[xyzzy_plugh]

Android is a much beefier OS than Pebble, which is an RTOS and doesn't scale down nearly as well. Pebble can produce products at such low prices and high-battery costs because they squeeze every drop out of their low cost hardware.

Most Android apps require more system resources than the entirety of a Pebble watch.

Aside, I'm continually impressed with Pebble, and disappointed with Android Wear products. Taking a phone OS and cramming it on a watch seems lazy, not innovative, and the experience has never felt great. What Pebble has done feels really innovative and polished -- they've come a long way.

[maxerickson]

The $100 Pebble Core is advertised at the link as an Android device.

[jamstruth]

It's also much bulkier than the watch and has no screen. It has a lot less to deal with and they can carefully control what apps it's running since the user has no input.

[predakanga]

The Core is also advertised as lasting through "5 days of 45 minute workouts" - I imagine that 3:45 battery life isn't too tough to achieve

[maxerickson]

Yeah, their lighter platform seems to be a win for battery. But their cheapest product is going to be an Android widget, presumably because that is an easy path to a broader range of features.

[jamstruth]

I agree, every Android Wear watch I've seen has the same issues of lag, screen time-out time and battery life. They feel like they're trying to be something that can't exist yet because of power limitations, whereas the Pebble watches embrace their limits and don't try to be more.