The Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 is the long-awaited successor to one of our favorite wearables, the original Galaxy Watch, and we’re enjoying all the new perks and features. But how does it stack up to the market leading competitor, the Apple Watch 5?
While both watches sit on either side of the operating system divide – the Apple Watch 5 works seamlessly with iPhones, while the Galaxy Watch 3 integrates with Android phones far better than iOS devices – so choosing between the two may come down to which ecosystem serves you better. Apple Watches only link to iPhones, while the Samsung Watch 3 won’t be able to reply to messages or transfer much health data unless linked to Android phones
That aside, both are all-around watches that can fit your fashion and your fitness needs – which is to be expected with their high prices relative to other smartwatches. These are the top-tier devices in their field, and you’d be hard-pressed to find wearables that outperform them.
The Apple Watch 5 and Galaxy Watch 3 do differ substantially in features, operating system, and functionality, but it’s tough to summarize their appeal. Instead, we’ve broken them down section-by-section, so read on for our deep dives into how they compare by category.
(Image credit: Future)
Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 vs Apple Watch 5 price and release date
The Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 was officially announced at Samsung Unpacked on August 5, 2020 and released a day later on August 6, 2020. Yes, it’s the direct successor to the original Samsung Galaxy Watch – we’re not sure why the company skipped the ‘Galaxy Watch 2’ name, but there was a two-year gap between the two watches.
The Galaxy Watch 3 starts at $399 / £419 / AU$649 for the smaller 41mm Galaxy Watch 3, and $329 / £429 / AU$699 for the bigger 45mm version, both in stainless steel – and there’s a titanium version in 45mm coming later in 2020 at an undisclosed cost. The price is even higher for the LTE-connecting models: $449 / £439 / AU$799 for the 41mm version, and $479 / £459 / AU$849 for the 46mm version.
The Galaxy Watch 3’s stainless steel cases come in three colors total, split between sizes: 41mm exclusively has Mystic Bronze, 45mm has Mystic Black, and both come in Mystic Silver. They’re shipped with a color-coordinating leather band, and the titanium version will have a corresponding metal link band.
The Apple Watch 5 launched alongside the iPhone 11 lineup on September 10, 2020. Costs for the cheaper GPS-only model start at $399 / £399 / AU$649 for the smaller 40mm size, rising to $429 / £429 / AU$699 for the 44mm size. LTE versions of the watch start at $499 / £499 / AU$799 for 40mm, and go up to $529 / £529 / AU$849 for the 44mm version.
Those baseline prices are for the aluminum case, which comes in three finishes: Gold, Space Black, and Silver. The stainless steel casing costs more based on band choice: $699 with a sport loop or sport band, $749 with a Milanese loop, or $799 with a leather loop. The titanium casing, in light and dark finishes, starts at $799 with a sport loop and goes up to $899 with a leather loop. Finally, a Ceramic finish will push the cost to a whopping $1,299 with a sport loop and going up to $1,399 with a leather loop.
(Image credit: Future)
Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 vs Apple Watch 5 design
The Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 is a refinement of the original Galaxy Watch and inherits much of its design. While the new watch is 14% slimmer and 15% lighter than the old, with some visibly streamlined elements, it’s still a large smartwatch.
Most importantly, the Watch 3 retains a physical rotating dial, which was one of our favorite features of the original Galaxy Watch that made it a pleasure to navigate the interface with precision and tactile clicking. Visually, the dial has lost its triangular pips that marked time, which overall contributes to a more minimal look. The lugs connecting the watch case to the strap are smaller, the buttons are distinct and rounded, and the leather band instead of rubber all contribute to a classy watch that takes cues from traditional timepieces.
The Galaxy Watch 3 has a suite of sensors on the bottom that face the wrist: an ECG sensor as well as an SPO2 sensor to track blood oxygen levels, as well as sensors to monitor blood pressure.
The Apple Watch 5 continues its own tradition of rounded rectangle that began all the way back with the original Apple Watch. The oval button that summons recent apps and rotating crown are relatively unchanged, while the ECG sensors on the watch’s bottom remain virtually the same from their introduction in the Apple Watch 4.
Design-wise, the Apple Watch 5 has more in common with the Samsung Galaxy Watch Active 2 – an overall ‘sporty’ look that contrasts with the more traditional appearance of the Galaxy Watch 3. The baseline aluminum versions Apple Watch 5 weighs 40.6 g for the 40mm model and 47.8 g for 44mm, which is notably lighter than the 48.2 g of the 41mm Galaxy Watch 3 and well under the 53.8 g of the 45mm Samsung watch.
(Image credit: Future)
Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 vs Apple Watch 5 display
The Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 has a 1.2-inch (41mm) or 1.3-inch (45mm) circular AMOLED display, with a resolution of 360 x 360 pixels, that’s protected by Corning Gorilla Glass DX. It inherits an always-on display from its predecessor, which shows a minimal version of the watch face for, say, checking time without draining much battery.
The Apple Watch 5 has a 1.57-inch (40mm) or 1.73-inch (44mm) rectangular OLED sapphire crystal display, with a resolution of 448 x 368 pixels. Apple introduced an always-on display with this model, beating Samsung to the punch by nearly a year.
While both watches have sharp displays with nearly the same pixel density, the biggest difference is form factor. The Galaxy Watch 3 screen is circular, while the Apple Watch 5 display is more rectangular – and this defines each one’s experience. While modern app content is arguably better suited for rectangular screens, the Watch 3’s rotating physical dial is easier to scroll with than the Apple Watch 5’s crown.
(Image credit: TechRadar)
Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 vs Apple Watch 5 fitness
The Galaxy Watch 3 builds on its predecessor’s fitness modes and offerings, which were acceptable but not impressive. It can track a total of 40 different workouts, seven of which (running, walking, swimming, cycling, rowing, elliptical, and aerobically dynamic) the watch can detect and start tracking automatically. Whether it’s actually a pleasure to exercise with the big watch will have to wait until we’ve done more testing – the original Galaxy Watch was notably top-heavy.
The other features are supplementary but helpful, like a VO2 Max reading that calculates the maximum amount of oxygen your body can take in while exercising. The Watch 3 also gets fall detection, which has been in Apple’s wearables since the Apple Watch 4. And of course, the Watch 3 has SPO2 blood oxygen tracking and blood pressure monitoring.
We haven’t fully tested the Galaxy Watch 3’s sleep tracking yet, but it’s encouraging that Samsung partnered with the US National Sleep Institute to help develop the feature. It automatically tracks sleep cycles and gives a morning report detailing sleep quality and tips on getting better sleep.
The Apple Watch 5 doesn’t have sleep tracking, though it’s rumored to be coming in the watchOS 7 update arriving later in 2020. Even if it does, the Apple smartwatch has such limited less-than-a-day battery life that it’s hard to imagine it being a helpful feature; at least the Galaxy Watch 3 can last overnight (or even two) to monitor sleep habits.
The Apple Watch 5 shines in its fitness offerings, though, even if little has changed since the Apple Watch 4. The watch accurately tracks and auto-detects workouts, steps, heart rate, and elevation thanks to the new internal compass, and automatically feeds the data into the iOS Fitness and Health apps, if the watch is connected to an iPhone. This makes the Apple Watch 5 a better fitness partner for those who have an iOS device.
(Image credit: Future)
Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 vs. Apple Watch 5 performance and battery
The Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 packs the Exynos 9110 chipset, the same as in the original Galaxy Watch and the Galaxy Watch Active 2. It has a flat 1GB of RAM and 8GB of storage for apps and media.
The Galaxy Watch 3 runs on Samsung’s Tizen wearable OS 5.5, which is the company’s proprietary wearable OS it uses instead of Wear OS. This allows Samsung to fine-tune how the rotating dial works within the interface, but it also potentially means fewer apps that have to release a separate version for the OS.
The Apple Watch 5 is powered by the Apple S5 mobile chipset, which reportedly isn’t much changed from its predecessor’s silicon, but does have a magnetometer (for the compass) and better power efficiency – all of which seems to have been counterbalanced by the always-on display, meaning the battery life is essentially the same as the Apple Watch 4. The new smartwatch does double its storage to a whopping 32GB for all the app and media you’d want to store locally.
Apple Watch 5 runs watchOS 6 out of the box, which notably has its own App Store for users to browse and download apps on the watch itself without having to route through a connected phone. The OS also has voice memos and basic versions of iOS apps (like the calculator), as well as ambient noise monitoring.
Battery life is where these smartwatches seriously differ. The Apple Watch 5 claims 18 hours off its 296mAh of capacity, which makes daily recharging a necessity – since, well, it can’t even last a full day. We haven’t fully tested the Galaxy Watch 3, but given its predecessor managed to repeatedly last over three days, and even into the fifth day on occasion without recharging, we’re eager to see how long it will last. But the disparity in capacity between the smaller and larger versions of the watch (247mAh and 340mAh, respectively) leads us to think it’ll be two days this time around.
(Image credit: Shutterstock)
Takeaway
Given the benefits of matching these smartwatches with phones of their operating systems, it’s likely best to pick the wearable that works best with the smartphone you already own. But these wearables are different enough in form and features to consider on their own merits.
The Galaxy Watch 3 is big, no doubt about it, but it looks classier and more broadly-appealing than its chunky predecessor, especially with its leather straps. Otherwise, its appeal is virtually the same as the original Galaxy Watch, albeit with more sensors for ECG and SPO2 to track health conditions.
The extra battery and health features give the Galaxy Watch 3 a bit of an edge on the Apple Watch 5 (where its SPO2 sensor is cleared by medical authorities, anyway), but the Apple-tuned wearable has polish befitting its brand. If you don’t mind recharging your smartwatch more often, the Apple touch and seamless integration with iPhones is just easy.
Either way, these devices represent the top picks of the best smartwatches on the market. If you want all-around quality and are willing to pay the price, both are great picks.
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Artificial intelligence‘s recent rise to the forefront of business has left most office workers wondering how often they should use the technology and whether a computer will eventually replace them.
Those were among the highlights of a recent study conducted by the workplace communications platform Slack. After conducting in-depth interviews with 5,000 desktop workers, Slack concluded there are five types of AI personalities in the workplace: “The Maximalist” who regularly uses AI on their jobs; “The Underground” who covertly uses AI; “The Rebel,” who abhors AI; “The Superfan” who is excited about AI but still hasn’t used it; and “The Observer” who is taking a wait-and-see approach.
Only 50% of the respondents fell under the Maximalist or Underground categories, posing a challenge for businesses that want their workers to embrace AI technology. The Associated Press recently discussed the excitement and tension surrounding AI at work with Christina Janzer, Slack’s senior vice president of research and analytics.
Q: What do you make about the wide range of perceptions about AI at work?
A: It shows people are experiencing AI in very different ways, so they have very different emotions about it. Understanding those emotions will help understand what is going to drive usage of AI. If people are feeling guilty or nervous about it, they are not going to use it. So we have to understand where people are, then point them toward learning to value this new technology.
Q: The Maximalist and The Underground both seem to be early adopters of AI at work, but what is different about their attitudes?
A: Maximalists are all in on AI. They are getting value out of it, they are excited about it, and they are actively sharing that they are using it, which is a really big driver for usage among others.
The Underground is the one that is really interesting to me because they are using it, but they are hiding it. There are different reasons for that. They are worried they are going to be seen as incompetent. They are worried that AI is going to be seen as cheating. And so with them, we have an opportunity to provide clear guidelines to help them know that AI usage is celebrated and encouraged. But right now they don’t have guidelines from their companies and they don’t feel particularly encouraged to use it.
Overall, there is more excitement about AI than not, so I think that’s great We just need to figure out how to harness that.
Q: What about the 19% of workers who fell under the Rebel description in Slack’s study?
A: Rebels tend to be women, which is really interesting. Three out of five rebels are women, which I obviously don’t like to see. Also, rebels tend to be older. At a high level, men are adopting the technology at higher rates than women.
Q: Why do you think more women than men are resisting AI?
A: Women are more likely to see AI as a threat, more likely to worry that AI is going to take over their jobs. To me, that points to women not feeling as trusted in the workplace as men do. If you feel trusted by your manager, you are more likely to experiment with AI. Women are reluctant to adopt a technology that might be seen as a replacement for them whereas men may have more confidence that isn’t going to happen because they feel more trusted.
Q: What are some of the things employers should be doing if they want their workers to embrace AI on the job?
A: We are seeing three out of five desk workers don’t even have clear guidelines with AI, because their companies just aren’t telling them anything, so that’s a huge opportunity.
Another opportunity to encourage AI usage in the open. If we can create a culture where it’s celebrated, where people can see the way people are using it, then they can know that it’s accepted and celebrated. Then they can be inspired.
The third thing is we have to create a culture of experimentation where people feel comfortable trying it out, testing it, getting comfortable with it because a lot of people just don’t know where to start. The reality is you can start small, you don’t have to completely change your job. Having AI write an email or summarize content is a great place to start so you can start to understand what this technology can do.
Q: Do you think the fears about people losing their jobs because of AI are warranted?
A: People with AI are going to replace people without AI.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Biden administration said Tuesday that it would provide up to $325 million to Hemlock Semiconductor for a new factory, a move that could help give Democrats a political edge in the swing state of Michigan ahead of election day.
The funding would support 180 manufacturing jobs in Saginaw County, where Republicans and Democrats were neck-in-neck for the past two presidential elections. There would also be construction jobs tied to the factory that would produce hyper-pure polysilicon, a building block for electronics and solar panels, among other technologies.
Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said on a call with reporters that the funding came from the CHIPS and Science Act, which President Joe Biden signed into law in 2022. It’s part of a broader industrial strategy that the campaign of Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, supports, while Republican nominee Donald Trump, the former president, sees tariff hikes and income tax cuts as better to support manufacturing.
“What we’ve been able to do with the CHIPS Act is not just build a few new factories, but fundamentally revitalize the semiconductor ecosystem in our country with American workers,” Raimondo said. “All of this is because of the vision of the Biden-Harris administration.”
A senior administration official said the timing of the announcement reflected the negotiating process for reaching terms on the grant, rather than any political considerations. The official insisted on anonymity to discuss the process.
After site work, Hemlock Semiconductor plans to begin construction in 2026 and then start production in 2028, the official said.
Running in 2016, Trump narrowly won Saginaw County and Michigan as a whole. But in 2020 against Biden, both Saginaw County and Michigan flipped to the Democrats.
Although no one likes a know-it-all, they dominate the Internet.
The Internet began as a vast repository of information. It quickly became a breeding ground for self-proclaimed experts seeking what most people desire: recognition and money.
Today, anyone with an Internet connection and some typing skills can position themselves, regardless of their education or experience, as a subject matter expert (SME). From relationship advice, career coaching, and health and nutrition tips to citizen journalists practicing pseudo-journalism, the Internet is awash with individuals—Internet talking heads—sharing their “insights,” which are, in large part, essentially educated guesses without the education or experience.
The Internet has become a 24/7/365 sitcom where armchair experts think they’re the star.
Not long ago, years, sometimes decades, of dedicated work and acquiring education in one’s field was once required to be recognized as an expert. The knowledge and opinions of doctors, scientists, historians, et al. were respected due to their education and experience. Today, a social media account and a knack for hyperbole are all it takes to present oneself as an “expert” to achieve Internet fame that can be monetized.
On the Internet, nearly every piece of content is self-serving in some way.
The line between actual expertise and self-professed knowledge has become blurry as an out-of-focus selfie. Inadvertently, social media platforms have created an informal degree program where likes and shares are equivalent to degrees. After reading selective articles, they’ve found via and watching some TikTok videos, a person can post a video claiming they’re an herbal medicine expert. Their new “knowledge,” which their followers will absorb, claims that Panda dung tea—one of the most expensive teas in the world and isn’t what its name implies—cures everything from hypertension to existential crisis. Meanwhile, registered dietitians are shaking their heads, wondering how to compete against all the misinformation their clients are exposed to.
More disturbing are individuals obsessed with evangelizing their beliefs or conspiracy theories. These people write in-depth blog posts, such as Elvis Is Alive and the Moon Landings Were Staged, with links to obscure YouTube videos, websites, social media accounts, and blogs. Regardless of your beliefs, someone or a group on the Internet shares them, thus confirming your beliefs.
Misinformation is the Internet’s currency used to get likes, shares, and engagement; thus, it often spreads like a cosmic joke. Consider the prevalence of clickbait headlines:
You Won’t Believe What Taylor Swift Says About Climate Change!
This Bedtime Drink Melts Belly Fat While You Sleep!
In One Week, I Turned $10 Into $1 Million!
Titles that make outrageous claims are how the content creator gets reads and views, which generates revenue via affiliate marketing, product placement, and pay-per-click (PPC) ads. Clickbait headlines are how you end up watching a TikTok video by a purported nutrition expert adamantly asserting you can lose belly fat while you sleep by drinking, for 14 consecutive days, a concoction of raw eggs, cinnamon, and apple cider vinegar 15 minutes before going to bed.
Our constant search for answers that’ll explain our convoluted world and our desire for shortcuts to success is how Internet talking heads achieve influencer status. Because we tend to seek low-hanging fruits, we listen to those with little experience or knowledge of the topics they discuss yet are astute enough to know what most people want to hear.
There’s a trend, more disturbing than spreading misinformation, that needs to be called out: individuals who’ve never achieved significant wealth or traded stocks giving how-to-make-easy-money advice, the appeal of which is undeniable. Several people I know have lost substantial money by following the “advice” of Internet talking heads.
Anyone on social media claiming to have a foolproof money-making strategy is lying. They wouldn’t be peddling their money-making strategy if they could make easy money.
Successful people tend to be secretive.
Social media companies design their respective algorithms to serve their advertisers—their source of revenue—interest; hence, content from Internet talking heads appears most prominent in your feeds. When a video of a self-professed expert goes viral, likely because it pressed an emotional button, the more people see it, the more engagement it receives, such as likes, shares and comments, creating a cycle akin to a tornado.
Imagine scrolling through your TikTok feed and stumbling upon a “scientist” who claims they can predict the weather using only aluminum foil, copper wire, sea salt and baking soda. You chuckle, but you notice his video got over 7,000 likes, has been shared over 600 times and received over 400 comments. You think to yourself, “Maybe this guy is onto something.” What started as a quest to achieve Internet fame evolved into an Internet-wide belief that weather forecasting can be as easy as DIY crafts.
Since anyone can call themselves “an expert,” you must cultivate critical thinking skills to distinguish genuine expertise from self-professed experts’ self-promoting nonsense. While the absurdity of the Internet can be entertaining, misinformation has serious consequences. The next time you read a headline that sounds too good to be true, it’s probably an Internet talking head making an educated guess; without the education seeking Internet fame, they can monetize.
