Why did Garmin implement an AMOLED on a sportwatch?

Alex said:

how is the software situation with the 955?

I think the software for frX55 was put aside for the quick release of frX65. But this does not remove the assumption that frX65 software has exactly the same errors. For the bugs are not in the interface, the bugs are in the logic and calculation methods.

Realistically, the forerunner series is already considered as a casual wear. If we believe the statistics, then half of the Garmin users who run at all run no more than 3 km a week :) Hence the need for a bright indoor display.  The people will buy such watches.

global_local said:

Realistically, the forerunner series is already considered as a casual wear. If we believe the statistics, then half of the Garmin users who run at all run no more than 3 km a week :) Hence the need for a bright indoor display.  The people will buy such watches

I find it very interesting that so many people have this opinion.  I am a triathlete, runner, and cyclist, long time Garmin user since 2009 with my Forerunner 305, and currently training for a 50 mile ultramarathon using my Epix.  I also use it for hiking and other outdoor sport activities.  I am very happy with the AMOLED display (I do use an Edge 1030 plus or 520 plus computer on the bike) except for water sports like kayaking where I cant turn my wrist to see the watch so easily while paddling.

I'm not sure why people try to make the argument that the AMOLED display is not for "real athletes", but I assure you that I run more than 3km per week.

I am currently trialing the 265 having had many FR since the 201 as well.  I run a lot and have been for over 40 years . I have tabulated my experience with the 265 under the 955 forum and have placed soem photo's there. I am not sure if the display on the Epix may be slightly different . In any event and I think you cover it well when you mention kayaking, as I find even running the gesture on the 265 takes to much wrist turn to activate , compared to how one can quickly look at the MIP display on the 955 for instance. Ok my eyes are older at 60 years.   If one could toggle the AOD brightness during activities to be brighter it would help , but as far as I can see on the 265 that isn't possible. 

forums.garmin.com/.../1584173

People in 2018: why are Canon and Nikon implementing Mirrorless technology into their cameras?

People ~20 years ago: why are phone manufacturers implementing touch screens to their phones?

People ~10 years ago: why is Tesla pushing for battery electric vehicles?

and so on.

Answer is the same as the one to a question:why aren’t we still living in caves? Because we like progress.

For me AMOLED is a step backwards. I switched to Garmin because I hated gesture on other AMOLED watches and now Garmin makes me buy AMOLED with gesture mode LOL. Constant dimming is the biggest flaw as I like to glance at my watch and if it's sunny, I can't see a goddamn thing. Hopefully they will continue to make Fenix and Forerunner watches with MIP display and won't go all AMOLED. Many people including me don't want a smartphone on their wrists.

But the progress has to help us. An amoled who has to be switch on by wrist gesture during a swim is not progress

djhonda said:

Because we like progress.

My first sportwatch was a suunto t3. It could measure time.
I added a cheststrap so I could train at a certain intensity. I added a footpod so I could see my speed and distance. That changed the way I train. Great progress.

Then I bought a suunto ambit 3. It had a gps. It could do everything the t3 could, but now I could load a gpx and the watch would tell me where to go. I could go out in forests and mountains without getting lost. It had bluetooth for easy syncing, and could show phone notifications. Now, that is progress.

Then I bought a tomtom running 2. It had gps, optical heartrate and could play mp3’s. In stead of 3 devices, I could go out with only 1. Now that is progress. (Except optical heartrate doesn’t work for me, the mp3 player couldn’t handle large mp3files and the promised phone notifications where never implemented by tomtom). It could be progress, but badly implemented. 

So I bought a garmin forerunner 935. It could do everything the ambit 3 could, plus optical heartrate (which doesn’t work for me). And had a ton of metrics, some usefull, others not or not accurate. Progress? Nah.. not really. It doesn’t give me new opportunities.

The 945 and 955 added maps. Nice, but not really needed (never got lost with breadcrumb navigation) and even more metrics. Also not needed. Progress? Nah, not for me.

Now there is a 965. Which is a 955 with an other screen. Does is give new opportunities? No. So no progress.

But others might see a pretty screen as a huge step for mankind.

But my Internal Combustion Engine drives me from A to B just fine, so Battery Electric is no progress.

But my Nokia 6310 does all the things I need my phone to do and it does it so well, I don’t need touchscreen, it’s no a progress it’s a gimmick.

but my Nikon d5 does everything well, why would I need new technology?

Maybe Amoled on 965 does not tick all the boxes for everyone yet but it’s an evolution for better whether you like it or not.

Your internal combustion engine is ruining the environment. Not doing so is great progress.

From analog to digital photography was great progress.

From a tiny screen to a big screen with a touch first design (not the design garmin is using on the 955, that only mimics the buttons) was great progress

And let there be no mistake. I loose. Amoled will stay. It makes watches more expensive and more profitable for garmin. Capitalism wins. But this is the interweb, so I'm expected to complain ;)

But as long as you can only explain with 'it's just better' there isn't any real progress. Don't fool yourself. You may be happy with a pretty screen. I'm not against that. But why on a sport oriented watch? There are lifestyle watches for that.