Is wearable equipment safe?

Absrtact: Smart watches that have been quiet for 10 years have begun to revive and become popular with the concept of wearable devices. Last week, I was with Inwatch founder Chen Mo to participate in the "It impact China-wearable equipment opportunities and future" salon event. An interesting detail is

The 10-year-old smart watch began to revive and became popular with the "wearable device" concept. Last week, I was with Inwatch founder Chen Mo to participate in the "It impact China-wearable equipment opportunities and future" salon event. One of the interesting details is that I was in the round-table discussion as a side of a wearable device, but I found that I had a disagreement with the device manufacturer on some points of view. Here are some of the points of disagreement I've listed and try to restore the views of both sides:

1, wear-type equipment safety?

Chen Mo that the safety of wearable equipment is controllable. In fact, their company's Inwatch products are also the privacy protection as one of the main features. The reason: wearable devices with special sensors can get biometric and physical data, but this data is hard to get when users don't share them.

My view is that the discussion of this issue is a bit unfounded, because the issue of privacy disclosure is unavoidable, for the most obvious example, online banking security? As usual, a large number of money theft occurred annually. What a device manufacturer can do is to create a closed system as much as possible, in which users entertain themselves, look at their own data and take precautions.

But one problem is that if you build a closed system and lose the sharing function, it means that the user's participation will fall. Social sharing is an important factor in the fire of airplanes. A realistic example is that many of the wearer of the smart bracelet, whose pleasure it is to exercise and share, actually exposes the individual's location information. So, this is a dilemma, and security and sharing are hard to do.

2, Google glasses have no future?

At the salon, several guests said they were not optimistic about the spectacle wear equipment. Chen Mo said: The glasses are not optimistic. The reason is that for this part of the consumer, the need for special customized lenses, this will be a very troublesome thing. And people who have worn glasses will not be willing to wear the same pair of glasses all the time, after all, the aesthetic needs of people are completely different.

Chinese Podcast "Friends of the chat" founder Friends Hide also said not optimistic about glasses.

My view is that Google glasses and smart watches, smart bracelet, like the location of the information acquisition terminal, and as a wearable device, it is another feature is not required to hold; This means that the existence of these products is that they can free up their hands to do some market segmentation work.

My other view is that the pan-mass market is dead and no product has the power to dictate the world in the market. Therefore, the meaning of the existence of Google Glasses, there may be medical field, there may be photography enthusiasts. Although this is not clear at the moment, but I think a price of 1500 of dollars of goods released, its early days must have done the user needs survey.

3. Is the value-added charge of wearable equipment reliable?

Most guests are bullish on value-added charges. Chen Mo said the current interest technology has been on sale of wearable equipment is not very profitable, the main profit points in the future data + services, with the current fiery smart TV as an example, the market has been a few brands at a very low price on the sale of Smart TV, their common denominator is that there are additional content, such smart TV can add more content distribution , content distribution also leads to a rise in the number of clicks, thus promoting advertising and other revenue, this model is easy to let consumers feel the value of money spent. Another wearing equipment manufacturers, Garmin China Region, director of product Huang said directly, the industry "money" very large, wearable equipment profit space considerable.

I am very not optimistic about the value-added charge of the guests. The reason is, I think the hardware + service is essentially the Silicon Valley as a representative of the European and American model, if this model to promote China, will certainly encounter acclimatized. One of the most obvious examples is that domestic e-books are largely closed, but Amazon's Kindle is living well. The real approach should be to focus on the integration of software and hardware, but through the hardware to show the price, rather than waiting for follow-up fees. In other words, the price of hardware is brought up through value-added services.

Last words:

Apart from the above differences, we also have consensus points in many places. For example, now the goal of everyone into the Bureau is to place the card in the enclosure instead of the circle money.