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

[ColdShadow]

I would like some more basis on how round is more ergonomic that rectangular or square, how can round fit be more ergonomical when a screen with pixels is laid out in a rectangular format (HxV pixels) ?

You can argue about the ergonomics since there isn’t a scientific comparison to compare but It’s simply much nicer aesthetically having a round watch on your wrist vs a giant square shaped one that resembles a geeky device rather than a sleek watch.
That’s all.

proof of that is the fact that over 90% of mechanical watches (specially premium ones) are round not square.

also almost all function focused watches (fitness/sports/diving/aviation/military /hunting etc) which tend to be large are round as well.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I wasn’t questioning Apple Watch s success and popularity.
It’s not like the “market” had a choice between square and round Apple watches.
again look at non smart watches,90+% are round not square.

They did it to make the watch identifiable as an Apple Watch rather than copy 90 percent of watches. Also, this watch does a thousand more things than a regular round watch, so they made it the best shape for Text and complications. How many round computer screens and phones are out there?

As I said, the shape is popular and has been worn by the most fashionable celebs, actors, models, musical acts, etc. This was a discussion when the watch was released, but there isn’t much to say at this point because it was a huge success. Go back and read all those articles that said it would be a flop and people had no reason for a smartwatch that did what their phones did better. Apple created a huge market with this “square” watch. I don’t think it would have done as well if it just blended in with the crowd.

I am not saying they should never make
a round Watch, but this “ pillowcase” design is now iconic. Glad they broke out and did the Ultra which looks quite different from their other watches ( for good and bad). Maybe they will get more “adventurous” with future models… we will see.

 

[Fthree]

as far along in tech as we are id say at this point if you're a garmin user you arent really concerned with the smart features of the AW that gamins do not have. The ultra isn't really adding anything new in the grand scheme except for battery life. The AW7 and even the SE are really advanced when it comes to all things apple has to offer except for diving just not in a rugged case with a few extra hours of battery life. I for one turn off the phone notifications to my fenix the majority could possibly do otherwise but who cares we have iPhones... Also i couldn't care less if the watch is square or round just as long as the aesthetics make sense for each device.

 

[Alan Wynn]

I use a standalone Frontier X for ECG measurements whilst exercising at the moment but would quite like 'always on' automatic ECG on my watch to track changes throughout the days / weeks.

How do you like the Frontier X? I was looking at it, but have not been able to find any reviews, and/or analysis of its performance. I looked at the Qardio for a long time, but they took forever to get U.S. certification, and now one needs a doctor to be able to get it.

What is your specific concern about ECG? Mine is just curiosity, although I take a track every week or so just to have a baseline, and like it there in case I have a problem (at 58, these things start to be a concern).

 

[Alan Wynn]

It’s not like the “market” had a choice between square and round Apple watches.

No, but they had a choice between round and square smart watches and Apple has won that.

again look at non smart watches,90+% are round not square.

You mean analog watches, which are round because they rarely display any information outside the hands. Text is linear if one has to scroll at all, a round face is hugely problematic, just as no one uses a round LCD display on their computer.

 

[Uofmtiger]

as far along in tech as we are id say at this point if you're a garmin user you arent really concerned with the smart features of the AW that gamins do not have. The ultra isn't really adding anything new in the grand scheme except for battery life. The AW7 and even the SE are really advanced when it comes to all things apple has to offer except for diving just not in a rugged case with a few extra hours of battery life. I for one turn off the phone notifications to my fenix the majority could possibly do otherwise but who cares we have iPhones... Also i couldn't care less if the watch is square or round just as long as the aesthetics make sense for each device.

Obviously, Garmin thinks this watch with only a “few extra hours of battery life” is something to worry about.. otherwise, they would have no need for their snarky and ridiculous post ( to the point of lying).

 

[bluecoast]

I think that the AW Ultra will mostly be used by the sort of people who wear Patagonia gear on Zoom calls.

I don't do multi-day extreme sports, but if I did, I'd want to have a watch that I was very sure would not die on me i.e. a high-end Garmin.

Maybe Apple will sort out the battery life, but maybe this is pretty much going to be as good as it gets (including the forthcoming extended power mode). Especially as the standard watch has constantly hovered around '1 day' since launch (ditto the iPhone).

However, the existence of the AWU has likely pushed Garmin top end watches into a pretty small market.

 

[Alan Wynn]

You can expect the battery life for Epix 2 with Always-on-Display turned off or for Fenix 7 to be several days:

• If you always listen to music while exercising, maybe you have to charge twice a week.
• If you stream music from your phone, you should expect to charge once a week. Music UI on Garmin is so lousy that you'll probably end up doing this

How does using ANT+ affect battery life? I use a Milestone BLE footpod, and I have on the fence about getting either a Wahoo Kickr or one of the new Zwift trainers. People talk about using power meters, etc. but I have not seen anything that talks about how this all affects things. Is listening to music battery draining because of the bluetooth or because of the music playing?

Yet another argument for your battery life estimator tool.

 

[m.dricu]

Users like you are a minority and should stick to the Garmin if that offers a better solution. However, i do multi-day stuff like bikepacking, i bike 15 hours a week, i live IN the mountains and hike quite a bit, i do ski touring and i use the watch and the phone for all those activities. For bike packing i just take a power bank with me. I would have to do the same thing with the Garmin depending what i track. I see the Garmin daily with people and where i live i think the Garmin is the „active lifestyle“ device, i hardly see those people on any of the close summits at all 😂

So really, what‘s the point in coming here to tell a bunch of Apple fans, that the Garmin is the better device 😂

And you’re saying that you see more people with an AW than a Garmin on “close summits”? Give me a break.

Also, it’s people like you who make the 😂 the most popular emoji

Top Five Favorite Emoji in the United States Are 😂, 👍, ❤️, 🤣, and 😢

The top five favorite emoji in the United States include 😂 (face with tears of joy), 👍 (thumbs up), ❤️ (red heart),...

www.macrumors.com

 

[I7guy]

I think that the AW Ultra will mostly be used by the sort of people who wear Patagonia gear on Zoom calls.

And maybe who are expert swimmers, some who do intra-day extreme sports or people who do any type of activity that could be tough on a watch.

I don't do multi-day extreme sports, but if I did, I'd want to have a watch that I was very sure would not die on me i.e. a high-end Garmin.

I would imagine a battery pack is among the items, but you can’t go by the anecdotal use cases on this forum.

Maybe Apple will sort out the battery life, but maybe this is pretty much going to be as good as it gets (including the forthcoming extended power mode). Especially as the standard watch has constantly hovered around '1 day' since launch (ditto the iPhone).

Apple claims more than one day but we’ll see real world.

However, the existence of the AWU has likely pushed Garmin top end watches into a pretty small market.

Again it depends how things are going to shake out.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I think that the AW Ultra will mostly be used by the sort of people who wear Patagonia gear on Zoom calls.

I don't do multi-day extreme sports, but if I did, I'd want to have a watch that I was very sure would not die on me i.e. a high-end Garmin.

Maybe Apple will sort out the battery life, but maybe this is pretty much going to be as good as it gets (including the forthcoming extended power mode). Especially as the standard watch has constantly hovered around '1 day' since launch (ditto the iPhone).

However, the existence of the AWU has likely pushed Garmin top end watches into a pretty small market.

They doubled the battery life with this watch and they are working on more efficient chips, so I expect it will get even better over time. I don’t see them making huge sacrifices in the design ( dimmer screen for example) to squeeze out more battery life. Also, they obviously thought cellular was the way to go since it is great for emergencies, but also drains battery. It is all about the trade offs they made and obviously thought 36 hours of “normal” use would be enough for the vast majority of the market. They will worry about those outliers with new chips down the road.

I guess Apple is happy to give up those that are doing ”multi day extreme sports” that never get a chance to top off a watch over a couple of days.

 

[bluecoast]

Slightly off topic, but I wonder if we'll ever see an iPhone Ultra?

A phone that's really tough to break, which you can take scuba diving with you & that has 2+ days battery life would be awesome.

Maybe this will be the oft-rumoured port-less iPhone.

 

[solq]

And you’re saying that you see more people with an AW than a Garmin on “close summits”? Give me a break.

Haven't you seen those new Apple ads? They on the mountain all right but they're all awaiting rescue

 

[bluecoast]

And maybe who are expert swimmers, some who do intra-day extreme sports or people who do any type of activity that could be tough on a watch.

I would imagine a battery pack is among the items, but you can’t go by the anecdotal use cases on this forum.

Apple claims more than one day but we’ll see real world.

Again it depends how things are going to shake out.

Agreed. The extreme sports professionals in the marketing are aspirational - Apple is really pitching this at 'weekend warriors'.

And as many have said here, that's a pretty significant market.

NOTE: Multiple edits to fix my terrible grammar and phrasing, but the sentiment of the post wasn't changed.

 

[Shirasaki]

A standard Apple Watch can do most of what the AW Ultra can do.

After all, the majority of us aren’t trekking to the top of Mount Everest or submerging to Mariana’s Trench.

TBH, just 3-day battery life is enough to entice me to get one of those bad lads. Less recharge and less stress when going out and about. I don't need to be an athlete to get one.

 

[Alan Wynn]

The point of a longer battery life is to be away from a power socket for as long as possible. Going on a multi-day hike with camping is among those uses (among many others). Users like me would gladly trade off a bit of the pixel density to quadruple the battery life.

Changing pixel density alone is not going to quadruple battery life. The main drains for the battery are: the CPU, the radios, and the LEDs for heart rate.

Apple Watches are made for city people who prefer to jog for 20min around the block and then gladly return home. Always tethered to the pocket socket, even if it’s for 10min. No harm in that but let’s not pretend that Apple Watches will ever be true activity trackers. They are computers with incidental activity tracking because of their time limited measuring potential.

Apple Watches are true activity trackers for what 99.99% of what people do, and I suspect that they would work fine (from a battery life perspective) 80%-90% of the time even for extreme athletes. Even with two hours of GPS and stats tracked walking/jogging, and one-two hours of indoor workout, I get through 24 hours of use with a 15-20 minute charge during my shower when come back from my two hours in the morning and 15-20 minutes when I get ready for bed. With the Apple Watch Ultra, I might be able to get with nothing more than that, even on the days when I use the watch completely standalone when I am on the track.

 

[I7guy]

The point of a longer battery life is to be away from a power socket for as long as possible. Going on a multi-day hike with camping is among those uses (among many others). Users like me would gladly trade off a bit of the pixel density to quadruple the battery life.

Absolutely buy the product that you believe is best for you.

Apple Watches are made for city people who prefer to jog for 20min around the block and then gladly return home.

That is incredibly condescending and naive.

Always tethered to the pocket socket, even if it’s for 10min. No harm in that but let’s not pretend that Apple Watches will ever be true activity trackers.

They’ll eat garmins lunch with activity tracking.

They are computers with incidental activity tracking because of their time limited measuring potential.

What time limitation. Does anyone who knows a garmin ever take a battery pack along? Battery packs work on Apple Watch also.

 

[solq]

They’ll eat garmins lunch with activity tracking.

Unlikely. Activity tracking has been on Apple Watch for quite some time, yet in 2021 Apple fell 3% points YoY due to intensified competition while Garmin showed 35% YoY growth (https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartwatch-market-2021/).

Why are you so keen for Garmin to fail? There's something unpleasant about this, you should look into it.

I don't like Apple Watch for example - at all - but don't wish Apple anything but success. I'm just not their client for this particular product. However if they made a round one with a week-long battery life...

 

[I7guy]

Unlikely. Activity tracking has been on Apple Watch for quite some time, yet in 2021 Apple fell 3% points YoY due to intensified competition while Garmin showed 35% YoY growth (https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartwatch-market-2021/).

If year one you sell one widget and year 2 you sell two widgets. Your sales doubled. Scale is important.

Why are you so keen for Garmin to fail? There's something unpleasant about this, you should look into it.

Why are you so keen for the Apple Watch ultra to fail?

I don't like Apple Watch for example - at all - but don't wish Apple anything but success.

No you don’t. You have every excuse in the book as to why the ultra will fail.

I'm just not their client for this particular product.

Cool. Buy what is appropriate for you.

However if they made a round one with a week-long battery life...

The latter before the former.

 

[spacemnspiff]

The point of a longer battery life is to be away from a power socket for as long as possible. Going on a multi-day hike with camping is among those uses (among many others). Users like me would gladly trade off a bit of the pixel density to quadruple the battery life.

Apple Watches are made for city people who prefer to jog for 20min around the block and then gladly return home. Always tethered to the pocket socket, even if it’s for 10min. No harm in that but let’s not pretend that Apple Watches will ever be true activity trackers. They are computers with incidental activity tracking because of their time limited measuring potential.

Since we are talking about arbitrary battery life standards, multi-day hike battery life is too for short for - let's say for people living off the grid 6 months out of the year, Garmin then sucks. That person would prefer a 16x2 dot matrix LCD display with battery life of 2 years or better yet, never having to charge. And so the opinion then would be, Garmin does not make watches for true outdoors person. Everyone else is a pretentious person including the so called multi-day hikers.

By that standard, as long as charging is needed, the problem of battery life hasn't been solved. If charging 15 minutes is too much of a trouble for pretentious folks who need a watch when they are on the pot and while showering, then eating 3 meals a days is also too much trouble. Human body is not for them, they need to find a new life form.

Probably way off on a tangent, but that's done just to show how outlandish the argument of reasonable battery life is.

 

[agmr]

And you’re saying that you see more people with an AW than a Garmin on “close summits”? Give me a break.

I see Apple Watches, normal trackers and hardly any Garmins here (in my spots, more with people doing ski touring, but not many), yep.

I see many wannabe outdoor people wearing Garmins at work and they don‘t do any multi day adventures. It‘s a lifestyle gimmick for them. Many of them might go Apple Watch Ultra, it just started.

 

[jole]

How does using ANT+ affect battery life? I use a Milestone BLE footpod, and I have on the fence about getting either a Wahoo Kickr or one of the new Zwift trainers. People talk about using power meters, etc. but I have not seen anything that talks about how this all affects things. Is listening to music battery draining because of the bluetooth or because of the music playing?

Yet another argument for your battery life estimator tool.

I use ANT+ on my mountain bike power-meter, Garmin HRM belt and Garmin InReach. Generally I have the unmeasured impression that ANT+ is very power efficient and that you should not worry about having ANT+ on.

One exception: Garmin implementation of InReach ANT+ based communication seemed to have some serious software bugs that eat battery life like crazy, turning that pairing unusable.

 

[spacemnspiff]

You can argue about the ergonomics since there isn’t a scientific comparison to compare but It’s simply much nicer aesthetically having a round watch on your wrist vs a giant square shaped one that resembles a geeky device rather than a sleek watch.
That’s all.

proof of that is the fact that over 90% of mechanical watches (specially premium ones) are round not square.

also almost all function focused watches (fitness/sports/diving/aviation/military /hunting etc) which tend to be large are round as well.

For me the change from round to rectangular is an evolution based on form following function.

I cannot help but think the round shape of the watches, depending on how far back in history one wants to go, for instance, Pocket watches or the watches that came before them were round because of the mechanics of a rotating hour and minute hand. Once that constraint of rotating hand is not necessary, the shape of the watch can evolve.

The wrist has rectangular real estate, so it's easier to think that larger area can be more functional for a rectangular shape than a round one.

Having round just because round was a traditional is the usual nonsense loop we humans get stuck in, we think that there is something profound and sacred about the tradition that cannot be changed. Off the soap box.

 

[solq]

If year one you sell one widget and year 2 you sell two widgets. Your sales doubled. Scale is important.

Unless we're talking about a startup - and we aren't, Garmin is a well established company - not to me it's not. Trend is far more important, it's a better predictor of that company making new products, doing updates etc.

Why are you so keen for the Apple Watch ultra to fail?

This is a very simplistic question. Your premise is false. The actual answer is much more complicated. These are the scenarios in my mind:

1) the Ultra doesn't particularly succeed - makes no difference to me whatsoever
2) the Ultra succeeds but primarily eats into Apple Watch sales - again, it makes no difference to me whatsoever, they can sell millions of units and I wish them the best of luck
3) the Ultra succeeds and eats into Garmin's sales to a moderate extent - this would be the most beneficial for me, because it would probably reduce my next upgrade price and make it better, given the increased competition
4) the Ultra is a runaway success in the sports tracker market so much that it obliterates Garmin/Polar/Suunto/etc, they stop making smartwatches because it's no longer profitable - this would be a disaster, it would leave me with no good fitness tracker option

I personally think it's gonna be (1). It has nothing to with my wishes which are (3). (4) is meteor strike unlikely.

 

[I7guy]

Unless we're talking about a startup - and we aren't, Garmin is a well established company - not to me it's not. Trend is far more important, it's a better predictor of that company making new products, doing updates etc.

The scale is important as there is a difference in selling thousands of watchs vs millions of watches. Having Apple (at least estimates, because these are all wetfinger in the air) lose market share while the market is growing and still be the most bought smartwatch is not relevant to me. Yu can track trends all you want if they are meanful to you. At the end of the day, 2 is still double 1.

This is a very simplistic question.

A simplistic response in response to a simplistic post I suppose.

Your premise is false. The actual answer is much more complicated. These are the scenarios in my mind:

1) the Ultra doesn't particularly succeed - makes no difference to me whatsoever

Okay, Ultra succeed or not - may not make a difference except prove your speculation wrong.

2) the Ultra succeeds but primarily eats into Apple Watch sales - again, it makes no difference to me whatsoever, they can sell millions of units and I wish them the best of luck

Is that like saying the Mercedes C300 eats into the sales of the Mercedes AMG or the iphone 14 eats into the scales of the iphone pro max? They are both apple watch and if the apple watch ulta is eating into the sales of the AW8, apple is making more revenue. win-win

3) the Ultra succeeds and eats into Garmin's sales to a moderate extent - this would be the most beneficial for me, because it would probably reduce my next upgrade price and make it better, given the increased competition

Or not. Garmin may be forced to raise it's prices.

4) the Ultra is a runaway success in the sports tracker market so much that it obliterates Garmin/Polar/Suunto/etc, they stop making smartwatches because it's no longer profitable - this would be a disaster, it would leave me with no good fitness tracker option

I suppose that's an option, but not a very viable one.

I personally think it's gonna be (1). It has nothing to with my wishes which are (3). (4) is meteor strike unlikely.

Whatever it is, the market won't be looking at this thread as it evaluates which tracker to buy.