Gizmo Watch Review

post by jefftk (jkaufman) · 2024-06-18T20:00:02.247Z · LW · GW · 3 comments

Contents

3 comments

Summary: the watches do the basic things they need to and have let us give our kids more freedom, but there are also a bunch of annoying limitations and they're 36% more expensive than they look. I'm overall happy we got them.

Our older two kids, Lily and Anna, are ten and eight, and are mature enough that they're able to cross streets and handle unusual situations. They can go to the park or a nearby friends house on their own, but we do need to know where they are. Over the past three years we've mostly used three strategies. They can:

Initially they were very excited about the independence of the walkie-talkies, but over time they got frustrated with them. While Julia made them pouches to make carrying them easier, they're still heavy (for a child) and hard to run with. They also make annoying noises, because even with the squelch codes we do sometimes hear static or bits of someone else's conversation. They're also range limited, about 1/4mi, and some of their friends or favorite parks are outside that range.

In mid-May we revisited this:

After looking at some options, we decided to get the older two smartwatches. The key features we wanted were:

Other things, like a calculator or clock, are nice to have but not critical. We talked to other parents, read reviews, and settled on the Verizon Gizmo 3. The bottom line is that while there are a bunch of annoyances we're happy with them, and they do what we need them to do. You can buy them online, and pay $18.30/month for the watch and service, [1] with an extra $35 for the first month.

I set up a place to recharge them, on our charging shelf:

The chargers are attached with adhesive velcro:

Advantages:

Disadvantages:

Some things we've done in the month since getting them that we wouldn't have done without:

One thing to keep in mind is that they have no authentication, so if your toddler gets ahold of one you might get some strange conversations:

Despite my gripes, overall I'm very happy with the watches: they do their core functionality well enough, which lets the kids do a range of things independently.


[1] It's easy to end up thinking you'll be paying less than this. The watch says it's $4.16/mo for three years (accurate!) and then it looks like it's $10/mo for service:

If you scoll down, which I didn't do when I first went hrough this, you'll see a "Broadband Facts" listing:

Unless you already know how this works (I didn't) you might think that the monthly price is a total, and the provider's additional monthly charges explain the breakdown. But actually the big number at the top is only one component of the monthly price, and the additional charges are on top of that. This is legal but I don't see why it should be. We wouldn't accept a Nutrition Facts label where the top-level "calories" number skipped calories from protein and only included them in a separate breakdown!

Making it even easier to misunderstand what you're signing up for, when you're asked to review your plan charges it just says "$10/mo" without even a fine prine "plus taxes and fees":

And it calculates your monthly bill by adding the "$10/mo" nominal cost to the $4.16/mo device charge, with fine print saying "Monthly surcharges, taxes, and government fees will be added to your bill:

Which is quite hostile, since they know what the additional charges are and they're just choosing to elide them here to show a smaller number.

So we're paying $28.28/mo for service for the two watches when we expected to be paying $20/mo. It's only $8.28/mo more, but it still bothers me how sneaky this feels. Combining this with the other fine-print fee, a $35 activation fee, over three years months you're paying 36% more than you'd initially expect. Instead of $510 ($360 for service and $150 for the device) it's $694 (an additional $149 in monthly fees and $35 for activation).

3 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by Seth Herd · 2024-06-19T18:03:28.639Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I don't have kids, but if I did, these technologies would be my biggest focus. They can give kids back the independence they've lost, and make going places and doing things much more possible and exciting than always having direct adult supervision.

So: It seems like what you got is far from idea. You must've researched other options. How about a very brief summary of your thoughts on the options you didn't get? We can assume they'd all have various hidden downsides just like these did.

Replies from: Sherrinford
comment by Sherrinford · 2024-12-03T18:08:45.321Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

In your opinion, why do kids need such devices to get that independence if kids had that independence before those devices existed?

Replies from: jkaufman
comment by jefftk (jkaufman) · 2024-12-03T19:36:13.583Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

In general, at any given level of child maturity and parental risk tolerance, devices like this watch let children have more independence.

What has changed over the last few decades is primarily a large decrease in parental risk tolerance. I don't know what's driving this, but it's probably downstream from increasing wealth, lower child mortality, and the demographic transition.