Without debating what you said, because I’m sure you’re right, my reaction to Garmin is that I dislike that they offer me a way to track and analyze ALL my training, and they want me to use their social and incentive features to manage ALL parts of my active life… but then they want me to buy only from them.
Which is unrealistic and either results in anticompetitive behavior if users are coerced into only buying from them, or a crippled service if users don’t (because Garmin only gets partial data and their service is unhelpful).
I feel that kind of monopolistic and anticompetitive attitude is generally harmful to society. And so I make a concerted effort to let those companies know that this is enough to make me buy from others instead of them.
I see Wahoo (for example) differently. They may be closed, but they only sell me devices and an app to move the data from those devices. Not the same thing. And as noted, I do prefer their trainers and head units anyway.
Not that this is relevant to TPV at all… just got sidetracked in philosophy. Carry on.
Basically $20/month with Zwift but workouts populate to Garmin and contribute to the garmin ecosystem. Pace partners are rad as is zwift racing.
$10.42 month (even cheaper if you use the black friday code or if you miss out and want to try, support will basically send you a code) for TrainingPeaks Virtual and a TP premium account, but no automatic upload into the Garmin ecosystem. We can manual upload into Garmin Connect though? TPV supports power pedals that are duo unlike Zwift perhaps?
This may simply move me even further away from using Garmin’s training load and other metrics. I’m sick of companies intentionally making it harder for me to use their services because they’re hoping to coerce me into buying their products instead of the competition’s.
If Garmin won’t let TPV connect, I’m more inclined to de-emphasize Garmin than to allow myself to be forced into using another platform just because Garmin plays nice with them.
HRV seems to give me a good indicator of whether my overall health and condition is trending well, or if I’m overtraining, getting sick, not sleeping well, or something. And their training load ratio has helped me NOT bury myself into an overtraining hole which I tend to do.
My best/favorite training metric is hours of work, followed by TSS. Those two are my best guides for overall training decisions. But for daily “do more or do less” and matching how I feel to some data-based indicator or health and condition, Garmin’s stuff has been useful to me.
My response is simply to push back against that type of coercion, by directing my purchases elsewhere where practicable, thereby owning devices from various brands rather than just one. I don’t expect that to have any commercial repercussions for someone like Garmin, it’s more about me staying aligned with my own values. Each to their own.
I have had Zwift free for the last 12 months however they have just started charging me again. At £179.99 a year I don’t see the value when I can get TrainingPeaks with Virtual/Indievelo for £96.92 (minus the discounts available) and have a much more powerful training analysis tool along with the virtual riding. Gonna give Virtual a go whilst it’s free and then make decision on what to do.
I had a Garmin watch and a Garmin head unit, but have used indieVelo for nearly 2 years. As those sessions don’t get added to the training metrics, that functionality became redundant to me - so at the next opportunity I also moved away from my 840 to a Karoo.
This kind of approach doesn’t force me in to their ecosystem, it encourages me away from it.
This is why intervals.icu is growing so rapidly and so well reviewed. Completely open, will connect to anything that allows it, responds to the userbase. I created a Garmin IQ app that displays your intervals.icu data on your watch, so that is now what I use rather than the Garmin in-built metrics that don’t consider half of my activities.
I get the Garmin is a hardware manufacturer, and that they want to Connect App to be a selling feature for their hardware and to tie you into the eco system. But it’s a dangerous game to play
My use case is a bit odd to others, but I am Type 1 diabetic, I have the IQ dexcom for my 1040, and it works (as long as you have you phone with you and coverage) but there is no watch face feature for the Garmin watches (so I can see my dexcom when not training), so I have changed from Fenix to Apple Ultra (which has a direct link so no need to have a phone or signal for it to update) so straight away, by fitness tracking goes out the window with Garmin and I can’t (and don’t) use the connect app … which then means, why am I limiting myself to Garmin Edge cycle computers (the IQ app is great, but I can still look at my watch)
If you are going to tie people into your eco system, and you try to make it 100%, don’t be surprised when they leave for that one killer feature that they find elseware
Going back to TPV, I’m impressed with how well it adapts to different hardware. I ran it on one of the cheapest Samsung tablets, and got good results by using less-demanding textures and shadows. I then ran it on a top-of-the-line Tab S9 Ultra, and got good results with the best quality textures.
Really nice app. My one real (but minor) gripe so far is that it rounds my workout targets to the nearest 5W just like Zwift does. And I’m OCD enough that, if my sweet-spot workout should be at 194W, I’d prefer to do it at at exact wattage and not be under or over my target by 1W or 2W. I understand it makes no real difference to training, but then why have the app do the extra work of rounding the target power I give it? Just give me what I asked for.
Seems to work for me. n=1.
Each to their own.
)