Garmin Announces Three New Wearable Devices Alongside Contactless Payment Solution 'Garmin Pay'

[Vanilla35]

There's just something about the Garmin brand that makes it seem like it would be antiquated to me. My perception of them is from an era of Map Quest, Palm and Blackberry.

I'm not saying it's fair or correct, just what my perception of their company is.

I agree. Pretty sure 80% of their business is still GPS based products. Their watches have been top notch though. Obviously fitness focused, but very very good. The only thing it's lacking is the display is not "smartphone like", as the Watches' is (OLED). It has perfectly good colors and resolution/clarity, but it's more of a matte screen experience; part of which allows it to achieve super long battery as well - so that's the trade off.

 

[satchmo]

Still no music storage?

Perhaps it's not in their DNA, and they believe fitness doesn't go hand in hand with music.

Decent looking, and priced competitively.

Close but no cigar.

 

[Vanilla35]

Sure but how many times has Apple banged the table on the benefits of X feature over Y only to later also make a model with Y. Apple never "eats crow" they always pivot to they were waiting until they could "do it right." I agree a round model is very much needed. Doesn't look like we'll get it this time but I don't see how the current stale square will sustain sales in light of all the renewed competition. And Garmin is still the leader in sports watch tech so Apple does need to be quick.

Reiterating that further, my take on it is not just to say they can do it better, but rather that they seem to have better interpretation of new products, not of further existing products. I don't think Apple's products evolve well overall.

I do think they lead for new product categories, and follow for everything after initial launch.

 

[xDKP]

I absolutely love my Garmin Fenix 5s - I got rid of my Apple Watch for it and it is far, far superior to the AW as a running watch.

However, I'm a bit concerned that Garmin may be losing focus with this announcement and if they try and take on Apple in the general purpose wearable market I think it will only end badly for them

What does your Fenix give you on runs that your AW didn’t? Assuming it was a Series 2?

Must say I do run quite A LOT (Just got the 160 km platinum award in Nike for August) but the ease of use and all in one device of the AWS2 is just awesome in my book

 

[69Mustang]

When did Apple ever say it wouldn't make a round watch, or that round watches were bad? They've actually left themselves a lot of room to offer different options, unlike the infamous Steve Jobs they'll have to sand their fingers down to use a 7" tablet comment ...

Not sure where Apple said they wouldn't make a round watch either. Also not sure who made that claim. Certainly not me. As for dismissing the round watch shape: "Ive said the Apple Watch’s rectangular shape with rounded corners just makes sense. “When a huge part of the function is lists, a circle doesn’t make any sense,” Ive said." Source.

Funnily enough, that same article contains thoughts on glasses as a wearable: “We always thought that glasses were not a smart move, from a point of view that people would not really want to wear them. They were intrusive, instead of pushing technology to the background, as we’ve always believed,” Cook said. “We always thought it would flop, and, you know, so far it has.” I mention this in relation to the rumor that Apple will have some AR glasses in the future.

 

[xDKP]

Oh my god these look amazing. The vivomove HR, full functionality, finally elegant AF, and it actually looks like a very nice normal watch.

But no GPS - close but no cigar

 

[Jimmy76]

Garmin Pay. Hahahaha

Since Apple Pay launched how many more have we seen just copy the name? Android Pay, Samsung Pay, Fitbit Pay, Garmin Pay. Am I missing any?

I think it's good that they match the name. Why have different names for the same service? I'm sure the Garmin marketing department looked up synonyms for the word pay.
Call it what it is. It makes it easier for us consumers.
Also imagine the poor cashier having to remember all of them...

 

[deeddawg]

Meh. I've owned Garmin running watches for about seven years now.

Two things I've learned:
#1 - The color watch displays suck. They don't look at all like the advertising pictures suggest.
#2 - The software is typically a work in progress at release time; beta grade if you're lucky. Smart folks wait at least three months post release before buying.

 

[Stella]

AliPay, LoopPay (Samsung Pay), WeChat Pay


Garmin Pay is simply using the FitPay platform. Basically a turnkey solution to contactless payments for wearables and IoT devices. Supposedly usable worldwide.

Thanks for the info. I'm glad they didn't implement their own method... a distraction from their core business.

I hope soon, rather than later, there will be one standard contactless payment method, instead the countless various proprietary methods we currently have.

 

[deeddawg]

What does your Fenix give you on runs that your AW didn’t? Assuming it was a Series 2?

The ability to stop or pause the watch while you're dripping sweat is a pretty big benefit on the Garmin watches. Autopause on the AW2 doesn't do a bit of good at the finish corral of a large race where you have to keep moving or get run over.

The higher end Garmins also have a lot tighter GPS recording; AW2 logs a position every ten seconds in the exported data files, Garmins do 1 second intervals. No big deal to the casual runner, but it makes a difference to the more serious runner (which is not me at this time).

... and that's not getting into the various configurable data fields and watch displays, various parameters upper end Garmins track that AW2 does not, etc.

From a sports / running perspective Garmin is miles beyond Apple at this time.

 

[tobefirst ⚽️]

I currently have a Vivoactive, Vivosmart HR, and a Vivomove. Garmin makes great stuff.

I've had the desire to have an Apple Watch for the past 6 months or so, but I could never figure out why. And with the release of the new Vivoactive especially, it makes that question even more difficult.

 

[dingamahoo]

Still no music storage?

Perhaps it's not in their DNA, and they believe fitness doesn't go hand in hand with music.

Decent looking, and priced competitively.

Close but no cigar.

My thoughts exactly. I'm waiting to buy a running watch that has MP3 storage or, really, can sync with a podcast app. I know there are a couple on the market, but I'm sort of waiting for second generation. I'm really surprised Garmin is ignoring this, as to me, it's much more of a no-brainer feature than texts, etc. Would just love a simple device that has GPS, music storage, and time. Not have to run with the phone. I've avoided the Apple watch because, well, not sure...

 

[RickInHouston]

Sure but how many times has Apple banged the table on the benefits of X feature over Y only to later also make a model with Y. Apple never "eats crow" they always pivot to they were waiting until they could "do it right." I agree a round model is very much needed. Doesn't look like we'll get it this time but I don't see how the current stale square will sustain sales in light of all the renewed competition. And Garmin is still the leader in sports watch tech so Apple does need to be quick.

Apple waiting until 'they do it right'? More like Apple 'until they have to do it"!

 

[spacehippo]

Whoa Garmin looks like it's taking some major design "influences" from Suunto, those look like the Suunto Traverse / Sparta Wrist HR smart watches with the thick bezels and wrist straps.

 

[deeddawg]

Would just love a simple device that has GPS, music storage, and time. Not have to run with the phone. I've avoided the Apple watch because, well, not sure...

Although music storage on the AW2 is bit clunky, it does it. Podcast storage is achieved with a 3rd party app Watchcast. I no longer carry my old ipod nano 7th gen (bluetooth). Just my AW2 and bluetooth headphones. I'd held out until the apple watch was waterproof and had internal GPS - I specifically prefer to not carry my phone out on a run.

Apple watch totally blows away my Garmin 235 in smartwatch capability, particularly in terms of integration with my iphone and macbook. Perhaps Garmin's made some strides in that area, but I'd be surprised if they're approaching Apple in that aspect.

As for charging - my AW charger sits on my nightstand. I take off my watch and set it on it when I go to bed. I have one of the short-cord extra charger units that lives in my travel charging kit bag. Hasn't been an issue.

 

[dingamahoo]

Although music storage on the AW2 is bit clunky, it does it. Podcast storage is achieved with a 3rd party app Watchcast. I no longer carry my old ipod nano 7th gen (bluetooth). Just my AW2 and bluetooth headphones. I'd held out until the apple watch was waterproof and had internal GPS - I specifically prefer to not carry my phone out on a run.

Apple watch totally blows away my Garmin 235 in smartwatch capability, particularly in terms of integration with my iphone and macbook. Perhaps Garmin's made some strides in that area, but I'd be surprised if they're approaching Apple in that aspect.

As for charging - my AW charger sits on my nightstand. I take off my watch and set it on it when I go to bed. I have one of the short-cord extra charger units that lives in my travel charging kit bag. Hasn't been an issue.

Thanks for this info. As I said, not sure why I've had a resistance to Apple watch (I have apple everything else). I think it's mainly that I don't want to get text messages (they just stress me out most of the time) on my wrist. But you make a compelling case for just using the AW as a fitness device, so maybe that's just the sensible, obvious way to go. Or maybe I buy it later in the year in case there are new innovations in store... Again, thanks.

 

[Stella]

Still no music storage?

Perhaps it's not in their DNA, and they believe fitness doesn't go hand in hand with music.

Decent looking, and priced competitively.

Close but no cigar.

A bit redundant. The vast majority of people have a phone with them... or some other kind of music device.

Realistically, adding music capability would have to be via bluetooth. any physical connection would require water proofing, which means added cost. All Garmin fitness devices are currently waterproof and should stay that way.

 

[Phil A.]

What does your Fenix give you on runs that your AW didn’t? Assuming it was a Series 2?

Must say I do run quite A LOT (Just got the 160 km platinum award in Nike for August) but the ease of use and all in one device of the AWS2 is just awesome in my book

For a start, a far better battery life (well over a week) and always on display

Then there is easier operation of running activities with dedicated buttons, far more detailed statistics and run data (including running dynamics and power stats using a separate add on pod), better and more detailed in run screens (easily configurable to show the data you want across multiple screens)
Then there is the option to load specific routes and follow them, or retrace your run back to the beginning, vo2 max estimations and training status
In short, it's a tightly focused running watch that excels at that task whereas the Apple watch is a general purpose device that supports activities

 

[deeddawg]

I think it's mainly that I don't want to get text messages (they just stress me out most of the time) on my wrist.

You can configure notifications to turn them off on the watch. I've never had a need to, and find it very convenient, but the messages I receive don't typically create stress. I particularly like that I can send a short reply from the watch, either via an emoji like a thumbs-up to acknowledge or even dictating a short reply (works more often than it doesn't). Same for emails; I let one account show up as a notification and others don't.

 

[Someyoungguy]

Meh. I've owned Garmin running watches for about seven years now.

Two things I've learned:
#1 - The color watch displays suck. They don't look at all like the advertising pictures suggest.
#2 - The software is typically a work in progress at release time; beta grade if you're lucky. Smart folks wait at least three months post release before buying.

#3 - Could be limited RAM of my iPhone 6, but if the Garmin app is swapped out, which is often, you lose all "smart watch" functionality (weather feed, stocks, Find my phone, and anything else requiring internet connectivity) except for notifications.

 

[mark081990]

As a fairly competitive runner (60-80 mpw, 3:02 marathon pb) I use a Garmin forerunner 230. It's simple and easy to use. Garmin has a great feature where runs are uploaded directly to your iphone/androids Garmin app via Bluetooth.

The issue is... in order to run with music I must use an iPod nano 6th generation (the square one with the screen and clip) while I run. The iPod is several years old now and has been replaced many times. It was great for a while. I loved the fm tuner for when the same songs got boring. I didn't mind paying 99 cents for songs. But after getting Apple Music and paying $15 / month... I minded very much.

I just want simplicity! A GOOD running watch that can play music (doesn't even have to be Bluetooth. I don't mind the wire). I can't run with my phone, too much weight - and running gets me away from my phone which is another bonus.

But I have almost 0 options. I haven't met too many serious runners who use Apple watches for their runs. They are just not at the same level as Garmin (lightweight, longgg battery, easy buttons to use, durability).

I debated buying the Mighty player (bemighty.com) and listen to music through that. It's a clip on music player that reminds me of the iPod shuffle. And it plays songs through the Spotify app (without having your phone on you)... but I just don't want to make the leap to Spotify. Especially with my sights on the homepod.

Why can't Apple and Garmin strike some sort of deal? This Garmin pay is a little ridiculous if you ask me. The few places along my run routes to stop and hydrate are little shops that don't even accept credit cards unless it's more than $10.. let alone any Garmin or Apple Pay.

If something were to check all my boxes it would look like this:

Garmin hardware with Apple Music integrated (along with AM/FM tuner) that allows for BT headphones.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

These are much nicer looking than the Samsung offering.

 

[dingamahoo]

As a fairly competitive runner (60-80 mpw, 3:02 marathon pb) I use a Garmin forerunner 230. It's simple and easy to use. Garmin has a great feature where runs are uploaded directly to your iphone/androids Garmin app via Bluetooth.

The issue is... in order to run with music I must use an iPod nano 6th generation (the square one with the screen and clip) while I run. The iPod is several years old now and has been replaced many times. It was great for a while. I loved the fm tuner for when the same songs got boring. I didn't mind paying 99 cents for songs. But after getting Apple Music and paying $15 / month... I minded very much.

I just want simplicity! A GOOD running watch that can play music (doesn't even have to be Bluetooth. I don't mind the wire). I can't run with my phone, too much weight - and running gets me away from my phone which is another bonus.

But I have almost 0 options. I haven't met too many serious runners who use Apple watches for their runs. They are just not at the same level as Garmin (lightweight, longgg battery, easy buttons to use, durability).

I debated buying the Mighty player (bemighty.com) and listen to music through that. It's a clip on music player that reminds me of the iPod shuffle. And it plays songs through the Spotify app (without having your phone on you)... but I just don't want to make the leap to Spotify. Especially with my sights on the homepod.

Why can't Apple and Garmin strike some sort of deal? This Garmin pay is a little ridiculous if you ask me. The few places along my run routes to stop and hydrate are little shops that don't even accept credit cards unless it's more than $10.. let alone any Garmin or Apple Pay.

If something were to check all my boxes it would look like this:

Garmin hardware with Apple Music integrated (along with AM/FM tuner) that allows for BT headphones.

Yes, this seems to be the story. Not one dedicated runner's watch with all the features. Perhaps it will come. As I've learned from this thread, the AW may be my solution, as I'm not a competitive runner, just someone who runs at home 3-4 times a week. The lack of physical buttons on the AW to start and stop runs may be slightly annoying to me, but a few seconds added to my times don't make that much of a difference to me. Maybe some company will finally address this. The Tom Tom Spark III has gotten good reviews. But I'm still waiting for another year of advancement.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

What does your Fenix give you on runs that your AW didn’t? Assuming it was a Series 2?

Must say I do run quite A LOT (Just got the 160 km platinum award in Nike for August) but the ease of use and all in one device of the AWS2 is just awesome in my book

I'm not OP but I use a Forerunner 935 which is a Fenix 5 in a plastic case. Previously I used the 620 and 630. I also have an AW. For me what makes the Forerunner so irreplaceable is all the real time analytics it spits out. My philosophy is train and condition the heart and the pace and distance will follow. So it's a must for me to know my real time heart performance (no optical system can do that and if it's off a couple beats well that could be the difference between two zones) and also long term progress post run so I can see when I'm about to burn out before I do so I don't push too hard. So I think that is a key difference. I can see where people that aren't really monitoring their HRM would be happy with the AW or similar type of running watch.

I think if AW licensed the First Beat analytics that Garmin and others use or had something remotely similar it could be the one watch that rules them all. It's kind of a joke that the only difference between the Nike AW and the regular Series 2 is a different band and exclusive face. Functionally they are all the same though.

Some examples of the data I use not available on AW include aerobic vs anaerobic performance, ground contact time, lactate threshold, cadence. The other thing that has become a "must have" for me is a built-in altimeter also missing from AW. AW using mapping data which is fine but not necessarily accurate. I'd run over a bridge and it has me at -1 ft below sea level even though I'm 20ft above the water because it can't discern if I'm in the water or over it.

 

[Phonephreak]

Good luck Garmin. Stick to what you know. Fitness not Finances.