F5X vs Epix disaster

In the past, it seemed that the products that sold best also got the best support.

I think the Epix was too big for most people's wrists. So it was just a niche product and got no resources for further development. Also, it had a different screen form factor than the Fenix 3 causing additional cost for updates.

Maybe the Fenix 5X will sell in big numbers (as the5krunner suggests in his blog) so it can get as many updates as the 5/5S.

The unusual appearance of the Epix probably made a lot of people choose the F3 instead. I did too. But later on I missed the basic mapping of the Fenix (2) too much and bought an Epix after all. To my surprise (I have small wrists) the Epix is more comfortable to wear than the F3. It feels lighter (but weighs about the same). It buzzes more noticeably and the font is easier to read.

If only the form factor had not held me back from buying it in the first place.. The F3 is great for day-to-day wear, short runs and indoor activities, but the Epix is super for hikes, walks, city trips, and long runs.

I've become a bit hesitant about the 5X even, it's slightly bigger and heavier than the F3 - but it could make it less comfortable for me than the F3. Probably best to wait and see what happens, what people report here, and how the firmware develops. I'm perfectly happy to use the the F3+Epix pair for another year or so.

Another reason I'm cautious is possible dependence on the GCM app or Express. I'm not using either, to avoid the mandatory uploading to Connect that they do. Running the Epix or F3 in "offline mode" works great though. But if the F5X can be used in the same way is by no means certain.

I'll follow my usual rule that I never buy a new Garmin device until at least 6 months after it's released, just to avoid the usual early problems. And because of what they did to the Epix, I've no plans to buy a 5X even then. The 5X has one big segment of software (maps/navigation) that are of no use on the other 5's, so my guess is that 5X firmware will be separate from the other 5's. If that's the case, that means that Garmin can do to the 5X what the did to the Epix and abandon it without affecting the other 5's. We'll see if that's what happens. If my Epix breaks, then maybe I'll consider a 5X in 2018 when it should be evident whether Garmin is serious about the 5X, but I'll probably just go back to my Fenix 1, which still works. Spending money on another Garmin wrist based mapping device isn't likely for me, at least for a year or two, and it's especially unlikely if some other manufacturer steps up and produces something equivalent.

TLDR: it'll probably become clear pretty quickly from firmware updates whether there is a common code base sufficient to keep releases in parallel or with fairly small delays.

While the Epix users got a pretty rough deal, at the end of the day it would have been a business decision driven by low sales of the Epix (the flip side is that the F3 and F3HR sold a lot, which in turn meant that their profits generated money which could get turned to continuous development).

If the CPU and memory are the same architecture, just faster/larger, then it seems reasonable that the rest of the firmware could be common. You might well see a lag in releases if the 5X needs extra testing for side-effects on the mapping portions, but if it's modular enough and they follow the public beta route that was taken for the F3, the lag might not be too big. I'd speculate it'll be similar to the F3 versus F3HR releases, which tracked pretty closely together. And there's a lot of interest in the 5X, so I'd guess it's going to sell better than the Epix did.

It should become clear pretty quickly after the watches are released, with the first couple of maintenance updates that always show up when devices get real world use beyond a small beta test group.

I'm hoping...

I'm hoping to get a 5X as soon as they become available and will keep my F3 for awhile. Once I'm sure, I'll sell the F3. So -- I hope to be able to provide some info once the 5X is on my wrist!

I would say the diff between the Epix and the F5(x) is that the Epix was never meant to be an replacement for the Fenix 3, therefor it co-existed with the F3 and the F3 was an way more popular watch.

The F5(x) is supposed to be an upgrade/replacement for F3 and i guess it will get the same commitment as the F3 got.

Hi all,
I have a doubt in this as CPU and memory should be different in F5X to handle maps.

I think F5 and F5x will share the same updates. I don't think F5X CPU will be very different than F5. If it's different Wifi chip protocol may be one reason. Epix chip wasn't faster then F3 chip (almost the same), but it has an external memory chip. So mainly some memory configuration change, some CIQ memory settings change and map software will be different. These can be fine tuned once and copied in each update.

Epix is more comfortable because it fits the arm better and band is larger. But people think it's ugly (no I don't). Ugliness was the reason of its losing shares. Fenix 3 is much more beautiful but with large body and cavity between the band holders and the arm makes it less comfortable.

However, Fenix 5X seems to be a beautiful watch and with some faster (than Epix) processor it'll run better. Even due to external memory chip CIQ apps will have more memories to run. For example F5 apps have 128 KB RAM dedicated to them, however F5X has more than 1 MB of RAM dedicated to CIQ apps. 4 times more memory for data fields etc. With 64color new screen and higher resolution apps will use more memory and while Fenix 5 will crash due to out of memory errors, Fenix 5X will just work with its enormous CIQ memory. In the Epix time people didn't think about ConnectIQ, but today it's known and a lot of people will prefer Fenix 5X for such differences.
For me there are two issues. F5X is really expensive! Will Fenix 6X have touch screen? :D

I think F5 and F5x will share the same updates. I don't think F5X CPU will be very different than F5. If it's different Wifi chip protocol may be one reason. Epix chip wasn't faster then F3 chip (almost the same), but it has an external memory chip. So mainly some memory configuration change, some CIQ memory settings change and map software will be different. These can be fine tuned once and copied in each update.

Epix has definitely faster CPU than F3. Watchface redraws and activity saves are much faster on Epix than on F3, almost like on Chronos. Just a remark :-)

I would wait about 6 months to see if they will be fixing bugs of F5X. After Epix, which is still great watch, cant trust garmin about fixing bugs :/ They advertise Epix as watch capable for running interival trainings and it's not :/ Dont metion few other bugs.

Im not sure why some of you think the 5x is a total different product than the regular 5 series. Its developed by the same team. Its literally all the same software except for maps. This isnt like epix where it was a different team and a whole different hardware. The 5x has a better processor, bigger storage, and little better resolution. Thats it, thats not going to put the 5x behind development at all. My guess is its going to get software release at the exact same time as the 5 and 5s. Your arguments are basically saying the 5 and 5s are going to be developed by different teams and abandoned too. Trust me, I know everyone is scared because of the Epix. I had one too, but this is their best selling series, they wouldnt put Fenix name on the watch if they didnt care about it.