on ridiculous boasts like yours, can be a very expensive lesson for you.

        (͡° ͜ʖ°)

      • Tommy Gumbs

        Apple very well may sell more than that 750k in its first year….but after that first year the market will be saturated and sales will fall off tremendously. Most people acquire the phones using carrier subsidy’s, and in other countries where full retail is paid, I doubt sales will be “stellar.” Its an amazing product though, and i may get one myself. I think this product will def fill the void in my life.

  • Lagax

    Android 4.3 is NOT 50% of the android market. By far not. Almost everybody has an android smartphone and almost nobody has Android 4.3, most don’t even have Android 4.

  • Tommy Gumbs

    Dude v

  • jake kneller

    With the bulk of smartphones in the market being iOS devices if there’s was enough features I could see it picking up a little but primarily with iOS users who think the apple watch is ugly or users that just don’t want to spend $349 or more on an apple watch but in my opnion I won’t be useing an andorid wear powered watch with an Idevice because I like my phone and tablet to be running iOS or both be running andorid I feel the same about my watch and phone just makes things simple and your guaranteed less compatibility issues

  • Freddy Born

    can you skip songs/control volume from your watch while streaming to apple tv?

  • Thanks for sharing that…
    This simply happens to be the best
    document editing and management suite for both your iPad and iPhone. You
    get so many different features… getappDOTcc/app/785157453