Suunto 7 Successor

[A Former User]

@olymay not now, I’ll do this evening. thanks!

[Brad_Olwin]

@olymay @lexterm77 @Jamie-BG @cosme-costa @ChrisA @isazi @suzzlo Let’s continue this conversation on topic.
https://forum.suunto.com/topic/7333/hrv-training-meta-analysis

[DavorP]

@olymay

5kruuner predictions
https://the5krunner.com/2021/11/28/2022-sports-watch-update/?amp=1

[Bulkan]

@davorp said in Suunto 7 Successor:

@olymay

5kruuner predictions
https://the5krunner.com/2021/11/28/2022-sports-watch-update/?amp=1

hahahahahahaha

[olymay]

Would it be too much to hope for a Suunto 7 successor to come this year and be powered by one of these?

Please Suunto… This could easily be the WearOS champ!!
(although it would need to be priced more competitively than the S7 was at launch!)

[harry08]

I had a look in the German Suunto online store. Almost all of the non titanium Suunto 7 versions are currently not available.
Maybe this is a hint that a successor is around the corner.
It was the same with Suunto 5 a few weeks ago.

[Aleksander H]

@harry08 said in Suunto 7 Successor:

I had a look in the German Suunto online store. Almost all of the non titanium Suunto 7 versions are currently not available.
Maybe this is a hint that a successor is around the corner.
It was the same with Suunto 5 a few weeks ago.

Maybe. Could also simply be that they are emptying stock due to low sales. Let’s be positive, while at the same time tempering expectations .

[olymay]

@aleksander-h

Personally, I think it is a bit cheeky of Suunto to continue selling the Suunto 7 knowing it is running extremely outdated hardware and will receive no more updates (last update received April 2021!).

Don’t get me wrong, it’s a stunning watch and I love mine. I am really very happy with it and glad I bought it.

Bout would I recommend to someone that they spend £259 for regular or £329 for titanium version? Not a chance! Half that price and maybe, but only maybe.

Sadly the Suunto 7 was always overpriced and it seriously hurt it’s sales. I saw countless comments about how much people wanted to buy one but it was too expensive.
Most of us on this forum understand the quality of Suunto and the work they put into their devices, so can understand (to a point) the prices.
However WearOS is different and to break into that market a device needs to be priced competitively.

Someone will buy a Suunto (or a Garmin, Coros, Polar, etc) with the expectation of it lasting 3, 4, 5, 6, years etc…
WearOS devices are more like phones and would be expected to last 2-3 years (maybe 4 at a push).

If Suunto release a new S7 running cutting edge hardware, give it everything users have been asking for (sensor support, auto pause, more advanced modes, etc) AND launch at a sensible price, then it could easily take a big share of the WearOS market and provide a real boost to the Suunto brand. It would likely be a great introduction to the brand to many people (I had never used Suunto before my S7, and only vaguely knew of the brand as a company that made dive watches, purely because a friend has one) but now I love Suunto.
Get the devices out there, get brand awareness, and the money will flow.

But then again, this is just my opinion and what do it know

[DMytro]

@olymay but if suunto can’t both put in great hardware/quality materials/manufacturing in Finland and sell it at the price point of a regular wear os watch - I think there’s a reason why suunto watches cost this much.
But I agree with you that wear os watches date quicker, just don’t see the way around it.

[Egika]

@dmytro the 7 is made in China…
But I don’t agree that the hardware is extremely outdated.
My S7 does what it is made for extremely well. It is neither slow nor limited in functionality.
I don’t like the idea of running through gadgets at high speed. My iPhone 6S is still going strong as well. But this is a personal thing.

[olymay]

@dmytro I may be wrong, but using in house factories to make watches will up the cost (economy of scale etc).

As the S7 is made in China and uses mostly off the shelf hardware, this should bring the costs down significantly.

The main expenses to Suunto would be in the design and the software (which with regards to the current S7 are simply incredible!)

I’m not against paying more for a Suunto 7 replacement, as it is clearly a step up from a typical WearOS watch (for example a fragile Fossil that breaks simply by charging it!).

Right now, even the most expensive Samsung Galaxy Watch 4 Classic 4G (46mm) costs £409.
Samsung are a well known brand in the smartwatch game and are also known for being expensive. (it is also the only device running WearOS 3 so is charging a premium for that right now).

The most expensive Fossil Gen 6 is £299.

If the S7 successor came in around the £300 price point it has a very real change of becoming a best seller.

Google tried to sell their Pixels at a premium price thinking that customers associate high price with high quality. They do, but only to a point. As a result, they never sold very well.
Their current Pixel 6 is a premium phone that competes with the best of the best, yet undercuts all others of similar spec. And surprise surprise it’s the best selling Google phone ever and has stolen back a chink of market share (yes it has a long way to go to sell as many as Apple and Samsung, but it’s a start).

Suunto could (and I think needs to) do the same. Premium top end hardware with class leading fitness software at a competitive price = big sales.

(again, all my opinion. but i have been following the tech industry for decades and have a fair bit of confidence in what i say)

[Egika]

@olymay

Premium top end hardware with class leading software at a competitive price

I think you can sell everything in big numbers if you follow this advice. Everything.

[olymay]

@egika the SD 3100 was launched in 2018.

Four years old in the smartwatch world is extremely outdated.

And I agree that whilst it is still running well (my S7 still runs well and better than the day I bought it), if they want to attract new customers and sell new hardware (and therefore make money) then new hardware is a must.

The amin problem with outdated hardware (in smartwatch and smartphone) is firmware and security updates.

The S7 hasn’t received a firmware update since April 2021 and running security patch 1 July 2021.
Would any of us run a PC without up to date antivirus? Why would we run a smartwatch/smartphone without up to date security patch? (I know it’s not exactly the same, but it’s close enough).
I won’t let any of my family run a smartphone that is beyond it’s security update lifespan (most of the time they get my old phones as I update pretty quickly )

The average smartphone is replaced every 2-3 years (more often with enthusiasts like me) and smartwatches are pretty similar.

[olymay]

@egika said in Suunto 7 Successor:

@olymay

Premium top end hardware with class leading software at a competitive price

I think you can sell everything in big numbers if you follow this advice. Everything.

The price just needs to be competitive, it doesn’t have to be budget or run at a loss.

(although sometimes running at a loss work well. Sony sell PlayStations at a loss and recoup the money from games sold, it’s genius!)

[A Former User]

@olymay said in Suunto 7 Successor:

Four years old in the smartwatch world is extremely outdated.

True, but I’d really rather wear an old watch and keep getting updates for several years (I’m also willing to pay for a major upgrade, of course!!!).

[olymay]

@g-q said in Suunto 7 Successor:

@olymay said in Suunto 7 Successor:

Four years old in the smartwatch world is extremely outdated.

True, but I’d really rather wear an old watch and keep getting updates for several years (I’m also willing to pay for a major upgrade, of course!!!).

This is exactly my point with the current S7, it hasn’t received a security update since July 2021.

Smartwatches and smartphones are very different to regular sports watches (other Suunto, Garmin, Coros, etc) in that the hardware and software evolves much faster. Most customers do not keep them more than 2-3 years, so why should the companies spend time and money supporting devices that aren’t used by many?
(one could argue that if they were supported for longer then they would be used for longer which is true to a point.)

Also, battery life plays a big part in device upgrades. Li-ion batteries have a finite shelf life and after a few years there is a noticeable drop off in capacity.
Most of use can put up with a certain amount of that with a phone as it’s easy to top it up or charge overnight.
But with a watch, I’m sure we’d all like it to last longer to avoid having top it up every day.

All in all, the current S7 is great, but with no firmware updates in 10 months, no security updates in 7 months, no support for WearOS 3, etc… it is definitely in the twilight of it’s lifespan.

With the new chip announced by Qualcomm this could be the perfect opportunity for Suunto to lunch back into the WearOS market and (with an appropriate marketing strategy) actually take the industry by storm.

Or, they will launch on old (4100) hardware, overpriced, and be doomed to failure, with only a few hardcore fans buying (me included).

(or worst of all, they abandon WearOS completely )

[A Former User]

@olymay said in Suunto 7 Successor:

but with no firmware updates in 10 months, no security updates in 7 months

I still naively think that this wait is somehow related to the acquisition of Suunto so I still hope they release something cool sooner or later

[olymay]

@g-q said in Suunto 7 Successor:

@olymay said in Suunto 7 Successor:

but with no firmware updates in 10 months, no security updates in 7 months

I still naively think that this wait is somehow related to the acquisition of Suunto so I still hope they release something cool sooner or later

I want to believe this, I really do. I’m a very hopeful and optimistic person, so I won’t rule anything out.

But deep down I can’t help but feel the S7 is dead to Suunto

[Aleksander H]

@egika said in Suunto 7 Successor:

the 7 is made in China…

People always forget that hardware is only part of the cost. Software is often very expensive to develop. Especially when development of said software continues after release of the hardware. We’re paying for hardware, software and everything else that surrounds the development of the product (HR for instance).

Yes, other companies have these costs, but many other companies stop caring about the software on their device once they launch, or they sell so many the don’t need as high a margin per device (Samsung for instance).

A Suunto 7 without Suunto apps (just vanilla Wear OS) would probably be quite a bit cheaper for Suunto to produce.

[Aleksander H]

@aleksander-h and I see now that others raised the same point. I forgot to refresh the page before answering