Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

jooonas.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–108 of 108 posts

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#101

Post by zikduruqe »

D13Fd wrote: post #98
zikduruqe wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The other big benefit I see is cellular. This. I seldom if ever leave the house with a phone during a normal day or on my bike rides. I use my Apple Watch SE on moderate rides (50 to 100 miles), use NFC during rest stops, and pull up the occasional map when I forget a turn. Cellular is a big plus. And if one day in the future, I can get a cellular enabled Apple Watch that is standalone and not dependent on having a…

> if one day in the future, I can get a cellular enabled Apple Watch that is standalone and not dependent on having an iPhone Not sure what you mean here, but right now Apple Watch cellular models can be set up to be independent of the iPhone that set them up (meaning a different number & alerts), although you are still reliant on having that phone to configure them.

You, as a consumer that does not have an iPhone, cannot walk into a store and buy an Apple Watch that is cellular enabled/activated. You have to have an iPhone to have it provisioned and configured.

In my perfect world, I purchase a cellular enabled Apple Watch, login to some eSIM provider portal or Apple, provide them my MEID and then the watch provisions. Then I can configure notifications, apps, etc... via iCloud.com or from my MacBook.

I honestly do not need a mobile phone at this point in my life and my Apple Watch is just absolutely perfect for my day to day needs outside the home.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#102

Post by bydo »

exabrial wrote: post #22
infotogivenm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree on every point except sunsetting in 12 months. What are you referencing there? They just this year sunset new OS versions for the Apple Watch 3, which was released in 2017 (the 4 came out in 2018).

Why are they sunsetting devices that still boot and literally just work fine? So wasteful.

Do you remember when Garmin made phones? Maybe not, because it was only for a year. They released their flagship Nuvifone with much fanfare (to T-Mobile customers, anyway) in June of 2010. They announced that they were withdrawing from the phone market that October. To be fair, they did release one update after that.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#103

Post by theklr »

I get what they’re going for but apple made it clear with two things he’s not the target audience (yet):

- cellular only (first in this space that no one speaks of with this battery capacity)

- them catering to planners/trainers in their adversing.

Sure Apple is pricey and they don’t make for everyone, but no one markets with bullseyes like Apple in tech. I hope Garmin truly welcomes the competition. It’s getting sad and I would love pressure on Apple to really continue attempting to push the space of wearables and not get idle from being on a market island

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#104

Post by theklr »

larsnystrom wrote: post #28
infotogivenm wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree on every point except sunsetting in 12 months. What are you referencing there? They just this year sunset new OS versions for the Apple Watch 3, which was released in 2017 (the 4 came out in 2018).

Not OP, but Apple has been selling Apple Watch series 3 as a new device in 2022, so people who bought it got less than a year of software updates.

It will still get security updates, but the hardware is a the point of no new support. If you don’t need those features in newer watches it makes a perfect device keep track of kids/elderly who don’t need all the bells and whistles

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#105

Post by ghaff »

D13Fd wrote: post #97
Woeps wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meh.... 18 hours vs 18 days of battery life and an ridiculous price gap. I think that's all that needs to be said.

The vast majority of people who walk are those doing long walks or day hikes rather than multi-day hikes. That's the audience Apple is targeting here. That fits my use. I go on 1- to 4-hour walks pretty regularly and the existing Apple Watch is already helpful for rough distance/time/calorie tracking. If the Apple Watch didn't exist, I'd probably have a Garmin, but I'm pretty happy with the "good enough" tracking fea…

People need to understand the advertising is mostly aspirational. Just like most GoPro buyers film their trip down the intermediate downhill ski slope, not over a waterfall in a kayak or base jumping.

The extra battery life of the Ultra will be nice as will the new apps. Garmin still makes more serious "adventure" watches but for really hard-core mountaineering, I'm not sure to what degree people actually depend on watches that still need periodic charging.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#106

Post by ghaff »

_fat_santa wrote: post #96
totetsu wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people buying the Garmin are only using it for day hikes, or a few day trips where they're taking along a mobile battery anyway to charge their phone to take photos. I'd guess the % of people who need 18 days of battery life is very small.

> I'd guess the % of people who need 18 days of battery life is very small. It's not that you will need 18 days of battery life, it's simply knowing that you have it there. If you're going off for 3-4 days on a hike, there's a possibility your trip is getting extended by bad weather, wild animals, and whatnot. Knowing that's a possibility you always pack extra gear, and the idea of your main map on the trail dying is…

I would hope they have a paper map and compass as well (and probably a phone). The actual map on any smartwatch isn't super useful.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#107

Post by kylehotchkiss »

Woeps wrote: post #79
nharada wrote: post #70

Comments in this thread are fairly dismissive of the Ultra as a serious competitor for Garmin's high end sport watches, and this article seems like an example of it not stacking up. But if I was Garmin I'd be terrified of Apple coming into the space. I was at Fitbit when the first Apple watch came out, and we laughed at how inferior it was to many of our products for the first several releases. Then around series 3 w…

Meh.... 18 hours vs 18 days of battery life and an ridiculous price gap. I think that's all that needs to be said.

I bet apple has a solar charger of some sort sitting in a table in their R&D department now: maybe it’s a strap, maybe it’s under the screen? I’m thinking it’ll just be for the watch and not the phones (they get too hot sitting in the sun) I think we’ll see it when satellite SOS comes to the watch.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#108

Post by kristofferR »

Woeps wrote: post #79
nharada wrote: post #70

Comments in this thread are fairly dismissive of the Ultra as a serious competitor for Garmin's high end sport watches, and this article seems like an example of it not stacking up. But if I was Garmin I'd be terrified of Apple coming into the space. I was at Fitbit when the first Apple watch came out, and we laughed at how inferior it was to many of our products for the first several releases. Then around series 3 w…

Meh.... 18 hours vs 18 days of battery life and an ridiculous price gap. I think that's all that needs to be said.

Getting these vibes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eywi0h_Y5_U
Post reply on HN