is a system update coming ?
-
@olymay said in is a system update coming ?:
Would I want a WearOS device with S9P features and battery? Hell yes!
Is it physically possible? I don’t think so.Its an interesting thought. Do WearOS watches have to have an AMOLED screen?
How long would a TFT based WearOS device last on a full charge.?
Am assuming that WearOS (because of the versatility) is not as efficient as a finally tuned more closed platform - but I would pay handsomely (£500GBP or 10,000 acorns) for a WearOS Suunto watch with a TFT screen that lasted a week between charges that I could be confident of covering 18hrs worth of GPS activity with from 100% (times that are roughly half the battery life I get from my TFT based non WearOS running watches, compared to 2 days standby & about 8hrs (if I’m careful) GPS activity tracking I get from S7) - that had GooglePay support and everything else you get with WearOS.
Amoled screens are good. But they’re definitely a compromise I’d drop in place of more battery life…even if I don’t need that battery life, just the extra confidence you get from having a watch with better life adds value…as my marathon program has ramped up, I’ve been away from S7 and back to my ‘other’ watches…seeing it now at 85% on a Friday (having last recharged I think on Monday morning or Sunday evening), and knowing I can run 12k tonight, a parkrun tomorrow, 30k on Sunday and not even have to think about recharging until Monday morning (and probably end of next week if I wanted to stretch it out) is a different prospect entirely in terms of ‘wrist confidence’.
-
Do WearOS ‘have’ to have OLED screens? Definitely not. But, with everything that WearOS can do it is definitely a very nice to have. The high resolution, high contrast, and excellent colours do make it almost essential.
I’m assuming by TFT you mean the transflective screens used by other Suunto watches and Garmin etc? If so, then there isn’t actually that much battery to be saved.
Most of the time these screens are used primarily to be visible in bright sunshine. Which is very nice, but has a cost of low resolution, low contrast, poor colours, and generally looking a bit naff.OLED (rather than LCD) only powers the pixels that need it, so depending on what is being displayed then the power consumption can vary wildly. This is another reason that AoD isn’t always the best option with OLED (a small sacrifice).
The biggest power drain with WearOS devices is not the screen, it is the operating system and antiquated SoC.
A WearOS device is doing hundreds of things more in the background than a Suunto 9 or a Garmin F6. That is what is eating the battery.
This is the trade off of a smartwatch vs a sportswatch.If you want to see how long the S7 can last without WearOS eating all of the battery, pop it into battery saver mode. It is still using the exact same screen (although it is likely now powering more pixels than the ambient screen). The watch will last for days and days and days. (although you won’t be able to do much with it!).
Don’t get me wrong, I would LOVE LOVE LOVE a Suunto 7 that lasted as long as a Suunto 9 Peak with the same fitness smarts inside, still an OLED, NFC for GPay, all the other smartwatch features, etc. I wouldn’t care if it cost me £700 (aslong as it was supported for a MINIMUM of three years at that price!).
Sadly, I don’t think it is physically possible right now
-
@Nigel-Taylor-0 > the ticwatch E3 has a LCD screen, but doesn’t seem to help overally much in battery life, so may be some point to what @olymay says. But if that is the case then why is the Garmin V2 (with an AMOLED screen like S7/GW4) only 2/3 days battery life like them, but with 11 days with screen off, and Garmin VA4 which is almost same as V2 but different screen has up to 6 days. To me this screams that the screen is the major impact factor, and really not what is going on in the background.
Lets face it, phones are pretty much the same - screen on always doing something - normally get around 5-6hrs of always on screen life. with it off, and its a different ball game +24hrs.
-
@jamie-bg it’s probably a better to compare the Garmin Venu (1st gen) to the VA4, as they are the same watch with the screen being the main differentiator.
The official figures for the Venu are
5 days in smartwatch mode (no gps) with screen off.
3 days in smartwatch mode (no gps) with screen always on.
6hrs of gps
(my lass has a Venu and these figures are pretty accurate)the VA4 is
8 days in smartwatch mode (no gps)
6hrs of gpsThe screen clearly does have an impact, but not as much as we would think.
If I use my own S7 for comparison, using it with screen always on, vs raise to wake (with power saver tilt) is a negligable difference.
I think the big difference comes when using the watch in full power mode it causes the SoC to fire up which in turn drinks the battery.
-
@olymay - Still think its the screen. Can’t see how it can’t be if a watch goes from 2 days with AOD on to 5/11 days with it off. Anything going on in the background will still be going on. That will not change.
Just like a phone - keep you screen on you get 5/6 hours - allow the screen to time out you get around 24 hrs.The watches without AMOLED/LCD screen have same if not more processing going on in the background (Fenix etc), yet still have longer screen time/overall battery life.
-
@jamie-bg we are running the risk of splitting hairs here
we keep comparing the battery life of AMOLED screens with the display always on or off. It’s a shame we can’t do the same with the transflective screens. I know it would be less of a hit, but it would still be interesting to see.
An AMOLED is always going to use more power than a transflective screen. But as the AMOLED is lit, would it be as much of a gulf if the transflective were also permanently lit?
I also think part of it is due to the AMOLED screen having more colours and higher resolution needing more processing power to operate.
However, one final comparison if I may…
A Suunto 7 with AoD off, tilt to wake off, etc. essentially in smartwatch mode but with as many power saving options on as possible. Should get you an easy 2 days, but not much more.
A Garmin VA4 will get 7-8 days.
WearOS is a power hungry OS and the current generation SD SoC is not power efficient.
I am homing that both of these factors change in the near future, as well as better battery tech over the next few years.
I think seeing a proper smartwatch with 5+ days of battery life is not unrealistic (although, I thought the same about smartphones a few years back )Suunto 7 Graphite Copper
Suunto App Beta (Android - Pixel 6 Pro) -
@olymay said in is a system update coming ?:
Suunto do listen and they do respond. For example, the issue of external sensors was explained by not wanting to affect battery life. Which judging the impact of using Bluetooth headphones with the watch, is a serious hit.
Yes, I would like to have the option. But Suunto have made their decision and explained it.In that respect, it’s a bit ironic that Suunto is promoting doing activities like running while listening to Spotify with offline music on the Suunto 7.
-
@olymay
A Garmin VA4 will get 7-8 days (generous probably 4-6 more realstic based on what I have seen and been told).
Venu 2 will get 2-3 days with AOD on.
They are running virtually the same software. So surely if a AMOLED doesn’t draw that much power, with same software, same battery size - surely the Venu 2 should get per the VA4 7-8 (4-6) days?It doesn’t so what is the main differnce - the screens!
I don’t deny that wear os is power hungry, and that is why we don’t see the same AOD off times i.e. GW4/Suunto 7 etc i.e. 2/3 days AOD on and up to 3/4 with it off i.e. not much difference. Yet the V2 difference is startling - 2/3 days goes up to 11 days with AOD off. So based on that yes I would agree with you that wear os is way more power hungry than garmin.
But again this just further reinforces my thoery on the screens being the major power drain. Especially as I know of no AMOLED wrist wearable that goes beyond 3 days. Fitbit can get past it, but only with AOD off, and can do up 6 days with AOD off.
-
@jamie-bg i think this is all relative.
With Garmin, the chipset and OS barely use any power (as they are doing very little in the background). Therefore, changing from an unlit low resolution transflective screen to a lit high resolution AMOLED screen will be a significant change.
However, on WearOS, the chipset is way more powerful and doing significantly more in the background (as well as being inefficient!), that changing screen type (or even how it is used) has a comparatively small affect on the battery consumption.
-
any info on what is contained in today’s update?
-
@metalmi said in is a system update coming ?:
any info on what is contained in today’s update?
Today’s update?
-
@aleksander-h Yes, I got some system update 6 hours ago.
-
@metalmi ah. Probably just the security patch that started rolling out 15th September.
-
@aleksander-h said in is a system update coming ?:
@metalmi ah. Probably just the security patch that started rolling out 15th September.
I was pretty sure I got that one already, but now when you mention it, that might be it. Thanks
-
@metalmi you could always check the firmware update page on the Suunto site and compare version numbers for the system apps.
-
@metalmi said in is a system update coming ?:
@aleksander-h Yes, I got some system update 6 hours ago.
I’ve a few ‘Google Play’ updates over the past week, and this always looks like a system update at first…
-
I see there is a new update released today for the S3, S5, and S9/S9B/S9P watches. These devices also had a big update back in June.
The past update for the S7 was April
Can anyone from Suunto, or connected to Suunto and in the know, please at least give us some information on IF the S7 will get any further updates or not?
I’m not asking for dates or details, just simply if the S7 will get any more love from Suunto. Or has it been dropped completely?Seeing as I’m still seeing adverts for the S7 and getting bombarded with emails trying to get me to buy (another)one, I would like to think there is more to come. Would Suunto advertise an obsolete device? I would hope not.
Please Suunto, just let us know if you still love us
-
@olymay,
I am very satisfied with the S7 and it really offers everything I need. IMHO more than a new update I would prefer Suunto try to fix those glitches you read about here and there… -
@walker said in is a system update coming ?:
@olymay,
I am very satisfied with the S7 and it really offers everything I need. IMHO more than a new update I would prefer Suunto try to fix those glitches you read about here and there…I love my S7 too, very much so! I’m not complaining about updates, just hoping to get some news.
And I am not demanding major updates with new features every few months, it’s just that regular updates mean that the product is still a focus for the company. Which I think the S7 still is for Suunto.
There are a few features being asked for on these forums (external sensor support, auto laps, etc) and whilst I know not all of them will come to the S7, some of them would be nice
Regarding glitches, there aren’t many glitches with the S7 anymore as most have been fixed. I think I’ve only had one wobble with mine in the last 6 months, which is considerably fewer than my phone, laptop, PS4, or TV).
-
Just guessing here.
I think the way Google is handling WearOS 3 has put Suunto in a bit of a difficult situation. Most people probably aren’t interested in buying a Wear3100 based WearOS 2, no matter how good it is. Suunto could make a Wear4100 based watch, but still be stuck with WearOS 2, which again, probably won’t excite many, because it is missing WearOS 3.
By the time WearOS 3 becomes available for other manufacturers, Samsung will probably have gobbled up much of potentially interested customers considering their watches are quite nicely priced and carry the Samsung brand.
All these things considered, I would not blame Suunto for thinking “Not worth it”, and decide against future efforts on WearOS. In that case, I also would not expect them to continue work on their current WearOS watch.
Now if they aren’t 100% decided on the matter, that poses a bit of a problem. If they say updates are coming, they commit themselves and will get massive backlash if they don’t. If they say no more updates are coming, they might risk losing even more potential sales, especially on the Titanium edition which is still quite new. By not saying anything, their options are all still open. I’m guessing this might be where Suunto finds themselves now. ,
I hope Suunto continue with their efforts on WearOS. As far as I’m concerned, there are no other options for those who want a WearOS watch capable of doing good/accurate sports tracking. Samsung don’t seem interested as they’ve always been hit-and-miss in terms of GPS and heart rate. As long as they have features they can list on their marketing material, they don’t seem concerned with how well it works.
All this is of course nothing more than wild guesses on my part.
