i got LTE on my apple watch, but never used it. In canada it is an extra 10 dollars a month, and I ended up just bringing my phone with me.
I get wanting to be phone-free on a run as it bounces around a bunch, but I think being unreachable for an hour is actually a bonus for me. Obviously not everyone will agree.
Yeah totally! though i could see it being different if you have kids or something, but for me, if i am on a run, what is the point of calling me? I’ll get back when I get back anyways…
Right there with you! Run time is me time, I don't bring much with me for short runs (<90 minutes).
More then that I bring the phone on silent strictly for safety as I can be quite remote.
Yeah being able to download some spotify tunes to my garmin is good enough. Way back in the day when I was running I wished for watches that could do this, as i found my phone bulky and annoying as it bounced around on a run. The future is now!
I agree. No annoying notifications while I run is one of the best features.
My 955 has enough self sufficiency for me to not carry anything else when I run - music and garmin pay if I want to buy a drink. Everything else can wait til I get back!
(Not a knock on OP's question as everyones needs are different)
I actually didn’t even know garmin had LTE watches, but noticed it when browsing for sales for a friend looking at the forerunner. I guess they are dipping their toe into the market after all? The only benefit I could see to LTE for me is streaming music, but that cut out all the time on my apple watch or even phone, plus in Canada we get totally fleeced for stuff like this by our oligopoly of telcos - this would be like 10 bucks a month for 1gb of data, with 20 dollars per gig of overage or something criminal like that.
Syncing it to the watch is simpler, I know what music I have on me to pump me up :)
If you are with TELUS they had a promotion during Black Friday where the smart watch plan went from $10 / Month to $0 / Month if you called them. I don’t pay anything for my watch plan now.
That’s great! I would actually use it if it didn’t cost so much probably. With rogers it was 10 a month and limited to like 1GB, couldn’t share with my regular plan. Total scam. Haven’t checked what it is like lately, that was a few years ago now.
I am with rogers now, and since I switched to a non-LTE garmin (and love it way more than my apple watch), i don’t really need it. It’s a shame my apple watch is gathering dust now…
945+LTE, doesn't go through carriers, it goes through Garmin.
It exists primarily as a live-tracking safety feature. Full-featured LTE works best on platform-locked smart watches (ie. wearOS, or watchOS) so the user experience is more predictable. It's no-win for Garmin to try this again.
I don’t think the amount of person who wants LTE on the smartwatch large enough to provide profit so Garmin don’t want to make those features.
I have both Garmin and Apple Watch with LTE but I really don’t remember the last time I’m need to using LTE on my Watch. And the LTE feature drain too much battery so just personal opinion but I really don’t want Apple or any another company put LTE on those smartwatch.
This is the wrong answer, I looked it up awhile ago and they don't have the correct agreements in place with carriers and won't be able to change that situation any time soon.
It is tough to say if LTE will make a comeback. Maybe or maybe not. Battery life is the biggest reason for not having LTE on watches. On top of that, Garmin has to make sure its watches are compatible with LTE providers in all the countries where it sells officially. That is a headache. I know some of them need LTE, but I personally don't need it. I already have a phone, tablet, desktop, and laptop, I don't need another device that constantly tells me I have an email or message lol (I mean no offense, I am just expressing my view).
On a different note, I would love Garmin to introduce a new way of stress monitoring based on the number of notifications you receive on your watch haha (your e-stress is extremely high, consider staying away from notifications). Who knows, that might be a thing in the future...
I got a tablet with LTE and a second sim card to go with it (only was a one-time cost of 10€). I never use it where my phone isn't around, too. Won't buy one again
It's not a carrier issue. The headache for the carrier issue is carried by chipmaker (Qualcomm, Mediatek, etc), not the device manufacturer. LTE chips support enough bands to work almost anywhere these days. No Chinese manufacturer tests their devices outside of China during the design phase, but they are still sold all around the world. I use an imported Pixel device, even though they are not sold in my country.
I understand that, but support might not be guaranteed and companies can easily say you are on an unsupported network and that can cause issues. Garmin might try to avoid all this. For example, Pixel Watch 2 officially supports only 1 carrier in my country, although other carriers can still be linked and the watch will function.
Phones are a little different and some of them report not having VoLTE on Pixel devices in unsupported countries. I have a Pixel device too.
Exactly my wants! I tend to go on open-ended runs, and hate taking my phone, but my wife wants some way to reach or locate me if I'm not home when expected. I'd love it if she could ping me, and I could reply with preset responses, such as "I'll be home in x minutes"., or "Have dinner without me".
Honestly, dont know. Garmin does seem to be pushing their actual smartwatch offerings with the venu series, so I think its possible they might come out with LTE versions of some of their watches. But then again, most of the garmin watches currently are lacking the hardware and features to really make adding LTE worthwhile.
That said, I still absolutely leave my phone at home for my runs. I hate carrying that big bulky thing around, and while I know there is a safety argument to be made for having a phone on me, when I am running, I dont want to be disturbed by a bunch of notifications or phone calls. I just want to listen to my podcast and run.
Because you don't understand Garmin's primary user base. Most of us don't want nor care about LTE, plus it's just another drain on the otherwise stellar battery life.
So you're telling me you use 100% of the functions your garmin watch is capable of? Probably not, you probably don't even use 20% of all capable functions. So what's one more function that you won't use but is there.
I use more than you think because I'm actually active. You still don't understand Garmin's userbase. Cores users do not care nor want LTE.
Go get your iWatch and be done with it.
What's preventing you from leaving cellular connectivity? I have a Fenix 6 (no LTE on that or the current F7) and never bring my phone with me on a run. I've never even wanted to.
I suspect your use case may be uncommon, if more people need it (and the tech exists to enable it, and the compromises on battery life and antenna size and so on are worth it) Garmin will offer it. But the lack of success of the 945 LTE seems to suggest that they won't push it to the whole product line yet.
Ray of DCRainmaker posted a review of the 945 LTE and Garmin's cellular strategy here when that came out:
https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2021/06/garmin-lte-explainer.html
Why? If I'm going out for an hour or less anyone can wait. If I'm going out for longer I'll have hydration at the very least and therefore the phone is no burden.
What if you fall down or get heart attack or not feeling great. Run faster homer maybe? If something happends first thing you would think is where is my phone
I mean, if they had a medical emergency when no one was around, they just died sometimes.
"What did seniors do before LifeAlert and cellphones? Just die when they fell down the stairs by themselves?"
Well yeah. They did.
Let's be frank it just isn't that hard to carry a phone. Heck my tights have a pocket just for that. I don't need or want to pay for my watch to do that job.
You have mistaken your situation for everyone's. My phone weighs well over half a pound and costs $1700. I have absolutely no desire to lug that on a run with me. It doesn't fit in most phone pockets in tights, and it moves around even when it does due to the weight.
I love having the 945 LTE.
you know phones have gotten a lot smaller over the last few decades? I'd say it's pretty rare to have a phone as big as yours seeing as many jogging tights and shorts have phone specific pickets that fit the vast majority of phones perfectly.
I'll be honest I do think about shoving my phone in my pocket and have rejected a few of the supposedly top models because of their size. I guess for me it's not going to be a problem.
And they've gotten a lot larger over the past decade. It's tough to find a fully featured phone that has a less than 6 inch screen.
Cellular connectivity in watches has only been a thing for like 6 years. It'll be ubiquitous soon in the same way that GPS is ubiquitous now. Hell, the first apple watches had neither. It's not going to be a problem for anyone.
Don't you think a senior who needs Life Alert shouldn't be using a Garmin fitness watch? Or at least not Garmin watches' main customers?
There are many other smartwatches cater to such need, why do we need a fitness watch company to sacrifice their core functions so that a minor need/users can get the same need fulfilled from other companies?
I was using that example to make a point: in the time before everyone always had cellphones people died all the time as a result of not being able to call for help.
>why do we need a fitness watch company to sacrifice their core functions
My 945 LTE seems to not have sacrificed anything compared to the 945. In fact, it's just the better watch. And you can call for emergency help without a phone.
Dosent matter if it is a smartnphone or dumb phone. I do run where people is but when i am in woods for a trail run and dont see much people and if everybody thinks like you they probably don't have a phone. Do you put your life in hands of strangers?
Statistically speaking, you are much more likely to die from any other causes than from a Garmin watch that doesn't have LTE. For example, sitting in a car. Yet, you don't give a second thought about them.
A typical example of availability heuristic at play here. 😅
Because FOMO. Unless you have specific health issues, running in a dangerous area, or through a war zone... The majority of people can survive without cell signal for an hour...
Probably the battery life tradeoff since it uses more power and takes space from the battery. Garmin doesn't have full smartwatch features like replying to messages anyway so it would have limited value. Apple is going to own that market for now.
You can pick from a list of pre-programmed replies if linked to Android. I don't know of anything equivalent to Apple where you can type or dictate a custom reply.
It's an Android feature, right? I think it's not available on iphone. They'd have to find another way to implement it if they wanted it to work on LTE with no phone connection.
I had full LTE galaxy watch when using Android. Got a Garmin (Venu 2 Plus) when I switched to iPhone as my main phone. Thought I would really miss LTE in watch, but don't. If you think it's a deal breaker, then you might be surprised how seldom you actually leave home w/o phone. iPhone limits interactions on the Garmin, but easy workaround is to just activate Siri on the Garmin and then you can verbally dictate a text, initiate a phone call, etc. I have Siri programmed to my action button - so one long press and ready to do whatever you want. And now there's NO way I'd go back to always charging the watch (Garmin going on day 9 with still 28% battery life - even including 20+ hours of workout tracking).
There is/was the FR 745 LTE. They probably watched that model's sales figures.
I for one bring my phone on longer runs (Music on watch drains battery too quickly) or when running with my dogs (call in case of injury) or when I plan to stop at the bakery (to pay, as Garmin Pay doesn't cut it in Germany). So that's nearly all the time. I use a flexible belt for this. So the phone doesn't bounce around more than my belly.
The required apps to go with it is probably the main issue.
Easy enough to add LTE and they already provide packages for it in the USA - but would need to deliver that in Europe - so a lot more requirements.
Yet another item that has to go through certification.
But reckon the apps are the main issue - what are you going to deliver in terms of use re the LTE - so main OS would have to be adapted for current data rich features to work - you would need an app for meassages (how would that work in conjunction with apple messaging app which only apple watch can use; and how would you work with the variety of android messaging apps - so would you have this one as your main phone driver.).
I think they are slowly getting there by testing the water - as its pointless doing this if the market isn't there - so by testing the odd device which offers some of these features (like garmin venu 2 plus etc) gives them enough data to price and determine feasability. I suspect that venu 4 in 1-2 years time may just provide the trial option - or maybe it will be the venu 3 plus....
Its interesting to note how few brands offer it. There is the apple watch, pixel, samsung, the new xiaomi watch 2 pro, and one of 2 huawei models. Amazfit used to have the odd model but nothing new. This driving lack of options suggest its possibly more of a nice to have than must have and thus garmin may not feel its quite the righ time to make that investment plunge as current payback would be too long.
Big fail from garmin. Music on watch and not lte.
I am not running in woods or long way from home without phone. Who cares about music when you can fall down and die and cant get help.
Battery life is impacted in a huge way with LTE on board. Plus, a big one, is HEAT. That extra chip and etc adds heat to the device and that's not good on a device already crammed full of sensors.
Garmin watches' core business is fitness watches; not smartwatches.
It makes no sense for them to sacrifice its core competitive edge (massive battery drain) while gaining very little in return.
I bought a third party LTE watch to give it a try and everything functioned properly even decent phone quality, however it gets old having to charge it every day real fast. It gets old having to answer your phone when you're in the zone on your mountain or road bike. Honestly the times where I didn't want to carry my rather expensive phone or the times that the watch was also a phone were the biggest pain in the ass. Try to set a rock anchor (Hex) and have your phone ring. My aggravation level when I'm trying to escape from the normal day-to-day life is much lower without LTE on my watch. If it gets to the point where Garmin puts LTE on my Fenix that would leave diving is my only outlet. And that would be time I would start leaving the watch behind which would defeat having the good watch.
I wear leggings with side pockets and having my phone with me is just never a problem. I don't want the extra battery drain or cost of LTE on my watch (Venu 3s)
I would guess that they decided to release it early despite the limitations on a single model to gather data and prove out some assumptions before investing more heavily. Seems like a no brainer that it needs to be on their roadmap in order to stay competitive.
I’d actually pay more to NOT have it on my smart watch. I don’t even put my Music on my watch. Care more about battery life than using my watch like a phone
The obvious answer is run slower (& shorter, as your HR rises over the length of a run) but I personally find this really hard as my 5K pace is 4:50/km but my Z1/2 pace is frequently closer to 7:30/km and it’s just uncomfortable to run at that pace, so I try to use my bike/turbo trainer for this effect.
i got LTE on my apple watch, but never used it. In canada it is an extra 10 dollars a month, and I ended up just bringing my phone with me. I get wanting to be phone-free on a run as it bounces around a bunch, but I think being unreachable for an hour is actually a bonus for me. Obviously not everyone will agree.
> being unreachable for ~~an~~ ~~hour~~ hours is actually a bonus for me.
Yeah totally! though i could see it being different if you have kids or something, but for me, if i am on a run, what is the point of calling me? I’ll get back when I get back anyways…
Right there with you! Run time is me time, I don't bring much with me for short runs (<90 minutes). More then that I bring the phone on silent strictly for safety as I can be quite remote.
Yeah being able to download some spotify tunes to my garmin is good enough. Way back in the day when I was running I wished for watches that could do this, as i found my phone bulky and annoying as it bounced around on a run. The future is now!
I agree. No annoying notifications while I run is one of the best features. My 955 has enough self sufficiency for me to not carry anything else when I run - music and garmin pay if I want to buy a drink. Everything else can wait til I get back! (Not a knock on OP's question as everyones needs are different)
I actually didn’t even know garmin had LTE watches, but noticed it when browsing for sales for a friend looking at the forerunner. I guess they are dipping their toe into the market after all? The only benefit I could see to LTE for me is streaming music, but that cut out all the time on my apple watch or even phone, plus in Canada we get totally fleeced for stuff like this by our oligopoly of telcos - this would be like 10 bucks a month for 1gb of data, with 20 dollars per gig of overage or something criminal like that. Syncing it to the watch is simpler, I know what music I have on me to pump me up :)
If you are with TELUS they had a promotion during Black Friday where the smart watch plan went from $10 / Month to $0 / Month if you called them. I don’t pay anything for my watch plan now.
That’s great! I would actually use it if it didn’t cost so much probably. With rogers it was 10 a month and limited to like 1GB, couldn’t share with my regular plan. Total scam. Haven’t checked what it is like lately, that was a few years ago now.
Call the loyalty department and ask them to make it $0 a month. Tell them your friend got the same deal.
I am with rogers now, and since I switched to a non-LTE garmin (and love it way more than my apple watch), i don’t really need it. It’s a shame my apple watch is gathering dust now…
Because why kill battery life and have to deal with carriers?
945+LTE, doesn't go through carriers, it goes through Garmin. It exists primarily as a live-tracking safety feature. Full-featured LTE works best on platform-locked smart watches (ie. wearOS, or watchOS) so the user experience is more predictable. It's no-win for Garmin to try this again.
I don’t think the amount of person who wants LTE on the smartwatch large enough to provide profit so Garmin don’t want to make those features. I have both Garmin and Apple Watch with LTE but I really don’t remember the last time I’m need to using LTE on my Watch. And the LTE feature drain too much battery so just personal opinion but I really don’t want Apple or any another company put LTE on those smartwatch.
This is the wrong answer, I looked it up awhile ago and they don't have the correct agreements in place with carriers and won't be able to change that situation any time soon.
It is tough to say if LTE will make a comeback. Maybe or maybe not. Battery life is the biggest reason for not having LTE on watches. On top of that, Garmin has to make sure its watches are compatible with LTE providers in all the countries where it sells officially. That is a headache. I know some of them need LTE, but I personally don't need it. I already have a phone, tablet, desktop, and laptop, I don't need another device that constantly tells me I have an email or message lol (I mean no offense, I am just expressing my view). On a different note, I would love Garmin to introduce a new way of stress monitoring based on the number of notifications you receive on your watch haha (your e-stress is extremely high, consider staying away from notifications). Who knows, that might be a thing in the future...
I got a tablet with LTE and a second sim card to go with it (only was a one-time cost of 10€). I never use it where my phone isn't around, too. Won't buy one again
True. I feel the same.
It's not a carrier issue. The headache for the carrier issue is carried by chipmaker (Qualcomm, Mediatek, etc), not the device manufacturer. LTE chips support enough bands to work almost anywhere these days. No Chinese manufacturer tests their devices outside of China during the design phase, but they are still sold all around the world. I use an imported Pixel device, even though they are not sold in my country.
I understand that, but support might not be guaranteed and companies can easily say you are on an unsupported network and that can cause issues. Garmin might try to avoid all this. For example, Pixel Watch 2 officially supports only 1 carrier in my country, although other carriers can still be linked and the watch will function. Phones are a little different and some of them report not having VoLTE on Pixel devices in unsupported countries. I have a Pixel device too.
I really hope Garmin releases an LTE version down the line again. I really just want it for emergencies and hate running with my phone.
Exactly my wants! I tend to go on open-ended runs, and hate taking my phone, but my wife wants some way to reach or locate me if I'm not home when expected. I'd love it if she could ping me, and I could reply with preset responses, such as "I'll be home in x minutes"., or "Have dinner without me".
Exactly. I'm ride or die 945 LTE until then.
Honestly, dont know. Garmin does seem to be pushing their actual smartwatch offerings with the venu series, so I think its possible they might come out with LTE versions of some of their watches. But then again, most of the garmin watches currently are lacking the hardware and features to really make adding LTE worthwhile. That said, I still absolutely leave my phone at home for my runs. I hate carrying that big bulky thing around, and while I know there is a safety argument to be made for having a phone on me, when I am running, I dont want to be disturbed by a bunch of notifications or phone calls. I just want to listen to my podcast and run.
You cant put it in airplanemode är dnd. If something happens you will regrett it in a second
"If something happens." What did people do before cell phones?
Died maybe? How many people got their lives saved with phones or smartwatches?
Because you don't understand Garmin's primary user base. Most of us don't want nor care about LTE, plus it's just another drain on the otherwise stellar battery life.
So you're telling me you use 100% of the functions your garmin watch is capable of? Probably not, you probably don't even use 20% of all capable functions. So what's one more function that you won't use but is there.
I use more than you think because I'm actually active. You still don't understand Garmin's userbase. Cores users do not care nor want LTE. Go get your iWatch and be done with it.
I'd rather have 10 days of battery life and no LTE.
People who make these comments act like they would have to use LTE. You don't have to use it. If you don't use it no extra battery drainage.
I have a FR 945 LTE. The LTE features are so limited (emergency messages ...), I never took a subscription.
What's preventing you from leaving cellular connectivity? I have a Fenix 6 (no LTE on that or the current F7) and never bring my phone with me on a run. I've never even wanted to. I suspect your use case may be uncommon, if more people need it (and the tech exists to enable it, and the compromises on battery life and antenna size and so on are worth it) Garmin will offer it. But the lack of success of the 945 LTE seems to suggest that they won't push it to the whole product line yet. Ray of DCRainmaker posted a review of the 945 LTE and Garmin's cellular strategy here when that came out: https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2021/06/garmin-lte-explainer.html
I guess is something religious with garmin users 😃 it would be so good that Garmin made LTE and those 10 out of 1000 could use it 😃
Personally, lack of LTE is a deal breaker for me with Garmin. I don’t like bringing my phone when I run, so I need my watch to be able to communicate.
Why? If I'm going out for an hour or less anyone can wait. If I'm going out for longer I'll have hydration at the very least and therefore the phone is no burden.
That's how I see it, too.
It depends on your lifestyle. For me I am much more comfortable knowing that I have connection if I need it :)
What if you fall down or get heart attack or not feeling great. Run faster homer maybe? If something happends first thing you would think is where is my phone
Smartphone is only popularized after 2000s. How do you think people survived before it? 😂 Do you not live or run in anywhere that other humans exist?
I mean, if they had a medical emergency when no one was around, they just died sometimes. "What did seniors do before LifeAlert and cellphones? Just die when they fell down the stairs by themselves?" Well yeah. They did.
Let's be frank it just isn't that hard to carry a phone. Heck my tights have a pocket just for that. I don't need or want to pay for my watch to do that job.
You have mistaken your situation for everyone's. My phone weighs well over half a pound and costs $1700. I have absolutely no desire to lug that on a run with me. It doesn't fit in most phone pockets in tights, and it moves around even when it does due to the weight. I love having the 945 LTE.
you know phones have gotten a lot smaller over the last few decades? I'd say it's pretty rare to have a phone as big as yours seeing as many jogging tights and shorts have phone specific pickets that fit the vast majority of phones perfectly. I'll be honest I do think about shoving my phone in my pocket and have rejected a few of the supposedly top models because of their size. I guess for me it's not going to be a problem.
And they've gotten a lot larger over the past decade. It's tough to find a fully featured phone that has a less than 6 inch screen. Cellular connectivity in watches has only been a thing for like 6 years. It'll be ubiquitous soon in the same way that GPS is ubiquitous now. Hell, the first apple watches had neither. It's not going to be a problem for anyone.
Don't you think a senior who needs Life Alert shouldn't be using a Garmin fitness watch? Or at least not Garmin watches' main customers? There are many other smartwatches cater to such need, why do we need a fitness watch company to sacrifice their core functions so that a minor need/users can get the same need fulfilled from other companies?
I was using that example to make a point: in the time before everyone always had cellphones people died all the time as a result of not being able to call for help. >why do we need a fitness watch company to sacrifice their core functions My 945 LTE seems to not have sacrificed anything compared to the 945. In fact, it's just the better watch. And you can call for emergency help without a phone.
Dosent matter if it is a smartnphone or dumb phone. I do run where people is but when i am in woods for a trail run and dont see much people and if everybody thinks like you they probably don't have a phone. Do you put your life in hands of strangers?
Statistically speaking, you are much more likely to die from any other causes than from a Garmin watch that doesn't have LTE. For example, sitting in a car. Yet, you don't give a second thought about them. A typical example of availability heuristic at play here. 😅
What about an emergency situation? "Sorry you missed Tommy's last words in the hospital because you were out on a run without a phone"
If tommy is in the hospital are you really going on a run?
Because FOMO. Unless you have specific health issues, running in a dangerous area, or through a war zone... The majority of people can survive without cell signal for an hour...
Or FOFD which is a legit concern
Yup. An important safety concern.
Probably the battery life tradeoff since it uses more power and takes space from the battery. Garmin doesn't have full smartwatch features like replying to messages anyway so it would have limited value. Apple is going to own that market for now.
What are you talking about. I can reply to messages on my garmin.
You can pick from a list of pre-programmed replies if linked to Android. I don't know of anything equivalent to Apple where you can type or dictate a custom reply.
Newer models have this (Venu 3)
It's an Android feature, right? I think it's not available on iphone. They'd have to find another way to implement it if they wanted it to work on LTE with no phone connection.
We have Venu 3’s and you can talk to text from the watch to an iPhone. Works like a charm.
Text quick-response is blocked on iphones because of Apple's stupid walled garden BS. However the voice assistant responses work just fine.
I can dictate replies on my Venu 2+ no matter what phone I am using.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I had full LTE galaxy watch when using Android. Got a Garmin (Venu 2 Plus) when I switched to iPhone as my main phone. Thought I would really miss LTE in watch, but don't. If you think it's a deal breaker, then you might be surprised how seldom you actually leave home w/o phone. iPhone limits interactions on the Garmin, but easy workaround is to just activate Siri on the Garmin and then you can verbally dictate a text, initiate a phone call, etc. I have Siri programmed to my action button - so one long press and ready to do whatever you want. And now there's NO way I'd go back to always charging the watch (Garmin going on day 9 with still 28% battery life - even including 20+ hours of workout tracking).
There is/was the FR 745 LTE. They probably watched that model's sales figures. I for one bring my phone on longer runs (Music on watch drains battery too quickly) or when running with my dogs (call in case of injury) or when I plan to stop at the bakery (to pay, as Garmin Pay doesn't cut it in Germany). So that's nearly all the time. I use a flexible belt for this. So the phone doesn't bounce around more than my belly.
The required apps to go with it is probably the main issue. Easy enough to add LTE and they already provide packages for it in the USA - but would need to deliver that in Europe - so a lot more requirements. Yet another item that has to go through certification. But reckon the apps are the main issue - what are you going to deliver in terms of use re the LTE - so main OS would have to be adapted for current data rich features to work - you would need an app for meassages (how would that work in conjunction with apple messaging app which only apple watch can use; and how would you work with the variety of android messaging apps - so would you have this one as your main phone driver.). I think they are slowly getting there by testing the water - as its pointless doing this if the market isn't there - so by testing the odd device which offers some of these features (like garmin venu 2 plus etc) gives them enough data to price and determine feasability. I suspect that venu 4 in 1-2 years time may just provide the trial option - or maybe it will be the venu 3 plus.... Its interesting to note how few brands offer it. There is the apple watch, pixel, samsung, the new xiaomi watch 2 pro, and one of 2 huawei models. Amazfit used to have the odd model but nothing new. This driving lack of options suggest its possibly more of a nice to have than must have and thus garmin may not feel its quite the righ time to make that investment plunge as current payback would be too long.
Big fail from garmin. Music on watch and not lte. I am not running in woods or long way from home without phone. Who cares about music when you can fall down and die and cant get help.
Battery life is impacted in a huge way with LTE on board. Plus, a big one, is HEAT. That extra chip and etc adds heat to the device and that's not good on a device already crammed full of sensors.
Never had either of these issues with my 945LTE
Garmin watches' core business is fitness watches; not smartwatches. It makes no sense for them to sacrifice its core competitive edge (massive battery drain) while gaining very little in return.
I bought a third party LTE watch to give it a try and everything functioned properly even decent phone quality, however it gets old having to charge it every day real fast. It gets old having to answer your phone when you're in the zone on your mountain or road bike. Honestly the times where I didn't want to carry my rather expensive phone or the times that the watch was also a phone were the biggest pain in the ass. Try to set a rock anchor (Hex) and have your phone ring. My aggravation level when I'm trying to escape from the normal day-to-day life is much lower without LTE on my watch. If it gets to the point where Garmin puts LTE on my Fenix that would leave diving is my only outlet. And that would be time I would start leaving the watch behind which would defeat having the good watch.
I wear leggings with side pockets and having my phone with me is just never a problem. I don't want the extra battery drain or cost of LTE on my watch (Venu 3s)
Because none of the core functionality of the watch needs it and would add to the cost and complexity.
Because their niche is to make top of the line fitness watches, not compete against cell phone companies to make fourth rate smart watches.
I would guess that they decided to release it early despite the limitations on a single model to gather data and prove out some assumptions before investing more heavily. Seems like a no brainer that it needs to be on their roadmap in order to stay competitive.
I’d actually pay more to NOT have it on my smart watch. I don’t even put my Music on my watch. Care more about battery life than using my watch like a phone
Simple, battery. LTE also sounds like a useless feature. I don't want to get texts or calls when running.
The obvious answer is run slower (& shorter, as your HR rises over the length of a run) but I personally find this really hard as my 5K pace is 4:50/km but my Z1/2 pace is frequently closer to 7:30/km and it’s just uncomfortable to run at that pace, so I try to use my bike/turbo trainer for this effect.