Image source: Gadgets & Wearables

Garmin faces backlash over charging for watch faces

A wave of frustration is building around Garmin’s handling of its stock watch faces. What used to be a free part of the ecosystem is increasingly trickling into the paid tier of the Connect IQ store, and quite a few feel the change misses the mark.


Stock faces are becoming paid downloads

One of Garmin’s long-standing perks was the availability of official watch face designs bundled with its premium hardware. These stock faces carried the aesthetic identity of specific product lines like MARQ or Fenix, and users expected them to be part of the purchase.

Recently, however, more of these faces are appearing in the Connect IQ store as paid downloads. What used to be free, is now paid. And the move is rubbing many users the wrong way.

Essential reading: Top fitness trackers and health gadgets

While users generally support independent developers selling their work, they draw a line when Garmin itself charges for official faces. Especially when those same faces were once bundled or simply ported from other models. The feeling is that if a watch costs several hundred dollars or even upwards of one thousand, users shouldn’t need to pay just to make it look different.


The porting argument and how it backfired

Supporters of the change argue that these are not direct copies but ports, watch faces that originally belonged to specific models and are being made available to others via developer time and effort. So the logic goes, it’s fair to charge for that compatibility.

The problem is that Garmin reportedly blocks free clones of these faces from appearing on Connect IQ. Users see this as gatekeeping. If Garmin prevents others from building lookalikes, then turns around and sells their own versions, it looks less like porting and more like squeezing a new revenue stream from something that used to be community-driven.

Some users said they would be fine paying if the product was at least on par with the native version. But in many cases, these paid watch faces are a downgrade. They come with limited data fields, less touch support, or customization that feels unfinished. If the font is too small or metrics are missing, users are stuck. There’s no trial option, so no way to preview the functionality before handing over money.


Price complaints and slippery slope fears

Pricing is another flashpoint. Five to six dollars for a single watch face feels high to many users, especially when compared to rich third-party faces that go for less. A few bucks might not seem like much, but the principle matters when it comes to software elements that used to be bundled.

There’s also a deeper concern bubbling underneath: that this is a test case for wider monetization. Some in the Reddit thread worried that Garmin could move toward subscription-based features for health metrics or advanced training insights. The fear is that selling stock faces is just the first step in what users call “enshittification”. Which is a slow process of turning useful tools into paid features while removing the free alternatives.

And they may not be far off the mark. Let’s remember, just last week Garmin gave Connect+ users a new “Rundown” feature. Which is basically an end-of-year fitness summary, we feel should have been made available to everyone.

If Garmin wants to make a bit of money selling visuals, so be it. But that is the minority view. At least on social media.

Garmin Watch Face frustration

Bad optics more than bad business

The core complaint isn’t just about money – it’s about perception. Garmin’s hardware isn’t cheap. People pay premium prices and expect a premium experience. So when familiar designs show up in a digital storefront with a price tag, it sends the wrong message.

Garmin likely sees this as harmless monetization, but the optics suggest something else. Blocking free community alternatives, offering subpar versions of native designs, and then charging for them all adds up to an experience that feels degraded, not enhanced.

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter! Check out our YouTube channel.

And of course, you can follow Gadgets & Wearables on Google News and add us as your preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds.

Marko Maslakovic

Marko founded Gadgets & Wearables in 2014, having worked for more than 15 years in the City of London’s financial district. Since then, he has led the company’s charge to become a leading information source on health and fitness gadgets and wearables. He is responsible for most of the reviews on this website.

Marko Maslakovic has 2980 posts and counting. See all posts by Marko Maslakovic

3 thoughts on “Garmin faces backlash over charging for watch faces

  • Nick Keur

    It’s called enshitificarion
    Enshitification, a term coined by Cory Doctorow, describes the process where digital platforms and services, after attracting users with great features, gradually degrade in quality and user-friendliness to extract more profit for shareholders, often by exploiting users or business customers. It follows a pattern: first good to users, then good to business customers (advertisers/sellers), and finally bad for everyone as the platform prioritizes short-term gains

    Reply
  • Richard Pinnell

    As I serious runner I just upgraded my Garmin Forerunner 745, which cost me $500 4 years ago, to a Amazfit Trex 3 for $200. I couldn’t be happier, and don’t think I’ll be returning to Garmin and their absurd prices anytime soon.

    Reply
  • Anonymous

    A few dollars? Like 90% of faces for Wear OS are like $0.99-1.99. And those aren’t even ported, they’re made by developers that paid $25 just to be able to publish apps on Google Play Store.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.