Sure but for this discussion this feels like moving the goalposts. Is it possible for FOSS to make a smartwatch? The answer is yes. Apple tends not to lead product categories either, letting companies like Samsung and Meta try new features before they are proven. That’s more a development strategy than a limitation on what FOSS can do. Look at 3D printers, which exploded in popularity in the OSS world after the patents expired. Yes a commercial company made them first, but the wealth of experimentation on new price points and features happened in the FOSS world.
GP's claim is that corporate development is holding product development back. That's what I'm responding to. I have no doubt that FOSS can produce clones of existing products, occasionally even clones as good or better than the original. But FOSS is not driving any form of product development at all. The anti-corporate pro-FOSS thing is just disconnected online idealism.
FWIW I own a PineTime and enjoy hacking on it quite a bit but a commercial smartwatch it is not. For me that's fine as I don't use a smartwatch as a daily driver, but if I did a PineWatch would be a nonstarter. I do hope that the PineTime can drive an ecosystem of open smart watches that occupy different points in the cost, functionality, customizability, and reusability space than commercial smartwatches do, especially those that may not be profitable to tape out large runs for, but I'm also thankful for commercial product development to drive new innovative products into our hands.
The root comment of this thread is all about demonising companies and lionising open source. That's why this discussion isn't moving the goalposts. You've moved them to "OSS can also do this" which is not where it started.
