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

Garmin Beats Apple to Market with Satellite-Connected Smartwatch

BelgianChoklit said:
Can you actually compare the 2? Those Garmin watches and many other sports watches all have so much better battery life that I started questioning if they even do the same/as much as the Apple Watch. Do they? What about the screen?

I'm seriously asking because I don't know and because something's not right here. I can't imagine this thing having 8x better battery life while doing the same.
Click to expand...

They don't do as much; apps are limited and less graphics-intensive, screens are smaller and less dense, no on-device Siri, limited background processing. No exact specs, but teardowns of the 265 show it uses about a 200mhz processor and just a few mb ram; fine for everything it does, but it's not flashy and the menus and graphics are simple. Garmin's also run a very lightweight OS. Mine has an AMOLED with a touchscreen..I disabled AOD and the touchscreen, so that saves some battery.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: gusmula
They are expensive, but given the cost of some bikes nowdays, and if you are a triathlete then this is a couple of race entries for an Ironman.

Having said that for most people a cheaper Garmin is a better and more likely bet. This is likely a Halo product to draw people to Garmin.

Having said all that I'm replacing my Garmin with a Pixel watch 4 next Month (non-lte so no satelite for me)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Agile55
MacsRgr8 said:
Kinda similar here.
Used to wear classic watches, then when Apple Watch was introduced had 3 of them, then switched to Garmin D2 Delta.
Do not want to wear a mini iPad on my wrist.

BTW, yes Garmin is more expensive, but you're less prone to buy a new watch every other year...
Click to expand...
I've always bought square watches, from the Casio data bank days, to various cuff style diesel watches, to the Apple Watch. Never understood sound. its only purpose is for a mechanical time face which there's just no need to have anymore.
 
What I noticed first and foremost: microLED! Is this the first commercially readily available device to have this tech? Does anybody know?
 
jz0309 said:
Battery life - how does Garmin calculate that? Apple publishes how it does, eg x number of notifications and such.
Does such a spec exist for Garmin? Can you point to it please?
Click to expand...

Garmin gives details about battery life in each of their various modes. They’re not lying or cheating.

The problem is that people often take the longest possible run-time of a Garmin (without explaining the limitations) and compare that to the Apple Watch run-time (which includes several always-on features).

If you turn everything on with a Garmin battery life drops to under a day. From the previously linked manual…
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9164.jpeg
    IMG_9164.jpeg
    677.7 KB · Views: 33
  • Like
Reactions: jz0309 and ZZ9pluralZalpha
WarmWinterHat said:
I have an inReach. It's month-to-month, so pay when you need it and don't when you don't. I spend a hefty amount of time in the boonies and wilderness away from cell service and electricity, and only pay about three or four months per year. You don't need a phone or watch for it to work, and the battery last over 20 days with 30-min pings.
Click to expand...
None of that alters the fact that inReach requires an extra subscription to manage and device to carry: good for very specific uses like solo backpacking, but in >99% of cases inferior to something that you carry in all circumstances anyway and is usable for free in emergencies. (And these are easily imaginable without requiring a critical “trying a Class 3 trail in flip-flops” level of irresponsibility; a car accident in a cellular dead spot or a medical emergency on a state park trail, for example.) Specialty audiences are Garmin’s niche and I respect that, but when the general public has Apple’s Satellite SOS and the professionals are flocking to Starlink, I don’t see a bright future for the current inReach operations model.
 
jdavid_rp said:
How’s that the microLED is more expensive but it’s battery life it’s worse? What benefits does it has then?
Click to expand...
I wonder about battery life as well. Benefits are:

MicroLED is technologically superior to AMOLED (higher brightness, longer lifespan, no burn-in, better colors), but it is still expensive.

Update: Artificial Joe thinks:
MicroLED model: Garmin is not marketing MicroLED as a "more energy-efficient" option. It is marketing it as the ultimate, no-compromise outdoor display. So it is very likely that this display has a maximum brightness of 3000, 4000 or even more nits. It is a display that will "outshine" even the midday sun on a glacier.

The consequence: Operating a display at such an extreme brightness level consumes a huge amount of energy, completely erasing any theoretical efficiency of the technology itself.

And it makes sense
 
Last edited:
ZZ9pluralZalpha said:
None of that alters the fact that inReach requires an extra subscription to manage and device to carry: good for very specific uses like solo backpacking, but in >99% of cases inferior to something that you carry in all circumstances anyway and is usable for free in emergencies. (And these are easily imaginable without requiring a critical “trying a Class 3 trail in flip-flops” level of irresponsibility; a car accident in a cellular dead spot or a medical emergency on a state park trail, for example.) Specialty audiences are Garmin’s niche and I respect that, but when the general public has Apple’s Satellite SOS and the professionals are flocking to Starlink, I don’t see a bright future for the current inReach operations model.
Click to expand...

I guess the service will get better, but Apple's SOS feature is very limited, but it does work. I was in the Starlink beta over the summer, and it barely worked, and would go out for 15-20 mins of a time..in the middle of the desert with an open sky. When it did work, it was slow enough that most web pages timed out...and when you're using it, it is sucking down battery like none-other..

The nice thing about my inReach is that it automatically sends my location every 30 mins (or 10, or 5, whatever I decide) without me doing anything.

justanotherdave said:
While being #1 in sales without having to resort to polling or other tricks to extend battery life.
Click to expand...

It's not a trick if it works. I got 10 days of charge, with daily GPS-recorded running, on my 265 out of the box. Health metrics are better than Apple offers by default, but i dump everything, from Garmin or Apple, into Strava and Runna anyway..so it's a wash.

I don't care, at all, about the smartwatch stuff, but it is missing a lot of that. If you want a wrist computer, Garmin isn't it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ZZ9pluralZalpha, turbineseaplane and Agile55
Battery life is great on these watches. The subscription service for satellite service is disappointing but at the same time, it will not be long before Apple decides to charge for the feature. Expecting it to be free for Apple devices maybe for a few more years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mganu
I always find the “beats Apple to market” kinda silly. So a company announces their product a few days before Apple just so they can say they’re first to market with ‘x’ feature?
 
now i see it said:
Well... Blackberry beat apple to the market with hand held messaging - and look where they are today
Click to expand...

No one really cares who is there first (well, I don't anyway), but Garmin isn't going anywhere. Go to a 10k or higher, or a cycle race, and count the Garmin vs Apple Watch. It'll be heavily skewed towards Garmin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beepster, Ghost31, turbineseaplane and 1 other person
I really wish a Swiss watch manufacturer would come out with a high end watch (precious metal, sapphire crystal) with an upgradeable core... even simply upgradeable to a pure automatic... it shouldn't be that difficult. Also color e-ink. Again, this should not be that difficult.
 
WarmWinterHat said:
It's not a trick it works. I got 10 days of charge, with daily GPS-recorded running, on my 265 out of the box. Health metrics are better than Apple offers by default.
Click to expand...

Garmin watches work great, but they don’t have some “magical unicorn GPS” that’s able to function at 1/10 the power of other watches. They get ridiculous battery life by changing polling intervals for sensors.

When everything is “on” their battery life drops to a similar level as an Apple Watch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZZ9pluralZalpha
Grayburn said:
Ultra 1 & 2 has L5 GPS as I’ve told you numerous times.
Click to expand...
ALL Garmin Models (including the cheap ones) have L5 GPS.

jz0309 said:
Battery life - how does Garmin calculate that? Apple publishes how it does, eg x number of notifications and such.
Does such a spec exist for Garmin? Can you point to it please?
Click to expand...
How about real world usage? Do an hour workout on the Apple Watch, the AW barely scrapes 14 hours. On a Garmin with an hour workout, it lasts for about 1.5 weeks.

Also the Enduros can last for months!
1756927510543.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beepster and Ghost31
justanotherdave said:
Garmin watches work great, but they don’t have some “magical unicorn GPS” that’s able to function at 1/10 the power of other watches. They get ridiculous battery life by changing polling intervals for sensors.

When everything is “on” their battery life drops to a similar level as an Apple Watch.
Click to expand...

I can adjust polling intervals for the sensors. Why doesn't Apple offer that? Even with an Apple watch with and SpO2, HR and GPS disabled, the Garmin will still outlast the Apple's battery life by a lot. It's not just sensors, Garmins run lower-power and lower speed processors, by a lot. Fine by me, since I don't need or want 90% of the smartwatch features. I kept them disabled even when I did have an Apple watch.

At the end of the day, my Apple watch was dead while my Garmin is still at 85%, and I didn't change my routine at all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Beepster and turbineseaplane
jz0309 said:
Battery life - how does Garmin calculate that? Apple publishes how it does, eg x number of notifications and such.
Does such a spec exist for Garmin? Can you point to it please?
Click to expand...
Well, my Epix Pro 2, which is essentially the same thing as an AMOLED Fenix 8 gets 14 days as a smartwatch when I have the OX sensor only run when I sleep. If I turn that sensor on 24/7 the battery life falls to 9 days. I use my Fenix as a bicycle computer for tracking long distance bike rides too, and I can use it as a GPS + smart watch + fitness tracker for two full days for sure (with no worry that it will run out of battery) based on my own use. The battery life for active folks is why I do not consider the Apple Watch to be a competitor. Also, I personally think that the rectangular shape of the Apple Watch is unattractive too.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Beepster
TIL Garmin didn’t have satellite connectivity. I assumed they had that already. Garmin is its own niche and if I didn’t have an iPhone I’d probably have their watches as an avid exercise enthusiast pushing 50. If I were to fall off my bike because my diaper slipped while reaching for my Jolt, I may need that satellite connectivity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jdawgnoonan
InReach? That is hilarious! Is it April Fools day or something? I ditched InReach for Starlink connectivity. $60 per month or more for 10 characters per minute of texting? Nah.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZZ9pluralZalpha
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