this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2023
87 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37573 readers
386 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Apple Watch.
I had a couple of Garmins before and the difference is night and day. The Apple Watch isn't perfect, but it's clear that a lot of thought went into it.
The Garmins on the other hand, were lowest of low effort.
They blatantly didn't talk to even a single cyclists while building their cycling app.
Cyclists use average speed, not pace. Even the junkiest $3 cycle computer from Ali Baba gets this right, but not Garmin. They just copy-pasted the running screen.
This is a troll comment.
Let’s review: has “had a couple of Garmins”, but doesn’t know that both speed and lap speed are default data fields in the bike activity. And can be trivially changed to average speed or essentially a bazillion other types of data (HR, power etc) in a highly customisable way.
Pretty sure my Garmin does pace for cycling. You bed to get a multisport watch from them first. The Forerunner watches are going to be focused on running obviously. Fenix line should do average speed
They were Vivoactives. They had pace, not average speed.
Regardless of what the focus of the watch is, the cycling app should show cycling stats.
It's incredibly low effort to get something so basic wrong.
Seems like your post was incredibly low effort, as the Vivoactive (all the way back to the blocky original) supported speed fields.
https://averagejoecyclist.com/how-to-use-garmin-vivoactive-3-record-bike-ride/
Oh, that's interesting. I was under the impression that Garmin was best for the actual fitness stuff, but this is good to know
Nah you’re right and this person has obviously never used a Garmin.
The Apple Watch is a great smartwatch though and solid for sports. My wife has one and loves it. I’m on the Garmin side, so we’re always comparing.
Garmins are smart fitness watches, not smart watches.
I have a forerunner 255 and it's amazing for hiking and running which is what I do most times. I can also take calls and see notifications which is all I need and the battery life is amazing.