Between Fossil exiting the game and limited options from the likes of Mobvoi, the Android smartwatch market is, by and large, a two-horse race between Samsung and Google.
So I was particularly excited for the arrival of the OnePlus Watch 2 as a potential contender for the best Wear OS watch crown.
Despite its limitations, the watch is setting a new benchmark regarding battery life, innovative dual-OS tech, and, arguably, design.
More importantly, the broader availability of this watch is very appealing.
However, despite all its positives, the OnePlus Watch 2 is not perfect.
I switched from an Apple Watch Ultra about a month ago and, while my experience has been largely positive, I believe the OnePlus Watch 2 is a phenomenal piece of hardware that is being held back by Google’s noncommittal approach to Wear OS.
OnePlus Watch 2: Large size, larger ambitions Dhruv Bhutani / Android Authority I’m not about to summarise everything I like about this smartwatch; you can refer to my colleague Kaitlyn’s excellent OnePlus Watch 2 review for that.
However, it wouldn’t be unfair to say that OnePlus has made a complete turnabout with this new watch.
While the company’s first outing nailed the design, it lacked in terms of actual smarts.
The Watch 2 manages to excel with its exceptional build quality — despite the non-functional, albeit aesthetic, crown.
Elsewhere, the fitness metrics aren’t perfect but good enough for casual use, and the sleep tracking is on point.
The OnePlus Watch 2 stands out for its incredible dual-OS feature and stellar battery life.
Most importantly, the OnePlus Watch 2 launches with Wear OS 4 out of the box.
And that’s a big win for OnePlus at a time when options running Google’s latest wearable operating system are astonishingly thin.
It brings compatibility with a wide range of apps and services, better watch faces, integration with Google’s calendar and mail apps, and more.
Phenomenal hardware let down by stagnant software Dhruv Bhutani / Android Authority However, the most significant advantage of the OnePlus Watch 2 is also its crutch.
I’ll be honest: I’ve never been the biggest Wear OS fan.
My last long-term experience with the operating system was on the OPPO Watch back in 2020.
What hasn’t, though, is the entirely disjointed experience of using a Wear OS watch.
Health and fitness are essential to me, but years down the line, Wear OS still has no standardized way of handling fitness tracking.
On the OnePlus Watch 2, the OHealth app is the primary means of tracking fitness.
Unfortunately, as we explored in our review, the app is too simplistic and lacks the granular metrics that I’ve come to expect from my Apple Watch Ultra or Garmin.
Adding insult to injury is the fact that health tracking isn’t perfect either.
Step counts tend to be inconsistent and I have no faith in the calorie burn information.
Google could solve this by offering a standardized health API that other apps can use to customize the interface experience, but that isn’t the case here.
The Apple Watch does it; why can’t Google?
On the point of health tracking, getting data out of the watch isn’t easy.
Yes, I’m aware of Health Connect but the entire process is incredibly hit or miss, and rarely does all the data transfer to Google Fit.
I also use Strava as my running data aggregator of choice.
Since neither Health Connect nor OHealth have hooks into Strava, I depend on Strava’s integration with Google Fit to pull data.
The problem here is that, once again, not all metrics are transferred across the board.
Compare that with my Apple Watch Ultra, where every time I finish a workout, the data is seamlessly transferred to Strava.
I really shouldn’t need three different health apps on my phone to access my workout data.
I shouldn’t need three co-dependent apps on my phone just to get better fitness metrics.
In fact, I’d have expected Google to leverage Fitbit’s excellent data algorithms to create a standardized fitness API that any app could tap into and get seamlessly reliable data.
Not only would this improve the fitness capabilities of smartwatches across the board, but it would also create a uniform baseline across smartwatch brands.
As it stands, if I switch from a Galaxy Watch to a OnePlus Watch or, perhaps, a Pixel Watch, the fitness data algorithms have no correlation at all.
The other big issue I’ve observed is the quality of apps.
Coming back to Wear OS after a couple of years, it’s pretty disheartening to see that the quality of apps and services on the Play Store hasn’t improved all that much.
For example, my favorite intermittent fasting app, Zero, still isn’t available on Wear OS despite having a fully functioning version for the Apple Watch.
The company has released an Apple Watch app but has no such alternative for Wear OS.
Sure, Wear OS’ limited user base leaves l
Android Authority and Dhruv Bhutani.
It would be an understatement to say that the Android wristwatch market has stagnated, but competition encourages innovation. In general, Samsung and Google are leading the Android smartwatch market due to Fossil’s withdrawal from the competition and the lack of options offered by companies like Mobvoi. Since the OnePlus Watch 2 may challenge the original Wear OS watch crown, I was especially looking forward to its release.
In spite of its drawbacks, the watch is revolutionizing battery life, cutting-edge dual-OS technology, and, perhaps most importantly, design. More importantly, this watch’s wider availability is highly desirable.
The OnePlus Watch 2 is not flawless, though, even with all of its advantages. My experience with the OnePlus Watch 2, which I replaced with an Apple Watch Ultra approximately a month ago, has been mostly positive. However, I think Google’s lack of commitment to Wear OS is impeding the potential of this incredible piece of hardware. That’s the reason.
Bigger size, bigger goals: the OnePlus Watch 2.
Android Authority / Dhruv Bhutani.
I won’t go through everything I like about this smartwatch here; for that, check out my colleague Kaitlyn’s fantastic review of the OnePlus Watch 2. Still, it wouldn’t be incorrect to argue that OnePlus has completely changed its ways with this new timepiece. The company’s debut product was brilliant in terms of design but lacking in real intelligence. The Watch 2’s outstanding build quality allows it to shine even with its decorative but inoperable crown. Its massive battery truly lasts me well over two days of heavy use, which includes GPS-enabled outdoor runs and an hour or two of daily workout tracking. In other areas, the sleep tracking is accurate and the fitness metrics are passable for everyday use but not outstanding.
The remarkable dual-OS functionality and excellent battery life of the OnePlus Watch 2 set it apart.
Most notably, Wear OS 4 is preinstalled on the OnePlus Watch 2 at launch. And given the dearth of wearable devices running Google’s most recent OS, that’s a significant victory for OnePlus. Improved watch faces, integration with Google’s calendar and mail apps, and compatibility with a plethora of other apps and services are all included. There is also a voice-based option available if that is your preference.
Static software belies phenomenal hardware.
Google Authority / Dhruv Bhutani.
That being said, the OnePlus Watch 2’s biggest benefit is also its drawback. As I said earlier, I’ve never been a huge fan of Wear OS. Using the OPPO Watch back in 2020 was my most recent extended exposure to the operating system. Many things have evolved since then. But using a Wear OS watch has remained a completely disconnected experience.
Years later, Wear OS still lacks a standardized method for managing fitness tracking, which bothers me greatly because I value my health and fitness. The OHealth app is the main tool for tracking fitness on the OnePlus Watch 2. Regretfully, the app lacks the granular metrics I’ve become accustomed to from my Apple Watch Ultra or Garmin, and it is overly basic, as we examined in our review.
Not only is health tracking not flawless, but it also exacerbates the problem. I don’t trust the calorie burn data, and step counts are frequently off. Instead of doing that in this instance, Google could resolve this by providing a standardized health API that other apps could use to alter the UI. Why can’t Google do the same that the Apple Watch can?
When it comes to health tracking, it’s difficult to extract data from the watch. I am aware of Health Connect, but it’s a very hit-or-miss process overall, and rarely does all the data transfer to Google Fit. My preferred running data aggregator is Strava. I rely on Strava’s integration with Google Fit to pull data because neither OHealth nor Health Connect have hooks into Strava. Once again, the issue is that not all metrics apply to every situation. In contrast, the data from my workouts is automatically uploaded to Strava via my Apple Watch Ultra. To access my workout data on my phone, I really shouldn’t have to use three different health apps.
To get better fitness metrics on my phone, I shouldn’t need to use three interdependent apps.
In fact, I had anticipated that Google would take advantage of Fitbit’s superior data algorithms to establish a uniform fitness API that any app could use to obtain dependable data with ease. This would not only raise the general fitness capabilities of smartwatches but also establish a standard for all smartwatch manufacturers. The fitness data algorithms currently have no correlation at all if I move from a Galaxy Watch to a OnePlus Watch or possibly a Pixel Watch.
The caliber of apps is the other significant problem I’ve noticed. When you return to Wear OS after a few years, you’ll find that not much has changed in terms of the quality of the apps and services available on the Play Store. For instance, despite having a fully functional version for the Apple Watch, my favorite intermittent fasting app, Zero, is still unavailable on Wear OS. Shelly’s smart home appliances also have a special place in my heart. Although the company has released an Apple Watch app, it does not currently have a Wear OS substitute. Yes, there isn’t much of a reason for brands to invest in Wear OS apps given the platform’s small user base. Google is solely to blame for the chicken and egg dilemma as well.
an issue entirely due to Google.
Android Authority / Kaitlyn Cimino.
Google has obviously treated Wear OS like a second-class citizen, whether it’s through its constant rebranding cycle, the glacial pace at which updates are released, or software exclusivity with Samsung that restricts options—the very thing that makes Android products so exciting. It seems absurd that features like offline maps are still absent from Wear OS and that navigation for public transportation is only now making its way to the platform.
This ecosystem of constrained hardware options and subpar software has been produced by Google’s second-class treatment of Wear OS, which includes software exclusivity and slow updates.
I firmly believe that OnePlus has produced one of the best Wear OS smartwatches available. Yes, it’s big, but because of its amazing battery life, I can get used to its enormous size. Nevertheless, the mediocre software running the show is undermining all those hardware advancements. The hybrid interface that made its debut on the OnePlus Watch 2 is one indication that Google is finally beginning to turn things around with Wear OS, but there is still a lot more work to be done before Wear OS can truly compete with the Apple Watch.
