Suunto App a giant leap backwards!

sartoric

@Chocksta
Well … let’s start saying that Sport Tracker website is not the web version of Suunto App even if you have (or at least it seems you have) all your moves and data there. You’ll find this remark in several discussions around here

That said, here it is an example of “already discussed bug”
https://forum.suunto.com/topic/1657/planned-route-strange-altimetric-profile-and-waypoint
This bug should be already fixed (or almost fixed) in the last Android beta version, unfortunately I don’t know about iOS ver.

Chocksta

@sartoric Hello again Sartoric. You are indeed correct. Sport Tracker website is not the web version of Suunto app…as there is no web version as the discussions highlight. Why users would have to vote for this as a feature request is ludicrous. I (like many other people) am not a slave to my mobile device and whilst the modern smartphone is extremely capable, there is no competition with the display capabilities of a computer and I would opt for the web version every time other than when out and about, and it would appear that the majority of users feel the same.
I also read the post you sent as a link regarding strange altitude profile and waypoint. It would appear that different people are getting different problems as my profile is dead flat with no up or down at all so I look forward to seeing how the various fixes pan out.
As I said in my original post, I have used Suunto watches for 20 years + and the reason I have been an avid Suunto backer is the quality of the hardware that they produce. The watches have been incredible and it is important to say that for the last 18 months using the Spartan Ultra, this has remained the case with the watch performing fantastically and I have no regrets continuing to use Suunto products. Why would I shoot myself in the foot and opt for an inferior product over an issue around an app! It is just frustrating that when the software side appeared to be moving forward with such detailed info and data, there seems to have been such a regression which ultimately undermines the capabilities of a £600 premium sports watch! Still, patience is a virtue I suppose so fingers crossed we end up with a setup that is an improvement on the seriously capable Movescount

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@Chocksta hey! I hear you! I ask for a second chance by joining the Beta journey of the app. https://testflight.apple.com/join/DJyDC5SU

IF that does not help or improve the feel of the pace that the app is going we can discuss again and I honestly mean that I prefer to see happy people than propose to stick with a app/brand/platform .

Chocksta

@Dimitrios-Kanellopoulos Hello Dimitrios. Thank you for your response. I will definitely take you up on your offer of joining the beta testing for the IOS app. Whilst I have been quite forthright with my opinions around the whole transition from Movescount, the time it is taking just to catch up with the quality and quantity of the data available within the web version of Movescount and the issues around route planning, it is driven by my pleasure and enjoyment in using such a fantastic watch (Spartan Ultra) and my desire to prevent such a quality device being failed by the surrounding software that should only enhance it. Lets see how things move forward

suzzlo

@Chocksta another idea for web solution (while we wait for a Suunto one) could be use Runalyze. Please give it a try, it’s not MC, but you can see tons of data and it’s free

BR

surfboomerang

@suzzlo Runalyze is indeed a great website. Especially now they use the Suunto API (still beta). The automatic sync is very fast, but not flawless yet. My speed diagrams are messed up and I get corrupt gpx/txc files when I try to export the activity.
Older activities I recorded with my Ambit 3 peak and imported manually are working perfect in Runalyze.

I already contacted Runalyze support. Let’s see what they will find.

mipapo

@surfboomerang Hey - I think I’ve just respond to your support mail at RUNALYZE. I haven’t found that activity with the 103km/h via API, but I need it to debug that problem. We do the best we can

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@mipapo there he is finally.!

surfboomerang

@mipapo thanks for the reply! I noticed it ended up in my spam box

I will reply on the mail with some additional information and other cases that show the same behavior.

Thanks for investigating

Chocksta

*** Update ***

OK. I thought that I would post an update to my original post. I was quite vociferous in my dissatisfaction with the transition to Suunto app and it is only fair and proper that I recognise some of the improvements that have been made.

So I joined the Beta program after the invite from Dimitrios and there are definitely fixes to some of the glaring issues that I pointed out. The map routing is definitely much improved within the Suunto app and the amount of ascent is shown. I am not convinced that the ascent information is correct but I will monitor that and report back accordingly, but the route planning within the app is pretty good so that is a definite plus.
I will see tomorrow if that annoying bug of “you have arrived…” is still there, which will in turn isolate whether this bug is down to the app or the watch firmware so I will report this back on the bugs page once I have a clearer idea.

There appears to be a few extra capabilities and graphs to the analytics within the app although still nowhere near the comprehensive collection and display capabilities of Movescount and the constraints of such a small screen is inevitably part of the problem. I haven’t had much of an opportunity to take a look at Runalyse yet but I will have a look so thanks for that Mipapo. The Sports Tracker site simply doesn’t cut it, both in the route planning and analytics aspects, and in my opinion all it does is highlight the fact that the lack of a complete Suunto web based version is a glaring mistake and it shouldn’t really be left for other people to plug that gap. Ultimately I stick to my feelings that there is no point trying to out-strava Strava, especially as Strava does what it does so well. That’s not to say that people shouldn’t have the choice of using an alternative piece of analytic software because they prefer the layout or the data available is more what they are looking for, but what is the point of a manufacturer developing such a great watch that gathers such a huge amount of information…and then disregarding all that capability and not allowing that data to be utilised; madness!

As always, I appreciate that everyone has their own opinions and I am more than happy hearing what people think. Ultimately it feels that everyone is aiming for the same thing and that is to keep Suunto products at the top of the tree and working well which can only be good

Until next time

Dimitrios Kanellopoulos

@Chocksta great feedback! I bow!

Chocksta

Brethren.

As I promised, I have been trying out the routing elements of the current version of the Suunto app (beta version 1.6.0 (6801) and Spartan Ultra Firmware 2.5.18) and I am posting my latest findings and feelings.

Before I get into it I must highlight something…the “you have arrived at your destination” notification that was going off every couple of minutes and doing my head in…hallelujah! Bye, bye and good riddance. It was so annoying and appears to have been resolved so there is one definite plus. Unfortunately there seems to be the introduction of another couple of small glitches which I think I should post on the bugs topic.

Anyway; routes! I said I was going to test them both in the planning and use, and to assess the accuracy of the altitude/ascent data. I planned 3 different routes and the numbers and conclusions are as follows:

Route 1; Planning on Suunto App = 6.41 miles with 502 feet of ascent.
Riding the route - 6.37 miles and 468 feet of ascent.

So the difference between theory and real life is 0.04 miles and 34 feet of ascent. I would go so far as to say that is pretty much spot on really; well done Suunto.

Route 2; Planning on Suunto App = 10.5 miles with 927 feet of ascent.
Riding the route - 10.5 miles and 954 feet of ascent.

So the difference between theory and real life is 0.00 miles and 27 feet of ascent. I would go so far as to say that is pretty much spot on as well!

Route 3; Planning on Suunto App = 28.5 miles with 2035 feet of ascent.
Riding the route - 28.6 miles and 887 feet of ascent.

So the difference between theory and real life is 0.1 miles but 1148 feet of ascent incorrect. This is clearly not very good but let’s keep this real. the route was along an old disused railway line which meanders its way through rolling hills and valleys and parts of the route would have been artificially raised or lowered to create a fairly level and even route. If you look at all of the contour lines etc. then I reckon that it is probably pretty close and so I think I will have to accept that this is not the best route to use for this test (or am I getting soft lol). So, despite my criticisms of this app, there are definite improvements so far and I am prepared to say that the ascent data for the route planning is, on the whole, pretty spot on.

I will continue to keep an eye on all of these points but for now things are definitely on the way up.

Keep up the improvements please Suunto

Word!