Next S9 generation without map feature

DMytro

@dimitrios-kanellopoulos well it’s not an automatic signal each turn, is it?
Probably fine to determine general direction, but not quite the thing for each specific turn, right?

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@дима-мельниченко POIS not waypoints.

So POIS like

Home
Peak at x
Water at X

Like having a whiteboard and putting all the POIS you know. It creates a visual reference to where you are in realation to this whiteboard grid

DMytro

@dimitrios-kanellopoulos yes, i got you. It’s a good way to have a feel for distance and your own position in the outdoors, but If you want to follow a specific route, it won’t do any good. I’m not complaining - just explaining my use case scenario.

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@дима-мельниченко correct

cosme.costa

I think we should differentiate two options:

1.- Maps in the watch for an adventure without following any route: Here I do not have experience and I do not believe that such a tiny screen can help.

2.- Following routes: I think we put a lot of importance to the map in the watch and not in the fact that most of the maps providers do not have all the trails or paths marked. I mean, how many of us have downloaded a popular route that then when you check it in SA is not following the map paths? This happens a lot in my area, you use trails that are not in the maps. So, here the use of the map is to check if you have something around you, for that you need tod zoom out in a watch, and again you hit with the tiny screen.

I like how it works now, but I would like to something more visual to follow routes, like arrows where there is a crossing (no text). Something that let me run faster when following a route. If I’m not running or not doing a tempo run is not a big deal because you do not loose to much time when you miss one crossing.
I have a bike computer (Garmin) with maps for my MTB rides and in my opinion is better for some tricky crossings and when you are a little bit lost to see if you have some path around you but not much more. In fact, when you have two paths that have a little angle between them you can also be in the wrong one having a map, it has happened to me.

Bulkan

For me there are two things:

Maps like the S7 has implemented in a brilliant way. Are useful, really useful when you are exploring
Routing maps. Here is where the challenge is very big. Only one brand has maps but they had the technology before and the resources.

If I need a map is because I’m for more of one hour and in that case I wear a vest 2L with hydration (here is very sunny, humidity…) so I finally carry a TwoNav with vector, raster, the heatmaps of strava and orto maps.

Would I like to have maps? Yes but is not as easy as looks like reading @Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos.

Fenr1r

@cosmecosta

For 1. There is the at-a-glance position-off-paths I mentioned above. It does require high quality maps, tho’. Possibly better than OSM for the reasons you give in …

Absolutely … which is why @Mff73’s icon suggestion seems good. Assuming the planner SW represents the junction accurately at all, it should get the number of crossing paths correct*. Thus you only need to know which notionally numbered exit to use, not its real-world departure angle.

(*Also assuming no additional tracks have been stomped thru’ in the interim.)

SaasFreak

@zhang965 For this reason, there was no fenix 4. 4 is a Chinese unlucky number.

wakarimasen

Having spent the last three days comparing a Polar Vantage V, a Garmin Fenix 3 HR and a Suunto SSWHR Baro for navigating walking routes, I think how the watch handles the navigation is much more important that having a map present. With all three units provided with the same rout via Komoot:

the Polar stubbornly refused to accept we were on the route, once we had strayed off (even though we were back on again)
the Garmin couldn’t make its mind up if we on the route or not

Only the Suunto navigated without problem, even though we strayed from the path once or twice. It even showed us where the path was (not so the Polar) and where we had already walked (not the case with either of the other two).

Capability of following a route is, in my opinion, much more important than showing topological details.

surfboomerang

@wakarimasen said in Next S9 generation without map feature:

Capability of following a route is, in my opinion, much more important than showing topological details.

I agree. However, showing a route on top of a (static) map layer can help you greatly by making decisions. Just a route line is not clear enough in some situations. Sure, you will get back on track eventually, but it could have been avoided with a map layer.

sky-runner

My experience running with Ambit3 is that with a breadcrumb route and navigational waypoints at every turn, the map is unnecessary for the most part. I did multi-hour trail runs with Ambit3 with multiple turns, never having to pull my phone to look at the map. But having directions at every trail junction is important.

So now that Suunto App can generate directions, perhaps that fulfills most of navigational needs.

But I should say that the way navigation waypoints are handled on Suunto 9 is still inadequate. Ideally I’d want to see a next turn along with a distance to it permanently at the bottom of breadcrumbs screen - the way Garmin and Polar display that. The area at the bottom of that screen isn’t very useful to me when navigating anyway - that corresponds to what’s directly behind me.

Another point is that mixing pre-generated navigation waypoints and other user specified waypoints is far from ideal. I know Garmin does that, but that feels completely broken when I try to use waypoints on a Garmin watch. Ideally I’d like to see navigational hints (turns) but also independently track distance to a next user (non-turn) waypoint, such as an aid station. The watch could filter those automatically.

DMytro

@sky-runner I think there similar points raised before and suunto probably knows about it. Let’s see what the future will unfold!