by electric_muse
13 subcomments
- Garmin’s hardware has always been exceptionally good, given epic battery life (~30 days even with all-day heart rate), exceptional sensors, and durability.
Their software has traditionally been pretty rough. That’s coming from a customer and developer. Mainly that was because they had various software platforms for various families of device, so each feature needed to be built for each family of watch separately.
They’ve unified that now to one main platform (picking the Forerunner’s platform), so it will be very interesting to see if they narrow the gap with Apple around software.
The next big innovation will likely be sensors. This still uses the elevate 5 sensor that launched a few years ago.
- And...I could not care less. Garmin needs to fix their software, I am a long time garmin user, from using garmin head units on mountain bikes for the last 30 years, using garmin watches, I have had 4 fenix watches over the years, I swapped to a Apple watch ultra this year, and as a ultra distance trail runner and mountain biker, I could not be happier. Yes, the garmin units are more rugged and can handle more abuse, yes, their battery is light years ahead, but, it does not really matter anymore, the apple watch ultra is tough enough and the battery good enough, and the software is so much better. I can download multiple different running apps, and follow a training plan with it (runna workoutoutdoors, or one of the many other ones), I can do my cross training using one of the lifting apps, like heavy or strong, I can use it with golf etc. yes, the fenix range can do all of that aswell, but the experience is just so much nicer on the ultra. I struggle to see, how garmin can compete software wise, as a single company battling the army of independant developers out there building iOS/watchOS apps. And more importantly, my ultra never crash, my fenix went through a phase, where it would randomly reboot, until garmin pushed a fix. Bugs happen, I get it, but...it's been happening now for years with garmin.
- If you've got a Garmin device check out GarminDB [0]. Garmin actually exposes an API that you can access with your credentials and get the raw activity, heart rate, etc data.
[0]: https://github.com/tcgoetz/GarminDB
by endorphine
0 subcomment
- Side: The 15.05 firmware upgrade is causing severe battery drain in some models. From 8 days battery life it got down to 1. Multiple reports can be found here[1].
Support's response is "go to your region-local support shop".
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Garmin/comments/1mspank/venu_3_seve...
by bastawhiz
4 subcomments
- As someone who isn't the target market for this, is there significant demand for this? $1200 for a smart watch that'll be e-waste in a few years is steep, plus $8/mo to keep it working (though I guess if you're going to pay four figures for a smart watch the $96/yr probably makes no difference).
I guess if you intend to carry a watch anyway, you can save the few ounces and leave your phone at home? And maybe a few ounces for a battery pack to charge a phone? But at the same time, the absolute last time I'd ever want to be tapping out a text message on my watch is when I'm in need of rescue through satellite message. In the most genuine sense possible, I really don't know who the actual target audience is that's not just buying it for the clout.
- I feel like Garmin watches are kind of slept on by normies. They seem to have a niche for fitness enthusiasts. I got one primarily because it looks like a normal watch and not a tech product. But I do appreciate the fitness tracking.
I've had the same one for 5 years and it's still solid.
by torstenvl
5 subcomments
- Still waiting on literally anyone but Apple to make a fitness watch/tracker that syncs over Bluetooth.
(Stealing the cellular data connection over Bluetooth to sync to the cloud does not count. True Bluetooth sync works when there is no cell service.)
- The coverage map isn't that impressive though: https://www.garmin.com/en-US/connectivity/fenix8pro/coverage...
They're using geostationary satellites, but their Inreach stuff is using Iridium. Anyone know which satellites they're using for this, and if the coverage can be expected to increase in the future?
by KaiserPro
1 subcomments
- I'm assuming from the blurb that its for emergencies, which makes sense.
But, given the amount of power that needs to be emitted from that watch to make it to the Satellite I assume you need to take it off your wrist first?
by vjvjvjvjghv
0 subcomment
- The price is a little steep and I wonder how well a watch with its smaller antenna will work in difficult terrain. My InReach Mini often doesn’t connect in narrow canyons and I assume the smaller watch will be even worse. An emergency device that doesn’t work in an emergency is pretty useless. That’s why the iPhone satellite messaging doesn’t work for me either. In my backcountry tests it was a crapshoot whether it worked or didn’t.
by chaseadam17
0 subcomment
- I frequently leave my phone at home and rely on my Apple Watch for the occasional texts, map, etc. I’d prefer a Garmin but not being able to use your existing phone number is a dealbreaker.
- They also beat Apple to market a smartwatch with microLED.
by bobmcnamara
0 subcomment
- Dup? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45118469
- Technically the Garmin Forerunner 945 LTE existed years ago.
- I got really disappointed in Apple's hardware when my mom bought an Apple Watch.
The software is entirely user-unfriendly. For one example: she wanted to use a photo as the standard background image. However, the clock digits could only be positioned such that they appeared over the faces in the photo. I cannot believe that Apple created such bad UX. This is really amateur level.
- Illegal in India?
- So did Google..
by diego_moita
2 subcomments
- > starting at $1,200
So I am not their target market. I'll stick with Pebble, then.
by curtisszmania
0 subcomment
- [dead]
- [flagged]
Hacker News