The article complains about Garmins closed ecosystem, totally ignoring the fact that developers cannot create watch faces for Apple Watch, but have free reign on Garmin devices.
I can't argue with someone having a frank blog on their opinion.
However you can't say on the one hand Garmin's a closed ecosystem as a bad thing, then say that its a good thing with Apple, saying Apple developed the "end to end" communication.
Yes I have an iPhone and Airpods and they work incredibly well together, better than anything else I've owned and that is partly due to the closed ecosystem and the control they have. But don't say a product isn't as good because its closed, then speak the merits of the same thing on another brand.
The only competition Apple has IMO is Garmin, not Google, not anything else. I had an Apple watch and it just felt like an extension of my phone, whereas I want my Garmin for fitness metrics and general body fitness/health and it excels in that market better than Apple. Those aspects are important and shouldn't mean that you pidgeon hole that product into a separate category that takes it out of contention.
Many legitimate grievances are described here, but I also have trouble understanding what triggered this post today. I'm loving the Pixel Watch 4. Maybe I am biased because I'm also on Google Fi and have a Pixel phone. Battery life has been great compared to the Pixel Watch 2. Using Google Maps and WhatsApp from the watch is quite convenient. The only pain points have been swapping Gemini for Google Assistant and the fact that Signal does not support WearOS.
This rant has nothing of value in it. Don't waste your time reading it. It tries to claim the only smartwatch that's any good is the Apple Watch. When the author tries to address the obvious counter of Garmin's smart watch products the only product discussed is a strawman version of the large and expensive Fenix 8, which leads me to believe they are ignorant of the broad smart watch lineup which includes things like the Vivoactive and Venu, which are absolutely smart watches first and fitness devices second (so is the Fenix 8, in reality).
And of course the Apple watch only syncs with Apple devices. So also implied is iPhone or don't bother.
Even if there were no other smartwatches in existence and it was iPhone + Apple Watch or Android + a Casio F91w, I would still take the Casio.
The iPhone experience is simply too inferior [for me / my uses] that even if I did encounter the flaws in Samsung watches (it tells me I have a notification and tracks my exercise), it's an accessory compared to a whole platform I don't care for.
"Google has had a decade, which is an eternity in consumer technology and roughly nine years longer than Google has ever sustained attention on anything that didn't directly monetise your search history"
The article complains about Garmins closed ecosystem, totally ignoring the fact that developers cannot create watch faces for Apple Watch, but have free reign on Garmin devices.
Does Garmin charge $100 per year to developers?
I can't argue with someone having a frank blog on their opinion.
However you can't say on the one hand Garmin's a closed ecosystem as a bad thing, then say that its a good thing with Apple, saying Apple developed the "end to end" communication.
Yes I have an iPhone and Airpods and they work incredibly well together, better than anything else I've owned and that is partly due to the closed ecosystem and the control they have. But don't say a product isn't as good because its closed, then speak the merits of the same thing on another brand.
The only competition Apple has IMO is Garmin, not Google, not anything else. I had an Apple watch and it just felt like an extension of my phone, whereas I want my Garmin for fitness metrics and general body fitness/health and it excels in that market better than Apple. Those aspects are important and shouldn't mean that you pidgeon hole that product into a separate category that takes it out of contention.
Many legitimate grievances are described here, but I also have trouble understanding what triggered this post today. I'm loving the Pixel Watch 4. Maybe I am biased because I'm also on Google Fi and have a Pixel phone. Battery life has been great compared to the Pixel Watch 2. Using Google Maps and WhatsApp from the watch is quite convenient. The only pain points have been swapping Gemini for Google Assistant and the fact that Signal does not support WearOS.
Where does Pebble fit into all of this? I'm eyeing the Pebble 2 Round myself.
Discontinued for most of the time they’re analyzing, and currently on preorder.
This rant has nothing of value in it. Don't waste your time reading it. It tries to claim the only smartwatch that's any good is the Apple Watch. When the author tries to address the obvious counter of Garmin's smart watch products the only product discussed is a strawman version of the large and expensive Fenix 8, which leads me to believe they are ignorant of the broad smart watch lineup which includes things like the Vivoactive and Venu, which are absolutely smart watches first and fitness devices second (so is the Fenix 8, in reality).
And of course the Apple watch only syncs with Apple devices. So also implied is iPhone or don't bother.
Don't bother with this blog post.
Even if there were no other smartwatches in existence and it was iPhone + Apple Watch or Android + a Casio F91w, I would still take the Casio.
The iPhone experience is simply too inferior [for me / my uses] that even if I did encounter the flaws in Samsung watches (it tells me I have a notification and tracks my exercise), it's an accessory compared to a whole platform I don't care for.
I've been very impressed with the Garmin vivoactive
"Google has had a decade, which is an eternity in consumer technology and roughly nine years longer than Google has ever sustained attention on anything that didn't directly monetise your search history"
I kind of liked that part. PREACH!