I just saw that Garmin announced their 645, which is the first ( that I’m aware of at least) Garmin that allows music playback. Should be great news for runners/athletes who are looking for more tracking ethics than the Apple Watch provided. The interesting thing is that , in workout mode, it will only last 5 hours, which is just about what the Apple Watch will do in similar usage. Garmins have always had amazon by battery life and the 645 will last for 7 days if not used for workout mode, but this tells me that the Apple Watch is actually pretty efficient for all that it does when used for working out.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Garmin 645
- Thread starter mk313
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
mk313: not really. garmin is artificially lowering the battery life on the 645 to provide some seperation in their product line to justify the higher cost of their more expensive models. the 935 and Fenix 5 which have all the features of the 645 jump to 24 hours with GPS active.
I was a Garmin user before purchasing my Apple Watch. Having music along with me was one of the pain points, as I didn't want to bring my phone with me. I do generally like their ecosystem, but for some reason wouldn't spend that much on their equipment.
DCRainmaker.com has pics of the user interface for putting music on the 645. It looks *painful* like back in the days of using iTunes (but worse) to manually load music to your iPod before heading out. There is no streaming, no online syncing of playlists etc. I'm not sure I would find it worth it, maybe you just upload a bunch once a month or something...
Love DCRainmaker. Ray is the best running/cycling/fitness reviewer out there.
Interesting. I didn’t look at pricing. I just assumed that this was a new top of the line watch for them.
Not all the features - the 935 (which I have) and the Fenix do not play music.
Very true. I doubt the bluetooth streaming of music accounts for the difference between 5 hours and 24 hours though. Rumor is a music version of the Fenix 5 and 935 are coming this spring much like Fenix 3 had the 3 HR update after a year.
Yeah, before the Apple Watch came along the 645 would have looked more appealing. Now that the Apple Watch can access your music library online and stream music, the 645 looks dated at launch. But I suppose it's better than nothing for those Garmin users who want to listen to music. I have no doubt though that the 645 blows away the Apple Watch when it comes to fitness. The short battery life is a real head-scratcher, however.
I agree about the fact Garmin has SO, SO many more fitness metrics, but after a decade + of Garmin watches including the Fenix 5S I had to look in the mirror and be honest that I'm a 40+ casual runner who knocks out 3-5 mile slow runs and every once in a while when I get too fat I might train and do a half marathon but so slow all the 70+ year olds wearing massive costumes are passing me. I simply didn't use or didn't have a use for many of the metrics I could see. On the other hand I am a big Apple user and really missed the seamless integration of notifications and such that Apple does within its own ecosystem. Now watchOS 1.0 was terrible for fitness with not only no GPS on S0, but only a single metric per screen while working out, no maps of your runs, no 3rd party ability to use HR, no 3rd party to send any data to the activity rings and more. I couldn't do it, but now 3 years later with watchOS 4.0 and S3 its more than good enough for this fat, slow runner having fixed ALL of that. Sold my Fenix 5S, got a SBSS S3 and I'm not looking back!
I briefly had an Apple Watch s3 and returned it. I’ll be getting a 645 instead.
I realized that what I wanted was a running watch with music, not a smart watch. The Apple Watch works fine as a running watch, but only fine. In particular, raise to wake never worked well for me, and I was unable to see my data while running unless I tapped it. It also obviously lacks a lot of advanced running dynamics. The battery life on the 645 is a little lower than I’d hoped but still better than the AW.
I think I’ll be happy with it. I’ve always found garmin watches to be a cut above the rest.
I realized that what I wanted was a running watch with music, not a smart watch. The Apple Watch works fine as a running watch, but only fine. In particular, raise to wake never worked well for me, and I was unable to see my data while running unless I tapped it. It also obviously lacks a lot of advanced running dynamics. The battery life on the 645 is a little lower than I’d hoped but still better than the AW.
I think I’ll be happy with it. I’ve always found garmin watches to be a cut above the rest.
Don't sell yourself short. I'm in my early 50's and last Thanksgiving hit a PR in our local 5-miler Turkey Trot race. My previous PR had been from exactly 10 years prior! I use my Garmin for speed work and intervals and structured plans, none of which the Apple Watch does well or at all. But I agree for a casual runner the Apple Watch is fine. No matter what you use, just keep moving.
I'm in the same boat as you, being 70, I've pretty much decided that the ultra's, and the Tour de France are out of my future, so while I have owned Many Garmins, from the 910XT, through the Fenix 3 series, (both HR, and non), Fenix 5, 5x, and a few in between, also Suunto's Ambit 2, and 3 Peak, and their Spartan line, the Apple watch gives me what I actually need to know, and does it efficiently. The other metrics, (I'm a data freak, been in computers for a LONG time), I can move to either Garmin Connect, or preferably, Suunto's Movescount. Does all I need, plus there's the added convenience of music on the run, notifications that work within the system, and the many other features that neither Garmin or Suunto have. Best all-round decision I've made. It should be said that I do not use the built in HRM on the Apple watch (Series 3, SS), but use a TickrX for actual classes, or gym work, but if I decide to take it easy, and do a simple mall walk, I have a Scosche Rhythm+. Although I'm thinking about buying the Wahoo Tickr Fit Optical HRM to replace the Scosche.
If I were 50 years younger, maybe the added cost of the Fenix 5x, or so, or the Suunto Spartan if they ever get it going correctly, would be in order, but for now, AW wins.
I use my Garmin 935 for my runs and my Apple Watch for my everyday watch. I stay with the Garmin because I love their guided run coaching and that I can base my runs on my lactate thresholds. I really wish Apple had more to offer on the running but understand it isn’t as focused on it as Garmin. I love both and just going to be a two watch owner.
Just a heads up, Scosche announced the Rhythm 24 HR at CES last week (arriving in April) which is the update to the Rhythm+. It has 24 hour or longer battery life, swim proof, improved strap, internal recording of data, and more. Seems to be the best in class (Valencell Optical in the Scosche still seems to have a slight accuracy lead over others) even over the Tickr Fit if you are looking for ANT+/BTLE combined. The Polar OH1 is great if you don't need ANT+ because its the smallest.