It's time to say goodbye to Motorola smartwatches, and here's why. For years, Motorola has been dabbling in the smartwatch arena, releasing a device or two annually, sometimes under its own name and other times through licensing agreements. Yet, despite this consistent presence, you might find yourself asking, "What have they actually done in wearables lately?" It feels like ages since their attempt to revive the classic Moto 360, and honestly, the overall Moto Watch experience has been so forgettable that it's easy to lose track. For a long time, I clung to the hope that something truly special was just around the corner. But with yet another Motorola wearable on the horizon, I've finally reached the point where I have to let go. I'm convinced that the Moto Watch line will never quite find its unique identity, and it's time for all of us to move on.
Sleek Hardware: A Pretty Face, But Is It Memorable?
Let's start by giving Motorola some credit where it's due. The latest Moto Watch isn't an eyesore; in fact, it bears a striking resemblance to a traditional analog watch. It incorporates a rotating crown and a button for navigation, much like some of my favorite Coros running watches. With a durable Corning Gorilla Glass 3 display and an IP68 rating for water and dust resistance, it certainly appears that Motorola has mastered the art of designing an attractive wearable. But here's where it gets controversial: is a good-looking design enough to make a smartwatch stand out?
When you place the Moto Watch next to the distinctively pebble-shaped Pixel Watch, the geometrically intriguing Galaxy Watch, or even the elegantly simple Pebble Round 2, the Moto Watch simply fades into the background. It's clean, yes, but remarkably unremarkable. Honestly, bringing back the Moto 360's signature "flat tire" design, even though it's no longer a necessity in 2026, would have injected a much-needed dose of personality. Instead, Motorola seems to have chased after a multitude of derivative designs, attempting seven different copycat styles without landing on a truly iconic one.
The Bigger Issue: A Lack of Continuity and Clear Direction
Perhaps my most significant concern with the Moto Watch, or rather its entire product family, is the complete absence of continuity. Motorola's previous wearable, the Moto Watch Fit, was essentially a square, single-button imitation of the Apple Watch. And the trio of licensed watches that came before it felt so disparate, they might as well have been from different manufacturers. Despite being priced within a $60 range of each other, the Moto Watch 40 felt like a budget fitness tracker, the Moto Watch 70 was a rather uninspired take on the Apple Watch, and the Moto Watch 120 resembled an older circular Samsung Galaxy Watch design. The only real threads connecting them were their names and shared software. This lack of a cohesive vision left me perpetually wondering what the next iteration would bring – until the Moto Watch Fit emerged, that is.
And then, just as quickly as it appeared, it was gone. Motorola promptly abandoned its innovative slot-based interchangeable watch band system, reverting to the more common 22mm quick-release options. Square design? Out. Single button? So last year. Pantone colors? Well, at least that element remains, and it's still the strongest aspect of most Motorola designs, for now.
If It's Not Wear OS, Will Anyone Actually Wear It?
Even if you're swayed by Motorola's straightforward hardware design, its software presents a more significant hurdle. And this is the part most people miss: ironically, my current frustration stems from the opposite of my previous complaint – I dislike Motorola's insistence on forging its own path. I genuinely wish they would embrace the industry standard and adopt Wear OS. Their in-house solution feels decidedly behind the times. While it handles the essentials like music control, activity tracking, and notifications, don't expect a comprehensive smartwatch experience.
What I mean is this: every function on the Moto Watch is channeled through Motorola's proprietary app. There's no dedicated app store, which means no access to popular services like Strava or Spotify, and none of the other applications that typically enrich a Wear OS experience. Without the robust foundation of Wear OS, my optimism for regular software updates for the Moto Watch is quite low. Sure, the initial updates might arrive promptly, but history suggests that, much like the Moto Watch 40, 70, or 120, the app will likely be neglected before long.
Fitness Focus: Polar's Potential, But Is It Enough?
There is at least a glimmer of hope for fitness enthusiasts, thanks to fitness tracking powered by Polar. This company brings a wealth of experience from its own line of running watches and heart rate sensors, including a sophisticated new optical sensor called the Polar OH1 Plus (definitely not to be confused with OnePlus). This technology should translate effectively to the optical monitor on the Moto Watch. Polar also underpins Motorola's refreshed approach to sleep and step tracking, continuous blood oxygen monitoring, and dual-frequency GPS for activities. However, and this is where opinions might diverge: as a dedicated runner myself, I don't know many people who exclusively wear Polar watches. Do they use Polar chest straps? Absolutely. But I've heard more than once that Polar's software ecosystem lags behind that of competitors like Garmin.
Furthermore, despite Motorola's exciting announcement of a shared Qira AI platform during the Lenovo Tech World keynote, the Moto Watch offers little reassurance of its integration. You can currently use the Moto AI model to generate custom wallpapers for your watch, but only if you own a compatible phone, such as the Razr (2025) or Razr Ultra. If you have a more budget-friendly device, like a Moto G Play, you're unfortunately limited to the pre-existing watch faces within the Moto Watch app.
When a brand offers such limited flexibility on what is presumably their flagship wearable, it becomes incredibly difficult to compete with the more complete ecosystems of the Pixel Watch and Galaxy Watch. This is without even mentioning the Pebble Round 2, which champions a much more open-source approach to bypassing Wear OS. Therefore, instead of placing my faith in a Moto Watch that's likely to undergo significant changes by 2027, I'll be sticking with the wearables I know and trust.
What do you think? Is a beautiful design enough to win you over, or is a robust software ecosystem and app support more critical for your smartwatch experience? Let us know in the comments below!
