this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2023
125 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37699 readers
280 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.
Oh, that's interesting. I was under the impression that Garmin was best for the actual fitness stuff, but this is good to know
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.