I can't believe people would ever use Garmin's aviation products if they first were made to live with cycling product. But £200 for Tamigotchi levels of technology seems like a nice little earner.
I think you've kind of got that the wrong way round.
Low levels of technology in aviation are pretty standard (look at MH370) because new technology is expensive to adopt and potentially unreliable: in short, risky.
The difference between aviation Garmin users and cycling Garmin users is that aviation Garmin users get weeks/months of training in how to use anything inside a cockpit, whereas cycling users get no manual (except on the device, lol) and no help.
I've always thought that the poor UX/user unfriendliness of Garmin's products comes down to their background in aviation where things don't have to be easy to use or intuitive.
I think you've kind of got that the wrong way round.
Low levels of technology in aviation are pretty standard (look at MH370) because new technology is expensive to adopt and potentially unreliable: in short, risky.
The difference between aviation Garmin users and cycling Garmin users is that aviation Garmin users get weeks/months of training in how to use anything inside a cockpit, whereas cycling users get no manual (except on the device, lol) and no help.
I've always thought that the poor UX/user unfriendliness of Garmin's products comes down to their background in aviation where things don't have to be easy to use or intuitive.