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

Garmin's –$40B Pivot

readtrung.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 317 posts

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#211

Post by LandR »

The_Colonel wrote: post #38
LandR wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always thought resting heart rate while sleeping was a pointless metric ? YOu can have a resting heart rate while sleeping in the 30s, yet your real resting heart rate in the 60s. I don't need a watch to tell me if I was sleeping or not, I was there, I know if I was sleeping... I also don't see the point if it telling me if I got enough sleep or not. Again, I know if I didn't get enough sleep as I'm tired... I also…

You remember when you fell asleep? I don't. Watch tracks how often you wake up, how long you spend in the deep sleep, etc. A lot of value is in the long term trends. One bad night doesn't mean much but if our sleep quality is trending down over weeks, it's a sign you should change something.

If I'm watching a film, yes... I know if I've fallen asleep and missed half of it!

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#212

Post by LandR »

iamacyborg wrote: post #113
The_Colonel wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You remember when you fell asleep? I don't. Watch tracks how often you wake up, how long you spend in the deep sleep, etc. A lot of value is in the long term trends. One bad night doesn't mean much but if our sleep quality is trending down over weeks, it's a sign you should change something.

> You remember when you fell asleep? I don't. Watch tracks how often you wake up, how long you spend in the deep sleep, etc. Anecdotally, this is very inaccurate for me.

Yeah, plenty times I've got up during the night multiple times, sometimes out of bed entirely wand walking about and the watch hasn't realised this at all.

Similarly I've been in bed, awake, reading, unable to sleep and the watch has thought I was sleeping.

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#213

Post by tra3 »

fiftyfifty wrote: post #146
NoboruWataya wrote: post #14

Interesting article. My partner bought an Apple watch a couple of years ago and I was shocked at what a poor value proposition it was. Very expensive and wouldn't even hold a charge for a day. I guess you get used to it but having to charge my watch every day would drive me mad. Obviously there are things it will do better than a Garmin (and things it can do that a Garmin simply can't) but overall it didn't make sens…

I've been using a Garmin Forerunner GPS watch for years, and what I've found I like the most about it is actually the Garmin Connect app on my phone. I don't think Garmin gets enough credit as a software shop. Connect is a great application for tracking your workouts over time. A fair number of runners even use Garmin's workout plans from the app. Even compared to running apps exclusively for iOS and Android I think…

What's more, Garmin has an API so you can pull your data and analyze it locally. It's pretty neat.

See garmindb: https://github.com/tamkaho/GarminDB

You can get a rolling average of your stress for example, or your sleep times.

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#214

Post by 827a »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #10
hx833001 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ultra has better battery life, most people don’t wear a watch while sleeping, so it’s easy to charge at night like you do with a phone anyway. It also enables you to do almost everything essential in terms of communication without a phone if you want to leave it. Garmin watches do not.

I thought the sleep tracking and resting heart rate tracking is one of the most important features of a smartwatch. pretty sure most garmin users wear them at night for these reasons.

[dead]

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#215

Post by bwanab »

One has to wonder about this kind of turnaround that happened simultaneously with Blackberry's corporate implosion which were mostly due to the same exogenous factors.

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#216

Post by 827a »

dagw wrote: post #25
cassianoleal wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Ultra is the most bizarre in the lineup. It's marketed at extreme adventurers, mountaineers, extreme hikers, etc. For that demographic, battery life of less than at least a week is a non-starter, not to mention 100% button navigation as opposed to touchscreen + dial. Those are really hard to operate whilst wearing thick gloves.

I know several people who own the Ultra, and while they are all 'outdoorsy' sort of people, none of them are even close to 'extreme'. The market more likely is people that see themselves as "extreme adventurers, mountaineers, extreme hikers, etc", despite mostly doing half day rides at the nearest mountain biking trail, national park hikes where they spend one night in a cabin, and a weekend snow boarding at a ski re…

[dead]

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#217

Post by superq »

rcMgD2BwE72F wrote: post #194
transpute wrote: post #49

Garmin: - sells an accurate blood pressure cuff with WiFi data sync (sans phone) - is an active R&D contributor to OpenEmbedded Linux - includes optional health data sync to vertically integrated cloud - provides open FIT [1] protocol for local data sync [1] https://developer.garmin.com/fit/protocol

Yet I can't use my new Forerunner 55 watch without connecting it to Garmin servers. They make sure it takes about an hour to have a reliable GPS position unless your make it regularly connect to an active Garmin account, either via Garmin Express (dekstop) or Garmin Connect. I switch to GadgetBridge but without updating the AGPS files, no reliable GPS. How open of them.

I was seriously looking at their Tactix 7 Pro Ballistics watch. But, yeah, that's a total no-go for me then too.

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#218

Post by mtalantikite »

sylens wrote: post #70
NoboruWataya wrote: post #14

Interesting article. My partner bought an Apple watch a couple of years ago and I was shocked at what a poor value proposition it was. Very expensive and wouldn't even hold a charge for a day. I guess you get used to it but having to charge my watch every day would drive me mad. Obviously there are things it will do better than a Garmin (and things it can do that a Garmin simply can't) but overall it didn't make sens…

The Apple Watch is also a terribly designed device for running. Too much of its functions rely on interacting with the touchscreen, something you are either unable to do with sweaty hands when running or don't want to do as it draws your attention away for a prolonged amount of time and hurts your form. Garmin's unwavering commitment to physical buttons and how you can customize what they do is what makes them the go…

Genuinely curious, what do you need to change mid-run on your watch? I set an apple music playlist to start, open a run on WorkOutDoors, and go. I really am only interested in heart rate, distance traveled and pace. And if I need to stop for anything walking back to my apartment after a session I have apple pay.

Granted, I'm not a serious runner, I only do it as a supplement for my muay thai training (i.e. I'm only running 5-8k at like a 4'30" or so pace). So I guess I'm interested in what runners who are running as their primary sport like about the Garmin, as I often hear people say the Garmin is so much better.

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#219

Post by layer8 »

rm445 wrote: post #185
maskull wrote: post #2

I'm amazed apple has got by with a 3/4 day charge for 10 generations while garmin has had products with a 7+ day charge for years.

Once you give up sleep tracking as a feature, it doesn't matter too much as people can charge their watch nightly. I'm very much on the other side of that decision - I find sleep tracking to be a killer feature, but you can see how Apple got away with it.

From my research, none of the available sleep tracking solutions are reliable, unless you attach electrodes to your head. When using multiple sleep tracking solutions in parallel, they all report significantly different results.

Re: Garmin's –$40B Pivot

#220

Post by RandallBrown »

eduction wrote: post #202

I felt personally trolled when he said Google Maps launched after the iPhone lol. If you’re not old like me, know that Google Maps launched in 2005 a couple years before the iPhone. It launched on the web and was lauded for its pioneering degree of interactivity (aided by then-new technology “AJAX”). Presumably he means Google Maps app for the iPhone/Android.

The original iPhone's maps app was Google Maps.
Post reply on HN