I really don’t think you can go wrong these days no matter which fitness platform you use
Wow, impressive review, thanks for that! I wrote a long post about my own odyssey through the Smartwatch jungle 🙂 but I found, that I got lost in all the features and I could not find the ideal watch. For me Suunto has some „sophisticated simplicity“ which makes me feel „home“. It does want I need and I can trust the data (besides Resources atm 😜). The only other brand I really trust like that and that has the same “magic” for me is Polar and I still have my trusted Vantage M which I use from time to time. My son owns and is a great fan of Apple Watches and I can use one whenever I like. The battery is just too weak for me using it as a sportswatch, but the sensors are really great and HR and other data from it is impressively correct and trustworthy.
Here’s a bad example of one of my workouts. It was at one single spot. No running, no jumping, just TRX, lunges, dips etc… but I know for sure that during workouts my arm is blocking off the baro holes. I wear my watch pretty loose. Same wearing style as when I go ski touring and mountain biking. I’m glad it happens during workouts only, because I do filter workouts in my QS summary.
…ascent on this single spot: 222m!
Now Spotify with offline music has come to Wear OS, which is great. I assume we got this watch because we want the smart watch features like playing offline music. We want this feature even though it means shorter battery life. So shouldn’t Suunto now realize that we are also willing to accept shorter battery life if we get the support of an external HR sensor? If we want best battery life we use the internal sensor, if we want best HR data we use an external sensor. Simple as that.
I am really bummed that the sport customization is so limited, along with the lack of interval support. I had an S9 and loved being able to really customize the sports modes, pace alerts, interval alarms, etc. Also, why no vo2max estimates?
@nigel-taylor-0 - to get back from ambient screen you would need to press button, as you only have power save tilt on, so will only show you ambient screen when you tilt your wrist
I know I need to press a button to get from the ambient low-power screen to ‘fully active’ - that works fine and is just how I want it. I’m only using a Suunto face, so thats fine…and the tilt in NORMAL circumstances is so good that its fine for me to have a blank screen, which shows time only when I move arm to look at it. I find the display too bright and distracting at night time to leave AOD on.
What I’m saying is, in the night (or also seemingly under sleeves) - the tilt gesture itself often doesn’t work so I just have a BLANK screen no matter how much tilting I do.
Its almost like there’s a proximity sensor which decides that if the watch is covered then power tilt to get to the ambient ‘time only’ display shouldn’t happen.
I agree. I get incredibly annoyed by notifications too. They distract me. I much more prefer to have a permanently visible next turn arrow at the bottom of navigation screen. Then I can just glance at it from time to time and be aware of when my next turn is. That is possible with a Garmin watch where it displays next turn at the bottom of map and all notifications can be individually configured.
Oh, I prefer notifications - but just one per notification please!
Although - I do like the idea of a stat that is “distance to next RoutePoint” that I could choose to put as a data item on a screen.
@jamie-bg i did see that post from Google (although after my other posts on here).
I’m inclined to believe a bit of both of them, but also think that they are both covering their own backsides.
Yes, it is likely that the 3100, 4100, and 4100+ can run WearOS 3. But will they run it well?
If a watch runs it badly then it will damage the reputation of the OS and the hardware. In fact, WearOS 3 could be dead on arrival if too many devices run it badly.
Obviously Google wants as many devices as possible to run it, but they want, no, they NEED it to run perfectly. This is likely their last chance to take on the Apple Watch and if all of the initial reviews are that it runs like a dog then it’s game over.
Consumers won’t take into consideration that the hardware is old, they will see the headlines that WearOS 3 is slow and that will be it.
Qualcomm however, don’t care two hoots about WearOS (i think that have become obvious over the years). All they care about it selling chips, saving reputation, and saying they are market leaders. So if their older chips are no longer supported then it hurts them as a company.
Qualcomm would put WearOS 3 on every chip they ever made if they thought it would benefit them, but sod the customer, as long as it makes them money.
Google want (and again, NEED) WearOS to run perfectly, so they should be pushing for it on only the absolute best hardware.
As good as the 3100 is and as good a job Suunto have done with it (which they really have!), it is old, slow and power hungry. There is no point having the amazing Suunto App if the OS underneath it is running slow due to the hardware.
IF (and it’s a big if) the 3100 can run WearOS 3 well then I would expect Suunto to support the S7 for quite a while yet.
However, if it runs with even the slightest lag then Suunto need to keep the S7 on WearOS 2 and get a new model out ASAP.
As I mentioned before, the average consumer already considers the TWP3 better than the S7 purely based on it having the 4100 (despite there being no notable improvement in having that chip).
The S7 is already over 18 months old, so is long in the tooth in the tech world. I personally think a 2 year cycle for something like this is perfect, as it allows each iteration to have noticeable improvements and ensures support from manufacturer.
However if Suunto are too late to the WearOS 3 party then they could lose out on sales.
A newer S7 (whatever it may be called) with Samsung silicone, better battery life, reduced bezel, lighter, slimmer, etc with still the Suunto smarts inside (and with continued updates) could be the WearOS device to beat and with proper advertising (and a sensible price unlike the S7 at launch!) could take a serious chunk of the market.
Just my thoughts for this wet and soggy British morning 🙂
@optics-field-test You need the app on both phone and watch and on the watch you need to be in the developer mode with ADB debugging enabled. I think the phone and watch connect via wifi. I don’t think the watch needs to be connected to the phone via the Wear OS app. Anyway, let’s hope it doesn’t need to.