Was just about to post about this as well...
Sounds like the battery life of the Apple watch ultra is supposed to be long enough for IM distance.
I guess most will wait to see what DC Rainmaker says.......if his review (I'm just assuming he'll be doing one) is positive I'll be getting one.

I'm in the market for a new watch and the new Garmin 955's lack of cell service makes it a nonstarter. I have an Apple Watch 6 now that I wear for everyday use but it's not a good multisport watch. The new Apple Watch Ultra looks like it checks all the boxes.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

I guess my question - and I've been searching google for awhile - is will it support ANT+?

I don't follow this space at all but am always intrigued. What does the Ultra have (other than battery life) to make it a possible suitable replacement to your Garmin?

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

I think the UI will be the biggest feature. I am pro Garmin now via a Fenix 6 and content. But in the long run I would be very nervous if I was them. Living in the Apple ecosystem will make it very attractive future purchase for me as Apple continues to add Health analytics that I suspect will far out do Garmin. Then having a phone, SMS to Satellite (I bet is in the watch in the future), all these things will draw people over and I doubt they go back.

Far away the biggest thing holding me back from Apple currently is the battery life of the watch. I wear my watch all the time, everywhere, so having to charge it when I am in a 3rd world country's (which I do often) is a big of an adjustment for me. Spent 3 day's in the high mountains this past Labor day, all my freinds Apple watches were toast when we went trail running, my Fenix 6 was great. So if Apple is getting closer, well you can tell me and I bet a lot of consumers will lean in.

This looks like it is a few generations away from competitive with the Garmin multisport watches. The big action button is an improvement over the base watch and UI, but it does not have any of the ANT+/BLE accessory support we take for granted in true sport devices. And, touch UI has historically been a liability in any sport device (even the current AW implementation).

They say you would need to use Low Power Mode to survive a long triathlon. Which means low resolution GPS, limited display interaction, and probably no accessory connectivity. In other words, nope.

I have had every generation AW except AWS1, and I have already ordered my Series 8 (not the Ultra). The Apple Watch has been my daily wear since introduction, but I have never considered it for training and racing due to its limitations. But, for someone who is just trying a triathlon, it might be great.

The AW's greatest assets as a smart watch (brilliant screen, simple user interface) are its greatest liabilities as a sport watch (massive battery drain & limited user interaction). My gut is that the AW cannot do both with excellence.

+1 to everything Zippy said.
Our family are big users of the apple products. 3 macbooks, apple tv, 4 iphones, 2 apple watches......I've wanted one but was holding off hoping they'd release one capable of triathlon...

I would bet on a firm no.....they won't want to pay anyone else for the use of ANT+.

---

"see the world as it is not as you want it to be"

Where did it say that? From the apple website:

Apple Watch Ultra has the best battery life of any Apple Watch, reaching up to 36 hours during normal use.1 Additionally, a new low-power setting, ideal for multi-day experiences, can extend battery life to reach up to 60 hours.2


and


Apple Watch Ultra has enough battery life for most users to complete a long-course triathlon, consisting of a 2.4-mile swim, 112-mile bike ride, and full marathon at 26.2 miles.

SBRcanuck wrote:

Where did it say that?

In their video event, around 30 minutes in. The narrator specifically says that a "long distance triathlon" (140.6 in their example) would need the low power workout setting.

https://www.apple.com/apple-events/event-stream/

The AW already has to dumb down GPS sampling and accuracy just to survive with the current models. So I cannot imagine what low power would do to GPS accuracy.

The Ultra is "capable of triathlon." But if you are accustomed to a true multisport device, then the AW Ultra might not live up to expectations.

My Caveat: I am a long time AW user and have given it a try in running, cycling, and swimming (but not a triathlon). It is fun, and good if I left my real sport watch behind. But it is a huge gap from a Garmin, Suunto, or Wahoo watch. And nothing in the release video looks like they made much real progress filling the gaps (other than adding true multisport and enough battery to make a 70.3).

Ahh..OK, thanks.

Well, I guess I'll see what DC says...

The other consideration about the AW as a sport platform is access and analysis of your workout data. If you have ever tried to get workout data out of an Apple Watch, it royally sucks. On one end of the spectrum, you have Garmin, which has a fully mature interface on the watch, mobile app, and web app for reviewing, analyzing, and sharing data. In the middle, you have Suunto and Wahoo which have good mobile apps (middle tier) but varying limits on the web tier.

Then you have Apple, which has a bad mobile tier and no web tier. And extracting a workout takes a willing app on the phone to do the work. It works, but it is clumsy at best. And you have to use something like Strava or TrainingPeaks for analysis - there is no Apple solution.

I have a lot of Apple products, and I upgrade every year. But I am also a deep cynic. To me, they are also the opposite of innovative in so many ways. It is like they design certain things without ever talking to experts who would use those things. For example, you see them often in the medical field, but a nurse cannot use the watch effectively to take someone's pulse, because the screen with a second hand disappears. Apple has known about this design limitation since 2015, but they implemented a half-assed non-fix. (Probably never actually talked to a nurse.)

I think the other 2 big pros of Apple is the social interactions with their ring competitions and health features.

Yup, I've got a Garmin and my partner has a AW and she refuses to go to bed if she hasn't closed her activity ring for the day

I think the one big con of Apple is that it's...Apple

Sorry :)

Garmin is, at least, 5 years ahead of Apple in multi-sport watches. That plus it is too small a market for Apple to focus on it.

I wonder if Apple will ever provide the option for health and recovery analytics similar to Whoop?? I haven't really looked closely at the new watch, but hopefully that will be a future option besides just basic data. I currently sleep with mine on to record a true resting HR as well as looking at HRV which doesn't correlate much for me unless something is seriously off. Maybe the watch isn't quite sensitive enough, but one would think their data pool would be enough to pull it off.

Hi Ecce, I would agree but is the dive market that big that they did a whole call out on their new product launch to go after Scuba divers?

I have always thought the one big challenge we all have is who holds our data in the end. I switched years ago from Suunto over to Garmin and lost all that history was it not for Strava. Now if I switch to Apple, again Strava holds my data but what happens when a new Strava comes along? I have always wished for a depository of data that is easy. Sure I could download a thousand GPX files, but just like I back of my HD to the cloud or something, you would think a brand agnostic back of service for us work out weenies would be interesting.

I'm one of those people that does my workout and that's the end of it. I don't analyze workouts because its past history and there's not a damn thing I can do about it. I know if my workout went well or not and whether I hit my paces/metrics or not. My watch or bike computer gave me real time feedback.

I get that other people do review and analyze their workouts so I get Apple's shortcomings in comparison to Garmin in that respect. For me it's not an issue.

I want a watch that can tell me how far, fast, and hard I'm going. I want a watch that has the ability to track me in real time in a race or training without a bunch of hoops to jump through. My wife can literally just grab her iPhone and see where I am at any given moment. Garmin requires a different ecosystem she just isn't going to use. I want a watch that has the ability to make phone calls if I'm injured and laying in a ditch on the side of the road. Bonus that I can buy shit with it (Apple Pay) and listen to music (iTunes).

Battery life for more than a 70.3 is a concern so I'm looking forward to reviews regarding that aspect of the watch.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

https://tapiriik.com/ is what you want - can dump FIT files to Dropbox for easy downloading/platform agnostic storage

Thank you, that is exactly what I used when I switched over. It was "ok" some 5-6 years ago so maybe better now, but yes an expansion to that would be great. Note no Apple on there either, so suspect you have to get it to Strava to pull it down somewhere as some others have said. Anyway maybe just me whinging.

Last I checked (which was a while back) Apple Health data could only be accessed directly on an iOS device (no web based APIs) so they'd need to build an app to pull it from there. Dumping to Strava does seem to be the best lowest common denominator option still.

My Dad ordered the Ultra, so I can give you second-hand-ish ask-me-anything triathlete view in a couple months.

It still looks like something a 12 year old girl would wear...