Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Where is your data behind saying it would cost Apple more to make the watch shape round?

This round smart watch is 38.99:

Haylou LS05 Smart Watch with 30 Day Battery Life, Biometric Sensors for Heart Rate Monitor, Sleep & Fitness Tracking, IPX68 Water Resistant, Metal Body w/ Touch Display, Bluetooth 5.0​


There are tons of round smartwatches for under $50 all over Amazon.
Do you think that thing has much R&D? And as far as I know, neither Apple nor Garmin develop their software in China.

Garmin charges where I live 200 to go from square to round.

But you know I love how this conversation has centered on this thing.

When it’s really about the battery life and the completely different use patterns one can have for Garmin’s devices, and no amount of snark or falsehood will change that.

Once you have a smartwatch that’s both pretty good and it has a great battery life, it‘s almost impossible to consider anything else.

Hint: the ‘d’ in 5d means days, as in remaining days:

4EBF3091-9BB2-4664-B1F0-38EBBBA2885B.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacCurry
Do you think that thing has much R&D? And as far as I know, neither Apple nor Garmin develop their software in China.

What does that have to do with anything? Your assertion was that the display alone would increase cost by $100 compared to a rectangular display.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Uofmtiger
What does that have to do with anything?
If Garmin made a car running on water with a range of 1000km compared to Apple's gasoline 50km you'd argue Apple's has a nicer radio.

And no, my "assertion" wasn't that the manufacturing cost alone would be that.
 
Apple's response:

"We measure unit sales in millions, not thousands".
Oooo, burn 🔥 lol. In all seriousnes, Garmin does just fine. the ultra is nice too and will fill that void where people would rather have that in Apples form. Trust me, they exist and the Ultra is a refreshing outcome from Apple. Garmin is like Samsung and google, always reacting lol. But Garmin makes a fantastic watch too.
 
He changed the subject because he has no data to support that statement.
Not really worth responding to him any more. He has made false statement after false statement and when called on them either ignores it or says I never said it.

Many others and I have defined our actual of the watch, and other than ad hominem attacks will respond on his average day/week.

Round displays have more area to perimeter. Who cares? Why does the perimeter matter? Even looking at the picture he picked shows why rectangular displays are better. Almost all the information fits in a small inset rectangle. They chose to curve the two indicator lines to make it less obvious how much space is wasted.

Any use that Garmin cannot do is absurd or invented or stupid.

Despite his fixation on batter life, he cannot describe his use case. As I pointed out, based on my use case, the Forerunner 945 using Garmin’s data would last me just about two days and then need two hours of charging. Even paying for Garmin’s $6 LTE subscription, it would do a fraction of what my Apple Watch with $5 LTE subscription does.

I chose to charge it for 15-20 minutes in the morning when I get back from my two hour walk/jog/run and 15-20 minutes as I get ready for bed. That is less time over the two days then I would spend with a Garmin, and I would have to block 2 hours.

It does not matter what time I am planning to go to bed, I know that it takes me at least 15-20 minutes to get ready. He talks like it is impossible to predict when he might go to sleep, as if a sleeping ray hits him and he is out.
 
Last edited:
Only if it has a battery or some other power source.
My mechanical watch has to be on my wrist or it stops working after a while. I have a watch spinner, but it still loses time. A cheap timex will run for a year on one battery.

I prefer the mechanical watch for looks, nostalgia and the fact that it never needs a battery, but you can find a downside to anything.
 
Not really worth responding to him any more. He has made false statement after false statement and when called on them either ignores it or says I never said it.

Many others and I have defined our actual of the watch, and other than ad hominem attacks will respond on his average day/week.

Round displays have more area to perimeter. Who cares? Why does the perimeter matter? Even looking at the picture he picked shows why rectangular displays are better. Almost all the information fits in a small inset rectangle. They chose to curve the two indicator lines to make it less obvious how much space is wasted.

Any use that Garmin cannot do is absurd or invented or stupid.

Despite his fixation on batter life, he cannot describe his use case. As I pointed out, based on my use case, the Forerunner 945 using Garmin’s data would last me just about two days and then need two hours of charging. Even paying for Garmin’s $6 LTE subscription, it would do a fraction of what my Apple Watch with $5 LTE subscription does.

I chose to charge it for 15-20 minutes in the morning when I get back from my two hour walk/jog/run and 15-20 minutes as I get ready for bed. That is less time over the two days then I would spend with a Garmin, and I would have to block 2 hours.

It does not matter what time I am planning to go to bed, I know that it takes me at least 15-20 minutes to get ready. He talks like it is impossible to predict when he might go to sleep, as if a sleeping ray hits him and he is out.
Agreed.
 
This has not been a focus of Apple’s until now. In this last release they added better support for swimming, and added first party support for Sleep Tracking and Triathlons, in the previous release they improved the ability to create multi-activity workouts (still not great, but much better than it was). While all the scientific studies I have been able to find show Garmin’s sleep tracking among the least accurate, those that have tested Apple’s sleep tracking show it as the best in class.

It does seem to be something many/most Garmin users like but still not something Apple is offering as a first party. There are real issues doing something like this with Apple’s Privacy first model, but it is only a year ago that Fitness showed up on the iPad (with the introduction of Fitness+), and that happened with the app being rebuilt in SwiftUI, making a macOS version possible (and pretty easy). As part of the last release, Apple also started offering the ability to share one’s health data with one’s healthcare providers (something Garmin Health has been discussing but I cannot find any providers or Electronic Medical Records (EMR) companies actually doing it, while Apple integrates with the (at least) the two largest in the United States. I would be surprised if Apple ever offered anything like Garmin Connect’s web accessible health data solution, but I guess we will have to see.

Apple only started offering any first party sleep tracking a year ago and as part of watchOS 9 have really done a lot more. Hard for us to know for sure until more people have played with it now that it is generally available, but it does seem that Apple went from nothing to best in class in a bit over a year. That is the advantage of having lots of money to throw at a problem when you feel it is important.

I am not sure how you can say that it does not seem to be changing when just over a year Apple had no publicly available first party sleep tracking and now has best in class sleep tracking. Apple went from having no support for triathlons and now has basic support. You are right that Apple relies on its App ecosystem and open APIs to fill in gaps in their offerings, and to provide for things they are unlikely to ever do.

Workoutdoors and HealthFit are both one time purchases. RunGap is free with an annual purchase option for some additional functionality supporting transferring data automatically between to/from some other services. I am not sure which app you mean when you say Athletic (there are a lot of apps with that as part of their names and none seem to match your description).

No, an LTE subscription is not required. My BF has an LTE Series 6 and has never had service. He got the more expensive Apple Watch for the peace of mind of having it for emergencies. Even without service, one can still call emergency services in over 100 countries. Although I am curious how you consider this required, when it is not really even an option on any Garmin watches (their $6 LTE does not include phone calls, email, messaging or personal data).

I cannot find an app that meets this description, so I cannot comment on it, but I do not use it and have not seen it mentioned by others.

How is this required? Putting playlists of one’s own music on an Apple Watch is trivial, and if one wanted, one could $25 a year and have Music Match that makes all one’s personally owned music available for streaming anywhere. However, none of that is a requirement for using the watch, any more than a Spotify subscription. Amusingly, pretty much every review of the Garmin music functionality has said it was awful to the point of being unusable.

Workoutdoors is $4.99, one time purchase with no upgrade fees. HealthFit is the same. They support family sharing, so they are good for all 6 people in one’s family. In our case, four of us have Watches, and have had both of these apps for quite a while, so we have paid less than $0.84 per person per watch. That should drop to $0.62 in a few days when we upgrade watches.

Yes it does and as far as I can tell, cannot be streamed over Garmin’s $6 a month LTE subscription (for the one or two watches that support it). It is funny that you include the cost of an optional LTE subscription as

I cannot speak to your experience, but that is not a complaint I have seen often. I am also not sure what you mean, are using saying that you have not been able to play music while you were doing a workout, or that you were trying to use some app that integrates music and it did not work? As another data point, what versions of Apple Watch have you had and were you a regular user or trying someone else’s?

Their product line is certainly very confusing, with many too many very similar options.
The app I was talking about it called athlytic I may have not corrected the auto correct. You make a lot of good points
 
The ultra better be amazing seems like all the reviewers have with the S8 at the moment is ovulation tracking,. I’ve never seen so many guys excited and talking about ovulation all at once.
 
With the many pages of this thread...it needs to be emphasized that battery life is important. I have ordered the AW Ultra and just today my CC was charged and is preparing for shipment. I travel frequently including internationally from North America to Asia. Having a smart watch which lasts more than 18 hours is useful for me and it was one of the reasons I picked the Garmin Fenix 6X and returned the AW7 SS. The AW Ultra should work well for me and if it doesn't I'll return it and get the Epix 2 which actually costs $200 more.
 
The epix is amazing but if you’re going to go garmin get the fenix 7 x the flashlight is phenomenal. Oled is great and all but you cannot beat the light
 
The app I was talking about it called athlytic I may have not corrected the auto correct. You make a lot of good points
That makes it easier to find. :) There are so many apps that use common words as their names and I cannot understand what they are thinking.

Now that I can at least find it, I read some reviews of it. Ray Maker does not review it directly that I found, but compares it to Whoop and seems to find it better. I have never used it and, until today, never heard of it, so I cannot really say much about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fthree
That makes it easier to find. :) There are so many apps that use common words as their names and I cannot understand what they are thinking.

Now that I can at least find it, I read some reviews of it. Ray Maker does not review it directly that I found, but compares it to Whoop and seems to find it better. I have never used it and, until today, never heard of it, so I cannot really say much about it.
When I tried the AW7 I used it. Actually really liked it. You may as well it is just as good if not better than whoop
 
The epix is amazing but if you’re going to go garmin get the fenix 7 x the flashlight is phenomenal. Oled is great and all but you cannot beat the light
For my aging eyes, I need a brighter display. It is one of the reasons why I prefer the Epix 2 AMOLED display and the AW Ultra. I hope the AW Ultra has a sufficient battery life where I don't need to worry about it. I charged my Fenix 6X on Sunday night, and I still have 19% battery left which is 2 days.
 
people who own iPhone won't consider android smart watch.
and people who own Android phone won't buy an Apple watch.
they just don't work together properly.
Yes, but Garmin, Suunto, and others make smart watches and did since before the Apple Watch and Apple customers chose the Apple Watch over them. Also, @solq made it quite clear that he had and Android watch with his iPhone and it was better (I do agree with your general premise though that Apple ecosystem people had a choice between an Apple Watch and leaving the ecosystem). The point is that had they really hated the square face, they would not have purchased it.
Yes I meant analogue watches and I said that clearly.
No you did not, you just said:
again look at non smart watches,90+% are round not square.
There are lots of non-smart watches that are not analog, and even a few analog watches that are smart.

I am talking from design,aesthetics and ergonomics stand point.
I cannot argue design and aesthetics with you as those are personal opinions and (unlike some people, I think your are completely entitled to have your own opinions). As for ergonomics, I think you are clearly wrong.
I said it earlier the reason Apple went for square is because square screen is a little bit better better for reading

Take a look at this image from Garmin’s website of the Forerunner 945:

1663298804580.jpeg
Pretty much all the information is displayed in the rectangle in the middle. One could have a watch that was quite a bit smaller and rectangular and have all the same information displayed. One cannot scroll on a round display without a great deal of effort (constantly reformatting the text making it difficult to read, or like the display above, just using the inset rectangle). Analog displays are inherently less space efficient, and any text/numeral display will be more efficient on a straight sided display.
text,showing stats etc but it's not like you will have problems with a round display.
proof of that : all other smart watches that are round shaped and they have no issue displaying text and perform all the smart features.
They do have problems (they end up with lots of wasted space), but you are correct they can do it.
the reason Apple dominates the smart watch market is not because it's square 😁 that's the point I'm trying to make.
I agree with you there, but they also do not dominate the space despite having a square display. They dominate because their prospective users like what the product does for them, and a lot of that is display text.
Apple watch would have been the best seller even if it was triangle shaped.
While I understand you are being funny, I want to make it clear that Apple Watch customers would not buy a product that did not serve their needs even coming from Apple. That is why the HomePod was not a massive success on its first release.
but it can look 100x better and most likely more ergonomic and natural if it's round shaped.specially with larger sizes and ultra form factor.
You might like the look better, but it would be way less ergonomic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uofmtiger
Apple watch would have been the best seller even if it was triangle shaped.

It really wouldn't have, though. Sure, Apple has a fair amount of PR might to convince you you need something more than you objectively do, but not enough to convince you of something that's a completely silly idea. Even some controversial decisions have an impact on Apple's sales; I bet the 2016-21 MacBook Pros would have sold better if they had avoided some of them (such as the butterfly keyboard).

I'm sure there are people who would prefer the Apple Watch be round. Some of them maybe even outright don't buy it for that reason. But no doubt Apple prototyped various round shapes, and realized it ultimately was a poorer choice in terms of UI.

but it can look 100x better and most likely more ergonomic and natural if it's round shaped.

I don't know why everyone thinks a round shape is "ergonomic". For a user interface, that doesn't make any sense. There's a case to be made that it's more "attractive", but I imagine that's largely a function of existing expectations; people think watches are supposed to be round because a lot of watches used to be round.

Now, if you have an analog clock face, or a compass, sure, a rectangular screen is wasteful. But those make up the minority of apps on a smartwatch.
 
I think this comparison does scores some points both directions, but if I was out in the middle of nowhere, “Keep going for up to 150 hours of battery life in GPS mode with solar charging”, is a major advantage. How many explorers carry a battery backup charger, solar panels for an Apple Watch when hiking?
I don’t think Apple ever intended to compete on battery life or that would be their main focus and would probably have significant compromises in functionality to accommodate longer life, which is precisely where we’re at. Sure the Apple Watch Ultra can’t last as long, but it has so much more functionality.
 
if I was out in the middle of nowhere, “Keep going for up to 150 hours of battery life in GPS mode with solar charging”, is a major advantage.
Let me ask you two questions:
  1. What percentage of the market (Garmin's or total) is this?
  2. How many places is one "out in the middle of nowhere" where one also has short sleeves and gets enough sun one's watch to remain charged (that 150 hours assumes one has 3 hours a day in 50,000 lux - full sun)?
How many explorers carry a battery backup charger, solar panels for an Apple Watch when hiking?
If they were part of some new Apple Watch? Probably a similar number as a percentage, as are buying Garmin's solar assisted products. Given that one might want to charge other electronics, I think having a battery and/or a larger solar panel on one's backpack is pretty common.
 
Last edited:
Everybody has batteries with them now, what‘s the deal?

The most extreme guys that stay under 0.2 months can probably go with a Garmin without charging (assuming you don‘t need to charge your phone or camera that you might have with you too).
Personally i‘d take a 10000mAh battery with me and a solar panel if i‘d be that extreme.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Johnly
Everybody has batteries with them now, what‘s the deal?

The most extreme guys that stay under 0.2 months can probably go with a Garmin without charging (assuming you don‘t need to charge your phone or camera that you might have with you too).
Personally i‘d take a 10000mAh battery with me and a solar panel if i‘d be that extreme.
Yes sir because if you were that extreme you would not go unprepared. people “think” they need a certain brand or a certain speck to make it when in fact if you are truly extreme, you are going to make it regardless of watch choice lol. AWU for the win🏆
 
I don’t think Apple ever intended to compete on battery life

This.

It’s not some gotcha. Apple is quite aware that their battery life is — relative to Garmin — a weakness. Fixing that would make other aspects of their product worse. Everything is a tradeoff.

If you need more battery life, yeah, AW ain’t for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GuruZac
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.