What do you expect from the next update?
-
@cosme-costa Thank you. Unfortunately I am not on Telegram
-
What do I expect? The usual: Better testing that leads to fewer bugs and elimination of bugs and inconsistencies mentioned in the forum or elsewhere by the users.
-
@SnowSailor Normal manufacturers use a barometric altimeter, which is much more accurate than GPS altitude data (which is often useless).
If Suunto has to improve anything, it’s the algorithm to reduce the effect of wind on the total elevation gain. This is doable because the other company (G) can handle it better.
-
@SnowSailor how is that different from FusedAlti?
-
@maszop said in What do you expect from the next update?:
If Suunto has to improve anything, it’s the algorithm to reduce the effect of wind on the total elevation gain. This is doable because the other company (G) can handle it better.
The last time I ran in a storm I chose to do it in a wood to escape the majority of the winds. Still, the Garmin Forerunner 955 added about 100 metres extra to the Ascent/Descent registered (on a well-known path). The baro sensor holes on a FR955 is located at 6 a clock, under the watch armband, and therefore facing Up/Forwards with a normal running style. Not that smart… Coros Pace 2 holes are at 12 a clock (Down/Forwards) which is better. The Suunto Race S sports the holes at 9 a clock, ie Backwards when running with it on the left wrist. I’ve yet to experience stormy winds on my backside, but otherwise the registered Asc/Desc of this Race S has been excellent - even when running into heavy winds.
-
@SnowSailor I think that this is what Suunto does since Ambit3 times, if not before. You do not need to calibrate anything if you do a GPS activity, the first 10 minutes FusedAlti calibrates the baro with the GPS readings.
In my opinion, Suunto is pretty solid when we talk about altitude and ascent in its baro devices.
@maszop said in What do you expect from the next update?:
If Suunto has to improve anything, it’s the algorithm to reduce the effect of wind on the total elevation gain. This is doable because the other company (G) can handle it better.
I never had such issues with my SV in any of my activities with strong wind, but I have read that few people have had problems with strong winds, so I hope they can improve this.
-
@cosme-costa I always have that problem (9PP and two Verticals). And I’m talking about climbing relatively steep slopes (so the speed is definitely different than running). The error is around 50-100%. The graph looks like an ECG and hence such absurdly overstated elevation gains.
The problem with Suunto is that people have been writing about it for several years, and there is always an answer that the problem does not exist.
Here is a more detailed explanation of the problem (you can already see it in the first graphic):
https://www.gpsvisualizer.com/tutorials/elevation_gain.htmlwhich is theoretically easy to fix (filtering excess measurements).
-
@maszop Very interresting stuff to read, really something Suunto should look into
-
@Elipsus Here is the solution, but a similar mechanism should be used for elevation gains:
-
@cosme-costa Great news !! Thanks for sharing. We just have to wait the time needed so !
-
@cosme-costa said in What do you expect from the next update?:
multiple sensors
Glad to read it’s on its way, it’s one of the major feature I’m waiting for before switching
-
@placebo original rumors were that this was coming in 2024, hopefully we’ll have it in 2025. I also heard rumors about better swimming functionalities, but have not seen anything yet.
Watch: Suunto Vertical Ti
Blog: isazi's home
-
@isazi any news about custom triathlon mode ?
-
@cosme-costa To me a regression is when something was working and a new version breaks that functionality, especially if it affects a wide array of cases. So the sleep tracking breakage is one regression to me, not a new “feature”.
To me a bug would be if it started tracking sleep erroneously because of other changes to the code, but not when it doesn’t work at all.
It’s quite strange that this problem slipped through beta testing, but hey, sh%t can happen
However, I believe Suunto should have released a quick-fix just to address this one as soon as it was addressed.
-
@jsuarez said in What do you expect from the next update?:
It’s quite strange that this problem slipped through beta testing, but hey, sh%t can happen
It did not totally slip through, it was just not properly acknowledged. It is also a difficult bug to fix (it is not only the watch firmware, it is also the OHR firmware at play), and it sometimes takes days, if not weeks, to trigger.
However, I believe Suunto should have released a quick-fix just to address this one as soon as it was addressed.
There have been already 12 software releases in testing to fix this, it is not easy to fix. Engineers have been working on this for weeks now, to avoid that the fix is going back to the OHR firmware in the 2.37 branch (as the temporary hotfix for S9PP did).
-
