Is your next 'fitness' watch an AW?

[satchmo]

While the AW is pretty much both, I purposely framed this question as 'fitness' and not 'smart' watches.

The number of competing fitness watches have exploded in the past few 6-12 months. From Fitbits' Ionic, Versa to Garmin's Forerunners 645 and Vivoactive 3, both now with music capabilities.

Some of the advantages the AW held over others were music and payment. Garmin Pay and others, are simply NFC enabled devices which are readily accepted. The music offerings are mediocre, with iHeart streaming and basic playback of loaded songs.

While watchOS5 has improved and added more, both Garmin and Fitbit fitness tracking and measurements are still more in depth.

Even with a new AW4 in the fall, would it's fitness capabilities be any better than what we've seen with watchOS 5?

 

[matrix07]

I’m not a professional athlete so buying a fitness watch purely for my fitness is a waste of my money, so yeah I’m all AW. It does the job good enough for me. With LTE, I won’t even look away to something else. I’m not sure how many fitness watch give you ability to listen to podcast while running. Probably zero.

 

[satchmo]

I’m not sure how many fitness watch give you ability to listen to podcast while running. Probably zero.

Not sure how many stream podcasts...but downloading and playback for sure.

 

[matrix07]

I believe many if not all do (natively).
Apple was a holdout, until watchOS5.

Well, natively might just cut it.. 4 years ago.

 

[44267547]

Even with a new AW4 in the fall, would it's fitness capabilities be any better than what we've seen with watchOS 5?

Perhaps wait until and see what the Series 4 in the Fall? (Assuming there will be a Series 4 announced) It was rumored that they would have additional health sensors alongside a 15% larger display and increased battery life.

Furthermore, with all these health capabilities and measurements/metrics with smart watches today, I question how much the consumer actually even takes advantage of all these capabilities besides tracking steps and heart rate measurements.

 

[denisbarbov]

Perhaps wait until and see what the Series 4 in the Fall? (Assuming there will be a Series 4 announced) It was rumored that they would have additional health sensors alongside a 15% larger display and increased battery life.

Furthermore, with all these health capabilities and measurements/metrics with smart watches today, I question how much the consumer actually even takes advantage of all these capabilities besides tracking steps and heart rate measurements.

That’s what I’m doing. I’ll get the new one when it comes out as I’ve started training seriously and it’s gonna be good to have a tracker.

 

[zhenya]

S3 LTE already is my regular wear and running watch. The only thing I can really ask for improvement-wise is better battery life. I'd like 10 hours of activity. It's at about half that now.

Garmin may have their own payment system, but they are still way behind on the number of banks it is compatible with and hard to see them ever getting everyone on-board. Having to manually load music is so 2003.

 

[Jason Hensley]

I’m not a professional athlete so buying a fitness watch purely for my fitness is a waste of my money, so yeah I’m all AW. It does the job good enough for me. With LTE, I won’t even look away to something else. I’m not sure how many fitness watch give you ability to listen to podcast while running. Probably zero.

This!

I'm with matrix07 here. The LTE capability, plus upcoming Podcast listening is hugely important to me. I love the way Apple has organized their goals into Rings, it motivates me to close them every day, and has made me much healthier. On top of it all, Apple simply releases better products overall. Some competition might have one advantage or two in certain categories, but Apple stuff usually works better. For me, AW all the way. I have an AW3 now, and we'll see if anything is important enough on the AW4 to make the jump.

 

[44267547]

S3 LTE already is my regular wear and running watch. The only thing I can really ask for improvement-wise is better battery life. I'd like 10 hours of activity. It's at about half that now.

Garmin may have their own payment system, but they are still way behind on the number of banks it is compatible with and hard to see them ever getting everyone on-board. Having to manually load music is so 2003.

More of a side note:

Aside from Garmins software being questionable, the battery life on their watches is excellent. The battery life being is adequate when needed, the durability with their watches is something on another level. The Apple Watch is a great fitness device and *all-around* smart watch, but the Garmin watch really is made for triathlons, long-distance runners, etc. Apple Watch will meet most applications for the fitness aspect of things, but Garmin really is more for the extreme measures.

 

[Newtons Apple]

I use my AW for daily use but the Garmin Fenix 5 for all exercise.

Apple needs to step up if it want to replace the most sophisticated fitness watches. I do not think they are serious about doing so.

 

[Jason Hensley]

Having to manually load music is so 2003

This made me LOL!

 

[zhenya]

More of a side note:

Aside from Garmins software being questionable, the battery life on their watches is excellent. The battery life being is adequate when needed, the durability with their watches is something on another level. The Apple Watch is a great fitness device and *all-around* smart watch, but the Garmin watch really is made for triathlons, long-distance runners, etc. Apple Watch will meet most applications for the fitness aspect of things, but Garmin really is more for the extreme measures.

I've used Garmin watches for years. I sold my last couple this spring after realizing I was never using them anymore with the AW. Yes, a Garmin is more durable. In practice, I don't really care. The AW is good enough. I think I qualify as an 'extreme' user - my in-season mileage is 70-90MPW and I am competitive in the most difficult trail races in the region. The only limitation that remains with the AW is the battery life which is not anywhere near enough for ultra distances.

YMMV, but I think the AW is more than up to the task as a full-time running/tri watch for the vast majority of people.

 

[sean000]

To echo what many others have said:
I'm not a competitive athlete, so I do not need health and fitness tracking beyond what the Apple Watch delivers (which is actually quite a lot). I know a competitive athlete who wouldn't think of giving up his Garmin watch, but his needs are different from mine. I just need "good enough" fitness tracking with advanced smartwatch productivity features. That's why the Apple Watch is a good fit for me.

I really like the way Apple is taking the lead in terms of using a smartwatch to detect potential health issues, and to provide data for studies like the one they are undertaking with Stanford Medicine. My lifestyle is a bit healthier than the men in my family who have struggled with heart disease, but I know it's still a concern (because of the family history) even though I eat reasonably well and get a decent amount of regular exercise. Not that other devices can't alert you to unusual activity like tachycardia, but Apple's attention in this area makes me want to support their efforts.

 

[iamasmith]

I compete only with myself and push myself hard sometimes to improve and the Apple Watch really helps with that. I also am very much hooked on Siri activation for setting timers and felt like I had lost a limb when I broke my S3 and was waiting for an AppleCare replacement last year.

At the time I was so peeved that I couldn't get a workable advanced replacement (apparently you have to unpair the watch and leave it unpaired whilst they ship out the replacement or it cancels the replacement... wtf??) I considered various options including Garmin Fenix but ultimately the whole package and in particular Siri and actually cost compared to the Fenix makes the Apple Watch actually extremely good value for money. I have the SS version and that's still great value for money against a decent Fenix.

I'm very much into the challenges and daily goals and definitely make sure that I hit my exercise and move goals although as I start to extend these the regime just doesn't allow for rest days whilst being able to achieve the challenges/badges and I know that as training gets more serious you have to listen to your body and use some carefully planned rests.

I think for now it's AW all the way but never say never.

 

[Knowlege Bomb]

Before my Apple Watch I wore a Garmin Vivosmart on a daily basis. It did a great job tracking steps and delivering my notifications when I was working and not able to pull my phone out of my pocket. The one I had worn for 2+ years crapped out and I had a REALLY hard time finding another one since they had upgraded to the Vivosmart 2 which was terrible.

The replacement I finally finagled had a bad display so I gave up and bought my first Apple Watch. Pretty sure I'll never have a reason to try anything else. Just like iPhones, I tell myself on an annual basis that my current model is perfect and I have no reason to upgrade when the new ones come out so we'll see what happens in the fall.

 

[oeagleo]

Interesting thread. I think I'll chime in here with my experience. I have spent a lot of money trying to find the perfect "fitness watch", and have owned almost all, from Polar, Garmin, Mio, Suunto, and a few "smart Watches", Huawei, etc. I am a "data freak", and really enjoy learning my EPOC, heart rate variability, etc, and an accurate GPS track is crucial. Last fall, I decided that my expenditure on the likes of Garmin's Fenix 5x, and Suunto's Spartan Ultra was simply overkill for a 70 year old man trying to overcome many years of being over 300 pounds, and smoking for 35 years. My knees are shot, but I can still walk with the best of 'em, and ride a bike. My "activities" range from Mall walks, outdoor trail walks on not too difficult trails, gym classes, weights, and the occasional bike ride. Now for the results. Sure, the $600-700 dedicated "sports watches" provide much MORE data, but how accurate? With the Apple Watch, (S3SS), the data is virtually in line with any of the other watches. I use RunGap to export from Apple Health, and import into Suunto's Movescount, or Garmin Connect, and the results are virtually identical to the data I get from the expensive watches. The GPS tracks aren't quite as accurate The metrics once imported into either Movescount (Suunto's website) or Garmin Connect give all the metrics you would need.
So, the bottom line? If you simply need to track calories, steps, and activities, and don't care about things like VO2Max, or EPOC, then the AW will work fine, it did for me for well over a month using only the AW. There ONLY drawback, and the reason I export from AW to other platforms, is that I really like a web based analysis of my metrics, and the ability to see a GPS track on a Satellite view of the route. Otherwise, the AW is an excellent "Fitness" and "Exercise" tracker.

 

[nokkynuk]

I love my Series 3 LTE SG. I would consider moving the Garmin's Forerunner Series if the next two generations of Apple Watch don't innovate to my liking. So far i'm pleased with AW. Garmin's Forerunner series has the "Sports Watch" aesthetic though. Some people prefer that look.

 

[satchmo]

Lots of great comments.
One fitness watch feature I neglected to mention that Apple seems to be moving away from, is physical buttons.
Navigating menus on any watch is difficult enough. And while it sometimes feels like it takes forever to find a section on some Garmin watches, having physical buttons are needed for some activities.
Swiping a watch face may be fine if you're stationary, but more difficult on a run or swim. Or if you have sweaty fingers, it's challenging at times to stop a timed run.

I've always wondered why Garmin's don't have a combination of both. Garmin Vivoactive 3 has touch screen but limited with just one button, while Forerunner has 4 buttons but no touch screen. Meanwhile Apple is rumoured to go all solid state with taptic feedback 'buttons'. Maybe this is the answer. All I know is it's more reassuring when I depress a button and can easily stop and start my run.

 

[Newtons Apple]

Not for fitness. Just got the new Garmin Fenix 5 Plus Saphire. My AW has never been able to track my HR, the Garmin never fails.

 

[nokkynuk]

Not for fitness. Just got the new Garmin Fenix 5 Plus Saphire. My AW has never been able to track my HR, the Garmin never fails.

You should do a thorough review and compare with AW and let us know!

 

[zhenya]

I will admit I am a bit concerned about the rumored change to haptic side buttons. It's the physical feedback of the current buttons allowing me to confidently pause/resume a workout or a lap that makes the AW workable now. Given my experience with the haptic buttons on the iPhone, I'm not totally convinced it's going to work - IMO the haptic button on the phone was a definite step back. Fine in some circumstances. Useless in others.

 

[matrix07]

Lots of great comments.
One fitness watch feature I neglected to mention that Apple seems to be moving away from, is physical buttons.
Navigating menus on any watch is difficult enough. And while it sometimes feels like it takes forever to find a section on some Garmin watches, having physical buttons are needed for some activities.
Swiping a watch face may be fine if you're stationary, but more difficult on a run or swim. Or if you have sweaty fingers, it's challenging at times to stop a timed run.

I've always wondered why Garmin's don't have a combination of both. Garmin Vivoactive 3 has touch screen but limited with just one button, while Forerunner has 4 buttons but no touch screen. Meanwhile Apple is rumoured to go all solid state with taptic feedback 'buttons'. Maybe this is the answer. All I know is it's more reassuring when I depress a button and can easily stop and start my run.

Right now you can press crown & side button at the same time to pause your run.

In a few months time you can just lift your wrist & say stop the run.

These are easy enough for me.

 

[BlueMoon63]

More of a side note:

Aside from Garmins software being questionable, the battery life on their watches is excellent. The battery life being is adequate when needed, the durability with their watches is something on another level. The Apple Watch is a great fitness device and *all-around* smart watch, but the Garmin watch really is made for triathlons, long-distance runners, etc. Apple Watch will meet most applications for the fitness aspect of things, but Garmin really is more for the extreme measures.

I wonder how long the Apple Watch battery would last if it was as big as half the fitness specific devices. Sometimes it is misleading (not you) to want the Apple Watch to last as long as some of these devices when it can be half the size. And then people want smaller and always on display.

Many times these devices that last so much longer have a battery double or triple the size and they also don’t do much else.

Hopefully someday the AW will last twice as long with full gps, Bluetooth playback, always on display and smaller.

 

[Mad Mac Maniac]

Not sure how many stream podcasts...but downloading and playback for sure.

Are you sure about that? I’m not up to date on the latest WearOS watches but I’m pretty sure none of the fitness watches (Fitbit, garmin, etc) can download podcasts. And Google didn’t even have a podcast app on android until just like yesterday (or maybe only announced, but not released) so I doubt they had one on their watches...

 

[Newtons Apple]

You should do a thorough review and compare with AW and let us know!

The Garmin is too big for everyday use, only when running. The AW is worn the rest of the time. Tire of looking down and seeing my AW with 00 for my HR.