[Closed] Why are GPS watches so buggy?

Fully agree. It seems that, as a society, we happily accept crap software. If the physical buttons didn't work, they would be replaced under warranty. If the strap failed after 6 months, the same, replacement on its way. But for software, anything goes. It can malfunction, functions can get changed or removed completely with updates. Faults can even come back, after they have been fixed. Yet there is nothing you can do.

If my understanding is correct, you can't even install your own software on them, as that breaks some legal agreement or other. I once looked up writing my own garmin software, was told by everyone I asked, garmin would prevent my company, or my customers, updating without a trip to court.

Absolutely sucks. Not just garmin, not just GPS watches. But garmin is a great example as they usually have top notch hardware, but utterly dreadful software.

Given that cycling GPS units have a long history of being buggy, packing the same stuff into something a quarter of the size and rushing to be early to market probably isn't going to go well.

Why are GPS watches so buggy?

Why are Garmins buggy? Because they are shit.

Used considerably cheaper TomTom and Leyzene GPS which have been faultless and accurate

My Leyzene does route mapping, connects to hrm/cadence, texts and emails pop up on screen. Cost £50

maybe i'm not a 'serious' user and i'm not looking closely enough, but my 935 has been faultless for getting on for a year. i like their software for the most part.oh, and it's served the purpose for which it was bought. i'm lighter and fitter than i have ever been. win.

Suunto have excellent GPS and stats (in my opinion), but the software is a little lacking as well. It can takes ages to sync to Movescount; doesn't always, but often takes hours

I am waiting for Wahoo to bring out a watch; if that works (and syncs) as well as the bike computers, it'll be excellent

This is a Garmin issue rather than a general GPS watch problem?

Unfortunately, for some unknown reason for many people Garmin are seen as the go to brand/the benchmark, and they are not setting the bar very high for reliable, user friendly devices.

1. Rushing to market.

2. If you break old devices your customers buy new ones from you. There's simply more profit in unreliable products if you've got a near monopoly and there's always another fool.

3. Millennial software Devs who have been told from birth that they're infallible and therefore don't test or design properly.

4. Hardware wears out. Batteries die and don't provide reliable power. Flash cells die and Garmin's software doesn't work around it.

Garmin's Bluetooth issues are simply indefensible; why deliberately make one half of your pairing incompatible with the other half?

For me Garmin would be the first choice cos I have 5 years of data stored on Garmin Connect. However if something obviously better came along I would go with that. Both Suunto and Polar have new watches, but according to DC Rainmaker the sofware/GPS is poor (at the moment). Maybe you need to wait till a device is nearly obsolete before you buy it, when most of its faults have eventually been fixed.

Wahoo have a watch on the way. Maybe worth waiting for?

From reading alot in the last few weeks, my perception is that the really older hardware is better. Maybe the modern stuff is too complex, too small etc at the cost of reliability, accuracy and durability.

Its basic stuff such as crashing, satellite lock and altimeter accuracy. There’s always complaints about battery life

I have a Garmin Vivoactive. It has never crashed. The battery life is excellent. I've only once had a problem with satellite lock in 14 months. Altimeter accuracy, I have no idea, not bothered about it really because I just use the watch to upload to Strava.

What is mediocre is the Garmin Connect software. I've never been much impressed with it.

yeah, garmin are definitely guilty of this. Its a rush to be first to market. The hardware is great, the software (in the early'ish releases) is usually terrible.

I have a fenix 3 that was bought within a couple of months of the launch of the device, the software was truly awful for the first 12-18 months, after that (by about version 6 of the software), it started to become stable, and now (on version 8.x) its a great product, it just took nearly two years on unreliable software to get there.

Will not buy another garmin consumer product so early on in the release cycle, will wait until they are at least a year old.

Interestingly their other product lines that I am familiar with (marine chartplotters) - dont seem to suffer anywhere near as many issues, I guess its a different software dev team involved, or maybe they have higher standards of testing for the stuff that could be life threatening if the equipment fails.

Well if you believe the various user forums.

garmin sell a shit load of GPS watches.

99.9% of users are perfectly satisified with the performance.

the 0.1% who do go online make a disproportionate amount of noise.

see any other consumer product.

I've owned my 920XT for 4 years now and its only had one issue , which to resolve I just reset the watch. Just like my iPhone however, I do not rush to install the latest software as soon as it comes out.

What hols2 said.

"99.9% of users are perfectly satisified with the performance.

the 0.1% who do go online make a disproportionate amount of noise."

That's the problem when you are a buyer. How do you gauge how representative the internet noise is? Its not like it is not an insignificant investment.

99.9% of users are perfectly satisified with the performance.

the 0.1% who do go online make a disproportionate amount of noise.

This over and over and over and over again.

I'm not convinced that Garmin hardware is great, I have a suspicion that they use really cheap components and rely on the software to work around defects.

My Edge dies when downloading particular gpx tracks from it. The car satnav crashes when updating maps. Both of those point to dodgy flash, although it could be any number of other reasons. Previous car sat navs have just point blank refused to turn on after having worked fine and turned off mid journey. That also screams hardware.

My Vivoactive was fine, but Garmin pushed an update to it and now it crashes weekly. That's clearly software.

The fact that brand news Edge devices in the shops now can't pair to the current version of Garmin Connect in the Google Play store is an active design decision, documented on their website. That's not a vocal minority issue.

The simple answer is because they can now. It used to be the case that a software update meant returning all the devices to the factory. Now you can just issue an update or patch. Less incentive to get it right first time.

3. Millennial software Devs who have been told from birth that they’re infallible and therefore don’t test or design properly.

Sounds like you've got a bit of a chip on your shoulder for the younger generation doesn't it?

Had (still have) a Vivoactive (1st generation) in daily use for 2.5 years and no issues with it,

Battery life is still great. I still get OTA updates and have no idea what they are doing, but it's never made anything worse.
The only issue I had was the little retaining ring on the strap breaking. I kicked up enough of a fuss with Garmin when I couldn't buy the little ring sepreately and wasn't going to pay £20 for a whole strap that they sent me a whole new strap for free. Which was handy when the strap itself broke a few weeks later 🙂

What jam bo said. I've got a Fenix 5 and so far it's been close to flawless - once crash in 10 months of continuous use seems reasonable to me for a fairly complex bit of software / hardware. Restarted the watch and it was fine.

Garmin gave me a reconditioned Vivoactive HR when mine died due to water intake, it was just over 2 years old.

The problem is also quite a lot to do with complexity. At some point, the number of features and capabilities present in software to address the hardware becomes so great that it is impossible to test fully. Software manufactures are effectively obliged to make a call as to what represents 'good enough'.

Even if you run a million tests on something (possible with fuzzing) You'll run up against things that you never expected. This might be due to having more than a million users, or jus having users doing things that you never expected. The plain fact is that it is cheaper to fix things in version+1 and maybe replace a unit than it is to test exhaustively before you ship something.

FWIW, I think Garmin probably use the same standard of components as everyone else. I just think they try and cram more into the software than a lot of other people. Complexity is the enemy of well tested.

Interesting timing. I've had a garmin forerunner 235 for a month or two now and, having previously been a long term garmin bike computer user, I've remarked how good the software is on the 235 compared to the bike computers. It's a bit complex to reach some functions (but maybe the limited number of buttons is part of that) but it seems completely consistent and I've not had any issues with it.

Got a Lezyne Micro GPS watch and it's been faultless. Software is good, syncs immediately with my android phone and distances, readings, etc seem pretty much spot on - can't moan at all

I have the old square vivoactive bought from the classifieds on here. It works great, never had a single issue and the battery lasts an age.

 I’ve got a Fenix 5 and so far it’s been close to flawless –

Same here. Had a 235 prior to that and that was mostly happy although could have some bluetooth connections issue which the 5 doesnt seem to suffer from.

I have an Apple watch. I use Strava on the watch to track my runs - seems OK location-wise, but if the watch says I've run for 38 minutes, then when I view the activity on my phone or computer (on the strava app or website) then it'll I've run for 36 minutes. It can also produce anomalies such as random kilometres which were run 30% faster, wtf!?

I have a fenix 5s, and its great, works flawlessly, doesnt look too much like a sports watch, never had software issues.

Also have a 520 plus for when i go somewhere new and want trailforks.  Also no problems.

Seems to me that if you google anything looking for reviews and things you will always find negative stuff.

Would not hesitate to buy something from garmin again.

I had an edge 205 . Worked grand.

Forerunner 305 which has been grand till the last 6 months (having owned it for 10 years) when it stopped playing with connect.

Edge 500 been perfect for 5 years or so.

My etrex 20x was annoying initially until I worked out how to use it

Upgraded to a 735xt as above its a touch complex to navigate but becomes intuitive

I think the Fenix 5 might well be flawless. Probably because 1, 2, 3 and 4 gave them time to sort out the software. What really gets me, I have a 3, is that once the later versions of hardware came out they just stopped the updates for the 3.

Where I perceive the brands have come from...

Garmin.. from 1st gen GPS bridging out of GPS being a military only technology; sorted the ANT/ANT+ thing and nailed it; segment-defining in most segments

Suunto... from Alitimeter/Barometer/Compass (expedition equipment)

Polar... from 1st gen consumer heart rate monitors

Tomtom... from consumer-facing 2nd gen GPS

Fitbit... from spinning low cost step-counters as a socially motivated fitness movement

Suunto watches are great but the interface (movescount) and support for it is absolutely shit. I'm now calling it Movescant on the basis of their customer service.

My Fenix 3 was flawless, right up until the point it wasn't.  The temperature and barometer sensors went kaput after about 3 years which messes up the elevation data and I have to auto correct every time in Strava.  Apart from that I'm sure it will keep going for a good few years and will probably get replaced with another Garmin.  All brands seem to have their flaws but I find Garmin's easiest to live with.

Of all the Garmin devices I've tried the Vivoactive HR seems the most bombproof and lacking in any obvious problems or flaws.

That said, when I had a problem with another device (Edge 520) Garmin were superb, sending me a replacement even though it was out of warranty.

Surely over half the software features they cram into these devices we don't need?  If they actually made simpler versions they might be more reliable.

I think my Fenix 3 is coming up to 3 years old. It only crashed once and it's had lots of use!!

If it had in built HR I'd not even consider replacing it. Think there's nothing that offers the feature set and reliability of the Fenix.

Vivoactive HR has been awesome.

I'd never buy a cycle specific GPS again, far too many other things done by a wrist device.

I've had a few GPS units - Garmin 500; replaced with a Lezyne Super Enhanced; replaced with a Garmin Vivoactive HR; replaced with a Forerunner 935.

Never had any issue with any of them apart from -

- Lezyne failed to take an update once - turned out the USB cable I was using wasn't plugged in properly - fixed as soon as I plugged it in properly;
- Vivoactive wouldn't update - plugged it into the PC and it also failed to update, then spotted that there was less than 2Kb on the device spare as I'd somehow managed to drag and drop a load of files to the unit - removed the files and the update processed no probs at all.

Forerunner is on my wrist virtually 24/7 (apart from showers where my wrist gets a wash and I'll rinse the watch every fortnight or so to make sure the strap is slightly cleaner!) - and apart from an occasionally longer time to get a GPS signal, it has been superb - but then I only use it to track my activities and tell the time - I don't use any navigation (as I figure if I get 'lost' it just adds to the adventure). I suspect I'm a very basic user of the units, but they have all worked very well over the years. The watch lasts about 10 days between charges (which suggests I'm needing to do far more exercise!).

No complaints from me...

went from garmin to lezyne,

menus are a bit clunkier on the lezyne, but fixes position quicker, battery life is good so far & I don't have to go near Garmin connect, which is a good thing.

Find Garmin connect a great tool.

Gets alot of hate from previous incarnations.

Current phone apps/website and interface with modern devices are a far cry from using Garmin express and the old style interfaces.

As for lezyne folk I ride with bought them and found they were less than awesome at keeping signal in the trees.

99.9% of users are perfectly satisfied with mediocre performance or don't properly use them or don't understand the limitations they are being subjected to or have more money than sense

the 0.1% who aren't go online and make a disproportionate amount of noise.

FTFY

And software software software 100x over. Its unbelievable how bad most software is on anything. Right now I am trying to make some fantastically designed amazing sounding wireless speakers work but can't because of the crappy crappity crap propitiatory app that goes with them - something that I would'nt expect from a sixth form project, let alone one of the largest tech companies in the world

My old TomTom Spark is working just fine.

sometimes less is more.......

I've given up on Garmin after the last Edge 1000.  I've had Garmin 200, 500, 510, 800, 1000, VivoHR and now just have a 520 that I use on the MTB.  I've always found they get to a certain age then just stop working, or can't pick up GPS signal or whatever.  Apart from the 1000 that had a dreadful battery life, however the functions on it were pretty good and the maps were great.  The VivoHR was pretty good, I used it daily for commuting so I didn't end up leaving my 520 on the bars at work - I actually found it much better in use than the Apple Watch I've got although the HR sensor was a bit optimistic.

I've now moved over to a Wahoo Bolt elemnt and it's great - not as flash as the Garmins but way more reliable and the function to control my turbo is pretty good.  Seems a lot more stable than the 520 and having the ability to set up the screens without having to do it on the device seems to work better than the Garmin method.

Hmm, was debating buying a Fenix 5X..

Not looking ideal in some eyes.

99.9% of users are perfectly satisfied with mediocre performance or don’t properly use them or don’t understand the limitations they are being subjected to or have more money than sense

the 0.1% who aren’t go online and make a disproportionate amount of noise.

I’ll put money on you being a Linux bore.

Fenix 3 which basically just worked for years, replaced it about a year ago with a Fenix 5, which also just works 🙂

My Leyzene does route mapping, connects to hrm/cadence, texts and emails pop up on screen. Cost £50

What Leyzene model is this? I'm thinking of getting a Garmin for following routes but they are a bit pricey.

Not looking ideal in some eyes.

In some eyes yes. In plenty of others, including mine absolutely no issues (well for the 5 as opposed to 5x).

I think it comes down to whether you are one of the elite 0.1% and are a connoisseur beyond any mere mortal.

I've got a theory about Garmin.

They make a range of devices from consumer crap to top grade marine and aeronautics equipment.

Lloyds register the MCA and their equivalents would have an issue if Garmin pumped out Marine navigation equipment as bad as their sports kit.

My reckoning is they put their best development teams on the safety critical stuff; and their worst developers just end up working on the stuff where it doesn't matter.

Lets face it with Consumer grade it isn't critical that it works, all you lose is a fairly meaningless GPS trace of where you were; being lost in the middle of the Atlantic because of f***ing Garmin on the other hand is going to kill you.

My reckoning is they put their best development teams on the safety critical stuff; and their worst developers just end up working on the stuff where it doesn’t matter.

My guess is that they hire the best people that they can afford and try to assign people so as to maximize their profit.

My guess is that they hire the best people that they can afford and try to assign people so as to maximize their profit.

Depending on whether its for a regulated market there may be additional audit/testing requirements which will lessen the chances of bugs getting through to production eg for aeronautics I think to get stuff approved it really does need to go through the hoops.

I've had a Garmin 200 on my road bike for almost 4 years now, still works wonderfully. Got a Fenix 3 last year and it's also been amazing. No issues with either, and I don't get the hate for Garmin Connect really, seems fine!

I’ve had a 935 which was replaced just short of a year old (can’t remember why) and I had a Fenix 3 which was also replaced under warranty (dodgy button). All the family have Garmin. I’ve toyed with the Tomtoms, but couldn’t get on with them.

i guess my Garmin satisfaction is a solid 7/10, but I can’t see any alternative - except maybe an Apple Watch.

just counted and I’ve owned 15 Garmin products over the years 😳

I started off with a FR610 with no problems. After a few years I decided to 'upgrade' it to a cycling specific Edge 520. However running the two devices side by side, I found that the Edge was under measuring the distance consistently by 5 to 6% which was annoying (recording set to 1 sec, and GPS or GPS+Glonass enabled). My normal riding terrain is challenging for GPS - mainly under tree cover and lots of twists and turns.

I sent the Edge back to Garmin via Evans and they obviously thought there was enough of an accuracy problem to send me out a new device. I again tried the Edge/FR together, and the same 6% difference was occurring. So I gave up, and decided that not all Garmin GPS are born equal.

I know that I could fix the problem by running a speedometer on the wheel.

When on the road, the distances are almost identical - no trees and lots of straight(ish) lines.

How can I be sure my next watch be a FR610 or Edge eqivalent? Wil my regular 50km rides become a feeble 47km?

How do you know which device is wrong..... All your test proves is one is wrong.

Smart phone measures even further. I think all devices probably under measure by straight lining, some more than others. The trick is to use a device consistently to get reasonable comparisons

Old Garmin's used to assume a constant velocity when they lost coverage. Newer ones with better receivers (once they switched to third-party chips rather than their in-house designs) don't lose reception as much.

That will likely make your rides on newer devices shorter.

Thus by proving the more data you have the less you know.

As you say consistant use of the same. Device is the best you can achieve really. Only way to get any useful comparison

Yep, my Vivoactive 3 has been spot on. Very happy

Right on cue, my Fenix 3 crashed tonight. This time while saving a workout. Had to soft reset it. Hold light button down for 30seconds, till screen goes blank. Luckily it hadn't lost my activity.