[Moto 360] jaykresge:
That's not a flaw in my idea, but I'll expand on that further below.

The way it works is exactly the polar opposite of what you just stated. OEMs sign a contract to purchase their chipsets in bulk. The larger the order, the larger the bulk discount. The majority of these contracts stipulate a minimum order of 10,000 units. They are contractually obligated to pay for the units that they order. Major foundries (Global Foundries, TSMC, Samsung, etc.) ramp up their manufacturing to meet their contracts. They don't set aside numbers for an OEM just to get stiffed.

And this is that part below where I explain the basis for my speculation.

1. From 2009-2012, Motorola had a rapid rise and fall in the Android ecosystem. It's not unfathomable that they put in a massive order during their rising sales, only to be left with a lot of stock during their period of declining sales.

2. TI isn't making these old OMAP SOCs anymore. That means that this is left over stock. The question is, who was holding it, Moto or TI?

3. TI's quarterly reports haven't indicated any major contracts with Motorola lately. However, TI is supplying the wireless charging chip for the Moto 360 as well, so if TI is supplying the OMAP 3, it's not a significant contract by volume.

So with that said, it's very likely that this is old stock. The only question is then, whose? TI's or Moto's?

They didn't have to design the watch around the processor. More than likely, they saw the leftover stock (theirs or TI's), and realized that it would work well enough for their needs so that they wouldn't have to source a Snapdragon. If the OMAP was on hand for Moto, this meant it was effectively free. If it was TI's left over stock, given a lack of customers, Moto probably got a sweetheart deal to justify it.

Sourcing more doesn't mean they'd pay over any odds. Assuming TI is sourcing for Moto and this isn't old Moto stock (not a guarantee either way), they don't have any other buyers for this SOC right now. Given TI's rapid departure from the market and the likely stockpile of these SOCS left over, it's more than likely that Moto doesn't expect to exhaust this supply. And if they do, they likely have a Snapdragon-based Moto 360 waiting in the wings. As often happens with certain products, Motorola could simply be projecting the end of their supply and plan an announcement for the 360's successor to coincide with that.

I'm not saying that you're right or that you're wrong. I'm simply stating that to call my speculation "flawed" is misinformed. It's an educated guess and we'll see how it plays out.

I'm a huge fanboy of OLED displays. My last 5 devices and all 4 Android phones have have OLED displays (Zune HD, HTC Droid Incredible, Samsung Galaxy S II, Samsung Galaxy S4 GPE, and Moto X 2013). I didn't have the ZHD too long. The Droid, SGS2, and SGS4 all exhibited burn-in with static UI elements (the notification bar). Plasma and OLED are notorious for burn-in and it's recommended that you don't use either with static UI displays. The watch face, outside of the hands, is very static. This is a recipe for disaster unless you plan to keep your watch for only a year and toss it.

In addition to that, OLED displays consume massive amounts of power (up to 3x that of an equivalent generation LCD) when displaying white. So power draw is consistent on an LCD regardless of watch face color. OLED will vary based on the design.

The LG G Watch R will use an OLED display. Since I already have a 360, I plan to evaluate how the G Watch R does with that display before I consider and OLED-based smartwatch for my next upgrade. If the 360 doesn't last me at least 3 years though, there won't be a next smartwatch for me. This isn't a part that I want to upgrade often.

---------- Post added at 06:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:34 PM ----------

And now I just wanted to make a separate post to highlight my personal concerns on the choice of SOC, expanding on a previous reply but more short and to the point.

CPU: The 360's CPU is roughly as powerful as the CPU used in the G Watch and Gear Live, but consumes more power. I see no benefit to this other than potential cost savings.

GPU: The GPU in the Samsung/LG is roughly 5x more powerful than the 360's while conserving less power. More importantly, it supports OpenGL ES 3.0, as opposed to the 2.0 limitation on the 360.

RAM: All 3 watches have 512MB of RAM. The 360, due to its SOC limitation uses 512MB of 200mhz LPDDR RAM. The Samsung/LG uses 512MB of 533mhz LPDDR2 RAM. This is significantly faster while consuming less power.

Conclusion: The SOC/RAM used in the 360 is slower and consumes more power than the SOC/RAM used in competing Android Wear devices. The best case scenario or 360 owners is that Android Wear remains a simple, terminal-like system which doesn't demand much performance. In this situation neither system is taxed, so the performance differences are rarely visible. And as for the battery life, as I said in a prior post, the SOC makes up a relatively small chunk of overall battery usage. So even if the OMAP uses double the juice of the Snapdragon, this may only have a 5-10% effect on overall battery life. So what I'm saying is that, best case scenario, the performance/battery differences might not manifest to a degree that matters.

The worst case scenario is that Google starts to flesh out Android Wear's capabilities. Requiring OpenGL ES 3.0 for any aspect of the UI would potentially restrict the 360 from updates that the other devices would be eligible for. Another concern is that the more demanding the OS becomes, the more the performance differences show up. Lastly, if this situation occurs, the SOC being taxed will also more severely highlight the power consumption difference.

The battery size limitation will have a larger effect. At a base of 320mAh for the 360, the 400mAh on the LG is 25% larger, and thus, can last 25% longer if all else were equal. When you add in the extra juice consumed by the SOC/RAM, this could make the difference as high as 30-40%. THAT is significant.

In the end, I got the 360 not for the specs inside, but for what it does. It meets my needs. But it's fun to participate in these discussions as I'm a spec-whore at heart.