Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
My point was that once it seems to matter, they are likely to do it. I will bet that until the Ultra, they did not think it was that important.

Timing. I would guess that adding it before the Watch shipped would have given too much of a hint about the new watch.

Guessing that until L5 got added, it did not matter.

Again, without the L5 signal, the GPS coverage is not reliable enough.

We will have to see what happens. :-D

GPS accuracy has little to do with need for offline maps.

Apple could have rolled out offline maps at any time - say to iPhone - without giving anyone a hint about Ultra.

My guess would be that:
  • Apple has licensed some of the map data from Tomtom with an agreement that does not cover offline use.
  • And someone who rallies for map UX consistency blocks the use of open street maps for offline.
Apple needs to fix this, it costs them lost sales.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HowardLive
The thing is, those actually hanging off the side of a mountain are a minority. They will continue buying Garmin watches, and Apple will capture most of the rest of the market.
You are right on point. 80% of their users will never do any of this stuff they buy it as a cool statement. Like trucks. Most of the off-road capable trucks have never and will never leave the pavement. These are the customers Apple will scoop up. Unfortunately for Garmin, these are likely their bread and butter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HowardLive
If I were a rugged type I’d have one of those solar chargers attached to my backpack so I could have whatever gadgets I wanted with me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GhostOS
Still rather have an Apple Watch over a Garmin. I find Garmins software a mess.
In a way you are right. Once they had a great piece of software, mapsource. I could read and write with it, but no… it had to go different and online and I still cannot find my way in the new software due to its complexity.
But if after hours, you find your way, then you can make nice routes. That is very different in Apple, that doesn’t have that possibility.
 
I'm not an athlete in any sense of the word. I opted for Ultra because it's only another $50 from the SS S8 I was planning to buy originally, and adds quite a bit more. I was willing to buy a ceramic watch if one was released this time around. So the Ultra is perfect for me, while a Garmin isn't. My stepdad has older Garmin and Suunto watches and he's never been much of an athlete as far as I'm aware.
That’s a very logical purchase. For only $50 more you get so much features than the “dressy” SS  Watch. The Ultra is much better deal than Ceramic and Ti Editions in the past.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mansplains and agmr
Focused meaning what. Fitness is part of lifestyle.

There is no hypocrisy as there is no one definition of “hardcore sports thing”.
No, I mean the central thing is being fashionable rather than having some particular purpose, like running or sailing.

I've been accused of comparing only the base apps. And that implicitly the Apple Watch is better because "apps". That makes no sense to me. Of course I compare the base apps because that's what I use, and Garmin's base apps (workout, maps, sleep monitoring, compass etc) are very good and often better compared to Apple's. We can pick one and we can share screenshots here and I will show you that you get more with Garmin.

But if you have some specific app in mind, something that Garmin doesn't do or does it poorly, I'd be curious to know. So far just someone mentioned flight tracking and 2FA use. I agree that I cannot use a Garmin for those purposes however I don't really understand why you're using a watch for those purposes to begin with, and what exactly is meant by for example "flight tracking".

The point of a watch is not to do everything the phone does, no matter how stupid or unwieldy the implementation (e.g. talking into your wrist). But to do what your phone cannot do (wear it while training or sleeping), cannot do easily and comfortably for long periods of time (navigation), or saving time with notification glances.

Yes you can use Siri on an Apple Watch to reply to text messages. What happens when Siri gets it wrong? Since this type of device is too small to meaningfully edit, how much time is lost on the failed scenarios? To me it makes more sense to answer texts in the actual phone, which is a simple and consistent operation, rather than the crapshoot of using a watch.

A couple of people commented on my dissing the Apple's choice of rectangular shape. While they're using mostly round analog watch faces in marketing materials!

To me, rectangular or square watches look odd/unusual and bad, in a Tag Monaco ugly way, and the bigger the watch, the worse a rectangular one looks.

A circle is actually the optimal shape for holding the largest area with the smallest perimeter. A watch is not a general purpose computer monitor worn on the wrist, just a tiny screen that displays info. And a round one will actually get you most screen for the size. The round perimeter makes the buttons easily accessible. Think of two buttons side by side on a flat edge compared to a curved edge - the latter you can more easily press and feel.

The fact that Apple's own marketing material favour the round analog look shows that they chose the wrong shape (because it's cheaper to produce and cheaper to make software for), and then, after making the choice, it shows their utter lack of imagination in designing good watch faces suitable for their poorly chosen screen. I think they'd better go with the Mickey Mouse one, it's clown fiesta anyway.

So yeah, this is a case of having your cake and eating it too; Garmin makes watches that actually look like watches, and in particular they have watches that look like men's watches, with the added bonus of having a highly functional and beautiful shape. Big plus.
 
We get it, you are Garmin. Garmin will sell less watches in the future and a piece of the cake will go to Apple who offer more than Garmin for a big chunk of the market. Some ultra-sports people (or wannabe ultra-sports) will stick with a Garmin brick on their wrist, also those in the Android ecosystem. The rest will be happily living with their Apple watches.

For me essential watch apps are Komoot, Strava, Runkeeper, Apple Fitness, Bring, Camera, Wallet, Okta, Audible, Podcasts.
 
But if you have some specific app in mind, something that Garmin doesn't do or does it poorly, I'd be curious to know. So far just someone mentioned flight tracking and 2FA use. I agree that I cannot use a Garmin for those purposes however I don't really understand why you're using a watch for those purposes to begin with, and what exactly is meant by for example "flight tracking".
You seem to have never used 2FA on a watch. Why people use it: you don’t have to grab your phone and authenticate. Of course you can’t try it out, because the Garmin ecosystem sucks.

Also a lot of phone apps just outsource controls to the watch app. It’s very convenient to not get out the phone to check off your shared grocery list while shopping, but having it on your wrist.
 
Garmin makes watches that actually look like watches, and in particular they have watches that look like men's watches, with the added bonus of having a highly functional and beautiful shape. Big plus.
Sounds like you’re talking about a lifestyle product 😂
 
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?
They do it so you can buy two: one to wear during the day, and another one for sleep tracking 😅
 
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?
That's probably what Apple had in mind. You can give it a quick charge say, during the two hours from when you get home from work to before going to bed (eg: you take off your watch before going to shower and have dinner). Same in the morning after waking up, when you go wash up. Should be enough to keep the watch topped up constantly.
 
When i sleep track i just charge it while showering/getting ready. I never really liked wearing a device at night so i uave a Withings sleep now and enjoy sleep tracking without a device on my wrist.
 
No, I mean the central thing is being fashionable rather than having some particular purpose, like running or sailing.
The central thing to an Apple Watch is being an extension of one's iphone. (and also being able to be operated without the iphone). Apple has a knack for making consumer products that look good.
I've been accused of comparing only the base apps. And that implicitly the Apple Watch is better because "apps". That makes no sense to me. Of course I compare the base apps because that's what I use, and Garmin's base apps (workout, maps, sleep monitoring, compass etc) are very good and often better compared to Apple's. We can pick one and we can share screenshots here and I will show you that you get more with Garmin.
There is more functionality in an Apple Watch than a Garmin. Many thousands of apps let one interact with an Apple Watch. There aren't that many with a garmin.
But if you have some specific app in mind, something that Garmin doesn't do or does it poorly, I'd be curious to know. So far just someone mentioned flight tracking and 2FA use. I agree that I cannot use a Garmin for those purposes however I don't really understand why you're using a watch for those purposes to begin with, and what exactly is meant by for example "flight tracking".
Because you wouldn't do it or understand it, doesn't mean somebody else wouldn't find it useful.
The point of a watch is not to do everything the phone does, no matter how stupid or unwieldy the implementation (e.g. talking into your wrist). But to do what your phone cannot do (wear it while training or sleeping), cannot do easily and comfortably for long periods of time (navigation), or saving time with notification glances.
The point of the Apple Watch is an extension of the iphone. So things like 2fa (to pick an example) can be done.
Yes you can use Siri on an Apple Watch to reply to text messages. What happens when Siri gets it wrong? Since this type of device is too small to meaningfully edit, how much time is lost on the failed scenarios? To me it makes more sense to answer texts in the actual phone, which is a simple and consistent operation, rather than the crapshoot of using a watch.
What happens if you're driving and get into a car accident? Why the whataboutism? Anything in life can happen.
A couple of people commented on my dissing the Apple's choice of rectangular shape. While they're using mostly round analog watch faces in marketing materials!

To me, rectangular or square watches look odd/unusual and bad, in a Tag Monaco ugly way, and the bigger the watch, the worse a rectangular one looks.

A circle is actually the optimal shape for holding the largest area with the smallest perimeter. A watch is not a general purpose computer monitor worn on the wrist, just a tiny screen that displays info. And a round one will actually get you most screen for the size. The round perimeter makes the buttons easily accessible. Think of two buttons side by side on a flat edge compared to a curved edge - the latter you can more easily press and feel.
Okay, different strokes for different foks.
The fact that Apple's own marketing material favour the round analog look shows that they chose the wrong shape (because it's cheaper to produce and cheaper to make software for), and then, after making the choice, it shows their utter lack of imagination in designing good watch faces suitable for their poorly chosen screen. I think they'd better go with the Mickey Mouse one, it's clown fiesta anyway.
So Apple choose the wrong shape?
So yeah, this is a case of having your cake and eating it too; Garmin makes watches that actually look like watches, and in particular they have watches that look like men's watches, with the added bonus of having a highly functional and beautiful shape. Big plus.
So then buy a Garmin, by all means. Competition is great and Apple just entered the ring with a strong contender. Apple Watch isn't the answer to everything. AW and Garmin have their own spaces and yet overlap in certain areas.
 
I can promise you Apple will sell more Ultra watches to the addressable market in the first month than Garmin has sold this year.
This assumption is correct I’m sure as I have been hearing people that do not even want it for working out talk about purchasing it. I believe the true garmin type user will not be switching to the ultra as it’s essentially the same as the AW7. There is not a new app interface to include all the things garmin app does in one easy to interpret place. As a user I couldn’t care less about how many they sell but I do care about the functionality so I’ll be one of the “few” users that possesses a garmin. Using sales metrics as a barometer for this matter is ridiculous.
 
I don’t think it will take that long. They own the smartwatch space already and just need to add features and functionality. They can work with the best outdoor/fitness software vendors out there to add more on top like they did with Huish.
 
I don’t think it will take that long. They own the smartwatch space already and just need to add features and functionality. They can work with the best outdoor/fitness software vendors out there to add more on top like they did with Huish.
When we look at the Garmin buyers, it seems there are at least the following types:

1. weekend/casual athletes and adventurers (including those scuba diving once a year or backpacking once a year)
2. The people buying into a fantasy. ( I have a friend that was convinced to buy a Garmin when he bought his bike. The bike sits, but the fantasy and watch remain)
3. The people buying for style/image
4. Android users
5. Athletes or adventurers with niche needs


Apple will take a bigger slice of the top of the list in coming days, while making a more compelling argument for the people at the bottom of the list as time goes by and more apps and first party solutions are introduced. I think #5 will be the hardest to penetrate. That market is so small that Apple’s motivation to move them could be low. However, that still leaves a lot of the market for Apple to try to move now.

It seems most of the discussion here is about #5 and that is probably the smallest concern for Apple right now. As more from group 1-4 move, the more tools for group #5 will appear.

Also, I think Apple is trying to increase sales of their Apple Watch to current Apple Watch owners that have been sitting it out for a few years and get some people that don’t have an AW or any fitness watch to buy. Despite the discussion above, those are probably the biggest areas to boost their bottom line.
 
I have a half-dozen garmin devices and pretty much every product apple makes from the 14” m1 mbp to the homepod and watch

The ultra will make a nice running watch. It’s just not going to replace a Garmin for the things people buy Garmin’s for. I suspect it will take a slice out of their business though. But the ultra changes nothing for me or probably anyone that’s serious about triathlon or cycling or anything outdoors beyond day hiking.

The apple watch can’t hook up to the power meters on my bikes or the garmin gpsmap satellite communicator like my fenix and Edge can. It can’t hookup to my swim straps, cadence or speed sensors. I can’t see the screen while on my bike. I’d have to have a half-dozen different apps on the watch with the subscriptions that entails. As for battery life, a proper gps navigator will offer like 4x the watch even if apple gets to the 60hrs they promise.

Overall, it’s just hard for one device to excel at everything. That’s why i have 3 difffere t Garmins in common use.

Best use case is someone that maybe runs a lot and does an occasional day hike. I may even get one at some point but I don’t see it replacing the garmin any time soon, and this doesn’t even get in to the fact that i like the integrated nature of garmin connect for all my activities + other things like trainingpeaks integration.
 
i love how apple never needs to stoop to the lows of samsung, garmin or microsoft with their snide ads and tweets. at least back in the "i'm a mac" ad days their campaign was funny and whitty. these attacks are just sad dying gasps. just make better products and then you won't need to resort to these tactics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: agmr
1. weekend/casual athletes and adventurers (including those scuba diving once a year or backpacking once a year)
Many in this group had an Apple Watch and just accepted they could not use it for diving or their longer backpacking trip. Even many people like me who go diving 3-5 times a year, will choose to switch from my average dive watch to an Ultra. Having had and lost many dive log books over the years, what Oceanic had already done with their app got me interested in switching, but not enough to spend that money. Now I definitely will and that makes me more interested in other Huish Outdoors brands. I hope that in the Ultra 2 or the Ultra 3 they have support for the lower frequency (frequencies) needed for air transmitters, something that might actually get me doing that (I have not wanted to upgrade my watch, so I do not own a transmitter, and since I do not have an air integrated watch I do not rent air transmitters either).

2. The people buying into a fantasy. ( I have a friend that was convinced to buy a Garmin when he bought his bike. The bike sits, but the fantasy and watch remain)
This group will be the most interesting to watch. A lot of the people on here who talk about "hanging on the side of a mountain" never climb higher than the 4th floor. If Apple is able to convince them that they can just as easily not climb Everest and/or K2 with an Apple Watch as with a Garmin, but will have a better experience for the other 22 hours/365 days.

3. The people buying for style/image
Some will switch, some will not.

4. Android users
Not happening any time soon.

5. Athletes or adventurers with niche needs
I expect that over time the number of niches that cannot use an Apple Watch will decrease. Garmin's biggest problem is that as Apple is able to take more of categories 1 and 2 (and some of category 3), their user base will shrink. As the bottom of the base shrinks, there will be fewer people entering the sales funnel, meaning few upsells and fewer replacements. That will not cause a catastrophic failure quickly, but it will mean they either have to raise prices on the higher end, cut spending for development, and/or reduce the number of products. All of this can lead to a vicious cycle where the changes cause people not to enter the ecosystem, causing more cuts, etc.

Apple will take a bigger slice of the top of the list in coming days, while making a more compelling argument for the people at the bottom of the list as time goes by and more apps and first party solutions are introduced.
Agreed.

I think #5 will be the hardest to penetrate. That market is so small that Apple’s motivation to move them could be low. However, that still leaves a lot of the market for Apple to try to move now.
What is likely to happen is that Apple and its partners will handle more and more of these niches, eventually leaving the smallest ones for Garmin and similar companies. Then these niche users will have to decide if the want to pay to have the proper gear that really handles their niche or if the would rather have the more mass market product that only sort of meets their special needs, but does everything else better.


It seems most of the discussion here is about #5 and that is probably the smallest concern for Apple right now. As more from group 1-4 move, the more tools for group #5 will appear.

Also, I think Apple is trying to increase sales of their Apple Watch to current Apple Watch owners that have been sitting it out for a few years and get some people that don’t have an AW or any fitness watch to buy. Despite the discussion above, those are probably the biggest areas to boost their bottom line.
Completely agree that this is targeted mostly at existing Apple Watch customers, people in the Apple ecosystem who are not Apple Watch users, and some Garmin users frustrated with the state of things. I also agree that as more from groups 1-4 move, it will encourage Apple and other third parties to better address the needs of group 5 shrinking its unserved size.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uofmtiger
Mmmm. I think its complicated. Apple watches don't have great battery life. If I use my 7 with screen off and all apps kept closed as much as possible I can get 1.5 days out of it (including sleep monitoring) but near no use of gps or sports monitoring. I assume therefore that on this basis the new watch could give me three days or realistically 2 days with a bit of gps use. The other problem I see is that if I have to buy multiple apps to cover the same space as the Garmin watch as many of them will require subscriptions not only will my Apple watch cost most of the price of a top end Garmin but will continually cost me more just to maintain the access to data. This might add up to as much as the price of another watch each year. I feel that Apple really needs to build in competitive stats to the Garmin devices in order to be considered existing in the same market. For occasional athletes it is very compelling and for someone whose just sick of the appalling battery life of the AW7 it might give just enough extra to be worthwhile.
 
Another thing people are forgetting is that the main selling point of this is that…it’s a watch. Is it also a computer on your wrist? Is it also a tool to help measure your health? Yes. Is it also used to measure sports metrics? Yes. Is it a communication device. Yes. It’s not intended to do just one thing but it does do one thing well, which is to tell time.
 
Many in this group had an Apple Watch and just accepted they could not use it for diving or their longer backpacking trip. Even many people like me who go diving 3-5 times a year, will choose to switch from my average dive watch to an Ultra. Having had and lost many dive log books over the years, what Oceanic had already done with their app got me interested in switching, but not enough to spend that money. Now I definitely will and that makes me more interested in other Huish Outdoors brands. I hope that in the Ultra 2 or the Ultra 3 they have support for the lower frequency (frequencies) needed for air transmitters, something that might actually get me doing that (I have not wanted to upgrade my watch, so I do not own a transmitter, and since I do not have an air integrated watch I do not rent air transmitters either).


This group will be the most interesting to watch. A lot of the people on here who talk about "hanging on the side of a mountain" never climb higher than the 4th floor. If Apple is able to convince them that they can just as easily not climb Everest and/or K2 with an Apple Watch as with a Garmin, but will have a better experience for the other 22 hours/365 days.


Some will switch, some will not.


Not happening any time soon.


I expect that over time the number of niches that cannot use an Apple Watch will decrease. Garmin's biggest problem is that as Apple is able to take more of categories 1 and 2 (and some of category 3), their user base will shrink. As the bottom of the base shrinks, there will be fewer people entering the sales funnel, meaning few upsells and fewer replacements. That will not cause a catastrophic failure quickly, but it will mean they either have to raise prices on the higher end, cut spending for development, and/or reduce the number of products. All of this can lead to a vicious cycle where the changes cause people not to enter the ecosystem, causing more cuts, etc.


Agreed.


What is likely to happen is that Apple and its partners will handle more and more of these niches, eventually leaving the smallest ones for Garmin and similar companies. Then these niche users will have to decide if the want to pay to have the proper gear that really handles their niche or if the would rather have the more mass market product that only sort of meets their special needs, but does everything else better.



Completely agree that this is targeted mostly at existing Apple Watch customers, people in the Apple ecosystem who are not Apple Watch users, and some Garmin users frustrated with the state of things. I also agree that as more from groups 1-4 move, it will encourage Apple and other third parties to better address the needs of group 5 shrinking its unserved size.
Yeah, re-reading what I put in #1, I should have just added recreational divers and backpackers that can get by justing bringing a portable battery if needed over a longer trip. Lots of people in category …. I undersold it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.