Race 3S & Race 3 rumours

aiv4r

@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+

isaac.net

@dreamer_ said:

@Mi_chael said:

@André-Faria

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…

SergioB

@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_

@aiv4r said:

@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.

withManish

@sky-runner said:

@withManish said:

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.

2b2bff

@isaac.net said:

Perhaps Suunto is killing the Race S and mantaining the Run with everything (navigation and S+) and the new plattform.

I heard there is a successor to the Race S coming AND a Run 2.

sky-runner

@elbee said:

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.

Garbage collection is problematic because of single thread execution environment of Duktape and the requirement to “stop the world” when it runs. Since Suunto embedded operating system is a real time system, “stopping the world” may have real consequences. That’s why many users reported the watch becoming sluggish shortly before it crashed.

Anyway, there is a lot of speculation on my part (aside from Javascript Duktape engine that has been confirmed based on fragments of the log output shared in the forum posts, for example here).

GratefulDeadpan

@2b2bff said:

@isaac.net said:

Perhaps Suunto is killing the Race S and mantaining the Run with everything (navigation and S+) and the new plattform.

I heard there is a successor to the Race S coming AND a Run 2.

Both could be true at the same time. It could mean that the Run 2 is coming—as a successor to the Race S. From what I’ve read the Run OS seems far more stable compared to what the flagships are running.

GratefulDeadpan

I have a hypothetical question since there seems to be a lot of se in here.

IF (big IF) Suunto moves away from the old OS running in V1/V2/R1/R1S/R2 and instead Run future watches on the Run OS. What does that mean for the current line of watches? Can they be flushed with the new OS or are they relics (albeit working still, but still abandoned in a sense).

Wondering if I should return my V2 and just wait this out as my Run is working just as well as the day I bought it.

André Faria

@GratefulDeadpan said:

I have a hypothetical question since there seems to be a lot of se in here.

IF (big IF) Suunto moves away from the old OS running in V1/V2/R1/R1S/R2 and instead Run future watches on the Run OS. What does that mean for the current line of watches? Can they be flushed with the new OS or are they relics (albeit working still, but still abandoned in a sense).

Wondering if I should return my V2 and just wait this out as my Run is working just as well as the day I bought it.

I have zero technical knowledge but I think it can be similar to what happens with garmin on their platform (fenix 7/965) vs (fenix 8/970) , the old gets bug fixes and some features but most features don’t come to it.
I belive it is a bit like it as always be…ambits vs spartans vs suunto 5/9/9 peak vs 9 peak pro vertical 1 vs race/race s (anyone correct if wrong).
There is the latest and greatest…and yeah slowly less features…