What I love from S9B and not so much after an A3P
-
I am 50 and I struggled with Suunto 9 screen too. It was especially bad at dim light conditions. Once I discovered that I could use standby backlight, screen readability has improved quite a bit, but still it is hard to read sometimes, especially when running. For example, I remember “GPS lost” notification had popup during a race once, and I couldn’t dismiss it safely because I simply couldn’t read the text without having to stop, which I wasn’t willing to do in a race. If I pressed the wrong button the activity timer would pause, so I preferred to just run with the notification on the screen for nearly 10 minutes until it disappeared. For the same reason I couldn’t possibly have more than 5 fields configured per screen, and even that was a stretch.
Now that I have Fenix 6X Sapphire, I should mention that despite lower resolution I find screen to be quite a bit easier to read - the contrast is definitely better.
One thing that I especially liked about Ambit 3 is having the additional “View” button. On regular sport screens it could be used to rotate through multiple different fields in the bottom row, and I used that quite a bit. I would typically have the main two fields in the top and middle rows - for example distance and time, then I could have multiple secondary fields at the bottom - out of sight most of the time until I really need them. I really liked that concept.
But for the Navigation screen the View button was even more useful. By pressing the View button I could switch between different navigation views - zoomed in view, zoomed out view that shows the entire route, and waypoint view that shows next waypoint on the route. That waypoint view is something that Suunto 9 completely misses, and I think that is a bad omission. I am glad to hear that the waypoint names can now be shown on the breadcrumbs screen on Suunto 9 (could someone share a screenshot of that?), but that still isn’t the same as having a dedicated “next waypoint” view in terms of usability and accessibility.
-
Easiest example would be an thought experiment; imagine a descent from a tall mountain on a sunny day with a bike at 55mph and trying to look at the screen with 3 data fields of A3P vs. 3 or 7 at S9B
which one would require less time to glance at? -
@lexterm77
you can do that experiment if you want, I’m still tired of being injured from last year
living sideways
-
@Brad_Olwin Of course, this depends on every person. However, I cannot see how the possibility to add more screens (something that, if I am not mistaken, has been raised in the S9 firmware suggestions thread) would harm people wanting less screens. Comparing A3P and S9B in terms of readability, I found the former to be much better.
@sky-runner I totally agree with the WP screen in A3P was much better. On the other hand, the capabilities of the watch for other sport information are impressive. My guess is that they are targeting a different group. What I can hardly understand is why they removed such a good options and interface design in the transition to S series (or, at least, in the S9B, clearly targeted to mountaineers and so). -
That’s really interesting; I came to the Ambit3 from a multisports/triathlon background so was mainly interested in the multiple configurable sports modes, pool swimming features and complex intervals - but have really appreciated the navigation/outdoors facilities as I’ve done more fell and trail running.
From what I’d read and the features that I’ve seen are missing from the Spartan / S-series watches I had assumed that Suunto were leaving the ‘multisports’ market and moving to be a trail runner / navigation / outdoor leisure type device.
-
@TELE-HO
My left leg open fracture (bone trough skin) hasn’t healed after 34 years. There is still a mark where bone impacted and where bone exited my skin.
-
@Efejota said in What I love from S9B and not so much after an A3P:
@Brad_Olwin Of course, this depends on every person. However, I cannot see how the possibility to add more screens (something that, if I am not mistaken, has been raised in the S9 firmware suggestions thread) would harm people wanting less screens. Comparing A3P and S9B in terms of readability, I found the former to be much better.
@sky-runner I totally agree with the WP screen in A3P was much better. On the other hand, the capabilities of the watch for other sport information are impressive. My guess is that they are targeting a different group. What I can hardly understand is why they removed such a good options and interface design in the transition to S series (or, at least, in the S9B, clearly targeted to mountaineers and so).Perhaps you fail to notice that the A3P shows distance to waypoints and start/finish as the crow flies in a direct line and not on the route path. This was the single biggest drawback and problem for me with the A3P as I am often off trail either doing mixed trail run/mountaineering or SkiMo. I wished and longed for on route accurate distances and purchased a few Garmin models out of this frustration.
The S series show distance as the route is plotted, I suspect having a Waypoint screen is substantially more complicated on the S series due to this change. I for one would not go back and can live without the waypoint screen as my distances now are route-based and not on a straight line that I cannot possibly follow due to cliffs/false summits/etc.
Vector/T6c/Ambit 3 Peak/S5 Copper/S3/S7 Ti/S9 baro Ti/S9P Ti/S9PP Ti/Vertical Ti/Race Ti/RaceS/Ocean/Wing
-
@Brad_Olwin I know that limitation and agree, as I said, that the ETE/ETA on route is brilliant. But I miss that functionality in other situations and it is hard for me to understand why it has been removed as a navigational thing. Particularly useful when added to the possibility to include coordinates only using the watch (for instance, for a refuge for which coordinates are frequently known).
-
@Brad_Olwin Yes, I know perfectly that Ambit series shows the straight distance to a waypoint and S9 shows distance on route. But why should that be preventing S9 from having a dedicated waypoint screen? What’s the connection?
I suspect the main reason it wasn’t included is the absence of “View” button and not having an otherwise easy way to switch navigation views with the new UI because that does fit the new UI paradigm. I guess whoever designed the UI tried to fit that because of you go down from the navigation screen (i.e. the navigation menu), at the top that shows the navigation route name and the route ETE/ETA in a really tiny font. That UI could be changed a bit to take more of the screen and to become more useful to show the next waypoint with all the info. That would be a good start, although I guess that still wouldn’t be accessible when the watch is locked.
By the way, if you go off-route in S9, the distance to next waypoint field becomes empty, which is kind of bad if the route isn’t perfect. I remember it happened to me in one of the races when the race got slightly rerouted in the last moment.
-
@sky-runner said in What I love from S9B and not so much after an A3P:
@Brad_Olwin Yes, I know perfectly that Ambit series shows the straight distance to a waypoint and S9 shows distance on route. But why should that be preventing S9 from having a dedicated waypoint screen? What’s the connection?
I suspect the main reason it wasn’t included is the absence of “View” button and not having an otherwise easy way to switch navigation views with the new UI because that does fit the new UI paradigm. I guess whoever designed the UI tried to fit that because of you go down from the navigation screen (i.e. the navigation menu), at the top that shows the navigation route name and the route ETE/ETA in a really tiny font. That UI could be changed a bit to take more of the screen and to become more useful to show the next waypoint with all the info. That would be a good start, although I guess that still wouldn’t be accessible when the watch is locked.
By the way, if you go off-route in S9, the distance to next waypoint field becomes empty, which is kind of bad if the route isn’t perfect. I remember it happened to me in one of the races when the race got slightly rerouted in the last moment.
I think the connection may also be calculations for a Waypoint screen would have to be continuously updated enroute as well.
Agreed on the tiny font, would love to see that improved and the last point! Would be nice to have some information as to how far you are off route.
-
@sky-runner said in What I love from S9B and not so much after an A3P:
if you go off-route in S9, the distance to next waypoint field becomes empty, which is kind of bad if the route isn’t perfect.
@Brad_Olwin said in What I love from S9B and not so much after an A3P:
Would be nice to have some information as to how far you are off route.
And if you’re not racing or otherwise rigidly route-adherent, it would be nice to pick a waypoint down your route at which to rejoin, after you have skirted some newly impassable terrain (for instance). Given the expired utility of that immediate stretch of mapping, bearing and crowflight distance keep you oriented towards your useful WP.
However, given that it is apparently too much to have both systems available at all on the same watch, it seems really unlikely that one would ever be able to switch mid-route-navigation.
-
@lexterm77
not nice… I hate accidents, how they set you back in fitness and cancel all your plans! -
@Fenr1r said in What I love from S9B and not so much after an A3P:
@sky-runner said in What I love from S9B and not so much after an A3P:
And if you’re not racing or otherwise rigidly route-adherent, it would be nice to pick a waypoint down your route at which to rejoin, after you have skirted some newly impassable terrain (for instance). Given the expired utility of that immediate stretch of mapping, bearing and crowflight distance keep you oriented towards your useful WP.
However, given that it is apparently too much to have both systems available at all on the same watch, it seems really unlikely that one would ever be able to switch mid-route-navigation.
Two improvements to S9 that A3P does not have that are relevant to your comments.
-
You can start a route at any time or rejoin a route or reverse, the watch will automatically detect where you are. You can use the new SuuntoPlus Bearing for this, which is available in Navigation at any time, I see this as somewhat solved and quite flexible.
-
A route can be uploaded into the watch during exercise while offline as long as it was saved in SA. So, I now plan bailout routes for my very long days in the mountains in case of storms or I underestimate my speed. I can then load the different route out and begin navigation anew.
-
-
@Brad_Olwin said in What I love from S9B and not so much after an A3P:
somewhat solved
I prefer control of my own route direction, so automatic detection and its interesting foibles amid forested switchbacks (experienced) isn’t an improvement for me, though I can absolutely see others preferring it.
My point is that you can pick the waypoint to which you want to return from a watch menu on the A3P and see the distance and bearing. Skirting something (usually) or other improvisation (often) describes an arc for which radial navigation is well-suited. The rest of the user’s attention can be devoted to not sinking into a bog or sliding down a landslip or whatever. It might not be the very best for speed but that’s at the user end of responsibility.
S9 gives me the route shape and the scale and, as you pointed out, no distance to any WP. With the (alternative) Bearing Nav, that’s more than a couple of button presses to invoke the GoTo and, unless within eyeshot, it’s map time.
The (my) problem isn’t the automatic rejoining or reversing of a route … it’s relocating the thing at an optimal, or at least predictable, point. For ease of use in that regard, A3P offers only a couple of button presses.
Fine (and not actually an answer to my use case) to have bailout routes but, of course, that’s a phone app, not watch capability (unless the S9 can pull that route from the phone via its own menu system). For which you need phone time.
As ever, I’m not saying one system should exist in isolation. Neither is a substitute for the other.
