> Garmin’s hardware has always been exceptionally good, given epic battery life

It is good to know the for measuring sleep, which is not a selling point of Garmin, it's far from being as accurate as Oura. But battery life is so incredible that makes you wonder how someone could wear other expensive smart watches (e.g. Apple/Samsung) for physical activities.

> Their software has traditionally been pretty rough. That’s coming from a customer and developer. Mainly that was because they had various software platforms for various families of device, so each feature needed to be built for each family of watch separately.

The software feels like a dumb terminal from the web, it doesn't work right without an Internet connection.

"As accurate as Oura" or "as is Oura"? The missing word is adding some ambiguity here :)

Has Oura sleep tracking accuracy been independently validated against real medical devices? From what I've seen, all consumer wearable devices give inconsistent data and none are really what you could call accurate.