Race 3S & Race 3 rumours
-
@2b2bff Wrist sensors are unreliable during cycling activities anyway so I wouldn’t trust anything but an arm or chest strap.
-
-
too many features add unnecessary load on it, and it finally crashes. Let it be a modular software system; I download what I want rather than loading everything onto the watch.
Features that are not immediately used don’t really add any load. I am a software engineer with 30+ years of experience and the above doesn’t make much sense to me. The reasons for the crash are likely way more nuanced and difficult to reproduce; otherwise they would have been fixed long time ago. My strong suspicion is that that the root cause is in fact due to an attempt to make the software more modular with parts of the software running as independent apps. The mechanism to make it modular uses a web app like execution environment with Javascript and garbage collection (Duktape Engine), which I imagine is hard to make work 100% reliably on a watch hardware with such limited resources - both CPU and memory. The reliability issues likely arise at where this engine is stitched to the rest of the operating system.
Suunto: Ambit, Ambit 3 Peak, 9 Baro, Race S, Race Ti, Vertical 2 Ti
Garmin: Forerunner 210, Forerunner 610, Fenix 6X, Fenix 7X Ti -
I presume those are all assumptions (pun intended
)I only have 29 years IT experience but I do know that ther are quite some OSes that become more unstable if storage space is limited. So, even if a user don’t use added features it might add to crashes or reboots. (notice the might)
And yes, a watch has limited resources… compared to modern computers. But javascript and garbage collection (which you don’t approve) are quite old and run on computers with even less resources.But making software work 100% bug free is next to impossible. It’s also a human resource and marketing priority issue if bugs will be fixed.
-
For what I’ve read, Race 3S (aka OW261) will be RUN 2.0
Wait and see !
Interesting. Perhaps Suunto is killing the Race S and mantaining the Run with everything (navigation and S+) and the new plattform. That will make sense.
-
@dreamer_ Contrary I hope they will keep one watch model away from S+. As an additional plus would be it does not crash due to buggy or too many S+
Suunto Race 2 (Titanium Trail)
Suunto Vertical (Titanium Solar Forest) -
For what I’ve read, Race 3S (aka OW261) will be RUN 2.0
Wait and see !
Interesting. Perhaps Suunto is killing the Race S and mantaining the Run with everything (navigation and S+) and the new plattform. That will make sense.
I don’t have any information on that, but my feeling is that the platform created for the Suunto Run has been stalled since they created OpenSuunto+ for the rest of the devices. The latest updates for that device don’t include any functionality, so my opinion is that the new Suunto Run 2.0 will use the platform for the rest of the line…
We won’t have to wait long to see where things are headed…
-
@dreamer_ this is my speculation: Suunto Run 2 will be something more similar to Garmin Venue/Vivoactive. A watch for people that occasionally do sports, but also want (many) smartwatch function.
And therefore I think Suunto Run 2 will keep the same software platform of Run 1, which is built and will be developed for a different scope (more smartwatch-oriented)
-
@dreamer_ Contrary I hope they will keep one watch model away from S+. As an additional plus would be it does not crash due to buggy or too many S+
I completely agree. When I mentioned S+, I was referring to features that the Run lacks and not how the OS is designed. It is clear that the S+ redesign is urgently needed—one free from the ridiculously small app limits (like in other brands), and free from the crashes. I understand that resolving things like these issues is central to the Run’s operating system.
-
too many features add unnecessary load on it, and it finally crashes. Let it be a modular software system; I download what I want rather than loading everything onto the watch.
Features that are not immediately used don’t really add any load. I am a software engineer with 30+ years of experience and the above doesn’t make much sense to me. The reasons for the crash are likely way more nuanced and difficult to reproduce; otherwise they would have been fixed long time ago. My strong suspicion is that that the root cause is in fact due to an attempt to make the software more modular with parts of the software running as independent apps. The mechanism to make it modular uses a web app like execution environment with Javascript and garbage collection (Duktape Engine), which I imagine is hard to make work 100% reliably on a watch hardware with such limited resources - both CPU and memory. The reliability issues likely arise at where this engine is stitched to the rest of the operating system.
I am also coming from the IT field; I understand what you are talking about, but the issue is I don’t see any intention to focus on core issues and give solutions, rather carry forward as it is with new system as well.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login