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

[Alan Wynn]

Ant+ is just a communication protocol. I think the latest version of the low energy Bluetooth communication protocols are on par with Ant+, no? Latest Bluetooth version can connect with multiple devices AT ONCE just like Ant+ has been able to.

ANT+ wins with some sensors for which there are not yet profiles. As you said, that list is shrinking. Despite being a mess, Bluetooth is a mess, but improves every release.

 

[Realityck]

Garmin forgot to mention it costs $1100 Enduro 2 vs $800 Ultra.

I don't think that is an issue, as long as it isn't outlandish. Perhaps Apple will see this comparison as goals they need to reach if they want to pitch it to real explorer's, not recreation types.

 

[solq]

Sorry, you have missed the point. I did own a Garmin Bike computer (and three sets of sensors for the three identical bikes I bought in the three locations I spent the most time so that I would not have to recalibrate it when I moved from city to city). I often considered getting one of the Garmin running watches even after I got my Basis Band and my Series 0. Unfortunately for Garmin, they were never compelling enough to get me to get one. When Wahoo came out with its first Bluetooth-connected bike sensors, I retired my Garmin bike computer.


With the introduction of the Ultra, a whole group of people who previously might have thought they needed a Garmin watch, will no longer feel that way. That is about as sudden as one can get. The day before, they were looking at Garmin products and the day after they were not. We have seen people post on this very thread that they were switching, so we have existence proofs that what you are saying is false.

Life is all about trade offs. Would I love a watch that had all the functionality of an Apple Watch with one year battery life, worldwide satellite communications for voice and data even underwater, with support for air integration for when I dive, and that weighed less than one ounce? Absolutely! Unfortunately, that product does not exist.

When the Series 0 came out there were people for whose needs it did not work and they bought other products. As Apple iterated on the product the people for whom the watch was “good enough” grew. It is now selling hundreds of millions. The Ultra moves that line further. Garmin’s problem is that each time that line moves further up the food chain, it hurts not just for those sales, but for all the people who will never enter the ecosystem that will move up as their needs grow.

Garmin’s clear fear is that Apple is moving that line faster than Garmin can add high end functionality to keep a differentiation at the high end.

It's unlikely though. If you thought that an Apple Watch was good enough and desirable, you might think that $800 is a good deal for an essentially bigger and fancier one.

But if you wanted a Garmin, it's hard to believe you're going to settle for this Ultra.

That's because the whole reason for wanting the Garmin were probably in the region of round screen and looks (you can get a titanium band as well to go with it), the battery life (which depending on the model can be good or awesome), the realistic use as a advanced sleep monitor (which you can do because of the battery life and great stats), and the training software, which is just way better compared to Apple's - a lot more info during (from offline maps to respiration and heart rate zones) and after (training readiness, recovery time etc).

I don't buy that any Garmin lover will look at this Ultra and think it's the bee's knees. But I see it cannibalizing regular Apple Watch sales. Some people can afford a more expensive Apple Watch instead of the regular one and Apple is happy to part them with their cash.

It's a lifestyle, fashion product after all.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Nothing Apple with a battery has a *good* battery life and nowhere near what Apple advertised, so I wouldn't have high hopes for this watch either.

You must live a cursed life. My AirPods Pro, Apple Watch, iPad and iPad all exceed Apple’s nominal battery life. My iPhone 11 Pro could go from LAX to MCO (Orlando) not in airplane mode (meaning that it was searching for signal the whole time) and still have more than enough charge to make it through the evening.

Yes I absolutely think that people get hoodwinked, en masse, all the time. It's an essential feature of modern commerce. Too much money, too much desire to impress.

Not surprised that you feel that way given that no product you have ever purchased from Apple (is it just Apple or do other companies disappoint you as well) performed as advertised.

I am curious though. Given what you have said, and how much you seem to dislike everything about Apple, why do you buy any of their products?

 

[azhava]

I doubt it, the usage you describe is more akin to someone that keeps busy using a phone in the wilderness. Why keep your self busy when you are enjoying the outdoors?

Which group do you think comprises the larger number (number, not percentage) of smartwatch wearers - hardcore ultra-endurance athletes and extreme outdoor adventurers, or average everyday people who mix in some exercise and the occasional half-day venture into the boonies right outside of town, along with the conveniences of a smartwatch in their daily lives?

I don't have any stats to back it up, but I'm willing to bet that even if you combined serious ultramarathon/triathlon/Ironman athletes, avid peak baggers/rock climbers, hardcore wilderness explorers and Arctic adventurers, they wouldn't make up even 1/100 of one percent of the population. They're a tiny niche market within an already small niche market.

The overwhelmingly vast majority of the market for any smartwatch manufacturer, as far as the athletic world goes, is comprised of aspirational/casual athletes - people very similar to what @agmr described above. For any manufacturer to not target, even cater, to that demographic would be a profound mistake.

 

[solq]

What is great about the Apple ecosystem is that there are a million apps that provide options for special needs. Granted, very few people agree with you that Garmin’s UI/UX is better than pretty many anyone else’s, as that is a frequent from Garmin users on sites such as DCRainmaker.com.

You are entitled to your opinion. I find it solves my problems quite effectively, for my actual use cases.

I routinely run/jog/walk without my iPhone. Having the ability to receive and reply to messages on my Apple Watch (and even better, sometimes make phone calls) is something I use all the time. Often I can reply with a canned response (easily settable for the most common responses for my personal style), and when I cannot, I find that scribble and Siri handle the other cases very well.

I love that someone who does not use the product can explain to someone who does that it does not meet the user’s needs. I reply to iMessages from my watch either directly or using dictation many times every day. That is in actual “normal life”, not your fantasy of what it might be like.

Like autocorrect, Siri is about 90% accurate. She works great on my Series 6, and with the new microphones on the Ultra, she is likely to be even better, meaning I will have even fewer cases where I will want to have my AirPods Pro paired for that function.

Sorry, I don't buy your use cases nor the utility or efficiency of having this much interaction with the watch. Siri is sub mediocre in my opinion and I know how frustrating the experience of inputting data (by voice or otherwise) is with such a tiny device.

I mentioned before that I found Apple Watch's interface very busy. As in, it does a lot, it's visually complex, and it's demanding of the user.

This is what Garmin nailed about the smartwatches: they actually require very little from the user. It's easy to start a workout, see notifications, most apps are called "glances" and you just scroll and click and you're presented with a lot of information. On my Epix you have a dedicated button for controlling playback but otherwise it's quite straight forward.

The watch itself asks very little of you. It sits on your wrist, it monitors and compiles info, so you get a wealth of data about your sleep, training and training readiness, without much intervention on your side.

Your Garmin is focused on you instead of focused on you handling it. You could say that the point of having an Apple Watch is to play with it and feel good about it, not actually accomplish anything.

I find the over-one-week-long battery life of my Epix vs Apple's daily recharge chore in the same situation - one is both useful and lets me get on with my life, the other is a constant attention seeking bother.

And sorry, the screen of this Ultra has LG G1 vibes for me. It's horribly rectangular in a way that no watch should be.

 

[Alan Wynn]

If you want a good sports watch with good sleep tracking, Apple offers no alternative, just a headache with smooth animations that needs daily charging.

This must one (or both) of two things:

1. Very few people want what you define as “a good sports watch with good sleep tracking” (given how few Garmin, Polar and Suunto - the three brands that meet your standards - sell).
2. Most people have a different definition of “a good sports watch with good sleep tracking”.

 

[phillypharm]

The overwhelmingly vast majority of the market for any smartwatch manufacturer, as far as the athletic world goes, is comprised of aspirational/casual athletes - people very similar to what @agmr described above. For any manufacturer to not target, even cater, to that demographic would be a profound mistake.

I don't disagree with you there, but let's be honest, it isn't Garmin's fault they can't do some of these features with an iPhone. Apple blocks it. If you look at Android features, a Garmin can do even more.

That said, it's pretty obvious from this thread that Garmin has a specific following that is unlikely to be (at least anytime soon) impacted by the Ultra. Even being an iPhone user, no way I'm trading in my Forerunner 945 LTE for an Ultra.

 

[Alan Wynn]

My son used his Apple Watch to train for the NYC marathon. To each their own.

I know several others who have run in the Boston, Chicago and NYC marathons who all use Apple Watches to train. I am sure there are some for whom they do not work and others from whom they do.

 

[solq]

You must live a cursed life. My AirPods Pro, Apple Watch, iPad and iPad all exceed Apple’s nominal battery life. My iPhone 11 Pro could go from LAX to MCO (Orlando) not in airplane mode (meaning that it was searching for signal the whole time) and still have more than enough charge to make it through the evening.

Not surprised that you feel that way given that no product you have ever purchased from Apple (is it just Apple or do other companies disappoint you as well) performed as advertised.

I am curious though. Given what you have said, and how much you seem to dislike everything about Apple, why do you buy any of their products?

Most companies lie in respect to battery life or product performance*. Apple is no exception. Garmin is no exception.

But with Garmin I go down some from 2 weeks, with Apple from 36h. The first perhaps gives 11 days (that's what my Epix does on a full charge with my use case), the other will probably conk out at 20 hours, knowing Apple.

I mean, there's no day where I don't have to put my iPhone in low battery mode. My 11" M1 iPad Pro has never seen 8h of video playback on a single battery charge. My Macbook Pro has never, even brand new, hit 3h of use time. Apple lies like everyone else.

(*) except Porsche, who generally understates product performance but even they lie in respect to battery life!

 

[Expos of 1969]

I find this new obsession to track sleep a bit amusing and perplexing. It seems to be almost on par with the need of so many people to carry a water bottle with them from the moment they leave the house to the moment they return. I realize that some people would benefit from sleep tracking, often obese folks with sleep apena, but the vast majority of people do not need tracking. What do they do with all this tracking info?

 

[Alan Wynn]

I doubt it, the usage you describe is more akin to someone that keeps busy using a phone in the wilderness. Why keep your self busy when you are enjoying the outdoors?

You doubt what? That he does what he says? I run/jog/walk without my iPhone quite often. I know where along my route there are Coke machines that sell water and take Apple Pay. Neither he nor I said anything about wilderness. I will often just go out and walk when I need to return phone calls as it is nicer than sitting at my desk doing the same. Living in Southern California has a few advantages.

 

[solq]

I find this new obsession to track sleep a bit amusing and perplexing. It seems to be almost on par with the need of so many people to carry a water bottle with them from the moment they leave the house to the moment they return. I realize that some people would benefit from sleep tracking, often obese folks with sleep apena, but the vast majority of people do not need tracking. What do they do with all this tracking info?

I'm naturally a night owl but I have small kids so I need to wake up early.

Sleep tracking helped me understand the amount of sleep I was missing and [somewhat] rectify it.

Garmin is also very good at calculating your post training recovery time. It helped me understand that sometimes I simply over-trained, which lead to tiredness and slow progress.

 

[Alan Wynn]

I think it was a humorous jab at smartwatches being generally not designed to go for long periods without needing to recharge. Most of Apple devices are that way. Even the improved Apple Watch Ultra has its limits.

It is not as bad as Samsung or Google highlighting a change Apple made that they will not make until the next year as a huge advantage, but it does make potential Garmin customers go look at Apple’s new products. For some people the changes will not be enough. For many more they will be. Garmin’s problem is that Apple is able to improve much faster than they are.

 

[visualseed]

Not really. Nobody would buy an ultra to use it instead of a Garmin.

A lot of people will. I imagine a lot more people have been buying Garmin watches for weekend activities or single events such as triathlons, where an Apple Watch Ultra will now suffice, than for multi-week expeditions. The extreme use cases will still benefit Garmin, but the majority of the revenue they make from selling to active users that need just a little more than an Apple Watch, is now vulnerable to Apple.

 

[Realityck]

It is not as bad as Samsung or Google highlighting a change Apple made that they will not make until the next year as a huge advantage, but it does make potential Garmin customers go look at Apple’s new products. For some people the changes will not be enough. For many more they will be. Garmin’s problem is that Apple is able to improve much faster than they are.

IMHO Apple is too entrenched in extending their technology to address specific needs like the hybrid iPhone & Watch pairing. I think they were very clever trying to make the case that the Apple Watch Ultra meets the needs of explorers, but it's going to be still real world usage of these devices that matters not their sales pitches.

Take this image that Apple Used. You really want to have pretty watch around Granite rock formations, or would you be carrying something else that you could take out of a pocket and wear when needed to find out where you are day after day? So many Apple devices I own have finite battery usage, I thought the solar chargeable Enduro 2 does show some marketplace maturity compared to a me to from Apple. Will the Ultra sell well, sure, will it kill off competition, don't think so.

 

[Alan Wynn]

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.

I was thinking further about your comment and it made me laugh even more. Mike Huish, the owner of Huish Outdoors - the parent company of Oceanic and Suunto - clearly thinks you are wrong, given he has spent a fair amount of money and company resources producing dive watch software and integrating it into his company’s ecosystem.

I think I will take his analysis of this market over yours.

 

[ruddyman]

Still two completely different devices at this point, but a step in the right direction for Apple. Do I bring an Apple Watch charging cable into the backcountry on multi-night trips with its inefficient charging drain on my battery bank? Another device to charge, more weight in my pack, and less battery bank capacity for the phone and headlamp. With a Fenix there would be no downsides in the backcountry. But the Apple Watch is so great for everyday use. So, we're still compromising one way or the other.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I don't disagree with you there, but let's be honest, it isn't Garmin's fault they can't do some of these features with an iPhone. Apple blocks it. If you look at Android features, a Garmin can do even more.

That said, it's pretty obvious from this thread that Garmin has a specific following that is unlikely to be (at least anytime soon) impacted by the Ultra. Even being an iPhone user, no way I'm trading in my Forerunner 945 LTE for an Ultra.

There are a lot of people that buy Garmin based on image rather than needing it for one of the niche’ cases mentioned in this thread. I know because my wife sold them in a jewelry store she worked in for a while. Garmin watches are just as much about fashion and image as any other watch out there. Before the Ultra, Apple had nothing that competed with that style or image. Now they do and it could be enough to move some people from one watch brand to another… especially given all the other things the Apple Watch can do that the other watches can’t. Obviously, Apple knows this and is marketing it this way for a reason.

Those people that fit into one of those shrinking niche cases mentioned will continue to buy Garmin or one of the alternatives. However, I expect the price will go up as the overall sales go down. Niche’ products usually carry higher price tags. I don’t agree that they will be put out of business, though. They have been around long enough to generate brand loyalty. I still have one of their old car navigation units and it still gets regular updates… so I expect they have some loyal clients.

As a side note, Siri on the Apple Watch is great. I use it several times a day for creating timers, reminders, with music, turning on and off lights, etc. Since it is on my wrist, I use it more than Siri on my phone or even homepods. It is just always there and available. It does a great job with random questions and sports scores, too. I find it to be one of their better implementations. Personally, I think Siri is pretty weak on the Homepod, so i think the satisfaction level depends on the product.

 

[Uofmtiger]

Still two completely different devices at this point, but a step in the right direction for Apple. Do I bring an Apple Watch charging cable into the backcountry on multi-night trips with its inefficient charging drain on my battery bank? Another device to charge, more weight in my pack, and less battery bank capacity for the phone and headlamp. With a Fenix there would be no downsides in the backcountry. But the Apple Watch is so great for everyday use. So, we're still compromising one way or the other.

The question is whether it is worth the money to buy that other watch for the multi night trips or it just makes more sense to have a watch that does better in pretty much every other life situation and occasionally carrying a battery ( maybe 8 ounces of weight) for recharging on those longer trips.

 

[msackey]

I mentioned before that I found Apple Watch's interface very busy. As in, it does a lot, it's visually complex, and it's demanding of the user.

This is what Garmin nailed about the smartwatches: they actually require very little from the user. It's easy to start a workout, see notifications, most apps are called "glances" and you just scroll and click and you're presented with a lot of information. On my Epix you have a dedicated button for controlling playback but otherwise it's quite straight forward.

I don’t think I get this. You can actually simplify the interface of the Apple Watch if you want. Start with eliminating apps you don’t need. You can customize the Watch face to something really simple. Then done.

I think I interact with my Watch quite minimally. I wear it mostly to track my everyday movements. Couple times a day, I use it to record outdoor walks (usually for tracking my walk commutes to and from work) and then also to record my exercise (running) at the end of the day.

That’s about it!

A few times a week, I may use the Watch to check my email or text my spouse.

Pretty uncomplicated.

And the Watch does track my movements, stands, calories spent, heart rate, all without my intervention.

Not sure what’s so complicated about the Watch interface.

 

[ruddyman]

The question is whether it is worth the money to buy that other watch for the multi night trips or it just makes more sense to have a watch that does better in pretty much every other life situation and occasionally carrying a battery for recharging on those longer trips.

That's exactly how I see it as well. Pack the extra ounces and put up with some extra fuss, or pay $900 for a hiking watch. Or wear the hiking watch all the time and curse when you can't find your iPhone with the ping feature.

 

[GadgetBen]

But a Garmin isn’t, and never will be, an Apple Watch.

 

[1rottenapple]

Which group do you think comprises the larger number (number, not percentage) of smartwatch wearers - hardcore ultra-endurance athletes and extreme outdoor adventurers, or average everyday people who mix in some exercise and the occasional half-day venture into the boonies right outside of town, along with the conveniences of a smartwatch in their daily lives?

I don't have any stats to back it up, but I'm willing to bet that even if you combined serious ultramarathon/triathlon/Ironman athletes, avid peak baggers/rock climbers, hardcore wilderness explorers and Arctic adventurers, they wouldn't make up even 1/100 of one percent of the population. They're a tiny niche market within an already small niche market.

The overwhelmingly vast majority of the market for any smartwatch manufacturer, as far as the athletic world goes, is comprised of aspirational/casual athletes - people very similar to what @agmr described above. For any manufacturer to not target, even cater, to that demographic would be a profound mistake.

Well said. It’s all about marketing. If one needs a a special designation to buy Jordan, ford raptors, Porsche 911 these manufacturers would be in financial trouble. Like these manufacturers apple is selling a lifestyle. The ultra can do what it says it does which is extreme sports more so than the regular Apple Watches but if the majority of those hard core sports enthusiasts buy garmin but many more people buy ultra than apple is happy.

 

[Expos of 1969]

That's exactly how I see it as well. Pack the extra ounces and put up with some extra fuss, or pay $900 for a hiking watch. Or wear the hiking watch all the time and curse when you can't find your iPhone with the ping feature.

Or use some common sense and intelligence and know where your phone is at all times.