Suunto 7
-
@steff
It’s funny, I remember a number of years ago when I was running a 100km race and I had to take a little battery bank with me (as did everyone else). Nobody thought much of getting to the 60-80km mark and having to plug in and charge our watches back upNowadays runners and endurance athletes won’t even consider a watch unless it has at least 20+ hours of battery life! Have to ask how many of them actually need that amount for their training and racing
-
@miniforklift said in Suunto 7:
Nowadays runners and endurance athletes won’t even consider a watch unless it has at least 20+ hours of battery life! Have to ask how many of them actually need that amount for their training and racing
I think it’s not just the race though. Longer GPS battery life means longer life, period. More time between charges even with heavy training. Should you displace your charging cable while in a faraway land, your watch continues to function because it has all the juice it needs.
We are surrounded by devices nowadays, each with their own set of little routines. The fewer routines the better I’d say. Roam free! So, yeah… I love myself some battery life.
-
@nickk
Absolutely agree with you on this.
I charge once a week whether I need to or not (can be anywhere between 40 -60% depending on how much tracking I do), but not having to worry about whether I need to or not makes such a huge difference.
Take the S7 which has up to 18hrs of tracking, or 2 days normal battery life. If go out for a 3/4hr session you are going to have to charge the following morning and it can be touch and go if you need to do another 2/3/4 hr session prior to recharging. It is really nice not always having to worry/think about whether you have sufficient battery or not, and I would agree that for me that is definitely the main driver more than the fact that I can track for 66hrs continously (before using extending power save modes) - which I am likely to only use a couple of times in my life. -
Personally (and this is just my opinion) I don’t get the fuss about charging smartwatches. We all adapted from charging our old Nokia feature phones one every three years to charging out smartphones every two hours (obvious exaggeration, but I’m just making a point) and now it is the norm. We accept it, because a smartphone does significantly more than a feature phone.
It is the same with smartwatches. They do WAY more than a traditional timepiece, and a fair bit more than a typical Garmin/Coros/Sunnto, etc. And with a bright AMOLED screen. Of course the battery won’t be as good.
For me, I don’t wear my watch when I shower, so I pop it on the charger whilst I shower and do my usual morning routine.
If I’m not doing GPS tracking activities I can do this every two days and it keeps it more than topped up. If I’m doing long GPS tracking (long for me is anything over 90 minutes) then I’ll need to top it up daily.Essentially, any time I take my watch off (which is usually only when I shower) it gets a top up. It’s easy, fast, and doesn’t disrupt my workflow at all. And ensures my S7 is always topped up. I’ve been doing this pretty much since day one and it has not yet affected the battery.
(I even take my S7 camping and top it up with a power bank whilst I ‘shower’ with a wet wipe. Easily lasted me through a four day music festival last month).
-
@metalmi said in Suunto 7:
Some day ago, I realised this layers over. Has anybody same problem?
It shouldn’t look like that. It looks pretty much like a burn-in.
@brad_olwin said in Suunto 7:
@macdav This is showing that there is a screen underneath this one as the overlay is a settings screen. There is nothing wrong here that I see.
Overlay of what over what? This below looks like a Solstice watchface.
I agree with @Metalmi that this loks like OLED screen burn in.
@macdav do you have the AoD turned on?
-
@olymay Yes,
I have Solstice watch face. I tried to switch to Heat map, but unfortunatelly, under is still burned some signs from Solstice
-
@olymay Honestly, I don’t see why we should accept short battery life any more than we should accept poor GPS accuracy.
It’s true the smart- and sports watches do more, but it’s also true they cost way more compared to regular time pieces that aren’t Rolex. And unlike regular time pieces, they don’t last a lifetime. Sometimes they lose functionality even when their battery is still kicking strong I hear…
Ever heard a sad tale of Ambit The Shortlived cut down in his prime at the battle of Movescount?
-
@nickk said in Suunto 7:
@steff Smartwarch wearable technology, you should add
With love from Google and Qualcomm.Garmin Enduro, COROS Vertix, and even Suunto 9 Peak beg to differ!
Yes, I missed to mention “smartwatch” wearable, and yes, I was referring only to smartwatches, not to dedicated sports watches.
Here I blame only Google, I don’t even blame Qualcomm.
Look what happen with the Google - Samsung colab, where with a newer and more efficient CPU, the battery life in WearOS 3 decreased compared to Tizen.@miniforklift said in Suunto 7:
@steff
It’s funny, I remember a number of years ago when I was running a 100km race and I had to take a little battery bank with me (as did everyone else). Nobody thought much of getting to the 60-80km mark and having to plug in and charge our watches back upNowadays runners and endurance athletes won’t even consider a watch unless it has at least 20+ hours of battery life! Have to ask how many of them actually need that amount for their training and racing
Yes, on sport watches the battery life increased.
But, on smartwatches, the battery life decreased with every new generation.
The best example here is Samsung.
Their initial Galaxy Watch from 2018 had 4 days stand-by or 10 hours of GPS.
Last year GW 3 can barely get 2 days of stand-by and 6-7 hours of GPS (without sharing GPS with the phone)
This year GW 4 is even worse.Take the S7 which has up to 18hrs of tracking, or 2 days normal battery life.
It will be good to mention in which conditions the S7 can get 18hrs of tracking (10 sec GPS which is useless for slow moving activities, no maps, no interaction with the watch).
Many people (myself included) before buying a product, checks the company forums for users experiences with the product.
Seeing posts like that, without having the product and knowing all the features, will mislead the buyers.I already said in one of my previous posts, that even though I really appreciate how helpful this community is, in many occasions users here tends to exagerate the positive points while overlooking the negative parts.
I noticed this also while briefly checking the S9P topics where the product was shown as the greatest piece of tech in it’s class, with best accuracy and everything, and when reviews started to appear on the internet, many showed that although good, it trails behind the competition in many aspects.
I know you most probably you will not agree with this but this is my opinion
-
@nickk oh I agree, I want longer battery life as much as the next customer.
However, there is a small issue of physics that currently stops us having longer lasting batteries (it could probably be achieved, but at vastly increased cost and possibly a reduction in safety.)
At the moment, as battery technology improves, more features and bigger high resolution screens get added.
A smartwatch from 2021 lasts similar to a smartwatch from 2018, despite having better battery tech and a larger battery (same goes for smartphones).I have a plastic fantastic Casio watch which I take sailing and it cost me £10. It can tell the time, run a timer, set an alarm, and has a pretty feeble light. But it is £10.
My Suunto 7 cost £400 new and I have no issue with that. It is a computer on my wrist and it still blows my mind with the things it can do. I’ve no doubt Suunto spent a vast sum of money on the R&D, not to mention sourcing and constructing miniature components is expensive.
So it should cost a hell of a lot more than my Casio (I still love my Casio though!).Should we accept poor GPS accuracy? Most of the time this comes down to software. Consumer GOS is accurate to 10m, so expecting better than this is expecting the impossible. Software can make it SEEM like something is more accurate, but it simply isn’t.
I came to Suunto post Movescount (the S7 is my first Suunto)
-
@olymay Yes,
I have Solstice watch face. I tried to switch to Heat map, but unfortunatelly, under is still burned some signs from SolsticeIf it burned in then you will see it even on other screens (depending on the severity of the burn and the brightness of the screen).
It may be possible to clear it with screen burn fixing software (my TV has this built in) but I haven’t seen anything for watch.
You could try contacting Suunto Support? They are normally pretty good. And as this seems to have been caused by one of their own watch faces they should look into it for you.
Suunto 7 Graphite Copper
Suunto App Beta (Android - Pixel 6 Pro) -
I noticed this also while briefly checking the S9P topics where the product was shown as the greatest piece of tech in it’s class, with best accuracy and everything, and when reviews started to appear on the internet, many showed that although good, it trails behind the competition in many aspects.
It is certainly behind. In very many respects. Battery life (for form factor), GPS and OHR aren’t one of them though, neither is GPS route creation and guidance. Still, I had seriously considered pouring some cold water with the observed negatives recently, after Month with S9P and Two Months with S9P celebratory reviews started to appear.
The forum does need a bit of wheel alignment.
I know you most probably you will not agree with this but this is my opinion
Well, I do agree with your approach. Read up all the reviews, research the user forums, and ideally get a gadget from a vendor where you have 30-90 day return window
This way you can see if it works for you as opposed to DCR or DesFit or ChaseTheSummit guy. Or some random @nickk on Suunto forums. -
However, there is a small issue of physics that currently stops us having longer lasting batteries
Well, I love physics as much as… any other physics lover
but when it comes to gas tanks, isn’t it how you use your gas and not just the size of said tank? Sure, we can blame that beautiful huge AMOLED screen, but before we get to it, I’d like to have a word with Qualcomm too, and even more so with Google.My Suunto 7 cost £400 new and I have no issue with that. It is a computer on my wrist
Speaking of computers, why not consider laptops? I remember days when a laptop was a encyclopedia* sized 6 lbs+ brick with a pretty crappy 12" 800x600 LCD screen that barely lasted a couple of hours on a battery despite having a fairly underpowered CPU.
Fast forward to today, and we are swinging around ultraportables with 15" high density screens and multicore CPUs that can run circles around professional workstations from 8-10 years ago. And they do so on battery power that lasts 8-10 hours or more. Sure, battery technology improved over the past 20 years, but so did system design, screens, CPUs, storage (bye-bye mechanical drives with spinning plates!), and operating systems.
The problem with wearables is twofold, however. A hugely successful Apple Watch normalized the idea a wearable should be charged pretty much like a phone (Fitbit Ionic disagreed, but who had it?). Then we have Qualcomm lagging behind with wearable SoC and Google doing pretty much nothing when it comes to optimizing the operating system, and these two cats were all too happy to follow Apple.
Should we accept poor GPS accuracy? Most of the time this comes down to software.
Funny, but if it was just software, I doubt we’d see a transition from an insanely good SiRF chipset in Ambit3 and V800, to Sony used by everyone now to dual-frequency (whoever) leveraged by COROS for Vertix 2.
Consumer GOS is accurate to 10m, so expecting better than this is expecting the impossible.
I’d take that 10m, thank you very much! And I’m talking open road, no high buildings/tree cover situation. On a trail, I’m ready to be even more reasonable
-
@nickk I agree with you about Qualcomm, they have definitely dragged their heels on the silicon front. For sure we could have better battery life if they pulled their finger out. But would the watches then be packed with even more features, thus negating the battery gains?
And yes, Google also could have done much more to optimise the software.Comparing laptops is a reasonable, but unfair comparison. The first laptops you mention (I remember them well! Monstrous devices with tiny screens, that were in no way portable!) also have very different battery tech to modern laptops (in the same way our old Nokias had different battery tech to the latest iPhone or Pixel). If we were to put a modern battery in an older device, we would see significant gains (in fact, an old Nokia may end up outliving humanity on a single charge!
).Laptops have also been around a LOT longer than smartwatches. If we compare a laptop from say five years ago to today, the improvements in battery life will be negligable.
Do we really NEED insanely good GPS accuracy for our activities? (this is a genuine question, as personally ‘good enough’ is fine for me).
Or for that matter, for anything we do in civilian life?
I sail boats that have the latest and greatest navigation equipment costing thousands and thousands of £s and yet we still use paper charts as they are more accurate and reliable (the GPS is a very nice quick check though, I do love it and wouldn’t be without it!).(especially don’t rely in GPS when the US decides to invade somewhere. I was out at sea when the second Iraq war started and my boat position was out by over 1NM!)
-
Hear, hear…
@nickk For sure we could have better battery life if they pulled their finger out. But would the watches then be packed with even more features, thus negating the battery gains?
Most likely that would be the case. That’s basically how Apple Watch kept their battery life despite all improvements Apple made elsewhere. Still… At least you’d have a choice of more features vs battery life.
If we compare a laptop from say five years ago to today, the improvements in battery life will be negligable.
Perhaps because most of the tech shift – new low powered multi-core CPU architecture, solid state drives, and better screens – all come from late 2000s and early 2010s? And what we are seeing now is mostly refinement?
Do we really NEED insanely good GPS accuracy for our activities? (this is a genuine question, as personally ‘good enough’ is fine for me).
Define good enough? For a marathon race of 26.2 miles, even 1% standard GPS error is 0.26 miles, basically more than a lap around the track, which – unless you are Kipchoge – means about couple more minutes. Kind of a difference between making your time and not. It’s worse still, if you are a slower runner or your distance is longer. Also, instant pace unless you use a footpod, would suffer if GPS is lame. Probably less of an issue in longer run races, but still…
Last but not least, good GPS performance in normal conditions should translate into something acceptable in bad ones… Like forests, canyons, or modern cities.
(especially don’t rely in GPS when the US decides to invade somewhere. I was out at sea when the second Iraq war started and my boat position was out by over 1NM!)
Was your boat off the coast of Iraq by any chance by Lebanon or Syria?
I was under impression military degrading civilian signal was region specific.Note to self: petition the US government not to invade anywhere at the end of October when my next marathon is coming up
-
@nickk said in Suunto 7:
Hear, hear…
Most likely that would be the case. That’s basically how Apple Watch kept their battery life despite all improvements Apple made elsewhere. Still… At least you’d have a choice of more features vs battery life.
Yeah, agreed. As much as I would love a phone that lasts a week (and a smartwatch to match!) I cannot see it happening any time soon, unless there is a significant leap in battery tech (enough to counter the inevitable processor and features additions that would inevitably result.
Perhaps because most of the tech shift – new low powered multi-core CPU architecture, solid state drives, and better screens – all come from late 2000s and early 2010s? And what we are seeing now is mostly refinement?
Yeah, it’s pretty much been refinement for years now. But as a battery get refined to eek out an extra hour of life, the processors will get faster, and more features will be added, thus battery life stays the same
Define good enough? For a marathon race of 26.2 miles, even 1% standard GPS error is 0.26 miles, basically more than a lap around the track, which – unless you are Kipchoge – means about couple more minutes. Kind of a difference between making your time and not. It’s worse still, if you are a slower runner or your distance is longer. Also, instant pace unless you use a footpod, would suffer if GPS is lame. Probably less of an issue in longer run races, but still…
I think ‘good enough’ will vary from person to person. For me, a 1% error is fine. But I’m not elite, or looking to set personal bests etc (anyway, for proper races they use chip timing, not GPS).
GPS accuracy isn’t bad, it’s just 10m for us civviesLast but not least, good GPS performance in normal conditions should translate into something acceptable in bad ones… Like forests, canyons, or modern cities.
But of the device cannot see enough satellites, then accuracy will always be bad.
(especially don’t rely in GPS when the US decides to invade somewhere. I was out at sea when the second Iraq war started and my boat position was out by over 1NM!)
Was your boat off the coast of Iraq by any chance by Lebanon or Syria?
I was under impression military degrading civilian signal was region specific.Note to self: petition the US government not to invade anywhere at the end of October when my next marathon is coming up
I have no idea if it is done by region etc, but I was heading into Chichester Harbour on the South coast of the UK and my GPS had me on the land
-
For me, a 1% error is fine. But I’m not elite, or looking to set personal bests etc (anyway, for proper races they use chip timing, not GPS).
Yeah, except that chip timing doesn’t tell you, the runner, anything – it’s for the race organizers and perhaps observers if timing is integrated into the event’s app (like NYC marathon).
When I run I want to know my pace, especially early on when you run on rested legs and are all excited, carried by the crowd. And if mile markers aren’t set up every um… mile, I’d like to know accurate distance too. And just in case I get slow and foggy in the head compartment, ETA and projected finish time.
Not to mention some automated pacing strategies like Garmin RacePro depend on accurate positioning.
Last but not least, good GPS performance in normal conditions should translate into something acceptable in bad ones… Like forests, canyons, or modern cities.
But of the device cannot see enough satellites, then accuracy will always be bad.
That’s why we will soon have the next generation of wearable GPS chipsets, dual-frequency and all GNSS systems. COROS got there first this time, just like Suunto was first with the Sony chip me thinks.
I have no idea if it is done by region etc, but I was heading into Chichester Harbour on the South coast of the UK and my GPS had me on the land
You could be heading into harbor while being on land. Even in a boat. You sure you are telling us the entire story?
-
@nickk said in Suunto 7:
Yeah, except that chip timing doesn’t tell you, the runner, anything – it’s for the race organizers and perhaps observers if timing is integrated into the event’s app (like NYC marathon).
I’ve done a races before where the chip registered over the start line and the finish line. It gave me my exact time to complete the course, which is more accurate and reliable than relying on a watch.
When I run I want to know my pace, especially early on when you run on rested legs and are all excited, carried by the crowd. And if mile markers aren’t set up every um… mile, I’d like to know accurate distance too. And just in case I get slow and foggy in the head compartment, ETA and projected finish time.
Not to mention some automated pacing strategies like Garmin RacePro depend on accurate positioning.
How on earth did we run before watches came along? I’m being silly (as I like to have all of that data too!) but it’s also a valid point. We can get too hung up on data, sometimes the best data we have is to listen to our own body.
That’s why we will soon have the next generation of wearable GPS chipsets, dual-frequency and all GNSS systems. COROS got there first this time, just like Suunto was first with the Sony chip me thinks.
I may be missing something, but surely they still work on line of sight to the satellites? The new fangled dual-whasnames surely just mean there are more satellites to see. But if the line of sight still isn’t there (trees, buildings, canyons, etc) then it will still struggle? Or am I wrong about that? (I kinda hope so, as accurate GPS without line of sight would be amazing!)
You could be heading into harbor while being on land. Even in a boat. You sure you are telling us the entire story?
HA HA!! I have run aground in a boat before. Although not a Chichester. And there was no alcohol involved. Honesht occifer…hic… no lips has passed my drink…hic
-
What’s the supported wattage for charging?
-
@steff
But don’t forget watches today are doing a lot more than they did 3 years ago, so I don’t really blame chip or manufacturers - its just a reality and you make your choice.
(Do more - 24/HR monitoring, better screens, spo2 sensors, more lifting around smarts and inter connectivity, HRV analytics etc etc, sleep tracking). -
For me, faster charging would be a bigger benefit than long battery life. If the shower after a run was sufficient to charge up the device, I wouldn’t notice longer battery life.
