Wear OS 5 blocks one of the best watch apps and it's high time Google fixes things

A custom Facer watch face showing two Pokemon cheering for you on the Samsung Galaxy Watch 6 Classic
A custom watch face from Facer on the Galaxy Watch 6 Classic. (Image credit: Michael Hicks / Android Central)
Wear OS Weekly

Android Central mascot Lloyd wearing a Galaxy Watch and Pixel Watch

This new weekly column will focus on the state of Wear OS, from new developments and updates to the latest apps and features we want to highlight.

You may not have heard of Google's XML Watch Face Format or even noticed the upgrade if you only use the default watch faces that come with your Galaxy or Pixel Watch. But it's one of the most important Wear OS upgrades in recent years, using minimal memory to stretch out your watch's battery life.

It's also taken a lot of fun out of Android watch faces, killing one of my favorite Wear OS apps (Facer) on my Galaxy Watch Ultra and Pixel Watch 3

I understand why Google made this move, but it's a creative and economic black hole for Wear devs, and Google's current Play Store solution isn't great.

The Watch Face Format (WFF) replaces the old AndroidX and Wearable Support watch faces. XML watch faces don't use any logic or executable code, with total memory restricted to 10MB in ambient mode or 100MB in interactive mode. These WFF faces run off your watch's coprocessor, with hardly a dent in the battery life.

Mandatory WFF faces, along with the Wear OS Hybrid Interface, make the Pixel Watch 3 more useable to me than the Pixel Watch 2 was, simply by stretching out its capacity to last two days instead of just over one day. But they're also boring. XML precludes any complex animations or features; it also discourages innovation by blocking the main third-party market for watch faces.

A custom Facer watch face showing Mewtwo in a pod on the Samsung Galaxy Watch 6 Classic

This Mewtwo watch face would change the water level based on how much battery life you had left. (Image credit: Michael Hicks / Android Central)

The Facer app syncs with Android watches and has hundreds of thousands of watch faces, including ones with truly creative animations and recognizable brands. The best faces cost money, but people found it worth it to keep their watches fresh, and you could even create your own faces or subscribe to try out the entire collection. 

Facer functions like a Play Store for watch faces organized by categories, free/paid, and general vibes. Because of discoverability, it's very easy to browse and find creators and faces you'll like, building up a cute library that would carry over to future watches.

It's a decade old, existing about as long as Wear watches have. And now Wear OS 5 is putting Facer's future in jeopardy, as well as the whole idea of "fun" watch faces.

New Galaxy Watch 7 or Pixel Watch 3 owners have lost their faces for good. You can either use the default on-watch faces and their basic "flavors" or go into the Play Store, search by device, tap "Watch Faces," scroll through a long list of WFF options, and buy whichever strikes your fancy. 

There's no organization and very little chance for developers to make their watch faces stand out and make money — meaning there's no incentive to make new XML watch faces. That's an issue for Google and (more importantly) for us.

Google needs to fix this and work with Facer

Play Store search results showing various watch faces using the WFF XML format.

Finding WFF watch faces for Wear OS 5 watches is a pain. (Image credit: Michael Hicks / Android Central)

Facer created a help page explaining its thoughts on the WFF developments. It says it's "working hard with Google to bring the Facer service" to Wear OS 5 watches, but while it has been "actively discussing a resolution with Google since the Watch Face Format was announced" in 2023, the "change was unfortunately rolled out before a solution could be reached."

With the current WFF system, Facer would need to convert each of its 500,000 faces to XML, removing any aspects that the "limited" format couldn't support, and then upload them one by one to the Play Store. They aren't allowed to credit users with watch faces they bought before, so you'd have to pay again for things you "own," and they could no longer charge a subscription model.

Google has every right to reinforce its hard XML requirement for Wear OS, even if this restricts the most creative watch faces. It makes Android watches look bad when the battery dies quickly over an aesthetic choice. But the Play Store requirement seems needless and unrelated, cutting out a middleman without an adequate substitute in place. 

The resolution seems obvious to me: let people continue to install WFF faces from third-party platforms (like Facer) so that artists and developers have a place to sell them and an incentive to make them. Either that or Google could buy Facer and make the app a first-party platform for Wear OS users to discover watch faces more easily.

Whichever path Google takes, it would be better than guaranteeing that the newest Wear OS watches are stuck with boring, basic watch faces for the foreseeable future. And even if Facer struggles to convert its full library to WFF, it'll have an easier time of it if it can keep making money through its store in the meantime.

Google needs to prioritize fixing the broken Wear OS 5 update on last-gen Pixel Watches before it worries about watch faces. But this isn't just some frivolous issue; it's a chance for Google to prove it cares about long-time Wear developers and indie creators after steamrolling over their ecosystem for a battery boost.

A new Wear OS Weekly column

As Android Central's wearables editor, I've written plenty about Wear OS watches in my Sunday Runday weekly column. But I use that space to deep-dive into Android watches' hardware quality (i.e., HR and GPS accuracy tests) and fitness software; it's not the right space for discussing watches in a more general context.

That's why I'm starting this new Wear OS Weekly column, which you can look out for every Wednesday!

My initial focus was on fitness watches because I felt I had more knowledge and authority to cover them. While I've used Wear OS watches for the past couple of years, starting with the Galaxy Watch 5 Pro, I'm not a native Android user, and I want to ensure I match our readers' standards when covering this topic.

Now that I've had more time with Wear OS, I felt the time was right to start this series. I plan to do deep dives on software updates, talk about the watch apps the Android Central staff loves (or thinks should be better), and generally try to improve the site's smartwatch coverage beyond simple news. 

If you have areas you'd like me to focus on, feel free to comment on this or future columns or email me with your questions and thoughts!

Michael L Hicks
Senior Editor, Wearables & AR/VR

Michael is Android Central's resident expert on wearables and fitness. Before joining Android Central, he freelanced for years at Techradar, Wareable, Windows Central, and Digital Trends. Channeling his love of running, he established himself as an expert on fitness watches, testing and reviewing models from Garmin, Fitbit, Samsung, Apple, COROS, Polar, Amazfit, Suunto, and more.

  • irfan9999
    AC News said:
    Facer is a decade-old watch face store with 500,000 faces and tens of millions of users that lets people get more creative with the most visible part of the Wear OS experience. And Google has basically killed it with Wear OS 5, replaced with a WFF system that's efficient but deadly dull.

    Wear OS 5 blocks one of the best watch apps and it's high time Google fixes things : Read more
    I totally agree! Facer brought so much creativity to the Wear OS experience, and it's a shame to see it sidelined with Wear OS 5. Customization is a huge part of what makes smartwatches fun, and the new WFF system feels too restrictive. Hopefully, Google listens to feedback and finds a way to integrate more personalization options again. It would be great to see Facer or similar apps make a comeback!
    Reply
  • Cronosurf
    Very good article! As developers of "Cronosurf" watch faces, we are now experiencing the same harsh fate as Facer. With over 2 million downloads and around 300k active users, the watch face "Cronosurf Wave" has reached an important place in the Wear OS community. Sadly, this unexpected decision by Google is changing the game for many developers of interactive watch faces. As is the case with Facer, our watch faces make extensive use of logic code and can not be reproduced with WFF. Why would Google develop AndroidX and Canvas as a standard for creating amazing watch faces just do kill it a few years down the road? Battery life is important, but so is usability. How about keeping backwards compatibility and letting the user decide when they want to run a more functional watch face versus a super-battery-saving XML-type?
    Reply
  • rvbfan
    How about you update your app/faces and stop blaming it on Google. Not like this came out of the blue. Maybe by your reasoning MS should still be supporting DOS? Should Doughnut, KitKat etc. still be supported as well?
    Oh and by the way, I really loved my Athlon 2600 on an Nvidia motherboard. They should still be supported as well.
    Reply
  • SeeBeeEss
    AC News said:

    Wear OS 5 blocks one of the best watch apps and it's high time Google fixes things : Read more
    I agree. Google should divert considerable time and resources from developing their own hardware and software to make sure that 10-year-old 3rd party battery draining apps still work on their system and so that the developers of those apps don't have to exert any additional thought or effort to continue to make a profit. 😉
    Reply
  • EmGeeEl
    SeeBeeEss said:
    I agree. Google should divert considerable time and resources from developing their own hardware and software to make sure that 10-year-old 3rd party battery draining apps still work on their system and so that the developers of those apps don't have to exert any additional thought or effort to continue to make a profit. 😉
    Spot-on. Your key point here is "battery draining," and boy howdy, is Facer guilty of that. I tried Facer for about a week four years ago when I got my first Galaxy Watch, and after having to charge my watch twice a day, every day it was installed, got rid of it. Also, and this is probably just me...most WF's available via Facer always seemed more amateurish. To each his own.

    I've always found that Samsung's 1st-party faces are the most optimized and performed best on GWs. Same deal with Google's 1st-party watchfaces and their Pixel Watch. So yeah, I often settle for a Samsung watchface, even if it isn't always tweaked to my aesthetic...because, end of the day, I want to maximize my battery life rather than have dancing anime on my wrist.

    For those on the hunt -- my favorite watchface designer on the Play Store who has updated their products to WearOS 5 is AmoledWatchFace (AWF)...very functional and great looking selection of watchfaces, all updated for the latest format.
    Reply
  • BerryBubbles
    Hey @Michael L Hicks
    Looking forward to reading your new column.
    😃👍
    Reply
  • Gadgety 1
    @Michael L Hicks, thank you very much for this much needed piece. It's quite intriguing that the tech press has been silent, I mean totally silent, about this major change that has been known for at least a quarter of year now. Not a word anywhere. It's a major change to the whole Wear OS ecosystem. Having only a few years ago publicly stated at Google I/O that Facer was a trusted partner, Google now instead does an about face and invalidate the future viability the 15 million app downloads that Facer and Watchmaker jointly represent, and approximately 1 million watch face variations representing hundreds of millions of development hours. Officially this is for battery life improvements and the ever present safety and security argument. Say what? So since 2014 Google has left the door wide open for hackers and now suddenly after 10 years, they're closing it. Yes, right. Of course it has nothing to do with the revenue streams Google's missing out on, as both Facer and Watchmaker apps have their own market places, removing Google's eternal cut, or that they want to offer control to prospective watch brands entering, or returning to the Google Wear OS fold. Of course not.

    For me as a user the switch to WFF means removing the esthetic component, the key to my originally opting for (Android) Wear instead of Apple's watch and ecosystem. Freedom. It's been a ride where the Google pony dragged its feet for many years, and the one saving grace was the esthetics, circular watches and Watchmaker and Facer enabling photo realistic, three dimensional, multilayered watch faces with fantastic multi-functionality, lasting 24 hours, and some beyond. The WFF change means replacing them with flat looking, simple, rather ugly and plain alternatives. There simply is no comparison. To use a car analogy Facer and Watchmaker faces can look and perform like powerful shiny Ferrari V12s compared to WFF one-dimensional frugal VW Bug battery-frugality-one-trick pony that lasts longer but emaciated, lank, haggard and worn right out of the box. Frugality above all. In some distant future it will last for days and days and days, even up to a week.

    That this move finally happens was perhaps in the cards. Google started by shutting down the Google+ forum, the largest congregation of Wear watch creators, where Watchmaker had 300 000 followers in no time at all, and Facer had 30 000. Then Google cut off Facer and Watchmaker access to features that were previously programmable. The next step "for safety reasons" made it hard for the user to access their storage of downloaded watch faces. Of course it was only a side effect of improving the user integrity. Blocking access to the hardware instruction set on new Wear OS watches was the next logical step.

    Funny how the users are now not allowed to decide for themselves what kind of trade off between frugality and performance they can have on their watch. No, you must use WFF and gain at least 10% extra battery autonomy. I know, I know, most market places offer a free choice, not counting the Playstore here, and I'm having second thoughts on my order of the Galaxy S24 Ultra, and the Tab S9, to accompany my Galaxy Watch. The only language Google and the rest of the Wear OS hardware partners understand is bottom line cash. So as they are turning the tailorable Wear OS platform into an AbandonWear OS appliance I realize this is a decision making point. I can keep my Samsung orders but the Apple fruit is looking more lush. If I can't have the tailoring, or the eye candy I crave, why stay with Android? So not only does it open up my eyes to the Apple and even Huawei and Garmin worlds, but it also opens up cases like the Epic vs Google trial and the potential for FTC's Bureau of Competition to take a glance at forever severing the Google and Android leash, so the onetrick-ponies can career off into the sunset of the empire.
    Reply