Why hasn't google made a pixel smartwatch yet?

>>60007638
>yet
you just answered it yourself

because wearables are retarded and Google is a shitty company who doesn't support their own products

>>60007638
You are a big guy.

>>60007782
But they are convenient

>>60007852
yeah another item to charge daily, so convenient

>>60007862
My apple watch loses like 15% battery a day.

>>60007638
Wearables failed because there was no affordable mid range, just terrible chink hand cancer for $20 and then nothing good until the $150 mark.

>>60008935
Disagree. Wearables don't do anything.
They literally don't do a thing. Many people don't even have a watch because they have a phone instead now. They just look at that. Always on display exists in some phones too. I have no idea what a wearable could ever do.

It is about the same effort to just whip out your phone and do the thing than to look at your watch and touch it, even if the apps were the same(they aren't).

Google Glass type shit might be worth it, but the watches are pointless.

Who actually needs a smartwatch?

There's zero demand.

>>60007638
I got a moto 360 for christmas and more than anything it's nice to check notifications when I'm at work with my phone plugged in nearby. I also sideloaded TouchOSC on it and got it controlling DMX lights so that's neat. Other than that texting and shit from it is terrible. Supposedly Android Wear 2.0 is coming and Moto 360 is on the list to get the upgrade but Lenovo are being dicks about it. I'm a fa/g/got so I like it but I can see the average user being disappointed, it really doesnt bring anything to the table, it is more or less an extension of notifications and simple tasks (like skipping to the next song or something).