Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Watch Ultra Reviews: Bigger and Better, But Not a Garmin Killer Yet

aacemyan said:
I used to own the Series 0 and Series 4 Apple Watches and moved over to the Fenix 7 this year. While I miss some of the smartwatch features (mostly rich notifications, messages, calendar), the Fenix is in a different league entirely from an active lifestyle standpoint.

To me the killer Garmin feature is the guided training for runs as well as the insight it give me on my training readiness (read more there: https://www.garmin.com/en-US/garmin...hysiological-measurements/training-readiness/). Garmin takes sleep score, 24/7 HR, stress levels, body battery, rolling HRV history, 7 day accute training load, etc. to let you know if your training is productive, unproductive, or if you're overexerting. Battery life is also wonderful - I sleep with this watch everyday and recharge it once every 1.5 weeks.

I did in fact pre-order an Ultra watch since I'm super curious about what the watch will accomplish, but I find it highly unlikely that it will replace my Fenix 7. Apple watches are just not good at motivating or providing insight for me and the 'close your rings' mentality doesn't jive with my on / off exercise regimen of my lifestyle.
Click to expand...
As a competitive runner in a former life (and former Garmin owner), I find the breadth of Garmin’s metrics just exhausting. I never felt I needed that level of analysis to understand how my body was feeling. I used to run with a watch that did nothing but track my time, if you can believe that!

Point being that even the Apple Watch has waaay more data for athletes than was available at any price just a handful of years ago. I’m skeptical of the claim that anyone - but certainly anyone sub-elite - needs the kind of metrics Garmin now pushes as essential for all.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Uofmtiger, crashFlow5, bwl2006 and 3 others
sea800 said:
I'm wondering if the surface is plain Titanium dioxide TiO2 or there is a protective layer in addition. Issue is (same as with anodized aluminium) that either is known to be able to pass the blood brain barrier. Aluminium or TiO2 in the brain is considered not a good thing. A question in that respect via Apple support was never answered for me, googling no avail. I bought the steel model which does not have the issue but would be interested in the Ultra were it to have an extra coating layer to prevent particles to rub into the skin and go into the bloodstream.
Click to expand...

The main part (the back) that touches the skin is ceramic I believe. Of course the sides may touch skin on occasion.
 
QCassidy352 said:
As a competitive runner in a former life (and former Garmin owner), I find the breadth of Garmin’s metrics just exhausting. I never felt I needed that level of analysis to understand how my body was feeling. I used to run with a watch that did nothing but track my time, if you can believe that!

Point being that even the Apple Watch has waaay more data for athletes than was available at any price just a handful of years ago. I’m skeptical of the claim that anyone - but certainly anyone sub-elite - needs the kind of metrics Garmin now pushes as essential for all.
Click to expand...
You have a point there too! I was once a competitive runner too. I started out with just a watch that had a timer and lap function. Some years later, I upgraded to a watch with HRM (Polar). In later years, I used a Garmin Forerunner that had GPS and also external HRM. To be honest, that's about all the information I really needed. The GPS was very useful as I could estimate how many miles my non-track workouts were. The HRM helped to provide information on biological effort and recovery.

What I loved about running was the simplicity of the sports, unlike competitive cycling (a sports I was comparing to back then). Back in the 90s and 2000s (and probably today too although I no longer really know) cycling can be a very gadget-y sports from bicycle, bicycle parts, cycling wear, shoes, etc. Running is pretty simple: shoes and your watch.

So yes, a lot of the metrics Garmin watch (and many smart watch provide) these days are nice to have but more often than not, not necessary.

"Funnily" enough, the one area that Apple Watch sucks at is marking laps. When you are doing serious track workouts, you really cannot rely on double tapping the screen to mark a lap/segment. It's unreliable, especially when you are running at such a hard pace that you cannot provide two taps in a way that the Watch properly registers as double tapping. $400 Watch and it can't mark laps well. SMH.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Thrutheroofnunderground and jimbobb24
QCassidy352 said:
As a competitive runner in a former life (and former Garmin owner), I find the breadth of Garmin’s metrics just exhausting. I never felt I needed that level of analysis to understand how my body was feeling. I used to run with a watch that did nothing but track my time, if you can believe that!

Point being that even the Apple Watch has waaay more data for athletes than was available at any price just a handful of years ago. I’m skeptical of the claim that anyone - but certainly anyone sub-elite - needs the kind of metrics Garmin now pushes as essential for all.
Click to expand...
You are right for the most part however (this is not medical advice) with all the new metrics available for everyone it could be a way for people to analyze their gait or whatever they need in order to change something that could be causing pain instead of trying to “push through it”.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and Fozziebear71
Fthree said:
You are right for the most part however (this is not medical advice) with all the new metrics available for everyone it could be a way for people to analyze their gait or whatever they need in order to change something that could be causing pain instead of trying to “push through it”.
Click to expand...
There's something to be said for not relying on computer visual data and learning to listen to one's body.

A downside of relying on so much supposed objective data (debatable whether such data is really objective or whether they are more in the vein of presenting AS objective) is losing the skill of honing in and interpreting physical sensoral experiences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fthree
In other words… don’t pay attention to these YouTuber reviews. They’re not on the same planet sometimes let alone the average consumer
 
Kierkegaarden said:
It sounds like the main points of Ultra vs Garmin come down to software features. Additional metrics, offline map capability, etc. — couldn’t this be solved with apps or a software update?
Click to expand...
yes, I think probably the biggest difference are software based. Unless I'm missing something, it seems that the Apple Watch (for the Series 8 and Ultra) have all the hardware needed to be in alignment with the types of metrics Garmin watches provide.

I think that's why one poster described this lack as "lazy", which seems appropriate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
msackey said:
There's something to be said for not relying on computer visual data and learning to listen to one's body.

A downside of relying on so much supposed objective data (debatable whether such data is really objective or whether they are more in the vein of presenting AS objective) is losing the skill of honing in and interpreting physical sensoral experiences.
Click to expand...
msackey said:
There's something to be said for not relying on computer visual data and learning to listen to one's body.

A downside of relying on so much supposed objective data (debatable whether such data is really objective or whether they are more in the vein of presenting AS objective) is losing the skill of honing in and interpreting physical sensoral experiences.
Click to expand...
I like what you’re saying however if you can measure something as simple as left to right strike ratios etc being a little more cautious of such things instead of just “running hurts” one could possibly save years on condyles and such.
 
Fthree said:
I like what you’re saying however if you can measure something as simple as left to right strike ratios etc being a little more cautious of such things instead of just “running hurts” one could possibly save years on condyles and such.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is something to be said about such metrics, especially when one doesn't have a coach who can provide observation from a distance and/or when one isn't experienced enough or able to coach oneself. After all, even elite athletes have coach. These metrics are, in a sense, a proxy for a personal coach.
 
I think some of these reviewers are missing the point. In regards for it competing as a "Garmin Killer", of course it's not, they're in 2 totally different leagues and use purposes. But, I also don't think that was Apple's intent. Apple is totally aware that the 97% of this market will not be dedicated thru-hikers, ultra marathoners, etc. BUT, it certainly is a threat to the weekend warrior 8-10mi hiker Garmin market that wanted the wrist bling of that group.

I will not be purchasing this watch because I fall into that 3% who actually utilize the niche features and (more importantly) battery life that Garmin provides. But, I love the fact Apple made this watch because the barrier that was keeping even casual hikers out of the AW space is almost 100% because of battery life. If they can find a way to squeeze out an extra day or two with the next version of this watch and offer it in space gray or other colors, I think folks will be surprised how many people who flock to this watch.
 
I don't know that golf is considered extreme but I frequently play 36 holds and use a golf app on my watch. And my series 7 won't last two rounds without charging between rounds. I am excited about the longer battery life!!
 
Couple of personal observations.... Things I find that the Ultra needs help.
  • Battery needs to be a lot more - like a week minimum
  • Needs a more ergonomic design. Note the edges and strap connection comparing the Garmin and Ultra.
  • Needs additional colors like ... Matte black or ...
  • The software is lacking. Apple could have had so much more.
  • The cost needs to come down.
Now for a question: What use is L5? It isn't even technically operational at best. Looks more like a gimmick.

Personally this will not currently replace my Garmin. I'll stick with my AW7, Eco, and Garmin for now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GuruZac and Thrutheroofnunderground
erikkfi said:
Every Apple Watch could have an action button right now if they just give the option to change the side button into an action button. I never, never, never use mine.
Click to expand...
I used to when you selected your 5 favorite apps and they were there. But with the bigger faces and more complications most my favorite apps are now complications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thrutheroofnunderground
MayaUser said:
Not for everyone?
Those who wants something new...that realised that its the same price, maybe cheaper than the AW stainless steel with good band...they will go for it just for the battery life alone
Click to expand...
There are watches that scoff at 2 days of battery life, this is the price of the Garmin Fenix with Solar charging where if you’re outside for 3 hours a day it’s basically infinitely charged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001
Kierkegaarden said:
It sounds like the main points of Ultra vs Garmin come down to software features. Additional metrics, offline map capability, etc. — couldn’t this be solved with apps or a software update?
Click to expand...
Could be. You also realize that the new watchOS was a MAJOR update and still isn’t in the same planet still? The HR zones for instance are stock, non-changeable, universal setting, which is an absolute joke. You also can’t pair any external sensors outside of a HR strap, which for triathlons, or cycling, or even some running sensors is insane too—especially for $800.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and Fozziebear71
Echo chamber over here. Ultra is getting a pass for being an Apple watch.

No offline maps- "oh thats okay just use your phone!"

2 day battery life- "oh just bring a power pack!"

Chunky and its not "extreme" as Apple puts it. In fact, its far from it. I think they intended this watch to those going from couch to 5k.

No one in their right mind is going to be replacing their Garmin for this. That's like 5 steps backwards.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: dk001 and Fozziebear71
crashFlow5 said:
Echo chamber over here. Ultra is getting a pass for being an Apple watch.

No offline maps- "oh thats okay just use your phone!"

2 day battery life- "oh just bring a power pack!"

Chunky and its not "extreme" as Apple puts it. In fact, its far from it. I think they intended this watch to those going from couch to 5k.

No one in their right mind is going to be replacing their Garmin for this. That's like 5 steps backwards.
Click to expand...
Exactly.
 
GMShadow said:
That's normal. You'll probably get a 'shipped' notification on Thursday morning.
Click to expand...
I hope so. No tracking number showing now. Still showing Friday 23rd delivery, preparing to ship status, and card has been charged, but no "incoming packages" on UPS account, and no email from Apple about it's shipped.
 
Thrutheroofnunderground said:
Could be. You also realize that the new watchOS was a MAJOR update and still isn’t in the same planet still? The HR zones for instance are stock, non-changeable, universal setting, which is an absolute joke. You also can’t pair any external sensors outside of a HR strap, which for triathlons, or cycling, or even some running sensors is insane too—especially for $800.
Click to expand...
Can third party apps offer this functionality, or does Apple not allow it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back