Very wrong counting of the steps in s9b
-
The watch counts many more steps than the real ones. I apologize if such a topic exists, I could not find it. Until recently, I used Suunto Traverse Alpha, on which I had installed an additional application for counting steps. I can’t say exactly which application, but it worked extremely accurately. In this more technological watch, I think it is unacceptable the step counter to work this way. This is a matter of an algorithm that is not related to any space technology. In addition, there is “WALKING” in sports activities, which is not related to measuring heart rate, oxygen and who knows what sports parameters. To track the walk, it is enough to count steps and the distance, but here it is not. Even in the activity selection displays has no steps. It is true that the watch is designed for athletes for whom the steps are not important, but it is still provided in the functions of S9. I would be happy if someone commented on the issue. I would also be glad if in the next software update appears the “steps” option to configure user displays.
-
@ingiliz I fear the issue with the steps is ‘by design’, because this metric is irrelevant to athleats, suunto hasn’t invested time into improving the algo. Although, i hear s5 has a much more accurate anticipation.
Doubt steps will come as a metric, but maybe in the future we can program our own suunto plus or suunto guide. Then, one could also write a convertion from km to steps or something like that. -
@dmytro Yes, it probably is. But I still think that more than half of their clients are not professionals.
-
@ingiliz said in Very wrong counting of the steps in s9b:
@dmytro Yes, it probably is. But I still think that more than half of their clients are not professionals.
I am not a professional but one of those who does not care about steps. The 9 series watches do not have an algorithm as good as the 7, 5, or 3 series as the emphasis is more geared to tracking exercise as opposed to daily tracking. Sorry for this but this is the current state. Perhaps that will change with a new generation of hardware.
-
@brad_olwin I don’t care either. However, I find this strategy curious at the slightest.
I have a very specific programming experience, but from my perspective it shouldn’t be that time consuming to implement the same algo on all watches, given that libraries for sensors and device specific functions are most probably already written. So it might (!) be as easy as copy/paste. On thing is to say we don’t want to research this direction because it’s irrelevant, the other is to stubbornly ignore even it would barely cost any effort (once again, I might underestimate the effort needed).All in all, it’s suunto’s decision, not mine.
-
@dmytro said in Very wrong counting of the steps in s9b:
@brad_olwin I don’t care either. However, I find this strategy curious at the slightest.
I have a very specific programming experience, but from my perspective it shouldn’t be that time consuming to implement the same algo on all watches, given that libraries for sensors and device specific functions are most probably already written. So it might (!) be as easy as copy/paste. On thing is to say we don’t want to research this direction because it’s irrelevant, the other is to stubbornly ignore even it would barely cost any effort (once again, I might underestimate the effort needed).All in all, it’s suunto’s decision, not mine.
100% agree, I do not know why this is. I also do not understand the decision but it may have its roots in the hardware.
