Is Your Smartwatch Really ‘Smart’? Rethinking Modern Watch Design

Form vs Functionality 

With "modernization," we went from physical pushers and knobs in cars to capacitive touch buttons for climate controls and infotainment systems. Until last year, my home had a 20-year-old kitchen vent hood with actual push buttons and knobs for suction control. I remember growing up using its small light to find midnight snacks. The tiny light was always just enough for me to find something but not bright enough for others to notice. I would press the button, the light would turn on, I'd grab some cookies, and enjoy.

I still try to do this, even when I need to cut down on snacks. But now, the manufacturers have decided to use touch buttons in the new hoods. The four closely placed capacitive buttons make it hard to guess which one you're pressing. And I can't slide my fingers over them to figure out which one is the light and which one will crank up the oh-so-loud suction at full speed.

I remember texting my friends back in the day on a Samsung keypad phone. After a while, you'd memorize every button press and soon be opening the SMS app and typing a quick text without even looking at your phone.

Sure, some things modern tech has caught up on—like phones now having haptics for button presses, giving you the "feel" that some action has been taken. But physical buttons did more than just confirm a tap; they made it easy to do quick tasks once you developed muscle memory for them.

Was this considered when they developed the concept of a "smart" watch as well? Is the touchscreen the only differentiation from a classic watch? Or is it the extra functionality we can now have on our wrist? Is being connected via Bluetooth to your phone what makes it "smart"?

A good number of movies make their audiences associate future tech with touch displays (and holograms, etc.), but that’s just it—they’re movies. They want to look good. They want their tech to look cool. This does not always translate to real-world functionality.

Try covering your smartwatch's display with your fingers. With just two fingers, you can almost cover its entirety.

Touchscreens work well on a phone—there's more screen space, more versatility with keyboards and buttons, and better content interaction. But what these companies seem to have overlooked is that, along with being tiny, a wristwatch's main function is to be a utility—something that tells you the time and maybe provides a little more information.

In the past, that information was limited to the date. I remember specialized Casio watches—some had calculators, some had world clocks, some had moon phases, and some even had compasses. Watches have always been companions, utilities that add easily accessible data and functions to an always-reachable place—your wrist.

People love Samsung watches' rotating bezels. They make navigation easy, allowing you to scroll through lists and text without your fingers covering the display. Apple Watch does this with a rotating crown. Both approaches still require you to touch the display at some point, leaving it smudged by the end of the day. And forget using these watches with wet or sweaty hands. To top it off, these watches last only a couple of days before needing a recharge.

So, what should a smartwatch be? Can a watch have all these "smart" features in a sleek simpler to use timepiece? That's the possibility we are challenging at TimeFlix