Ambit4
-
@fazel Maybe stirred it a little. The can’s a bit rusty and the worms are worn out from wriggling in circles.
The question for you folks that want an outdoor watch, are you willing to give up some of the sport-specific software to enable robust outdoor capabilities?
Sure. I would “sacrifice” functions that can already be found on other watches in the Suunto portfolio to maintain this conceptual Ambit 4’s USP (and competitive merit vs Garmin). Although I wouldn’t post opposition to those functions’ retention/reinstatement in a notional future watch.
Your question assumes such loss is actually necessary which, with an improved processor and better RAM in the same chassis, it might well not be. Even so, yeah. And if the Ambit chassis has had its day, I’d lean more towards the OHR-free Spartan. If colour touch-screens are required, a Spartan 2 would carry the outdoor-specific FW nicely. But it seems that keeping the Ambit-style screen would keep costs down and the watch competitive.
I’m not sure the Traverse and Ambit are quite so different.
-
@Fenr1r right - a dot-matrix screen and no OHR should keep cost down I would think, as would using the existing chassis, no? The basic idea is use what you’ve already developed when possible to create a watch that is, in spirit, about executing core functionality quickly with accuracy and precision. Seems like a winner.
Does anyone know if the external antenna design is inherently better than newer designs? It seems like it would be but I don’t want to make assumptions.
-
@fazel Maybe stirred it a little. The can’s a bit rusty and the worms are worn out from wriggling in circles.
I think Suunto is likely pushing the hardware on the S9 given how SuuntoPlus is implemented. My opinion as I know nothing of the hardware/firmware. To easily implement and keep costs down re-utilizing the hardware would seem prudent. Not sure all you want and all sports firmware already present is feasible.
-
@Brad_Olwin said in Ambit4:
@fazel Maybe stirred it a little. The can’s a bit rusty and the worms are worn out from wriggling in circles.
Haha
-
Does anyone know if the external antenna design is inherently better than newer designs?
Single user sample: about 8/10 times my A3P is closer to my handheld’s tracks (& map-/OHI-drawn paths) than my SSU. Same GNSS chip in both watches. But usually not by much - I don’t know how it compares to your 6% variation between external and newer. I should check.
-
There just isn’t a watch that can do what the Ambit3 series can do with regard to the points @Fenr1r is making. That’s why Ambit3 owners are so disappointed in Suunto with the SSU, S5, S9 and the new Suunto App. They are largely worthless for backcountry use. The addition of bearing lock helped, but POI mgmt and navigation (still not available on iOS and only in beta on Android if I’m not mistaken) will go a long way to bringing the S9 back in parity w/ the Ambit3. Hopefully the S9 ‘vNext’, whatever they call it, will come out of the box.
But the topic wasn’t about the S9 or what current Suunto device might marginally match up with a requested “Ambit 4”, it was about requesting a device ‘on par’ with the Ambit3 with regard to screen and features, and a bump in performance. I’d definitely snag one of those, even at an S9 price point.
The thing is that the ambit does all that and “still” has training plans, intervals, apps, it is a swiss army knife.
When I bought it, I didn’t need to think if it connected to a power meter, or had interval training or whatever, it had it all!
And on my side it is what made it a good seller, and what makes the current fenix a good seller.
No compromises. Even if users use 10% of the functions, they don’t care, they pay to have for whenever they feel they would like to use it.
And I guess this rules is for about anything: cars, pcs, bikes…
For me, and ambit 4 would need to be on this philosophy: no compromises, but also not unecessary stuff (color screens, smartwatch stuff, ohr (if it has it, at least that is a good one, otherwise better not to have it).) -
@Fenr1r the 9 did have an error on that track, but I assumed it was due to the Sony chip. Last lap tho, which seems a bit odd. The 9 was actually off on both the elevation and the track for the last part of that run. I believe @Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos logged it.
-
Absolutely! I would totally give up any number of features on the S9 related to training, etc if a second watch/os/firmware/model was necessary to produce those features and keep the watch performing up to Suunto internal benchmarks. Don’t know that I would want it to be an Ambit3 Vertical or Traverse rehash, both had pretty meh GPS accuracy and poor battery life. But yea, something along those lines.
My dream watch doesn’t need a HR monitor. When I had my SSWHR Baro, I frequently didn’t keep it tight enough while hiking/backpacking for it to get a good read anyway.
My dream watch core features would be the following…
- Good to Great GPS for navigation accuracy. If it can do it w/ less accuracy fine, but every GPS watch that I’m aware of requires the watch to go into ‘best-ish’ mode when navigating.
- POI/Waypoint navigation as a crow flies
- POI/Waypoint navigation ‘on route’
- Route navigation
- Elevation profile and navigation (of the route)
- Elevation profile and navigation (as a crow flies)
- Altimeter, Barometer, and Storm Alarm
- Bluetooth POI and route mgmt from my phone w/ onboard maps (no cellular connection required)
- Typical ETA/ETE calculations when navigating
- Sunrise/Sunset
- Compass with bearing lock
- Battery life on the order of an A3P or Coros, or better if we are wishing big and asking for something that’s not gonna happen
I’m sure I’ve forgotten some things if I sat here and pondered longer, but I can most likely take or leave almost everything else. That includes smartphone features, notifications, etc.
-
totally agree, i think the A3P hardware could handle what is necessary and then some for what we are talking about here w/ regard to an Ambit4. But to @Brad_Olwin’s point, with the onboard HR monitor and all the stuff going on behind the scenes, and the totally overhauled OS that resides on the SSU/S-series watches over what was on the A3P, the A3P likely can’t handle all that’s going on. It was my understanding, and maybe I’m wrong, that with the Spartan platform and forward, Suunto moved to a JavaScript based or Java based OS…my guess is that’s a huge CPU drain compared to what was going on on the Ambit/Traverse platform which was much lighter weight and probably a nightmare to manage.
I understand why decisions like this are made…but I don’t have to be happy about it
Suunto basically started from scratch is my guess. Maybe even dumped an entire development group in the process. And what they’ve accomplished in this amount of time is great, impressive in some regards.
-
I love my Suunto 9baro, as I was in my Ambit peak 1 and 3. I use the watch for mountain hikes and training. The S9baro and Suunto app is a winner for my use and I’m glad I upgraded from Ambit 3 peak to S9bar
-
I dont think Ambits had auto mem management, in that case it is really pure old school pointer programming. Back when programmers needed a large working memory because systems had small memory and processing power could not fit mmu but those had high efficiency, as opposed todays offloading programmers brain burouts with large managed but unefficient systems that eat battery just to run garbage collectors in memory.
-
ha! yep, good chance that’s the case. I imagine coding for an Ambit was quite the adventure in ‘old school techniques’ in many respects. I’d love to take a crack and some custom work if Suunto would release the details on the protocol w/ the Ambit series. I spend my days, or have from time to time, managing memory and CPU usage in stuff that’s gotta run fast and lite.
-
ha! yep, good chance that’s the case. I imagine coding for an Ambit was quite the adventure in ‘old school techniques’ in many respects. I’d love to take a crack and some custom work if Suunto would release the details on the protocol w/ the Ambit series. I spend my days, or have from time to time, managing memory and CPU usage in stuff that’s gotta run fast and lite.
Mind I add, an old school programmers had a mind set of an ultra runner. You literally need to complete hundreds of thousands of tedious steps correctly to complete the job. And nothing will stop you from falling over the cliff.
-
@lexterm77 said in Ambit4:
Mind I add, an old school programmers had a mind set of an ultra runner. You literally need to complete hundreds of thousands of tedious steps correctly to complete the job. And nothing will stop you from falling over the cliff.
Personally I rarely commit finished code at work without falling off a couple of cliffs along the way first
. -
@lexterm77 @chrish @Aleksander-Helgaker If xkcd has taught me nothing else, it is that you cliff walkers are the real heroes of our age.
I salute you all.
Of course, I might have misunderstood the jokes.
-
@Fenr1r you made my day
-
@Fenr1r
so true!! -
@lexterm77 @Aleksander-Helgaker
I have fallen off quite a few cliffs in my past. But it’s been awhile. 25 years ago my phone rang and it was a DBA who not so politely asked me what the hell I was doing and could I get out of his database. My memory and CPU usage had crashed the big iron mainframe that was running a claims processing system.
But I’d be way better off left to coding against my Ambit3 connected to my computer. Nobody’s day impacted but me.
-
It goes without saying that if you stick long word into wrong place, consequences shall arise.
-
@lexterm77 Is there no place for “antidisestablishmentarianism” in programming? Sad.
