Bluetooth does not work very well at this point on bikes where there are multiple radios. (Power meter, HRM, Speed sensor, electronic shifting. phone connection, music, etc) multiple connection losses and dropouts make it a frustrating experience. You won’t see BT replacing ANT + anytime soon for these applications. In addition BT consumes a lot of battery resources.
1 Like
It would also be nice since Apple Health will support cycling power if TR would actually sync to Apple Health.
2 Likes
Apple Watch is rubbish for cycling they can’t even introduce stop detection. They did for runners, stop at lights, etc and you end up with an average speed of 11 mph. I asked Apple for stop detection in one ear and out the other. This will take a lot of convincing.
Apple isn’t going to respond to users. Heck they don’t even respond to developers. They operate under radio silence.
If running has stop detection then I bet that cycling will too. It’s just a matter of time.
Apple has been doing Bluetooth connectivity for I think two decades now. Bluetooth connectivity generally just works, I can only remember one time where I had Bluetooth connectivity problems with my iPhone after an OS update. And this is really table stakes and not an issue.
Yes, but sports watches sell in much smaller quantities than Apple Watches, and Apple takes the oxygen from the room.
Basically, Garmin’s problem will be that many customers who start to get into sports will already own an Apple Watch since this is the best smartwatch on the market. And if it can do most of the things a Garmin/Polar/Suntoo sports watch can do, which are at the same time not great smart watches, many people won’t even consider a Garmin watch in the first place. For a small percentage of the market, the extra features may still matter. But I think this percentage is shrinking.
Two things: I think having one more option to do your workouts is great. And yes, perhaps an Apple Watch isn’t ideal for 30-30s outdoors, but what about endurance rides? I’d find them more relaxing if I didn’t have to look at my head unit all the time.
Moreover, taptic feedback is a killer feature for people with e. g. vision impairment.
Yes, but I think the air is getting thinner and thinner for Garmin. E. g. Apple’s running features seem to work really well and how serious do you have to be until you can leverage the extra functionality that Garmin (and other sports-first) watches afford you?
Moreover, there is important functionality that Garmin watches do not have (with the exception of a few expensive models), e. g. cellular support. That’s one of the main reasons why I would like an Apple Watch when I am out and about. Coupled with e. g. automated fall detection or close iPhone integration and you have a big advantage over Garmin et al.
No, I am sure Garmin has been concerned about Apple’s moves for some years. They know Apple’s track record. E. g. when they introduced running power, it just worked and produced consistent results compared to its competitors with good working running power features.
Garmin is like a PC company selling desktops in 2002–2004 whereas Apple is focussing on selling laptops. All the same arguments are trotted out from desktop lovers: you can’t get real work done on a puny laptop, they are too weak. The screens suck. You cannot expand them. But the desktop market share is definitely shrinking, because laptops are just getting better and better with time. Garmin knows this, and they are preparing for it — especially since many of the missing features can be added by way of a free software update.
In my opinion Garmin will eventually have to make a decision, and as far as I can tell they have three options:
- They make their own OS platform geared towards sports devices.
- They adopt Google’s Wear OS for their mainstream devices.
- They create apps for Watch OS, iOS, wear OS and Android.
All of these have trade-offs and would require a substantial change in how the company operates and sees itself. E. g. it may not have the capital to develop their own OS that has feature parity for all features that count. Becoming an app likewise sucks. As does adopting someone else’s OS (since you are not in control of where the journey is headed and you may be commoditized out of existence).
1 Like
You can now record most (all?) relevant data in a triathlon on a single device. You could still use a headunit for dual recording and displaying information.
I have all of these sensors on my bike connected to my iPhone or iPad via Bluetooth and to my Wahoo using Ant+. It just works, indoors, outdoors, even when the microwave is running (which uses the same frequency range as Bluetooth and wifi).
The only advantage of Ant+ over Bluetooth is that it is a 1-to-N connection, whereas Bluetooth is 1-to-1 and when Bluetooth devices are paired to multiple devices (e. g. your iPhone and your iPad), they will often connect to the first device they come across, which isn’t the device that you want.
I mean, that’s true of every workout device ever.
I’ve never really understood this complaint. Not saying it’s not a valid one, but I love looking at my head unit. I love all the data. I literally buy the biggest one I can get so I can see more data fields more easily. And if I don’t want to look at it, I just don’t. It’s kind of like the “will TR hide my HR” posts. I can’t imagine wanting to hide my data.
I’m not an Apple Watch hater. I bought one of the first ones. My wife is on her second one. My daughter has one, but she’s a teenager so she never wears it. I think AW is great. I just don’t see it in any way as a replacement for a head unit. Especially with its battery. AW WILL be the winner some day, but until you don’t have to do daily charging, I won’t be buying one. This is another one where I guess I’m not like most people. I HATED having to charge my watch multiple times a day. I know it’s gotten a little better, but it’s not even close to what you can get from a Fenix/Forerunner/Epix.
2 Likes
I think we need to split two arguments:
- Smart/sports watch as a replacement for a head unit.
- Smart/sports watch augmenting a head unit.
I was primarily talking about scenario 2. E. g. triathletes record their race with a watch and they typically also have a head unit. Now they could do that with an Apple Watch, too, and not just with a Garmin/Suntoo/etc.
Another one is where you e. g. record commutes or other rides where seeing your data might not be important in the moment. E. g. if I go mountain biking to practice my technical skills I might not need to look at heart rate, power and the like. Or for a mellow endurance ride along a known route, which I basically only record to, well, keep a record and check data like IF, TSS, etc. after the ride.
You might also want to do some dual recording, because, ahem, TrainerRoad does not integrate with Apple Health yet. (I know other people dual record for all sorts of reasons.)
It could also be an option for people who don’t yet have a head unit.
That’s a thing of the past. My wife’s SE lasts >1 day, including on days when she goes to the gym. It replaced her AW 3 after many years of faithful service.
PS I haven’t owned any smart or sports watch. My only two watches are mechanical or quartz.
1 Like
Yeah, if you’re looking to integrate as a triathlete or dual record, I get it. I just can’t imagine how inconvenient it is to look at your wrist every 10 seconds during a workout.
My Fenix 6, with everything turned on, lasts 10 days, and it’s a generation behind.
1 Like
Like I wrote, I think you could use a combination of taptic feedback (a great option for e. g. visually impaired TR users) and announcements.
Yes, I understand, but I think the market that really needs more battery life than the Apple Watch offers gets ever smaller. By and large, a very big share of smart watch customers are fine with charging it daily or every second day.
I get that increasing battery life by an order of magnitude really changes how you use the device. On the other hand, you pay a price for this (e. g. AFAIK I cannot use a Garmin smartwatch to pay for my subway fare here in Japan).
Personally, I’d like 3ish days, not because I need that much, but so that the battery lasts longer. What did my wife’s Apple Watch 3 in was just the battery. Having it replaced would have cost us about 1/2 of a new Apple Watch. With 3ish days of battery life, battery life (as in how many years the battery lasts before it exceeds about 1,000 charge cycles) will be three times as long.
1 Like
You are a hardcore apple fan. 
There are many people who don’t really care about a smart watch. I personally don’t see the point on having an apple watch (my wife has one, my kids want one). Garmin is by far a better platform for the vast majority of people who do endurance sports…
Yes, the apple is nicer looking and yes it’s a premium watch with better screens and apps… I know
But in the realm of sports is apple the one trying to catch up to Garmin not the other way around. If I was a Garmin executive, i would be worried about apple, but not to the point of panicking yet. The day apple delivers a watch that can do sports the way Garmin does (and they are getting closer with every iteration and software update) AND also deliver an experience where I don’t need to charge my watch every other day (yes I know apple has the ultra with a 800 price tag) for something a price closer to a forerunner 265, then i would panic. But they are still far.
What i can see apple doing to fuck everyone up is create apple watch sports that would be closer to a Garmin watch than an apple watch… But maybe not… Apple want industries to change to what apple does, not the other way around.
I can see the parallel between early 2000s Garmin and the start of the smart phone industry…
But I think this is not the same. The space is big enough to have both smart watches and sport tracking watches. No need for one watch to both badly. I rather see apple keep doing a great smart watch that can track sports, and Garmin (and others) doing a sport tracking watch that will notify me of calls and messages.
2 Likes
Don’t get two wrapped in where we are, Apple is a creeping domination
I was a Garmin man through and through (apart from a little detour to Karoo recently but I came back after getting wrapped up in everybody elses fear about battery life) and Currently use a 1040 (went to Karoo and 1040 for the large screen size) and had a Fenix on my wrist
About a year ago I changed my blood glucose monitoring to Dexcom and got a free Apple 7 from Vitality (the workouts coming off my Garmin payed for it) I thought I was going to be only using the Apple on the bike when I would be using the 1040 to record the ride, the Apple Watch would allow me to view me BG levels easily
I started wearing the AW more and more, as I use the functionality more and more, I released that I was only wearing the Fenix because it looked like a “mans watch”, battery life didn’t bother me, I just got into the habit of charging it when I has a bath or shower (you know, to wash), about a month ago I upgraded to a Ultra (the programmable button, helps with my eye site and the dexcom app) and can’t think of a reason to wear the Fenix, and record all my MTB rides on the Apple now
I expect that the one thing that kept with TR (AIFTP) is under threat, and if they release a iPhone rugged edition, suitable to be used as a bike computer, all within a few months of buying a 1040
2 Likes
Apple actually added auto-pause to cycling with the launch of WatchOS 9 last year. They also added a plethora of new screens to the cycling workout function that are all customizable. Battery life has also become a non issue with my Ultra.
Really the only thing it’s missing at this point is support for power/cadence sensors and that seems like something they’re resolving with the new version of WatchOS this fall.
While I’m thinking I probably still wouldn’t want to do TR workouts with my watch, for everything else it’s going to be great.
Fwiw, there’s actually already a watch app called “WorkOutDoors” that can read my power meter that I’ve played around with. It works pretty well, but the app itself seems to crash on occasion so I’ve decided not to use it. Having power support with the native app should solve this problem.
EDIT: I also prefer not to use my watch for navigation. It works fine, but I tend to miss turns when it’s not right in front of me.
1 Like
Throwing the Apple fanboi label around is so 2001 
Like I wrote before, I don’t own a smart/sports watch, neither from Apple nor anyone else. However, my wife has one (I married a nerd) and my dad has one (fall detection and emergency button).
Apple sells something like 40 million Apple Watches each year and have >1 billion iOS users. Most of these people don’t have a strong opinion on any of this.
Really? I neither have an Apple Watch nor any Garmin product, just a Wahoo Elemnt Bolt, a Polar heart rate strap and a Wahoo speed sensor. What should I do?
No, seriously, I think there are fewer and fewer features that make Garmin stand out, especially once you consider the fact that you can run apps on the Apple Watch to get e. g. recovery metrics. Maybe Garmin does a better job, but how much better? What about next year, how quickly can Apple catch up vs. Garmin innovate? Garmin isn’t just up against Apple, but Apple plus the entire app ecosystem. Moreover, let’s be charitable and say that developing easy-to-use UIs hasn’t been Garmin’s strong suit in the past.
All of this sounds like I want Garmin to fail, quite the contrary. When Wahoo came unto the scene, they made their head units easier to use. When it comes to competition, they have to figure out how to go about it. I’m curious what they will do.
I think Garmin executives are much more worried than you are and have been for several years. They know Apple Watch sales have been eating into the size of their addressable market for several years, and most features can be added by a simple software update. People at Garmin are not dumb. They for sure don’t want to end up like Blackberry. Other products are impacted as well, gadgets like their emergency satellite beacons have been commoditized to some degree if you are on the latest iPhone.
@dcrainmaker has dropped hints several times that the people at Garmin know. AFAIK Ray also rents out his consultancy skills and they just have to listen to his reviews of watchOS and the Apple Watch du jour.
I don’t think Garmin has shown their hand yet, but If I had to bet people at Garmin are very concerned and know they cannot and should not compete symmetrically with Apple. I want them to survive, because competition and niche products are a good thing. And I am super excited to see what they have in store 
That’s the problem, those aren’t two separate markets, though: smart watches are a subset of sport tracking watching, though: any smartwatch can do fitness tracking. Only if you go towards the extreme ends (e. g. triathlons), then regular smart watches might not have the battery life you need.
The difference, I guess, is that Garmin has plenty of other products, many of which are beyond Apple’s scope (e. g. maritime and aeronautic navigation). Just read @WombleHunter’s post to see how easy it is to get squeezed out. If I had a smartwatch, I could listen to podcasts, music, pay with them, place calls, etc.
Yes, indeed, there is an app for that. Is that the one you use? (I’m also asking for a friend with a son who has type 1 diabetes.)
I wish there was more competition in the smart watch market. But wear OS seems to be a rounding error in the smart watch sales numbers.
I think you’re way off here…but we’ve already discussed that. I just keep pointing it out because I believe you’re VASTLY underestimating the people who want a sports watch that you don’t have to charge every day.
2 Likes
record your cycle rides on it ? So screen size isn’t a issue ?
Fo
I am wearing a Dexcom G6 (not gone to G7 yet as don’t want unknowns in the middle of the season / events) so I use the Dexcom app, it gives me blood sugars in real rime (or 5 min intervals) with additional notification, it works brilliantly, life changing, you can get data field for Garmin IQ, but it’s a data field so can’t be used as part of the watch face, and it only works with a phone signal, doesn’t update if you are out of signal which is often the case in Gravel / MTB events, my next one is in Iceland so I will be relying on my AW a lot
I think this is the great thing about the AW it can be what you want it to be, I have HRV4Training, Trainnow and Athlytic, AutoSleep (does HRV as well) not tide to BodyBattery or Whoop
I know that my reason for moving to AW is unique (or it’s easy to dismiss it that way) but as a endurance athlete (my shortest even this year was 4.5 hours, my longest will be 11) I feel myself moving more towards apple at the moment, but I do feel that the whole “battery thing” is just standard use case, people will buy Suntoo, Polar e.t.c for a specific use case, and Garmin Battery life is another one, if you don’t want to take you watch off when you have a shower or bath (and charge it, thats how long AW takes to charge) don’t , watches / computers are just tools for getting the job done, just get on with it, we don’t need to justify our choices , just be aware that somebody might be improving their tools quicker and making something that is a better fit for you than you think (it doesn’t mater if you stay with what you have, people are still buying Casio calculator watches for god sake)
2 Likes
I don’t understand why people keep saying this. You can not fully charge an Apple Watch in 10 minutes.
1 Like
I charge mine every time I have a shower or bath, I never have to charge it outside this, maybe I don’t take it off the last second before I get in the shower, maybe I don’t put it straight away, maybe because I do it every time it doesn’t go down to Zero (AW7 lasts about 2 day Ultra about 2.5) so doesn’t have to fully change (AW7 goes from 20% to 100% in 25 mins
Works for me
1 Like
It seems only the 7/8 and Ultra support fast charging. An older edition or the SE will need an hour or two on the charger.
1 Like
No, you can’t fully charge it in 10 minutes, but if you charge it while you shower, and you shower every day, then you’re not charging it from zero every time. When I had an Apple Watch with the fast charger, I charged it from around 60% back to 90% or so in the time it takes me to shower, more than enough to get a couple more days of charge.
3 Likes