Garmin Reacts to Apple Watch Ultra: 'We Measure Battery Life in Months. Not Hours.'

[Le0M]

I wonder if and when Apple will start adopting solar panels in its devices to make battery last longer (or recharge in case battery is depleted already.)
can you imagine having a watch that can call out for help through satellites just by using solar power?
no more fear of having a low battery!

 

[Allen_Wentz]

No some of us are tired of AW not being able to do the simple things. Ever been on a run and wanted to get directions anywhere or back? Oh and not have to pay for celular connectivity? How about laps... Most ppl who use Garmin aren't looking for an Apple Watch who half a..Ed it.

?? AW has stopwatch and lap timer and a separate timer. I use them constantly.

 

[azhava]

No some of us are tired of AW not being able to do the simple things. Ever been on a run and wanted to get directions anywhere or back? Oh and not have to pay for celular connectivity? How about laps... Most ppl who use Garmin aren't looking for an Apple Watch who half a..Ed it.

You don't have to pay for cellular connectivity. If you don't activate the cellular plan on the Ultra, you're not paying anything - and you have the exact same cellular connectivity as a Garmin (none). And Apple doesn't determine that anyway - that's the cellular provider charging you for access, not Apple.

I'm pretty sure laps has been an AW function for quite a while now.

 

[djphat2000]

Sorry bud, it isn’t just the Enduro 2. The Solar Fenix 7 is also $799. Please know products you’re going to compare, or look like you’re Samsung 😂😂😂. Also triathlons would be a nightmare with a AW compared to a Garmin. The slightest bit of water, sweat, etc and the AW screen is unresponsive to touch, and doesn’t have enough buttons to actually be useful. $800 for 36 hours is honestly indefensible. Wouldn’t even cover some of these ultra races. 🙈

do people not sleep?

 

[spinedoc77]

Still not as capable as an apple watch either.

And vice versa, the AW is still not as capable as a Samsung watch either.

 

[DamFu]

I expect a lot of the Garmin sales are to people who never find themselves in the places it’s advertised for. Garmin must be absolutely terrified to see the Ultra come out.

Spoken like someone that knows nothing about Garmin watches.

 

[spinedoc77]

Right cause like Apple did with fitness plus. It recreated something not broke to sell to it's audience. I have no doubt that they sell tons but they're not going to win many people who use Garmin. Especially if they can't do simple endurance things correctly.

Yeah I hear ya, it will be interesting to see but I still think a lot of Garmin users will consider switching over, maybe just the fence riders and weekend warriors. It will be interesting to see what happens, and hopefully Garmin innovates on their end making an interesting competitive market.

 

[StupidOpinion]

the watch needs to have an endurance mode where it turns off all the running software and hardware that uses up power so that it's just a stopwatch that maybe tracks gps and heart rate. nobody is gonna read their friends text when running a marathon

 

[The1Biz]

Garmin is simply superior for sports..round shape too instead of askward square formfactor.

I think with the square it is more out of the way with wrist flexion. Overall though if the watch is too big it's going to be an issue with sticking out anyway.

I'm not thrilled with the 44mm/45mm size. It's too big when compared with the 42mm.

It would be nice too if it could count swim laps where you are just kicking, too, but as for now, nope.

 

[azhava]

It would be nice too if it could count swim laps where you are just kicking, too, but as for now, nope.

From the WatchOS 9 page on Apple.com:

 

[Alan Wynn]

The Ultra is nice and all, but as someone who runs 60-80 miles a week, Apple can’t compete yet. 36 hours based on normal use and 1 hr of workouts and apparently 60 hours in an upcoming low power mode. Apple doesn’t say what is cut to get to 60hours. I’m guessing cutting GPS down, etc.

Yup, Apple does not yet hit every segment of the market. This just cuts the number of segments it cannot cover.

How long will the Ultra last connected to a power meter, plus live tracking, plus music? Can it make it through a 3 hour 22-24 mile run?

For rides, I have my iPhone and I am pretty sure its battery life will be fine for that.

When I’m running, I don’t need constant notifications. Just emergency communication, which my 945 LTE has. Also, Apple Watches don’t work with prepaid plans and I’m not going back to post-paid plans.

Awesome that Garmin has the pre-paid phone ultra runner market covered.

Also, while some divers might get the watch, it can’t replace a dive computer until it can connect to an O2 tank and tell you how much air you have left.

This is the funniest part of your post. I dive a fair amount. I have lots of friends who also dive a fair amount. In our group of friends who dive at least 3-5 trips a year, we have two with air integrated computers. I look forward to getting an Ultra and never using my dive watch again. Even more excited about having an accurate dive log and something that will really calculate dive to fly for me.

 

[bookofxero]

Nah. Remember "I'm a Mac" ads?

I cannot remember any of those mocking PCs all that much, and definitely not a specific brand.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Sure, but endurance runners are a minority. Casual runners/hikers/etc. who want a rugged watch with a decent battery life combined with social and lifestyle functions are a much much bigger group!

There are not enough of them to even make minority status. They are a tiny niche. Fortunately they can buy Garmin. What is most interesting about the Ultra is that Apple has put down a marker saying they are going to differentiate on features and start looking at the higher end of the sports market. Good for the market, even if they have not yet satisfied its needs.

 

[bookofxero]

I get 2 - 3 weeks out of my Fenix 7X. The only real feature that it lacks is taking calls on the watch.

And a decent screen. Those MIP screens are terrible, but the AMOLED ones are OK.
Honestly, the biggest advantage Garmin has over the Apple Watch is the ability to transfer songs through the power cable (I like to listen to music and audiobooks w/o having to bring my phone along). Sure, you can transfer to an Apple Watch - and if you sacrifice a goat to the right deity at the right time under the right moon phase, it might even do it over wi-fi instead of BT.

 

[jca666us]

Well their tweet is true.

Until it isn't - remember Blackberry's CEO's laughing at the original iPhone?

Garmin wins in a few metrics, but once Apple can get battery life to a few weeks, Garmin's advantages evaporates.

Apple never stands still.

 

[msackey]

I love my Apple Watch. Wear it daily. But if your a serious runner that trains for marathons the Ultra has a loooong way to go before it will even remotely come close to replacing a Garmin running watch. If you're someone who goes out for jogs the base model Apple watch would be more than enough and the Ultra would be overkill. If you just want the latest and greatest Apple Watch, get the Ultra. I thought Garmin's social media posts have been hilarious even though I think its two different use cases for their watches verses Apple watches.

Hmmm...I don't agree that marathoners won't find the Ultra good enough. I think many will! I mentioned in a different post that the Apple Watch isn't ideal for training on the track, though it can still be used for that but you'll have to use a different app that isn't Apple native. Serious marathoners often do train on the track for tempo workouts or to build speedwork into their exercise.

I should also say that there was a time when serious and competitive marathoners did not need use the kind of smart technology that we are using now. All they needed to train well, in terms of electronic technology, was a watch that kept time and could do laps and record them. So thinking back to that simplicity, for sure the Ultra can handle what a serious marathoner would need ;-)

When I was a competitive runner, GPS watches was not a thing in the early years. The most I had was a heart rate monitor (Polar) and the watch also kept time and laps. That was it. It was only some years later when Garmin made GPS watches for sports that I adopted that technology. Certainly I didn't use the GPS functions for track workouts (never depend on GPS for track workouts) but I did use the GPS function for middle and distance running workouts. ;-)

 

[bookofxero]

Garmin watches are amazing for athletes with polished features and external sensors support. They sell at least in millions. The latest Epix with always on OLED and always on heart rate sensor still lasts a week. Garmin Pay works great. There’s a super detailed offline map of the whole world on the watch.

But the main feature for me is still the battery. I can go for a long run without worrying about the battery even if I haven’t charged the watch for a few days already, and the low battery warning prompts to turn on battery saver when there is just 24 hours of battery left.

Sure, not everyone needs that, but Apple really needs to make a watch that lasts a full day with several hours of maps and GPS recording to challenge Garmin’s top line watches.

You must not use BT on the watch - 11 hours max on the Epix 2 w/ always-on display turned off.

 

[jca666us]

The tweet is good because it shows that Garmin is worried. Garmin has sat on the same watch eco system for an long while, and have charged a hefty premium for it, not to mention the battery replacement is almost impossible. While the price is a bit high for me, it’s going to replace Garmin for many many users.

Garmin that’s what happens when you sit on your bums and watch the money flow in, Apple have come along and are going to steal some of your market.

Close - replace "some" with "all"

Blackberry, Tile, Zune, etc.

 

[Chloros]

Apple's response:

"We measure unit sales in millions, not thousands".

Long live the sheep!

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Even when my 4 was new it wouldn't make it on an overseas flight without dying. I'll settle for daily charging.

I do wonder though, why apple bothers to put sleep tracking in it, when you can't wear it while sleeping because you have to charge it for a few hours. Do they think people are going to charge in the middle of the day?

With the latest watches, I can top off the charge in 30 minutes over lunch or just before going to sleep. It goes from empty to full in a little over 45 minutes.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Yeah, I remember my fenix lasting for months, oh weeks, oh, days... And if I used none of the features, months, oh, weeks, actually nearly a week

 

[everlast3434]

For a person that’s seriously into the outdoors and climbing, mountaineering, etc, Ultra won’t compare to the usefulness of a garmin device for soooo many reasons.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Long live the sheep!

I didn't have any problem selling my fenix. I gave my Apple Watch away because it was only worth $40 for a trade-in because it was a 4, before I got my 7. *shrug*

 

[Herrpod]

Apple's response:

"We measure unit sales in millions, not thousands".

Not of this watch they won’t be.

 

[msackey]

Meh, it’s 36 hours with standard use and 1 hour of activity. Endurance runners do at least 1-2 hours per day and 2-3+ hours for a long run. So it’s daily charging still.

I don't know if what you say is a good argument. I looked up what standard or "normal use" per Apple means and this is how they define it for the Ultra:

1. All-day battery life is based on the following use: 180 time checks, 180 notifications, 90 minutes of app use, and a 60-minute workout with music playback from Apple Watch via Bluetooth, over the course of 36 hours; Apple Watch Ultra (GPS + Cellular) usage includes a total of 8 hours of LTE connection and 28 hours of connection to iPhone via Bluetooth over the course of 36 hours. Testing conducted by Apple in August 2022 using preproduction Apple Watch Ultra (GPS + Cellular) paired with an iPhone; all devices tested with prerelease software. Battery life varies by use, configuration, cellular network, signal strength, and many other factors; actual results will vary.

Source: https://www.apple.com/apple-watch-ultra/

Is how Garmin define "normal" use when calculating battery life similar to Apple's own definition?

When I look at Apple's definition, their idea of "normal use" is way more than the way I use my watch even if I were back to being a competitive runner. I don't use my Watch apps for 90 minutes a day; I think I use them a max of 5 to 10 minutes a day total. I also don't use the Watch for music playback. I haven't counted but I don't think I check my Watch time 180 times a day. Given that I can subtract all of those activities to more accurately reflect my "normal use", and as a middle distance competitive runner I did run about an hour a day (more on weekends), I think the Ultra would do just fine. It wouldn't need to be charged everyday.