The Apple Watch is much slimmer. Part of the reason for that is the SoC that Apple uses is more modern and compact than OMAP.
OMAP3 isn't the best processor to use for a watch. I'm sure if we spend some time going back and forth we will identify at least one or two more modern processors that beat OMAP3 on efficiency, size, AND performance.
I don't thin Motorola should be skimping on the processor for their first watch, if they are trying to convince us its a premium product that we should feel proud to wear on our wrists. People see watches as prestige items, and they will pay more for a well constructed and designed device. There's already enough competition in the plastic trashy wrist-wear segment.
Both the OMAP3 and OMAP4 are 12mmx12mm BGA packages, with pop-memory (package on package). This does add to the height, but the alternative is to put the SDRAM on the board which chews up a lot of board real estate.
OMAP3 isn't the best processor to use for a watch. ... I don't thin Motorola should be skimping on the processor for their first watch,...
You still haven't explained what the OMAP3 watch doesn't do now, that it could do with an OMAP4.
There's already enough competition in the plastic trashy wrist-wear segment.
That's actually likely to be a problem with the Apple watch too. If it doesn't prove to be too popular, then will future versions of iOS support it? Sure, 8 will, and possibly 9. But after that? In a couple years there will be a watch with some other whiz-bang feature and everyone will want to upgrade to that.
These tiny wearable computers will suffer just as much obsolescence as our phones do. A Seiko mostly just tells time, and the standards for don't change much.
