6 ms·

Just buy a Garmin if you want to do anything -useful- with your watch for sports or outdoors. Apple is 5-10 years behind their reliability or battery life. And

Just buy a Garmin if you want to do anything -useful- with your watch for sports or outdoors. Apple is 5-10 years behind their reliability or battery life. And if you’re going somewhere without a cell signal… or god forbid, you don’t have (shudder) wifi, it’ll tick right along. Not to mention they don’t sunset their products after 12 months… your watch will get updates for a long time. They’re also -very- repairable to boot.

greggsy 4y ago
Sure they’re 5-10 years behind, but I wouldn’t underestimate Apple’s ability to create a thriving ecosystem. Any Garmin app developers worth their salt should be scrambling to port their existing apps to the Apple Watch platform. It’s currently an under-supplied market, and failing to tap into that opportunity is a bad business strategy. Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they extend the user repair program to this sector. Also, it’s a bit disingenuous to claim that they sunset their products after 12 months. They might refresh them, but that doesn’t change the software support cycle.
- exabrial 4y ago
  Not at all, Garmin is not fashionware like Apple. You buy Garmin because you are an athlete that needs an actual complete product that is tested and bullet proof; where you own the hardware, and you’re not ‘renting’ it from Apple. If you want to flash how fancy you are to your coworkers and have a second iPhone, you buy the iwatch. Apple does not hold a candle to Garmin’s software for sports and training… they have everything from an actual desktop app that works (gasp) without an internet connection, an online portal where you can freely download all of YOUR data (gasp) if you choose the connected option, and the sports and training analytics is light years ahead of Apple. And besides, Apple can’t receive ANT+ signals from connected sensors, and BLE battery life is abysmal in comparison. The only thing Apple has on Garmin is the have app stores full on apps, but that’s it. Nobody is using their Garmin to play Candy Crush but that misses the point.
  - infotogivenm 4y ago
    Eh... I think there is an enormous gap between “pro athlete” and “normal smartwatch user” that does not diminish to just “fashionware”. The battery life sucks tho, thats what keeps me from using one. I think the health and exercise features are more than fine enough for “non-pro athletes”. No idea what “renting from apple” means but it does not seem to be the watch for you.
    - AmericanChopper 4y ago
      Garmin sensors are more precise, and the off the shelf analytics are better. Everything else in that parent comment is nonsense. Apple Health data is very easy to download and share with 3rd parties (say a 3rd party that has better analytics than Apple Health offers, for instance…). I don’t get the battery complaints either. I only ever charge mine while I’m in the shower, and I don’t really have any problems. The only instance I found it an issue was in 24+ hour ultras, but I don’t think that’s what most people are complaining about… Imo, the advantage that Apple has over the more well equipped Garmin models is that it’s comfortable to wear all day and sleep with. I never liked wearing the chunkier Garmins outside of training.
      - jojule 4y ago
        Any proof for Garmin sensors being more precise? TheQuantifiedScientist on his YouTube channel has great tests for many wearable devices and their sensors. His assessment has been very favorable for AW Ultra on HR, location and sleep when compared to Garmin devices: for sleep tracking Garmin is very inaccurate, for HR and location Fenix 7 and Ultra are identical. Fenix 6 and older are poor. Blood oxygen and temperature seems to be quite inaccurate on both.
        AmericanChopper 4y ago
        Just my own anecdata I guess. I’ve always found heartbeat and location tracking to be a lot better with the Garmins. I haven’t trained with the new Apple Watches yet though, so maybe I’m completely wrong…
- AmericanChopper 4y ago
  > Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support Is the target market really concerned about this? I’ll chew through a $200-300 pair of shoes in 4-6 weeks, and I’m more-or-less a casual runner. The cost of attending events is much more than that. I probably would buy a Garmin if I was really taking things seriously, but the Apple Watch does what I need, and even if I brought a brand new one every year it wouldn’t have much impact on the costs of this hobby.
  - r0fl 4y ago
    Top result on Google for how many km should running shoes last Experts recommend you replace your running shoes every 500 to 750 kilometers. That's roughly every 300 to 500 miles, which equates to approximately four to six months for someone who runs 20 miles a week. What are you doing replacing your shoes every 4 weeks?
    - AmericanChopper 4y ago
      I typically get around 400-600 kms out of a fresh pair of running shoes before the tread is completely gone and the energy return structure stops returning energy. I typically run about 100km/week. A bit less if I’m tapering, or injured (not very often), or on holiday. I also walk a lot, which I have different shoes for, but that adds an extra few pairs to the annual shoes bill as well. Edit: I probably go through shoes slightly faster than most runners, because I weigh a bit more than most runners. But I don’t think that’s a huge factor.
      - abstract_put 4y ago
        > I’m more-or-less a casual runner > I typically run about 100km/week This feels pretty naive or disingenuous. I'm pretty sure vanishingly few people understand 100km/week to be "casual". While you may not feel like you're a "pro" or have a competitive mindset, I'd argue averaging more than an hour a day at pretty much literally anything moves you out of "casual".
        4y ago
majou 4y ago
> Not to mention they don’t sunset their products after 12 months Apple still provides security updates for the iPhone 5s from 2013. https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT213428 https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT213428
- WirelessGigabit 4y ago
  Doesn’t matter. Your applications could choose not to include certain iOS versions anymore. And then you’re SOL, even if you’ve paid for the app but now the online component doesn’t work because they changed their APIs.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    What's your suggested alternative for a 2013 device?
  - macintux 4y ago
    That risk exists for all electronics. The point remains: 12 months is not an accurate assessment of how long you can expect software upgrades.
  - spike021 4y ago
    Depending on the app, do you really expect companies to devote X resources (maybe even a full, separate iOS team) specifically to maintain a version of an app for older devices? Maybe that's feasible for the larger tech companies but not the smaller ones.
teruakohatu 4y ago
Also the minimum repair cost ($499). The Apple repair pricing may work for laptops and even phones, but for a not for a watch designed to be taken diving, skiing, mountaineering and trail running. Garmins repair costs are much more reasonable and for things like broken screens there are third party options.
- seanp2k2 4y ago
  with AppleCare+ : """ AppleCare+ for Apple Watch, Apple Watch Nike, and Apple Watch Ultra extends your coverage3 and includes unlimited incidents of accidental damage protection. Each incident is subject to a $69 service fee plus applicable tax for Apple Watch and Apple Watch Nike, and $79 service fee plus applicable tax for Apple Watch Ultra.2 In addition, you’ll get 24/7 priority access to Apple experts by chat or phone. """ https://www.apple.com/support/products/watch/ https://www.apple.com/support/products/watch/
enlyth 4y ago
I just find it weird that in their reveal event they portrayed all these people doing extreme sports in the middle of nowhere, climbing some huge mountain with the watch, and then you find out it has a battery life of 36 hours at most. You're supposed to carry a power bank to your climbing expedition and charge your watch constantly? How impractical is that.
- xattt 4y ago
  You mean you don’t snap on the magnetic puck while the watch is still on your arm, cable dangling, while you hold a power bank in your hand?
  - jerlam 4y ago
    Does the Apple Watch actually support charging in the middle of a workout? The first generations of the Garmin Fenix actually supported charging in use with a very overcomplicated charging cable: https://youtu.be/S9haDnwIuSQ https://youtu.be/S9haDnwIuSQ
    - xattt 4y ago
      It does not. As soon as you take the puck out, you have to input your pin again.
- ghaff 4y ago
  Well, if you're climbing some huge mountain in the middle of nowhere you probably need to charge your Garmin as well. Garmin absolutely has better battery life. But if you can see your way to charging the Apple Watch more frequently it seems more interesting for a combination of regular smartwatch use and day activities. And, if you are climbing huge mountains in the middle of nowhere, I assume purchasing a specialized watch if you want one is the least of your expenses. (Or something like an InReach.)
  - ip26 4y ago
    You may need to charge… but the Garmin uses something like ~10mAh/day? You could top off the watch for months with a single pair of AAA batteries.
kanbara 4y ago
apple products are not sunset for _years_. the iPhone 8 i think is being sunset NOW. 6 phones later and it still got sw updates
- exabrial 4y ago
  Why are they sunsetting hardware that is in perfect working order?
  - stepanhruda 4y ago
    They are sunsetting future OS feature updates for it, not the hardware itself. Plus they release security patches for some older devices as well. Eg iPhone 8 supports latest OS, but they just released a patch for OS that supports iPhone 5s, which came out 9 years ago.
  - wfme 4y ago
    You make a phone. After one year, you release a newer, faster phone, and then repeat every year following. At which point do you stop producing the first phone you made? Perhaps you say "when it stops working". Well if that were the bar then we would still be producing computers from the 90s. Ok so maybe you say "no, when it stops running the apps I want to run". Sounds reasonable enough. So when should the app makers stop supporting the older hardware? Presumably at the point when maintaining the old hardware starts costs more than they make from the support. This point will be reached sooner or later, and you might disagree with it because you still see the product as fully capable, but ultimately the phone will stop making economic sense at some point and production will stop.
infotogivenm 4y ago
Agree on every point except sunsetting in 12 months. What are you referencing there? They just this year sunset new OS versions for the Apple Watch 3, which was released in 2017 (the 4 came out in 2018).
- exabrial 4y ago
  Why are they sunsetting devices that still boot and literally just work fine? So wasteful.
  - infotogivenm 4y ago
    The devices continue to work the exact same way… apple just does not choose to spend the money adding new features to it (or in more likelihood, testing that new features that require newer hardware do not screw the old device up). The watches still appear in the Watch app etc. If there is a bug to fix (like security), the device/versions will often end up getting out of band updates for even longer.
    - ghaff 4y ago
      I have an Apple Watch 3. I will probably buy an Ultra. And I plan to continue using the Apple Watch 3 for a lot of routine wear indefinitely. Probably won't use a lot of apps beyond a watchface and random local walks though.
  - bydo 4y ago
    Do you remember when Garmin made phones? Maybe not, because it was only for a year. They released their flagship Nuvifone with much fanfare (to T-Mobile customers, anyway) in June of 2010. They announced that they were withdrawing from the phone market that October. To be fair, they did release one update after that.
- larsnystrom 4y ago
  Not OP, but Apple has been selling Apple Watch series 3 as a new device in 2022, so people who bought it got less than a year of software updates.
ulfw 4y ago
It's aspirational. Apple Watch Ultra is great for wanna be athletes, not actual ones.

greggsy 4y ago

Sure they’re 5-10 years behind, but I wouldn’t underestimate Apple’s ability to create a thriving ecosystem. Any Garmin app developers worth their salt should be scrambling to port their existing apps to the Apple Watch platform. It’s currently an under-supplied market, and failing to tap into that opportunity is a bad business strategy. Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they extend the user repair program to this sector. Also, it’s a bit disingenuous to claim that they sunset their products after 12 months. They might refresh them, but that doesn’t change the software support cycle.

exabrial 4y ago
Not at all, Garmin is not fashionware like Apple. You buy Garmin because you are an athlete that needs an actual complete product that is tested and bullet proof; where you own the hardware, and you’re not ‘renting’ it from Apple. If you want to flash how fancy you are to your coworkers and have a second iPhone, you buy the iwatch. Apple does not hold a candle to Garmin’s software for sports and training… they have everything from an actual desktop app that works (gasp) without an internet connection, an online portal where you can freely download all of YOUR data (gasp) if you choose the connected option, and the sports and training analytics is light years ahead of Apple. And besides, Apple can’t receive ANT+ signals from connected sensors, and BLE battery life is abysmal in comparison. The only thing Apple has on Garmin is the have app stores full on apps, but that’s it. Nobody is using their Garmin to play Candy Crush but that misses the point.
- infotogivenm 4y ago
  Eh... I think there is an enormous gap between “pro athlete” and “normal smartwatch user” that does not diminish to just “fashionware”. The battery life sucks tho, thats what keeps me from using one. I think the health and exercise features are more than fine enough for “non-pro athletes”. No idea what “renting from apple” means but it does not seem to be the watch for you.
  - AmericanChopper 4y ago
    Garmin sensors are more precise, and the off the shelf analytics are better. Everything else in that parent comment is nonsense. Apple Health data is very easy to download and share with 3rd parties (say a 3rd party that has better analytics than Apple Health offers, for instance…). I don’t get the battery complaints either. I only ever charge mine while I’m in the shower, and I don’t really have any problems. The only instance I found it an issue was in 24+ hour ultras, but I don’t think that’s what most people are complaining about… Imo, the advantage that Apple has over the more well equipped Garmin models is that it’s comfortable to wear all day and sleep with. I never liked wearing the chunkier Garmins outside of training.
    - jojule 4y ago
      Any proof for Garmin sensors being more precise? TheQuantifiedScientist on his YouTube channel has great tests for many wearable devices and their sensors. His assessment has been very favorable for AW Ultra on HR, location and sleep when compared to Garmin devices: for sleep tracking Garmin is very inaccurate, for HR and location Fenix 7 and Ultra are identical. Fenix 6 and older are poor. Blood oxygen and temperature seems to be quite inaccurate on both.
      - AmericanChopper 4y ago
        Just my own anecdata I guess. I’ve always found heartbeat and location tracking to be a lot better with the Garmins. I haven’t trained with the new Apple Watches yet though, so maybe I’m completely wrong…
AmericanChopper 4y ago
> Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support Is the target market really concerned about this? I’ll chew through a $200-300 pair of shoes in 4-6 weeks, and I’m more-or-less a casual runner. The cost of attending events is much more than that. I probably would buy a Garmin if I was really taking things seriously, but the Apple Watch does what I need, and even if I brought a brand new one every year it wouldn’t have much impact on the costs of this hobby.
- r0fl 4y ago
  Top result on Google for how many km should running shoes last Experts recommend you replace your running shoes every 500 to 750 kilometers. That's roughly every 300 to 500 miles, which equates to approximately four to six months for someone who runs 20 miles a week. What are you doing replacing your shoes every 4 weeks?
  - AmericanChopper 4y ago
    I typically get around 400-600 kms out of a fresh pair of running shoes before the tread is completely gone and the energy return structure stops returning energy. I typically run about 100km/week. A bit less if I’m tapering, or injured (not very often), or on holiday. I also walk a lot, which I have different shoes for, but that adds an extra few pairs to the annual shoes bill as well. Edit: I probably go through shoes slightly faster than most runners, because I weigh a bit more than most runners. But I don’t think that’s a huge factor.
    - abstract_put 4y ago
      > I’m more-or-less a casual runner > I typically run about 100km/week This feels pretty naive or disingenuous. I'm pretty sure vanishingly few people understand 100km/week to be "casual". While you may not feel like you're a "pro" or have a competitive mindset, I'd argue averaging more than an hour a day at pretty much literally anything moves you out of "casual".
      - 4y ago

majou 4y ago

> Not to mention they don’t sunset their products after 12 months Apple still provides security updates for the iPhone 5s from 2013. https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT213428 https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT213428

WirelessGigabit 4y ago
Doesn’t matter. Your applications could choose not to include certain iOS versions anymore. And then you’re SOL, even if you’ve paid for the app but now the online component doesn’t work because they changed their APIs.
- ghaff 4y ago
  What's your suggested alternative for a 2013 device?
- macintux 4y ago
  That risk exists for all electronics. The point remains: 12 months is not an accurate assessment of how long you can expect software upgrades.
- spike021 4y ago
  Depending on the app, do you really expect companies to devote X resources (maybe even a full, separate iOS team) specifically to maintain a version of an app for older devices? Maybe that's feasible for the larger tech companies but not the smaller ones.

teruakohatu 4y ago

Also the minimum repair cost ($499). The Apple repair pricing may work for laptops and even phones, but for a not for a watch designed to be taken diving, skiing, mountaineering and trail running. Garmins repair costs are much more reasonable and for things like broken screens there are third party options.

seanp2k2 4y ago
with AppleCare+ : """ AppleCare+ for Apple Watch, Apple Watch Nike, and Apple Watch Ultra extends your coverage3 and includes unlimited incidents of accidental damage protection. Each incident is subject to a $69 service fee plus applicable tax for Apple Watch and Apple Watch Nike, and $79 service fee plus applicable tax for Apple Watch Ultra.2 In addition, you’ll get 24/7 priority access to Apple experts by chat or phone. """ https://www.apple.com/support/products/watch/ https://www.apple.com/support/products/watch/

enlyth 4y ago

I just find it weird that in their reveal event they portrayed all these people doing extreme sports in the middle of nowhere, climbing some huge mountain with the watch, and then you find out it has a battery life of 36 hours at most. You're supposed to carry a power bank to your climbing expedition and charge your watch constantly? How impractical is that.

xattt 4y ago
You mean you don’t snap on the magnetic puck while the watch is still on your arm, cable dangling, while you hold a power bank in your hand?
- jerlam 4y ago
  Does the Apple Watch actually support charging in the middle of a workout? The first generations of the Garmin Fenix actually supported charging in use with a very overcomplicated charging cable: https://youtu.be/S9haDnwIuSQ https://youtu.be/S9haDnwIuSQ
  - xattt 4y ago
    It does not. As soon as you take the puck out, you have to input your pin again.
ghaff 4y ago
Well, if you're climbing some huge mountain in the middle of nowhere you probably need to charge your Garmin as well. Garmin absolutely has better battery life. But if you can see your way to charging the Apple Watch more frequently it seems more interesting for a combination of regular smartwatch use and day activities. And, if you are climbing huge mountains in the middle of nowhere, I assume purchasing a specialized watch if you want one is the least of your expenses. (Or something like an InReach.)
- ip26 4y ago
  You may need to charge… but the Garmin uses something like ~10mAh/day? You could top off the watch for months with a single pair of AAA batteries.

kanbara 4y ago

apple products are not sunset for _years_. the iPhone 8 i think is being sunset NOW. 6 phones later and it still got sw updates

exabrial 4y ago
Why are they sunsetting hardware that is in perfect working order?
- stepanhruda 4y ago
  They are sunsetting future OS feature updates for it, not the hardware itself. Plus they release security patches for some older devices as well. Eg iPhone 8 supports latest OS, but they just released a patch for OS that supports iPhone 5s, which came out 9 years ago.
- wfme 4y ago
  You make a phone. After one year, you release a newer, faster phone, and then repeat every year following. At which point do you stop producing the first phone you made? Perhaps you say "when it stops working". Well if that were the bar then we would still be producing computers from the 90s. Ok so maybe you say "no, when it stops running the apps I want to run". Sounds reasonable enough. So when should the app makers stop supporting the older hardware? Presumably at the point when maintaining the old hardware starts costs more than they make from the support. This point will be reached sooner or later, and you might disagree with it because you still see the product as fully capable, but ultimately the phone will stop making economic sense at some point and production will stop.

infotogivenm 4y ago

Agree on every point except sunsetting in 12 months. What are you referencing there? They just this year sunset new OS versions for the Apple Watch 3, which was released in 2017 (the 4 came out in 2018).

exabrial 4y ago
Why are they sunsetting devices that still boot and literally just work fine? So wasteful.
- infotogivenm 4y ago
  The devices continue to work the exact same way… apple just does not choose to spend the money adding new features to it (or in more likelihood, testing that new features that require newer hardware do not screw the old device up). The watches still appear in the Watch app etc. If there is a bug to fix (like security), the device/versions will often end up getting out of band updates for even longer.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    I have an Apple Watch 3. I will probably buy an Ultra. And I plan to continue using the Apple Watch 3 for a lot of routine wear indefinitely. Probably won't use a lot of apps beyond a watchface and random local walks though.
- bydo 4y ago
  Do you remember when Garmin made phones? Maybe not, because it was only for a year. They released their flagship Nuvifone with much fanfare (to T-Mobile customers, anyway) in June of 2010. They announced that they were withdrawing from the phone market that October. To be fair, they did release one update after that.
larsnystrom 4y ago
Not OP, but Apple has been selling Apple Watch series 3 as a new device in 2022, so people who bought it got less than a year of software updates.

ulfw 4y ago

It's aspirational. Apple Watch Ultra is great for wanna be athletes, not actual ones.