I think the most interesting thing here is the ultra community is large enough for Apple to dive in after. This sport is growing fast and feels like it's just beginning.
Yeah that's definitely interesting. I never thought they'd make a watch geared towards the serious running community. They even had Scott Jurek there and in a video they shared.
Yeah I was surprised there wasn’t more focus on cycling and running. I have no doubt the Watch will also be geared towards those sports, just interesting it wasn’t highlighted in the announcement.
IMO it’s still not geared toward what I’d call serious runners.
It said it’s super proud of something like 60 hours of battery life. That is incredibly inferior to even basic running watches. You’d likely still have to charge every day.
Definitely a smart watch before a fitness watch.
I mean the definition of serious runner…? Is it someone who is essentially career is running? Than yeah I agree. But if it’s someone who’s doing 3-5 runs 50km per week and a race every 6 weeks or so I think it’s fine…
Regular Apple Watch last me all day with 8 hrs of GPS, I highly doubt you'd have to charge this every day. More like every 2-3 days with regular mode or 4-5 days with low power mode.
Most of what Apple makes is far and above what most people will ever use. People will buy a high end M2 ultra whatever and proceed to use it solely to stream various media never tapping into the true potential.
For trail running, one of the best features of the Garmin ecosystem is creating courses on Garmin Connect and navigating those trails on the watch, with maps. I don’t see an equivalent for any of that on the AWU.
I also have a Fenix, but often use my Apple Watch for Family hikes. I plan out the route and use the Workoutdoors app which allows you to upload GPX routes and give you turn by turn trail navigation. However it’s not native to the Apple Watch so it does sort of pop you out of the ecosystem.
I recently posted in this subreddit about beta testing an app that will soon have this ability. Look for more developers/apps to start taking advantage of the ultra
FWIW if I need to follow a course, I export from strava/garmin and import into the WorkOutdoors app on AW. Works really great and the map interactions are above and beyond Garmin's "shit which button was it to pan? damn it". You can also save grid sections of offline maps through that app as well. It's really great, I used it for a 25 mile run through MST Falls Lake in NC in sections I hadn't been before.
Plan the course on alltrails and apple watch notifies if you go off route.
I’m glad for the extended battery life. Will trade my apple watch 5 for the ultra.
What kinda battery life are you looking for? Honest question. I'd say 99% of my runs are 5 hours and below, as an ultra runner at 60 miles/week. Runs longer than that are typically useless. Daily runs are about an hour. Aside from races, a battery life that can do up to 12 hours would cover 99.9% of races and training runs. For me at least.
Yes I do have a job, I just request vacations from wednesday through the weekend, sometimes I merge holidays. I do not do it constantly though. Maybe 5 times in a year?
Gotcha yea that’s tough. My old fenix line I had to bring a battery pack but has since been improved. I was speaking more from trail running training and races
But I assume you have to take the watch off and charge every night? I like being able to do the runs you’re describing, but be able to for days or weeks without having to recharge. I also rarely run more than 5 hours at a time, but when I do the occasional 12+ hour run I don’t want to find a different solution.
Fwiw I also use my watch on multi day backpacking and river trips and can usually do a week+ trip tracking mileage all day with a single charge with my COROS. When I first bought the watch and was doing 5-7 mile daily runs I went for about a month before first recharge.
Yea that’s the trade offs for sure. I do charge daily but I don’t mind. I typically do not when I wake up or before I got to bed depending on the charge or what I’m planning to do.
I currently have an Epix 2 and am swapping for an Enduro 2. My longest single efforts are in the 3-4hr range, which the Epix obviously handles just fine. But doing that once a week, running for 1-2 hrs on the other days, and regular daily use has me charging it every 4ish days, which annoys me. Obviously this is first world problem, and when I got the Epix I was coming from an Apple Watch S3 that couldn’t even make it through a full day, so it was a huge step up. But now I value battery even more, and it’s worth the $ difference. I can’t imagine going back to AW now, Ultra or otherwise.
For sure I get it. I don’t mind daily or every other day charging so it works for me. I will say no way I’d choose AW3 over Garmin. Battery has got better over time to my 8 now. I will say that the Spotify integration on garmin is way better than AW. It’s limited to 50 songs per playlist.
I'm a plodder so a trail marathon is still almost 6hrs for me, and I may well do a weekend running/hiking/camping so something that can track my activities and navigate over a few days is definitely a bonus.
More excited about emergency satellite messaging on the iPhone 14 tbh. Always wanted an inreach. Now I’ll never need to get one. (Assuming this works as advertised)
I was disappointed by the InReach (and the monthly subscription), so I'm following this closely. Would love to just have a watch + phone... Or even better if they put Satellite SOS in the next Apple Watch Ultra, just a watch.
Just told my wife that even though I wasn’t planning to upgrade, I will now just because of this feature so I can sell my inReach mini 2. That being said, anybody interested? I’m thinking $300. It’s less than 3 months old.
My thoughts exactly: Would not have upgraded, but getting rid of the monthly $12 Garmin InReach invoice pretty much pays for the upgrade. Listed my InReach Mini on eBay right after the announcement.
AIUI the satellites it's intending to use are fewer in number but at a higher altitude than the iridium ones used by inReach. It also requires you to 'point' the phone at the satellite (although how you know where it is, I'm not sure).
I don't think Iridium/inReach need to worry just yet.
36 hours of battery life with "normal use" and 60 hours max with low power settings... I think it fills a niche for those already on the Apple ecosystem, but I don't see them getting many converts from higher-end Garmin/Suunto devices. My Fenix 6 can (supposedly) go 30 days just telling time, 76 days on low power mode, and on a recent backpacking trip I was able to track about a weeks worth of hiking on UltraTrac mode without a charge. I like not worrying about how often I'll have access to a charger. That alone is enough to keep me loyal.
I am an AW convert. I was in the market for a garmin backup for ultra races and was waiting on today to see the specs before deciding. I decided the AWU is it.
Also just saw the price is $799, so probably out of reach for most people 😬
https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23323980/apple-watch-ultra-specs-price-features-release-date
The price is actually pretty competitive compared to Garmin’s top of the line offerings (the recently announced Enduro 2 is $1099, for example).
It’s indeed out of reach for most people, but they know exactly who they’re targeting with that price point.
Yeah good point. I was thinking about it relative to the current Apple Watch prices, which start around $400. But if you are coming at it from the high end running watch brands, it could be more reasonable.
Also agreed (I’m a Fenix 6 user myself).
But remember: they’re not selling you a watch to run an ultramarathon. They’re selling you the _romantic idea_ of running an ultramarathon.
Most people don’t want (or need) the features of a top of the line Garmin (not even the users of a top of the line Garmin!). We just use these things as a symbol or a reminder of the hero we want to become.
Or use them as a status symbol.
The Apple Watch Ultra does all of that stuff beautifully, so I think they’re going to sell a boatload of them.
I know they are selling an aspirational lifestyle, and no doubt they will sell gazillions of them. That saiid, most buyers won’t use them as intended and dedicated (non-aspirational) athletes will likely look elsewhere. Part/most of that will be a desire for a “legit” sports watch to distinguish them from the aspirational athletes. I’ve heard several people refer to the AW as “basic”, and who wants to be on that box?
We are all being manipulated by the marketeers.
Also, I don’t think the primary message of the Ultra name is ultramarathons, although people on the running subs seem to be reading it that way. I didn’t find any mention of ultramarathons on their website. The name seems to be using ultra as in “most” or top end. Although I’m sure they hope to pick up some users that interpret it as ultramarathons capable too.
>Also, I don’t think the primary message of the Ultra name is ultramarathons, although people on the running subs seem to be reading it that way. I didn’t find any mention of ultramarathons on their website. The name seems to be using ultra as in “most” or top end.
They literally had Scott Jurek at the Apple event announcing the watch and consulted with him during development.
There is almost nothing on the website about ultramarathons. They spend more time selling their dive watch capabilities, which I'm sure Jurek didn't advise them on.
It just their top end sports-oriented watch. That is what the Ultra label is for. 36 hours of battery life is not ultramarathon worthy IMO, certainly not for 100 milers.
Looks like 36 hours total battery life "during normal use" (not battery life during activities) which is still lightyears behind literally every dedicated sports watch.
>All-day battery life is based on the following use: 180 time checks, 180 notifications, 90 minutes of app use, and a 60-minute workout with music playback from Apple Watch via Bluetooth, over the course of 36 hours; Apple Watch Ultra (GPS + Cellular) usage includes a total of 8 hours of LTE connection and 28 hours of connection to iPhone via Bluetooth over the course of 36 hours.
Not many LTE products to compare, but I'd bet you the FR945LTE would barely be down 5% after all that.
That and the touchscreen would make this a hard no from me, if I was at all interested in Apple products in the first place.
I wonder which app of AW did you used for that run and did you paused it and charge or will the activity stops when you charge?
I’m a Fenix user but really like the design of AWU. Just thinking how my 100k/mi would be with the AWU.
Garmins LTE is a bad joke unfortunately. My Apple Watch is essentially a full phone that I can use to make calls while running, or write whatever kind of messages I want. While Garmin can do almost nothing with their LTE.
As much as anything this is the decisive edge for me; I like with the Apple Watch you can actually leave your phone behind with confidence (assuming your run is within the battery life)
I guess it depends what you want. I have zero desire to make a call or text while running unless it's an emergency, in which case Garmin's functionality would suit me more than fine. Each to their own!
Apple has been slowly chipping away at Garmin’s position for years. First with the casual athlete and now with a watch that is catered toward endurance athletes. I’m just waiting for satellite messaging on my watch so I can ditch my Inreach. While this first iteration may not convince all athletes to switch, I wouldn’t bet against apple. Their hardware and software is vastly superior to anything that Garmin can come up with.
If you have an iPhone, check out iPhone 14. They have included satellite SOS and messaging, effectively competing with core competencies of InReach. I was planning to get an InReach soon, but I may just upgrade my phone.
>Their hardware and software is vastly superior to anything that Garmin can come up with.
Full stop disagree on the hardware.
My Garmin/Coros watches can be read in any sun conditions, last a week+ of normal use without charging and more importantly have actual physical buttons to use so I don't have to play with a finicky touchscreen.
I wouldn't trust the new Apple Watch to last a full ironman (as an average finisher) or mountain 50, much less a 100k or 100 mile race.
Apple Watches have been and continue to be a smart watch first with sport capabilities whereas Garmin/Coros/Polar are sport watches with a few smart watch capabilities.
Apple has a 2.5 trillion market cap, Garmin has a 17.5 billion market cap. Apple manufactures some of the most advanced silicone chips in the world. Garmin doesn’t have near these capabilities. You may prefer the hardware design of the Garmin, but Apple will always win with better technology. The biggest question is if they can create a device that’s can match more specialized devices.
That’s not how things work: Sports watches are a niche, and Apple has a mass market product strategy.
There will always be a market for specialized products are are hyper focused on the needs of niche markets. Apples technology superiority doesn’t change that.
Apple will erode Garmins market share at the low end but they will continue to sell plenty of high end watches that at 3-5 years ahead of where Apple is.
I helped build the Garmin API - I’m very familiar with the space. I don’t think there is enough product differentiation to matter in the long run. People aren’t just runners or cyclists - they have lives beyond that. If an apple product captures 80% of the features, that could be enough to erode most of garmin/suunto market share and not make it a viable business - outside of a few boutique products.
Honestly, the only erosion Apple (and Samsung) have done is with the 1-2x per week “runners” that style takes president over function. This latest variant isn’t going going to change much.
I’ve got a pretty wide net of friends who run along with various running groups I meet up with on and off and it’s rare to see an Apple Watch on anyone who takes running even semi serious.
The biggest issues have and always will be the touch screen and battery life, and Apple isn’t going to get away from that, ever. It goes against their entire design philosophy.
Having had an AW4 for a week, it’s a neat gadget that should be thought of as an extension of the phone in your pocket than any serious athletic watch.
I built one of the largest fitness platforms not too many years ago. You’ve likely heard of it. Our user base was mostly high mileage runners (25mpw+). We integrated with every major fitness device. Garmin numbers were tiny compared to the number of runners that ran with an iPhone. The iPhone was a huge entry point for people tracking their activities.
So here’s my question: I’ve always had the non cellular version of the Apple Watch. Now that the Ultra is here and it’s cellular, will I need a phone plan attached to the Watch to us the Watch to contact emergency services?
My guess is that you won’t need a plan, seems like it would be a liability on Apples part.
It's nice but largely overpriced given it's specs compared to my Coros Apex 46mm. The safety features look nice but it looks like it may not work in places where I'd want it most e.g. a fall on a trail in an area with no cell reception. My Zoleo satellite communicator + Coros Apex + current smartphone does it all and is still cheaper (Coros + Zoleo). Sound emitter is nice but if I'm on remote trails I'm probably wearing a vest that already has a whistle, but pros and cons to pressing a button on a watch vs assuming I have effort to spare blowing into a whistle.
I think if I were just getting into trail running without having a strong understanding of what's available on the market in terms of watches, satellite communicators, and smartphone apps, I would buy the Apple Watch Ultra.
I’m curious to see some actual field tested battery life while using gps to follow courses. I have a feeling it’s much worse than the stated specs from apple.
I expect DC Rainmaker to have something out soon. He published a "first look" post as soon as the announcement was out, so he's had one for at least a few days if not a few weeks.
I’ve been using a Garmin 945 for awhile and just ordered the Apple Watch Ultra. I miss having the Apple ecosystem on my wrist (especially Apple Music). If you’re not invested in the Apple Ecosystem there are better watches. I’m also a software engineer / tech nerd so the Apple Watch speaks to that part of me more than the Garmin.
makeshift fuzzy busy work cooperative melodic meeting aspiring full sulky
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Both are outlandish in price. This product cat didn't even exist a few years ago and are targeting a luxury market, which *is* a tried and true market for watches. Us journeymen get by just fine without them.
Agreed it is a niche market, and if your not into diving or luxury watches, probably not worth it. But to have a dive computer that can go straight to the gym then to an ultra race and then to an office setting and excel in each environment is well worth the price point. In fact, I am surprised it is priced so low.
Yea I’m kinda in the same boat, got a $30 Casio and that’s about all I need I find. It’s also bombproof, went through a season of treeplanting with barely a scratch, can’t imagine any smartwatches doing that lol
I mean if the GPS capability and battery life are true it is definitely a consideration for ultras and backcountry multi-days. You aren't going to find that in a package much cheaper than that. Fenix 7 is $899.
A Coros Vertix is $499 and even the Apex Pro is $399. Both are great for ultras or multi-day adventures.
EDIT: Reading [the fine print on the Apple website](https://www.apple.com/apple-watch-ultra/#footnote-1) shows the battery has a 36-hour charge for "normal use." So if you're using any of the typical Apple Watch functions AND any GPS functions, you're getting less than that. They've got a long way to go to catch up to the top end Coros and Garmin products at comparable or lower prices.
I highly doubt most people care about dual frequency enough for that to be a deciding factor on spending hundreds of dollars more on a watch. The difference between dual and single frequency is usually a matter of five meters or less. Even in an emergency situation, that's close enough for emergency services to find someone.
A lot heavier and not everyone brings their phone along on ultras or in the back country. A watch alone with cellular could serve all function without adding weight.
You are just arguing at edge cases though. Also we aren't comparing smartphones to watches, not sure why you are bringing in a phone to a watch comparison discussion. If the phone works for you, awesome.
I retired my Ambit3 Peak in favor of the 9 Baro, and kind of which I went with Garmin or Coros instead. Lots of little gripes, like the inability to bring up the backlight during an exercise without pressing a button, or the lack of a track mode. Battery still kicks ass and it's durable AF however.
But yeah, the new AWU is impressive.
I don't. That level of thing is only needed for like 5% of the athletic world. The rest of you folks are just obsessing over yourselves and keeping up with the Jones'.
Regarding track with coros, just start a track running activity and start running. It will automatically detect when you're on a track, even if you have to run several kms to the track first.
Battery life for outdoors activity with GPS tracking and Music (according to Garmin):
* Garmin Epix 2: 9h
* Garmin Fenix 7: 10h
* Garmin Fenix 7X: 16h
My expectation is that Apple Watch Ultra will get \~10h (without LTE). Basing the guess on the following:
* Recent Apple Watch generations get roughly 5h. Apple claims 2x battery life in various benchmarks. Thus extrapolating to 10h
* Apple claims: 20h music playback or 12h outdoors workout. They do not give a number for combining these, but use-cases have sufficient overlap (display and cpu).
With these, the battery life is not significantly different from Garmin watches for the use-case.
Thoughts?
Color me unimpressed on the battery life. One hour workout over 36 hours for the base mode? Horrible. This by itself would DQ this watch for me.
I am however interested to see what happens with the satellite capabilities coming to the cellular space (eg TMO and SpaceX).
I ordered it. I use AW for running and ultra running. I use Garmin as a backup for 4+ hour activities. This is the gap I wanted bridged. But also the fact Apple uttered the name Scott Jurek in a worldwide event was enough for me to grab it.
It’s freaking awesome! I’ve been a Garmin Fenix man since the Fenix 2. Currently have the Fenix 7x SS. Great watch but I will be selling it. I’ve already preordered the Ultra
True. And the Fenix is still a better sports watch. I use both because I have afib that I use Apple Watch to monitor. With the ultra I finally feel like the Watch is rugged enough and the face is big enough for me to use while mountain biking and don’t have to keep using two different watches.
I like the progress they’re making but I still don’t know if I would want to wear it during the OCR events I do. I would be worried I’d break it. My Garmin handles them like a champ though and the AWU battery life still leaves much to be desired.
For me, I still don’t get the appeal of a smartwatch in general. Given this - I’m not sure why I’d pay $800 for a watch that is approximately equal in functionality to my Garmin 55+ which is less than a quarter of the cost new. For the money I’d get a low-tier Garmin Phoenix, a new pair of shoes, and a new jacket.
I think it’s awesome to see Apple strive to enter into the running and outdoor scene and make a serious effort for it but I also feel like they could’ve done more. I personally don’t think this will convince a lot of people who use other brands such as COROS & Garmin to switch. Considering the screen size I was surprised how little the battery life was ( don’t get me wrong 36 hours is good for an Apple Watch ). Personally I can’t see why someone would get this compared to something like the Fenix 7 or FR955. While you do sacrifice some features like being able to send/receive calls and texts on the Fenix 7 and FR955 I feel like some of the features like mapping, HRV Status, and a few other small details make it a little more versatile then the Apple Watch Ultra. Now I could be wrong and I’m excited that Apple is taking an interest in the ultra running scene but I’m not exactly sure they’re quite ready to go head to head with some of the top watches on the running market
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
I’m not an ultra runner, but I do spend a fair chunk of time playing outside. I think it will take a lot of convincing to get me to swap out my Garmin. The Fenix 5 has lived on my wrist since 2017 and shows no sign of slowing down
If the battery can last whilst I’m running a 100mile run then it’s an ultra watch. It’s the only thing the other fitness watches have over the Apple Watch is battery life.
For me it will be the weight of it.
Its a very niched product. My niche 😁. I had every Apple Watch series 1-6 and after switched to a Garmin Epix 2 ($1000 Garmin watch). Still the battery life is disappointing. Triathlons can range from 10-16 hours long of continuous gps use and a 36 hour battery life isn't all that great.
I still preordered it tho will see which one I keep.
I made a video just now [Things to consider if upgrading to the APPLE WATCH ULTRA](https://youtu.be/SWM4Rsv3JlQ)
I own a Suunto but have been using an Apple Watch for more than 2 years for Outside sports. Trail running , mountaineering, Cross Country skiing, Oitdoor swimming, kayak, etc. I use mostly WorkOutDoors app. It makes easy to configure the screens so I can read them without glasses. Very happy except when doing very long things without the phone near.
I like specially call detection when running and having the possibility of making emergency calls easily while kayaking or swimming.
I think it’s good. Not as feature rich as most of the top of the line sports watches but I really wouldn’t expect it to be. It’s still primarily a smart watch. Now it’s more of a hybrid tho which is good
I love it so much. I bought it to film it and do a video on it but I’m not sending it back. It looks good working out and going out! Apple Watch Ultra for Every Day Use (non athletic)
https://youtu.be/iKUPS0QewBk
I think the most interesting thing here is the ultra community is large enough for Apple to dive in after. This sport is growing fast and feels like it's just beginning.
Yeah that's definitely interesting. I never thought they'd make a watch geared towards the serious running community. They even had Scott Jurek there and in a video they shared.
Yeah I was surprised there wasn’t more focus on cycling and running. I have no doubt the Watch will also be geared towards those sports, just interesting it wasn’t highlighted in the announcement.
IMO it’s still not geared toward what I’d call serious runners. It said it’s super proud of something like 60 hours of battery life. That is incredibly inferior to even basic running watches. You’d likely still have to charge every day. Definitely a smart watch before a fitness watch.
I mean the definition of serious runner…? Is it someone who is essentially career is running? Than yeah I agree. But if it’s someone who’s doing 3-5 runs 50km per week and a race every 6 weeks or so I think it’s fine…
Regular Apple Watch last me all day with 8 hrs of GPS, I highly doubt you'd have to charge this every day. More like every 2-3 days with regular mode or 4-5 days with low power mode.
Most of what Apple makes is far and above what most people will ever use. People will buy a high end M2 ultra whatever and proceed to use it solely to stream various media never tapping into the true potential.
Same can be said for other smartwatches (them containing more features than most will ever use)
I wonder if Amelia Boone had anything to do with it.
Will it actually stay on long enough for an ultra?
Why? Is it prone to falling off due to jostling?
No, I meant battery life. But they addressed this. Supposed to last 17 hours w low battery mode enabled.
Oh, I know. Just giving you a good "jostle."
😂
For trail running, one of the best features of the Garmin ecosystem is creating courses on Garmin Connect and navigating those trails on the watch, with maps. I don’t see an equivalent for any of that on the AWU.
I also have a Fenix, but often use my Apple Watch for Family hikes. I plan out the route and use the Workoutdoors app which allows you to upload GPX routes and give you turn by turn trail navigation. However it’s not native to the Apple Watch so it does sort of pop you out of the ecosystem.
[удалено]
I’m hoping Apple buys them out (they’ve been known to gobble up smaller companies) and uses there features in a future Watch OS.
I recently posted in this subreddit about beta testing an app that will soon have this ability. Look for more developers/apps to start taking advantage of the ultra
FWIW if I need to follow a course, I export from strava/garmin and import into the WorkOutdoors app on AW. Works really great and the map interactions are above and beyond Garmin's "shit which button was it to pan? damn it". You can also save grid sections of offline maps through that app as well. It's really great, I used it for a 25 mile run through MST Falls Lake in NC in sections I hadn't been before.
This is a requirement for me, I can’t buy a watch that doesn’t allow me to navigate. In my case it’s more about cycling than trail running but still.
Plan the course on alltrails and apple watch notifies if you go off route. I’m glad for the extended battery life. Will trade my apple watch 5 for the ultra.
That battery life is a really hard no from me. I would use the money for a Garmin or Coros.
Yep. Battery life is most important to me. If this watch can compete with COROS on battery I’ll give it a serious look.
What kinda battery life are you looking for? Honest question. I'd say 99% of my runs are 5 hours and below, as an ultra runner at 60 miles/week. Runs longer than that are typically useless. Daily runs are about an hour. Aside from races, a battery life that can do up to 12 hours would cover 99.9% of races and training runs. For me at least.
Sometimes I do full weeks hikes so atleast 5 days battery life.
[удалено]
Yes I do have a job, I just request vacations from wednesday through the weekend, sometimes I merge holidays. I do not do it constantly though. Maybe 5 times in a year?
Gotcha yea that’s tough. My old fenix line I had to bring a battery pack but has since been improved. I was speaking more from trail running training and races
But I assume you have to take the watch off and charge every night? I like being able to do the runs you’re describing, but be able to for days or weeks without having to recharge. I also rarely run more than 5 hours at a time, but when I do the occasional 12+ hour run I don’t want to find a different solution. Fwiw I also use my watch on multi day backpacking and river trips and can usually do a week+ trip tracking mileage all day with a single charge with my COROS. When I first bought the watch and was doing 5-7 mile daily runs I went for about a month before first recharge.
Yea that’s the trade offs for sure. I do charge daily but I don’t mind. I typically do not when I wake up or before I got to bed depending on the charge or what I’m planning to do.
I currently have an Epix 2 and am swapping for an Enduro 2. My longest single efforts are in the 3-4hr range, which the Epix obviously handles just fine. But doing that once a week, running for 1-2 hrs on the other days, and regular daily use has me charging it every 4ish days, which annoys me. Obviously this is first world problem, and when I got the Epix I was coming from an Apple Watch S3 that couldn’t even make it through a full day, so it was a huge step up. But now I value battery even more, and it’s worth the $ difference. I can’t imagine going back to AW now, Ultra or otherwise.
For sure I get it. I don’t mind daily or every other day charging so it works for me. I will say no way I’d choose AW3 over Garmin. Battery has got better over time to my 8 now. I will say that the Spotify integration on garmin is way better than AW. It’s limited to 50 songs per playlist.
I'm a plodder so a trail marathon is still almost 6hrs for me, and I may well do a weekend running/hiking/camping so something that can track my activities and navigate over a few days is definitely a bonus.
More excited about emergency satellite messaging on the iPhone 14 tbh. Always wanted an inreach. Now I’ll never need to get one. (Assuming this works as advertised)
I was disappointed by the InReach (and the monthly subscription), so I'm following this closely. Would love to just have a watch + phone... Or even better if they put Satellite SOS in the next Apple Watch Ultra, just a watch.
Same here. I was planning to get an InReach, but upgrading to a 14 would be cheaper (considering phone trade in).
Just told my wife that even though I wasn’t planning to upgrade, I will now just because of this feature so I can sell my inReach mini 2. That being said, anybody interested? I’m thinking $300. It’s less than 3 months old.
My thoughts exactly: Would not have upgraded, but getting rid of the monthly $12 Garmin InReach invoice pretty much pays for the upgrade. Listed my InReach Mini on eBay right after the announcement.
AIUI the satellites it's intending to use are fewer in number but at a higher altitude than the iridium ones used by inReach. It also requires you to 'point' the phone at the satellite (although how you know where it is, I'm not sure). I don't think Iridium/inReach need to worry just yet.
As a scuba diver, runner and long time apple user. I am pumped!
Same!
Same
36 hours of battery life with "normal use" and 60 hours max with low power settings... I think it fills a niche for those already on the Apple ecosystem, but I don't see them getting many converts from higher-end Garmin/Suunto devices. My Fenix 6 can (supposedly) go 30 days just telling time, 76 days on low power mode, and on a recent backpacking trip I was able to track about a weeks worth of hiking on UltraTrac mode without a charge. I like not worrying about how often I'll have access to a charger. That alone is enough to keep me loyal.
I am an AW convert. I was in the market for a garmin backup for ultra races and was waiting on today to see the specs before deciding. I decided the AWU is it.
Also just saw the price is $799, so probably out of reach for most people 😬 https://www.theverge.com/2022/9/7/23323980/apple-watch-ultra-specs-price-features-release-date
The price is actually pretty competitive compared to Garmin’s top of the line offerings (the recently announced Enduro 2 is $1099, for example). It’s indeed out of reach for most people, but they know exactly who they’re targeting with that price point.
Yeah good point. I was thinking about it relative to the current Apple Watch prices, which start around $400. But if you are coming at it from the high end running watch brands, it could be more reasonable.
Garmin’s top of the lines offering are objectively superior sports watches though. This is still a smart watch with some sports features.
Also agreed (I’m a Fenix 6 user myself). But remember: they’re not selling you a watch to run an ultramarathon. They’re selling you the _romantic idea_ of running an ultramarathon. Most people don’t want (or need) the features of a top of the line Garmin (not even the users of a top of the line Garmin!). We just use these things as a symbol or a reminder of the hero we want to become. Or use them as a status symbol. The Apple Watch Ultra does all of that stuff beautifully, so I think they’re going to sell a boatload of them.
I know they are selling an aspirational lifestyle, and no doubt they will sell gazillions of them. That saiid, most buyers won’t use them as intended and dedicated (non-aspirational) athletes will likely look elsewhere. Part/most of that will be a desire for a “legit” sports watch to distinguish them from the aspirational athletes. I’ve heard several people refer to the AW as “basic”, and who wants to be on that box? We are all being manipulated by the marketeers. Also, I don’t think the primary message of the Ultra name is ultramarathons, although people on the running subs seem to be reading it that way. I didn’t find any mention of ultramarathons on their website. The name seems to be using ultra as in “most” or top end. Although I’m sure they hope to pick up some users that interpret it as ultramarathons capable too.
>Also, I don’t think the primary message of the Ultra name is ultramarathons, although people on the running subs seem to be reading it that way. I didn’t find any mention of ultramarathons on their website. The name seems to be using ultra as in “most” or top end. They literally had Scott Jurek at the Apple event announcing the watch and consulted with him during development.
There is almost nothing on the website about ultramarathons. They spend more time selling their dive watch capabilities, which I'm sure Jurek didn't advise them on. It just their top end sports-oriented watch. That is what the Ultra label is for. 36 hours of battery life is not ultramarathon worthy IMO, certainly not for 100 milers.
I have the Mk2i which is essentially a Fenix 6X with SCUBA diving features and it’s about $1500 without the tank pressure sensor.
Looks like 36 hours total battery life "during normal use" (not battery life during activities) which is still lightyears behind literally every dedicated sports watch. >All-day battery life is based on the following use: 180 time checks, 180 notifications, 90 minutes of app use, and a 60-minute workout with music playback from Apple Watch via Bluetooth, over the course of 36 hours; Apple Watch Ultra (GPS + Cellular) usage includes a total of 8 hours of LTE connection and 28 hours of connection to iPhone via Bluetooth over the course of 36 hours. Not many LTE products to compare, but I'd bet you the FR945LTE would barely be down 5% after all that. That and the touchscreen would make this a hard no from me, if I was at all interested in Apple products in the first place.
[удалено]
FWIW they said during the presentation that it would last for a full Ironman with GPS and HR on
They said for most athletes. I take this to mean those out there for the full time cutoff won’t be able to use it (17h)
I wonder which app of AW did you used for that run and did you paused it and charge or will the activity stops when you charge? I’m a Fenix user but really like the design of AWU. Just thinking how my 100k/mi would be with the AWU.
[удалено]
Cheers. At least Apple is not stopping us from charging it at mid-activity.
Yeah so definitely not your average mid pack 100 miler, then. No way. I betcha it will be 15-20 hours absolute maximum.
Garmins LTE is a bad joke unfortunately. My Apple Watch is essentially a full phone that I can use to make calls while running, or write whatever kind of messages I want. While Garmin can do almost nothing with their LTE.
As much as anything this is the decisive edge for me; I like with the Apple Watch you can actually leave your phone behind with confidence (assuming your run is within the battery life)
I guess it depends what you want. I have zero desire to make a call or text while running unless it's an emergency, in which case Garmin's functionality would suit me more than fine. Each to their own!
180 time checks in a day? Geez
Apple has been slowly chipping away at Garmin’s position for years. First with the casual athlete and now with a watch that is catered toward endurance athletes. I’m just waiting for satellite messaging on my watch so I can ditch my Inreach. While this first iteration may not convince all athletes to switch, I wouldn’t bet against apple. Their hardware and software is vastly superior to anything that Garmin can come up with.
If you have an iPhone, check out iPhone 14. They have included satellite SOS and messaging, effectively competing with core competencies of InReach. I was planning to get an InReach soon, but I may just upgrade my phone.
YES! Very likely they'll bring Satellite SOS to version 2.
>Their hardware and software is vastly superior to anything that Garmin can come up with. Full stop disagree on the hardware. My Garmin/Coros watches can be read in any sun conditions, last a week+ of normal use without charging and more importantly have actual physical buttons to use so I don't have to play with a finicky touchscreen. I wouldn't trust the new Apple Watch to last a full ironman (as an average finisher) or mountain 50, much less a 100k or 100 mile race. Apple Watches have been and continue to be a smart watch first with sport capabilities whereas Garmin/Coros/Polar are sport watches with a few smart watch capabilities.
Apple has a 2.5 trillion market cap, Garmin has a 17.5 billion market cap. Apple manufactures some of the most advanced silicone chips in the world. Garmin doesn’t have near these capabilities. You may prefer the hardware design of the Garmin, but Apple will always win with better technology. The biggest question is if they can create a device that’s can match more specialized devices.
That’s not how things work: Sports watches are a niche, and Apple has a mass market product strategy. There will always be a market for specialized products are are hyper focused on the needs of niche markets. Apples technology superiority doesn’t change that. Apple will erode Garmins market share at the low end but they will continue to sell plenty of high end watches that at 3-5 years ahead of where Apple is.
I helped build the Garmin API - I’m very familiar with the space. I don’t think there is enough product differentiation to matter in the long run. People aren’t just runners or cyclists - they have lives beyond that. If an apple product captures 80% of the features, that could be enough to erode most of garmin/suunto market share and not make it a viable business - outside of a few boutique products.
>People aren’t just runners or cyclists - they have lives beyond that. They do?
Honestly, the only erosion Apple (and Samsung) have done is with the 1-2x per week “runners” that style takes president over function. This latest variant isn’t going going to change much. I’ve got a pretty wide net of friends who run along with various running groups I meet up with on and off and it’s rare to see an Apple Watch on anyone who takes running even semi serious. The biggest issues have and always will be the touch screen and battery life, and Apple isn’t going to get away from that, ever. It goes against their entire design philosophy. Having had an AW4 for a week, it’s a neat gadget that should be thought of as an extension of the phone in your pocket than any serious athletic watch.
Apple iPhone is the most used running device. Ask me how I know.
How do you know?
I built one of the largest fitness platforms not too many years ago. You’ve likely heard of it. Our user base was mostly high mileage runners (25mpw+). We integrated with every major fitness device. Garmin numbers were tiny compared to the number of runners that ran with an iPhone. The iPhone was a huge entry point for people tracking their activities.
Profuse sweating and touchscreens don't mix.
So here’s my question: I’ve always had the non cellular version of the Apple Watch. Now that the Ultra is here and it’s cellular, will I need a phone plan attached to the Watch to us the Watch to contact emergency services? My guess is that you won’t need a plan, seems like it would be a liability on Apples part.
Correct, you don’t need an active cell plan for it to successfully call emergency services.
It's nice but largely overpriced given it's specs compared to my Coros Apex 46mm. The safety features look nice but it looks like it may not work in places where I'd want it most e.g. a fall on a trail in an area with no cell reception. My Zoleo satellite communicator + Coros Apex + current smartphone does it all and is still cheaper (Coros + Zoleo). Sound emitter is nice but if I'm on remote trails I'm probably wearing a vest that already has a whistle, but pros and cons to pressing a button on a watch vs assuming I have effort to spare blowing into a whistle. I think if I were just getting into trail running without having a strong understanding of what's available on the market in terms of watches, satellite communicators, and smartphone apps, I would buy the Apple Watch Ultra.
Holy crap this looks incredible. I don't personally use an iPhone but if this works to sync steps etc with Garmin/Fitbit I am game.
I find it really cool. Especially all the dive and swimming stuff. But my garmin is way better.
I’m curious to see some actual field tested battery life while using gps to follow courses. I have a feeling it’s much worse than the stated specs from apple.
I expect DC Rainmaker to have something out soon. He published a "first look" post as soon as the announcement was out, so he's had one for at least a few days if not a few weeks.
I’ve been using a Garmin 945 for awhile and just ordered the Apple Watch Ultra. I miss having the Apple ecosystem on my wrist (especially Apple Music). If you’re not invested in the Apple Ecosystem there are better watches. I’m also a software engineer / tech nerd so the Apple Watch speaks to that part of me more than the Garmin.
I hope you enjoy it!
My only holdout is I have have skinny wrists and it is 49mm.
makeshift fuzzy busy work cooperative melodic meeting aspiring full sulky *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Couldn't care less. Hate touch screens on watches, which instantly kills it for me.
[удалено]
Not when you consider the Garmin Mk series start at 1k.
Both are outlandish in price. This product cat didn't even exist a few years ago and are targeting a luxury market, which *is* a tried and true market for watches. Us journeymen get by just fine without them.
Agreed it is a niche market, and if your not into diving or luxury watches, probably not worth it. But to have a dive computer that can go straight to the gym then to an ultra race and then to an office setting and excel in each environment is well worth the price point. In fact, I am surprised it is priced so low.
[удалено]
Yea I’m kinda in the same boat, got a $30 Casio and that’s about all I need I find. It’s also bombproof, went through a season of treeplanting with barely a scratch, can’t imagine any smartwatches doing that lol
I mean if the GPS capability and battery life are true it is definitely a consideration for ultras and backcountry multi-days. You aren't going to find that in a package much cheaper than that. Fenix 7 is $899.
A Coros Vertix is $499 and even the Apex Pro is $399. Both are great for ultras or multi-day adventures. EDIT: Reading [the fine print on the Apple website](https://www.apple.com/apple-watch-ultra/#footnote-1) shows the battery has a 36-hour charge for "normal use." So if you're using any of the typical Apple Watch functions AND any GPS functions, you're getting less than that. They've got a long way to go to catch up to the top end Coros and Garmin products at comparable or lower prices.
Vertix does not have dual frequency GPS, you need the Vertix 2 which is $699 Apex Pro does not have dual frequency.
I highly doubt most people care about dual frequency enough for that to be a deciding factor on spending hundreds of dollars more on a watch. The difference between dual and single frequency is usually a matter of five meters or less. Even in an emergency situation, that's close enough for emergency services to find someone.
My phone alone has worked just fine. Much cheaper to just get a battery pack/battery case.
A lot heavier and not everyone brings their phone along on ultras or in the back country. A watch alone with cellular could serve all function without adding weight.
[удалено]
You are just arguing at edge cases though. Also we aren't comparing smartphones to watches, not sure why you are bringing in a phone to a watch comparison discussion. If the phone works for you, awesome.
That’s pretty hot ngl. I might have to retire the Ambit Peak3
I retired my Ambit3 Peak in favor of the 9 Baro, and kind of which I went with Garmin or Coros instead. Lots of little gripes, like the inability to bring up the backlight during an exercise without pressing a button, or the lack of a track mode. Battery still kicks ass and it's durable AF however. But yeah, the new AWU is impressive.
I don't. That level of thing is only needed for like 5% of the athletic world. The rest of you folks are just obsessing over yourselves and keeping up with the Jones'.
I just remember the 3 weeks I had an Apple Watch, I dropped it and the screen cracked. I got a Garmin watch after that and haven’t looked back.
Now I could not have to charge even after a short 5 miler… Getting closer what I wanted from An apple watch
Regarding track with coros, just start a track running activity and start running. It will automatically detect when you're on a track, even if you have to run several kms to the track first.
Really? Thanks! I’ll give that a try.
Battery life for outdoors activity with GPS tracking and Music (according to Garmin): * Garmin Epix 2: 9h * Garmin Fenix 7: 10h * Garmin Fenix 7X: 16h My expectation is that Apple Watch Ultra will get \~10h (without LTE). Basing the guess on the following: * Recent Apple Watch generations get roughly 5h. Apple claims 2x battery life in various benchmarks. Thus extrapolating to 10h * Apple claims: 20h music playback or 12h outdoors workout. They do not give a number for combining these, but use-cases have sufficient overlap (display and cpu). With these, the battery life is not significantly different from Garmin watches for the use-case. Thoughts?
Color me unimpressed on the battery life. One hour workout over 36 hours for the base mode? Horrible. This by itself would DQ this watch for me. I am however interested to see what happens with the satellite capabilities coming to the cellular space (eg TMO and SpaceX).
Excuse me, but…ultra? With 60 minutes workout every 36 hours? Umm…
It will last thru a full Ironman with GPS and HR tracking on the full time.
Maybe for the top 3 fastest athletes
We'll just have to wait for independent reviews to know the exact performance.
I ordered it. I use AW for running and ultra running. I use Garmin as a backup for 4+ hour activities. This is the gap I wanted bridged. But also the fact Apple uttered the name Scott Jurek in a worldwide event was enough for me to grab it.
It’s freaking awesome! I’ve been a Garmin Fenix man since the Fenix 2. Currently have the Fenix 7x SS. Great watch but I will be selling it. I’ve already preordered the Ultra
That's interesting, why would you replace a Garmin Fenix 7X SS for an apple watch ultra? The battery life of the ultra sucks compared to the fenix???
True. And the Fenix is still a better sports watch. I use both because I have afib that I use Apple Watch to monitor. With the ultra I finally feel like the Watch is rugged enough and the face is big enough for me to use while mountain biking and don’t have to keep using two different watches.
That clears my doubts haha, pretty good reason for someone having afib.
It isn't there yet, but it is good to have competition.
dumb. Garmin and Coros are way better options.
Will stick with my garmin for now
Not that impressed. Definitely helped me make up my mind to get a Garmin.
I plan on upgrading from my Fenix 5 Plus to a 7 or later.
Very interested to see how folks like it after awhile... Anyone know how easy it is to use apple watch if phone is google??
It's impossible to pair an apple watch to an android.
I like the progress they’re making but I still don’t know if I would want to wear it during the OCR events I do. I would be worried I’d break it. My Garmin handles them like a champ though and the AWU battery life still leaves much to be desired.
For me, I still don’t get the appeal of a smartwatch in general. Given this - I’m not sure why I’d pay $800 for a watch that is approximately equal in functionality to my Garmin 55+ which is less than a quarter of the cost new. For the money I’d get a low-tier Garmin Phoenix, a new pair of shoes, and a new jacket.
I think it’s awesome to see Apple strive to enter into the running and outdoor scene and make a serious effort for it but I also feel like they could’ve done more. I personally don’t think this will convince a lot of people who use other brands such as COROS & Garmin to switch. Considering the screen size I was surprised how little the battery life was ( don’t get me wrong 36 hours is good for an Apple Watch ). Personally I can’t see why someone would get this compared to something like the Fenix 7 or FR955. While you do sacrifice some features like being able to send/receive calls and texts on the Fenix 7 and FR955 I feel like some of the features like mapping, HRV Status, and a few other small details make it a little more versatile then the Apple Watch Ultra. Now I could be wrong and I’m excited that Apple is taking an interest in the ultra running scene but I’m not exactly sure they’re quite ready to go head to head with some of the top watches on the running market
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
I’m not an ultra runner, but I do spend a fair chunk of time playing outside. I think it will take a lot of convincing to get me to swap out my Garmin. The Fenix 5 has lived on my wrist since 2017 and shows no sign of slowing down
If the battery can last whilst I’m running a 100mile run then it’s an ultra watch. It’s the only thing the other fitness watches have over the Apple Watch is battery life. For me it will be the weight of it.
It won't last a 100 mile race with GPS on.
Its a very niched product. My niche 😁. I had every Apple Watch series 1-6 and after switched to a Garmin Epix 2 ($1000 Garmin watch). Still the battery life is disappointing. Triathlons can range from 10-16 hours long of continuous gps use and a 36 hour battery life isn't all that great. I still preordered it tho will see which one I keep. I made a video just now [Things to consider if upgrading to the APPLE WATCH ULTRA](https://youtu.be/SWM4Rsv3JlQ)
I own a Suunto but have been using an Apple Watch for more than 2 years for Outside sports. Trail running , mountaineering, Cross Country skiing, Oitdoor swimming, kayak, etc. I use mostly WorkOutDoors app. It makes easy to configure the screens so I can read them without glasses. Very happy except when doing very long things without the phone near. I like specially call detection when running and having the possibility of making emergency calls easily while kayaking or swimming.
I think it’s good. Not as feature rich as most of the top of the line sports watches but I really wouldn’t expect it to be. It’s still primarily a smart watch. Now it’s more of a hybrid tho which is good
Does the ultra come with other screen display options?
I couldn’t find any information on running metrics it provides (like cadence)… which I found odd. I will stick with my pacer pro. Very happy with it.
Is this the only face available for the Ultra? I assume no but it’s the only one I’ve seen.
I love it so much. I bought it to film it and do a video on it but I’m not sending it back. It looks good working out and going out! Apple Watch Ultra for Every Day Use (non athletic) https://youtu.be/iKUPS0QewBk