2 articles that bookend the CES wearable madness

The bad: I tried on 56 wearables today. Here’s a photo of every single one of them

The sensible: Fitbit's CEO explains why his company isn't making a smartwatch

Signal, noise and Apple Watch

I'm always interesting in people making predictions, particularly after reading Nate Silver's The Signal and The Noise.

The nicest thing we can say about them is that they're always wrong. Still, we can learn a lot from their mistakes.

Currently I'm pondering the 'news' that Analysys Mason reckons 1 million smart watches will be sold in 2014. That's likely not a terrible prediction. It's a nascent market, with the Pebble still having the largest install base.

However, Analysys Mason reckons 13.6 million smart watches will be sold in 2015.

An oddly precise number, but the uplift is - of course - predicated on the news that the Apple Watch won't be released until "early 2015".

What's interesting about the prediction, however, is that to my mind it assumes that more than 85 percent of smart watches sold in 2015 will be Apple Watches.

(That's assuming growth of 100 percent for the non-Apple devices that no one cares about. Even if they sell 3 million units, Apple takes 78 percent of the market.)

In that sense, then, Analysys Mason isn't predicting the growth of the smart watch market but the growth of the Apple Watch market; a market that currently doesn't exist.

Android Wear is GO

On the back of the Google I/O conference in San Francisco, the first Android Wear watches have been released.

LG's G Watch ($229/£159) and Samsung's Gear Live ($199/£169 - more expensive in the UK for some reason) can now be pre-ordered for early July delivery.

Motorola's much anticipated 360 (around $250) is expected sometime during the summer.

On the wrist

Of course, the point of this first generation of smartphones is - like the Pebble - to link to your phone and act as a notification point for messaging and Google Now, as well as providing the opportunity for voice search.

They will also sync with peripherals such as heart rate monitors, although it's not clear that these devices will attract the  fitness crowd per se. Design-wise, they're just a bit professional.

Next up, let's see if Apple can fulfil its "50 million sales" expectations...

How Google expects Android Wear to make you more present in the real world

"More present in the real world, yet more connected to the virtual world."

That's what Google's Timothy Jordan reckons is the guiding principle behind Android Wear.

"It's a fundamentally different mobile device," he says of the watch compared to a phone, asking developers to think about the wrist and the micro-interactions that best fit with the form factor.

Of course, voice interaction is probably the most important change, at least in terms of UX.

The diagram below shows how Google thinks Android Wear will improve the speed of getting information.

Check out the full video below.

Why smart watch market share estimates remain meaningless hokum

According to market intelligence outfit Strategy Analytics, the smart watch market is exploding.

It reckons global shipments were up 250 percent year-on-year in Q1 2014 to over 700,000 units.

The key driver of this growth was Samsung, which shipped 500,000 units, taking an estimated 71 percent market share.

What tosh...

Whether the numbers are correct or not - and the fact these are units shipped not sold is a clue - it's pretty clear Samsung is not going to be the market leader on this sort of scale.

After all, back in 2013, rival market intelligence outfit Canalyst estimated that Samsung had a 54 percent market share but that was when it had shipped lots of Galaxy Gear smartphones, many of which were subsequently returned to retailers because it was a rubbish product.

But did Canalyst track those returns? Did it heck.

Of course, the more vital issue with Samsung smart watches is they only work with Samsung phones. Sure, that's a big market but it also demonstrates that Samsung doesn't get the potential of smart watches in the way that Pebble (which supports iOS and Android phone) does - and I'm not just saying that because I'm a Pebbler.

But, perhaps even more importantly, the smart watch market is so nascent at the moment that until we've had a couple of quarters of Android Wear hardware shipping (and more importantly being sold and worn by real people), there's little point even discussing market share percentages.

Still, if you have $6,999 burning a hole in your pocket, feel free to buy Strategy Analytics' no doubt awesome 6-page report. 

LG gets all operatic about its G Watch

LG seems to be very confident about its G Watch. It's one of the many smart watches that's built using Google's Android Wear wearables platform.

I'm not sure the music appeals to the target audience, though.

Motorola looks to reinvent the smartwatch

Following the news that Google's released its preview for the Android Wear SDK, Motorola has revealed a neat-looking smartwatch.

Called the moto 360, it takes a high-end approach with a round face and analog styling; that's in contrast to the smartwatches we've seen from the likes of Samsung, Sony, Pebble etc.

There's no news on pricing yet, but availability in the US will be sometime during the summer. 

Fitbit and Samsung market leaders in fitness bands and smart watch sector, reckons Canalys

ABI Research recently licked its finger and raised it to the breeze, predicting 90 million wearable devices will be shipped in 2014.

Now rival market intelligence outfit Canalys has got more specific (if more pessimistic), suggesting 17 million wearable bands will ship in 2014. It reckons 9 million will be fitness bands like Fitbit Force, while 8 million will be smart watches like Pebble.

Shipments are predicted to rise to 23 million units in 2015; a 35 percent rise.

Looking at the current situation, Canalys has considered the market share of the key competitors in each sector. For what it calls "basic wearable bands", it gives Fitbit a 58 percent of the global market, followed by Jawbone at 21 percent.

That's probably about right as general consensus - which I agree with - is that Fitbit's devices are the best, with Jawbone, Nike and the rest struggling to catch up.

Surprisingly, however, Canalys thinks that Samsung is leading when it comes to smart watches. This is surprisingly, as though the company has spend tens of millions of marketing dollars, its Galaxy Gear watch is generally considered to be useless.

Similarly, devices from second placed Sony have not found much critical acclaim, leaving Pebble - in third place with 16 percent market share - in a stronger position than the numbers suggest.

I couldn't sleep wearing a Basis B1 fitness watch

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The only point of wearables is if you wear them.

Over the next decade, it seems likely to me that wearables will become invisible as they integrated within our homes, clothes, perhaps even our bodies.

The point is what they track is important. We won't want them to have screens on them. All that data will be crunched in the cloud and the important bits displayed on any personal screen we happen to use.

Long pre-amble to the incredibly-looking Basis B1 health tracker ($199)

It's a monster, which is fine if like the Nike and Adidas sports watches, you're using it to track activity. However, a core feature of the Basis is how it analyses your sleep.

Personally, I have enough problems wearing a Fitbit Flex to sleep and that's about the smallest, thinner tracker there is. Wearing a brick on your wrist isn't going to be conductive to good sleep, although one thing Basis has done correctly that you don't need to push any buttons to toggle between sleep/active mode.

I'd also be interested to see how accurate the heart rate tracker is compared to a proper chest strap, but that's another complaint for another time.

Pebble Steel is fool's gold

As I've always said, the issue with wearables isn't the technology or the features (although there has to be a minimum of these).

The issue is whether you actually want to wear them.

For me, the original Pebble watch was on the borderline of being wearable; slightly tacky and plastic-y, but at least it was colourful and toy-like

The new range of Pebble Steel watches - a pre-CES announcement - are truly horrible, however. Again, it's not the technology or features, it's just the look.

The Pebble is not a high-class piece of consumer electronics. It's an early adopter gadget. If I want a watch with a CNC milled steel case and Gorilla glass, I don't want a Pebble. Ugh!

Pebble Steel will be available, priced $249 from 29 January. 

Despite $350 price tag, ugly Qualcomm Toq sells out initial run

Following the over-priced monstrosity that was Adidas' $399 miCoach sport watch comes something similar from phone chip company Qualcomm.

Called the Toq smartwatch, it's a phone companion, not an activity monitor - like the ill-received Galaxy Gear from Samsung.

Currently it's only available in US, but despite its $350 price, the initial batch has sold out, with further units not expected for 1-2 weeks.

Of course, this is likely to be the case because the initial production run would have been very small - a few thousand - while the Toq also works with any smartphone running Android 4.0.3 or better (unlike the Galaxy Gear which only works with certain Samsung phones).

Still, it's another small demonstration of the nascent demand for these type of devices, no matter how ugly and overpriced.

Ahead of the pulse

Despite my note about the Danger of Data, there appears to be a strong move in the industry when it comes to heart monitoring.

As we all know, wearing a chest band is the best way (to-date) of measuring heart rate, but people don't like wearing these monitors or the additional cost.

Instead, they want heart monitor built into existing watch or bracelets. Indeed, Withings has a small pulse meter built into its Pulse pod tracker, although this isn't for tracking during exercise.

Perhaps the answer is new techniques for measuring heart rate. One interesting approach is the ability to measure the tiny amount of redding on the face using a web cam as each heart beat forces blood into the skin's capillaries

The face is useful in this regard because it has a large area and a large volume of blood flow. I don't think this sort of technique would work if integrated into a watch.

In that regard, I think Adidas is using more conventional monitoring in terms of its $399 miCoach Smart Run watch, which contains a heart rate monitor.

Yet now we hear that ex-Nokia outfit PulseOn has raised €1 million in VC funding to commercialise its optical heart rate monitor technology.

The race is certainly on...

Adidas goes big, big, big with its $399 miCoach Smart Run watch

Can you have too much of a good thing?

It's something to consider as Adidas announces it's competing with the likes of the Nike+ TomTom, revealing its new fitness watch - the miCoach Smart Run.

Due for release on 1 November, it's a large piece of kit that will retail for a large chunk of cash - $399.

Of course, for that you expect - and will get - an all-singing all-dancing watch. As well as the usual GPS tracking, the watch includes a pulse meter built into the back of the case.

How accurate this will be is the important question, however, given that chest straps have always been the standard way to get a proper measurement of heart rate.

The other interesting news is that the watch will run the Android 4.1.1 OS, giving it a mere 4 hours battery life when everything is switched on. It is a standalone device, so won't connect to your smartphone, which could be good or bad, depending on your point of view.

As the name suggests, the miCoach Smart Run builds on Adidas' existing miCoach range of fitness apps (and shoe-based) hardware trackers. The latter have been more focused on sports such as football and basketball rather than running, though, making this something of a brave move for the company - but mainly because of that price.