Google’s Pixel Watch 5 is promising — but it isn’t finished
Developing story first seen 2 hours ago
Google's Pixel Watch 5 has launched with only modest hardware tweaks but a raft of promised software upgrades, and The Verge's early review finds that most of its headline new features are not yet functional. The watch's standout health tools — including blood pressure and insulin resistance trends, nightly sleep breathing quality tracking, and wrist-based strength training cues — won't roll out until next month, while breathing emergency detection remains pending FDA clearance in the US, leaving reviewers unable to fully judge whether the device justifies its cost.
The watch keeps the same case sizes as its predecessor, with only slight boosts to chip and battery, plus a new pyrite satin finish, and now costs $399.99, a $50 rise on last year's model. Other software updates already available include Wear OS 7, offline Gemini, a more accurate Raise to Talk feature, Proactive Assistance, tighter gesture controls, AI watchfaces, improved bedtime automations and notably better GPS mapping for outdoor activities, which the reviewer singles out as a genuine highlight. Aside from GPS, most changes are described as incremental refinements rather than major leaps, and the new features will initially be exclusive to this model, though Google has previously extended such updates to older watches over time.
- Pixel Watch 5's key health features aren't live yet at launch
- Price rises $50 to $399.99 with minor hardware changes
- Improved GPS mapping is the standout upgrade so far
New here? Start with this
Google's Pixel Watch 5 is the latest version of Google's own smartwatch, running its Wear OS software and designed to work closely with Android phones. It sits alongside devices like the Apple Watch and Samsung's Galaxy Watch range as one of the main options for people who want a smartwatch that tracks fitness, health and notifications on their wrist.
This particular model has been reviewed early by the technology website The Verge, which tests gadgets ahead of their wider release to help readers decide whether they are worth buying. Google is a major technology company best known for search, Android phones and its Gemini artificial intelligence assistant, and it increasingly builds AI features into its hardware, including watches.
The story matters because it touches on a common tension in gadget reviews: companies sometimes launch devices with new features still to come via later software updates, rather than everything working from day one. That raises questions for buyers about whether to pay full price now, and for regulators such as America's Food and Drug Administration, which vets health-related features like breathing emergency detection before they can be switched on.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Reasonable observers note that Google is being upfront about a staged rollout rather than a broken promise, and that phased software delivery is now standard practice across the industry, allowing a device's core hardware and platform to launch on schedule while genuinely complex features, including ones needing regulatory clearance, are properly tested and approved. They argue the watch already includes substantial improvements, from Wear OS 7 and offline Gemini to markedly better GPS tracking, and that buyers gain real, lasting value as promised health tools arrive incrementally, with Google's track record of eventually extending updates to older models suggesting good faith rather than a bait-and-switch.
The case against
Sceptics counter that charging a premium price, and $50 more than last year, for headline features that are not yet functional at launch asks consumers to pay now for a product that does not yet exist, undermining their ability to judge whether the purchase is worthwhile. They argue that marketing a watch around flagship health capabilities such as blood pressure trends and breathing detection, while those remain pending or restricted to a single new model, risks misleading buyers and sets a troubling precedent where hardware releases outpace the software and regulatory approval needed to make them work, leaving early adopters effectively beta-testing an incomplete device.
More coverage