Tech
I’ve Tested Smartwatches for a Decade. These 10 Do More Than Tell Time
Other Smartwatches to Consider
The number of smartwatches on the market is staggering. I’ve tested models from Tag Heuer, Citizen, Montblanc, and many other fashion brands, but most of them are simply too expensive for what you get. Here are a few options I like.
Apple Watch Series 10 for $364: Thanks to watchOS 26, the 2024 Series 10 (8/10, WIRED Recommends) has many of the same features as the new Series 11, like hypertension notifications and Sleep Score. It has a thinner and lighter design with a larger screen than prior models, and it even got blood oxygen sensing back via a software update in August 2025. It’s too bad this one still has the 18-hour battery life. Avoid paying anywhere close to MSRP for this watch. If you can find it for under $300, snag it.
Google Pixel Watch 3 for $299: The Pixel Watch 3 (8/10, WIRED Recommends) is seeing some steep discounts now that the Pixel Watch 4 has been announced. It’s a great smartwatch, with the caveat that it’s not repairable. (The newer model addresses that.) It features loss of pulse detection—cleared by the FDA for use in the US—which can be critical in saving someone’s life. Google also focused its fitness updates on running, enabling users to create custom runs and follow AI-powered run recommendations while getting feedback on cardio load—how hard your heart is working and whether it’s appropriate for your body. I strongly recommend you go with the 45-mm model, which doesn’t even feel that big. It simply delivers better battery life—just about 24 hours with the always-on display or a little more if you have it turned off.
Apple Watch Ultra 2 for $700: The Watch Ultra 2 is still worth considering, just don’t pay anywhere near MSRP; otherwise, you may as well buy the new Watch Ultra 3. It can last several days of use, and has many of the same great features as the latest model, including better mics to pick up your voice, an 86-decibel siren to alert your position to anyone nearby, and precise GPS to better track your hikes (plus help you find your way back with the Backtrack feature). The screen can display topographic maps, but you cannot view offline maps without an iPhone.
Samsung’s Galaxy Watch Ultra 2025 for $650: The 47-mm Galaxy Watch Ultra (7/10, WIRED Review) is the company’s Apple Watch Ultra and Garmin competitor, and it’s a solid first entry into the world of pricey, feature-rich, and powerful smartwatches designed for professional athletes. This is technically the 2025 model, which is identical to the 2024 version but comes with 64 GB of storage and in a new blue color. It lasts a little over two days on a charge because it’s a big 47-mm watch and can pack a beefy battery. There’s a titanium case and sapphire glass face, plus it’s rated to 10 ATM and IP68, so you can submerge it up to 100 meters underwater. The heart rate tracker is remarkably consistent with the Apple Watch Ultra 2, and the dual-band GPS delivers accurate mapping. The software isn’t as intuitive, and a few features are lacking when compared to other performance smartwatches, but this is a good start if you’re in the world of Android. If you don’t care for the blue or the extra storage, you can buy the 2024 model for hundreds less.
Samsung Galaxy Watch7 44 mm for $230: Samsung’s Galaxy Watch7 from 2024 is a little plain. This model debuted Samsung’s Energy Score and added updated sleep tracking capabilities. You also get FDA-cleared sleep apnea detection, though this isn’t a feature you’ll turn on all the time—it takes two nights to track, and afterward, you’ll get a note saying whether or not you show symptoms. This feature, along with the electrocardiogram and irregular heart rhythm notifications, is only available when paired with a Samsung phone. Otherwise, this watch functions well with any other Android. You can choose from two sizes, plus Bluetooth-only or LTE. I tested both sizes and found battery life frustrating compared to its predecessors. With the always-on display, I struggled to hit 24 hours with two tracked activities and sleep tracking overnight. With it turned off, things fared a little better, but I was still barely hitting a full day. You’ll have to baby the battery and utilize the power-saving modes. If you don’t care for the latest and greatest, you can save a lot of dough with the Watch7.
Casio G-Shock Master of G Rangeman GPR-H1000 for $500: It’s not for every event, but the Master of G-Land Rangeman (GPRH1000RY1A) looks great on my wrist, and I love that I only need to charge it about once a week. This is a G-Shock first and foremost. It has a durable, thick case and a comfortable strap. It’s a big watch. It also has six sensors and a built-in GPS. Connect the watch to your smartphone via Casio’s app, and you can get simple notification alerts, heart-rate tracking, activity tracking, and sleep tracking. That’s without mentioning other features like blood oxygen monitoring, compass, world time, altimeter, and barometer. I’ve compared the results to an Apple Watch Series 10, and for the most part, core metrics like heart rate, step tracking, and sleep are similar. I have had some data not show up in the Casio app for a few days, and many of these functions are slow to load on the watch. This would not be my first choice if I wanted a fitness-focused wearable—get a Garmin instead—but I like the ability to look at and track some of these metrics whenever I want. More importantly, I like having a G-Shock around my wrist.
Samsung Galaxy Watch FE for $250: The Galaxy Watch FE is a fine budget Wear OS smartwatch. The 40-mm Galaxy Watch FE has a smaller screen that doesn’t get as bright and sports a slower processor and a smaller battery compared to the Watch7 series. The health sensors are almost the same, and I got accurate results with heart rate and sleep tracking. The battery lasts just about a day, if not a little less.
OnePlus Watch 2 for $245: This is last year’s OnePlus smartwatch, but it’s still available. It seems like a better value now that the OnePlus 3’s price has been jacked up. The 46-mm OnePlus Watch 2 (7/10, WIRED Recommends) runs Wear OS and lasts roughly three days on a single charge, a little more if you enable some power-saving settings. The health capabilities are lacking—there’s no fall detection or electrocardiogram—but there’s sleep tracking, and it’s pretty accurate. Some features, like heart-rate tracking, distance traveled, and steps, have mixed accuracy in my testing, which means you shouldn’t buy this smartwatch if you’re primarily using it for those functions. Also, consider the OnePlus Watch 2R, which you can snag for less cash. The differences are mostly around build quality. The screen doesn’t get as bright, it has an aluminum case instead of stainless steel, and there’s no sapphire crystal protecting the screen, so it’s less durable. However, this makes it lighter and more comfortable to wear.
Withings ScanWatch 2 for $370: The ScanWatch 2 (7/10, WIRED Recommends) can pass for an analog watch. Its health-tracking feature set is comprehensive—you get heart rate monitoring, an electrocardiogram, blood oxygen measurements, and sleep tracking. Battery life is stellar too, as it can last up to 30 days with light use. (Heavier usage will see roughly 22 days before needing a charge.) The main problem is the tiny display on this watch, which is too small to read some notifications. The GPS is also connected, meaning it requires your phone to be tethered and nearby. There’s an optional Health+ subscription, but we’d advise against it, as it doesn’t offer much utility. The ScanWatch 2 comes in a 42-mm or 38-mm case size and doesn’t have the rich features and apps you’ll find on the likes of an Apple Watch, but if you want to monitor your health data—and you don’t want your watch to look too techy—this will do the job.
Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting and exclusive subscriber content that’s too important to ignore. Subscribe Today.
Tech
The Moto Watch Looks and Feels Like a Polar Fitness Tracker—but More Fun
However, rendered here in Motorola’s Watch app, everything looks fun and easy! Motorola (and Polar, I guess) uses Apple’s “close your rings” approach, with active minutes, steps, and calories. I particularly like that you can now use Polar’s sleep tracking with a cheaper Android watch. Polar takes into account sleep time, solidity (whether or not your sleep was interrupted), and regeneration to give you a Nightly Recharge Status.
You can still click through and see your ANS, but there’s a lot more context surrounding it. Also, the graphs are prettier. I compared the sleep, heart rate, and stress measurements to my Oura Ring 4, and I found no big discrepancies. The Moto Watch tended to be a little bit more generous in my sleep and activity measurements (7 hours and 21 minutes of sleep instead of 7 hours and 13 minutes, or 3,807 steps as compared to 3,209), but that’s usual for lower-end fitness trackers that have fewer and less-sensitive sensors.
On that note, I do have one major hardware gripe. Onboard GPS is meant to make it easier to just run out the door and start your watch. I didn’t find this to be the case. Whatever processor is in the watch (Motorola has conveniently chosen not to reveal this), it’s just really slow to connect to satellites and iffy whenever it does. This isn’t a huge deal when I’m just walking my dog or lifting weights in my living room, but it constantly cuts out when I’m outside and doesn’t have the ability to fill in the blanks, as another, more expensive fitness tracker would do.
It’s just really annoying to constantly get pinged about satellite loss and to have a quarter-mile or a half-mile cut out of your runs. That’s how I know the speaker works—it was constantly telling me it lost satellite connection during activities.
Finally, the screen and buttons are really sensitive. It does give you an option to lock the screen, but even then, I found myself accidentally unlocking it from time to time and turning the recording off when I didn’t mean to.
As I write this, I have seven different smartwatches from different brands sitting on my desk. If you’re looking for a cheap, attractive, and effective Android-compatible smartwatch, I would say that the CMF Watch 3 Pro is your best choice. However, I do think the integration with Polar was well done, and the price point is not that bad. I’m definitely keeping an eye out for what Motorola might have to offer in the future.
Tech
These WIRED-Tested Automatic Pet Feeders Are the Cat’s Meow
Compare Our Picks
Others Tested
Photograph: Molly Higgins
Closer Pets C200 2-Meal Automatic Pet Feeder for $50: This automatic feeder is super simple, which is both its weakness and its strength. It’s essentially two shallow plastic containers with stainless steel inserts (both dishwasher safe) and tamper-resistant lids that are locked and automatically open using an old-school egg-style timer that runs on a AA battery rather than electricity. Although the container has an ice pack to keep the wet food cool, after one night it lost virtually all of its coolness. There’s a lid-link clip attachment, a small piece of plastic that links the lids to ensure they will open at the same time, which is super helpful for owners of two cats like me. I wish the timer were electric so I could program it to the exact time I want it open, rather than guesstimating the timing on the little marks. However, this is a simple solution to help make sure both my cats are given wet food without me having to wake up at the crack of dawn.
Photograph: Molly Higgins
Oneisall Cordless WiFi Automatic Cat Feeder for $50: I had high hopes for this cordless feeder that boasts a rechargeable battery with a 100-day life and an integrated app, but it’s just too unreliable. Through the app, you can program up to 10 daily meals (in 1-12 portions each), monitor pets’ eating habits, and customize meal calls. Unlike other apps, you’re not able to choose portion size, but instead have to multiply the number of servings. The app gave me constant problems, and would often disconnect from the feeder and be unable to reconnect to WiFi. Luckily, I was able to program meals via the screen and buttons, but it would’ve been a whole lot nicer if the app had worked reliably.
Do Not Recommend
Courtesy of Amazon
Catit Pixi Smart 6-Meal Feeder for $117: Like others on this list, the Catit Pixi wet and dry feeder uses ice packs to keep wet food fresh and rotates the meals in six compartments on a set schedule. The schedule can be programmed via the app or changed on the body of the feeder. At this price point, the app shouldn’t be this limited and glitchy. The schedule is available in military time only, and the app is extremely limited—you can only set the meal schedule for the same day, and when I wanted to do only two to three meals a day spread over two days, I had to reschedule the meals for every new day. The feeder didn’t keep it cold enough to spread the meals out and the wet food was not at a safe eating temperature. At this price point, just get the Petlibro Polar wet feeder for a few bucks more.
Catit Pixi Smart Cat Feeder for $114: Kibble is stored in the body of this dry feeder, but it doesn’t have a window to visually check food levels. The calendar to plan meals shows only a week at a time, and although it should repeat daily based on the schedule, I found that some days there would be no schedule despite setting one up. The Pixi also doesn’t tell you how much food was dispensed; it just refers to it as a “portion”—I manually measured and found the portion was less than a tablespoon of kibble. After using it continuously for more than a month, I found it was extremely glitchy and almost never reliably stuck to the programmed schedule, sometimes skipping meals altogether. This feeder is potentially dangerous, and I’d caution pet parents against relying on it.
Closer Pets C500 for $75: This automatic wet and dry feeder can schedule up to four pre-portioned meals (and one meal given manually) that are opened on a timer system using three AA batteries (sold separately). The user presets the four times they want the bowls, which have ice packs underneath, to rotate. The bowls are quite deep and narrow and aren’t super easy for cats to reach, which could cause whisker fatigue. And although there are two relatively large ice packs, when I checked on the feeder after a night’s sleep, the packs weren’t very cold. This may be OK for kibble, but wet food was kept at unsafe temperatures, and my cats couldn’t reach all of the food.
Why Use an Automatic Feeder?
Automatic feeders are great for pet owners who want to help manage their pets’ weight and monitor eating patterns. Plus, they allow for a lot more control and precision for owners to learn exactly how much their cat is eating and when. Because cats are naturally more nocturnal, many have the annoying habit of waking you up in the early hours demanding food, and these allow you to set up a schedule that fits more to their schedule without inconveniencing yours.
Of course, it’s never recommended to leave pets alone for long periods, but these automatic feeders give more peace of mind and are a whole lot healthier for your pet than leaving a huge amount of food for free-feeding while you’re away for the night. Simply put, it’s an easier way to feed and monitor your cat’s health with less work for you, the human.
I have two rescue cats, ages 4 and 5, and they eat two wet-food meals a day and small amounts of dry kibble throughout the day. Vets (and TikTokkers) have successfully persuaded me to move toward a primarily wet-food diet, however, which has a higher water content. This provides more moisture in their diet, which helps with potentially life-threatening problems like UTIs, which are especially prevalent in male cats. I still like to give smaller dry-food meals throughout the day for them to satisfy their need for crunch.
For dry food, I use Hill’s Science Diet, and for wet food I use Friskies’ Shreds variety. (Yes, only Shreds. Fellow cat owners will understand.)
I set up the feeders, noting ease of set up, potential problems, and app navigation. I also tested various schedules and manual feedings through the app, noting any issues. I used each of the feeders for at least a week, if not more.
How Long Can I Leave My Cat Alone?
Although cats are generally thought of as less high-maintenance than dogs, it’s still not good to leave your cat for prolonged periods. Under dire circumstances, you can leave a cat alone for 24 to 48 hours with scheduled feedings and a clean water source, but it’s not ideal—especially for cats with health issues, kittens younger than a year, or very elderly cats. Although these feeders are automatic, and meals can be scheduled in advance and over multiple days, our pets still need their human pals around for enrichment, care, and well, love.
Tech
Hollywood Is Losing Audiences to AI Fatigue
An insurrectionist robot unleashed by a mad inventor in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis. HAL 9000 sabotaging a manned mission to Jupiter in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Skynet, the self-aware global defense network that seeks to exterminate humanity throughout the Terminator franchise.
Hollywood has never wanted for audacious depictions of artificial intelligence or the ways in which it could alter the fate of our species. But the rapid integration of AI into the studio system and our now unavoidable interactions with it have severely compromised the genre, not to mention film as a medium.
On the one hand, it’s perfectly understandable that screenwriters and studios would return to the subject of AI in recent years, particularly since it provokes such fierce debate within the industry. (A major cause of the 2023 labor strikes was the threat that AI posed to creative jobs.) Still, the novelty faded fast.
Consider M3GAN, a campy horror flick about an artificially intelligent doll who starts killing people, released just a week after the debut of ChatGPT in 2022: It was a surprise box-office smash. Last year’s sequel? A critical and commercial flop. Mission: Impossible—Dead Reckoning (2023) introduced a rogue AI called The Entity as a final adversary for Ethan Hunt and crew. The resolution of its cliff-hanger ending and blockbuster finale for the spy saga, Mission: Impossible—The Final Reckoning (2025), underperformed its predecessor, and neither quite justified their expense.
The latest AI-themed bomb is Mercy, a crime thriller starring Chris Pratt as an LAPD detective strapped into a chair who has 90 minutes to pull enough evidence from security cameras and phone records to convince a stern judge bot (Rebecca Ferguson) that he didn’t kill his wife—or else face instant execution. Despite releasing in January, one reviewer has already declared it “the worst movie of 2026,” and judging by its mediocre ticket sales, many US moviegoers decided as much from the trailer alone. It’s almost as if nobody cared whether a fictional software program might be capable of sparing a life when real health insurance claims are being denied by algorithms already.
For those few who did see it, Mercy fell far short of its dystopian premise, failing to grapple with the ethics of such a surveillance state and its medieval-modern justice system in favor of cheap relativism. Spoiler: Pratt’s character and the AI ultimately team up to stop the real bad guys as the bot begins to show signs of unrobotic emotion and doubt, which manifest as glitches in the program. By the end, Pratt is delivering a true groaner of a we’re-not-so-different speech to the holographic Ferguson. “Human or AI, we all make mistakes,” he says. “And we learn.”
While the naive belief in AI’s progress toward enlightenment feels dated on arrival, you are also reminded of how prophetically cynical something like Paul Verhoeven’s RoboCop, now almost 40 years old, was in addressing a future of cybernetic fascism. Contrary to that kind of pitch-black, violent satire, the current trend seems to be propagandistic narratives about how AIs are scary at first but secretly good. (See also: Tron: Ares, Disney’s wildly misguided attempt to leverage an old IP for the era of large language models, another cinematic train wreck of 2025.)
In fact, the insistence on some inborn value or honor to artificial intelligence may be the driving force behind the new Time Studios web series On This Day…1776. Conceived as a blow-by-blow account of the year the American colonies declared independence from the British crown, it consists of short YouTube videos generated in part by Google DeepMind (though actual actors supply voiceovers). The project has drawn serious attention and scorn because acclaimed director Darren Aronofsky served as executive producer via his creative studio Primordial Soup, launched last year in a partnership with Google to explore the applications of AI in filmmaking. It probably doesn’t help that Aronofsky and company are valorizing the country’s founders in the same aesthetic that has defined the authoritarian meme culture of Donald Trump’s second term.
-
Entertainment1 week agoClaire Danes reveals how she reacted to pregnancy at 44
-
Sports1 week agoCollege football’s top 100 games of the 2025 season
-
Politics1 week agoTrump vows to ‘de-escalate’ after Minneapolis shootings
-
Sports1 week agoTammy Abraham joins Aston Villa 1 day after Besiktas transfer
-
Business1 week agoPSX witnesses 6,000-point on Middle East tensions | The Express Tribune
-
Entertainment1 week agoK-Pop star Rosé to appear in special podcast before Grammy’s
-
Tech1 week agoThe Surface Laptop Is $400 Off
-
Sports1 week agoAaron Judge named cover athlete for MLB The Show 26

.jpg)




.jpg)


