Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Watch Ultra 2 Advertised With 72-Hour Battery Life in Low Power Mode, But There's a Catch
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Was hoping Apple would force Garmin to up their game. If you're into endurance sports the limited batt life is a pain. Over the past year I've tracked 2.5 hours of activities daily, in the summer it's 3 hours. The Ultra might last in that use case but it'd constantly be needing charging.
Not to mention lack of support for fully offline world maps etc. I hope when day they do aspire for endurance nerds but I guess they saw from their own data that hardly anyone does that activity. Even on the Garmin platform it tells me i'm in the 99th percentile for steps, elevation gain, running etc.
Not to mention lack of support for fully offline world maps etc. I hope when day they do aspire for endurance nerds but I guess they saw from their own data that hardly anyone does that activity. Even on the Garmin platform it tells me i'm in the 99th percentile for steps, elevation gain, running etc.
It’s also possible that the new test, which includes 360 notifications, is actually more battery intensive. You don’t know, and are just speculating.
I wonder what you get with always on turned off. My AW6 has that disabled and it makes a big difference.
Hey thanks JoEw ! If I spread a little happiness then I'm very glad,
especially since my jokes don't always work
Tend to switch low power mode on at about 20-30% left and it certainly lasts well. Need to switch it on though to get full 48 hours and even then doesn’t always go past 40-44 hours
Call me old school but I prefer a black and white display. With always on disabled and grayscale set to on with reduced transparency in accessibility, the watch looks like LCD display to me which I love. Way finder face can be further reduced by rotating the bezel. Still works in sun well enough. I routinely get 72 hours with a loss of functionality (for my use case)
Best way to remember is to build it into a morning or daytime routine.. like putting the charger in the bathroom, and always charging while showering and getting ready.
Or, put it next to the coffee pot or kettle, so a morning routine like making a warm beverage is married up with taking the watch off and charging it a bit at least.
My partner who while not Trip9 is probably Mensa, I had to find the routine that fit or else it was always just before bed “ugh, I have to charge my watch”. I almost hesitate to get her whatever the smaller form factor AWU2 or other is going to be since they last at least two if not three days, and that’s a harder routine to behaviorally condition.
/s
Do you have a picture of yourself from high school with a Casio Databank you could post?
/s
Garmin just is not interested, as most Garmin (like most sports/athletic product) users are aspirational and do not need more.
How about we start with some background of your use cases. What do you consider “endurance sports”? How often do you participate in such activities? When you do, do you also carry a phone? Which Garmin watch do you have?
What is your definition of “constantly be needing charging”? As I have mentioned, I track workouts for more hours than you just listed, and I can easily go two full days without needing to charge. That is clearly less time than the longest Garmin watches will last, but works quite well even for weekend camping trips (just bring a small extra battery).
WorkOutDoors supports offline maps for Apple Watch. Apple’s ecosystem truly enhances its products (including Apple Watch), often adding features that Apple has not yet made a priority (or in some cases, will never directly support). Their large developer community is a big benefit.
As I said, most Garmin users have no need for the super long battery life they offer. They are not switching to Apple Watch, because that would require acknowledging that their use of the product is purely aspirational. Garmin’s problem however is that new users (those who get into sports or other physical activities), can go longer with their existing Apple Watch before needing some feature not available and needing to consider something else.
It used to be that one who did even a single 45 minute workout would need to charge one’s Apple Watch during the day. Now with an Ultra/Ultra 2, one can go for two days with no issue.
Previously one needed Ant+ to use trainers, power meters, and other sensors, now almost every product supports multi-channel Bluetooth. Starting Monday, Apple Watches running watchOS 10 can support power meters, etc., adding another category of uses for which one no longer needs to leave the ecosystem.
Every step up that ladder denies Garmin new users entering their ecosystem. None of these problems will be life threatening to Garmin, but each loss gets worse for them. Ray Maker (proprietor of DC Rainmaker) once commented something like Garmin’s problem will be if Apple gets better at sports/activity watches, faster than Garmin gets better in general smart watches. That seems to be what is happening. Apple rarely makes giant leaps, but eats away at a market incrementally.
I am curious what the 99th percentile is according to Garmin’s stats: How many steps (over what period(s)) are needed to hit that level? What about running? Elevation gain? (Also curious what you do per day/week, to see how I compare - I am sure you do more but wonder how much.)
I’m someone that has gone the other way.
I started off with, and still use my SS series 6 as my primary smart watch. I learnt to scuba dive last year before the Ultra was released, and bought a Garmin descent Mk2 as my dive computer.
I now use the Descent as my primary fitness watch for swimming, cycling, running and hiking. The long battery life on the Garmin means I don’t think about charging as much as I do for my Apple Watch. If I want to go for a long run I just pick up the Garmin, put on heart rate strap and set off . The Garmin training plans for running has helped improve my 5k times. I use Garmin connect to plan running routes when in a new city, and just sync them with my watch without the need for Strava or a third party app. I love the swimming metrics on the Garmin and the fact I can add a training plan to my swim workouts. I love the fact the Garmin has metrics that show progression of my fitness again with the need for third party apps
My series 6 Watch is due for an upgrade but I am finding it hard justify upgrading to an Ultra. The price difference between the stainless steel series 9 and the ultra2 rules out upgrading to a series 9 SS and the aluminium versions aren’t tough enough for my daily use.
Purchasing the Garmin has opened up a whole lot of fitness activities for me, but I still use my Apple Watch as my daily smart watch
It’s possible that the first numbers were estimates of how watch users would use the watch, before the watch came out, while the new numbers are based on how watch users actually do use their watch.
Amazing? Compared to what? Are there any smart watches out there (other that the regular AW) with shorter battery life? 3 weeks battery life for Garmin watch is "amazing". 3 days is meh at best.
Don't use low power mode then. I know I wont be because I want all that connectivity too, as well as always on display. After all, I'm paying for that! My S6 needs charging every night using all that connectivity/screen.
Brightness? We talkin’ bout brightness?! Not a redesign; Not a new color! We talking about brightness.
Not exactly. You added a Garmin for specific uses. That helps Garmin, but even what you say shows the problems for them.
I am a casual scuba diver and I used to use a Suunto dive computer. Having purchased an Ultra, I also bought Huish Outdoors's Oceanic+ dive computer, and stopped using my Suunto. Still in the Huish Outdoors world using their BCs and other gear. However, had I learned to dive after I had my Ultra, I would never even have looked around for another dive computer. The app meets my needs and provides the addition of a solid, automatic dive log. (I have been diving for over 30 years, and have never really done it enough to get an air integrated dive computer.) I will not speak for you, but I will bet that more than a few like you who would have switched in the past, will not now (especially as the Ultra is $200 cheaper than the Descent).
Do you wear both watches most of the day everyday? If not, you have to think about charging even more, as now you have to worry about the watch you describe as your "primary smart watch" and the one you have as your "primary fitness watch". For me that would make it worse, especially as it would make having a regular routine much more difficult.
I do that without needing to change watches. Sometimes I go without my iPhone and can still be accessible if I want to be (I have LTE service on my watch). Do you always have your iPhone and/or your Apple Watch with you? Again, seems much less convenient.
There are lots of great applications for doing that (many of which people feel are than GC, with Training Peaks being at the top of that list), but I am glad Garmin Connect has worked for you. I am curious if you use sync your workout data to Apple Health? Health is my health and fitness data hub, so, were I to use a Garmin watch, I would still need a third party app to sync my data (it would be Garmin's Garmin Connect iOS app, a product that even Garmin fans acknowledge leaves a lot to be desired).
However, the more serious issue for me is that using a different watch than the one I have on all the time would mean that I could not just go for a walk or a jog/run without first going back to the place I was staying to prepare. Not a crisis, but certainly less convenient.
What is funny to me is that instead of a third party app, you spent $999 on a third party watch. Now instead of needing a third party app on your Watch, you need one on your iPhone, as well as needing two watches.
Before I switched to the Ultra, I had a Nike+ Series 6. Before that I had Series 4, Series 3, and Series 0. In everyday use, I never had a problem (although I did once scratch the crystal, but it had no impact other than aesthetics). Given that you do not need it for working out or diving, I am surprised the aluminum would not work for you. Did you previously have an aluminum version that failed?
Here is where we disagree. Purchasing the Garmin did not open up anything for you. Deciding that you wanted to try the whole world of fitness activities was what opened them for you. You may justify your purchase of the Garmin by arguing that without it you would never have done so (and that maybe true), however, there are lots of people who do all the activities you have mentioned (and many more) quite happily with an Apple Watch.
The Ultra, Ultra 2, watchOS 10, etc. just raises the bar for people needing to move to a Garmin. The higher that level gets, the fewer new people enter their ecosystem. That is their long term problem.
Pretty much every other smart watch (Google's Pixel, Samsung, etc.). Garmin's watches are more accurately described as fitness watches.
Indeed. To be fair to the watches you mentioned, they weight half the weight of Ultra. Weight wise Ultra is firmly in the Garmin (Fenix) category.
Really? The Galaxy Watch 6 Classic weighs 85 grams (vs. Apple Watch Ultra’s 61 grams) and has a battery life of 30 hours.
Last edited:
I’m not getting anywhere near the battery life that is being claimed. I run every day and connect to my Powerbeats Pro for approximately 90 minutes of music. I also spend quite a bit of time driving every day and that seems to drain the battery as well as the watch seems to display music controls and follows whatever is playing in my car through Apple CarPlay.
Not long ago I drove from North NJ to HHI SC and my watch was around 25% driving 14 hours. I still can’t figure out why the watches drain so fast while driving.
Not long ago I drove from North NJ to HHI SC and my watch was around 25% driving 14 hours. I still can’t figure out why the watches drain so fast while driving.