Develop Bugs

Any Regrets

I'm looking to finally pick up a smart watch and at this point I'm heavily leaning towards the sw3. Any regrets with choosing the Sony? Also considering the Zenwatch.
Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

Same here

no regrets
No regrets here at the moment. Software support to GPS and Bluetooth HR will come, but takes time.

Would recommend
After a month using it, would definitely buy again. The apps I'm using most are the music player and the gps, both stand alone. Can't wait for a proper app to make use of the gps while running.

After 3 days using
So far so good...
Still learning how to squeeze the battery juice to the max for 2 days usage.
My opinion for purchase, just follow ur heart.

chinfong said:
So far so good...
Still learning how to squeeze the battery juice to the max for 2 days usage.
My opinion for purchase, just follow ur heart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only regret is that google is taking too dam long to release updates. This watch may get 3 day battery life with android wear 5.0, as they are saying the moto360 is increasing 1+ day. Plus, if they could support offline actions, the onboard wifi, BLTE profiles, this would be killer

So far it delivers on the main features I bought it for (decent waterproofing, standalone GPS & ability to listen to music without having to cart my phone about).
General Comments would be:
Offline GPS tracking is getting there (I'm on the Runkeeper beta) and will only get better as more apps support it.
Standalone music playback is solid, although a bit slow getting music on the device.
USB charging port is fine albeit a bit fiddly. That said I much prefer it to a proprietary charging mechanism.
It's early days for android wear so my expectations were low on that front, but I've been pleasantly surprised at how genuinely useful some of the features are even at this early stage in the evolution of the platform.

jughead17 said:
I'm looking to finally pick up a smart watch and at this point I'm heavily leaning towards the sw3. Any regrets with choosing the Sony? Also considering the Zenwatch.
Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No regrets, the transflective LCD tech is really a great concept, and this comes from someone who despises LCD but on a smartwatch I think the transflectiveness is better than OLED. I think the sw3 is the only AW device with this kind of screen.
Choosing the sw3 is the best way to future proof since it is the only AW device with gps at the moment and AFAIK the only one with a Wi-Fi chip. Wi-fi support is in the works for AW.

But...... the price to pay is no color on dim mode, with transflectif only monochrome when all another wear can display mono or color in dim mode. I have a SW2 with transflective display and it is very sad and as it is in dim mode 90% of the time it is sad 90% of the time

dersie said:
But...... the price to pay is no color on dim mode, with transflectif only monochrome when all another wear can display mono or color in dim mode. I have a SW2 with transflective display and it is very sad and as it is in dim mode 90% of the time it is sad 90% of the time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It reminds me of my pebble :3

nobunnysapro said:
It reminds me of my pebble :3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And I have also a pebble (And LG G-Watch and R-Watch, and Sony SW1 (and LiveView))

Dersie which is your favorite of your watches?
Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

No regrets
IP68 + GPS + 420mAh battery + transflective screen. It fits perfectly my needs.
Sooner there will be GPS apps for android wear, golden era of SW3 is comming.

dersie said:
But...... the price to pay is no color on dim mode, with transflectif only monochrome when all another wear can display mono or color in dim mode. I have a SW2 with transflective display and it is very sad and as it is in dim mode 90% of the time it is sad 90% of the time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dersie said:
But...... the price to pay is no color on dim mode, with transflectif only monochrome when all another wear can display mono or color in dim mode. I have a SW2 with transflective display and it is very sad and as it is in dim mode 90% of the time it is sad 90% of the time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but isn't daylight visibility important on a watch? It is winter and dark most of the day here now but I imagine that this will be very nice on a bright summer day.
They might be able to use OLEDs with white sub pixels on future models or some kind of e ink hybrid solution but we're not there yet.

mertzi said:
Yes but isn't daylight visibility important on a watch? It is winter and dark most of the day here now but I imagine that this will be very nice on a bright summer day.
They might be able to use OLEDs with white sub pixels on future models or some kind of e ink hybrid solution but we're not there yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes you are right but 98% of time I want to look at clock I'm indoor mostly dark room, and not many time in sunlight. So 98% of time it is better to have display emitted light. So often even with transflective display I must backlight the watch and with OLED nothing todo, allways able to see even in total dark without touch the watch.
With OLED even in full sunlight you can view your watch if you select for outdoor clock with dark hand and white background like :
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3dhZYESs_5bZ2hHc3JKNDNhVnM/view?usp=sharing
or also I tried this :
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3dhZYESs_5bQ3k1anpGdVFmNkk/view?usp=sharing
only with brightness 2 (and we can setup up to 6).
I think if you have a clear backgroung you can see very well the black numbers even with sun in the display.

hellos
I am interested in this watch but I was wondering if it was suitable for sports because it semnble me that there is no built-in heart monitor. there you it suddenly solutions for cardiac rytme?

ced360 said:
hellos
I am interested in this watch but I was wondering if it was suitable for sports because it semnble me that there is no built-in heart monitor. there you it suddenly solutions for cardiac rytme?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just take your pulse with your fingers. Just as easy to do an probably more accurate than any of these devices with hr monitors built in.
Sent from my SM-N910V using XDA Free mobile app

ced360 said:
hellos
I am interested in this watch but I was wondering if it was suitable for sports because it semnble me that there is no built-in heart monitor. there you it suddenly solutions for cardiac rytme?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The sw3 has bt but I don't think you can pair it with a hrm at the moment. Maybe some app will support it in the future
tu3218 said:
Just take your pulse with your fingers. Just as easy to do an probably more accurate than any of these devices with hr monitors built in.
Sent from my SM-N910V using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe not the most convenient method while e.g. running. In fact I think it would be impossible with all that movement.

jughead17 said:
Dersie which is your favorite of your watches?
Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The most beautiful is the LG-R but wear is not very successful and very very very....... poor notification system. The most useable is by far the Sony SW2.
SW2 : a lot of app, all works well, notification 10/10, vibration 10/10, battery 10/10 always ON (between 3 at 5 days), many many watchface and can customize your face with what you would.
(I have also SmartQ ZWatch and Wimm-One)

Considering a return because of the ambient screen :(

It's a shame really, since I love EVERYTHING else about this watch - good price, snappy processor, GPS, WiFi (not even sure what that will bring eventually), NFC.
But with this thing serving primarily as a watch on my wrist, I just can't stand the ambient screen. From pretty much any angle it is a low-contrast, mustard-y yellow.
I'm looking at the LG R watch now. It's $50 more, and is missing a bunch of features, but the screen is GREAT. :'-(
I really wanted to like this watch! Please XDA, talk me into keeping it!!

** Delete **

loneBoat said:
It's a shame really, since I love EVERYTHING else about this watch - good price, snappy processor, GPS, WiFi (not even sure what that will bring eventually), NFC.
But with this thing serving primarily as a watch on my wrist, I just can't stand the ambient screen. From pretty much any angle it is a low-contrast, mustard-y yellow.
I'm looking at the LG R watch now. It's $50 more, and is missing a bunch of features, but the screen is GREAT. :'-(
I really wanted to like this watch! Please XDA, talk me into keeping it!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The LG P-OLED screen can burn in... Otherwise I possibly had bought it aswell.
I love the sw3 and especially the ambient mode screen and GPS. Its looks like a compromise between a e-ink and LCD..
But maybe it's a kind of different tastes.
Send with Tapatalk on Sony Z2

djgodlike said:
The LG P-OLED screen can burn in... Otherwise I possibly had bought it aswell
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point about the burn-in. I just searched over on the LG R watch forums and there's some horror stories of burn-in after just a week. :-o That may be a deal-breaker for me.
Hah! You may have talked me into staying on SW3 just as I requested - thanks! :highfive:

It's a garbage screen on a first-gen looking product. I returned mine for the same reason.

foxfire235 said:
It's a garbage screen on a first-gen looking product. I returned mine for the same reason.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't gotten mine yet but have played with it in store. I wouldn't say it's garbage. Is it on par with other android wear devices? Probably not. However, just as another user stated above, its sort of a mix between e ink and color. It seems to be helping to deliver great battery life with it too. Also, with the update it seems you guys can turn off the feature of activating the screen arm movement. So with this screen you can leave it on always on mode and still be able to see the screen without killing battery. All the android wear devices are first gen tech, but the Sony SW 3 still offers so much more than any of the other watches. For that, I can certainly deal with the screen negatives. Even though it does offer positives so its not completely bad, therefore back to my point that I wouldn't call it garbage.

I like the screen...in my office or while outdoor, I can look at it at any time and almost any angle and can see the time w/o artifiially tilting my arm, or pressing a button. The screen is always on and I get easly 2 days...that is worth a lot to me. My 2 cents....

No matter how you look at it the pro's outweigh the con's.And if you can't live with then just return it and I'll keep mine.

techrider6262 said:
No matter how you look at it the pro's outweigh the con's.And if you can't live with then just return it and I'll keep mine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 :good:
---------- Post added at 10:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 AM ----------
djgodlike said:
The LG P-OLED screen can burn in... Otherwise I possibly had bought it aswell.
I love the sw3 and especially the ambient mode screen and GPS. Its looks like a compromise between a e-ink and LCD..
But maybe it's a kind of different tastes.
Send with Tapatalk on Sony Z2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good point. It's a major flaw of OLED screen. SW3's transflective screen is the perfect choice for ambient mode. It's more readable in bright sunlight. Honestly, transflective LCD is born for outside activities.
I got my first SW3. The screen is too yellow with a small dark spot at the bottom of the screen. I returned it immediately and now the 2nd one is really good.

I disagree. Try taking your smartphone and let the sun shine on the screen (or a bright lamp) and lower the brightness. The whites and blacks will be very similar in color to the SW3's screen. I'm currently using the Odyssey watchface and sometimes it takes a while for the full watchface to turn on so I get the opportunity to seen the ambient screen with the backlight on. Whites are white on it. What I would like is for the ambient light sensor to turn on the backlight at minimal brightness in low light conditions.

my device is very white. It is of course no OLED screen that are over saturated mostly but i definetly see no yellow tint there on white (maybe a really tiny bit more yellowish but really nothing i notice at all in normal use).
And having the watch always on is such a huge + in my opinion. Yes you can't see the screen in low light situations. But honestly.
People are never happy. When the backlight would be always on some people would complain that the watch is always making light in the dark.
(which would annoy me probably more)
If you want correctly displayed colors you would need to calibrate your screens.
Who does that for home usage here?

It's definitely not first gen. I had first gen smartwatch from Sony, this one is ten times better

I would like the option for a low backlight on low light (current low backlight settings are too bright to begin with). I suppose that's what custom ROMs/root apps are for.

I like it on mine. The default faces are pretty bad on it in ambient mode, but I built ones for it on Facer that make it really easy to read.

vitaminxero said:
I would like the option for a low backlight on low light (current low backlight settings are too bright to begin with). I suppose that's what custom ROMs/root apps are for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure if you had something like this in mind ( http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=57615301 ) ...but I'm using this app and it lets me lower the brightness down to where it's much more comfortable for using my watch in bed at night. The developer is letting us try it out for free until 12/21... but I went ahead and bought it for a buck from the Play Store.

Grown to love ambient mode, except for complete darkness I can read the watch fine.
I have a Gear Live, try to go out in the sun and read the time, this watch no problem.
I purchased Facer, made myself a digital watch face with huge numbers that makes the watch even more visible in direct sun

vitaminxero said:
I disagree. Try taking your smartphone and let the sun shine on the screen (or a bright lamp) and lower the brightness. The whites and blacks will be very similar in color to the SW3's screen. I'm currently using the Odyssey watchface and sometimes it takes a while for the full watchface to turn on so I get the opportunity to seen the ambient screen with the backlight on. Whites are white on it. What I would like is for the ambient light sensor to turn on the backlight at minimal brightness in low light conditions.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed! I live in Florida (the sunshine state) and spend lots of time outdoors. Our days are long, it's almost always sunny, and the sun is INTENSE! I got this watch specifically because of this display. Try reading an OLED display outdoors in Florida sun. Even my Note4 with its high-brightness outdoor mode is barely readable. Yet my SW3 is clear as day, with or without the backlight. Yes, it definitely doesn't look as pretty indoors as the OLED screens, but for my use its perfect. Not like I'm watching movies on it or anything. I'm glad Sony decided to carry over the transflective tech from the SW2...it was a bold move but it's one of the things that sets this product apart. If you don't like it, there are plenty of competing products on the market.
I just wish there was a way to disable the backlight under any ambient light conditions, like my SW2. One of the firmware updates for the SW2 introduced a smarter backlight that stayed off, even when in use, when there was enough ambient light, like outdoors. While it makes no difference in appearance, it helps conserve battery.

Calvin Gross said:
+1 :good:
---------- Post added at 10:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 AM ----------
Good point. It's a major flaw of OLED screen. SW3's transflective screen is the perfect choice for ambient mode. It's more readable in bright sunlight. Honestly, transflective LCD is born for outside activities.
I got my first SW3. The screen is too yellow with a small dark spot at the bottom of the screen. I returned it immediately and now the 2nd one is really good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Transflective screens are also installed on all Garmin outdoor standalone GPS: if you want a well readable screen on EVERY situation you need a transfective.... NOT a AMOLED.
Amoled is much contrasted and wonderful on artificial light or on low natural light, but is a pain during summer outdoor activity (and need maximum power consumption to be barely readable)

heavyhms said:
Transflective screens are also installed on all Garmin outdoor standalone GPS: if you want a well readable screen on EVERY situation you need a transfective.... NOT a AMOLED.
Amoled is much contrasted and wonderful on artificial light or on low natural light, but is a pain during summer outdoor activity (and need maximum power consumption to be barely readable)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The transflective display is one of the big selling points of this watch if you ask me. It's visible in pretty much any light except very low. I don't have to turn the backlight on to see it (saves battery) and it's viewable in direct sunlight. This is a huge plus for anyone taking this thing out for runs or bike rides. I'm a long distance runner and use this watch exclusively for tracking and music, it works great!

The screen on the Sony Smartwatch 3 is the best, hands the fak down!! Always on and viewable, just as watch suppose to be.
Its comical sporting a watch thats turned off until you put it up in front of your grill to turn ON...gayness to the fullest.

Just ordered one, I'm cominng from an LG G R watch what can I expect?

So I tend to use both the LG G R watch as a daily driver and my Samsung Neo when I go joggin since I can easily just attach it to my computer and just drag and drop music. Before this I use to use the Sony SW2 which was okay for it's time.
My question is, can I expect anything crazy from this SW3? I know it has the GPS and decent enough screen that I can see in daylight but is there anything else?
I also bought a Pebble Steel yesterday and that's going straight back.

Comfortable to wear, excellent screen for viewing just about whenever except dark, with the screen "off". So it's perfect for being a watch and easily lasts 48 hours with always displaying the time. Screen will look dull compared to your GWR but its visibility outweighs that flaw. GPS can be sometimes erratic but no solid evidence about that. Getting the USB cover out can be tricky but not that bad, but it's awesome knowing you can charge it wherever without an accessory. Best waterproof rating of any android wear smart watch. Other than nothing to crazy. It's a solid watch that stands out cause its GPS, and its pretty futureproof with that, wifi, and a big one being NFC. Just need google to open that up.

Nothing more to add but I really like mine and feel I made the right choice, It was either the G watch R, Asus Zenwatch and this one. Got this one and haven't regretted it at all, I find it really useful and battery life is great.
Out of interest why are you leaving the G Watch R behind? I'm in the middle of writting an app and struggling with just the Sony with it being square and was thinking of picking up the G Watch R so I could test on a round device (and have another toy)

better screen, better mic, better battery
Also band is better, plus its lighter.

I have both the SW3 and the GWR. The GWR is a prettier watch, the SW3 is a more useful gadget. I use my GWR as a dress watch and the SW3 for everything else. The main reason is the trans- reflective display, I can live with it being duller because I can read it in daylight, even with sunglasses on. I got over it not looking like a watch a long time ago. In fact most of the watch faces I use don't even look like a traditional watch. I would also rate it even higher if the light sensor was a bit more effective in dimming the screen at night.

I don't think the light sensor is needed at all on the SW3. I always keep mine at the lowest brightness level, and it is very readable anyway. In fact, the more ambient light, the better.

Sony Smart Watch 3 Review

Sony Smart Watch 3 Review
TLDR? Quick version here.
First Impressions: A small plain little box, clear plastic and the rather plain looking watch. It’s all quite an non-fancy affair, simple and nondescript. The watch is just like the box, plain and simple looking. Actually I like it in the flesh more than in photos, the matte black strap with the silver clasp and the black face. Mind you in photos the metal silver one looks considerably more fancy. I’ve seen it said that you should be able to buy the silver strap and transfer the watch face into it. That is something I certainly fancy the idea of.
Specifications: OS Android Wear, Display Resolution 320 x 320, Colors 16 bit, Diagonal Size 1.6", Transflective TFT LCD, Dimensions 36mm x 10mm x 51mm, Weight Watch Module 38g, Sport armband 36g, Battery 420mAh, Processor 1.2 GHz, Quad-core ARM® Cortex™ A7, Water and Dust Resistance IP68, Memory 4GB eMMC with 512 MB RAM, Ports & Connectors Micro USB, Connectivity Bluetooth 4.0, WiFi ready, Sensors Ambient Light, Accelerometer, Magnetometer, Gyro, GPS, Vibration Motor, Microphone
Okay that’s a lot of spec’s. so what bits of it matter? Well it’s pretty similar to most Android Wear watches. The RAM, the CPU, the storage space, the screen size and resolution are pretty much all the some as every other one. So why did I buy this one? Well that’s easy but unless you know about screen technologies you won’t have picked up what makes the Sony Smartwatch 3 different.
Accessories: Well the 3 comes in an assortment of coloured strap options. It also can come in metal and personally I think the metal one one looks freekin’ awesome. Sony did once say they were going to make the metal band available……… yeah they still haven’t and at this point I don’t see it coming. You can buy the rubber straps, they do black, white, luminous yellow or bright pink. Yet those straps seem to go for over £30. Errr no. Ebay also seems largely bereft of things, other than screen protectors. They also curiously do a universal holder thing. You put the watch facing into a rather unattractive black plastic holder and that then attaches to standard fitting watch straps. If it was metal and not black plastic I’d be all over that but as it stands, na, it’s pretty ugly.
Fit/Comfort: Excellent on both accounts. Now for charging the snap shut strap band thingy may be a pain in that it doesn’t separate but for use on the arm? Great stuff. Set to the size I wanted, hand goes in, snap the thing closed and voilà. I’m normally not wild about plastic/rubber straps as I find it traps sweat and you can get a bit of skin irritation. Though its easily cleaned and because the strap comes away from the electronic bit you can stick it under a running tap.
Screen: Some Android wear watches use AMOLED which only consumes power as it lights up individual pixels. So a mostly black screen will use relatively little power, a mostly white and it’ll eat much more. Then there is a normal LCD display. They work by shining a light behind the screen then the screen blocks out colours to make a picture. The whole screen is powered up no matter if you show a mostly black face or mostly white. The key similarity with both technologies is that they need to consume power to light up in order to be visible.
The Sony watch uses a transflective screen. If you don’t know what that means I’ll explain. An AMOLED screen is emissive, each pixel emits its own light. A normal LCD is a transmisive screen, allowing light to pass through the screen and it has to be bright enough to be visible, which is why LCD screens are pretty rubbish in the sunshine. A transflective is different. Transflective screens have a backlight just like a normal LCD but it also is reflective. That means with the back light (the power hungry backlight) is off you can still see what’s on the screen by utilising the ambient light of where you are. This makes is possible to permanently have the time showing on the display! Something that is kinda handy for a watch. It also means that in the brightest sunshine you can still read the screen too, in fact the brighter the environment the more light there is for it to reflect, just like an e-ink screen would. A feature I for one think rather useful in a watch.
Simply put this screen is what makes it a viable device to use in real, normal life.
UI: The user interface is the standard Android Wear one. Everything is a sequence of up/down to get to new cards. Then scrolling left to progressively go into that cards details. So the weather one, first card tells you the weather right now. The next card to the right tells the weather for the next series of hours then the next one gives you the option to open the app on your phone. The cards you have available changes based on what Google Now cards Google thinks are appropriate. Oh and of course any notifications you have outstanding. Personally I’d like the weather card to be always available. So I have to not sweep it away and sometimes you just do it without thinking.
It is actually a bit complex when you start adding in all the different notifications and different apps that add cards, you can over load yourself. You can fill it up and make it practically as complex to use as your phone is. Add in your own app drawer and everything, Wear Mini Launcher is so freekin’ awesome!!! Sure it’s not for everyone but if you want complexity and having every imaginable option in the world available to you then it’s just fantastic. I personally love it and the interface to all my apps it provides. However in many ways it’s not what you want for a watch and I understand that. It’s not for everyone and as is shown by the Iphone popularity, mind numbingly locked down and limited is a boon to many.
In short the UI can be as complicated as you like, though it can still be fairly simple if you want it that way but it require you to remember what commands you have available to you so it may not be for everyone.
Features: Erm anything and everything just about. In terms of what’s common in a smart watch the things it doesn’t have is Qi charging and more oddly, no heart Rate monitor function. Now given I have things that can do that, I’m aware just how not super useful that functionality is, they don’t monitor you continuously because it would destroy the battery so it’s only read when you tell it to. Sony for some reason, in might I add its very sporty looking watch, did not include it. The trade-off it seems is that it has built in GPS rather than simply relying on the phone (which may be in a pocket or at home) so the watch can chart your outdoors run itself. Yeah I live in Edinburgh and don’t run so it’s not such a boon to me.
The other lacking item, no Qi means that you have an awkwardly placed micro USB slot to charge it underneath a rubber flap. This is so awkward to use, I immediately hit up old ebay and got a right angle adapter for the damn thing. Seriously Sony what the F were you thinking? I know it does have a better water proof rating, IP68, which has been said is thanks to the rubber flap but I don’t see how Qi would have made that worse?
The thing also has not just Bluetooth but Wi-Fi too so….. what that means is you can use the watch without a phone. Stream Google Music directly to your Bluetooth headphones while on your run outside that the built in GPS can track for you. You can leave your gigantic phone at home. Though where you’re getting Wi-fi that you wouldn’t be wanting your phone with you anyway, yeah I don’t know. A gym that bans phones maybe?
Frankly, far and away the best “feature” on the 3 is that transflective screen. Words can’t express how useful it is over the highly pretty but battery destroying AMOLED on the 360. Personally having used both, I don’t think I’d buy a non transflective screened watch. Well e-ink maybe.
Build Quality: Very good. I have mixed thoughts on the rubbery strap, that may be because Sony swore the Silvery metal one would be coming separately and it yet has to. Still it’s nice so ignore my bitter grumble. Its everything you would just expect from something Sony stamped on it.
Usability: Well its really up to you. If you want it nice and simple you can keep it pretty simple. If you don’t then you can add it full of everything and have it tell you whatever you like. It really was a joy to use, I vastly preferred it over my Moto 360 and its retarded circularish screen. While the almost round screen looks great and watch like but the fact is square is more functionally useful. It just is better to use. Seriously, everything is made squareish, try imaging what a round monitor, round TV or round book would be to use. Square make it so easy to just swipe in or out across the screen. Round is awkward and frustrating. I really cannot emphasis enough how nice to use the Smart Watch 3 is. It’s so pleasant and easy, straight forward and really what I would hope all Android Wear things to be.
Battery: When it’s behaving, 2 days and maybe into a third depending on how much you use the thing. That’s what it’s like on a good days however, since the last update it got, I think that turned on the Wi-Fi direct thing the battery sometimes seem to just tear through the battery. I mean in half a day its gone. I don’t know what causes this battery abuse and thus I don’t have any way to avoid the circumstances that cause the battery destruction. Its entirely unpredictable and thus when it happens the first you may know of it is when you go to use the thing and it’s just dead. Very frustrating, VERY VERY VERY, get it fixed Sony, Google whoever is to blame.
N.B. So of course just after writing there was an update, seemingly it has cured the random battery drain issue so it’s back to being great. Still I’m not giving it weeks to time to test and confirm it’s cured so that’s why I’m leaving this as is.
Connectivity: It has Bluetooth® 4.0, NFC, Micro USB and Wi-Fi. It doesn’t specify the WiFi so I have taken it to be 802.11G. NFC doesn’t seem to do much but assist in pairing super easily. Though I suppose that if Google Pay is less utterly useless than Google Wallet was then maybe one day you might be able to pay for things with it. I however, would certainly not hold my breath on that one. (Frowny face at Google.) Otherwise Bluetooth worked just perfectly and without the faintest whiff of an issue. Paired easy, stayed connected, always reconnected easily and range was great.
Value: The metal one is currently going for about £185ish which is roughly what the Rubberbanded ones started at. They however have since plummeted to about £110. I look at the Smart Watch 3, at the £60 odd fit bit and my god, the 3 is vastly, vastly, vastly better and more feature filled. If you want it to be just a pedometer it’ll do that and act as a watch should and tell you the time. That’s already double what the Flex can. The other reason why this is super good value is that transflective screen. There is no way you can quite grasp how important that screen is. It stays visible not just in the blazing sunshine but it can be always on with negligible power consumption. You can glance at your arm and see the time!!!! Trust me these sound so stupid and trivial and they are too. They are right up until you use an Android Wear watch that has a normal type of emissive display. Just trust me on this.
Conclusion: The Smart Watch 3 isn’t a faultless device. That wonky battery issue is the most glaring thing but it’s only a software issue as it didn’t do it before. At present it seems cured however. The lack of Qi, well with the right angled adapter I bought it’s not so bad anymore and the rubber cover flap thing, well I’ve just gotten used to it. The positives waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than make up for it. That screen. That tranflective screen is the star feature of the 3. Sure when you first see it, it won’t wow you. It does look a little washed out in comparison to the stunning OLED one of the 360. It looks so lacking in colour and mildly greyed out. Ahhh but then you walk outside. You can see the 3 perfectly, it is perfectly clear somewhat like those of e-ink screens. The 360 in comparison may as well be a mirror attached to your arm.
So what about indoors then? It not like Edinburgh is blessed with endless days of brilliant sunshine. So the watch, on your arm, you flick it ever so slightly and glance down. With the 3 you can read the display and see the time, all the time. In theory the 360 can light up with a wrist flick but it’s not a subtle wrist flick or you can have it always, dimly lit. That destroys the battery like you would not believe. The transflective one on the 3 is the screen type that ALL Android Wear watched ought to use. Google needs to mandate its use. Yes it really is that good over normal display types.
The rest, well that’s really a question of if you want an Android Wear watch. I’d say you do if you have bothered to read this. It’s not something you will ever need but it’s so convenient glancing at your wrist rather than pulling out your ginganto phone just to see the time or to see who it was that just texted you. The little vibration on the wrist I found super helpful in actually noticing notifications too. That and telling the time was worth it for me. You? Well only you can answer that but if you have read this far, you clearly want one and the Smart Watch 3 is no question, THE Android Wear watch to get.
N.B. i did have photos but it seems to be a total arse to add them to XDA, that is why there is none showing.

Nice review. I believe that the usb charge option is great as i can charge it in most places. Nowadays microusb is everywhere. QI charging cannot even use the phone equivalent version so I need to carry the mobile one which is kind of irritating.

Nice review. I am new to the SW3 and currently have an iphone 5s so I'm using with the new iOS Android Wear (I'm hoping to change my phone to a OP2 soon) The functionality on iOS is currently very limited so I'm definitely not getting the most out the device but that aside I'm enjoying the experience.
Do you really thing NFC will not be able to be use for Android pay? I really hope it will.

Would you buy one today?

Hey everyone,
So I like to bike maybe once a week and have typically used Map My Ride or Strava to, well, map my rides. But I'm on Project Fi now so am becoming a miser with my data. I was thinking of getting a SW3 and using GhostRacer and the built in GPS to handle that but wanted to see if it is still worth it. I know the 360 Sport is around but the reviews haven't been stellar. Assuming the price is in the $100-$125 range is it still worth it?
I do also go to the gym a couple of days a week so keeping music on the watch and using headphones is a plus as well.
Thanks,

I owned both SW3 and Moto 360 Sport, however I just sold the 360 Sport yesterday because the battery drained on it a lot faster than on the SW3. I prefered the look of the Moto 360 Sport over the SW3 even though I own the SS, Universal strap and silicone strap for the SW3. Both are also water resistant.
Here is a breakdown of pro and cons.
The display of both watches are similar other than round vs square, however the Moto display is a bit nicer with more vibrant colors and while in ambient mode it's in color vs b&w.
Moto 360 Sport also has a built in optical HR monitor SW3 does not.
SW3 has replaceable watch band, infinite combination, Moto 360 Sport comes in White, Black, and Orange and you can not replace the bands.
Again, battery life is night and day better on the SW3 additionally you can charge is with any Micro USB cable vs a proprietary wireless charger. Additionally SW3 charges really fast, almost 2X faster than Moto 360 Sport.
SW3 has built in NFC, you can't do much with it now but future updates may give you more options.
I haven't used either watch with the headphones, so I can't comment on that aspect of the watch.
So I would say go with SW3 and save some money, you'll have no regrets.

Had the SW3 for about 6 months now and I love it. I use it for tracking runs, playing music paired with BT headphones and for keeping track of my appointments. It's great for the price, but I suggest holding out a while longer until announcements for support (or lack thereof) for Android Wear 2.0 come out. Motorola has confirmed it won't be getting the software update for the 1st gen Moto360, so there's a good chance the SW3 won't either..so you might be better off getting one of the newer models. I'm thinking the price might still go down if it won't support AW 2.0, but if it does, at the current price it's a steal.

pawces said:
Motorola has confirmed it won't be getting the software update for the 1st gen Moto360, so there's a good chance the SW3 won't either..so you might be better off getting one of the newer models.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because first gen has bad processor and bad battery.
SW3 has same processor than Moto 2nd gen and other actual wear watch.

dersie said:
Because first gen has bad processor and bad battery.
SW3 has same processor than Moto 2nd gen and other actual wear watch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I won't get my hopes up. It may have the hardware requirements , but seeing as the SW3 was the last of the 1st gen devices to get the recent android update, Sony may not be too keen on putting any more effort into the device. Still a great device for the price it's going for now though, and a good entry point into Android Wear for minimal $. Just bear in mind that when purchasing any piece of tech, it's bound to become obsolete in a year or so, simply because that's how fast technology is evolving. Hardly anything is future-proof these days.

I have this watch for a couple of months now and yes I absolutely love it. Might even buy a second one, for no other reason than having a spare, just in case. I'm sad that smart watches aren't really popular - I'd love to have a SW3 with better hardware and a heart rate sensor - but this watch is great. I use it for stuff like skating and thanks to the great location tracking, I can safely leave my phone at home, and when I'm back it will sync my whole route. This took a looong time the last time I did it, but ok, I rode for 30km so that's probably a lot of data to sync. Now I can see my entire route back on Google Fit. I really love that.
As a sysadmin I also use my watch for easy notifications, and for dispatching tasks to Tasker, using WearTasker. It's great that I don't need to take my phone each time I get a notification. This also applies to when I'm driving - using my phone when I'm on the road is something I absolutely never do, and now, when I get a message, I get it on my watch, so at least I can see if it's something urgent.
The voice capabilities work well enough to also make this a lovable feature.
The rubber wrist band fits nicely. I also bought a, what's the name, the plastic thing in which you can fit a band of your own choice. But I like the rubber band a lot more.
The display works great with a screen protector and the light sensor also works good.
All in all.. what's there not to love about this watch?

Have had mine for about seven months now. Overall I'm very happy with the watch and will probably (hopefully) keep it for a long time.
I'm most impressed by the battery life, which is great, and the durability of the display. I'm very neurotic about my phone's screen, always using tempered glass protectors, but I've worn the SW3 without any kind of screen condom pretty much all the time for over half a year, and the display still looks like brand spanking new. Thing is tough, is what I'm saying.

I just went through all of this myself when my original SW3 broke. I went through all of the available smartwatches and started narrowing them down. I like running but hate taking my phone because of its size (6p). I found an awesome Amazon Warehouse deal on a 360 Sport. The band is a deal breaker. Plain and simple. Its awful. Everything sticks to it and it was uncomfortable for me. This wouldn't be an issue normally, but you cannot replace the band...ever. Also, potential issue with the 360 Sport is IP67 water resistance vs IP68 on the Sony SW3.
I also tried the Samsung Gear S due to its IP68 rating and heart rate. While the fit and finish is above and beyond what the SW3 has to offer, I missed the always-on TFT screen, Wear, Google Now (voice commands work amazingly well), and my customized Watchmaker Premium face (with Tasker integration .
I would still choose the SW3 today due to these things: battery life (2 days not uncommon), TFT display (always on without killing battery-visible in direct sunlight), ambient light sensor (I'm looking at you Huawei and Asus), microUSB charging (yes, it's kinda a pain, but you can charge anywhere-getting a right-angle USB cable helps make it less annoying to plug in), and interchangeable bands (I have 2 bands now. They are comfortable for me and quick clasp). Lack of heart rate does not bother me b/c I don't think any wrist-based HR is accurate enough to matter.
Note: I use my SW3 with headphones all the time. Works great. Syncing music is cake with Play Music, though, since it has USB, I would prefer if it supported MTP and you could just drag and drop whatever straight to the device. Definitely not a problem, just annoying to have to wait for all your offline music to sync over BT.

My main issue with my SW3 is the very very.... poor readability indoor in dim mode. With low light it is very difficult to read. And with only black & white dim mode most of the wear face are very bad. Even the pebble time LCD screen color is much better
Good outdoor 1% of the time but bad indoor 99% of the time.

dersie said:
My main issue with my SW3 is the very very.... poor readability indoor in dim mode. With low light it is very difficult to read. And with only black & white dim mode most of the wear face are very bad. Even the pebble time LCD screen color is much better
Good outdoor 1% of the time but bad indoor 99% of the time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I will say that the LCD in the SW3 is not the best for viewing angles and resolution. However, readability is never an issue for me. The main reason is the ambient light sensor. I tried a Zenwatch 2 (which is a nice watch for the money), but the lack of the ambient light sensor meant the screen was always too dim or too bright. I don't want to fiddle with brightness every time I go outside or back inside. Yes, the always on TFT mode is going not the greatest for inside, but that's not its point. Still, sitting here at my desk under weak, florescent light, I can read it perfectly at a glance. That is another selling point for this watch. It is fairly useful as a watch...lol.

I am bit disappointed with my SW3, or more with Android Wear actually.
Besides notifications I have not been able to find much use for it. I had Pebble for two years and loved the way it handled notifications, with a certain third party app though. IMO Android Wear is quite clumsy and I miss more customisation options especially with the way notifications are handled. My battery lasts about a day and a night. For a smartwatch I guess that is not bad but I do miss Pebble's several days of juice.
So I am not sure if I would buy one now that I have used SW3 for few months...
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

Which Smart Watch?
I own the Sony S3 Smartwatch, the Samsung Gear S2 and two Moto 360 2nd generation watches. Yes, I have four smart watches for no reason other than I love gadgets. I also owned the Huawei smart watch for about a week before I exchanged it for a Moto 360. The Huawei is great but I have huge wrists. So the Moto looks best on my wrist. Anyway, I use each watch for different activities. Each watch has it's pros and cons and correlates directly to which activities they are best for. For instance, the Sony Smartwatch has the best waterproof rating. So I wear the Sony to the beach and for playing beach volleyball (any activity with the possibility of submersion). The Sony is also one of the only watches with on-board GPS. That's great when you want to track your movement without lugging the phone around with you. The Samsung Gear S2 is probably the most versatile and it's sort of a hybrid between a sports watch and a casual dinner watch (depends on which band you install). The Samsung works great in every aspect and is probably the best overall performer but you cannot wear it as a luxury piece. It just does not have the look of a luxury piece. That's where the Moto 360 2nd Gen comes into play. The Moto performs great but you don't want to wear it playing beach volleyball. The Moto is designed to look like a luxury time piece and it looks the part. Of course the stock straps with the Moto are absolute garbage. You will want to order good thick leather straps online (or nice stainless steel). Once you have installed the new 3rd party strap your Moto will look very much like a fine time piece similar to a Breitling, Tagheur, Omega, etc.... Then you just need to use the Watchmaker premium app to download hundreds of custom watch faces that resemble luxury time pieces. In conclusion, if you want the smart watch solely for exercise I suggest the Sony S3. If you want a very nice (large) watch that looks like a Rolex I'd suggest the Moto 360 (46 mm). If you want a smart watch for the office and exercising I'd suggest the Samsung Gear S2. Most importantly, all three of these watches are top performers with good processors and great screens. So the only thing that differs greatly is the appearance of the piece itself.