> Long ago I wrote about ANT+, for example, a failed personal area network standard designed mostly around fitness applications.

I didn’t know ANT+ was “failed”, I use it all the time with my Garmin products. It’s cheap and it works better than Bluetooth.

I have ANT+ cadence and heart rate sensors. Lights, camera, Varia radar and power meter.

Some of that can be done with Bluetooth but realistically not all at the same time.

Anyone that’s run a smart trainer in a group with others will know that ANT+ is generally more reliable than Bluetooth too.

Apple refuse to support ANT+ so I need a dongle for my Mac and it’s the reason I don’t have an Apple Watch. No biggie.

▲

g0ran 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"In 2025, Garmin announced that they would end their certification for ANT+ devices, blaming changes in wireless communication regulations. This is likely to lead to future devices dropping ANT+ support in favour of BLE."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANT_(network)

I believe that's what the author was referring to when describing it as failed, but yes, this could've been worded better.

	▲	Lio 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Aha! OK that's sad news but makes perfect sense. Thanks.

▲

SuperNinKenDo 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The ANT+ article was really interesting and it seems like a real shame that it's going the way of the dodo. Now I know what those little status symbols are on some of the gym equipment. Seems like a great protocol for the use case, but nit massively surprising it couldn't survive on that niche alone. Shame.

	▲	derbOac 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		My impression was part of the issue was ANT is a proprietary Garmin protocol and so never really gained traction or imprint beyond those devices. Without meaning to sound too critical or supportive of BLE, I think something more open would be better for that area anyway.