What will be the purpose of galaxy store then, if the wear OS apps and faces can be downloaded directly from play store? Will it remain there for “obsolete” devices?
Yeah and statements like “they’re unified” or “we don’t know yet” try to distract from this fact.
@Peter My best guess is that the Galaxy Store will continue to distribute for the old Tizen watches for 3 years. I expect Wear OS apps will be distributed through Googles Play Store - just like currently.
Maybe there is an error in the Galaxy Store system but if you add .tpk file (for free app) it is marked as supported for WISE and FRESH devices. So doest it mean that WISE and FRESH have Tizen or can launch Tizen app?
First of all, I think it’s worth to thank Samsung for the opportunity to earn for several years in an environment where there is minimal competition (at least at the very beginning), as well as almost free promotion.
But time does not stand still, and corporate motives may be unknown to us.
I think GWS or Tizen watch face developers can benefit from market expansion if they can adapt.
I also hope that the Galaxy Store will continue to distribute watch faces (after all, applications for smartphones on Android is distributed in the Galaxy Store).
The native language of android is Java, and it is used for Wear OS.
Tizen native language is C or C ++.
It is true that both operating systems use libraries but I find it almost impossible to use the native language of Tizen OS with Wear OS.
Android can work with web applications and this could work with an improvement in Tizen studio.
But I find it difficult to create watch faces with GWS (Galaxy Watch Studio) since this software works with the native Tizen language.
Will GWS disappear or will there be an update compatible with Wear OS?
Will Tizen Studio disappear or will there be an update compatible with Wear OS?
I do not give much hope to GWS but if an update compatible with Wear OS comes out, it will surely require knowing how to program.
For me perfect if this happens.
In the editorial on Samsung News by Janghyun Yoon EVP and Head of S/W Platform Team pointed out Galaxy Watch Studio.
Our hope is that this platform will ignite innovation in spaces like the Galaxy Watch Studio and inspire third party development, bringing a bigger and better network of apps to benefit Galaxy users around the world.
Because of Samsung non disclosure policy I simply cannot give you an answer for most of your questions or speculations. I can’t either affirm or deny them. As information is made available we will respond openly.
Samsung Developer Relations
I’ve got lots of questions myself. But I don’t expect this forum to be the original source of much information. It won’t be until Samsung makes an announcement that I expect to be able to hear more here. Having looked at the sessions that were available in Google I/O, there were only two concerning their Android for wearables. Not a lot of information from which to make an inference.
Until Samsung says more, all we have to go on is speculation.
My speculation is that we will get Android OS with some support for widgets. I don’t expect native applications to make the jump.
On a positive, I hope that Samsung will bring some recognition to Android Wear. While I am able to find Wear hardware with a bit of research, the watches that support it don’t really put it front-and-center. I don’t see a consumer getting a watch because it has Android on it. I see it far more likely that someone will get a watch because it is branded the same as their phone.
I may start porting some of my Tizen wearable applications to Android Wear just in case.
Android supports development in C/C++. Not that I suggest using it for a full application. But yes, languages that compile to Java byte code (Java, Kotlin) are the most commonly used languages.
Having only been involved in developing watch faces for Tizen… How is the support for watch face developers on Wear OS? Anyone with experience, both Java and C/C++? And when I say “developers” I literally mean developers and not designers using software to create watch faces (nothing wrong with it, but not the information I’m after).
I have a pretty big line up of new products to be developed, but ever since these rumors (and now made official) started popping up, the development have stopped until more information on this are revealed.
I’m sure this “merge” of OS will be beneficial (or I doubt Samsung would do it), but to justify spending time, energy and money on developing products for the platform, more information is needed. Both a roadmap going forward and also practical information as to what it means for a developer. And also a third to add, how is this going to be marketed?
When Samsung released Tizen OS in its devices there was only the Tizen SDK.
To create applications and watch faces could only be done with the Tizen SDK.
The developers had to learn to code and understand the APIs and the Tizen OS development scheme to create something functional.
Samsung wanted to have more watch faces than other operating systems and was creating the Galaxy wath designer software.
It is currently called the Galaxy Watch Studio, only for watch faces, and Tizen Studio for everything.
We developers lost out with the Galaxy Watch Studio (GWS) release because people only wanted to create watch faces and not code.
This freaked out the developers and attracted people just to design.
For me, a serious failure.
Developers stopped working on Tizen OS because it kept us on the clock faces so we could make a profit and spend time creating applications.
With Galaxy Watch Designer even my daughter can design, this takes away profits and a developer cannot create applications without making a profit.
Can you imagine if Samsung removed the Galaxy Watch Studio software?
99% of the people on the Samsung account would disappear as developers.
For you to understand, bye developers and welcome designers.
I am the only one here who thinks what I see and it may be that Samsung can delete my account for saying what I think, but it is my opinion.
I fully see where you are coming from, however I’m not sure I agree with you 100%. If you are a good designer AND you know how to program, you have such tremendous power over 90% of the market. Why is that? With programming you can engineer an entire experience around your design to a level that a software like Galaxy Watch Studio never can. This opens up an entire new world of creativity.
I think it was a good move from Samsung to provide GWS for designers. I even started with it years back, but soon after I released my first watch face I almost instantly went back and engineered the same watch face from scratch for a re-release. I did that because I couldn’t fully deliver on the vision I had for the design. But engineering it myself, my vision became possible. And I base my entire brand around that philosophy, to push things beyond what has been done before and treat my designs more as experiences.
But like with everything in life, once you democratize something, you will also flood the market. The good news, when that happens, the majority will most likely hold low quality, a big amount that have quality are looking at shortcuts, which in the end, with a little bit more effort, makes it easier for you to stand out.
With that, I think the biggest challenge is designing the marketplace to be fair and help great designs to easily be found by customers. Not an easy task I’m sure.
And now with the OS merge… Am I concerned? A little, yes. But that has also to do with information still being held back. But if this can make Samsung and Google to provide much better technical support for developers, a much bigger market for the products, a stronger wearable OS, and bigger muscles to compete with the big fruit… This can potentially be a very good thing for everyone. But yes, as mentioned with me being concerned, this all the depends on what information gets revealed next and what the plan is, which at current point we know nothing about other than some pr announcement.
I, like the reactions I see, got scared at first… But the more I think about it, I also start to see opportunities with it. So lets see what happens next.
To make my opinion as a developer clear.
Applications can only be created with the Android SDK.
A mix of Wear OS and One UI
Rom, mentioned above, possibly Galaxy Watch Studio is updated to create watch faces,
It is clear to me that Tizen Studio will disappear after 3 years.
It is what I understand and my personal opinion.
Once you can provide information, I will be happy for your advice.
I am currently in the process of developing a new application in the Xamarin.NET environment. I want the app to work on the new models of smartwatches including the Galaxy watch 4, so, given the circumstances, should I stop the process and wait for updates, or continue the development process?
Thanks in advance,
It has been announced that the next Galaxy smartwatches will run on the Unified Platform Wear OS 2.0.
Samsung Developer Relations
I bought the Galaxy Watch 46mm several years ago becuase I wanted the ability to run a few apps and to make my own watch face. I started from scratch with GWS (it was GWD back then) and made my first face OK. I’ve used that face ever since (actually I recreated and tweaked it a bit with the Facer app and use that face), but I do understand about the underlying Tizen software etc.
Based on what what I’ve read here’s what I think is going to happen:
- Samsung will release a new line of smart watches that run Wear OS.
- Development of updates for existing Tizen based software (like GWS) will be frozen, but the software as is will be kept active for 3 years or so.
- Someone may develop an app like GWS that works with Wear OS. Or if not, the Facer software can be used instead. Developers of current Samsung watch faces will have to re-do their designs using either the WearOS app or the Facer app if they want to make their faces available for the new watches.
I have no knowledge of creating apps for Tizen based devices, so I have no comment on that. My guess is the app situation will mirror that of the watch faces, but I don’t know what software people use to develop apps for either Tizen or WearOS devices.
I cannot confirm or deny what you have wrote specifically except that number 1 is inaccurate
Samsung next line of Smart Watches will run on a Unified Platform that uses some Tizen and some Wear OS technology. It will not be the current WearOS.
All the rest is speculation and you can find a dozen different scenarios online.
Samsung Developer Relations
Thanks for that clarification Ron. It sounds like the base firmware for the new line of smart watches will be unique to Samsung. That’s ging to make things even more interesting than I had imagined.
Google acquired FIT Watches which will use the newer Wear OS version and I expect other new non-Samsung wearables will use the new unified platform.
I only saw the keynote for Google I/O and no sessions but they are available online.
Samsung Developer Relations
I have developed software for Wear OS in Java and Tizen in C. There is actually a huge difference between what is possible on current Wear OS compared to Tizen. Wear OS is just a very limited and restricted version of Android, and Android itself does not allow many things that can be done in Tizen. I personally am afraid that this move will be a step backwards, at least for us Tizen native developers.
Also one other point of concern: Tizen is currently the only wearable OS on the market that allows centralized management (through Knox Configure). There is no equivalent on Google’s Wear OS or Apple’s WatchOS.
I think that Tizen OS is prety much already dead for us devs. And I do not have issue with that. I have already stopped future development and upgrade of existing apps for Tizen. Companies evolve, developers should too - learn new languages etc. The only issue I have (as Tizen developer for several years) is that Samsung didn’t inform us of how this Wear OS adventure would affect our existing apps tailored for Tizen OS only. As Sergio already mentioned, most of us spent a lot of time studying Tizen API. What now? Throw that knowledge? Sure! But wouldn’t it be fair that we get at least some information based on which we can plan our future development, start porting existing apps, or just turn to some other hardware, like Apple?