Sorry Garmin

I was a fitness instructor when I was in the Army (back in the 1980's), so I have a pretty good understanding of fitness and basic nutrition. Keep your heart rate in the cardio zone for at least 30 minutes, do 3 sets of muscular training to stimulate and break down both muscle fibers, eat a wide variety of nutritious foods, and don't eat too much junk food.

It ain't rocket science like first beat (worst beat), and other companies make it out to be. They are just over complicating a basic simple process, and making a ton of money off of it. And idiots like us are paying for it... lol

I do like Garmin devices, but have just grown tired of having all these advanced athlete features reminding me that I'm never going to be an advanced athlete. The apple watch features used to be too basic until now. They now seem to have plenty enough features for me to stay in shape without making me feel like a slacker just because I'm not a elite athlete.

But all that aside, this apple watch ultra is really cool.

They are just over complicating a basic simple process, and making a ton of money off of it.

  unlike the small family company called ... *checks notes* ... "Apple", which never complicated a thing.

Skyewalkr said:

a fenix is a hardcore athlete watch

Not necessarily. Do you think in this forum we are all pro athletes? 

I'm certainly not. I needed a watch with cartography. That's all. Since there aren't many around, one has to stick with Fenix even though 90% of the features won't be used.

Good for you. I dislike apple watches but I was surprised to learn that they have the most accurate optical heart rate measurement in the industry, beating Garmin as well. So I wondered when that potential will be used. It seems that Apple is headed for sports usage finally, and I am glad they do, because it seems that things on smartwatch market became stale - there is more effort to put in new features than to make basic things work reliably. So I welcome competition. 

This reads as 'Buyer remorse' , trying to justify a purchase .!   I'm not an elite athlete but am a numbers geek with a healthy running hobby. I'm 60 my Fenix7 estimated V02max varies 53-55 depending on time of year,mt Fenix5+ estimated was 49-52 (again time of year dependant) my labtested v02max is 54 , my amazfit estimated vo2max iwas52  my Gearfit pro was 54. I dare say an Apple watch would also be in the same window. 

Irrelevant of the Numbers they all mean the same thing that im near the top of my ability , this is a personal and unique thing and is partially genetic and early life development. Neither of which can be altered.

Blaming a device for you 'unproductive' or low V02max is in itself counter productive these devices only interpret data your body provides irrelevant of device Garmin or Apple don;t blame the messenger .

Andy W said:

this is a personal and unique thing and is partially genetic and early life development. Neither of which can be altered.

80% of a persons fitness level is genetic, so it seems that you inherently have a much higher fitness level than I do. So your user experience with a Garmin is great. I have to work just as hard (or maybe even harder) just to get "fair", and it's frustrating to never feel like I'm good enough to be wearing a Garmin.

sounds to me like you need to work on your Mentality instead of blaming a watch brand about how you feel, lol... Set your own goals instead of comparing and get some confidence . Why do you workout in the first place - For your own sake or for others satisfaction?

But that is true for any device that estimates v02max .

neither the Number or conclusion is via firstbeat or Garmin but both are well known metrics that meanings are generally agreed upon .

Apple devices will come to the same number and hence same conclusion so not sure what your gaining .? 

Perhaps it's just a matter of "labels" for any given range of values by age/gender.

For example, looking at this screenshot (I don't have an iPhone neither an Apple Watch):

it looks like Apple decided that there's no Average range. Either you're Under or Above average. I'd bet it's a precise, intentional decision not to make anyone feel "average" thus removing the related level. So w.r.t Garmin, Apple is missing one label/range. I wonder, if they introduced the Average range, what that'd be for your age/gender, and would that be satisfying? By the way, out of curiosity, have you already performed enough workout with the new watch to get a VO2max estimate from it ? How different is it, as absolute value, with respect to the Garmin?